Alias <aka@masked&anonymous.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>> If you want to troll by implying that there's no difference between
>>>> legal and pirated Windows (and third-party for-profit software), you
>>>> are a piece of shit, and will be treated as such.
>>>
>>> Sorry the truth bothers you so much. There is no difference.
>>
>> So, I can just use one of the verifiable MSDN ISOs, and plug in some
>> OEM's Product Key, and it'll activate? Oh, *NO*, that's *NOT* the
>> case! I have to install a BIOS emulator, or crack activation itself!
>> Yeah, sounds like "no difference". 
>
>The ones I've seen come with a product key. I've never downloaded one.
>I've just seen the ones people have who bring me their computers to be
>fixed.
Of course warezed Windows comes with a stolen Product Key. But it's
not that fucking simple. To bypass activation, the system BIOS has to
match that OEM SLP key (so the pirate has to fool Windows into
thinking it is that OEM's computer), or activation itself has to be
disabled. Both methods involve running questionable code, not to
mention a lame hassle, to save as little as $105 from Newegg for Home
Premium.
>>> You're infected and don't even know it.
>>
>> You have cancer and don't even know it. Well, it *could* be true,
>> right?
>
>Not according to the analysis I had done last week. Course, you don't
>have anything to analyze your computer ...
I'm glad you are in good health, in all seriousness. However, I
certainly do analyze my computer. If I were to get owned, presumably
there would be some purpose for the hacker(s) to use my box for. If I
were to be a zombie machine, for example, I'd (along with Verizon)
probably notice the bandwidth usage in denial-of-service attacks. If
they wanted my bank info/etc., I'd obviously notice that very quickly,
and one thing I'd want to investigate would indeed be whether my
computer was compromised.
Hasn't happened.
>> There are advantages to
>> Linux, also, but it often doesn't even *allow* the lack of passwords
>> or running as root.
>
>For good reason, one you apparently are unable to understand.
It's a good *option*, even a good *default* option - but I'm glad that
MS still has a way for a knowledgeable user to easily convert Win7
into NT6.1 (so to speak).
>>> I hope for your sake that you don't have any bank or
>>> personal information on your computer.
>>
>> Quite the contrary. I use online banking/shopping all the time. I
>> don't worry, because I secure my system properly. Prevention is the
>> best medicine.
>
>Right. You're a sitting duck.
Neither of us can prove what hasn't happened yet, but I certainly do
whatever will meaningfully secure my computer.
>> Anyone can learn to use Windows (*and* other
>> operating systems) safely. If you aren't part of increasing awareness
>> of that, including for non-Windows OSes/software, you're part of the
>> problem. Microsoft can take credit all the way back to 1998, with
>> Windows Update automatically discovering (and/or providing with XP/
>> etc.) OS updates.
>
>I've met people who don't know how to make a new folder and didn't even
>know that they were running Windows or what Windows is. You are giving
>the average computer user too much credit.
That's why I suggested that we do what we can to increase awareness.
They *can* learn - but that doesn't necessarily mean they *will*.
>>> I am not competing in a personality contest and need not be accepted
>>> into any In Group. The facts are the facts and a pirated copy of Windows
>>> will run just as good as a "genuine" copy will. So will PhotoShop,
>>> Office, Studio Vegas or whatever. I have seen computers where all of the
>>> above was pirated and they didn't have one single virus or malware on
>>> the machine.
>>
>> Not the point. You, yourself, just made a big issue out of
>> non-techies using computers. They, in particular, are much more
>> likely to be the victim of tampered-with warez, than the techie-
>> pirates. Pick a *side*, troll.
>
>The side is that the ALL users would be safer with Linux.
Linux is not perfect, though - and has not been tested on the scale of
lusers' use that Windows has, obviously. It's easy to claim that
Linux's security record would scale up, but impossible to prove, until
its usage itself scales up.
>>> When you consider that 99% of all Windows users buy the OS preinstalled
>>> on their new computer, who is MS targeting?
>>
>> Primarily victims of counterfeiting, as per their long-stated policy
>> (most of whom do indeed get it from a fly-by-night "OEM"). If that
>> weren't the case, it wouldn't be an *optional* update.
>
>It's all about money and control. MS could care less about their
>customers. This is typical of a monopoly or, in this case, a de facto
>monopoly. You are presumed guilty of piracy until you prove otherwise
>with programs that are infamous for false positives.
Well, without regard to your accusations about whether they care,
let's think about it from their business point of view: if they
didn't have any anti-piracy mechanisms, one Win7 DVD-ROM could install
an unlimited number of machines. Fly-by-night box builders could get
away with murder in terms of counterfeiting. Unless they decide to
make Windows free, they are going to need to use Product Keys at a
minimum.
As for false positives, I don't doubt that there *may* be some cases
of it. I do promise you that legit customers will get it straightened
out, though, if so. Microsoft does take its corporate
responsibilities seriously.
--
Joel Crump
