I'm Pirating the Next Version of Windows • Hacker News Board

Re: I'm Pirating the Next Version of Windows

#211

Post by peteretep » Thu, Jan 19, 2012, 7:54 AM UTC

trotsky wrote: post #74

Windows activation is shockingly easy. Enter your key and when you go online it verifies it. If you're not connected to the internet make a 5 minute phone call. If you don't want to do that, no problem - there is no need to activate for up to 180 days. Really don't want to activate? No problem - it'll just turn your screen black and announce it's unlicensed software. It seems the author's only significant complaint i…

No, the author's complaint is that he gets a better service as a 'pirate' than as a paying customer, which is backwards.

Re: I'm Pirating the Next Version of Windows

#212

Post by cgoddard » Thu, Jan 19, 2012, 7:56 AM UTC

morsch wrote: post #106

nate_meurer wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft has tried their damndest to ensure that you must buy their OS in order to use a computer. They've done this directly using the Windows Tax, and indirectly with over two decades of anti-competitive business practices, some merely shady and others outright illegal. "If you don't like it, then don't use it" is pretty useless advice in this situation.

And the amazing thing is that they managed to do it again for Android. Except this time Apple is in a better spot than they were with PC operating systems.

Huh? Microsoft has a very tiny hold in mobile computing. Android is Google.

Re: I'm Pirating the Next Version of Windows

#213

Post by res0nat0r » Thu, Jan 19, 2012, 8:04 AM UTC

dwb wrote: post #144

MatthewB wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm...interesting. I see the difference you are trying to illustrate but to me, obtaining something illegally that was intended to be purchased is stealing. We're talking about the same thing though:)

If you steal an apple from someone, you are depriving the owner of that apple. If you, say, download a film, you are not depriving the copyright owner of anything at all – it is a copy of information. Whether or not you should have paid for the download is not relevant to the distinction. The action you took does not involve deprivation, therefore you didn't steal. Therein lies the difference.

Thats defined as copyright infringement, and is still against the law.

Re: I'm Pirating the Next Version of Windows

#214

Post by cgoddard » Thu, Jan 19, 2012, 8:08 AM UTC

6ren wrote: post #185

ChuckMcM wrote: post #85

I share the pain this guy experiences. I had Age of Empires 3 which would not run on my machine, period, because it didn't recognize the CD Rom driver and, as Microsoft explained, it might be a 'virtual' CD ROM and that would violate the terms of service. And even though it wasn't and didn't I could never run their software on that machine. Thus the who piracy economic argument is broken in three ways: 1) Folks who p…

Just had a thought on seeing your point 1): Part of the value some people buy is exclusivity. If others can get it for free, it reduces this aspect of its value.

How does exclusivity add any value to a piece of software? The utility and productivity that I get out of a piece of software is in no way influenced by how anyone else obtained it. Sure, I might be bitter that I didn't also break the law and obtain an illegal free copy of my software, but that's really just sour grapes.

And in business if the value I'm able to produce with software is governed more by my exclusive ownership than my skill with it and other professional skills, then it's probably a good idea to find another line of work.

Re: I'm Pirating the Next Version of Windows

#215

Post by megablast » Thu, Jan 19, 2012, 8:13 AM UTC

MatthewB wrote: post #130

Karunamon wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Minor niggle, but please stop misusing "steal". We need to get that meme killed.

What do you call it?

Are you new to this argument, or are you deliberately being ignorant? I have trouble believing that someone in the tech industry has not come across this before.

Re: I'm Pirating the Next Version of Windows

#216

Post by tjogin » Thu, Jan 19, 2012, 8:19 AM UTC

MatthewB wrote: post #138

Karunamon wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Take your pick. There's: Using unlicensed software copyright infringement downloading a torrent pirating ..among others. None of them roll off the tongue as nicely as "steal" or "thief", but copyright infringement is just as illegal as stealing. The industry groups have been campaigning for years (with great success) to ensure they mean the same thing. They do not. Please don't fall into their trap.

Hmm...interesting. I see the difference you are trying to illustrate but to me, obtaining something illegally that was intended to be purchased is stealing. We're talking about the same thing though:)

No it isn't. Stealing is taking something from the owner. Like if I steal your bike, you no longer have a bike. If I copy your bike (were it possible), you still have a bike.

Copyright infringement isn't stealing just like it also isn't rape or murder. That doesn't make it right, but it definitely make it different from theft.

Re: I'm Pirating the Next Version of Windows

#217

Post by cgoddard » Thu, Jan 19, 2012, 8:21 AM UTC

billpatrianakos wrote: post #207

This is laughable! User gets pissed by activation system. User does the exact thing that causes the activation to not only exist but become more infuriating as time goes on. How about you either deal with it or not use Windows. If its that much of a pain then there's no reason to use it. Come on. How do we not see the blatant excuse to pirate something here?

What's more laughable is that a minority decide to pirate a piece of software, and everyone gets punished. No, actually, in large part only the people who chose not to pirate get punished. How far does it have to go before people realize the whole strategy is absurd?

Re: I'm Pirating the Next Version of Windows

#218

Post by tjogin » Thu, Jan 19, 2012, 8:27 AM UTC

res0nat0r wrote: post #213

dwb wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you steal an apple from someone, you are depriving the owner of that apple. If you, say, download a film, you are not depriving the copyright owner of anything at all – it is a copy of information. Whether or not you should have paid for the download is not relevant to the distinction. The action you took does not involve deprivation, therefore you didn't steal. Therein lies the difference.

Thats defined as copyright infringement, and is still against the law.

Yes, but it is not stealing.

Re: I'm Pirating the Next Version of Windows

#219

Post by cgoddard » Thu, Jan 19, 2012, 8:28 AM UTC

_sh wrote: post #177

valverde wrote: post #2

"Why do pirates have a better experience than customers?" This pretty much sums it up. I couldn't agree more.

It's only a 'better experience' if they're not caught. Bank robbers have a 'better experience' of a bank if they're not caught too.

Why are customers being made to jump through hoops that do practically nothing to deter actual infringement?

Re: I'm Pirating the Next Version of Windows

#220

Post by cgoddard » Thu, Jan 19, 2012, 8:58 AM UTC

twodayslate wrote: post #81

I am buying my next copy of Windows. You can get a copy really cheap now if you look hard enough (less than $100) through MSDNAA or through another student organization. For me, peace of mind is worth the price.

The discount is a nice thing for students, but there are plenty of non-students in the US and especially other parts of the world where dropping a few hundred dollars on software that makes their computer work is a major burden.

Given the large distribution of the Windows OS (this isn't boutique software with a small customer base), it really doesn't make much sense that it's so expensive. If the price was lowered significantly ($50 maybe?), I think MS would see piracy numbers go down and sales go up more than enough for them to remain profitable.