Comments on: Microsoft vs. open source http://www.livingwithoutmicrosoft.org/2006/09/12/microsoft-vs-open-source/ XPloring the alternatives Thu, 21 Aug 2008 18:56:47 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.9 by: Gadget Guy http://www.livingwithoutmicrosoft.org/2006/09/12/microsoft-vs-open-source/#comment-24548 Wed, 06 Jun 2007 12:44:24 +0000 http://www.livingwithoutmicrosoft.org/2006/09/12/microsoft-vs-open-source/#comment-24548 "Once they have their “customer” base, they can push anti-piracy systems " This is how Cubase (the most used software in the recording industry) got a big user base back in the old atari days - by letting pirate copy's slip out - it has not done them any harm “Once they have their “customer” base, they can push anti-piracy systems ”

This is how Cubase (the most used software in the recording industry) got a big user base back in the old atari days - by letting pirate copy’s slip out - it has not done them any harm

]]> by: Chris Lowe http://www.livingwithoutmicrosoft.org/2006/09/12/microsoft-vs-open-source/#comment-1377 Sat, 23 Sep 2006 03:02:12 +0000 http://www.livingwithoutmicrosoft.org/2006/09/12/microsoft-vs-open-source/#comment-1377 The findings don't surprise me - I've been saying the same thing (albeit without the research) for 6 months or more - since arriving in China. There are many ways that Microsoft could discourage piracy, but if they stopped Chinese people using pirated copies of Windows, Linux would become the number 1 OS overnight. Chinese companies and private individuals will not, now or in the near future, pay for Windows, because they can not afford to. At the same time, there is a very large surge in computer literacy here. Mix those two factors with strong anti-piracy measures, and there would be a large scale defection to free OSes. The development of Linux would gather pace, and become even more viable an alternative in the first world. China is just an extreme example of the importance of piracy in market share. If we consider GIMP vs. Photoshop, I believe that there is a similar marketing strategy; don't make piracy too difficult, because many people simply won't pay the price for Photoshop, and would switch to the GIMP. The GIMP is already almost as powerful as Photoshop: an large influx of users would give it an extra boost. The fear of theses companies is not that their product will be pirated, but that they will lose the cash cows, the companies and individuals who *do* buy their product, because they have too much to lose if they are caught with pirated software. There is a low risk of discovery for pirates, linked up with catastrophic fines should the software company choose to sue the pirate. Individuals can take the risk, but businesses can not. In contrast, more computer games are implementing piracy protection, because they make their money from the individual gamers, rather than large corporate licenses. They implement unique passwords verified by a central server, or insist on the installation media being kept in the computer. I can not see Microsoft strongly pushing anti-piracy measures in the short-term. With the growth of Linux, Apple's continuing development, and economic conditions in China and India, it would be suicidal. The findings don’t surprise me - I’ve been saying the same thing (albeit without the research) for 6 months or more - since arriving in China.

There are many ways that Microsoft could discourage piracy, but if they stopped Chinese people using pirated copies of Windows, Linux would become the number 1 OS overnight. Chinese companies and private individuals will not, now or in the near future, pay for Windows, because they can not afford to. At the same time, there is a very large surge in computer literacy here. Mix those two factors with strong anti-piracy measures, and there would be a large scale defection to free OSes. The development of Linux would gather pace, and become even more viable an alternative in the first world.

China is just an extreme example of the importance of piracy in market share. If we consider GIMP vs. Photoshop, I believe that there is a similar marketing strategy; don’t make piracy too difficult, because many people simply won’t pay the price for Photoshop, and would switch to the GIMP. The GIMP is already almost as powerful as Photoshop: an large influx of users would give it an extra boost.

The fear of theses companies is not that their product will be pirated, but that they will lose the cash cows, the companies and individuals who *do* buy their product, because they have too much to lose if they are caught with pirated software. There is a low risk of discovery for pirates, linked up with catastrophic fines should the software company choose to sue the pirate. Individuals can take the risk, but businesses can not.

In contrast, more computer games are implementing piracy protection, because they make their money from the individual gamers, rather than large corporate licenses. They implement unique passwords verified by a central server, or insist on the installation media being kept in the computer.

I can not see Microsoft strongly pushing anti-piracy measures in the short-term. With the growth of Linux, Apple’s continuing development, and economic conditions in China and India, it would be suicidal.

]]> by: renan http://www.livingwithoutmicrosoft.org/2006/09/12/microsoft-vs-open-source/#comment-1316 Thu, 14 Sep 2006 22:09:52 +0000 http://www.livingwithoutmicrosoft.org/2006/09/12/microsoft-vs-open-source/#comment-1316 I think I will be flamed for this, but for me, piracy works as a large "marketing strategy" for Microsoft. Once they have their "customer" base, they can push anti-piracy systems and the users will buy Windows. I think I will be flamed for this, but for me, piracy works as a large “marketing strategy” for Microsoft.

Once they have their “customer” base, they can push anti-piracy systems and the users will buy Windows.

]]>