General discussion


Why run pirated Microsoft instead of legal open source?

By CharlieSpencer ·
Why do so many users in economically emerging countries seek out pirated versions of Windows and Office when a Linux distro is free?

I'm not interested in a discussion of the technical merits of either OS. I'm not interested in the pros and cons of the development models. I'm not interested in the moral values involved in the respective business practices. For purposes of this discussion I'll concede open source is superior in each of these areas.

Having conceded these points, we've all seen the questions asking how to crack the license keys on Microsoft products. Can anyone explain the appeal the apparent demand for questionably legal MS products when free (and for purposes of this converation, superior) alternatives exist? Lack of awareness of the alternatives? Buy in to the MS brand name and marketing? Peer pressure?

Edited to remove a link to an example later correctly deleted as spam.

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

In the case you use

by Jaqui In reply to Why run pirated Microsoft ...

it's pure marketing, and pressure to have the latest bloated toy from Adobe / Autodesk ...

It does seem to be a large number of requests from the "developing" areas, but the truth is, there are far more people using open source operating systems in those same areas than there are in the "developed" areas of the world.

Collapse -

It's an unfair fight

by gddik In reply to In the case you use

The plain fact is that Microsoft beat the Open Source people to the punch, and by the time the OS alternatives had matured to become real alternatives, people had formed a dependency not on Windows itself, but the apps that run under it.

I'm a big fan of Linux, and two of my three machines at home run it, but it's still too "technical" for most non-techie people to grasp - it still has some way to go before it's as easy for everyday users to adopt in large numbers.

As for network infrastructure, this is where OS has thrived best, and will continue to make inroads in the future, I think. As long as skills in developing and supporting OS infrastructure are available and valued, then the future here looks bright.

Collapse -

At national levels

by jdclyde In reply to In the case you use

You see cities and even countries make the informed decision to go linux.

They are way ahead of the curve.

We always hear how government and our school systems are strapped for money, and then they don't save 20K in a lab for the OS.

Collapse -

Respectfully, cities and countries don't count.

by CharlieSpencer In reply to At national levels

When I say that, I mean that cities and countries wouldn't have run pirated copies of software in the first place. Had they chosen to run software licensed under the 'traditional' proprietary EULA model, they would have paid for it, not stolen it. They wouldn't have surfed the web for license keys.

Collapse -

People are stupid and lazy

by jdclyde In reply to Why run pirated Microsoft ...

They have heard of MS, so in their stupidity, blindly follow that path.

It is one thing to choose MS because it is the correct tool for the job, it is quite another if it was because you were to stupid to even LOOK of there WAS a best tool.

Related Discussions

Related Forums