this post was submitted on 28 Oct 2023
469 points (90.2% liked)

Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

53370 readers
711 users here now

⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules • Full Version

1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy

2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote

3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs

4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others



Loot, Pillage, & Plunder


💰 Please help cover server costs.

Ko-FiLiberapay


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Windows as a software package would have never been affordable to individuals or local-level orgs in countries like India and Bangladesh (especially in the 2000's) that are now powerhouses of IT. Same for many SE Asian, Eastern European, African and LatinoAmerican countries as well.

Had the OS been too difficult to pirate, educators and local institutions in these countries would have certainly shifted to Linux and the like. The fact that Windows could be pirated easily is the main factor that led to its ubiquity and allowed it to become a household name. Its rapid popularity in the '00s and early '10s cemented its status as the PC operating system. It is probably the same for Microsoft Office as well (it is still a part of many schools' standard curricula).

The fact that Windows still remains pirateable to this day is perhaps intentional on Microsoft's part.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 116 points 9 months ago (4 children)

Absolutely, and Microsoft knows this. You could even upgrade a pirated version of Windows to a legit copy when they did the upgrade drive for 7 I believe it was. Did it myself. And they completely turn a blind eye to OEM key reselling, which is why you can get legit windows keys for less than $10 these days.

They've also never done anything substantial against pirates, all they do is pester about buying a key and warn about the risks. The "worst" they do is stop you from using windows update which some see as a feature. When they could just completely lock you out and/or report you to the police.

The money is in server for Microsoft, but they're losing that battle slowly but surely since they can't make windows actually work properly in a container setting. I have customers that love Microsoft but despite their best efforts at making containerized windows workloads work it just sucks major ass. And virtually everybody is coming around to realize just how insane of a paradigm shift containers are.

And losing that battle is why 12 will likely move to subscription. And I'm willing to bet money that, in 10 years time, will be considered the starting point for Microsofts dramatic loss of market share in the home PC market. From 90% or so now down to like 50 ish %. But maybe some smart guys at Microsoft will nip that in the bud.

[–] [email protected] 37 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Although I mostly agree with you, this is not true:

The "worst" they do is stop you from using windows update

The worst they do is practically force you to buy a windows license with most laptops and even some pre-built tower PCs.

Yes there are some vendors/manufacturers who don't force you or ask, if you want an Ubuntu/Mint/Pop_!OS or smth. but most just don't give a shit.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

in my country vendors are forced to offer a free OS/no OS option.

most new laptops here come with linux preinstalled lol

[–] [email protected] 12 points 9 months ago (9 children)

I would argue there's nothing to snip in the bud, since the home PC is a dying breed anyway. It is increasingly only used by hobbyists and professionals. Some people will use a laptop issued from work but the choice of OS in those cases is seldom theirs. Other than that it's all phones, tablets, consoles, TVs etc.

The PC market itself is shrinking.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 9 months ago (1 children)

PCs are expensive and unpractical.

I wanted a PC, bought a tablet. Ideally, I'd want a SFFPC plus screens that I could easily move. I'd settle for a SFFPC with a dedicated graphics card if I couldn't move it. I'd also settle for a notebook that would allow me to easily swap HDDs/SSDs. However, none of those things are possible and/or have a good cost-benefit, so I got a tablet.

Notebooks are too clunky compared to tablets because they are attached to a keyboard and to a screen. If those parts were removable, they would be more successful. Tablets would also be more popular if you could use them as PC screens (some from Lenovo already come with this featur).

Manufacturers are moving in the opposite direction, soldering memory, and making as hard as possible to change parts.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 85 points 9 months ago (4 children)

When most people bought their PCs, Windows was already bought and paid for and installed by the vendor, so piracy might not have hit as hard as you think.

If you’re Microsoft, that last thing you want is people having a choice of operating system - either in the store, or when they get home - so you make sure it’s a done deal before the PC is unboxed.

That’s SOP for Microsoft, and what got them into trouble when they were bundling Internet Explorer.

It’s also worth noting, that Linux hasn’t always been a competitive desktop product for the home market.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Mate, the most advanced and popular MS product activator is open source, hosted on GitHub owned by Microsoft and Microsoft is fully aware of it. And, just like in the 90-s when one serial key was known to every human on earth and was never blocked, they give exactly zero fucks. I won't even be surprised if I see some commits with bug fixes from Microsoft themselves.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 9 months ago (1 children)

just like in the 90-s when one serial key was known to every human on earth and was never blocked

How would they have blocked it? Windows activation didn't exist in the 90s.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 9 months ago (1 children)

In 2000s at least in SEA most likely the installed windows when buying a new PC or Laptop is pirated copy. Even now you can request that if the laptop is not bundled with Genuine Windows

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago

Same with South Asia. That's how the independent resellers do it. The authorised resellers either mark up the price for the Windows license or sell without an OS for a reduced price.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 9 months ago

Yeah, solid take. Even today, the vast vast majority of people don’t even realize Windows isn’t free because every single PC sold, comes with it, preinstalled.

Microsoft’s real dominance is having schools (pre and post secondary), businesses, governments and just about anyone they can force a license on to run their software. Windows, Office (a third of my first year computer course was learning MS Office ffs), etc.

That’s why they got slammed with a multi million dollar class action: https://www.thatsuitemoney.ca/ for manipulating their licensing and subsequent fees associated.

Sadly, a pittance when compared to how much they got from all those shady deals. Piracy doesn’t even touch them.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 52 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Microsoft has openly encouraged piracy as far back as the 90s. I remember an interview with Gates where he said as much.

This has been part of Microsoft's business model, especially for Windows and Office for 30 years. They actively encouraged pirating the software to ensure it cemented itself as the defacto standard in homes and offices with a view that one day users would have no choice but pay for it. For over 20 years now this has been part of the bigger desktop-as-a-service goal.

Soon businesses and home users will have no choice but to remotely log into a Windows system that is hosted in a datacentre and provided by Microsoft or one of their partners. Local installs will be a thing of the past. Think Citrix Presentation Server and thin clients which is where this whole idea started a long time ago.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 45 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Microsoft

Ignoring unauthorized copying

... Bill Gates said "And as long as they're going to steal it, we want them to steal ours. They'll get sort of addicted, and then we'll somehow figure out how to collect sometime in the next decade."

The practice allowed Microsoft to gain some dominance over the Chinese market and only then taking measures against unauthorized copies. In 2008, by means of the Windows update mechanism, a verification program called "Windows Genuine Advantage" (WGA) was downloaded and installed. When WGA detects that the copy of Windows is not genuine, it periodically turns the user's screen black. This behavior angered users and generated complaints in China with a lawyer stating that "Microsoft uses its monopoly to bundle its updates with the validation programs and forces its users to verify the genuineness of their software".

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halloween_documents

... the documents identified open-source software, and in particular the Linux operating system, as a major threat to Microsoft's domination of the software industry, and suggested tactics Microsoft could use to disrupt the progress of open-source software.

[–] [email protected] 40 points 9 months ago (4 children)

Windows is largely successful because there was nothing else good enough for Intel to use back in the late 80s. They struck a partnership and it took off, indoctrinating people into the Windows way of life for decades to come. Most people hate new tech, it means that they have to learn something new that they'd rather not (akin to telling someone to write with the opposite hand than the one they've been using their entire lives), even if that thing is simple. Piracy just strengthened that already strong foothold that they had.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 27 points 9 months ago (8 children)

Not true at all. You're thinking the past 20 years instead of the past 35 years. Windows was already "the" OS around the world well before you could just pirate a copy online. They cut deals and made sure if you bought a pc it has windows on it. They made sure the countries you speak of had dirt cheap cd keys without piracy. Microsoft in the late 80s/90s had a lot of moving parts that went into making sure the only OS you'd be using was windows. Even after they got in trouble in 1992-94 and in 2000-2001.

Piracy or not. Windows was almost anyone's only choice.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] [email protected] 27 points 9 months ago

That's the genius of proprietary software business models, also adobe is guilty of this, let people pirate your software so they dominate using your software. Once their skills are built on it once they get to the workforce they won't even question using a libre alternative. In the end they manage to dominate the market

[–] [email protected] 27 points 9 months ago

Windows being easy to pirate wasnt the reason for it's popularity. It had market share because they allowed for it to be preinstalled on machines for virtually nothing. They allowed it to be preinstalled on machines for virtually nothing because the OS wasn't the flagship product.

MS Office has always been the major flagship product for the company. This was true in 1994 and still is today. Office is so important to their revenue streams that it's fairly common knowledge and has been mentioned by former employees that OS development would focus on compatibility with Office programs, not the other way around.

Specifically if you look at the years around Office XP and 2003, that suite is used very much as a CVS. They deprecate their operating systems using Office.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (13 children)

I think Windows is successful because it was defacto preinstalled on all computers. Even people in third world countries are buying computers whole, not a basket of parts to assemble.

Also software. You're not going to assemble a computer, install Linux, and then not be able to run anything on it. You want to run all the software that was built to run on Windows, which was built to run on Windows because it came installed on every computer, etc. (Remember Linux back then really couldn't run all that much. No office? No games? You're toast.)

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] [email protected] 21 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (4 children)

Windows as a software package would have never been affordable to individuals or local-level orgs in countries like India and Bangladesh (especially in the 2000’s) that are now powerhouses of IT. ... Had the OS been too difficult to pirate, educators and local institutions in these countries would have certainly shifted to Linux and the like.

While i somewhat agree with your overall statement, this part is just wrong. Linux in the late 1990s and 2000s was very different from today, where you just plug in a CD/USB and select your region. Linux back then was very nerdy, you had to choose your hardware first to make sure there was a linux driver and the installation process was very difficult, especially before plug&play where you had to know which IRQs and slots you had to use for network, sound and videocard to avoid conflicts. I remember trying to install Linux from a CD, only to work my war from one error message to the next because it did not like my videocard, soundcard or both.

Also, what would you do with a linux pc at home or at work if it could not run word, excel, duke nukem 3D, TTD, programs you knew from work/school or software you could pirate from your friends?

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 19 points 9 months ago (2 children)

yup ADOBE is exactly the same.

they do it on purpose for the exact same reason you are mentioning.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Eh. Adobe puts more effort into making it harder or tedious.

With the introduction of Creative Cloud, the notorious "amtlib.dll" that houses Adobe licensing, was bundled into the respective applications binary (exe). It didn't stop pirates. In 24 hours they found the licensing mechanism and patched it.

You could create a CC account, install the desktop manager, install any app(s) you wanted, then crack them. When an update arrived, you could simply update the app(s) and apply the crack again.

Occasionally the licensing mechanism would update and an updated crack would be needed. As usual, pirates had this worked out the day of or a day later.

Adobe would later patch the desktop manager and break functionality to update software if it wasn't genuine. People could still get the latest versions by uninstalling and reinstalling through the desktop manager. Since it would retain user settings by default.

Later, a mechanism was built into each application that would throw a warning message that the application isn't genuine. For example, Photoshop would soft lock and the genuine check would display with the only option to close. This too was eventually patched out by pirates.

The latest attempt from Adobe now forces users to input and have a credit or debit card saved before activating a trial. This removed the ability for users to easily install software anonymously.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

They already have the monopoly so it’s fine for them to cash in now

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago (2 children)

The same goes for a lot of big-name software.

They know you're pirating their software. Almost everything phones home, whether you pirate it or not. Unless the ping comes from a MAC address of a machine bought by a company, they don't care.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 9 months ago

...and they knew it from the beginning.

Even the MPAA and RIAA know piracy fuels culture and makes golden hits into platinum hits and boost sequel album sales and auxiliary items (toys and lunchboxes).

They can't help themselves because to the execs and shareholders, it feels like lost sales and theft. And the DRM market capitalizes on those feelings.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 9 months ago (1 children)

windows is largely successful because of oems.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 9 months ago

You are right, but it's not just poor developed countries and not just windows either.

Back in the 1990s, copy protection in general was weak and companies wishing to expand market share did not prioritize combating piracy.

They always just focused on making the big companies pay through licensing audits and kept prices high to ensure revenue.

The whole industry just accepted that students, researchers and tinkerers would pirate their software.

Photoshop, Office, Visual Studio and even enterprise software like Oracle had this dual strategy: let piracy help spread market share among those who can't or won't pay, while maintaining high prices and security audits to drive revenue from companies.

Many companies still follow this strategy.

[–] FARTYSHARTBLAST 15 points 9 months ago

Pirate Linux!

Wait...

[–] [email protected] 13 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I agree. If they would've locked piracy down sincerely, Linux might have had a shot back in the 90's.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago

Yeah, the 90's were the turning point for MS. If they flopped, we would have a whole different story right now. Unfortunately, they didn't... which is why we have to have everything MS compliant right now on OSes that share nothing in common with Windows.

Samba and Wine are perfect examples.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (3 children)

Same with Photoshop, Maya etc. These corps know that letting consumers pirate their software will create more legit end users. Since people will get used to their software and won’t easily switch when they enter the professional workforce where these corps don’t condone piracy and actually audit businesses. At least in Western nations they even audit small businesses. Like my friend used to work at a small engineering firm in the Netherlands and Autodesk came by to audit the CAD licenses.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

microsoft owns github

microsoft owns windows

mas is used to pirate windows

mas is hosted on github

hmmmm...

[–] [email protected] 11 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Yup, when I was talking with a few different Microsoft representatives, they just straightforwardly stated that they don’t focus at all on punishing or pushing consequences for “obtained/purchased windows instances via any existing alternative/not supported ways” when it comes to private/home users.

They surely and happily will put the idea of buying a key or official upgrade from their certified resellers locally or online on the table.

It is quite a different story with larger organizations and companies.

Of course all this info is based on just a few talks during the last decade and with incoming subscription (ugh) model a lot will change, I guess.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

I think it is the other way around; easy pirate versions appeared becuz windows was popular, providing access to those who can't afford.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] soothing 9 points 9 months ago

I think this is really true. In 2000s people used to pirate everything (at least where I am from). And even now, apple marketshare is never big compared to US for example.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 9 months ago

Its not random thoughts, its the reality and msft knows it and they let it happened same as adobe with photoshop. They let students pirate their softwares so that by the time they graduated and enter the work field, they'd keep using it in their new job/company, where they would charge real expensive money for the license

[–] [email protected] 6 points 9 months ago

I saw a yt video few years ago about how microsoft allowed windows piracy on South Asian countries to increase windows adoption rate.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Not really. Offices were one of the major early adopters of computers and windows is perfect for them with plethora of features they offered right out of the package.

Windows GUI was groundbreaking, their text processing and excel was a game changer, and windows doesn't allow you to delete your own boot partition with a sudo command so it was pretty idiot proof.

Once windows had the majority of marketshare, it was pretty obvious that whoever was buying PCs (back in the day it was more that a dad got a PC from his office or bought one which was similar), got it with windows.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I read something similar many years ago where Microsoft intentionally wanted people to use use pirated windows to increase their user base.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago

I mean sure in those countries maybe. But the vast majority of people using windows in North America would still be using Windows (And possibly Europe, but I cant speak for Europe) even if it wasnt easily piratable.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago

That's how they got around selling at a loss to crush the competition I guess.

load more comments
view more: next ›