bit-tech.net

Latest WGA deletes wallpaper

Latest WGA deletes wallpaper

The latest revision of WGA will delete your wallpaper every hour if it believes your copy of Windows isn't genuine.

If you're wondering why your desktop background keeps disappearing, it's because Microsoft believes you're a filthy pirate. Arrr.

The latest version of the Windows Genuine Advantage tool – built by Microsoft to programmatically determine whether a version of Windows is legal or not – has introduced some new, in-your-face functionality for remonstrating with users of less-than-legitimate operating systems. First and foremost amongst these, according to BetaNews, is code to reset your desktop wallpaper to a plain colour every sixty minutes. You can change it back again, but until you shell out on a real copy of Windows you'll be doing so on the hour, every hour.

If you're running Vista rather than XP, the new version goes one further – as well as consigning your pretty wallpaper to the void, the Aero graphics interface will be disabled too – pirates will only get to play with the “Vista Basic” theme.

Finally, a semi-transparent overlay in the lower right corner of the screen will display the message “You may be a victim of software counterfeiting.” This text will appear on the top of any open applications – including, it would seem, full-screen 3D applications such as games.

With this latest revision, Microsoft has gone out of its way to irritate and nag users of illegitimate copies of Windows into shelling out for the real deal – and yet has still to come up with an 'advantage' of Windows Genuine Advantage for the end-user. That is, other than the satisfaction that comes from seeing the little “Your version of Windows is genuine” message.

Do we have any piratical types reading who have been wondering where their wallpaper went, or is the latest WGA version simply another thing for the professional pirates to work around? Share your thoughts over in the forums.

81 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply
[USRF]Obiwan 28th August 2008, 13:01 Quote
As if any pirate will care about backgrounds and 'text" appearing in some corner. they know they have a copy.
As if any legit user will care about the "your windows is genuine" msg when doing a ms driver upgrade.
As if anybody cares if you have a honest or pirated windows.
badders 28th August 2008, 13:05 Quote
It's true though - it seems to be all stick and no carrot when it comes to getting people to shell out a fortune for an OS...
Glider 28th August 2008, 13:06 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by badders
It's true though - it seems to be all stick and no carrot when it comes to getting people to shell out a fortune for an OS...

A fortune is relative... People don't bother dishing out €350 for JUST a GFX card, but when it comes to one of the key components, the OS, then every € is one too much...
Silver51 28th August 2008, 13:26 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by badders
It's true though - it seems to be all stick and no carrot when it comes to getting people to shell out a fortune for an OS...

£60 OEM.

I'd rather build my system with a trustworthy OS version rather than struggle with a dodgy pirate version.
sotu1 28th August 2008, 13:30 Quote
that's just plain irritating! hehe! have M$ dropped the price of XP with the advent of Vista? I'm planning on a new PC soon, a basic media pc, and was wondering if the ol' XP dog was a cheaper option
badders 28th August 2008, 13:41 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silver51

£60 OEM.

I'd rather build my system with a trustworthy OS version rather than struggle with a dodgy pirate version.

I know, that's what I paid for it - to me, that's a fortune, no matter what you spend it on.
Glider 28th August 2008, 13:46 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by badders
I know, that's what I paid for it - to me, that's a fortune, no matter what you spend it on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by badders' SIGNATURE
CPU: Q6600 G0 @ 3GHz | COOLER: Arctic Cooling Freezer 7 Pro | GPU: Asus EN8800GT 512Mb @ 700/1750/2000 | M/B: Asus P5K (No Line in passthrough - If anyone knows how to fix, PM me!) | PSU: Corsair VX550 | HDD: Seagate 7200.10 300Gb SATA | DVD: Optiarc 7170 IDE | My Image & file Hosting Site (no Bandwidth Limits or waits) - http://www.file-city.co.uk | My Blog

Yeah, with a quad core and a 8800GT it does seem you don't have a lot to spend on your PC, and certainly not on key components like for instance an OS :(
liratheal 28th August 2008, 13:52 Quote
I paid £96 for my copy of Ultimate, OEM, and while it's well over what I want to pay for it, it's not a fat lot more expensive than XP was/is (£73 (OOS) on Ingram Micro), or even Leopard (£85).

I don't ever recall them being 'cheap', and when people are spending hundreds on a homebuild (I've yet to see a prebuild come without a license), it's hardly unfair to ask them to pay for the software that they're going to use day in, day out for the next few years.

Complaining about the cost, even though it seems pretty damn extortionate, isn't going to change anything. If it's that much of a bind, get a copy of Linux, they're nearly all free.

Admittedly, Windows does a very bad job of being 'nice' to users, but hey, that software is pretty much the base of everything we do. Not like we can change that too easily.
badders 28th August 2008, 13:57 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glider
Yeah, with a quad core and a 8800GT it does seem you don't have a lot to spend on your PC, and certainly not on key components like for instance an OS :(

No Not really.

My PC was for christmas.

Ninja Edit:
Quote:
Originally Posted by liratheal
Admittedly, Windows does a very bad job of being 'nice' to users, but hey, that software is pretty much the base of everything we do. Not like we can change that too easily.
This is more like what the point of my first post was - all stick, no carrot.
There's no "Advantage" to having a genuine copy of windows, we just don't get crippled like the detected pirated versions.

They should probaby have called it "WCD" - Windows Counterfeit Disadvantage
Glider 28th August 2008, 14:02 Quote
Well, if you don't get an OS you end up with a pretty expensive door stopper... Maybe you should have asked Santa for a bit less excessive CPU, and an OS to actually use your system.

I just love it how people prioritise hardware over software, while software is actually more important than hardware... Bleeding edge hardware without software is useless, software without bleeding edge hardware still works, just a bit slower...
azrael- 28th August 2008, 14:08 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silver51
I'd rather build my system with a trustworthy OS version rather than struggle with a dodgy pirate version.
So, what flavour of Linux are you using? ;)
badders 28th August 2008, 14:09 Quote
I did buy my OS, but it doesn't mean I have to be happy about it.
It's exactly the same as buying petrol at the price it is, I have to pay it, but I don't have to be happy about it.
LeMaltor 28th August 2008, 14:14 Quote
I have 4 comps, 3 with XP and one with Vista and ive never seen this WGA O_o ?
liratheal 28th August 2008, 14:15 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeMaltor
I have 4 comps, 3 with XP and one with Vista and ive never seen this WGA O_o ?

I've never seen it getting in my face, I assume it has itself a mug or two of 'sit the **** down and shut the **** up' within legal copies.
Glider 28th August 2008, 14:17 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by azrael-
So, what flavour of Linux are you using? ;)
Gentoo ;)
Quote:
Originally Posted by badders
I did buy my OS, but it doesn't mean I have to be happy about it.
It's exactly the same as buying petrol at the price it is, I have to pay it, but I don't have to be happy about it.
That's exactly my point... You are perfectly happy to dish out for a quad core and gaming GPU, yet you complain when you have to pay for an other core component, the OS (which probably costs even less...)? To me that's flawed reasoning... That makes about everything too expensive...

And in case you didn't know, if you hate MS so much, or dislike their practices, vote with your wallet... There are (free) alternative OSs... But live with the consequences of your choices. IMHO you should either STFU and pay the price, or do something about it and deal with the consequences. But that is most peoples problem, they whine and whine, yet they take the easy way out... But that's an other discussion I guess...
scarrmrcc 28th August 2008, 14:30 Quote
look at it this way, apple OS's are cheaper, but you get a new every year.
Windows costs more, but they update it all the time for free.

essentially you are getting a deal with windows.
wuyanxu 28th August 2008, 14:52 Quote
am i the only one getting Vista (bith 32bit and 64bit) for free?
liratheal 28th August 2008, 14:54 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by wuyanxu
am i the only one getting Vista (bith 32bit and 64bit) for free?

I bet you're getting it through Uni, yes?
Quote:
Originally Posted by scarrmrcc
look at it this way, apple OS's are cheaper, but you get a new every year.
Windows costs more, but they update it all the time for free.

essentially you are getting a deal with windows.

Apple OS's are barely cheaper, though, there aren't any annoying license codes to put in, which is nice.
OleJ 28th August 2008, 15:31 Quote
lol so in essence pirates get the better looking and performing Vista experience. Hahahaha!
Delphium 28th August 2008, 15:38 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by wuyanxu
am i the only one getting Vista (bith 32bit and 64bit) for free?

Near enough... from a mate whom got it on employee purchase ftw :)
ie <£20

However id still feel it would be worth purchasing the os at normal retail or possibly oem if i had to, as Glider correctly says, the OS is as important as the hardware inside the machine, so something to always factor in.
Dreaming 28th August 2008, 15:53 Quote
I bought the OEM for £60 and project it to last 2-3 years which is £20-£30 per year for an operating system. My alternative is linux. It doesn't seem that much to pay for a years use of Windows which is much better for my needs than linux, especially when I'm forking out £30 every month or two for a single computer game which I probably wont be playing consistently for 2-3 months let alone 2-3 years.

I think its a shame though, I think microsoft turning off the bit that disabled your system in the WGA was a good move - yes notify users that it's a copy, but don't break the whole PC. Now they're going one step backwards. They want to force people to buy it, but die hard pirates never will and those in the margins aren't going to be endeared to Microsoft if they are crippling their software, it's just going to annoy people who will get a fix that will no doubt be on torrent sites a few days after the update.

It's like terrorism in a sense. You can't defeat an ideology by chucking bombs at it until they go 'oh, ok, we give up now and will play by your rules', you need to go through the route of looking at the issue, understanding the motives and finally trying to come to some kind of compromise so that all parties are satisfied.
steveo_mcg 28th August 2008, 16:03 Quote
My mate (honest i'm still on XP) runs a pirated version of Vista and XP and has never had an issue with WGA he just doesn't let it install in the updates. Have they changed it?
docodine 28th August 2008, 16:16 Quote
I've recently been forced to use a pirated copy of Windows, because all three of my genuine disks would fail at some point during the installation. I got pissed, downloaded the 500mb file, and it worked fine, but I ended up buying a new DVD drive to get the real ones to work.

I wouldn't call it dodgy, it installed quicker than the genuine copies... Also, nlite is a godsend.
ChaosDefinesOrder 28th August 2008, 16:16 Quote
If you're thinking that Vista is too expensive, think of it like a game

You want a game to have a good play time, right? Don't want it to be over too quickly, and get good re-playability factor. Games are roughly £30 for the premium decent games, some offering up to 60-100hrs of play time.

Think how long you spend using the core OS, then compare the cost of the OS with the cost of the aforementioned example game. Good value? Of course it is. Nay-sayers shut the hell up.

I personally think that Vista is good value for what you get. I like Vista, it runs more stabily for me than XP and my PC is 4 years old! I've been running Vista for over a year now and never had any form of BSoD, and only twice has it siezed up requiring a restart.

What i do object to, however, is the price difference between Vista Home Premium and Vista Ultimate. I just don't think that the extras included with Ultimate is worth that price difference - even including Ultimate Extras which pretty much just allows you to use videos as wallpapers, and VLC can do that anyway! Even saying that, though, If I was building a PC from scratch (which I will be doing soon) I would still gladly pay for Ultimate x64 as I do believe that the cost is worth it when compared to the cost of the hardware!
wuyanxu 28th August 2008, 16:22 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by liratheal
I bet you're getting it through Uni, yes?

yes. university FTW! 2 years down, 2 years to go, don't want the good times to end.

that argument on game prices actually stand up very well. well said.
DarkLord7854 28th August 2008, 16:32 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Article
That is, other than the satisfaction that comes from seeing the little “Your version of Windows is genuine” message.

There's more satisfaction needed then having a valid license key, being able to use your OS properly, and getting Updates and support from Microsoft? :?
wgy 28th August 2008, 16:38 Quote
pretty much everyone i know uses pirate copys of windows. its not comparable to hardware atall. nor is the argument "you spend 100+ on a CPU pr GFX card why not OS???!" valid,.

downloading a illegal OS is easy, extremely accessible, and it saves £60-100. thats why people do it. and thats why people will NEVER stop. alot of people have a mentality of if its free why pay?

to say i/you/he/she or we spend money on a GPU but not OS is a poor example... the oppurtunity to download/obtain or... steal for a more accurate term a GTX280 is not given to us in the same easy way, so therefore, we do no not. risks are higher, and for a start we have to leave the comfort of our chair.

you cant stop the pirates, and am i being simple? or can you just opt not to install this piece of annoying software called a update, and carry on installing updates from else where? i know ive seen a few places that hold microsft updates with out the need to check you've you a legit copy.

oh! and people download games too, for free, like a dirty pirate.

[i do not support pirates, as developers need money and credit like any other professional. but you cant stop them]
naokaji 28th August 2008, 16:39 Quote
support from microsoft? for what reason would anyone ever need support from them?
remember.. its not hardware, so it cant fail, oem version costs a whole lot less, sure you wont get support from ms, but what could they help you with anyway?

back to topic, whats the point of telling pirates that they have a illegal copy of the software they are using? like they woudnt know allready, microsoft should grow some brain, if someone decides he doesnt care about the people who loose their job due to piracy then no stupid message on the screen is going to change their opinion.
Glider 28th August 2008, 16:47 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by wgy
pretty much everyone i know uses pirate copys of windows. its not comparable to hardware atall. nor is the argument "you spend 100+ on a CPU pr GFX card why not OS???!" valid,.

downloading a illegal OS is easy, extremely accessible, and it saves £60-100. thats why people do it. and thats why people will NEVER stop. alot of people have a mentality of if its free why pay?
to say i/you/he/she or we spend money on a GPU but not OS is a poor example... the oppurtunity to download/obtain or... steal for a more accurate term a GTX280 is not given to us in the same easy way, so therefore, we do no not. risks are higher, and for a start we have to leave the comfort of our chair.
So as long as it's easy it's ok? There is a thing called morals... There are FREE alternatives, but that would require YOU to change your attitude, but we don't want to do that do we?

I just wish MS would enforce their EULA's a bit more, and I'm all in favor of constant online activation (like Steam). Those freeloaders ruin everything for legit users. Like game downloaders, regardless of the fact that anti piracy rootkits don't work, they are there because smartasses steal software.
Xir 28th August 2008, 17:00 Quote
Havent checked Prices in a long time:

Hmmm, the OEM version of:

Vista Business 64 100€ Retail 260€
Vista Ultimate 64 125€ Retail 240€

XP Professional 64 110€ Retail 230€

might buy it.
Platinum 28th August 2008, 17:01 Quote
Morals are something thats severly lacking these days imo, I blame the parents and the government for allowing chavs to breed for benifits..
metarinka 28th August 2008, 17:13 Quote
I get all my software liscences from Uni, I got 3 seats of xp a few years back for $15, and I just got a seat of vista and xp for free this year.

not pirating cause the school is paying for it
but I'm glad I don't have to buy windows

in terms of the whole graphics card/os thing.
I think it's mostly psychological.

hardware of a computer is A) tangible and differen't priced and types of hardware offer differen't user features if you want a media pc or a gaming rig you'll buy special hardware and don't mind paying the price premium for the performance you want. on Pc's an Os is a very universal and basic function of the computer so while yes OS's do have a real cost and should be paid for its sort of like buying a car and then having to pay extra for the dashboard and stearing wheel.
Every PC needs an os and the vast majority run windows and it's really not that special, I think pyschologically it's just taken for granted that the os will be there and people aren't willing to pay extra for it. I know I hate paying for windows I feel like I've already bought it once why do i need to buy it again? luckily I have many legit and legal liscences but still
DarkLord7854 28th August 2008, 17:22 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by naokaji
support from microsoft? for what reason would anyone ever need support from them?
remember.. its not hardware, so it cant fail, oem version costs a whole lot less, sure you wont get support from ms, but what could they help you with anyway?

back to topic, whats the point of telling pirates that they have a illegal copy of the software they are using? like they woudnt know allready, microsoft should grow some brain, if someone decides he doesnt care about the people who loose their job due to piracy then no stupid message on the screen is going to change their opinion.

So you've never broken your OS by doing some silly edit of a file/setting and made everything crash, or gotten some BSOD you cannot figure out how to fix? Have you actually ever called Microsoft?

Their support is pretty good and worthwhile.


Also, the point of telling them they are using an illegal copy is to make them get a legit copy by inconveniencing the person with the illegal copy. There are also many shops that install illegal copies of an OS onto an unknowing customer's computer and tells them they got a "free upgrade" and the customer, being potentially computer illiterate, doesn't think much of it, until they get that message.
Mother-Goose 28th August 2008, 17:31 Quote
I think this is perfectly excusable, if you run legit vista you've got nothing to worry about, if you aren't, then you deserve it.
Liquid K9 28th August 2008, 17:33 Quote
When I was building my new pc, I'll be honest and say i seriously considered the possibility of pirating windows vista. The reason I use Windows is not one purely of choice, but a fact of life that we are locked-in to this system, good or bad, primarily when talking about software like games. In the end I took the approach many of you have suggested... thinking of it as an investment.

I ended up paying for the OEM copy of Vista x64 to ensure I have a secure, up to date system, that I know some pirate hasnt inserted some malicious code onto or that microoft wont be bullying me to 'upgrade' to a full copy.

In fairness its a good argument that you cant expect to shed all your cash on a top of the line computer, then start pirating the OS purely because "its too expensive". If you can afford a quadcore, you can afford Vista, simple as that.
Liquid K9 28th August 2008, 17:34 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mother-Goose
I think this is perfectly excusable, if you run legit vista you've got nothing to worry about, if you aren't, then you deserve it.

I agree except.... what happens to the poor sod that somehow triggers a false-positive.
Digital-Prozac 28th August 2008, 17:36 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by liratheal
I paid £96 for my copy of Ultimate, OEM, and while it's well over what I want to pay for it, it's not a fat lot more expensive than XP was/is (£73 (OOS) on Ingram Micro), or even Leopard (£85).

Leopard may be £85, and using a pirate copy is still bad, but if you do, there's no validations or WGA stylee crap with it. One disc does ALL Macs. Only the bundles ones are machine specific, but that's down to drivers, where the full version holds everything.

As for Windows:

Home Premium OEM @ £62.26 (32/64 Bit)
XP Home @ £58.74

That's bugger all to shell out for an OS. How many here play a subscription based game such as EVE or WoW, or subscribe to XBox Live? All of which cost more per year to use than shelling out for an OS.
reflux 28th August 2008, 18:19 Quote
Oooooo, OEM Vista for only £60?

Yeah, enjoy attempting to upgrade your motherboard.
Platinum 28th August 2008, 18:22 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by reflux
Oooooo, OEM Vista for only £60?

Yeah, enjoy attempting to upgrade your motherboard.

What upgrade, phone MS, get a new key, enjoy, whats difficult there?
The Bodger 28th August 2008, 18:29 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Digital-Prozac
Leopard may be £85, and using a pirate copy is still bad, but if you do, there's no validations or WGA style crap with it.

True, but don't forget that Apple are practically guaranteed to have made money from you already when they sold you the machine that runs the OS. Microsoft don't have that advantage; they get nothing at all if you pirate the software.

I'll openly admit that when I was a student I did run a pirate copy of windows on one of my two PCs, simply due to the fact that money was tight. However, as soon as I had a proper job, I "upgraded" to a legitimate copy, simply because my conscience didn't like the fact that the software was stolen and nagged me to sort it out as soon as I could afford to. Besides, despite various niggles, I reckon that XP home is probably worth the £57 I paid for my genuine copy.
teamtd11 28th August 2008, 18:31 Quote
Payed $90 for my vista ultimate retail
chicorasia 28th August 2008, 18:41 Quote
Just wait until WGA starts deleting legit windows users' wallpapers....
IanW 28th August 2008, 19:01 Quote
I don't run bleeding edge games (no reaction time left at my age), so Linux + WINE = Cheesecake. :D
Cptn-Inafinus 28th August 2008, 19:06 Quote
Very sensible method tbh.

Rather than just say "No! Bad!" they should just irritate the hell out of Pirates.

Obviously a work around will be made, but that's why they should keep doing new things.
Faulk_Wulf 28th August 2008, 19:17 Quote
When Linux can finally run Direct X games or when programmers finally support OpenGL, then we'll see the end of Microsoft and potentially Apple too.
Until then. We will be shelling out a stupidly high amount of money for dodgey software. Because you see, it isn't that Windows is the greatest, its that its the only option if you want high-end gaming content on a computer. And Apple is fine-- if all you want to do is work with photo/video editing and check your email while wearing an Oxford shirt while sitting in Starbucks sipping your overpriced latte. Mac's and their OS are beautiful to look at and stable as hell, and I love World of Warcraft-- but forgive me if I want to play something on a computer with REAL graphics sometime. Linux is getting there, but slowly. And until the DEVELOPERS start support OpenGL or Linux in some other way-- we'll have this problem.

Software is important. As Glider said, without it-- you just have a box of parts. However that doesn't mean that our two choices should be limited to a moldy apple and a gilded apple. One you'd eat only because of desperation and one you CAN'T eat because its solid gold. Pretty to look at, but a bitch on the teeth. Open source makes sense with an operating system. I think the majority of mature adult end-users that would choose a solid free OS over something like Windows-- i think with them you'd find them willing to voluntarily donate money to the project.

All in all, it doesn't justify pirating a copy of whatever, for now. But as someone else said-- its like complaining about the price of gas. I will pay it cause I have to, but I damn well won't be happy about it. And its my given right to complain about it. If you don't like it, don't listen. Voting with your wallet only works if you're in the majority and/or have the upper-hand. Combined, what is MS and Apple's market-share? We will never be the majority until a good free alternative comes out for the gaming demographic as well as the mom-and-pop demographic.

---
For those who'll TL;DR this: Linux needs better high-end game support to sway alot of people.
Firehed 28th August 2008, 21:28 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silver51
Quote:
Originally Posted by badders
It's true though - it seems to be all stick and no carrot when it comes to getting people to shell out a fortune for an OS...

£60 OEM.

I'd rather build my system with a trustworthy OS version rather than struggle with a dodgy pirate version.

That would be a reasonably valid point if WGA was accurate. Or, indeed, if a pirate copy ever had any problems beyond all of the problems that Windows has regardless.

When MS makes a good OS, people won't have an issue paying for it. Unfortunately, they don't, so they have to result to dirty tricks and abusing their monopoly.
notatoad 28th August 2008, 22:09 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by steveo_mcg
My mate (honest i'm still on XP) runs a pirated version of Vista and XP and has never had an issue with WGA he just doesn't let it install in the updates. Have they changed it?

nope. and it's still clearly marked in windows update as "windows genuine advantage tool" or something. if you are running a pirated version of windows and install that update, you deserve whatever microsoft does to you and your system.

i am running a pirated copy of windows, but i have an unused purchased copy sitting in a box, so i don't feel bad. i have never seen the WGA message on my pirated copy, but on my purchased copy i kept getting bugged to activate and then my activation would fail because i had reinstalled so many times, or had windows running virtually inside windows or something. so i use a pirated copy, it's just easier.
The Bodger 28th August 2008, 22:31 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by supertoad

i am running a pirated copy of windows, but i have an unused purchased copy sitting in a box, so i don't feel bad. i have never seen the WGA message on my pirated copy, but on my purchased copy i kept getting bugged to activate and then my activation would fail because i had reinstalled so many times, or had windows running virtually inside windows or something. so i use a pirated copy, it's just easier.

A point that sadly I have to agree with. Last week I swapped my DVD drive... and my legitimate copy of Windows locked my machine down and demanded that I re-register the installation. Fine, I connected to the internet and it worked again, but I was wondering to myself; what will happen when Microsoft get fed up with XP and decide to terminate their validation service? Some of our work PCs are still running windows 98, and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. Hell, one of them still runs DOS6.22. In ten years or so, will Microsoft issue a patch to let us bypass the registration system and run XP after they pull the plug on the registration service? Sadly, just like with DRM, you pay for something, and ultimately get less functionality from it than if you were using a pirate copy.
Boogle 28th August 2008, 22:38 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tile
This WGA tool will be removed by hackers in no-time. And as I stated numerous times Vista is a real failure. Microsoft should really can that crud named Aero that eats up resources.

You sir, should go back to DOS.
koola 28th August 2008, 23:22 Quote
Pirate versions imo are better than OEM/Retail with all the added crap and hoops they make genuine users jump through. I have a valid OS key which I used on a pirate install lol.
impar 28th August 2008, 23:31 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Originally Posted by koola
Pirate versions imo are better than OEM/Retail with all the added crap and hoops they make genuine users jump through.
What "added crap and hoops"?! :|
yodasarmpit 28th August 2008, 23:37 Quote
^

I'm running genuine versions of Windows and don't have any issues or crap and hoops to jump through.

Some time ago when I went through a benchmarking phase, trying to beat overclocking scores (constantly changing hardware) it could be a pain having to call MS, but not on a normal system I use for day to day use.
koola 28th August 2008, 23:49 Quote
The crap being most of the included software i don't want/need and the hoops being the activation and DRM. As such, I now have nLite and vLite unattended versions.
Otis1337 28th August 2008, 23:51 Quote
just so you all know, there is now a crack to take WGA off your system even if you install it.
notatoad 29th August 2008, 00:47 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by impar
what added "crap and hoops"?

read bodgers post above. and sometimes it doesn't even need to be new hardware. my computer crashed once, and when i turned it back on windows decided that i had new hardware and i needed to reactivate. calling microsoft to get permission to use my computer after it crashed was the last straw for me. now i have a cracked copy and can do whatever i want with my hardware without having to explain it to microsoft.
yodasarmpit 29th August 2008, 00:49 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by supertoad
read bodgers post above. and sometimes it doesn't even need to be new hardware. my computer crashed once, and when i turned it back on windows decided that i had new hardware and i needed to reactivate. calling microsoft to get permission to use my computer after it crashed was the last straw for me. now i have a cracked copy and can do whatever i want with my hardware without having to explain it to microsoft.
All I can say then is I must be very lucky.
bowman 29th August 2008, 02:50 Quote
I bought Vista.

I have a plain color wallpaper and the windows classic interface.. By choice.

If this is all they can do to make me pay I don't think I'll be buying the next one! Haha.
impar 29th August 2008, 03:16 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Originally Posted by supertoad
read bodgers post above.
Never had to phone anyone. And I do make lot of hardware changes.

Correction:
"Did" make a lot of hardware changes.
nitrous9200 29th August 2008, 04:08 Quote
This is how much of a pain WGA is:
1) Install operating system.
2) Enter product key and check the box to activate Windows when I'm online. (easier in Vista because it has most of the drivers already)
3) If you have a Dell or other computer that won't let you activate online, take the 3 minutes (literally, I do this all the time) to call Microsoft and get your activation code.

Then if I have to download something off of MS's website, all I have to do is download a little exe which gives me a code to copy and paste into the box on the web page. Not all that intrusive if you pay for your software, is it?
DarkLord7854 29th August 2008, 04:18 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by koola
The crap being most of the included software i don't want/need and the hoops being the activation and DRM. As such, I now have nLite and vLite unattended versions.

You're confusing buying a pre-made computer with the OS pre-installed to installing a fresh Vista install from Microsoft.
leexgx 29th August 2008, 05:50 Quote
i own vista 64 Ultimat but i use an Vista 64 ultimat OEM patched disk, Do not install the WGA update or the other ones that say thay are going to noob your pc (set updates to notify only and check each update before installing them)
liratheal 29th August 2008, 08:40 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Digital-Prozac
Leopard may be £85, and using a pirate copy is still bad, but if you do, there's no validations or WGA stylee crap with it. One disc does ALL Macs. Only the bundles ones are machine specific, but that's down to drivers, where the full version holds everything.

As for Windows:

Home Premium OEM @ £62.26 (32/64 Bit)
XP Home @ £58.74

That's bugger all to shell out for an OS. How many here play a subscription based game such as EVE or WoW, or subscribe to XBox Live? All of which cost more per year to use than shelling out for an OS.

Yeah, but with OS X, you have to take into consideration that they control the hardware too - Releasing a 'one DVD for all Macs' OS is pretty much the only way they can do it.

XP Home isn't an OS, it's a POS :p

Home Premium isn't much better >.>
impar 29th August 2008, 10:34 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Originally Posted by liratheal
XP Home isn't an OS, it's a POS :p
A domestic user doesnt need the XP Professional version.
Xir 29th August 2008, 10:47 Quote
If he goes to LAN's he does ;-)

Where's the difference between Vista Business and Vista Ultimate?
steveo_mcg 29th August 2008, 10:47 Quote
Unless they run any kind of real network appliances in which home doesn't always play nice, thus why pro is around.
Quote:
Originally Posted by yodasarmpit
^

I'm running genuine versions of Windows and don't have any issues or crap and hoops to jump through.

Some time ago when I went through a benchmarking phase, trying to beat overclocking scores (constantly changing hardware) it could be a pain having to call MS, but not on a normal system I use for day to day use.

But on that point if your running and OEM version and have to phone MS to get your code, then you've probably already broken the EULA and as such might as well be running a pirate copy since in MS eyes its still wrong. For every one who says just buy OEM and phone up and get your code your just as bad as a pirate so get down for your moral high horse, an OEM should die withe the hardware its installed with, tbh i don't know how much needs to change but a new motherboard is a new computer.
impar 29th August 2008, 11:39 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Originally Posted by steveo_mcg
... an OEM should die withe the hardware its installed with, tbh i don't know how much needs to change but a new motherboard is a new computer.
There seems to be an exception if the original motherboard was defective:
http://www.michaelstevenstech.com/oemeula.htm
koola 29th August 2008, 13:07 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkLord7854
You're confusing buying a pre-made computer with the OS pre-installed to installing a fresh Vista install from Microsoft.

No I'm really not, although pre-loaded computers are annoying too. A fresh install also includes software I don't want for instance IE, Outlook, WMP, MSN, WGA, DRM, ULA etc...
Cupboard 29th August 2008, 13:25 Quote
I have used a pirated copy of XP pro because my computer came with a licence for it but no recovery CDs. When I came to break it far enough to need a reinstall, there wasn't a huge amount else I could do save buying a new copy of Windows which I wasn't about to do.

That copy of XP passes WGA absolutely fine, which is more than can be said for my perfectly legit version of Vista which has in the past thrown a hissy fit for no apparent reason, locking me out until I rang Microsoft.
DarkLord7854 29th August 2008, 16:06 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by koola
No I'm really not, although pre-loaded computers are annoying too. A fresh install also includes software I don't want for instance IE, Outlook, WMP, MSN, WGA, DRM, ULA etc...

So go Linux
crazybob 29th August 2008, 17:40 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by koola
...A fresh install also includes software I don't want for instance ...DRM...
I was all set to sit this discussion out, but you've gone and dragged me into it with this stupid statement. Repeat after me: VISTA DOES NOT INCLUDE DRM. Vista includes features which allow you to play DRM-equipped media. Using XP instead of Vista will not magically give you more privileges or make your pirated movies work better, it will just prevent you from playing legally-purchased media which would have played flawlessly in Vista. I hate DRM and wish it weren't around, but I really get tired of people flaming Vista for its big, scary "DRM."

And since I'm posting anyway:
Back in my younger days, I used a pirated copy of XP. I don't anymore, and I'm never going to again. An OS is not terribly expensive; it's roughly the difference between a dual- and quad-core CPU using the same technology. Very few tasks at the moment benefit from a quad-core, and yet many people use them. Plainly, spending $100 for little or no visible benefit doesn't bother people - and I'm pretty sure there are more benefits to a legal OS than to two cores which never go past 5% utilization. I don't have to spend three hours trying to get .Net installed to run some unrelated program. I don't have to check all my updates to make sure I'm not inadvertently installing WGA. I never have to spend any time fiddling with my OS to make sure it's behaving like I want it to. With a legal copy of Windows, once I'm installed and configured the way I want, I never even think about it again, and that's the way it should be.

Sure, I like fiddling with my computer; that's why I spend time on Bit-Tech. But car enthusiasts don't spend hours fine-tuning the behavior of their windshield. When I'm spending time with my computer, I want to be playing games and browsing the internet, not fiddling with my OS. I don't even want to notice my OS. Unless you can say with complete honesty that you installed a pirated copy of Windows, configured it once, and then never again even thought about it or took any special steps to keep it working, then, well... How little do you value your time?
impar 29th August 2008, 20:36 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazybob
With a legal copy of Windows, once I'm installed and configured the way I want, I never even think about it again, and that's the way it should be.
Yep. Copy protection should be a nuisance to the pirates and freeloaders not the legitimate buyer.
mp3manager 29th August 2008, 21:28 Quote
I bought a *retail* boxed version of XP Home. It was flagged as a pirate copy by WGA. It took a correspondence of about a dozen or so emails from tech support of, 'try this and try that', to finally deduce that it was a false positive.

Now if I upgrade to Vista, my *retail* XP will stop working. WTF is that all about? It's not OEM...it's RETAIL!!

When I upgraded from vinyl to CD....my vinyl collection didn't suddenly stop working.
When I upgraded from CD to SACD...my CD collection didn't suddenly stop working.
When I upgraded from VHS to DVD...my VHS collection didn't suddenly stop working.
When I upgraded from DVD to Blu-Ray....my DVD collection didn't suddenly stop working.

Why does my *retail* bought XP, have to suddenly stop working??

BTW, Vista *does* have DRM.

It's Digitally Restricted Media.
DarkLord7854 30th August 2008, 01:46 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by mp3manager
I bought a *retail* boxed version of XP Home. It was flagged as a pirate copy by WGA. It took a correspondence of about a dozen or so emails from tech support of, 'try this and try that', to finally deduce that it was a false positive.

Now if I upgrade to Vista, my *retail* XP will stop working. WTF is that all about? It's not OEM...it's RETAIL!!

When I upgraded from vinyl to CD....my vinyl collection didn't suddenly stop working.
When I upgraded from CD to SACD...my CD collection didn't suddenly stop working.
When I upgraded from VHS to DVD...my VHS collection didn't suddenly stop working.
When I upgraded from DVD to Blu-Ray....my DVD collection didn't suddenly stop working.

Why does my *retail* bought XP, have to suddenly stop working??

BTW, Vista *does* have DRM.

It's Digitally Restricted Media.

If you *upgrade* then duh, you're overwriting XP. Doesn't stop you from installing that XP license on another computer though
Platinum 30th August 2008, 17:05 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by mp3manager
I bought a *retail* boxed version of XP Home. It was flagged as a pirate copy by WGA. It took a correspondence of about a dozen or so emails from tech support of, 'try this and try that', to finally deduce that it was a false positive.

Now if I upgrade to Vista, my *retail* XP will stop working. WTF is that all about? It's not OEM...it's RETAIL!!

When I upgraded from vinyl to CD....my vinyl collection didn't suddenly stop working.
When I upgraded from CD to SACD...my CD collection didn't suddenly stop working.
When I upgraded from VHS to DVD...my VHS collection didn't suddenly stop working.
When I upgraded from DVD to Blu-Ray....my DVD collection didn't suddenly stop working.

Why does my *retail* bought XP, have to suddenly stop working??

BTW, Vista *does* have DRM.

It's Digitally Restricted Media.

Because your upgrading, when you upgrade your vinyl to CD as you say your not actualy upgrading what your doing is buying a CD player then purchasing the music again on CD, theres no upgrade there my friend.
koola 31st August 2008, 18:20 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkLord7854
So go Linux
I went one better, Mac.
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazybob
I was all set to sit this discussion out, but you've gone and dragged me into it with this stupid statement. Repeat after me: VISTA DOES NOT INCLUDE DRM. Vista includes features which allow you to play DRM-equipped media. Using XP instead of Vista will not magically give you more privileges or make your pirated movies work better, it will just prevent you from playing legally-purchased media which would have played flawlessly in Vista. I hate DRM and wish it weren't around, but I really get tired of people flaming Vista for its big, scary "DRM."

Those "features which allow you to play DRM-equipped media" are effectively DRM "Digital Rights Management". Allow the Vista Team Blog to make that "stupid statement" not so stupid afterall
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazybob
snip... I never have to spend any time fiddling with my OS to make sure it's behaving like I want it to. With a legal copy of Windows, once I'm installed and configured the way I want, I never even think about it again, and that's the way it should be.

Likewise I never have to fiddle with the OS or have to phone Microsoft or have my OS tell me windows isn't genuine. I used nLite (vLite for Vista), configured the install, burned the CD and installed. Easy.
Matticus 1st September 2008, 01:38 Quote
I think this is a laughable way to combat piracy. A friend of mine installed and cracked vista 64 ultimate, it passed genuine check and updates itself all the time, it installed sp1 no problem and has been running flawlessly, he frequently goes onto the windows genuine check website and shows me that ms thinks its genuine. So basically if MS thinks its genuine how is this check going to work.

For a company like MS, there is little point in spending a large sum on anti piracy, they are so big and have such a huge market share that they will make enough money anyway, and because of their size they are great target for hackers. They would probably loose money trying to make an "amazing" anti piracy system, firstly it would put off legitimate users if it was going to be intrusive, and it would be an even bigger challenge for crackers who would have it sussed in a matter of days no doubt.

The standard CD key being genuine is enough to put off anyone who isn't very tech savvy, and genuine check when you update is enough to put off the more tech savvy but less confident would-be-crackers, just leave it that way.
Xir 1st September 2008, 09:07 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazybob
I don't even want to notice my OS.

Correct...which is why Vista is a pain in the ... as it makes itself noticed all the time.

Had to work with it yesterday..bloody grrmblllsonofanOS

Oh...about:
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazybob
An OS is not terribly expensive
Welll, we're all supposed to buy retail...not OEM...
then it is expensive
steveo_mcg 1st September 2008, 13:28 Quote
Imho piracy has helped MS in the past, you don't get to be the market leader selling software to businesses and how many people (back in the dim and distant) would have payed for ms dos/windows 3.1 over say the amiga os or one of the other half dozen providers, but they used windows at work so either got a discount to encourage its use at home or helped them selfs now its in a ridiculously dominant position it can (try to) force every one to buy a legal copy with out worrying about loosing its market share.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xir


Oh...about:
Welll, we're all supposed to buy retail...not OEM...
then it is expensive
True
Vista home premium OEM: £70
Vista home premium Retail: £150

Thats more than i've spent on a single peice of kit, although I do admit to buying oem and letting it die with the mobo most of the time.
Paradigm Shifter 1st September 2008, 14:31 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazybob
Very few tasks at the moment benefit from a quad-core, and yet many people use them. Plainly, spending $100 for little or no visible benefit doesn't bother people - and I'm pretty sure there are more benefits to a legal OS than to two cores which never go past 5% utilization.

Sorry, just because you don't use a quad to it's fullest doesn't mean that everyone is like that. :) Video encoding is getting more and more accessible, and when there are free programs out there to convert videos to DVDs or DVDs to videos that can utilise quad cores... well, I don't know about you, but the quicker something encodes, the happier I am. Long gone are the days when I'd be prepared to have my computer churning away for days on end to encode a few hours of video. And with the dropping prices of 1080p camcorders, anything that can transcode faster is a Good Thing(TM). Games might not use quads fully yet, but

...

Even buying OEM, Microsoft must have made a heck of a lot of money out of me with all the Windows licenses I've bought over the years - not including the ones that came installed on (my first) PC and laptops. They should do some sort of volume discount for people with multiple systems. :)
crazybob 1st September 2008, 19:15 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by koola
...Those "features which allow you to play DRM-equipped media" are effectively DRM "Digital Rights Management". Allow the Vista Team Blog to make that "stupid statement" not so stupid afterall ...
Glad to see you read your own article.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Article
Windows Vista includes content protection infrastructure specifically designed to help ensure that protected commercial audiovisual content, such as newly released HD-DVD or Blu-Ray discs, can be enjoyed on Windows Vista PCs."
Sounds pretty much exactly like I described it. The "DRM" included in Vista does not remove any of your rights, or restrict what you are able to do in any way. The "DRM" included in Vista provides you with more abilities. Go ahead and pick your favorite DRM-free OS - this could be Linux or Windows XP. If you want to play unprotected video content (content like a DVD, with no DRM), then either Vista or XP will behave just fine: The new infrastructure in Vista doesn't disable anything you were previously able to do. Now, pick up a shiny new BluRay disk, loaded up with DRM. On Vista, it'll play perfectly at full resolution. On XP, if it plays at all, it'll play at half- or quarter-resolution. Yes, I think DRM is bad and yes, I understand that Vista is enabling it. However, if Microsoft hadn't included that framework in Vista, the content producers would still have used DRM. You'd just have to play your movies on a consumer electronics player, because your computer wouldn't be able to.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paradigm Shifter
Sorry, just because you don't use a quad to it's fullest doesn't mean that everyone is like that. :) Video encoding is getting more and more accessible, and when there are free programs out there to convert videos to DVDs or DVDs to videos that can utilise quad cores... well, I don't know about you, but the quicker something encodes, the happier I am. Long gone are the days when I'd be prepared to have my computer churning away for days on end to encode a few hours of video. And with the dropping prices of 1080p camcorders, anything that can transcode faster is a Good Thing(TM). Games might not use quads fully yet, but...
Oh, I won't deny that there are uses for quad-cores. As you say, video encoding makes good use, as do a lot of photo and video editing programs. However, most people don't use those programs, or at least not often. And look around Bit-Tech; how many people do you see with quad-core gaming systems? I wasn't trying to claim there's no point to a quad, just that it's a waste of money for most people.
koola 2nd September 2008, 02:28 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazybob
Glad to see you read your own article.
Sounds pretty much exactly like I described it. The "DRM" included in Vista does not remove any of your rights, or restrict what you are able to do in any way.

It does if your not HDCP enabled as this guy found out.

However MS phrase their "content protection infrastructure", we all know it's DRM with a different name.
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums