Isn’t activation enough? Why have Windows Genuine Advantage?

[Greg R]

Isn’t activation enough? Why have Windows Genuine Advantage?

Activation now validation. I thought activation was supposed to take
care of validation.

If they are going to eventually going to require you to validate your
Microsoft software to get updates. This is going to cause a huge
problem. So, Much for Microsoft concerned about security.

If this happens. I will not be updating my Microsoft Software.
(Look like my next system will not be a loghorn*, windows xp. It will
either be a Linux system or custom made 98se computer.)

Greg R

*unless I need it for work.

Q. What is validation?

A. Validation is a short process that enables you to verify that your
copy of Windows is genuine. You will be prompted to complete the
validation process if you request a download of genuine Microsoft
software from the Microsoft Download Center. If you choose not to
validate your software, you may still obtain your requested download.
However, validating now enables faster access to the Download Center
in the future when validation may be required. During the validation
process Microsoft does not collect any information that can be used to
identify you or contact you.

 

[Rock]

Isn’t activation enough? Why have Windows Genuine Advantage?

Activation now validation. I thought activation was supposed to take
care of validation.

If they are going to eventually going to require you to validate your
Microsoft software to get updates. This is going to cause a huge
problem. So, Much for Microsoft concerned about security.

If this happens. I will not be updating my Microsoft Software.
(Look like my next system will not be a loghorn*, windows xp. It will
either be a Linux system or custom made 98se computer.)

Greg R

*unless I need it for work.

<snip>

Why is this going to cause a huge problem?

 

[Larry Samuels]

You can call it "the straw that broke the camel's back".

This is a bad idea any way you look at it--it does nothing to hinder pirated
copies and infuriates many legitimate users. It is a lose-lose proposition.

I fully expect many users will switch to another OS, ignore getting updates,
or get their patches from other sources if MS ever decides to enforce
validation.

--
Larry Samuels MS-MVP (Windows-Shell/User)
Associate Expert
Expert Zone -
Unofficial FAQ for Windows Server 2003 at
http://pelos.us/SERVER.htm

 

[Greg R]

You can call it "the straw that broke the camel's back".

This is a bad idea any way you look at it--it does nothing to hinder pirated
copies and infuriates many legitimate users. It is a lose-lose proposition.

I fully expect many users will switch to another OS, ignore getting updates,
or get their patches from other sources if MS ever decides to enforce
validation.

Rock
Answered your questions.

I bet if windows xp sp2 required validation. Most people would not
get it. Including me.


Greg R

 

[Alex Nichol]

You can call it "the straw that broke the camel's back".

This is a bad idea any way you look at it--it does nothing to hinder pirated
copies and infuriates many legitimate users. It is a lose-lose proposition.

I fully expect many users will switch to another OS, ignore getting updates,
or get their patches from other sources if MS ever decides to enforce
validation.

This present one seems to be more in the nature of a test of the method
rather than something ongoing in this form. What I would rather expect
is that it will become invisible, but will be arranged to prevent those
with pirated copies from installing matters that are not security
critical. Such as new versions of DirectX, Media Player and the like

I know there was a lot of discussion about whether those with pirated
systems should be locked out of SP2; as I recall that was resolved with
the view that real pirates would be either not getting it or would hack
a full version into installing, and the real problem was to make sure it
got to those who had unwittingly bought black market copies and might be
acting as distributors of infection.

 

[Greg R]

This present one seems to be more in the nature of a test of the method
rather than something ongoing in this form. What I would rather expect
is that it will become invisible, but will be arranged to prevent those
with pirated copies from installing matters that are not security
critical. Such as new versions of DirectX, Media Player and the like

I know there was a lot of discussion about whether those with pirated
systems should be locked out of SP2; as I recall that was resolved with
the view that real pirates would be either not getting it or would hack
a full version into installing, and the real problem was to make sure it
got to those who had unwittingly bought black market copies and might be
acting as distributors of infection.

Alex,
My system was reported as a pirated system during one of my clean
installs. I just changed the product key to what I used to install
windows xp and it worked. Yes, my copy is legal. Just the product
key got messed up.


I just wondering how many people had bad installs that messed up their
product key, that will be reported as pirated, when actual they are
not.


Greg R.

 

[Al Smith]

You can call it "the straw that broke the camel's back".

This present one seems to be more in the nature of a test of the method
rather than something ongoing in this form. What I would rather expect
is that it will become invisible, but will be arranged to prevent those
with pirated copies from installing matters that are not security
critical. Such as new versions of DirectX, Media Player and the like

Microsoft seems determined to hurt itself as a company, and to
reduce its market share and profits. They almost seem to be
deliberately driving their former customers to Apple and Linux.

Case in point. They had a chance to do something really original
and daring, with their stripped down version of Windows intended
for the Asian market. They could have made Windows lean and mean,
while still retaining all its core functions, and sold it for a
quarter of what they are presently getting for XP Pro. Imagine it!
A $50 version of Windows XP that did everything you needed it to
do, and ran quicker and with less bugs. Microsoft could have sold
a billion copies worldwide. Any person who wanted extra functions
would have bought their full version of Windows. It would have
increased their "shelf space" -- just as when Coke puts out
another brand, such as Cherry Coke, to take shelf space away from
Pepsi.

What did the idiots at Redmond do? They crippled their stripped
down Asian version of Windows so that nobody would want to buy or
use it. By doing this, they threw away the chance to make billions
of dollars in increased revenue. Such stupidity can't be
accidental. Gates must want Linux to succeed. Probably he uses it
himself.