Copied/Illegal Disks

[Skii]

LOL at poll result so far

[Michael]

I use Windows, i've never paid for it, but i don't go round claiming it sucks. If i had the money i probably wouldn't pay for it.

I tried linux (Mandrake), didn't like it too much, and couldn't quite grasp it right away, and when i joined linux channels in IRC and asked what i should use, and how to go about getting it set up right, the elitists kick in with "omfg n00b, using M$??? Command line roolz".

So, if someone suggests a version that looks good (I like my verdana ), and isn't a stupidly large learning curve, then i will try it.

[killgORE]

suggestion for michael MANDRAKE and don't talk in that IRC channel !

I get every piece of Microsoft software for free anyway

does that extend to any one of their fine OS's ? Just curious because I looked into that last year and the best I got was Xp for £30 off OH and not the PRO flavour. but that was last year. I suppose by the grace of god we get win 95 for free !

Each to their own on the development front dgr. Each their own. I thought visual studio was clunky personally. but then again I just plain dislike IDE's on all but the biggest projects. By any chance was "eclipse" the open source one you tried ? lots of people love this. But I found it crap.

Open source does not always provide the easiest interface - particularily on things that have been under development for bloody ages - because there is usually too much configurability/functionality because one person in the development team thought it would be neat IF...

But then try things like trillian ? yeah u get the free version... but this misses features (crack the full version ?). GAIM is free and full featured - or will be in the future and its issues will be figured out. Why waste time with trials or limited versions ? Yeah. I tried the AVG route etc but it wasn't for me. Paying for AV software ensures updates and connections to get them...

cheers

[oyster]

I use copied disks, but I then buy a legal copy of anything that I end up using regularly. So I use copies to sample what's available and pay for what best suits my needs (or those games that I actually end up playing and/or trying to complete).

While technically illegal, I don't have any moral problems with my actions.

Also, I don't believe that illegal copying is equivalent to stealing. If I steal a physical item, then I deprive it's legal owner of its use. If I illegally copy a piece of software or a music CD or whatever, then I have deprived no-one of anything. And I'm not even depriving the owner of the money I should have paid, since I DO pay for anything that I would have bought.

[Dr. X]

I'm quite happy to say that almost all of my software and operating systems have been legally licenced for use by all students at Ox Uni. Even before that, I was on a Student Licence of Office 2000 and free software slowly replaced all of my software anyway.

Like Hex pointed out, even if you don't want to or can't pay the free alternatives are almost as good as the professionally developed stuff these days, just listen to people endorsing, AVG, the GIMP, OpenOffice or StarOffice.

[Grey M@a]

People would copy them even if they were a fiver. Price isn't an excuse.

I'm Sorry but if I could get my software for £5 my whole collection would be on original. My OS is original, games are, software such as office 2003 and visual studo.net 2003 are original and licenced through work to which i am entitled to a copy for home.

[myth]

It is one thing to buy a legal copy of XP Pro! It's totaly diferent when you need to buy a second just because you upgraded your mobo!!! And dont even get me started on the third time I had to buy it........

So far I own:1 x 95, 1 x 98, 1x 98 SE, 1 x ME, 1 x win 2000 server, 2 x XP home, 3 x XP Pro! I now have a "FREE VERSION" JUST IN CASE!!!!!! It gets to the point where you refuse to pay for what you alredy own!

[Grey M@a]

em myth why did you do that?

In my computer I have upgraded HD's graphics cards, mobo's memory cpu's and XP Pro still runs on the same copy I bought a year or two ago, you bought the MS crap about a new copy whenyou change your hardware, so you wasted your own money there. You dont need a new XP when you change your hardware

[myth]

Ummm.... When I bought this comp it came with an actual XP Pro cd.... But it was altered! It serched for a bios thread implant! Errrr.. when I changed my mobo It would not instal... So I bought another copy! Then after about 9 reinstals MS refused to activate it! So I bought another....

[Grey M@a]

oh you bought an off the shelf computer? hence the custom xp cd, big mistake always build yourself, that way you know exactly what you are getting

[myth]

I have learnd my lesson! I paid 1900 US and it had no cool case no raptors and no monitor! also no speakers or mouse!

www.abspc.com

Stay away! FAR AWAY!!!!

[directhex]

it's worth considering that a "locked down" copy of xp, which will only install on one vendor's kit, is cheaper for them to buy from microsoft - and the computer is correspondingly cheaper. if they were to use full oem, then it would increase the cost of the machine.

[Devilbod]

I dont agree with copying games because that has had a bad effect on a few companies that are now no longer about, not the main reason but its still a contributing factor. And at £30 a game nobody can really complain.

Music is a grey area, I have a huge CD collection but dont have a very good stereo so I use my PC and MP3 is the easist to use. I have a fair amount of MP3's of stuff that is either deleted, or a single track on an various artists double CD that I dont want the other 20 tracks, or is damn near immpossible to get in this country, things are better now with Amazon and other websites offereing import services and the future of being able to download track (paye) over the net seems like a good idea to me.

Software is a whole other ball game, if I can aford it I will buy it, but when something cost £1000 there is no way I can afford to use that software, there might be free alternatives available but when the industry uses a particular type of software for example Photoshop, above all others then using other software is not going to help you in the long run. I'd like to see anyone sit down in a job interview to a none tech person and try to explain to a potential employer that the software your using is the same only free and that you wont need any time/training to adjust to the software they use...
I also believe that trails software should not have anything hidden or disabled, I want to know that if I am going to spend my hard earned cash on something that it's going to work.

With OS software whether you like it or not Windows is the most used opperating system and when it cost £100+ each new version every couple of years it does get a bit silly the upgrade versions for £30 are a good idea but it seems to me a bit two faced, you bought windows or got windows x years ago and have to use 3 upgrades to get it up to date why cant I just send or trade in my old CD pay £30 and get the full new version. And I seem to remeber one of the upgrade versions of XP wasnt that stable and often wouldnt work, I've also had problems in the past is with OEM versions and upgrades.
At the end of the day Windows is essential if you want to be 100% compatible with all the possible future releases of software but if you cant afford to buy it what are you supposed to do?
The same goes for office as I've said in the software bit word is the accepted norm just like windows itself, if your doing anything IT related your expected to have word knowlage to some degree, I personaly would like to see word included with XP because I dont need powerpoint, excel, outlook or frontpage.

Using linux is all well and good but most people havent got the time or know how to set it up and then spending ages waiting for compatible software and drivers to be released.

Basically I do agree that you shouldnt copy software especaily if you can afford it, if you can go out and buy the latest graphics card every year and then claim you cant afford to buy games, or cant buy this that and the other when you blow £30 on booze at the pub every weekend....
But if it's impossible to afford that software because you low income or out of work then you dont have much choice with software that is essential. i.e. Windows, Word and any software which you have to have for a possible future career. As long as when you have the money you buy it.

[dgr]

does that extend to any one of their fine OS's ? Just curious because I looked into that last year and the best I got was Xp for £30 off OH and not the PRO flavour. but that was last year. I suppose by the grace of god we get win 95 for free !

yes it includes all their OSs, all their IDEs, all their databases, all their office suites. Current that is. Immensely useful and opening my eyes to the fact that Microsoft DO make quality software.

Each to their own on the development front dgr. Each their own. I thought visual studio was clunky personally. but then again I just plain dislike IDE's on all but the biggest projects. By any chance was "eclipse" the open source one you tried ? lots of people love this. But I found it crap.

I still use Eclipse for Java development - and do kind of like it. Under Linux i've largely tried Kdevelop - not bad, but its just *not* as good as VS.

Open source does not always provide the easiest interface - particularily on things that have been under development for bloody ages - because there is usually too much configurability/functionality because one person in the development team thought it would be neat IF...

Very true - not enough is abstracted in Linux yet. Why do I have to edit text files to get my file systems mounted or to get X working? Fine, have it there if you want, but give me a decent interface to use it! (talking in the sense of someone coming to linux and finding that they have to crap around to get the most basic of things sorted).

[dgr]

I'm sure the results will be very very close to 100%. I agree - if software was cheaper, then less people would copy. I think Microsoft office is a few hundred £ (I could be wrong!). At that price, it's no wonder people copy disks.

Maybe, but I think there'd be less people copying if they were cheaper.

Its quite ironic that the companies are losing out on profit because of them trying to make too much profit.

Basic economics. will reducing my price by 10% result in 10% more customers? To bring down the prices to what you suggest, thats around 90% off the original. Is it going to lead to a 1000% increase in users? No? Then wheres the motivation? Even at half price - are you gonig to buy Office 2k3 pro for £150+?

Home users have software suppied with their systems (at significantly reduced rates for the OEMs) or pirate it. Businesses however must pay for their software - or expect court cases. Whils they also get significant discounts, they are in no position to do otherwise than pay the money!

[Barry]

Am I the only one that finds it worrieing that 41 voted yes and only 1 no?