To pirate XP or not to pirate Xp?

[Vater Araignee]

Were they marketing their product in each of these countries? Nothing Sneaky Rotten or Dirty about it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Are you saying that Microsoft was right and Lindows was trying to capitalize on the windows brand name?

Personally I thought that they where aptly naming their product.

Sooth - Yeah they did have some shit like that in XP that would record your hardware config, etc and the cd-key for XP that you entered and send it off to Microsoft..

Only problem is, they didn't do that on Windows XP Pro Corporate Edition, because it's for business application. Meant to be installed on many different systems, you just had to purchase that many licenses and get 1 CD.. That version doesn't check shit. That's the one that's floating all over the net.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

so is Home, Tablet and Media Center.

Oh I forgot W2K work station & server and ME, 98 & 98se, 95 A B and C ummmm NT 4.0 & 5.0 work station & server hell you can still find MS DOS all the way back to 3 if you know where to look and I bet even older.

BTW the only difference between XP Pro and Corporate Edition is the key

[Daniel]

Were they marketing their product in each of these countries? Nothing Sneaky Rotten or Dirty about it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm not really in any anti-Microsoft crusade. I use Windows, have one licensed copy and have download a few. One computer runs on an unauthorized copy, one runs legit. But, MS definitely use anti-competitive tactics, though many people misunderstand them.

The whole case with IE is the easiet to understand. They used their Windows monopoly to crush other browsers. I dont know how many people were around when Netscape v1 and IEv1 were around, but IE v 1 and 2 were fucking horrible, and through v4, Netscape was king. It was a better browser, period. I have been watching server logs for years, and this reflected since most hits came from Netscape users.

Then, MS integrated IE into their OS in a way that made it more... unavoidable to use. They set it up so a normal user almost had to use IE if they used Windows. The technology behind this isn't worth going into, so rather than needlessly hash through the details of this, let's just say a long drawn out court battle decided this to be true. And everyone knows how hard it is to sue a company the size of MS, so there must be merit in it. Since we don't have all of the evidence to discuss it, best to just assume the court knew what they were talking about.

MS still does these sorts of things regularly, but they do tread a bit more lightly than they did in the browers wars of the late 90's. They have this monopoly (as determined repeatedly by the courts) and they use that monopoly to gain an unfair advantage over their competition. This is illegal and unethical, if you want capitolism to thrive. Does this justify using their software in an unauthorized manner? I don't know. I don't really care. I don't download their shit to "fight the man", I just know MS is profitting like a mad man, and it really doesn't make any difference. Even if it did, it wouldn't bother me to see MS disappear. So I guess, either way works for me.

Linux, BeOS, and other open source OSes have a long, long way to go before they will ever be regularly used in small to mid sized offices, and in people's homes. The running joke between my friends and I is that Linux is for people who like to watch log files edit text files. Macs, these days, are just for style. You get one when you care what people think about you. People know how to use Windows, and even the slightest change throws them off. I'd like to see the world go towards Linux, but we are a long, long ways off before that is going to happen. Though, if you want to get rid of spy ware/virus problems and all you do is browse the internet and use office documents, using Linux could make your life a bit easier. And it is all free, so you won't have a guilty conscious for downloading it if you can't afford to buy it.

[Black Sunday]

For those of you that say "I use microsoft 'cause I have no other choice" what about BeOS, the baskin robins of os's Linux, their king Linspire (formerly known as Lindows) or UNIX? I left out a lot. Saying forced to use windows is simply untrue. Now saying that you should not have to pay for inferiority...

Oh do you know why Lindows got renamed Linspire?

After Microsoft lost their case against Lindows over COPY RIGHT INFRINGEMENT here in the USA,They brought suite against Lindows in six countries simultaneously. Lindows not being able to afford so many defense teams consigned and changed the name.

Sneaky rotten and dirty don't you think?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I run software that needs windows....cubase for one, I have games like NBA Live 2005 and Enter theMAtrix which requires windows. Lindows would not run these applications.

I should have just gotten a mac mini but I didn;t, so I am stuck pulling my hair out (if i had hair i would be) over this crazy operating system called XP.

[phee]

I run software that needs windows....cubase for one

Actually Cubase was origianlly only for Apple/Mac, and as I understand it, still is initially designed for them

[Black Sunday]

Macs, these days, are just for style. You get one when you care what people think about you.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

eh, not quite. People use macs because of RAM implementation for one,their smart ram works alot better than the way PC's use ram. Every musician I know uses MACS not because they care what people think of them but because they are better for music, hell Electronic Musician magazin named the g5 computer of the year for musicians last year. My brother edits TV shows and movies using Avid - guess which computer he has? Mac. Everyone he works with uses mac.

it has nothing to do with what people think.

[Black Sunday]

Actually Cubase was origianlly only for Apple/Mac, and as I understand it, still is initially designed for them

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

oh I know, I meant to use cubase on the computer i just got. i got this used laptop cause i got a deal on it, so i am saying now that i have this computer and i want to use cubase, i need to use windows.....not lindows

i used to use pro tools on a mac g3 and loved it way more than this.

[phee]

Makes sense....

[Daniel]

eh, not quite.    People use macs because of RAM implementation for one,their smart ram works alot better than the way PC's use ram.    Every musician I know uses MACS not because they care what people think of them but because they are better for music, hell Electronic Musician magazin named the g5 computer of the year for musicians last year.    My brother edits TV shows and movies using Avid - guess which computer he has?  Mac.    Everyone he works with uses mac.

it has nothing to do with what people think.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In the day of 1gigabyte ram chips and 3ghz processors, platform is irrevelent. I can mix down about anything I want and I use a 1ghz Windows laptop. There are more software packages that do more things on Windows these days than Macs. There isn't a whole lot you can do on a Mac that you can't do on Windows for half the cost (if anything). Macs are for hip people. Of course Electronic Musicians magazine gave Mac an award... they are obviously hip. All art school grads are hip, I expect them to be using Macs. The whole Mac world revolves around being hip and stylish. Look at I-pods for example. For digital audio players, they are horribly expensive and not very compatible, but everyone wants one. They are hip, and if you use one, you are cool.

Again, Im not all pro-Windows, but, realistically, the alternatives that are out there aren't all that fantastic either. Windows has the best software selection, and the machines are at a much better price point. I can run any game I want on my machine, turn the game off, and then do any sort of music/video/editing project I want. And, I do these things quite prolifically.

Ten years ago, what you say would have had more merit. Some audio software wouldn't run on Windows at all. Particularly Pro Logic, et al. These days, I can't think of anything I could need to do on a Mac that I can't do just as well on a PC. In fact, this dude I work with bought a Mac laptop for audio, and has a difficult time finding a good selection of audio applications that duplicate a lot of the free vst and direct x effects and instruments he put together on the windows machine.

[Vater Araignee]

oh I know, I meant to use cubase on the computer i just got.  i got this used laptop cause i got a deal on it, so i am saying now that i have this computer and i want to use cubase, i need to use windows.....not lindows

i used to use pro tools on a mac g3 and loved it way more than this.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

OS 10 is a unix flavor

ever try a free point and click unix?

[phee]

No what is that?

[Marblez]

In the day of 1gigabyte ram chips and 3ghz processors, platform is irrevelent. I can mix down about anything I want and I use a 1ghz Windows laptop. There are more software packages that do more things on Windows these days than Macs. There isn't a whole lot you can do on a Mac that you can't do on Windows for half the cost (if anything). Macs are for hip people. Of course Electronic Musicians magazine gave Mac an award... they are obviously hip. All art school grads are hip, I expect them to be using Macs. The whole Mac world revolves around being hip and stylish. Look at I-pods for example. For digital audio players, they are horribly expensive and not very compatible, but everyone wants one. They are hip, and if you use one, you are cool.

Again, Im not all pro-Windows, but, realistically, the alternatives that are out there aren't all that fantastic either. Windows has the best software selection, and the machines are at a much better price point. I can run any game I want on my machine, turn the game off, and then do any sort of music/video/editing project I want. And, I do these things quite prolifically.

Ten years ago, what you say would have had more merit. Some audio software wouldn't run on Windows at all. Particularly Pro Logic, et al. These days, I can't think of anything I could need to do on a Mac that I can't do just as well on a PC. In fact, this dude I work with bought a Mac laptop for audio, and has a difficult time finding a good selection of audio applications that duplicate a lot of the free vst and direct x effects and instruments he put together on the windows machine.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I have seen the pattern myself that the artistic communities tend to gravitate toward Macs. So basically, what you are saying is that Mac used to be better geared for the artistic applications but are no longer superior with the advancements in Windows. The Windows advancements are being overlooked by the artistic community because they continue using Macs simply because that is what they are used to?

[Black Sunday]

I have seen the pattern myself that the artistic communities tend to gravitate toward Macs.  So basically, what you are saying is that Mac used to be better geared for the artistic applications but are no longer superior with the advancements in Windows.  The Windows advancements are being overlooked by the artistic community because they continue using Macs simply because that is what they are used to?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

He might be saying that but it isn't true.

Unix systems are more robust than windows, more flexible. While it's true that with a souped up PC you can do anything a mac can do......run pro tools on a G5 and then run it on a windows computer with the same specs and you'll see the g5 is faster, there will be less errors (ie buffer issues) with the G5, and it will just run smoother.

Don't believe me? Well then why did Microsoft use Mac's to design the next Xbox?

http://www.xboxlive.fr/news_affiche_2150.html

Funny seeing microsoft stickers on apple computers.

[phee]

Unix systems are more robust than windows, more flexible. While it's true that with a souped up PC you can do anything a mac can do......run pro tools on a G5 and then run it on a windows computer with the same specs and you'll see the g5 is faster, there will be less errors (ie buffer issues) with the G5, and it will just run smoother.

Don't believe me? Well then why did Microsoft use Mac's to design the next Xbox?

I believe this, Macs/Unix machines are hardware based, while windows machines are software based (I realize that this is a gross over simplification) which means that Macs/Unix machines have a hell of a lot less problems than most windows machines as far as viruses, spyware, software failure, etc... HOWEVER: On the rare occasion that one of these machines does have a problem, than they are a heck of a lot harder to fix than the average windows machine (as they are much easier to break and much easier to fix)

[Black Sunday]

by the way i just downloaded a bunch of free VST synth's for cubase.

i LOVE windows xp now! :grin

seriously you gotta admit there is just tons more software for windows. i am now glad i got this computer and didn't go with mac mini.....

but i will probably changemymind again tommorow.

[Daniel]

I have seen the pattern myself that the artistic communities tend to gravitate toward Macs.  So basically, what you are saying is that Mac used to be better geared for the artistic applications but are no longer superior with the advancements in Windows.  The Windows advancements are being overlooked by the artistic community because they continue using Macs simply because that is what they are used to?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Almost. What I am saying is that Macs were at one point superior, but that was ten years ago. People continue to buy them because if you use a Mac, you are seen as hip. It isn't like it is the same user base that keeps buying them. They get new users all the time, and this is why. Not because the system is better in any noticable way.

run pro tools on a G5 and then run it on a windows computer with the same specs and you'll see the g5 is faster, there will be less errors (ie buffer issues) with the G5, and it will just run smoother.

Then you look at the cost. Wow! A Windows PC with twice the power of the Mac is half the cost! Plus, again, I can still run a billion times as much software. So, yeah, you are right, but then... are you? Who cares about specs when I can get twice the specs at half the cost? Plus, pro tool is what... the ONLY application you might really notice a real difference on? I run Reaktor 4 on a very slow PC and do just fine with it. I could push it harder and maybe have issues, but I could also upgrade my machine for about $200 and enter a world with no problems. Not that I have any problems, but I suppose if I were pushing twice the load I would.

As far as Unix, you'll get no argument from me. If I ran a business where security and dependability were an issue, there is no way I'd run a Windows server. Unix (or Linux) is the way to go, hands down. I still think Linux and Unix have a long way to go before they will be used widespread as client machines, but I think anyone with security in mind that uses Windows is out of their minds.

[Daniel]

I really sound like a Windows advocate. I'm not. I actually wish more people used Linux or Macs, but Linux isn't user friendly enough (where Windows is TOO user friendly) and Macs have major compatibility problems and are too expensive. I don't like the Mac business model at all, and they really do cater the Young Urban Professional art-grad hipster crowd. Mac is like a respected tradition to them.

Windows is a liability. It is insecure, is half the reason worms, viruses and spyware are so rampant, and is completely bloated. What Black Sunday says about Macs handling memory better than Windows is very, very, very true. The problem is... it really is much cheaper to just put more RAM in the windows machine than it is to buy a Mac and start finding software that does everything you could do in Windows. Linux is getting better about software selection, but you have to be a certified nerd to install half of it. But Windows is horribly inefficient. I make weekly trips to clean up my father's Windows machine because of all the spyware/adware the gets on it.

Of course, as Bill Gates has said, the reason Windows gets exploited by "hackers", viruses, etc, is because it is so popular. It is possible, though I don't think as likely, that if Linux were as popular as Windows, it would get exploited just as much. I agree that this is slightly possible, but Linux/Unix is a lot more secure and stable than Windows.

So, for the record, I really don't like Windows AT ALL, I just don't think the alternatives are all they are cracked up to be by the nerds that use them.

[Scary Guy]

Computers running windows do have more application support. Which is why so many are "forced" to use it. The software just doesn't exist on any other platform. Take PCDJ for example. I actually bought and use this software (and hardware controller) in the club. Currently it only runs on Windows based operating systems 98-XP. Just thought I'd throw that bit of info in.

[Soulrev]

admittedly I have been running XP Pro for a while without paying for it, but, alas I will be buying a legit copy soon so I can upgrade to XP Pro 64 bit edition.

[Black Sunday]

admittedly I have been running XP Pro for a while without paying for it, but, alas I will be buying a legit copy soon so I can upgrade to XP Pro 64 bit edition.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

you have a 64 bit processor? how much did that run you? I heard you can put 128 gigs of RAM in a pc that has a 64 bit chip.

my next pc will be a home built one, I want a 64 bit chip and I want at least 3.0 ghz processor, 2 gig of ram minimum though I guess I could put like 10 gig of ram if the motherboard can handle it.

apple has dual processors on some of their g5's.....can pc's run dual processors? It would be nice to have two 3 ghz processors running.

[Goth Brooks]

I really sound like a Windows advocate. I'm not. I actually wish more  people used Linux or Macs, but Linux isn't user friendly enough (where Windows is TOO user friendly) and Macs have major compatibility problems and are too expensive. I don't like the Mac business model at all, and they really do cater the Young Urban Professional art-grad hipster crowd. Mac is like a respected tradition to them.

Linux GUIs like KDE at this point in time are far more user friendly than Mac/Win were 10, even 5yrs ago, so I don't understand why people are saying it's not user friendly enough. With the exception of games, there is nothing that can be done on a Mac/Win box that cannot be done on *nix/BSD.

Of course, as Bill Gates has said, the reason Windows gets exploited by "hackers", viruses, etc, is because it is so popular. It is possible, though I don't think as likely, that if Linux were as popular as Windows, it would get exploited just as much. I agree that this is slightly possible, but Linux/Unix is a lot more secure and stable than Windows.

Linux and BSD of all flavors are exploited every single day, but due to it's open source nature patches can be written, tested, verified, and placed on the web for distribution far quicker than Mac or Windows. I would say that there are actually more people at any given time working on exploiting linux systems than windows systems.

So, for the record, I really don't like Windows AT ALL, I just don't think the alternatives are all they are cracked up to be by the nerds that use them.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Nothing's perfect, it's just a matter of preference as to what bugs you can live with and what features you prefer.