I ran into a very interesting scenario with Microsoft's Genuine Office Validation the other day. Basically, I have Office 2007 Professional Plus installed and activated on my notebook. And, I wanted to install the Save as PDF or XPS Add-in (Link). No problem, I located the Add-in download page on the Microsoft site, and started to step through the validation process and was then presented with the following message: "This computer has failed validation."
Err... What? Internet Explorer was then redirected to the following page:
Hmmmm... Per the page validation summary I have a valid copy of Office 2007 Profession Plus. But, it states that my Office Visio Professional 2007 installation didn't pass validation. Oh how nice, on the page that Microsoft is giving me there is an option to purchase Office 2007. Ok, let's back this license train up and look at why this picture is wrong:
Why is this picture wrong in so many ways? Well, the Visio license is valid, I just haven't activated it. I'm just too lazy to complete the wizard, I guess. In addition, I have a valid copy of Office 2007. Granted, I know that the Add-in works with Visio, but why couldn't I just get the Add-in for my "valid" Office installation. Furthermore, why the heck does Microsoft even require you to activate software in the first place in order to download the Add-in? Haven't they been pushing the whole download, install, and try scenario for the past couple of years?
I can download Office 2007 or other products and try them out. But, if I want to also try out Add-ins, tools, or other enhanced content (hmmmm... to maybe see if those enhancements meet my business requirements) I then need to deal with a schizophrenic DRM system.
Dear Microsoft,
When used incorrectly and in direct conflict of something that you are promoting. DRM sucks! By making the usage of your software a hassle, you risk further pushing more users of your applications to other solutions.
On another note, I have a new Media Center PC coming next week that has a cable card tuner. I can't wait to see what DRM fun will be in store for me: http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/software/soa/Ex-MS-security-guru-to-dump-Media-Center-for-Linux-/0,130061733,339282399,00.htm
For all of today's Microsoft news, visit the Microsoft Subnet.
With more than nine years of experience in IT, Tyson Kopczynski has become a specialist in Active Directory, Group Policy, Windows scripting, Windows Rights Management Services, PKI, and IT security practices. Tyson is the author of the new book Windows PowerShell Unleashed (read a sample chapter and learn about the drawing for a free copy here). Tyson has been a contributing author for such books as Microsoft Internet Security and Acceleration (ISA) Server 2004 Unleashed and Microsoft Windows Server 2003 Unleashed (R2 Edition). He has also written detailed technical papers and guides covering various technologies. As a consultant at Convergent Computing, Tyson has worked with next generation Microsoft technologies since their inception and played a key role in expanding scripting and development practices. Tyson also holds the SANS Security Essentials Certification, Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer Security certification, CompTIA Security+ certification and SANS Certified Incident Handler certification.
|
|
I don't have the same problem you do
... because I run Linux.
I stayed with Windows 2000 even when XP came out. The writing was on the wall then. I never migrated to XP either. Win2K did the job just fine.
My desktop box, a 1997 vintage P3/500, was way overdue for replacement. I had updated it as far as it would go and it was still slow. I needed more memory.
It was time for a new machine, I had a whitebox built to order from a local independent computer store, with the parts I wanted, at a fair price, with NO Microsoft software installed, especially the non-standard Windows Vista pre-installed by the vendors (Dell, HP) that won't run anywhere except that machine. Even better: no crapware installed by the major system builders: no I don't need a trial subscription to AOL; it's free now anyway; whyTF should I pay for it?
When my new machine arrived, I installed Ubuntu Linux. Everything worked perfectly out of the box.
You could do the same, you know. Save you a lot of hassles. You don't need as much hardware to run it. Save yourself some money. Have some sense that your machine is secure from the bad guys. Some sense of security knowing that Microsoft won't update your computer without your permission, possibly resulting in your nice computer becoming a door-stop, not to mention the data loss.
But then, you bought into the MS hype. Double-digit twit.
Ubuntu Linux
What Anonymous said, just more polite.
Not as polite
I feel bad 'cause you're going to get reamed by free-software people, but I bet you kinda deserve it. I bet you had conversations way back when, where free software people tried to get you to try OOo, or some alternative, and you were all "I don't have time for matters of principle, or want to learn something new, I just want to get some work done."
Well now you can't. I advise you to just get it over with and switch this time.
amazing free software bigots
I'm totally amazed how proponents of linux/open source can call everyone who elects to not follow in lockstep an idiot and a twit - this attitude certainly doesn't help make converts, in fact it repells many/most who might be interested. And, it's totally disingenouous as well - if I have a requirement to deliver a MS word document to an important customer, or to run software designed for windows, I don't care how low priced STAR office is, I need the real thing to guarantee compatability.
Oh, and the other thing about open source bigotry - how come it applies to Microsoft but not to Apple, or Oracle, or Cisco, or Intel? How come there is no whining about "free silicon" and no design for an open source microprocessor? You see, Microsoft is an easy target, and with some of these DRM schemes they stick their neck out. But every time I've personally tested the Linux alternatives, I've found them lacking in one way or another.
Some very good points...
I often ask myself this question, "Why can't we all just get along?" There really is no need for all the hate. It only makes things worse. As you point out, we often work with the applications we work with because of a some requirement. To tell you the truth, I most likely would have a bone to pick with any application I'm using (MS or Open Source). Software is software and until is written by a perfect AI that uses humans to power it... oh sorry that is the Matrix plot. My point is, nothing is perfect, and smearing hate does nothing.
- T
I hate you all equally!
:P
Stop the dam whining and just get on with your life! It's really too short to get caught up in "My software choices are better than yours!"
M$ sux because of all the buggy programs and the security holes. Part of their problem is lazy 3rd party developers writing crappy code.
Linux sux because there aren't enough drivers out there and noone has ported the latest yet.
Apple sux because because they think they are better than everyone else.
;)
free software bigots?
"I'm totally amazed how proponents of linux/open source can call everyone who elects to not follow in lockstep an idiot and a twit" Noone has said that in the article or discussion. In the wider sense, I've seen Windows, Linux, AND Mac users all say the others are all morons or the like. 10 or 12 years ago, there were Atari ST, Amiga, and OS/2 users in the fray too.
"if I have a requirement to deliver a MS word document to an important customer, or to run software designed for windows, I don't care how low priced STAR office is, I need the real thing to guarantee compatability." I've actually had to use openoffice a few times to open Office files that would not open properly in Office itself -- a Mac file would open up on the PC with bullet points replaced by symbols, Word 97 files losing formatting in 2003, and so on. Overall, there's just no issue with generating office files with openoffice, or staroffice for that matter.
As for Windows *apps*, quite true.. if you're going to run some windows apps most of the time.. well, wine can run quite a few, and is fast, but may not work. qemu or vmware, well, windows running under it is slower than running windows straight on the machine.
"Oh, and the other thing about open source bigotry - how come it applies to Microsoft but not to Apple, or Oracle, or Cisco, or Intel? " People have chewed out Apple for being closed for years, stopped for a bit after OSX came out, and now do again now that Jobs has messed around with IPod ItunesDB file at regular intervals, trying to close the iPhone, and so on. Oracle isn't chewed out much but the stereotypical open source bigot will tend to use MySQL or PostgreSQL if they can at all get away with it. Cisco.. umm.. actually people don't chew them out too much. Intel, people chewed them out over wireless support (now there's fine Linux drivers), besides the AMD, PowerPC, PA-RISC, Sparc, Alpha, etc. users who have spoke out against intel at various times.
"How come there is no whining about "free silicon" and no design for an open source microprocessor?" Because they exist. opencores.org has a bunch of CPU cores, ethernet, etc. for FPGAs. For actual microchip use, basically companies can get a MIPS or ARM for like $1-2 per chip, and have full specs at that point.
"You see, Microsoft is an easy target, and with some of these DRM schemes they stick their neck out." Sticking your neck out over DRM is not a good thing... no customer wants DRM. At best it makes software a bit less efficient. For the user, any triggering of DRM is an added inconvenience, see the article for a good example.
"But every time I've personally tested the Linux alternatives, I've found them lacking in one way or another." Entirely possible. A lot of distros just aren't quite nice out of the box. I run gentoo personally, but only would wish it on anyone if they want to tweak everything. Ubuntu seems nice; you've gotta install a few extra packages out of the box for things to make the movie player and web browser nice (flash, Java, and "ugly" plugins to maake DVD and wmvs work.)
Good reply...
I'm glad that you came back and replied. However, with your first answer, I would have to say that statement is not correct. If you look at the comments, several people did in fact attack me for using Microsoft products. So, the comment about free softies being bigots is in a way correct (at least in relation to the comments for this blog entry).
- T
Thanks for the comment...
Matt,
Well... actually, I'm not opposed to using or learning new things. That is what I do. And, in fact I've use a number of open source applications for various things. So, your assumption about me is wrong.
Cheers
-T
So long Microsoft
When Microsoft bricked my Office 2003 Suite and Visio (legal, but old) about 2 months ago, I converted to Suse running as a VMWare guest on my XP machine.
After enduring a certain amount of conversion pain and learning the Open Office applications, I can say the only thing I miss is Visio as I had a large library of drawings that are not reachable now. I understand that the binary format has not been reverse engineered so no open source tool is on the horizon.
Using my existing Office generated files and importing e-mail from the pst worked pretty well. As I tend to use only a small subset of features of the tools, things seem to work just fine.
I can also see why Microsoft has such a hold as the Windows franchise and it's millions of trained people may not ever be willing to change.
Windows Genuine is sure going to either spark migrations like me or revenue from the folks who cannot make the leap to Linux or Mac (what Microsoft is counting on, I think).