Vista: a paradox-- if Microsoft is really serious about counterfeitsand viruses, then why this?

[raylopez99]

Microsoft claims they are concerned for potential users of Vista (or
XP) about the effects of counterfeit copies of Vista and viruses,
trojans, etc that may be loaded onto such counterfeit copies.

If this is true, then why doesn't Microsoft insist that a clean
reininstall of Windows Vista or XP be done if a counterfeit copy is
detected? Instead, Microsoft merely asks a user of a counterfeit copy
that a Genuine Windows key be bought. No virus check is done, nor is
a clean reinstall performed. In fact, after you buy a Genuine Windows
key, no backup copy of Windows is sent on a DVD/CD unless you pay
extra. So even if a user wants to do a clean reinstall, they cannot.
And if you read the fine print on a EULA they post, it says that MSFT
is not responsible if, even with a Genuine Windows XP key, your system
is infected by a virus and you have to rebuy another key later (so
some lawyer at least has thought of this problem).

Anybody notice this paradox? Seems MSFT is only concerned with your
money after all, not your security.

BTW I running Vista Ultimate right now on a $3 copy I bought in Asia.
I'm not sure, maybe it's the shoddy packaging, maybe it's the low
price, but something tells me it might not be a genuine copy. But no
matter, so far, and I've avoided the SP1, it's working fine and I
don't notice any obvious trojans or viruses.

RL

 

[7]

Microsoft claims they are concerned for potential users of Vista (or
XP) about the effects of counterfeit copies of Vista and viruses,
trojans, etc that may be loaded onto such counterfeit copies.

If this is true, then why doesn't Microsoft insist that a clean
reininstall of Windows Vista or XP be done if a counterfeit copy is
detected? Instead, Microsoft merely asks a user of a counterfeit copy
that a Genuine Windows key be bought.

Thats because it is important to Micoshaft that you (a windummy) buy
more windummy licenses (not software). Licenses cost nothing but software
costs loads of money (about 20 cents + pp + admin) - which is several
thousand percentage more expensive than just giving you nothin
and laughing all the way to the bank.

Hope that helps you decide to get Linux instead.

http://www.livecdlist.com

Free to download, copy and distribute as often and on as many
PCs as you need. It comes with source code so you can modify
and incorporate into products as often as you want and sell
without having to negotiate complex licensing agreements
and spending money wastefully with micoshaft and its satellite
companies. 1 million+ Linux desktops get installed per month
and Linux sells 3 million embedded Linux products PER DAY.
More reasons to get on the free Linux bandwagon.

 

[What?]

raylopez99 wrote:

<snipped>

You are a clown, and the person who made the original post is a clown in
addition to you being a clown.

 

[Charlie Tame]

<snipped>

You are a clown, and the person who made the original post is a clown in
addition to you being a clown.

Actually you are the clown. The original post is correct, simply
licensing a pirate copy is flawed logic.

There could be any number of things on a pirate copy that you wouldn't
want, including identity theft malware, rootkits and God knows what
else. Sure it is up to the user to decide, but if you doubt that malware
could be included in an operating system why do you think Linux and
Solaris distributions come with MD5 checksums?

 

[Kerry Brown]

There could be any number of things on a pirate copy that you wouldn't

want, including identity theft malware, rootkits and God knows what else.
Sure it is up to the user to decide, but if you doubt that malware could
be included in an operating system why do you think Linux and Solaris
distributions come with MD5 checksums?

How does this work? If the checksums are included with the install media
couldn't a malicious distributor just alter the checksum to match their
hijacked version? If the checksums are external then how are they checked?
It is an interesting idea but how is it implemented?

Thanks,

 

[PNutts]

IMO you confuse licensing (the key) with physical media (the DVD). There are
reasons an install with a valid DVD will fail WGA validation. Also, at least
for XP, there is replacement valid install media.

It is no secret that (for now) Microsoft is trying to stop illegal software
from the top down. They want the people who manufactured it and sold it to
you, not you. From the few moments I spent at the link below, it appears WGA
helps people recover who unknowingly purchased non-genuine software.

For more information that may answer some of your questions:
http://www.microsoft.com/Genuine/

 

[DanS]

Microsoft claims they are concerned for potential users of Vista (or
XP) about the effects of counterfeit copies of Vista and viruses,
trojans, etc that may be loaded onto such counterfeit copies.

If this is true, then why doesn't Microsoft insist that a clean
reininstall of Windows Vista or XP be done if a counterfeit copy is
detected? Instead, Microsoft merely asks a user of a counterfeit copy
that a Genuine Windows key be bought. No virus check is done, nor is
a clean reinstall performed. In fact, after you buy a Genuine Windows
key, no backup copy of Windows is sent on a DVD/CD unless you pay
extra. So even if a user wants to do a clean reinstall, they cannot.
And if you read the fine print on a EULA they post, it says that MSFT
is not responsible if, even with a Genuine Windows XP key, your system
is infected by a virus and you have to rebuy another key later (so
some lawyer at least has thought of this problem).

Anybody notice this paradox? Seems MSFT is only concerned with your
money after all, not your security.

You are right. This has nothing to do with 'protecting' us.

It's just another scare tactic. Propaganda.

BTW I running Vista Ultimate right now on a $3 copy I bought in Asia.
I'm not sure, maybe it's the shoddy packaging, maybe it's the low
price, but something tells me it might not be a genuine copy. But no
matter, so far, and I've avoided the SP1, it's working fine and I
don't notice any obvious trojans or viruses.

No comment.

 

[NoStop]

How does this work? If the checksums are included with the install media
couldn't a malicious distributor just alter the checksum to match their
hijacked version? If the checksums are external then how are they checked?
It is an interesting idea but how is it implemented?

Thanks,

Checksums are posted by the respective Linux distro. If the Checksum on your
ISO doesn't match, then it's been tampered with and is not the official
distro.

Cheers.

--
Frank's Brain Activity Plotted (watch the red line):
http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i4/Astronomy2/PreformanceMonitor.jpg

AlexB: "If it is Business or Ultimate open Command Prompt as administrator
and type lusrmgr.msc."
^^^^^
I must say the developers at Microsoft do have a sense of humour.

 

[cheen]

they want customers from rich countries to pay for what they get,
but kinda turn their eyes away on piracy from developing nations because
they want windows to be learned and depenended upon.. for example MS's
biggest nightmare is for china to use only Linux! LOL

They prefer them being pirates and perhaps a future customer than everything
to be based on linux over there...

they are even putting their dirty hands on the OLPC project by making a
version of xp that will run on that...

read here http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS5428347716.html

 

[Moshe Goldfarb]

Microsoft claims they are concerned for potential users of Vista (or
XP) about the effects of counterfeit copies of Vista and viruses,
trojans, etc that may be loaded onto such counterfeit copies.

Whenever ANY large company claims they have *your* best interests in mind
you should run...
And fast....

The same thing applies when large corporations express interest in Linux
and offer a few scraps for free to the Linux community.
Watch out....

 

[Kerry Brown]

Checksums are posted by the respective Linux distro. If the Checksum on
your
ISO doesn't match, then it's been tampered with and is not the official
distro.

OK. I knew about that. I thought that maybe this had been automated somehow
to ensure authenticity. How many people actually check MD5 checksums? I know
I don't. I always download from an official mirror for whatever distro I
want. If a have a problem installing I may check the hash to see if it was a
good download but that's about it. When MS distributes CD/DVD images they
have SHA-1 hashes available.

 

[NoStop]

OK. I knew about that. I thought that maybe this had been automated
somehow to ensure authenticity. How many people actually check MD5
checksums? I know I don't. I always download from an official mirror for
whatever distro I want. If a have a problem installing I may check the
hash to see if it was a good download but that's about it. When MS
distributes CD/DVD images they have SHA-1 hashes available.

I always do a md5sum on the downloaded iso just in case the download was
bad. Why waste a disk and time if the md5sum doesn't check out?

Cheers.

--
Frank's Brain Activity Plotted (watch the red line):
http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i4/Astronomy2/PreformanceMonitor.jpg

AlexB: "If it is Business or Ultimate open Command Prompt as administrator
and type lusrmgr.msc."
^^^^^
I must say the developers at Microsoft do have a sense of humour.

 

[Spanky deMonkey]

they want customers from rich countries to pay for what they get,
but kinda turn their eyes away on piracy from developing nations because
they want windows to be learned and depenended upon.. for example MS's
biggest nightmare is for china to use only Linux! LOL

Vista.generals biggest nightmare is Cheen. Just FYI

 

[7]

The fact is that Linux has a miniscule share of the desktop market: in
recent reports NetApp says 0.67%, the BBC says 0.8%.

BWAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAAA!!!

All you have to do now is prove that your BBC has used an approved
independently verifiable methodology that measures Linux.

At least press releases are independently verifiable.
At least 1 million+ Linux desktops installed per month
and 3 million+ embedded Linux devices sold PER DAY.

 

[Snit]

BWAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAAA!!!

All you have to do now is prove that your BBC has used an approved
independently verifiable methodology that measures Linux.

At least press releases are independently verifiable.
At least 1 million+ Linux desktops installed per month
and 3 million+ embedded Linux devices sold PER DAY.

If you can find any reason to show that there is a greater than 1%
penetration of Linux on the desktop then show it... but if you could you
would.

Linux.
Free.
Runs on almost anything.
Offered as an option by the biggest OEMs
Less than 1% of the only market Linus really cares about.

Compared to:

OS X
Not free.
Runs only on relatively high end proprietary hardware.
Offered by only one relatively small OEM
Around 10% of the the same market

Linux has a problem here. A big one. Not sure why folks in the Linux
community are so afraid to look at it.

 

[Holz]

Linux has a problem here.  A big one.  Not sure why folks in the Linux
community are so afraid to look at it.

you are right. This is why you have to load all your "anti" software (virus.
malware, spyware etc.) and we sit and laugh.