Rexford Ballard <rex.ballard@xxxxxxxxx> espoused:
> On Mar 29, 8:38 pm, Roy Schestowitz <newsgro...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>> Microsoft Happy with the Evolution of Windows Vista Piracy
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>> | But the truth is that Microsoft is happy with the way Windows Vista
>> | piracy is evolving. Is there a catch to this?
>
>
> Microsoft loves to scream "piracy" even when the piracy is actually based
> on software that was originally legally obtained. For example, users
> of beta versions distributed to MSDN subscribersr are legally "pirates"
> shortly after the operating system is available to the general public.
> MSDN subscribers, who pay about $1500/year for their subscription,
> which includes lots of demonstration software. I've known more than
> a few MSDN subscribers who didn't read the license agreements very well.
>
I was more than a little confused by the nature of the article, though.
Microsoft seem to be claiming that because illegitimate copies of Vista
are only fetching US$5, then this is a good thing. Their argument being
that this is because their anti-copyright-violation capabilities are so
good that illegitimate copies are worthless. I do wonder, however, if
another good reason might be that few people want Vista, and even fewer
are willing to buy the hardware required to run it?
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
| Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
| Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
|
|