According to Computer Times, Microsoft will allow SP2 to be installed on any copy of Windows XP including copies with invalid license keys. Microsoft decided “that even if someone has pirated copy of Windows, it is more important to keep him safe than it is to be concerned about the revenue issue.” There is no news of whether or not pirated copies will be allowed access to the Windows Update site afterwards or just allowed to install SP2.
Microsoft will Allow Pirated Copies of Windows Download SP2
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Seems like MS wants to stop security issues before there is a large backlash against them. All of their moves have been in the direction of preventing anyone from hating them. Perhaps they’re trying to stabilize their dominance to keep it going for as long as possible.
Giving away free services to people that don’t deserve it is not the best way to maximize profits. I hope Microsoft tracks every computer SP2 is installed and raids the homes of these commie thieves.
This is the most respectable, honorable, and responsible thing Microsoft has ever done in my opinion. I am a senior Network and Systems Engineer for a California data center, and hopefully this will decrease miscreant traffic and improve the internet on a whole. Though we do not run Windows servers, our network is continually bombarded with worms and viruses trying to infect our computers and our client’s computers. If I received a penny every time my kernel logs a request on port 445 I would not have to work anymore. I am proud that Microsoft has realized that this is an issue and the greater good of the internet is finally important to them. In my opinion it shows that Linux can even make Windows better, if indirectly. good work Microsoft, you are one step closer to making your products transparent and more secure. Keep up the good work, you have a long way to go.
As it was discussed here: http://www.osnews.com/comment.php?news_id=6966
This is a good thing. It’s not a way to reward piracy but to prevent the spread of worms and such. It’s to protect everyone else, not to protect the one with the illegal copy of XP, I seriously don’t think that MS cares about their safety.
In other words:
“We’d rather keep the users who have pirated our OS using it that changing over to Linux/*BSD/OSX”
That’s the bottom line.
I’m not so sure it is bad for their investors. By doing things like this they maintain a their user base. MS products are far to expensive for home users. Think of it this way, who would like to be hooked up to a telephone network where no privte customers could afford to have a home phone. Especially if there was a free network that offered almost the same services.
This is a sign that Microsoft recegnizes that their products are overprized and that the losses they claim they do due to software piracy is imaginary figures.
MS has a huge threat in front of them in the form of linux. Better to keep their existing use userbase and perhaps build it even more (pirated) than to lose it to linux. They are still going to generate revenue even with those who pirated copies of their OS because they need the software and games to run on it. I think its a splendid move.
I’m sure they would love it if the Cheap-@$$ pirating parasites, would leech off the “Linux/*BSD/OSX” community instead of them.
The bottom line is that they want to protect as many customers as they can from exploits, even if it means giving away the results of millions of dollars of work to ingrates, and theives.
‘Course this could have been headed off back in the 90’s if they had taken “secure computing” more serously.
This is a really BAD move by microsoft.
What microsoft should have done was made sure users with pirated software are not able to download the service pack and therefore their computers are NOT secure.
Any known exploits would then only hit these people. So what ? They want to use window for free, they put up with the dangers.
Microsoft would not get bad press from this, as in reality, these people are not entitled to any of the benefits of a “proper” microsoft user.
I have to use microsoft products at work, but I dont at home. If I did have to, I would make sure that I had a fully up to date,(and paid for) system, then I would know who to blame when it all screwed up.
So block these users from getting updates and laugh at them when they complain their computers aren’t working properly… there is an old saying, it begins with “F” and ends with “uck em”
Product activation was set in place to reduce piracy. We all know that it was hacked days after Windows XP was released, and the only consolation and reason people put up with it was so that they could get the patches which pirated copies could not.
Now that pirated copies can get patches too, what reason is there for product activation apart from inconveniencing the people who bought the original product in the first place?
MS is not doing this to give pirates a better user eXPerience. It is doing it because these pirated machines are a nuisance for everyone that uses the internet. It would be irresponsible of MS to demand everyone else deal with the traffic from their poorly secured operating system just they don’t personally agree with those peoples ethics.
MS dropped the ball with Blaster, Nachi, and Sasser. They owe this. If the investors don’t like it, that’s too bad.
“We all know that it was hacked days after Windows XP was released”
Actually their product activation has proven to be pretty effective against piracy. Obtaining a leaked corprate key is the only method I know of that people bypassed the product actication.
Some people made claims they they managed to generate “valid keys” after letting a small PC farm crunch numbers through the night, but even then they never made the claim that they could authenticate those keys to the product activation service. And that method of piracy is placed out of reach of joe user.
SP2 addresses the remote security of windows, I suspect this generosity is likely a one time deal.
Anyway, becuase copies of windows are tied to hardware, it is my opinion that MS should ship “family pack” versions of the OS much like Apple is doing.
Adding XP pro to 3 computers in your home is a $900 expense. If one of the computers die, the OS tied to it dies with it, new PC, new license, $1200. Price tags like that should not be seen by home users.
Like it was imposibille to install SP1 on pirated XP….
It did refused to install on copies with known serialz (like FCKGW-******),but it is easy to find XP keygens and apps to change XP serial number that work with SP1.
A commercial software company that realises they rely on pirated software. The various software monopolies (Windows, Office, Photoshop) would not be where they are today without piracy. Photoshop certainly couldn’t be the defacto standard it is if it were impossible for Art and Design students to run pirated copies. Similarly by quietly allowing pirated copies of Windows XP Microsoft can sidestep the nightmare of having to support windows 9x.
This is a very intelligent move. Microsoft understand that by pirating Windows people are being locked into to their software. As everyone who has Windows at home understands it, businesses can then save on training their users if they also use Windows. Microsoft then know that if a company buys Windows they’ll also be more likely to buy Office, Windows Server, SQL Server, etc which have larger profit margins.
Microsoft also understand that most worm infected computers are poorly maintained home users. The less worms around will help to keep business users happy because they won’t have to spend as much time fixing infected computers.
This move is certainly clever and I see it aimed at keeping business customers happy rather than home users.
Microsoft’s true objective is to try to stop the procreation of the massive worms that cripple Windows installations — and patching ALL XP systems is the way to do it.
Microsoft, autodesk, macromedia and adobe have a large monopoly due to it’s pirated user base. I’m sure that Longhorn will have great features and a pathetic anti-piracy system, it won’t be coincidence.
It is just a plain fact that pirated use of MS Windows is huge everywhere, especially in poor countries. I suppose that especially in the 3rd world countries practically everyone but those who have got their legal copy of Windows when buyng a new PC machine, use pirated versions of MS Windows. So MS is just acknowledging the facts when they allow also the millions of pirate users to update their Windows.
Just think if all those people were really not allowed to update oe even use their pirated WIndows copies anymore, what that would do to MS monopoly? People would have to conisider Linux or something else then.
Of course it is great that MS allows also those users to update their Windows who would have no money to buy a legal copy of MS Windows anyway. Nothing bad to say about that decision in itself. But in the end Microsoft is indeed just trying to maintain their desktop OS monopoly here…
But in the end Microsoft is indeed just trying to maintain their desktop OS monopoly here…
…and why shouldn’t they?
…and why shouldn’t they?
Because it stifles competition and innovation?
what is a non “pathetic anti-piracy system” ??
It is long known that part of the success for Windows to become the more widespread OS in the world was that it was easily pirated. This way, millions of users would become proficient Win users and many small bussiness would use their products, getting used to them and then requiring new products that were not available as warez and ultimately buying them.
Currently, even with piracy, MS profit grows year after year in the double digit realm. That means that all development/R&D is already baing paid by current legal user base.
Now the problem with denying security fixes to pirated versions is that everytime a worm/virus starts attacking, no one says: “it is pirates fault, because 90% attacks came from unpatched-illegal Windows installations and 10% from legal installations”, in fact, they would see Windows installations as a whole and say “9000000000 windows computers are infected”, which ultimately affects MS credibility.
Current move from MS is wise, they are trying to diminish the security/virus/worms problems associated to windows universe. It w’ont affect that much MS profit,because either way they would had to develop such fixes for their legal user base. It is unlikely that a significant amount of illegal users had ever buyed licenses due being unable to upgrade. People will think better of a company that patches security flaws even to this extend, just to protect their user base.
I’m not saying pirating is good or bad, but MS decision to patch these sources of virus/worms is the wisest one
While its just as likely that people get pirated copies of Windows “unknowingly” through friends, I would argue that this move does little to halt worms spreading on pre-SP2 computers.
As is likely the case, the people who have pirated copies of XP knew where to find it and how to install the software. And they also know how to (better) secure Windows, check for viruses etc. They’ll also know when service packs are relased .
Unless OEMs (Dell, HP, etc.) and MS are going to go to large extents to help granny or average user to advertise SP2, help install it and remove existing viruses from their computers than the problem will still exist.
Are you saying linux hasn’t innovated?
Because it stifles competition and innovation?
And why should they care of that?
“what is a non “pathetic anti-piracy system” ??”
I would have thought that was obvious… A warship.
They will “allow”? reality check… they cannot do anything about it anyway (as seen with SP1).
“And why should they care of that?
”
because its illegal to use a monopology to stiffle competition
Most of their software originally got spread by giving it away for free in the first place (OEM). So people are used to having the OS for free when they buy a new computer. Buy a new computer, get windows, office, … So I think they never really cared for piracy that much since it helped to spread their software.
common ppl like u have problem with everything MS does? firstly u ppl bash ms for poor security! think of blaster & other recent worms their patches were released days before or months. also win xp, winme has built in automatic update features but those so called “geeks” who are just after performance disable such services even ICF. just check out windows xp tweaks on google & see what services they recomend to disable. & now they are giving security biggest priority you guys are starting to bash ms AGAIN! have u oss ppl got used to talk ONLY bad about paid softwares??? stop bashing & produce some better product so that ppl will automatically will be attracted to it. (e.g. Mozilla) it is that simple.
p.s.: for that guy saying that winxp pirated is easy to obtain & all crap dude ms is ONLY allowing to install SP2 & not u to advertise about how u use pirated version. you may be in trouble dude. be careful. as far as i know it is a crime…….
because its illegal to use a monopology to stiffle competition
And why should they care if they can keep it without getting proper punishment?
“because its illegal to use a monopology to stiffle competition
And why should they care if they can keep it without getting proper punishment?”
you mean its good to do bad things as long as you dont get caught. i have nothing more to say
http://www.betanews.com/print.php3?sid=1013753253
You don’t need a computer farm to do that. If there’s a demand, there’ll always be an offer. Honestly, I wonder if it’s worth it spending millions of USDollars on anti-piracy and being a bully, or just instead lower the price for those who REALLY can’t afford it. Think of it – american salary and, say, chinese salary really differ that much. So instead of asking $150 for a product, just lower that number.
On a side note, KDE is (arguably) already a better experience than XP. It’s only a matter of people learning to do things slightly differently and then MS’s ‘sunny road ahead’ is over.
Most anyone who has a pirated copy of Windows XP will know where to get SP2 slipstreamed.
My guess is that by allowing pirated copies to install SP2, they’ll be able to track them better
I’d like to protest capitalist’s post on purely historical merits. It’s shameful that his post got past the moderators. He perpetuates a hateful and shameful stereotype of communists by associating them with software pirates. His false comments about communists is no different than if he had made racist remarks about Asians pirating software!
“Because it stifles competition and innovation?”
And why should they care of that?
Because it antagonizes consumers down the road, leading them to jump ship once alternatives are available. And because it gives ammunition to those who advocate a breakup of the company and/or the opening up of the OS and Office’s proprietary file formats.
What some posters do not understand is that these wroms affect the entire internet. If you manage a large data center environment you will see that it doesn’t matter what operating systems are attached to your switches. What you will find is increased CPU utilization at the aggregate switches; due to incredible amounts of virus and worm traffic. You will log more hits to your access-lists and you will see your layer 3 switches start process switching packets like little sissys. What happens then is a DOS effect against your network. Down stream clients receive degraded service and everyone suffers. What Microsoft is doing is not only honorable, it will also help their business and their stock price. Investors read headlines and when your operating system is in the headlines every month regarding vulnerabilities and exploits, investors take note. Eventually the media will start to report more accurately and Microsoft will lose confidence in the markets due to their poor security design. This move by Microsoft is good in many ways, for users of Windows, users of the internet and to Microsoft’s business and share holders. it is also a testament to the fact that their is actually competition in the OS market for the first time in years. Who knows, next, maybe Microsoft will innovate in some area of technology, maybe even security.
I am a very passionate user of Linux and OS X. I refuse to use Windows unless there is no other way to get the job done, but I still believe that this is a positive step in the right direction for Microsoft and the internet. Calling users of pirated versions of Microsoft operating systems thieves and communists is not appropriate. Regardless of how people acquired their software, patching security holes, whose exploits degrade the internet and the business conducted within its space makes perfect sense.
I agree. It seems the moderators can be quite selective in how they apply the OSNews guidelines.
you mean its good to do bad things as long as you dont get caught. i have nothing more to say
Maybe it’s better like that because you don’t seem to get it. They’re a business. Why should they care of the competition, those who are trying to crush them? I do not approve what they’re doing but it makes sense from a business perspective.
—
Because it antagonizes consumers down the road, leading them to jump ship once alternatives are available.
But they’ll also lose customers if they don’t try to keep their monopoly. If customers really cared of Microsoft’s monopoly and were really opposed to their modus operandi, they would already have jumped ship as there are alternatives out there (Mac OSX and Linux (to an extend)). If they were really pissed off, I’m not sure Microsoft would play that hard.
And because it gives ammunition to those who advocate a breakup of the company and/or the opening up of the OS and Office’s proprietary file formats.
I’m not sure if they are really worried of them because, in my opinion, these people are more barking than biting…
Perhaps they hadn’t thought of it from Rayiner’s point of view? I only realized it when Rayiner pointed it out and I agree with him. Capitalist’s posts should be modded down.
This is the most respectable, honorable, and responsible thing Microsoft has ever done in my opinion.
That’s not saying much, is it? This costs them nothing. It’s not really different from what was done with previous bug fixes either, it it? I don’t remember having to verify my license to download previous service packs.
The current state of Windows security is an embarassment to the company. Each employee in my office spent a full day loading patches and service packs for Windows 2000 Professional following the Sasser worm.
Microsoft has to fix this; and to then glorify them by saying ‘How noble!’; sad. Microsoft has certainly lowered everyone’s expectations.
I do not approve what they’re doing but it makes sense from a business perspective.
Perhaps, but then again once you get to be a monopoly there’s nowhere to go but down. From a strategic point of view, you become the prime target.
Also, when we say that they “shouldn’t” do something, that doesn’t imply “from their point of view”, but rather “from ours.” It feels like you always have to play devil’s advocate. It’s a bit annoying, to tell you the truth. If you agree that you don’t approve what they’re doing, then why do you argue that they should continue to do it?
I’m not sure if they are really worried of them because, in my opinion, these people are more barking than biting.
I think the EU would disagree. I also think it’s a bad idea for Microsoft to assume that now that it got a slap on the wrist, it can do what it wants. Since it’s likely that there will be a new administration in the White House in November (especially after this week), I don’t think that MS should consider itself immune from more prosecution, especially if it takes its anti-competitive practices to a new level…
The linked article is nearly 2 1/2 years old. MS has since released SP1, the mothod in the article will not work on SP1. I admit, I personally own 4 licensed copies of Micsofot windows. I am short one SP1 License and I would very much not like not to shell out another $300. I am no stranger to pirated software and I can’t find anything to get past the product activation for that system. I will probably end up paying the $300 before I hit the 30 day limit.
I’d like to protest capitalist’s post on purely historical merits. It’s shameful that his post got past the moderators
I would like to second Rayiner’s protest. People like capitalist need to be moderated or banned completely as they provide nothing useful to a discussion, if not flame wars.
i haven’t seen windows update in years… and my windows installation never had a virus, nor problems. Security depends on the user and how much the OS with documents/help/warnings pushes this user towards acting secure. People should be informed more how to use a computer secure and effective.
For example in linux when running root and you want to chat with xchat. It’ll give a warning that it’s not smart/safe to chat as root.
What I don’t understand is why anyone is still using any of the invalid product keys. Surely anyone who’s pirated Windows XP already knows which keys Microsoft has blocked? The people I know with a pirate installation of Windows XP have used a keygen to get a valid ID and installed SP1 despite Microsoft’s efforts.
I doubt the people who haven’t bothered switching to a valid ID to get SP1 would bother downloading a new service pack. I doubt that this will really change anything.
Perhaps, but then again once you get to be a monopoly there’s nowhere to go but down. From a strategic point of view, you become the prime target.
That is very true…. and that’s why it makes sense for them to keep their monopoly.
Also, when we say that they “shouldn’t” do something, that doesn’t imply “from their point of view”, but rather “from ours.” It feels like you always have to play devil’s advocate. It’s a bit annoying, to tell you the truth. If you agree that you don’t approve what they’re doing, then why do you argue that they should continue to do it?
Did I said they should continue to do that? I’m just saying that their actions make sense when you consider the situation and they have no reason to stop them at this moment. Hey, I would probably order them to do the same thing if I was their chairman/CEO. If you find this annoying, then I guess the best solution for you would be to stop reading my posts.
I think the EU would disagree.
I don’t think the judgement made by the EC will really change something. Yes, they have to open their protocols and possibly some of their formats but they can get patents on them… They barked a lot but they finally only made a weak bite.
I also think it’s a bad idea for Microsoft to assume that now that it got a slap on the wrist, it can do what it wants. Since it’s likely that there will be a new administration in the White House in November (especially after this week), I don’t think that MS should consider itself immune from more prosecution, especially if it takes its anti-competitive practices to a new level…
Well, it will probably depend on who will fund that new administration…
“i haven’t seen windows update in years… and my windows installation never had a virus, nor problems. Security depends on the user and how much the OS with documents/help/warnings pushes this user towards acting secure. People should be informed more how to use a computer secure and effective.”
You may want to visit Windows update if you are on windows. It’s helpful for fixing those buffer overflow issues that you can’t stop. Unless you have some kind of killer firewall (which is entirely possible).
The record time for a worm is now 18 days after the patch, so if you update every 14 days you were safe; or as safe as updates can make you. Next advise, uninstall outlook.
Because if they disable pirated version they would realise there market share isn’t so great.
The products market share is though.
I dont have IE installed so I can’t even do an “automatic update”. The only thing I did is remove all MS stuff I could with XPlite. And yea I have a decent hardware firewall… With windows security updates you can keep updating all the time, I’m not going to waste my time on that for the few times I run windows. I removed the software with infinite security holes that’ll never be fixed. Windows can easily score higher in security.
Think… you couldn’t install SP1 if it was a pirated copy.
Now, if it is one of those, you can, but blocks windows update.
Because it stifles competition and innovation?
Sure looks like a lot of competition out there to me. More legit competition than MS has ever had in fact.
With Linux pushing on corporate america MS’s monopoly dosen’t look as strong as it once did.
“I dont have IE installed so I can’t even do an “automatic update”. The only thing I did is remove all MS stuff I could with XPlite. And yea I have a decent hardware firewall… With windows security updates you can keep updating all the time, I’m not going to waste my time on that for the few times I run windows. I removed the software with infinite security holes that’ll never be fixed. Windows can easily score higher in security.”
You might as well just stop running Windows since you seem to dislike it so.
Is to why MS makes it sound like pirating users are insecure users. To be honest, most of the people I know that do things legit are the least secure, and the least to take charge of keeping there system safe. Like sasser or whatever the virus is called, all you need is a firewall to save you from that. Its a stupid ftp script that downloads the virus and then runs it. Block port 21 and issue resolved, but no legit users would take the time to notice that. Not to say MS isn’t trying to make it easier and more obvious of the importance of the updates, but as far as I’ve seen, there legit users seem to be more of the insecurities than anything.
Of course, this doesn’t apply to everyone, but as far as I can tell it seems like it.
Keath,
For the record, though I said this was an honorable and respectable action Microsoft is taking, it does not mean that I believe they consitently act in a respectable or ethical manner. I was simply rejoicing that it is possible for Microsoft to do something that is actually good for the internet. It actually lends itself to the idea of a community, which I know is quite odd. It is interesting though how a company can change its image with time. IBM seems to have done that well of late. I just want to make it clear that I am not a proponent of the insecure products that Microsoft peddles, I just respect their choice in this matter.
In that case (in ref to news post).. M$ should honestly consider offering a bare-bones Windows installation for free.. or, realistically, cheap.
As a developer I realize that the integration of IE and WMP are not exactly that great of ideas. Instead, add the API and functions to the OS and have IE and WMP become much more simple applications. This is the general method I use in all my development so I can avoid many frustrating bugs and errors.
The API should be fully opened for usage, potential security holes should have blocks / safeguards on them ( I call the debugger up with info to halt the intrusion and the offending app ), and then all these lawsuits would have less merit.. and we could all take advantage of M$’s technologies.
Applications could call a standard API for accessing internet or media functions for their own uses… in fact, the best thing M$ could do is allow a standardized API that will call whatever browser that supplies an add-on (aka, driver/plugin) for the integration for use system-wide… allowing people to easily remove Microsoft’s technologies and supplant them with outside technologies.
This will make Windows more useful, and therefore maintain and increase sales.
Oh well, just my opinion.
–The loon
Well, from a user and developers perspective that would be nice. But MS wants control, and integration gives them more control.
This is not particularily good news for Linux, Microsoft’s inconvient(serial numbers), onerous(product activation)and downright sleazy(Windows Media Player sending data to Microsoft) anti-consumer behaviour is responsible for more than a few Linux installations.
Although Linux proponents go shame on you about these things behind their keyboard they pump their fists and go yeah.
Consumers should feel sick to their stomachs that they have to send unknown data to a software company to just use their computer, that comparatively few do is sad, but everyday more wake up to the fact it doesn’t have to be this way.
To Microsoft I say keep working on tough anti-consumer… oops! I mean anti-piracy systems and here’s hoping that Longhorn has the most uncrackable, phone-home, all your-data-are-belong-to-us, rock solid, insert your CD type in 5876-ioug-9876-ojhv-8765-oigu-8976-iojh-8767, send a blood sample systems ever thrust on the software buying public
YeahHoo!
“b) piracy is not theft”
Really…?
Oh yes I forgot…the new world reasoning…what is ‘is’ ?
Get a grip…piracy has been a scourge for thousands of years.
M$ is stooping pretty low in this regard…to battle piracy on one hand with their ‘Is it Authentic? campaign…..and then to also open the doors for free updates to pirated copies.
What a mixed message.
They had me for a second there, i was thinking “aw, how nice if microsoft”. Then I remembered rule number 1 of software piracy: NEVER run the update system, because it’ll help them catch you. I’m willing to be alot of folks who use this service will be getting busted.
NEVER run the update system, because it’ll help them catch you.
Just unplug your networkcable when installing the SP2 then, to be on the safe side. I doubt that MS has any tracking code hidden in it though.
“Just unplug your networkcable when installing the SP2 then, to be on the safe side. I doubt that MS has any tracking code hidden in it though.“
Never put ANYTHING past M$…
“I’m sure they would love it if the Cheap-@$$ pirating parasites, would leech off the “Linux/*BSD/OSX” community instead of them.”
The Linux/BSD/OSX communities welcome all because Linux and FreeBSD are free, and OS X is open source based, and while not free, Apple still got their cut from the hardware you bought.It is notable that OS X has no product activation. I guess in your way of thinking all of the Open Source people are just Cheap-@$$ pirating parasites.
On another note: while I have despised Microsoft for many years and shun their software totally, this news softens my attitude towards them some. It seems like they are attempting to become responsible members of society.
You might as well just stop running Windows since you seem to dislike it so.
_______________
I share the computer with other people. And they need windows for gaming, a program to learn french, some other things. And since I know everything about windows I administer it… and windows has some beautiful applications like K-Meleon and Miranda IM, I like to test them with every new version.
grtz
“They had me for a second there, i was thinking “aw, how nice if microsoft”. Then I remembered rule number 1 of software piracy: NEVER run the update system, because it’ll help them catch you. I’m willing to be alot of folks who use this service will be getting busted.”
The thought scares me, and I bought my copy (legally).
Keeping him safe is NOT the issue. Keeping other users that are slow on updating from being attacked by viruses etc from the computer with pirated software is most likely the issue. And of course it makes MS Gates look good to.
does anyone know if SP2 will support mount rainier/easy write? my cd-rw does.