finally someone with common sense at microsoft.

Permabanned
Joined
3 Dec 2006
Posts
1,396
A senior exec at MS, Raikes says the following "You want to push towards getting legal licensing, but you don't want to push so hard that you lose the asset that's most fundamental in the business,"

Round of applause for that man. He is welcome at my local any time, and the drinks are all on me. This is something I have been saying for a long time regarding the draconian and finicky nature of Vista WGA.

He even goes on to say ""If they're going to pirate somebody, we want it to be us rather than somebody else". Fantastic. Common sense prevails over lunacy. "We understand that in the long run the fundamental asset is the installed base of people who are using our products,". Correct, and it this gives MS the leverage that prevents a greater loss to linux or to other alternatives. Raikes also says "What you hope to do over time is convert them to licensing the software,". Round of applause.

Full story here.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/03/13/ms_piracy_benefits/
 
These execs have been around for a while spreading their common sense, the only problem being they're drowned out and overruled by people who think they know better :(

Burnsy
 
Slam62 said:
uh they want you to pirate their products what the ...... :confused:

They want you to buy their products, but if you're definently going to pirate, pirate theirs so they still have control over the industry and market as a whole.

Burnsy
 
burnsy2023 said:
They want you to buy their products, but if you're definently going to pirate, pirate theirs so they still have control over the industry and market as a whole.

Burnsy


Indeed !
 
It looks like an out of context piece by The Register again.
I can see what is being said, however the Register in their uisual wisdom is taking the pieces of the article it wants and just posting those.

There will be a lot more to this story than the Sunday Sport, sorry The Register have had to say.
 
stoofa said:
It looks like an out of context piece by The Register again.
I can see what is being said, however the Register in their uisual wisdom is taking the pieces of the article it wants and just posting those.

There will be a lot more to this story than the Sunday Sport, sorry The Register have had to say.

Who doesn't put a spin on a story anyway, we are, after all, human. Such a shame. I really did think for split second that perhaps MS would stop giving the genuine people serious grief with WGA (as it does nothing at all to halt the pirates and they should realise that ALL copy protection is ultimately broken given the desire)

Your not a wikipedian by any chance. I know they are biased towards The Register because of all the grief it gives that website.
 
Last edited:
I think its easy for him to say that thanks to windows being overpriced. Almost £100 for professional windows xp and the price doesnt move even after 6 years. And all your buying is a cd key really. Sort of seems like they make up for the pirated copies by charging the legit buyers extra.

Also surely a large userbase is good only if people have to buy software for it? I mean, people who pirate windows are not going to go and buy microsoft office or any other program actually, so whats the significance of the userbase?
 
burnsy2023 said:
Seriously, why bother posting?

Burnsy
how else is he going to get the posts required to get on members market and rip someone off.
just post "whatever" or "that will be the day" or "screw micro$oft" in all the microsoft threads and you're there within a week
 
xiphrex said:
And all your buying is a cd key really.

No, what you're buying (paying for) is the cost of development. Software is cheap/free to reproduce, but the initial costs of development are huge.
 
div0 said:
No, what you're buying (paying for) is the cost of development. Software is cheap/free to reproduce, but the initial costs of development are huge.

Just look at the $10bn spent on Vista...

Burnsy
 
barnettgs said:
It's a case of poor management and programming? Vista doesn't look $10bn to me...

I'm pretty sure I saw that velcrow cost millions to develop, although that doesn't look it to me....

Looks can be decieving and its very easy to blame poor management. The truth of the story is: it's never that simple.

Burnsy
 
burnsy2023 said:
I'm pretty sure I saw that velcrow cost millions to develop, although that doesn't look it to me....

Looks can be decieving and its very easy to blame poor management. The truth of the story is: it's never that simple.

Burnsy


lol i didnt know that my Lacoste has velcrow wow million on my foot
 
Back
Top Bottom