Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 4th Mar 2007 13:56 UTC, submitted by danwarne
Windows "A genuine crack for Windows Vista has just been released by pirate group Pantheon, which allows a pirated, non-activated installation of Vista (Home Basic/Premium and Ultimate) to be properly activated and made fully-operational. Unlike cracks which have been floating around since Vista RTM was released in late November, this crack doesn't simply get around product activation with beta activation files or timestop cracks - it actually makes use of the activation process."
Thread beginning with comment 218449
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: You won't spend $200 for Vista
by zztaz on Sun 4th Mar 2007 18:37 UTC in reply to "You won't spend $200 for Vista"
zztaz
Member since:
2006-09-16

"If Linux would cost $200 and Vista cost $200 and the only advantage of Linux is that you got source code, I would bet you that all you so called Open SOurce advocates would be running Vista."

You would lose that bet. I use freely licensed software to avoid vendor lock-in. Being at the mercy of sole-source suppliers is too expensive. Dealing with the whims of single suppliers is affordable only if your time is free.

You've also trotted out the canard that open source is only useful if I read the code. That's nonsense. I benefit when anyone else reads the code. It's no different than the fact that if someone were to try to steal my car, one of my neighbors would call the police. We look out for each other. Shared efforts in a community work well, and have since before recorded history.

Reply Parent Score: 5

stephanem Member since:
2006-01-11

> You would lose that bet.

Wanna bet your salary for 1 year? As soon as something that was free started to cost $$$, people will move on. We've seen that a million times in the dot-com era.


> We look out for each other. Shared efforts in a community work well, and have since before recorded history.

But if everybody had to PAY MONEY for each other's efforts - a guy making a modification on some open source program was going to charge you money anyway, exactly how does having the source benefit you?

Edited 2007-03-04 19:53

Reply Parent Score: 1

zombie process Member since:
2005-07-08

This is a ridiculously confused argument in the first place, and frankly even weak as a strawman.

1) This cannot happen so making up hypothetical arguments for or against how many people would stay with linux if it started costing money is absurd.

2) Many people enjoy products that *do* have yearly costs, such as RHEL, Mandriva Club, SLED, etc, and haven't "gone running to Vista" because of it.

3) Many people (though admittedly far fewer than should) contribute $$$ to F/OSS projects regularly.

4) Icebox.com cannot be compared to an OS. Flash animation that is at best worth a chuckle and at worst is vulgar or just plain stupid is not as important to, well anyone, as their OS of choice. Hard Drinkin' Lincoln versus Ubuntu -- Hmmm...

Reply Parent Score: 3