TechSpot

Microsoft tightens Windows 8 activation policy to curb piracy

By Jos
Aug 6, 2012
Post New Reply
  1. cliffordcooley

    cliffordcooley TechSpot Paladin Posts: 6,393   +1,588

    As much as I might agree with you on the high prices, we are not the ones running Microsoft and would never have a clue as to how much it cost to create and deliver Windows worldwide.

    If only wishes could come true.

    Thats is what you call justification, come on be serious. Windows is just a fraction of the cost to put a computer in your home.
     
  2. Yes, I'm sure that M$ only charges what it cost to make it plus a little extra, to keep the company afloat. Just like Apple do, when they charge you 2.5 times the production cost for an iPhone.

    Let's get real, these companies can buy entire countries, you still think they treat you fairly ?
     
  3. LNCPapa

    LNCPapa TS Special Forces Posts: 4,371   +289

    Who wants to make just enough to stay afloat? Is that what you go to work for everyday... just to get by? I know that's how most people end up but I assure you that's not what everyone is trying to do. Also, those who need to test MS products for a larger audience - that's what MSDN accounts are for. It will be available in a week to those with MSDN accounts which are really not that expensive if you are serving a larger community anyway.
     
  4. EEatGDL said:

    ...At this point it?s unclear what the move will mean for individuals buying OEM versions of the OS, or if the hardware based activation will somehow affect users manually upgrading their laptops? storage or memory."


    Unless I am mistaken...end users should not be able to buy OEM versions that are not installed on an already built and supported computer. Therefore this will force computer resellers into licensing compliance and stop selling "cheap" OEM versions separately
     
  5. cliffordcooley

    cliffordcooley TechSpot Paladin Posts: 6,393   +1,588

    First sentence, you said it as a joke and I agree with you.
    Second sentence, that is what keeps them afloat. The way todays society is looking for reasons to sue for quick million/billion, any company must be prepared for anything or anyone that may threaten their finances.
     
  6. Chazz

    Chazz TS Maniac Posts: 640   +60

    It was a quick google search to get that link. It honestly took me 30 seconds. The main point of linking that, btw, was to show you the Mac sales numbers not Apple's income. That's what we were discussing right? Keep up.

    I already linked you a cheaper price for windows 7, so why are you still quoting some ridiculous price. Speaking of price, how do you think Apple became the most valuable tech company? By offering generous deals? They are specifically the most valuable company because they overcharge people for their products.

    I am in no way showing hate for Apple or their products, this is just how it is. I personally don't use any Apple products, but when my sister asked me which phone she should get I pointed her towards the iPhone. And my other sister towards the Galaxy S2. I understand what each platform/product has to offer and the type of audience it should be marketed to. And thus gave my sisters the best products for them. I just see your arguement as baseless and completely biased.

    Apple gets their income from overpricing their hardware, what they charge for their software is completely irrelevant. You've already paid for it, it's just extra cash for them. Microsoft makes it's money by selling software, the difference there is fundamental. Google makes it's money by selling ads, so you see them shelling out free software. You gotta understand that first and foremost. No company out there does software like Microsoft, it's what they're paid for and they're paid well to do it.

    As well anyone who knows anything about computers should know that Microsoft allows you to install upgrades from scratch. You don't need to install it over windows 7, so if you're that cheap you can just buy the upgrade and install it. But for the majority of users, you will get Windows 8 for little cost at all and those who aren't buying a new PC can upgrade to Windows 8 for little cost as well.

    Again if you prefer Apple that's good for you. That alone, doesn't justify your reasoning. And if Apple's products serve you so well, you should not be looking for a reason to justify your preference. If it serves your purpose then you made the right decision for YOU.
     
    gwailo247 likes this.
  7. SNGX1275

    SNGX1275 TS Forces Special Posts: 12,687   +334

    That is the wrong way of thinking. You probably haven't used OS X though, at least not multiple releases and certainly not as your main OS for any period of time. You are in this mindset that you have learned from Microsoft, MS changes their gui with major releases (95->98->Me or 2k->XP->Vista->7->8) all of those look visually different and have things moved around, start menus changed, control panels ect.

    Updates come to OS X free too, there are driver updates and patches without changing the OS number. When there is a somewhat big update there is a 3rd decimal update, ie - 10.7.3 -> 10.7.4. A full point update 10.7 to 10.8 or 10.3 to 10.4, any point update is a BIG OS update. But visually OS X stays very very similar, so it 'looks' pretty much the same every time there is a big OS update. I think it is a combination of that, and the huge gap between XP's release and Vista's release that makes Windows users think Apple's relatively more frequent OS releases are inconsequential updates they are charging for. They are big updates to the core OS, just not the GUI.
     
  8. Zen

    Zen TechSpot Paladin Posts: 938   +44

    I personally think paying $40.00 for the Windows 8 upgrade is very reasonable, as well with Apple upgrades, their $30.00 to $40.00 asking price for them seems reasonable.

    But in regards to post #41 from Gwailo247, asking where the hell does Windows cost $300.00? If talking about anything current, than yeah, $300.00 is unfounded. But if your talking about going back in time a ways, back in 2008 I purchased my currently in use copy of Windows Vista Ultimate with the two disk option of both the (32-bit) and (64-bit) versions for $399.99 + California State tax! I think I walked out the doors of Fry's Electronics being minus $423.00 in my wallet! If no one believes this, I've still got the original fancy slide out plastic box that my copy came in, it's Fry's price tag clearly says $399.99, I could scan it and post it for any possible non believers!

    So if anyone complains about having to shell out $40.00 bucks for an actual operating system, you won't have my sympathy!
     
    SNGX1275 likes this.
  9. Why would anyone want to pirate such a steaming pile of SH*T as W8 would be the proper q.

    As fro "new steps" it'll be bypassed within days if not hours regardless... M$ just never learns.
     
  10. howzz1854

    howzz1854 TS Maniac Posts: 585   +79

    I don't know how many times I have to say this. but it seems you always fail to comprehend. I have already pointed out, even with the price you quoted for the windows 7 ($179), a user would still need to shell out another $40 on top of it for windows 8. simple math here if you can't add $179+$40= $219, with tax, you're looking at $240. HOW is THAT not ridiculous pricing. unlike many in the world today, I am blessed with a decent paying job that I can afford a lot of things in my life, but AGAIN, paying $240 for retail copy of window is still is.. and I'll say again, STUPID. Microsft only points out the best side of their pricing scheme, that is telling you it's only $40, without mentioning the inherent cost that's really behind it. if you like that pricing scheme, that's great.. but don't try to justify it for Microsoft. but please don't try and tell me that a retail copy of windows is only $40 because you just pointed out yourself with a little simple math on my part that it isn't. oh yeah.. and that "anyone should already have an OEM computer with an existing windows to upgrade, make it none issue". it isn't a none issue. the inherent cost of the OS is AGAIN built into those OEM machines. that's like telling someone who wants to buy product A, that it isn't an issue since you should have already purchased product B. but that doesn't mean the inherent cost of the product A isn't built into product B. it's called marketing. anyone can advertise their product for as low as they want, as long as they hide the intrinsic cost of it into something else. I can sell my house for $40 if I want, provided if I say it in the fine print, if you already own the land that costs you $600,000. in fact, quite a few recent cases where pending bankrup automaker sold their assembly factories for $1, provided in the fine print it states that the buyer must retain the employment of all labors within. Maybe not the best example, but hopefully you get the idea.

    you seem to think Apple's products are overprice for no reason. like you I used to think so. until I tried one of their Macbook Pros. anyone who knows me would be first to say they were surprised that I got an apple. but after using one, I truly appreciate the quality, and build of their machines. it's like buying a well built, and well equipped product that does 95% of what you want it to do right out of box, as oppose to buying a bare bone automobile that requires a bit of customization here and there to make it great. both products can be great, but one with a upfront cost that gets you there right out of the box, while the other requires some work. Design also plays a huge part in today's laptop wars. and I refuse to settle for a typical PC that looks like a plastic rectangle. apple's pricing ISN"T ridiculous, and has been point out by recent Techpot review of the "apple tax". there's a reason people WILL pay more for something that has a higher perceived value, better build quality, better experience, and in the end a higher resale value.

    the next time you walk into a coffee shop, count how many macbook pros you see versus the PCs. they're almost always greater than 8:1. there's a reason behind it. again, I recommend you try one yourself.
     
  11. cliffordcooley

    cliffordcooley TechSpot Paladin Posts: 6,393   +1,588

    There is a term I like using for software that includes everything, the term is called bloated. If you can prove to me I would absolutely use all the software that comes included, I probably wouldn't mind paying the extra. I do not however want to pay extra for something I will never use. Windows even comes with crap I never use, so why would I want more out of an OS. There is a reason why there is a variety of software and why the same software should not be included in the OS.
     
     
  12. SNGX1275

    SNGX1275 TS Forces Special Posts: 12,687   +334

    Thats kind of a tough argument to get behind cliff. Since every consumer MS OS since 2k (probably since Windows began, but its been so long since I've used 95 and 98 I don't remember) has added things to the OS that used to be covered by 3rd party software (cd burning, firewall, now iso mounting, others that I'm forgetting offhand). I get what you are saying... I'm just not sure you can use that as a point in arguing against what howzz1854 said.
     
  13. cliffordcooley

    cliffordcooley TechSpot Paladin Posts: 6,393   +1,588

    It is based more around my opinion than it is an argument. Some people seem to want their OS bloated with everything, I'm not one of them. I understand the concept of getting more and paying more to get it. I don't understand why someone would say getting more is better regardless of whether they plan on using every aspect of what they get.

    Remember this discussions, European Windows 7 Will Ship Without IE. Apparently, I'm not the only one who thinks users should have a choice instead of everything being bundled together. Needing to uninstall software that is bundled in order to select the apps of choice, takes away from the feel of a fresh OS installation. Forgive my ignorance but is this not an issue with Macs? If it's truly not an issue, then I can see where my opinion/argument has no merit.
     
  14. The closest comparision to a Mac upgrade from OSX Leopard > Snow Leopard > Lion is MS Service Pack upgrades (free).
     
  15. SNGX1275

    SNGX1275 TS Forces Special Posts: 12,687   +334

    Yeah, I wasn't trying to argue with you. In these type of discussions I almost always bring up Windows 2000 because it was a very solid OS and very minimalistic.

    As for your Mac question. 3rd party software doesn't come on them, you only get Apple owned software with a new Mac. Buying an upgrade OS is the same as buying a Windows upgrade OS, you only get the OS not any 3rd party apps. So, sure a Mac will come with some software that not everyone is going to use, but it isn't 3rd party software, and you can certainly remove it (by just dragging to the trash) if you want it uninstalled.
     
    cliffordcooley likes this.
  16. howzz1854

    howzz1854 TS Maniac Posts: 585   +79

    I am not talking about bloat ware and 3rd party software, in fact we all know OEM PC are well known best example for that. I am talking about the entire feel of the OS. from video codec to simple photo editing, cd/dvd burning, web cam support, ease of use to install/uninstall, and all the basic everyday operation like having a use-able calendar that's linked to the built in email program, which btw is a no brainer to setup an Exchange account for work right out of the box, unlike a right out of a box PC which requires you to install Office and setting up Exchange is also a pain even with basic vanilla Outlook Express. having used both windows and OSX, I can honestly say OSX is a much more simple and complete package right out of the box without having to tinker things first.
     
    cliffordcooley likes this.
  17. Chazz

    Chazz TS Maniac Posts: 640   +60

    Again, you don't seem to understand. A large percentage of windows users qualify for upgrade pricing and the rest will get OEM pricing which is a lot cheaper than the link that I provided. It doesn't matter if the cost is buried somewhere else. You are raving about apple's cheap software upgrade, which I also told you is buried in the cost of their overpriced hardware. If you're gonna dismiss Windows "marketing" pricing then do the same for Apple. Or the mods should do it for us and delete everything we've said to each other because this all would be a moot point.

    I'm fully aware of the advantages of owning a Apple product(besides AppleTV). That doesn't make you anymore right. The majority is Windows users will pay a decent price for a good operating system with excellent support from third party software programmers
     
  18. howzz1854

    howzz1854 TS Maniac Posts: 585   +79

    re-read my posts.

    keywords: "retail copy", "apple tax".

    better, you should buy everyone a retail copy of windows since they're so cheap, everyone should already have an oem copy of windows right? or tell the enthusiasts who upgrade frequently from one mobo platform to another. since it's so cheap.
     
  19. If Outlook Express is your email client, it is obvious that you can't compare apples to apples lol..
     
  20. Macbook selling like hotcakes? LOL Why apple is losing ground, over priced and if they can't sue someone, they can't make money.

    It doesn't matter what ANY company does to prevent pirating... Hackers are way ahead of the programmers.

    I love windows 8, I was able to activate it 1 week after the retail was released for $0.00. It's amazingly fast on boot-up and within the work environment, applications load extremely fast.
     


Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.