Coffeehouse Thread

15 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

Microsoft spreading the WGA love ....

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    Ray6

    Mary's "unblinking eye" has fallen upon the latest PR-disaster-in-the-making,  from our friends at Redmond ...

    They're now offering WGA style activation for third party developers.

    Okay, I just have to check; this is not some way of trying to get third party developers to validate Windows installations for them is it?



  • User profile image
    AndyC

    Ray6 wrote:

    Okay, I just have to check; this is not some way of trying to get third party developers to validate Windows installations for them is it?


    Um, no. It's a method for providing Activation style licensing in your own applications.

  • User profile image
    Ray6

    AndyC wrote:
    
    Ray6 wrote:

    Okay, I just have to check; this is not some way of trying to get third party developers to validate Windows installations for them is it?


    Um, no. It's a method for providing Activation style licensing in your own applications.


    Phew!

  • User profile image
    esoteric

    That ought to be a hit with dev's.

  • User profile image
    Tom Servo

    AndyC wrote:

    Um, no. It's a method for providing Activation style licensing in your own applications.

    ...and Windows.

    Don't kid yourself.

  • User profile image
    figuerres

    Ray6 wrote:
    Mary's "unblinking eye" has fallen upon the latest PR-disaster-in-the-making,  from our friends at Redmond ...

    They're now offering WGA style activation for third party developers.

    Okay, I just have to check; this is not some way of trying to get third party developers to validate Windows installations for them is it?





    Hmm... actualy I can see several benefits to the software publisher...

    start with the questions of

    -- should I be trying to support a hacked / cracked / warzed system?
        is the users bug report / other problem valid?  what if the hacked OS is not working normaly due to the hackage and how many man hours might I waste trying to figure out the problem?

    -- can I trust this user to not pirate my software if they are running a pirate OS?

    -- security: if my app needs system level security features and the OS has been tampered with can my code work correctly ?

    -- system patches: If the OS is hacked / pirate can I trust that it has been updated / patched correctly?  what exploits might be left open on this system that might cause my app problems?

    not that I am 100% for this .... just that I can see some reasons why it might be good for the developers and publishers of software.

  • User profile image
    DarthVista

    I think this is exactly what the developer community needs. Thanks for all the hard work on this, Microsoft. The only people who have to be concerned are the pirates themselves.

    You're not concerned are you?

  • User profile image
    cheong

    Apparently that'll come with VS2008, and available for download - not mentioned whether a 1) free download, 2) a "apply for Microsoft Connect" download, or 3) MSDN subscribers only download.

    I think it'll most probably work the 2nd way, since it's somehow near DDK in nature.

    Recent Achievement unlocked: Code Avenger Tier 4/6: You see dead program. A lot!
    Last modified
  • User profile image
    Ray6

    figuerres wrote:
    

    Hmm... actualy I can see several benefits to the software publisher...

    start with the questions of

    -- should I be trying to support a hacked / cracked / warzed system?
        is the users bug report / other problem valid?  what if the hacked OS is not working normaly due to the hackage and how many man hours might I waste trying to figure out the problem?

    -- can I trust this user to not pirate my software if they are running a pirate OS?

    -- security: if my app needs system level security features and the OS has been tampered with can my code work correctly ?

    -- system patches: If the OS is hacked / pirate can I trust that it has been updated / patched correctly?  what exploits might be left open on this system that might cause my app problems?

    not that I am 100% for this .... just that I can see some reasons why it might be good for the developers and publishers of software.



    I'm sorry, but it is not up to third parties to validate Windows for them.  They have enough on their plates without having to support Microsoft's WGA false positives.

  • User profile image
    Ray6

    Tom Servo wrote:
    
    AndyC wrote:

    Um, no. It's a method for providing Activation style licensing in your own applications.

    ...and Windows.

    Don't kid yourself.


    Right, obviously no-one knows for sure, so perhaps MS should clarify this.

    Apart from that I think it's a good idea. By the time the Free Software brigade, aided and abetted by Microsoft's marketing department are done with it,  it'll be billed as the coming of the AntiChrist.


  • User profile image
    AndyC

    Ray6 wrote:
    

    Right, obviously no-one knows for sure, so perhaps MS should clarify this.



    If you read the linked article and, more importantly, the original press release it's pretty obvious. They are announcing an obfuscater that includes an Activation-style licensing model so that you can implement this sort of thing easily in your own applications.

    It's not for validating Windows or Office or doing WGA checks (that's what WGA is for).

  • User profile image
    Ray6

    AndyC wrote:
    
    Ray6 wrote:
    

    Right, obviously no-one knows for sure, so perhaps MS should clarify this.



    If you read the linked article and, more importantly, the original press release it's pretty obvious. They are announcing an obfuscater that includes an Activation-style licensing model so that you can implement this sort of thing easily in your own applications.

    It's not for validating Windows or Office or doing WGA checks (that's what WGA is for).


    Yup, I did read it, but I didn't think it was particularly reasurring.  The 'Activation Style' licensing model is fine, but I'd just like to know if MS considers validating Windows something that should be done as standard.


  • User profile image
    AndyC

    Ray6 wrote:
     but I'd just like to know if MS considers validating Windows something that should be done as standard


    The anti-trust implications would be enormous. I can't believe for a second that the lawyers would stand for it, even if some tech geek considered otherwise.

  • User profile image
    jamie

    Great!

    I think Ill add validation to my next cartoon

  • User profile image
    Ray6

    AndyC wrote:
    
    Ray6 wrote:
     but I'd just like to know if MS considers validating Windows something that should be done as standard


    The anti-trust implications would be enormous. I can't believe for a second that the lawyers would stand for it, even if some tech geek considered otherwise.


    Well, here's hoping then ....

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.