OEM licensing can mean a lot of things, does it include OEM copies sold by newegg, or just Royalty OEMs, Dell, Hp, etc..., if it include both, it possible to be 90%, because many retailers are selling those OEM software as a stand alone product, as if it's retail. I Quote form Chris Anderson's book Free "Although 3 million computers get sold each year in China, people don't pay for our software," Gates said in 1998 to a group of students at the University of Washington. "Someday they will, though, and as long as they're going to steal it, we want them to steal ours. They'll get sort of addicted, and then we'll somehow figure out how to collect sometime in the next decade." Microsoft is playing this whole piracy game strategically, they can tolerate piracy, tolerating OEM software selling as retail can't be any harder. For those who's in denial, about bios mod detection, please read what i have quote, it's not they can't, but they didn't want to.
Actually, I think its Microsoft saying that the majority of its OS revenue is derived from the sale of PCs -- not OS upgrades. Look at their posted (poor) financial results for third quarter. They explain that lower OS revenues were caused by reduced PC sales and the lower margins derived from the increasingly popular netbook sales. I imagine that most, if not everyone, that visit this forum have upgraded their OS at one time or other. However, we are not representative of the retail consumer business. Its folks buying HP, Dell, Lenovo, Acer and other OEM PCs. These consumers typically hang on to their PCs 3 or more years and then will buy new again complete with OS already installed. I would guess that you would find the largest number of actual OS upgrades come from MS' corporate accounts but then these outfits are not likely using loaders or BIOS mods to avoid paying licensing fees.
...and how many of these people do you figure bought a new PC with Vista on it (because they had to to utilize all the new enhancements) and now will upgrade to Windows 7? Why would you buy a new computer again, when the one you bought because you need to when you got Vista will more than suffice? Exactly, lower revenues from lower PC sales. Windows 7 is selling...I would like to see the numbers for sales volume, then we can make a proper assertion. ...and if people hang on to a computer for 3 or more years, how many with Vista already do you expect will buy a whole new system? I suspect not many when the saleswoman at the local Best Buy tells them how easy it is to upgrade, but that is just an assumption based on logic. I would have to look at the numbers to make a more precise assertion. Anyway, if most of the users of Windows 7 were buyers of new PCs, that would only make it easier to detect a BIOS mod...BIOS modders would be like the "odd man out", and would stick out like a sore thumb... OEMs like to use interchangeable parts whenever they can to take advantage of economies of scale. By using the same mobo, or the same brand of mobo but different model, they can take advantage of vendor discounts by buying in bulk from the same vendor. By having OEM vendors use a smaller amount of hardware manufacturers to product their mobo's for their PCs, they can buy more from 1 vendor and save money, but they also increase simplicity and reduce costs per-unit and overall costs when you figure in repair (having a smaller inventory of boards to manage saves time and money as well when people send in their PCs for repair). It also makes it easier for MS to track good boards and make a white-list this way. There are many different ways each idea can spin...and as heliosys said, MS will play this game very strategically, to their benefit. But this is getting away from the subject of my discussion earlier, about how a BIOS mod can be detected. And we are straying even more off-topic of the OP, who's question was where to find a keygen... This thread has become pointless, and just bickering....lol, I'm sorry I said anything.
Congratulations, HotCarl, you are the top poster here. (by amount of words posted)... at least I guess so, I haven't really counted them. What I want to say: You are right, it's pointless, anway it's a lot of fun. Why else are you the top poster? Without the cooperation of the OEMs, biosmods are not detectable. The OEMs don't need to provide the data to M$. M$ alone cannot disable mods without the risk to disable legit users. That's a fact...And M$ did only a small update from SLP2.0 (Vista) to SLP2.1 (W7) Why? Have a look at Intel bioses, they are digitally signed! If you modify one byte it refuses to flash, so easy! Why is it still possible to mimic a SLIC? Because M$ don't care yet, I would say they tolerate and want it.
M$ won't do anything against the bios mods 'cause it's some kind of advertisement for windows that quite a lot of people are trying to get a genuine version without buying it. Anyway I think m$ does not bother about the 0.00001% of total windows users that flashed their bios
I Counted them Words - 2,815 Characters - 12,394 No Spaces Characters - 15,235 With Spaces Paragraphs - 11 Lines - 204 Pages - 6
ROFL....thanks guys! ...I think I so honorably take this crown in behalf of all those people like myself who are sitting at home on a Friday (and yet again on a Saturday night ) with not enough to do apparently. Says a lot about me. Actually, I have been bobbing in and out between this and MW2. Been doing some m-u-r-d-e-r-i-n-g...and even disarmed a few bombs once in a while . I guess thanks for putting up with my rambling...
May i surmise ? If and i do mean if you can actually get a working keygen for windows 7, the key produced from it WILL be detected. There are far better ways of activating, safer ways. Keygens often end up containing malware and viruses....... I know from experience. Why risk the integrity of your computer in this way ?
HotCarl is the top poster Yen provide the most interesting comment To a person without insider information, it seems easy for Ms to gain cooperation from OEMs, Ms are the one who's issuing certs, thus if you don't cooperate, no certs for you, seems simple enough. Yen should be working for some OEMs, which explain how he knew policy of Ms not requiring OEMs to provide data, with this added insights, the whole issue looks more interesting.
OEMs don't need Windows embedded in their boxes or at least not so much. Instead, Microsoft is the one who need Windows embedded in those boxes, as you know Microsoft's income most came from OEMs. This means OEMs don't have to cooperate with Microsoft for OA. And I doubt Microsoft can do those detecting methods without any interference from laws, such as pivacy laws. I can easily see the EU will quickly sue Microsoft yet again.
You sure? Let us construct a simple model, with 2 OEMs and Microsoft, your classical prisoner dilemma, with 3 possible outcome, both cooperate with Microsoft and both reject, lastly 1 cooperate and 1 don't, now look at the payout, with both cooperate or reject Microsoft, there isn't any advantage/disadvantage to both OEMs, the only difference came from the last outcome. If i cooperate and you don't, all my computer is shipping with preactivated windows, and yours require user to key in product keys, connect to net, to activate, or maybe even a call to Microsoft, who's product is a superior? obliviously mine. Even if you start shipping with Linux, how well are your sales? How many ready buyers are there? There a reason why Microsoft windows is ship with every computer, because we are addicted, it's part of their strategy all along. It might be new to you but OEMs and Microsoft need each other, and they are working closely together, remember vista capable, that label benefits OEMs and not Microsoft, but it's Microsoft who's facing legal consequences. OEMs need Microsoft, to program resource hungry OS, else there won't be purchases of new computer, only replacement of faulty machine. How many of you upgraded or bought a new computer to run vista, 7? Sigh, big words about privacy laws, came in again, how well do you understand those law? How different is querying motherboard information, and query of device information? Maybe you didn't realize when you are connected to the net, vista or 7 will search for drivers, by sending device information, in your logic, clearly it violate privacy laws, start suing them now, let us know the out come thanks.
Let me add a few thoughts. -I don't work for an OEM, my profession isn't even about PC or IT related. I have to use a PC for my work, all other stuff is my hobby. -EU and M$: M$ doesn't care about what the EU claims. The degree of penalty is much to low. It doesn't hurt M$. Anyway the EU is doing well. -M$ needs the OEM. And the OEMs can claim conditions. The OEM's can claim from M$ what is practicable for them. They claimed (no insider info, only a guess again) a easy, practicable SLP licensing. Hence M$ has to upgrade the SLIC marker to 2.1. only. This was the least they had to do! I bet if M$ would have wanted more, the OEM's had said NO! According to M$ NO biosupdate should have a marker implemented, only the public key data. But the OEMs disobey M$ . This fact makes me assuming that M$ really needs the OEM. SLP licenses are shiped before W7 is available on DVD. Also M$ would probably have made it much more difficult to mimic a SLIC at w7. They already knew that SLIC'ing at Vista is made. But the OEM's want a practicable and easy solution: No major changes from SLP2.0 to SLP2.1 (major changes would have meant more work to add it to bios) AND pubkey and marker programmed into biosupdate. OK some OEM's like Lenovo obey M$ regarding no marker at bios..... -Laptop modding isn't reliable. Most of them have got a SLIC already. It doesn't harm M$ . What really harms is to mod a mainboard bios of a self built PC. Therefore NEVER a SLP license is available, so M$ is losing a real potential customer. -About secure bios and Intel: Intel can pay for such development. Most of other OEM's don't care about. They don't invest money for it, why should they do? Who really buys a Intel reference board to build his own PC? Almost nobody, most buy an Asus or MSI or Gigabyte board instead of..... And OEMs like Asus don't care if their bioses can be SLIC'ed. Far from it! They can only win if it is....I bet M$ sometimes claims from the OEM's to take more care about piracy and want more secure bioses. But the OEMs say that it would only cost money to develop a new protection for the bios. Why pay for? Piracy matters M$, not the OEMs......
Let's face it we are addicted to windows, china share that same addiction. Maybe you are enjoying that 30 euros savings, and spending hours installing windows after your purchases. let's not forget that 30 euros entitle you a recovery partition, a savior if anything goes wrong, and a black screen free windows. Let me remind you without people paying for windows, there won't be any windows to pirate, thus stop bragging about your moded bios, how smart you are and how dump i am paying that 30 euros. It's Vista capable, not compatible. It's a certification program, on computers that came with xp, prior to vista launch. If you have read what i have type "remember vista capable, that label benefits OEMs and not Microsoft, but it's Microsoft who's facing legal consequences." That label is Microsoft effort to boost OEMs sales, and not their own. If I'm willing to risk legal consequences for you, what is our relationship? Are we close? You have realized driver installation, but you didn't realized it on by default, maybe you have agreed it in EUL, drafted by Microsoft's lawyers, and what are the things we sign off in EUL? If it's not in the EUL when did we allow it? Hardware and software manufactures is part of a system, we need both to function, and can debate forever on who need who more, like supply and demand relationships in economics. The over clocking crowd was once like our bios moding crowd, bragging about their accomplishment, now look at actions of Intel and AMD, they lock you out at places you can't do anything about, namely, core and cache. Those big cooperation aren't dumb, don't be overconfident, and underestimate their capabilities. When anyone claim bios mod is undetectable and unstoppable, are they challenging Microsoft, any reaction would not be in our favored, thus why provoke, and taunt them? The reason i started posting in this pointless and meanness and off topic tread, is because I see the growing popularity of bios mod as a treat to the convenience that i have enjoy, changing hardware without reactivating. Why won't people understand, exploits use to activate windows is not a popularity contest, you want to win, winning method will be the one going down, don't draw too much attention to it, stop being a ambassador, or a promoter. Dreaming now, being David, defeating Goliath, bragging triumphantly, feeling unstoppable, awakening helplessly.
Think you gained enough to this thread? This could show MS we want to find Keygens which isnt good. Any objections to a lock?
Maybe most of you have not notice Vista is version 6 and windows 7 is version 6.1, how much have the kernel change? Remember Gates want us to pirate windows, for windows xp it's the leak VLK keys, vista and 7 is slic emulation or modification, was all this leak on purpose?
The thread is off topic already. And all are stating there is no way to make a keygen............a little change at the title and it would be on topic again... When I'm stating that M$ cannot detect and disable biosmods, then I'm referring to current facts, nothing else. If somebody uses a mod or not, it's up to him.
As we all know, the (western) world is strictly money-oriented. Therefore you can be sure that everything is set up so that everyone gets the most possible profit out of it. Its all intertwined. Key Concept: Availability generates popularity, which generates more availability, which generates more popularity. And that in the end generates money. MS wants to sell an OS. As per the key-concept it can only help if the product is being used by as many folks as possible, ergo they put up with OEMs and 'Pirates' since the former will greatly increase sales and distribution while the latter are helping to consolidate the OSes supreme position on the market. OEMs want to sell PCs. As per the key-concept it can only help to offer them with the most popular OS already installed, ergo they put up with Microsoft since it will greatly increase sales and help to consolidate the brands position on the market. And so on and so forth... Somewhat simplified of course, but you get the idea. The gist of it is that in some way or other everyone needs everyone in order to increase revenue, and that is why they will always choose to live with the situation even if it means having to live with things that dont actually sit well with them. Because in the end it is only the money that counts. And that is why if there are any questions the answer is easily arrived at too. Just think 'what is the most profitable scenario' and do the math from there. As pathetic as it is, you cannot err that way in corporate world. Its the one parameter that never changes...