Product Activation Unacceptable 5

[gwinn7]

I sincerely hope that I am not the only one to find this new Microsoft product activation system unacceptable.

I have been a fan of Bill Gates and Microsoft for a long time now, but after reading an article in CNET.COM and Microsoft's statement regarding product activation, I became very concerned. Needless to say, if I can avoid it, I won't be upgrading.

Microsoft claims that 37 percent of its software is "softlifted" by consumers. Therefore, Microsoft is demanding that all Windows users register with them in order to obtain a product activation code. Without this code the user cannot run the operating system. Microsoft also claims that most users respond to this new activation system as "That's it?".

Personally, like most people, I enjoy my privacy. I like the freedom of not having to contact Microsoft in order to run their software. Right now, all we have to do is enter a valid key and its done. Most of the software I own has been paid for.

There are many situations where it would be a pain to contact Microsoft to get their product activated. So, when I do have to contact them, what kind of hold times can I expect when I don't have an active Internet connection? How much information and how long will it take for me to hand over all my personal information to this company? In my opinion, the answer is: TOO LONG and TOO MUCH. The CD Key validation was a much simpler fairly effective security step, I will miss it.

I completely agree that companies should protect their intellectual property interests, especially Microsoft. However, Microsoft, I believe, is asking more of the consumer than is necessary. Up to 37% of software may not be "legal", but is Microsoft really suffering because of that? I think not. Take a look at their sales and size. A major reason why they became as much of a success as it has is because consumers felt Microsoft made it easier to run their software on computers where its wanted/needed. Well, now, it is becoming more difficult and demanding every few versions produced. It makes me think, "What's next?".

My interest in the convenience of Linux is growing. I intend to try this out and perhaps purchase more copies for my home and businesses. It is a low cost, fast, stable, and supported operating system. It is an alternative that I am now beginning to consider.

Anyone have any thoughts on this?

Gary
gwinn7

 

[CodeDeficitDisorder]

Windows is impoving in baby steps, but the idea of product id codes irritates me. Anyone who has ever had to reinstall the product over and over again knows what I'm talking about.

Linux, from what I have seen, has potential. I think that we should all give it a try if we can get our hands on it.

Microsoft's evasion of our privacy is only going to get worse, I'm sure.

 

[issac75]

I have a question. Have you ever gone down to a local computer store, or any store for that matter and purchased an item that there was some kind of warranty or support offered for? Weren't you required to give them your name, address, and phone number in order to recieve that support?? I know that i have been on several occasions. What Microsoft has done with product activation and registration has been done for 2 reasons.

1. To help ensure that the software you are using is software that you purchased. If you had a product out on the market that could potentially be "shared", wouldn't you want to try to ensure that it was being used only by the person that purchased it?? After all, Microsoft is a business. Windows is not and has never been freeware. It's like 30 people going into a buffet restaraunt and using the same plate. If that was your restaraunt, wouldn't that disturb you somewhat. Using someone elses software is theft, and Microsoft is merely trying to ensure that their products are not being stolen.

2. To help identify those people that should recieve support from MS for Windows XP. Not only do people steal MS software, but they also are essentially lieing to MS and trying to pass as a legitimate costumer that MS has obligated themselves to support.

I find it humorous that people are complaining about this. It is merely another petty excuse for them to dislike Microsoft. Put yourself in their shoes, and I guaruntee that you would do something similar. If you didn't then, in my mind you are a very naive and stupid person. But none of us are stupid are we??? Think about it people, and stop whining.

 

[issac75]

By the way, as a member of the United States Armed Services (Army in particular), and a system/network administrator for an Army istallation, I can assure you that we do not use any Linux/Unix based servers or workstations for our primary networks. The only exception to this would be some of our older tactical systems were designed to be used by Sun Solaris and are still in use. Due to that fact we are forced to accomodate those systems by having a few linux/unix servers to be able to properly communicate between those machines and other systems that are not fully compatible with them. Most of the places that are required to use these measures have frequent problems and require very close attention by the admins responsible for them.

 

[AjayM]

Most of the software I own has been paid for.

Hmmm...isn't this what they are trying to avoid?

There are many situations where it would be a pain to contact Microsoft to get their product activated. So, when I do have to contact them, what kind of hold times can I expect when I don't have an active Internet connection? How much information and how long will it take for me to hand over all my personal information to this company? In my opinion, the answer is: TOO LONG and TOO MUCH. The CD Key validation was a much simpler fairly effective security step, I will miss it.

Key validation is obviously not an effective security step if 37% of people still can steal the software. As to your other questions, you don't even have to give them your name let along all your personal information, hold times are usually under 5 minutes (at least from the few times I've called them).

I completely agree that companies should protect their intellectual property interests, especially Microsoft. However, Microsoft, I believe, is asking more of the consumer than is necessary. Up to 37% of software may not be "legal", but is Microsoft really suffering because of that? I think not. Take a look at their sales and size. A major reason why they became as much of a success as it has is because consumers felt Microsoft made it easier to run their software on computers where its wanted/needed. Well, now, it is becoming more difficult and demanding every few versions produced. It makes me think, "What's next?".

You completely agree that companies should protect their intellectual property, except Microsoft. Just because they are big, is the only reason you give. I'd like to know what kind of reasoning that is, maybe we should just pull an extra 37% out of your paycheck this year, you're probably making more than the average person in the US, so you shouldn't notice it at all, right?

It's amazing the amount of people that complain about the activation system, yet I bet almost none of your have used it. If your machine is connected to the internet when you setup it takes all of about 30 seconds to do, you don't have to give any information to MS. If you are a corporation you probably don't even have to deal with that provided you are on one of the license programs with MS. So again, where is the problem here?

It takes me a lot longer to download 4 Redhat ISO's than it does to activate Win XP.

Andrew

 

[DCCoolBreeze]

I admit I do not like activation all that much. Not because it is hard...it is very simple but it becomes difficult when you have multiple copies of the software and multiple PC's to register. Trying to keep up with which set of CD's goes with which PC.

However, let's look at the logic here with activation. Microsoft wants to protect their software from piracy and people have a problem with that. So why do those that have a problem with that leave their house doors unlocked and their car doors unlocked. Perhaps they should leave their wallets out in the open and unattended. If you own a grocery store, leave the doors unlocked at night. Stealing software is no different that stealing clothes from a store.

Microsoft did not start doing this until their software was being pirated out of control. Believe me it takes funding to supply activation numbers to customers. It takes funding to add activation functionality to the software. It takes funding to maintain the database to hold the registrations. They are not going to spend money to do all this at a loss.

No I am not a Microsoft employee and I do not make my living on using Microsoft technologies right now. I am on Unix and I work with Oracle products but let us be fair to Microsoft. They have a right to protect their product.

 

[sheronne]

The only problem I had with Activation is that there were a couple of trial software packages I wanted to use. XP Office Pro and Studio.NET and I had just moved and didn't have internet access at that time. It was frustrating for a couple of days, but once I got connected again it was fine.

I just find it amazing how many people do not think that Microsoft should have the right to protect their software (and their business) from piracy.

I have asked this before, and I will ask it again. Any programmer that is currently profiting from an application that they have created, please send me the source code.

 

[DCCoolBreeze]

Good analogy and excellent point.

 

[mattKnight]

Hi all,

I have followed this thread with interest and would like to pose the following questions,

[ol][li]Is there anyone who truely believes that Microsoft (or any other company) does not have the right to protect their investment (time etc in development)/ software?[/li]

[li]If so, why?[/li]

[li]That then leads to the question of whether "Product Activation" is the right way for them to do so?[/li][/ol]

my answers are
[ol][li]I believe they have the right[/li]
[li] [/li]
[li]Not really sure, with limited experience of it[/li][/ol]

Product Activation means that if you don't register it after a certain period you get crippled functionality. What is the difference between this and other shareware providers?

For my money, I think that it is not a bad thing, but I am not sure that it is a good thing either. If it cuts piracy/ software theft down, then it should reduce the price of software purchase; in theory we will have to wait and see in practice.

I agree that there are practical difficulties for some people, but you can't please all of the people all of the time. Maybe MS will offer soem sort of solution to those people i.e. large corporate users or people whos eHW changes often. I would agree, however, that charging people for extra licences after a certain number of activations is not a good thing, IMHO I think that MS should have to prove that multiple copies of the SW exist, rather than that the HW has changed.

Anyway, its here we have to abide by it, change to some open source system or wait until someone hacks it, which won't be long!!

2 pennies worth

Matt

 

[Bullschmidt]

Yes, product activation has so many horror stories, it's probably easy to hate without really having had a bad experience oneself.

Best regards,
J. Paul Schmidt - Freelance ASP Web Developer

http://www.Bullschmidt.com

- Creating "dynamic" Web pages that read and write from databases...

 

[dbMark]

Remember when dongles were plugged into the printer or serial ports? Remember when you needed an original boot disk to start your program? No? That's because those attempts to police program usage, though legal, were very bad for public relations. In short order those companies withdrew their copy protection plans. They realized it was bad for business. Did some take the programs home? Yes, but businesses allowed for that, even helping the companies to get a larger user base. The users' goodwill meant something and it pretty much balanced out.

Today, though, several issues have come to the fore:

Counterfeiting has become widespread, an industry in itself. Counterfeiters are making big profits from stolen software, sometimes almost with impunity in many countries. Apparently counterfeiters are not being stopped fast enough, so M$ has decided instead to go after every single individual user, namely you, me and all of us.

That doesn't make me happy. I was not online when I installed my XP. I had to dial up and tell a computer my seemingly hundred numbers and letters, get another hundred, then go though it again to get the right combinations. No, I was definitely unhappy and frustrated. You try sitting on the phone doing that! For $300 software at least the call was free. No, wait, my purchase money must have paid for it! Bah humbug on onerous "activation".

Activation, and a high price: I remember a number of years ago when M$ said that an operation system should never cost too much, that it should be like any other computer subsystem. (That was before the DR DOS and Amiga, Atrai and GEM desktops, etc. were gone.) At the time I could get DOS for about $40 or so, and another $40 for the early Windows in a stack of 16 disks. Back then 2 MB DRAM cost $80, $40 per MB (16MB DRAM cost $600 so no one got all that). Mainboards were $100 to $150. Now it's way out of sync. Windows is $200 to $300 and a hefty 512MB DRAM is what, under $70? Mainboards are still about the same price range too. When everything else hasn't gone up much and in many cases dropped, why has their software gotten so expensive?

Most companies today make do on very slim margins. They have no choice. M$ has the big margins and money to buy up small but potential competitors and those who have products they can incorportate into theirs, or use deep pockets to compete. The infamous claim was made that Internet Explorer was "free" because it ought to be free. Why should that be free and nothing else? Of course, it just so happened to compete directly against Netscape's browser which was not free.

Sun currently offers their StarOffice Suite for $25-$80 per user, depending on the number of users, whereas M$ sets their prices about 8 times higher. Few would try to argue which is better and more polished. But is their program really 8 times better or rather that they have the power to dictate price as few others do? Not to mention, OpenOffice is free from the .org website.

So what's coming next? I have read that M$ is seeing that many users are satisfied, by and large, with much of the software they already have. How many more bells and whistles can you add to a word processor? A spreadsheet? A browser? Before, users eagerly and desperately awaited new releases. So no one cared that licenses didn't expire since the user always rushed out and bought the next release anyway. Not now. Before everyone fully realizes that, M$ was said to have been planning to "rent" their software licenses, you know, 2 or 3 years at a time. No more indefinite licenses. They are already doing that with their corporate clients, calling it Software Assurance. It took a couple years, but many companies have given in. From what I read, they realized the general users wouldn't accept that, so they backed off plans to do the same for consumers... so far.

M$ does have a risk of losing the OS to lean Linux, but despite that their applications are well respected.

 

[wbg34]

Well imho I for one am happy with Microsofts new product activation. Ever since it came out I have been trying to get the products that need activation on all of my companies computers. Why? for one simple reason because now I can say that those computers are legal. When someone refuses to buy software for a new install its not their job at stake its yours. Thank god for product activation because now all I say is that it's not possible to load copies. As for Linux/MAC or whomever is going to knock Microsoft of the top of the hill. I'll be more than happy to sign on for any program that is as easy to use, install, get new software for and train people on as MS is but for less money. Unfortunately that doesn't exist yet. Until it does I'll only buy MS software that needs to be activated.

 

[skiflyer]

Hate to burst your bubble wbg34, but MS's product activation has been effectively circumvented for some time now (I won't say cracked as the sol'n is more a workaround in my opinion). There are no such assurances against illegal uses, and once a modified CD has been burned, it can easily be passed around and there's no such issue of it requiring a user determined to cheat.

-Rob

 

[wbg34]

Ski,
Your not bursting my bubble at all. As far as the workaround for MS activation goes I can always feign ignorance about it. As far as other users on the network installing it they will need me to give them the privledges to do it. Either way I'm still in control.

 

[skiflyer]

Well, then I ask (genuinely), what are you gaining from activation?

License keys et al. are attempts to do the same things. I ask, because I believe the problem product activation is a real problem that needs a real solution, but I'm not convinced they took a viable approach, I'm not convinced anyone so far has come up with a viable approach.

A fun memory test is to think of all the failed approaches... which reminds me, does anyone remember the 4th word on the third line of the twelvth page of the Prince of Persia manual?

-Rob

 

[Stevehewitt]

OK, I am going to get hammered here, but here goes:

I cannot believe that programmers are saying that £200 for a full operating is too much money. I am trying to learn Access/VBA and I have suddenly appreciated how much work goes into an application. Microsoft are correct to do product activation. You can't please all the people all of the time but they have tried. If you have an Intenet connection then simply 3 or 4 clicks will do it. No problem. If not then all you have to do is call a free phone number and key in your ID number which takes about 3 minutes. If it helps reduce piracy just 1% then I am more than happy to do it.

I know many small time pirates, (local pub types selling Windows for £30 - £40). Its stopped them, and rightly so. MS software is getting better and better, they are going in the right direction. It may not be the best software that is going to be produced, but its the best we have at the moment and does the job for me and all of my clients fine.

If you don't like it don't buy it. Code your own if your that bothered.

Rant over, and I thank you.

Steve.

 

[Perplexe]

If I can allow myself (sorry for my poor english), I wouldn't say that key activation is THE problem about Microsoft.

According to me it is more a matter of general philosophy.

Of course Microsoft is a money making company -a very successful one- and legitimately fights to preserve its rights.

But the way they are doing it seems a bit unfair to me.

For instance, the fact that there is no one sole windows os (I am talking about client os) but 2, 3 or 4 of them, not including the same abilities.

Buy a computer with Windows XP "Home", and try to integrate it a few month later in a small company network under 2000 server ? You'll have to upgrade to XP Pro, paying 500 USD for it !

In the same trend, the new licence system, invented to raise M$ benefits by 30% is a shame !

I don't know any other company acting this way.

Of course, the fact they are a standard make consequences even worse because you're not in a position you can choose.

Activation is one further step to a market control which seems dangerous to me.

Perplexe

 

[AjayM]

The reason earlier copy protection schemes didn't stick around is because they simply didn't work. The scheme of having something to plug into a parallel or serial port worked great, until you lost the dongle. Then your software didn't work at all. Or maybe it wasn't compatible with your whacky no-name off-brand printer, etc. Master boot disks, same deal, lose the disk and you are SOL. Plus they were cracked pretty easy with a PC Copy Board and software (anybody else remember those?).

Everybody talking about prices of software and how unfair it is, you have got to be kidding me. OS software from MS has gone WAY up in features/stability/security/lower TCO/etc and the price has not gone up at the same rate of features being added. Windows 95 cost me $129 or some $60 upgrade. The home version of XP costs $199 or $99 respectively (those are full boat retail prices, they can be found MUCH cheaper elsewhere). That's hardly a ridiculous amount of money considering the differences between the two OS's.

And upgrading Windows XP home to Pro for $500??!?! You need a new vendor REAL quick. You can buy TWO retail full versions of XP for $500USD

And why is everybody blaming MS for trying to keep it's own money. You would sure be bitching and complaining if every pay-day somebody stole 30% of your money.

Andrew

 

[GwydionM]

I've just moved from Windows 98 to Windows XP, with the new Word etc. The system forced me to use 'Product Activation' and Microsoft's automated process was slow to take notice of me, but I did have 40 free runs before I had to get the code and I only used up 5 of them.

I've found XP vastly better and more reliable and a little incovenience is a price I'm willing to pay. What worries me more is that Microsoft have no real interest in people who don't have much money, and are concerned only to persecuit them.

Trespass on Microsoft code is described as 'theft', which is untrue. (If someone walks on my lawn they are tresspassing, if they take a rose that is theft, though it wouldn't bother me much if there was no significant damage.

THis really should be another thread, I'll go and start it.

 

[danomaniac]

Random thoughts...

What if you choose not to have an internet connection? Not that I have, but can you still activate? Are they forcing you to have an internet connection? - for instance rural communities, farm life, etc. Just wondering.

I personally have no problem with the activation process. Big deal. M$ is obviously free to do as they please as I would expect to be if I were in their position. However...

M$ says (and this seems to be a common perspective in the business world) that their software prices are set high enough to generate enough revenue to offset the losses due to piracy - or lost opportunity. In other words, if no one stole their software, then their software would be cheaper. Is that true? If they could guarantee no one illegally used their software, would they drop their price? Maybe, but I doubt it. Not until some real competition showed up to force them to.

It seems to me that there really is no lost opportunity here. Many of these people only use the software because they can get it free, if they couldn't, they wouldn't buy it - they'd do without.

What if M$ took a leap of faith and lowered the price of licensing to $10 a pop? Suddenly it would not be worth the effort to steal for most people who currently do. Some will continue simply because they feel it's their right to have something free and companies have no right to expect them to pay, but the majority of people (causal pirates) would gladly pay the ten bucks to save the hassle of pirating. How much does it cost to stamp a cd? Pennies. Dump them all over - Sell them at convenience stores. Buy a tank of gas, get a free copy. Whatever. Just some random thoughts.

I personally feel it's a bargain the way it is. Than again, I also remember paying $1500 for an 8 MHz IBM/XT with no hard drive back in 1986 and thought that was a bargain, too.

"It's more like it is now, than it ever has been."

 

[wbg34]

Dano,
There is a phone # you can call and give your license key and they will give you a actvation #. So as long as the person didn't have the same restrictions to phone usage as they did to the internet, then there is still a way. If they had the same restrictions, then they should ask the prison officials to activate it for them.
As for the $10 deal for MS products, well all I can say is that would be the beginning of Anti-trust Part 2.