Again, quite laughable... now he wants me to cite sources!!! How many times have people on this site seen sources!!! Next he'll be asking me to footnote. The problem we're actually having is in our differing definition of "hack." You're taking a narrower definition, which is fine, as long as you realize that you're not the Oxford dictionary. I'm taking a broader definition - a software hack to me is any process that allows the user to circumvent actually paying for the software in question. The commercial software manufacturer does not intend people to indefinitely use their software for free. Thus anyone who manages to do just that is, in essence, "hacking" their software. But I'm also not the Oxford dictionary. Just as long as you realize that I have the right to accept my broader definition of the term, just as you have the right to accept the narrower one. Finally, I understand completely what you're bitching about. A loader does not change Windows in any way. It just fools it into thinking it's a preactivated OEM version. Whereas anemeros' excellent hack DOES change windows slightly, fooling it into thinking it's a trial version indefinitely. Our main difference in opinion is that you believe the loader technique to be superior, whereas I think that they're merely different. You've tried to advance your opinion by claiming that the Chew technique will (1) be easier for MS to kill, and (2) that it might make Windows unstable. These claims are unsubstantiated at the present time and merely your speculation. IMHO the only technique clearly superior to both processes is the BIOS mod procedure in that MS would NEVER be able to defeat it. However, this method is somewhat risky, especially for the average user, and only works on a SLIC 2.1 BIOS in any event. Personally, I believe you need to "think outside the box" just a little bit more...
oh wow this thread is growing into war of the words ... many things have said, so ill just say this. again. it doesnt wreck ur system... and again, if loaders wont work, thats the only way.
Wow, you sure enjoy being argumentative... I asked for how you came by the information that a loader is just as easy to disable as CHEW...not for sources for everything you posted. I wanted to know if you just pulled that out of the air, or actually had some proof...for my own knowledge. And FYI, the loader technique is superior because it not only proven from years of use, but has to modify no system files/services (other than boot files). It is also superior because it enables genuine activation, the whole point of what I am talking about. Again, if you want to use a hack to put your PC into permanent trial mode and just make it appear as though it is activated, then go right ahead...there are also hacks around to make your Windows 7 say "Windows 8" btw if you are interested... All I am trying to do is explain the difference in activation and the difference in method used to attain that "activation". If you are content with a modified system that shows false activation, then enjoy CHEW. I, myself, prefer to use a loader that a) modifies no part of my Windows system (other than boot files), b) that enables genuine activation so that I will not have to worry about future windows updates causing stability issues or breaking the activation if they do not play nice with the modified files/services (even anemeros, who makes CHEW, has admitted to me that it *can* cause system instability or break activation), and c) is very easily removed if I have any problems. Everything else in your retort is simply arguing semantics, and is a waste of time (e.g. you idea that a loader is a hack). My only point is what I have said multiple times...the difference in activation and the difference in methods used to attain that activation (ease of uninstallation is another, but my posts seem to have urged anemerous to at least develop an automatic uinstaller and set a restore point prior to CHEW's install, which is a step in the right direction). While you may know the difference between loaders and CHEW (and the difference in "activation" used), there are many people who do not (and who don't even know that there is such a thing as non-genuine activation) and these are the people who I am talking to. I am informing people so that they can make an educated decision as to the software that they put on their PC. I wish that anemeros would put that information in the OP of the CHEW thread, so people know exactly what CHEW is doing, and exactly what it does to gain "activation", and say it in "plain English" so that it does not confuse novice PC users (my biggest concern)... The OP says nothing of the non-genuine activation that CHEW enables, nor anything about the fact that there is a difference in activation between CHEW and loaders/BIOS mod methods...it should really say *something* about this. If you like CHEW, go ahead and use it. My only intention here is to inform, because I have seen many people recommending it to others without mentioning what it does or the type of activation it enables...and the CHEW OP is not as straightforward as it should be about these things (it may be if you are a computer savvy user, but to the many novice users that use this forum, it is quite apparent when I speak to some of them about it that they do not know how CHEW does what it does, and the type of "activation" that it enables). If people are totally informed by reading my post, then still wish to use CHEW, go right ahead and be my guest, as it is not my intention to stop them from using it. It is you PC to do what you wish to... Just don't devalue my very valid points by arguing over something as silly as the definition of a hack. Thank you.
I never said it messes up your system, I said it messes up your virgin Windows 7 install due to the fact that it modifies Windows files, registry keys, and service(s)...and is a pain in the butt to remove, in its current form, just to get your original install back (unlike loaders). I wish people like jackpet would read what I have said previously before jumping on my case... And you are correct Atfish, CHEW-WGA is a valid tool to use if you cannot get loaders to work (and do not want to, or can't, mod your BIOS). I have recommended CHEW as a last-resort act*vator for a while. There is no reason not to use it if nothing else works...I would. All I'm saying, and have said this whole time, is that you should at least try the loaders first, and if they do not work (and you don't want to mod your BIOS), then give CHEW a shot... Fair enough? Geez.. All I wanted to do is to inform people about what is happening when they use CHEW (since the CHEW thread does not do a very good job, especially in the OP, and unfortunately not many people seem to read past the OP anymore) so they can make an informed decision...not start an argument about if CHEW is a "good" program to use or not. People should decide if it is good or not for themselves (based on whether or not it meets their needs and requirements), and they should have access to all the information (in plain English so they can understand it, because if they don't even understand it then what is the point of having the information?) so they can make the best decision that they can for themselves... I don't see why anyone would have a problem with me freely making this information available to novice users, or any users that do not know the difference since they were never told. I'm not trying to debate anything, I am trying to spread information...
No problem, Carl, with providing information. Actually this thread has probably done that to a certain degree. I just don't understand this devotion by some (not just you) for "genuine" activation. And you know, except for the BIOS mods, the loaders would be actually quite easy to kill. I've often wondered why MS doesn't do it. They'd just have to go after the GRUB loader file (grldr). I, for one, am happy to see a different type of hack than just the loader types, which I believe to be quite vulnerable. The more the merrier, I believe...
I am happy to see diversity as well. I am happy that there is a hack available to allow users that would normally be out of luck to gain some degree of activation. I know that it is helpful to many people where loaders do not work and BIOS mods are not an option... I am devoted to helping people with their computer problems, and to helping people make the best decision that they can for themselves. I want people to be informed so they can feel confident in the decisions that they make themselves, and to maybe even be able to help others effectively. All I want, and my whole goal for speaking about CHEW openly like this, is for anemeros to put some "plain English" information in the OP of his thread to explain what CHEW does, how it does it, and the type of "activation" it enables...so that (all) people (including novice users) know exactly what is going on when they use his program. If he will not, then I will put it here so that people at least have access to the information. If you have a great experience with CHEW, then fantastic! I am happy for you. I just don't want people to use CHEW assuming they will get genuine activation only to find out later that they don't, and now have no easy way to remove the tool if they want to. I am glad that at least anemeros is working on an automatic uninstaller now (with my idea that I said in a previous comment of setting an automatic restore point before even installing CHEW, on top of the wonderful idea of an uninstaller). If people use the tool knowing that it is non-genuine, and that it modifies the Windows 7 system to gain trial mode "activation", then that is totally cool with me. Just as long as they know beforehand what they are getting into is all. ...and yes, loaders can be disabled just like CHEW...there are just not as many things that MS can tweak with loaders as with CHEW to make things go awry (because CHEW modifies a lot more than loaders do, and loaders mainly rely on 1 GRLDR (grub loader) file to load up the SLIC 2.1 tables where CHEW modifies a range of things that any 1 of which could be disabled by MS and possibly throw the whole CHEW activation system out of whack...perhaps leading to system instability)... Also, MS would just have to basically remove GRLDR to remove the loader, but if they did it right and restored the original Windows bootloader as well after deleting GLDR (which they would have to be dumb not to do, as just removing GRLDR would leave the system unbootable), at least Windows 7 would still boot and there would be no change of system instability, the system just wouldn't be activated. But yes I totally agree with you jackpet, they are both (loaders and CHEW) definitely susceptible to deactivation via MS at their whim...unfortunately. BIOS mod is the only 100% fool-proof method where MS will have no way to deactivate you (without also deactivating all the OEM PCs as well that use the same k e y for activation) and no way to tell if your PC is not legit (with a valid k e y of course ). It is just risky because you can possibly brick your PC doing it...
You have more faith in MS than I do. I think they'd be perfectly happy to leave non-paying users with an unbootable system. As for the other scenario, the users who didn't know they had a illegitimate copy... I think MS would be happy to have unhappy users point out to their tech support exactly WHO sold them their system. As mentioned previously, 2 of my systems have loaders. If they were killed by MS, I would do a repair, and then I would use Chew. As anemeros has pointed out, one has to merely re-apply Chew if one was unfortunate enough to download a "Chew-killing" update. Although Chew is not as "pretty," I think it could prove to be more robust and ironically "safer" than the loader based system. (Pure speculation, I know. As Toe Blake once said, "Predictions are for gypsies.")