Desktop Linux is Windows piracy aide (Silicon.com) [LWN.net]

Desktop Linux is Windows piracy aide (Silicon.com)

Posted Sep 30, 2004 12:08 UTC (Thu) by nhasan (subscriber, #1699) [Link]

That copy is probably licensed for use with only *that* laptop.

Desktop Linux is Windows piracy aide (Silicon.com)

Posted Oct 1, 2004 1:18 UTC (Fri) by hingo (subscriber, #14792) [Link]

And that part of the license is probably not enforcable in many jurisdictions throughout the world.

Desktop Linux is Windows piracy aide (Silicon.com)

Posted Oct 1, 2004 2:00 UTC (Fri) by Los__D (subscriber, #15263) [Link]

I must admit to never trying, but I have this feeling that you cannot install it to another computer than the brand/model you bought it with...

Anyone that has tried?

Desktop Linux is Windows piracy aide (Silicon.com)

Posted Oct 7, 2004 14:06 UTC (Thu) by jmason (guest, #13586) [Link]

yep, that's true. those copies of XP are locked in some way, as "OEM copies".

I found this out when I tried to install my Thinkpad's licensed copy of XP into a VMWare partition. (I don't use XP on the hardware itself, but I couldn't buy a Thinkpad without it -- grr!! -- and a VMWare instance running under linux, if/when I need it, would be useful.)

Desktop Linux is Windows piracy aide (Silicon.com)

Posted Oct 1, 2004 6:08 UTC (Fri) by arasila (guest, #20891) [Link]

Unfortunately that's true -- only for this laptop.

But I haven't used any MS software since 2000, and yet MS insist me to pay them money for it. And they actually dare to complain that *they* are not treated fairly by Linux users and distributors.

Desktop Linux is Windows piracy aide (Silicon.com)

Posted Sep 30, 2004 12:13 UTC (Thu) by sandy_pond (guest, #9734) [Link]

I'm issuing a report stating that 100 per cent of Windows PCs I've purchased were modified to run a legal copy of Linux, an illegal monopoly manoeuvre by Microsoft that has cost me money and increased the illegal profits gained by Microsoft.

I truly believe that the total number of PCs that have had Windows ripped out and replaced with Linux exceed the reverse.

Desktop Linux is Windows piracy aide (Silicon.com)

Posted Sep 30, 2004 13:57 UTC (Thu) by Baylink (subscriber, #755) [Link]

It's a well known fact that 83.5% of statistics are made up on the spot, a number that rises to 92.75% for statistics with two or more decimal places.

Desktop Linux is Windows piracy aide (Silicon.com)

Posted Oct 1, 2004 1:26 UTC (Fri) by hingo (subscriber, #14792) [Link]

I find it hard to believe that people who can get linux pcs would not be able to get pcs without an OS installed directly, given that few major distributors offer PCs without windows pre-installed.

You live in the US right? Out here in the rest of the world it is quite common for shops to sell bare bones computers, especially smaller shops. In fact, the arrangement MS has with OEM dealers in the US is illegal in the EU. So the problem is not how to find a bare bones computer. I guess the reason these Asian shops install Linux, is that it would be suspicious if 10-40 % of all computers sold would be without an OS. And then I remember reading that in some countries with rampant piracy it is illegal to sell computers without an OS, so you have to add Debian or DR-DOS to any package to be clear.

Desktop Linux is Windows piracy aide (Silicon.com)

Posted Oct 8, 2004 11:24 UTC (Fri) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954) [Link]

I guess the reason these Asian shops install Linux, is that it would be suspicious if 10-40 % of all computers sold would be without an OS. And then I remember reading that in some countries with rampant piracy it is illegal to sell computers without an OS, so you have to add Debian or DR-DOS to any package to be clear.

Here's another explanation, maybe even simpler: It costs next to nothing to put a copy of Linux on the bare system before you ship it, so why not?

Desktop Linux is Windows piracy aide (Silicon.com)

Posted Sep 30, 2004 11:16 UTC (Thu) by mmarq (guest, #2332) [Link]

Another independent study like those, that show lower TCO for Windows... i'm sure they had choose study cases where there wasn't a tremendous windows Lock-on,... i'm sure nothing of lock-ons !!!...

As to this one is EASY:

HEY Michael Kannelos JUST TELL YOUR BOSS TO MAKE AN ACTIVACTION MECHANISM, WITH VERY STRONG ENCRIPTATION, SO THAT *ALMOST NO ONE* CAN BREAK... BE IT ON A EMULATOR OR ELSE...

When it was just *BEFORE* the official launch of Windows XP there was already posted from ASIA origin, (sorry dont have links anymore) technical articles how you can copy a certain hash file from one Machine to another and that way illegaly activate the same copy of WinXP through an infinite number of machines... and if that information was available that soon, then *IS FAIR TO ASSUME THAT THAT INFORMATION CAME FROM INSIDE*...

What is no wonder, Piracy is the main mechanism by which Microsoft maintains a firm grasp in the domestic and SOHO markets,... there the TCO is lower than Linux, because there almost nobody pay for Windows or Office anyway...

Desktop Linux is Windows piracy aide (Silicon.com)

Posted Sep 30, 2004 15:48 UTC (Thu) by mmarq (guest, #2332) [Link]

" *ALMOST NO ONE* "
Almost no one in the sense that i belive its a fraud, without a shred of a doubt, scientifically proved, to advertise that a given system remains unbreakable for a very large considerable amount of time...
...Oracle has moved with such a marketing play to only see a little after a published exploit to there supposed 'unbreakable' database system.

" (sorry dont have links anymore) "
I really had that link and erased it,... never used it anyway. And *worst* it appear published in a local small almost unknowned local publication of wish i guard a copy(know what i'm talking about). It should had been investigated no matter if Microsoft had correct it afterwards or not... or is that, that the world wide of BSA likes only exist to hassle companys that seem to have enough money to pay for the penaltys if they got caught ?

Marques

Probably not completely wrong

Posted Sep 30, 2004 11:30 UTC (Thu) by AnswerGuy (subscriber, #1256) [Link]

These estimates are at the far edge of plausible. Particularly as we
look at the international scene.

I don't condone piracy.

However, this report is silent on some related issues which are worth noting.

I've purchased a few PCs for personal use of the last 15 years. I've
built many more of them myself (just buy case, power supply, motherboard,
and a few other components and plug them all together). The PCs I've
purchased have each come with a copy of the Microsoft OS of the day
(MS-DOS or MS Windows). Naturally I used to use MS-DOS (13 years ago,
before Linux existed, and concurrently with DOS/DESQview for a couple
years while Linux was maturing and I was learning to live with it).

My point is that the number of machines sold with an unnecessary copy
MS Windows far exceeds the number of machines sold with Linux. Many
Linux users still want the convenience of purchasing a pre-built system
and want a particular model and manufacturer which is simply not
offered without the unwanted software.

This doesn't justify piracy. People who buy a machine with an unwanted
copy of Windows had other choices (build their own or purchase from
among the extremely limited number of vendors who aren't bound by
exclusive contracts to Microsoft).

It's possible that Microsoft's contracts with the majority of PC
vendors still constitute an illegal monopoly. I personally think that
the DoJ was incompetent in its handling of the previous anti-trust
case and that the "remedies" exacted were and still are a mere slap
on the wrist. Some of the "remedies" actually encourage further
entrenchment -- like "giving" Microsoft software to schools and other
public institutions.

However, that point is moot. It still doesn't justify piracy.

One huge problem with the software business today is the discrepancies
between "licensing" practices and traditional first sale and fair use
doctrines of other media (books in particular).

In a free market with "fair" products the situation would be much
less of an issue. Many of the people who received unwanted copies of
software with their systems would simply resell it and many of the
pirates would by an inexpensive and otherwise unwanted copy. The going
rate in the U.S. for such copies would probably be around $10 to $25
(from what I've seen the vendors that will sell systems sans OS will
only give about a $25 discount -- which says something about the
wholesale value of the product).

Of course this is not a free market and the software in question is not
"fair." There are many versions of it that are locked to a given PC
or model and which can't be transferred to other systems.

Anyway, I'm in no position to offer up real suggestions here. My general
suggestion would be that free software advocates condemn piracy,
encourage the use of "the right tool for the job" (recognizing that its
not always going to be free), educate selected parties about the broader
economics of software and other "intellectual property," and solicit
feedback to find out to woo more of the pirates into the fold of free
software users.

JimD

Probably not completely wrong

Posted Oct 1, 2004 16:37 UTC (Fri) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link]

$25 is about fair. You can not sell OEM version of Windows by itself but you can sell not fully equiped system so you can sell "desktop system without system block, keyboard and monitor with fully licensed OEM Windows" for $30 and it's typical price here in Russia.

Since OEM version of Windows does not include support from Microsoft (OEM is supposed to do it) the only think you're getting is promise to not be sued by Microsoft.

P.S. If you wonder what exactly is left in system if you remove "system block, keyboard and monitor" then the answer is simple: mouse.

Old FUD in a new wrapper. (Silicon.com)

Posted Sep 30, 2004 11:58 UTC (Thu) by cliffman (guest, #13144) [Link]

Sigh. What FUD. Data point not addressed: What percentage of the PC vendors in this report offer a PC with _no OS? ( Which would presumably be the _lowest cost option, and even more attractive to pirates )
I suspect this data is really showing us the absence of naked PC sales, and is a continuation of older FUD. Remeber from several years ago, Microsoft had an ad campaign claiming "A PC sold with no OS can _only be used to pirate software". ( buy only from those that pay the Windows Tax! )

Notice the tone in the first paragraph: "Linux PCs will be modified to run an illegal copy.." That's a straight Fear statement, implying that adding the Linux bits somehow enables a 'modification' of the PC ( what would that be?? ) making it magically easier to steal Microsoft's IP. Contrast with this substitution: "Dirt-cheap PC's will be modified to run an illegal... " How does the term 'modified' apply here? The addition of Linux to the PC package purchased in no way relates to the end use of the PC, other than cost. It would have been more honest for Gartner to have said, "Pirates are using the cheapest boxes they can find, and more cheap box-pushers are adding a Linux CD to their offerings"

Desktop Linux is Windows piracy aide (Silicon.com)

Posted Sep 30, 2004 17:49 UTC (Thu) by fLameDogg (guest, #11305) [Link]

At the least, I'd say the modifier "somewhat" is somewhat overly kind.

Desktop Linux is Windows piracy aide (Silicon.com)

Posted Sep 30, 2004 19:54 UTC (Thu) by Ajarn (guest, #8521) [Link]

Around 80 per cent of the time, Linux will be removed for a pirated copy of Windows."

That is about right .
I am living in Thailand, one of those countries discussed so often.
I am in contact with this socalled pirated world regulary.
Regulary means actually, daily if I want, weekly if I want.
Here you can buy PCs preloaded with windows, legal or illegal , your choice.
Here you can buy PCs with nothing on, No problem at all. Just ask.
first about windows.
--------------------
They use windows because that is what they know, not because it is good.
If they have a problem, they ask the neighbour A or neighbour B.
Don't ask about linux, the neigbour doesn't know, so the avarage user (not knowledgable user )doesn't want linux.
Microsoft is going to release a starter pack !!!!!!!.
Don't waste your time discussing this. Here is what the Thai's say about it.
Why the heck should we spend $40 on a crippled version of winXP, if we can get a full version for $4 ?
Does Microsoft think we are stupid or crazy ?? ( their exact wordsw )
I have asked about 30 people, all the same reaction.
And don't worry about the Law here !!
I can tell more, but this post will get to long.

About Linux
-----------
Gartner says that 80%....bla bla...
Yes, that is true, but do you know why ????
NOw I am talking about the guys who actually know a thing or two about comnputers.
If you get a linux preloaded pc, they strip linux, then they load WinXP on it, and then they install linux again, because you can not install windows after linux.
You install linux after you have installed windows.
That is why 80% has to be stripped from the PC
I am moving around in schools, have may connections at universities ( all students ), and about 50 % has linux installed.
They are not actively using it, as they know their way better in windows, but every one I met so far, says they will one day.
Also, there was very little linux documentation in Thai, but things are changing rapidly.
Books are filling the shelves in a rapid pace.

OK, I am not a writer , but hope that this is a little clear.
Gartner had it right with the number 80, but the end result is 40, since they load it again.
So, gartner statistics are what they always have been, sensational, but useless.

Desktop Linux is Windows piracy aide (Silicon.com)

Posted Oct 1, 2004 2:08 UTC (Fri) by Los__D (subscriber, #15263) [Link]

Hmmmm.... Why do you think you cannot install Windows after Linux?

Yes, the installation of Windows removes LILO/GRUB, but you only have to reinstall the loader, not the entire OS...

Dennis

Desktop Linux is Windows piracy aide (Silicon.com)

Posted Oct 1, 2004 5:44 UTC (Fri) by Ajarn (guest, #8521) [Link]

yes, I thought some one might give me this reply, but it was posted and I was to lazy to edit it.
but the solution you mentioned is a small 2 minute thing for you and me, but a major hassle for them.
I don't want to go technical, my post was just giving my 2 cents
Thanks for seeing me right

Desktop Linux is Windows piracy aide (Silicon.com)

Posted Oct 1, 2004 16:41 UTC (Fri) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link]

You need to repartition drive first and resize tools are not very reliable. It's just easier to clear everything and install Windows then Linux from scratch.

Desktop Linux is Windows piracy aide (Silicon.com)

Posted Oct 3, 2004 7:53 UTC (Sun) by boson (guest, #23807) [Link]

You can clear the disk, install Linux first and Windows next. Installing Windows first and Linux second is a matter of, I don't know, preference? Or the motto "business before pleasure"?

Desktop Linux is Windows piracy aide (Silicon.com)

Posted Oct 1, 2004 1:50 UTC (Fri) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link]

And Windows will be replaced with pirated copy or Windows - what's the difference ?

Of course Linux will be often replaced with Windows but Windows is sometimes replaced with Linux as well. It's all relevant only for notebook market anyway: it's not a problem to buy desktop PC without any OS here and then you can install anything you want there.

So yes, most copies of Windows are illegal here but "PCs sold as PCs with Linux then converted to Windows" is such a small percentage of PCs overral that it does not really even worth mention. Even if it's 80% of "PCs sold with Linux" - if you need Linux you'll install it yourself since supplier does not have tech support for Linux anyway even if Linux installation is an option.

Why anyone will replace legal copy of Windows with illegal copy ? Simple: if you'll replace Russian Windows Home edition with English Windows Professional Corporate edition + Russian MUI you have no problems with updates (patches are month or two late for Russian version), activation (corporate edition does not need it!) and so on.

Why Windows is so popular here ? Simple: it's cheaper then Linux. For the same $10 you can buy ASPLinux, ALTLinux, Debian, RedHat, or Windows. But it's be only ASPLinux, ALTLinux, Debian or RedHat while "windows disk" will include the following (typical "windows disk" contents):
1. Windows 95 OSR2 + USB Update OSR2.1 (russian & english)
2. Windows 98 SE (russian & english)
3. Windows ME (russian & english)
4. Windows NT 4.0 SP6a Workstation (russian & english)
5. Windows NT 4.0 Server (english)
6. Windows 2000 SP4 Professional (russian & english)
7. Windows 2000 SP4 Server (russian & english)
8. Windows XP SP2 Professional (russian & english)
9. Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition (english)
10. Norton SystemWorks 2004

If you'll try to find software for Linux - yet again it's harder then with software for Linux. And games are non-existant.

So 80% conversion looks like correct approximation: only geeks like me will choose Linux over Linux when alternative is so cheap. What exactly will be installed on PC in the end has almost no relevancy to what was installed initially and Windows is more popular (way more applications).

Desktop Linux is Windows piracy aide (Silicon.com)

Posted Oct 1, 2004 2:01 UTC (Fri) by cross (subscriber, #13601) [Link]

Gartner had already retracted this, they hoped *before* it got published by the media.

"We in the press find recalls and corrections a big help. We get a hell of a lot of junk that we assume is dull and therefore throw away without reading, often without even noticing, but the shrill words RECALL!!" or "CORRECTION!!!!" signify to us that there is something somebody has decided they'd rather not have said, or that they'd rather we didn't read. We dive straight into the trash, and although frequently the original remains very dull indeed and is immediately retrashed, sometimes it isn't.

We're not sure about this week's effort on behalf of Gartner, because we didn't get it in the first place and it may be that, bless 'em, they've drawn our attention to something they never actually distributed.* Not directly, anyway. The unreleased/dereleased release was headed: "Linux has a fight on its hands in emerging PC markets says Gartner," and we can track it back as far as this report here, which you'll note Gartner wants a cool $795 for the full text of."

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/09/29/linux_windows_pir...

It's true

Posted Oct 1, 2004 10:36 UTC (Fri) by BrucePerens (subscriber, #2510) [Link]

Folks,

Let's not drink our own kool-aid. Sometimes there are bad things to say about our side too, and sometimes they are true even if the analyst redacts their report, and it's better to acknowledge the truth than to exercise knee-jerk naysaying.

It is absolutely true that many PCs sold with Linux, especially in the third world, have received a bootleg copy of Windows after sale. I first found out about this while working for HP, which sold a Linux PC in China all the way back in 2000. They had lowered the cost of everything in the PC but the operating system, and then they lowered that, too. But HP never publicized outside of China that they were selling a Linux PC way back then, because they knew well that many users were loading bootleg Windows on the computer after the sale. It was a very cynical play. But China really took up Linux, which wasn't in the plan. So, this "buy Linux, run Windows" is not the case so much any longer.

Also, this sort of cynical play is not going on in other parts of the world where the $14 price for the initial Windows load doesn't matter as much. Did you really think that you were paying the retail price for Windows in new PCs? And that those "Windows refund" efforts were going to win you back one or two hundred bucks per PC? That initial load is something that Microsoft wants there to get you addicted, and they can afford to give it away. No doubt the reduced-capability "home" Windows loads we are finding in some PCs these days are there for the same purpose as Linux in China was playing in 2000. Microsoft can afford to put that software on the PC for nothing or even pay the manufacturer to put it there, as long as the user purchases one upgrade in the PC lifetime.

But yes, at one time Linux was a component in what was predominantly a Windows bootleg play. And it might still be going on in some places.

Bruce

It's true

Posted Oct 1, 2004 14:05 UTC (Fri) by zutman (guest, #5077) [Link]

<i>Sometimes there are bad things to say about our side too</i>

Hmm, you're making the same mistake as Gartner did.

I'm not a member of 'our side' but just a linux user. Who dutifully
adheres to the licenses of his software. Of which he most likes the GPL,
as it is most to his advantage. That doen't say anything about my
morality per se. In general I think 'our side' does not exist and
morality (in its broader sense) is irrelevant for this discussion. Your
opening remark has the ring of a non-sequitur.

However, statements about Microsofts monopolistic practices remain
relevant. And always happen to be 'blanket' (coincidence?).

It's true

Posted Oct 1, 2004 15:15 UTC (Fri) by hppnq (subscriber, #14462) [Link]

Sometimes there are bad things to say about our side too, and sometimes they are true even if the analyst redacts their report, and it's better to acknowledge the truth than to exercise knee-jerk naysaying.

Who are you and what have you done to Bruce Perens, Open Source advocate?

That's not my side you are talking about.

It's true

Posted Oct 1, 2004 16:23 UTC (Fri) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link]

It's one thing to advocate Free Software. It's completly other thing to say "it can not be true since it can not be true". I've seen a lot of systems sold with Linux with bootleg Windows installed and I've seen a lot of systems sold with Windows with Linux installed (basically situation in Russia is simple: almost 100% of new notebooks with Linux preinstalled is retrofited with Windows right after purchase while older systems often are not upgraded to last version of Windows but used with Linux instead). Unless you can present comprehensive study or point to severe error in Gartner's study you can not just dismiss Gartner findings as irrelevant.

It has nothing to do with advocacy of Linux and/or Windows.

It's true

Posted Oct 1, 2004 16:46 UTC (Fri) by hppnq (subscriber, #14462) [Link]

Yes, but you too are making the slight mistake of forgetting that there is no connection at all between Linux (and its community) and Microsoft software piracy. Anyone can shamelessly abuse the freedom that comes with Linux, but that doesn't make me part of the scam, for instance. Other people have written much better explanations of why this is ridiculous -- no one is saying there is no Windows piracy.

I would have expected someone like Bruce to understand and explain these things, and I cannot believe that he actually wrote that. (If he's serious it's even worse, he was HP's Linux guy at the time.)

It's true

Posted Oct 1, 2004 17:27 UTC (Fri) by BrucePerens (subscriber, #2510) [Link]

Well, yes I help make Linux for people who really want to use it, not for the people who want to make a scam of it to support bootleg software. But the fact is that people do abuse it as part of a bootleg scheme, and I'm not at all happy to see my software being used that way. Why should I be?

Bruce

It's true

Posted Oct 1, 2004 17:40 UTC (Fri) by hppnq (subscriber, #14462) [Link]

Getting back to your original point: why are you making me part of it then? Or am I reading too much into your "confession"?

It's true

Posted Oct 1, 2004 18:18 UTC (Fri) by BrucePerens (subscriber, #2510) [Link]

Well, I think we'll win more often if we don't allow ourselves to be blinded by our own rhetoric. Yes, there are panderers to software pirates who use the free software community as some sort of "human shield". It's best to admit that it goes on and deprecate the folks who do it, rather than deny it and sound insincere. I don't believe the premise of the (withdrawn) Gardener report, which is to discount the figures quoted for Linux sales. We all know about lots of systems sold with Windows that don't run Windows. But we should also admit to ourselves that sometimes it works the other way.

Bruce

It's true

Posted Oct 1, 2004 18:14 UTC (Fri) by zutman (guest, #5077) [Link]

Please give me a break. People will use Linux in every useful way
imaginable. But only when it is considered useful. Don't want that? Don't
publish under an open source license.

(Or you could recognise that you should go into politics.)

But I digress. My point: windows piracy has nothing to do with linux. Not
in this particular case, never.

It's true

Posted Oct 2, 2004 1:17 UTC (Sat) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link]

But I digress. My point: windows piracy has nothing to do with linux. Not in this particular case, never.

Directly, no. But indirectly... Few years ago RoverBooks was sold with Linux preinstalled but without support for half of installed hardware (winmodems, etc). It had CD with drivers for Windows attached - and for all hardware in this case. Now think: why they will ever do that ?

No, Linux is not directly responsible for "windows piracy" - yet it's used for that purpose quite often. You can say what you want about it but it'll not change basic facts.

There are also were versions with PTS-DOS - and then most of hardware was unsupported (including RAM above 16MB range LOL) and you were more or less forced to install some modern OS. So Linux is not alone in such usage.

It's mostly the same story as DeCSS: while initially this thing was not developed for piracy later it become widely used by pirates. Linux is going the same way. Do we need to fight it ? Probably not - it's not our fight. Do we need to admit and accept it ? Yes - it's fact of life. That's all.

It's true

Posted Oct 3, 2004 12:06 UTC (Sun) by zutman (guest, #5077) [Link]

Do we need to admit and accept it ? Yes - it's fact of life. That's all.

I'm also happy to admit that the sky is blue and that knives are used to kill people. But wait a minute -- I don't want to admit that, because it would imply that I was trying to hide these facts. And I never did that. I just do not consider them very relevant.