Microsoft "Genuine Advantage Validation Tool"

Message

dsvochak · #1 Post by **dsvochak** » Sat Jul 30, 2005 6:40 pm

Apparently, Microsoft has implemented their required "Genuine Advantage Validation Tool" on the XP update site. It also appears, from the postings in the newsgroup related to this issue, that a lot of people are getting "Invalid Product Key" messages stating that "The product key associated with your copy of Windows was never issued by Microsoft".

To date, the MS response seems to be "This message means that the key used to install your
system was generated by a counterfeiter, not Microsoft."

If you haven't already, it might be a good idea to go to Windows Update and see what validation says for your copy (or copies)

#2 Post by **GomJabbar** » Sat Jul 30, 2005 7:55 pm

Yes, I ran across that last night. Fortunately my T42 with XP Pro has a valid key, and I came out clean.

I did read there that if you didn't pass the MS test, you can turn on Automatic Updates and still keep your Windows up to date.

I am wondering if this Product Key test applies to Windows 2000 as well? Any W2k users out there that have tried Windows update since Friday evening July, 29th?

dsvochak · #3 Post by **dsvochak** » Sat Jul 30, 2005 9:20 pm

I pulled out my trusty W2K 560Z and went to Update. It downloads an update to BITS and the Verification tool and asks for a reboot. Logging on again, it went from the Express vs Custom Page to the available updates. Don't know whether it validated along the way or not.

I've been poking around the MS site for awhile and ran across this page

https://s.microsoft.com/resources/howto ... eport.aspx

If you go to the type of piracy drop-down box, one of the choices is "Internet Auction". I wonder what this means for all the eBay software auctions going on.

#4 Post by **GomJabbar** » Sat Jul 30, 2005 9:43 pm

OUCH !!!

sickofit · #5 Post by **sickofit** » Sat Jul 30, 2005 10:52 pm

If you get an invalid key...paste this "javascript:void(window.g_sDisableWGACheck='all')" (without quotations) in the address bar when at the Express-Custom page and hit ENTER(not custom or express)....BAM...the key checker is bypassed...hehehe

Sorry,had to...Bill's got too much loot as it is...

Greg St.L

pphilipko · #6 Post by **pphilipko** » Sun Jul 31, 2005 1:13 am

sickofit wrote:If you get an invalid key...paste this "javascript:void(window.g_sDisableWGACheck='all')" (without quotations) in the address bar when at the Express-Custom page and hit ENTER(not custom or express)....BAM...the key checker is bypassed...hehehe

Sorry,had to...Bill's got too much loot as it is...

Greg St.L

Excellent! Now I can download updates for the pirated windows on my other 5 computers. Thank you so much! It really is a nifty trick!

Just jking.

#7 Post by **GomJabbar** » Sun Jul 31, 2005 1:32 am

pphilipko wrote:Just jking.

I hope so. I saw your other post.

dsvochak · #8 Post by **dsvochak** » Sun Jul 31, 2005 10:38 am

The reason I posted the original message are the comments in the newsgroup

[url]http://communities.microsoft.com/newsgr ... CID=us[url]

from people who either have preloaded XP or copies purchased from legitimate retail outlets (i.e. Newegg) and are getting the "invalid product key" error. I see only 2 possibilities. Either IBM, HP, Dell and others are preloading counterfeit software or the MS validation process is somehow flawed.

Given the aggressive nature of MS's pursuit of piracy, it's highly unlikely the manufacturers are counterfeiting. If the manufacturers are getting the product keys, CD's and COA's directly from MS, or are allowed under their contracts with MS to generate their own product keys (which I think is unlikely), then it's probable the validation process is flawed. If validation is flawed, they'll get it fixed eventually.

If there are preloaded counterfeit copies, we have a problem.

(I assume IBM, et al would gladly provide a legit copy for those who have a counterfeit preload, but then what do the manufacturers do? If they got everything direct from MS, I suppose they get a credit against their contract. But that might take litigation and years to resolve.)

In the meantime, according to the EULA "If you are not using a licensed copy of the SOFTWARE, you are not allowed to install the SOFTWARE or future SOFTWARE updates." The meaning of this is clear: you have to remove the software from your machine. (By the way, I think MS will have a fix for sickofit's suggestion before a fix for any validation process flaws). And then you get to fight with your vendor, whether it's a preload or a boxed version.

As far as internet auctions go, I don't see anything in the EULA preventing one. A sale/transfer of all of one's right, title (or license), and interest in the software is allowed, assuming you jump through the hoops (remove it from the machine, provide coa, etc). How the method of sale being an "internet auction" constitutes piracy is beyond me, but that's what the piracy report seems to indicate.

All I'm sure of is I'm not going to run out and buy copies of "Vista" when it's available. In fact, I wouldn't even want it preloaded on a new machine. It appears that it would be safer to buy a new machine w/o and OS and move a known valid licensed copy from another machine.

Which doesn't help those with preloads because the EULA provides "You may permanently transfer all of your rights under this EULA only as part of a permanent sale or transfer of the COMPUTER..."

egibbs · #9 Post by **egibbs** » Mon Aug 01, 2005 5:55 am

Anyone with a pre-loaded copy of Windows that fails the WGA check really should remove it from their machine in order to be compliant. Once MS and the OEM get all the licensing and keying ironed out I'm sure they will provide a new licensed copy. Of course, in the meantime the machine needs an OS. Might I suggest...

http://www.ubuntulinux.org/download/

Ed Gibbs

pphilipko · #10 Post by **pphilipko** » Tue Aug 02, 2005 8:13 pm

GomJabbar wrote:
pphilipko wrote:Just jking.
I hope so. I saw your other post.

What other post?

#11 Post by **GomJabbar** » Tue Aug 02, 2005 8:46 pm

This one$

http://forum.thinkpads.com/viewtopic.php?t=13788

#12 Post by **jdhurst** » Tue Aug 02, 2005 9:48 pm

After years of Microsoft use, I may be on to Linux. Microsoft's validation appears to be in contravention with Canadian Privacy Laws, and I have told them I want all identifiable private information (including machine model information, language information and so) returned to me and destroyed from their systems within 7 days. I have also told them I will return their licenses if they so require, although the licenses were not sold with the requirement to validate with private information. We'll see.

I know how to put my hands on the vendor diskette, so I may change the model and serial number of my machines (warranty nearly over), and change all my information with the machines as well as spoof all the NIC addresses. I.E., make the machines unidentifiable by their records.
... JD Hurst

egibbs · #13 Post by **egibbs** » Wed Aug 03, 2005 6:04 am

The privacy issue is not such a big thing for me as the whole "We know you're a criminal until you prove otherwise" thing.

Windows is getting more and more locked down, with DRM and TCPA being built into every corner of it. Me, I like to tinker. That's what I enjoy most about computers - getting under the hood and fiddling with the knobs. It seems like more and more of the OS is being marked off-limits, and if you muck with it you'll void your license.

Linux is exactly the opposite. You HAVE to muck with it to get it to do what you want. You can freely fool around with anything and everything, even the kernel, and it's all open and documented. Very refreshing.

Ed Gibbs

dsvochak · #14 Post by **dsvochak** » Wed Aug 03, 2005 1:15 pm

I haven't been back to this post since Sunday for an interesting reason: it turns out that 2 of the 3 unused, still shrink-wrapped OEM copies of XP Pro I had were "counterfeit". Although I was hesitant to do it, I finished assembling a desktop and pulled out a spare drive for a T21 and started installing XP Pro. The Validation Assistant gave the "product key never issued by MS" error on 2 of 3 installs.

According to an e-mail from MS, "... the PID indicates that the product installed was Volume License media (the stuff we sell to large corporations)". A subsequent e-mail confirmed that both the media and COA stickers were counterfeit. At this point, the CD's, COA's, packaging and relevant information has been mailed off to see whether the two copies qualify for the "complementary" offer. Again, according to a MS e-mail "... You would certainly quality [I think we should read "qualify"] for free replacement...". We'll see. The web information says expect a response in 4-6 weeks.

Microsoft has been pretty responsive on this. It was less than 24 hours from the time I e-mailed them regarding the problem to the time they confirmed the copies were counterfeit. In between, they asked for photos of the CD's and COA's, which I sent and they reviewed, plus whatever other analysis they may have done.

I spent a long time on Sunday trying to find a difference in the CD, COA & packaging between the "genuine" and the counterfeit copies. I'm 56 so my eyes aren't what they used to be, but I'm still not 100% convinced that there was a difference.

Now I'm going to go back and (in my spare time so it may take awhile) try to validate other spare copies of XP (which are mostly retail Home copies that I've accumulated for OS-less systems). Not exactly fun.

I can't speak to whether Microsoft's validations is "...in contravention with Canadian Privacy laws...", however there is this from the Windows Validation Assistant FAQ:

"What data does the Windows Validation Assistant gather from my machine?

Windows Validation Assistant does not collect any personal data from your computer. The information gathered from a users machine includes:

* Windows Product ID
* Windows Service Pack version
* SKU and Suite Mask
* Security ID
* PC manufacturer and model
* BIOS manufacturer, version and date"

The problem I've got with this is "....the information gathered...includes..." [emphasis added]. As an attorney, I have to wonder whether other information is collected, and if so, what information, and for what purpose?

I've been using Personal computers since a Kaypro 4 with CP/M. I've been through DOS and the numerous iterations of Windows. Warp 4 was at the time (and in some respects still today) the best. I've never tried linux but after all of this I ordered the free Ubuntu CD's yesterday and I'll give it a shot when they arrive.

So what's the moral of this story? I'm not entirely sure.

According to MS, piracy is about 21% According to MS, there are some really good and really intelligent counterfeiters out there. If the WGA program eliminates piracy & counterfeiting, is there anyone that expects MS to drop prices by 21%?

I'm not, by any stretch of the imagination, an MS basher, but this forum posting and the hevanet article have got to make one wonder:

[/url]http://forum.thinkpads.com/viewtopic.php?t=10724[/url]

[/url]http://www.hevanet.com/peace/microsoft.htm[/url]

While I may be a little more sophisticated than the average user, computers are still tools or appliances--something that allows me to accomplish my work easier, faster and cheaper. Unlike egibbs, I only "get under the hood and fiddle" when I have to in order to make things easier, faster and cheaper. So I'm not thrilled about possibly "...having to muck with [ubuntu] to get it to do what I want", let alone having to learn how to run entirely different software, or whether the software I'm currently using will either run under linux or if there's a linux app that will import the data For those of us who are self-employed, time is indeed money. The more time I have to spend "fiddling", the less I have to spend earning a living.

Back in the day, the issue wasn't the operating system, it was the "killer app". Lotus 123 and Word Perfect were the biggies. Instant recalculation for "what if's" and "wysiwyg" for documents were big things. Law firms and accountants jumped on those and at the time their price made the current prices for things like MS Office look like a give-away.

The newest notebook I'm using is a T23. If I wasn't for a faulty UPS system on 8/14/03, the newest desktop would be a May, 2000 home built. There are a lot of reasons that "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" is a cliché. I'd guess the cliché may explain why a lot of businesses haven't switched from W2k to XP.

There are things about XP that are significantly better than W2k but product activation and validation are not among them. As a joke, in political discussions, I've started telling people "I used to be an anarchist, but I quit because there were too many rules." I'm seriously wondering whether, in computer discussions, I'm going to have to start telling people "I used to use MS operating systems, but I quit because there were too many rules."

leoblob · #15 Post by **leoblob** » Thu Aug 04, 2005 11:11 am

I find this whole development by Microsoft quite alarming. On the one hand, I DO feel they are entitled to be paid for each copy of each program or OS. They did the work... their work should not be pirated.

But on the other hand, if I have a LEGAL copy, I want to be able to uninstall and re-install it at will... as long as I only have one copy on one machine. If I decide to wipe my hard drive, I don't like the idea of asking their permission if I can use the software I legally own. And I especially don't like the idea of them collecting data about me or my computer.

And if their "validation" process is technically flawed, which seems possible, that's even worse! If I, in good faith, buy what I have every reason to believe is a legitimate copy, from a legitimate vendor... then Microsoft can interfere with my using my computer... ?? !!

I think this new policy will have the following effects... the handful of individuals who are pirating the software will probably be stopped... the large commercial pirating operations will figure out how to get around the problem... and many of the honest people who are simply trying to use the software (legally!) to get their work done, will get fed up and move to something else like Linux or the Mac. If Microsoft makes it so hard for honest people to use their product, they'll stop using it.

I am just now making the transition from WIN98SE to WIN2K. Looks like that may be the end of the line for me... Guess it's time to start learning about Linux!

Toe · #16 Post by **Toe** » Thu Aug 04, 2005 3:22 pm

This keeps getting better and better......Wonder if my Copy-I-Bought-From-College will pass or fail? (I'll be annoyed if it doesn't......)

-Toe

verktyg · #17 Post by **verktyg** » Thu Aug 04, 2005 10:45 pm

Mickeysoft doesn't produce most of the CDs, they farm out replication. I'm concerned that some of these CDs are completely legal but may not pass MS's inspection.

I had a copy of Office 95 that I got at a very good price in 1995. I was concerned that it might be counterfeit and I contacted MS about it. They said that it was fake but it turned out that it was genuine, just a difference between replicators.

I only run XP on 3 laptops - just for the wireless features. One is an IBM X31 factory load, one is a used TP that came with a legal install and the 3rd is one that I installed from a corporate copy that's legit. None of them require a "mother may I" from Mr. Bill (activation)!

I recently ran Windows Update on all of them, they eventually passed the Genuine Advantage Validation Tool test. The euphemism "Genuine Advantage" - who's advantage?

The Windows Update site was not working properly on several occasions -so we should trust their buggy programing to validate our systems while they have a chance to snoop in our PCs!

My concern is that someday I'm going to try to update my software and I'll have a problem like last weekend for instance, Windows Update said that the used TP didn't pass scrutiny. I ran it through again the other night and it worked.

A while back I tried to install XP on a new HDD for my X31 using the IBM Recovery CDs. It would install up to the point where it asked for an activation number or the COA but wouldn't take either. I screwed around for several hours and couldn't get it to install. Calls to MS linked me to someone in the subcontinent who kept telling me that I had to purchase a valid copy of XP!

There are much less intrusive way to control software. Most high end CAD and engineering software programs have done away with dongles and have switched to to software. These programs are far more expensive than anything Mickeysoft sells.

It would be nice if the MAC OS were ported to run on Intel I386 hardware. Linux is getting better but still not ready for prime time.

dsvochak · #18 Post by **dsvochak** » Fri Aug 05, 2005 3:42 pm

It's a good thing this was a slow week for me. In general, the level of annoyance keeps rising.

What follows is the text of an e-mail to the person at Microsoft who may be in charge of WGA (and was possibly the person in charge of Activation):

I assume you are probably inundated with e-mails, etc at the moment, but at this point my level of concern is significantly higher than it was over the weekend.

Given what took place with the 2 copies of, apparently counterfeit, XP which are now in the possession of Microsoft in Erie, PA, I thought it would be prudent to validate other copies of XP I have, specifically 2 copies of XP Home SP1 purchased from CompUSA after the blackout in Aug, 2003. Accordingly, I loaded it on a machine earlier this afternoon. I skipped registration and activation as all I wanted to do was connect to the Windows Update site, validate the software and then remove it from the machine. As you are probably aware, validation could not complete because the software had not been activated.

Unless there is a way to validate without activating, I'm now in the position of having to activate 2 copies of XP Home on a machine, or machines, that I have no intention of using the software. If I install and activate the software in order to validate and then remove the software and later install it on another machine, I am very likely into the "activate by telephone call" situation.

Further, on the WGA newsgroup there is now the following message, identified as being from "Carl" <Carlstep@microsoft.com>:

"This error indicates that you have hit the limit in the maximum number of times you may activate the product.

Please try the validation again Thursday evening or Friday and it may validate.

Thanks,

Carl

>-----Original Message-----

>

Validation Failure: Invalid Product Key

>[0x80080222]

>

>Why did it not validate?

>The product key associated with your copy of Windows was never issued by Microsoft.

>

>Ok, I'm [censored]. I bought Windows legally from CompUSA >back when it first came out. (about 2002). I got a >product key that only I know, and use. (in fact I even >memoroized it because I'm having to wipe my hard drive so >many frickin' times on my stupid compaq laptop).

>

>The only problems I've had before was activating it, I >would call up to activate it using the automated computer >and she would transfer me to a pseron. I think I've wipe >my computer one to many times. Someone please help!"

This message states that there is "..a maximum number of times you may activate the product". "Carl"'s reply was posted on 8/3. On 8/4 someone posted asking "Could someone please explain the reference to "hitting the limit in the maximum number of times you may activate the product". I was under the impression there is no limit to the number of times the product may be activated on the same PC." To date there's no answer to the question. If there is indeed a limit to the number of activations that can be done, I have no desire to activate purely in order to validate but the way the system is set up, apparently I have no way to validate without activating.

There have also been questions raised regarding HIPPA regulations which have been responded to by Jason Nottingham. As an attorney, it does not appear to me that Mr. Nottingham's responses assuage all the HIPPA concerns which have been expressed. HIPPA is a relatively new statute and the ramifications of allowing Microsoft to collect any information from a "medical computer" are very likely not known, and perhaps at this point not knowable. There are, however, severe penalties to the medical personnel and institutions for violation HIPPA.

I have also seen questions in other forums relating to whether or not the information collected violates Canadian Privacy Laws, which is an issue I am not qualified to address.

I think it's imperative for Microsoft to quickly and publicly address the real and significant concerns that are being raised by the implementation of WGA. Incorrect, or inappropriate, statements being made by Microsoft personnel need to be immediately corrected.

In one of his responses, Jason Nottingham says his response should not be considered legal advice. It would probably be prudent for Microsoft to request a legal opinion from Microsoft's attorneys regarding whether the validation process and the information collected constitutes a violation of HIPPA. Further, should the opinion indicate that no violation of HIPPA exists , it should be made public and made available to anyone facing the issue. If the opinion indicates that there may be a HIPPA violation, the WGA process need to be altered to eliminate the possibility of a violation.

The reason I say Microsoft's attorneys need to provide the opinion is it is not prudent for the attorney for a medical facility to offer such opinion relying solely on the information contained in a Microsoft FAQ related to WGA. In fact, the only FAQ I was able to find states "...the information collected includes..." giving rise to possibility that other, non listed information is collected. Based on that FAQ, the only opinion I could offer is "I don't know whether there's a violation or not"

Another concern is "Carl's" statement regarding a maximum number of activations. If that statement is incorrect it needs to be quickly and loudly corrected.

Thank you for your time. If you have any questions or comments, please let me know.

-------------------------
EDIT: HIPPA is the "HEALTH INSURANCE PORTABILITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT". It's the one that all your Dr's and Hospitals made you sign forms for in the past couple of years. By the way, I don't expect a response from MS. Another by the way, I'm posting a "WTB" in the for sale forum.

JHEM · #19 Post by **JHEM** » Fri Aug 05, 2005 4:56 pm

Counselor,

dsvochak wrote:The reason I say Microsoft's attorneys need to provide the opinion is it is not prudent for the attorney for a medical facility to offer such opinion relying solely on the information contained in a Microsoft FAQ related to WGA. In fact, the only FAQ I was able to find states "...the information collected includes..." giving rise to possibility that other, non listed information is collected. Based on that FAQ, the only opinion I could offer is "I don't know whether there's a violation or not".

I am conversant with a situation where two of the larger PHARMACOs are refusing MS requests for "Validation Tool" access to their computers running XP, specifically due to HIPA concerns and the underlying requirement that the companies can certify the security of their systems.

Their position is that, e.g., they have 20K XP licenses and 16K computers, ergo any of their computers being other than legitimate is an impossiblity.

Regards,

James

dsvochak · #20 Post by **dsvochak** » Fri Aug 05, 2005 7:14 pm

I'm not sure this is a Windows OS thread anymore, but that's where I started it.

Surprise, I got a response from Microsoft:

"Darryl,

In order to validate you must activate your PC. This is because 5% of the systems WW and 12.5% of the pirated systems in the US have "tampered" binary files that automatically skips validation and never requires it. So, yes you must activate.

I totally understand the issue you're trying to address. We're in an interesting position in the sense that if we allow a tool out that validates keys, counterfeiters will just us it to make sure they are
generating keys that would fool us. We're still discussing what we should do here.

That said, send me the two 5x5 product keys in question and I'll be happy to validate them for you."

My reply:

"I assume you meant to say "...the pirated systems...automatically skip activation" rather than "the pirated systems...automatically skip validation".

I've thought about it and I don't think I'm entitled to something that isn't being generally offered, that is submitting my 5x5 product keys for validation. Should you come up with something that's offered publicly, I'll probably take advantage. I only sent the earlier message to point out what I see as some significant issues that must be resolved. I'm certain there are other issues which neither of us are aware.

However, the other issues I raised remain. I've since been informed that the HIPA issue may be more widespread than the questions raised on the WGA newsgroup site may indicate. The statement that there is a "... limit in the maximum number of times you may activate" if correct is troubling, and, if incorrect, has not been corrected on the WGA newsgroup.

Thank you for your assistance on the counterfeits. I'll be very interested to see how this all works out."

The situation JHEM points out is interesting. I was just speculating from posts on the WGA newsgroup. I would hope, if MS is willing to validate my 2 lousy 5x5 product keys, they would do it for someone that has 20K licenses. Or at least come up with a process that doesn't require going through the validation process on each machine. Or at least address the concerns expressed by the PHARMACOs.

If you're sitting at home with one machine that you use for internet, wp, games and maybe doing your taxes, this isn't all that big a deal. If you've got 16,000 machines that are legally required to be secure, this becomes a major issue. Even for my 4 machine network, it's become a problem.

I also wonder why the WGA issue hasn't gotten some major publicity. I check the PC Mag and PCWorld sites on a regular basis and I haven't seen anything there. I'm not aware of any newspaper or tv story about it either.

Now, my $0.02 on validation and piracy/counterfeiting:

Validation will have no impact on piracy/counterfeiting. As JHEM and a lot of others probably know, if you have one legal XP machine you can update all of them with no significant difficulty. I've never tried it, but you can probably get all the updates if you have one Windows machine of any flavor.

The people who made the counterfeits I had created a product that is virtually identical to the legal one I've got. There is no readily apparent visible difference. And they don't care that I can't validate, because they've already gotten their money somewhere way back along the food chain. I can't think of a reason why the counterfeiter's would stop as a result of WGA.

The thing that's more disturbing is "... you have hit the limit in the maximum number of times you may activate the product". Is that a change in the license or a mistaken statement? I don't know. If it's a change, it's a significant one for people who replace/update systems or components on a regular basis. If the license needs to be renewed (read "repurchased") after some indeterminate number of activations, the value of the original license is significantly reduced.

I'm afraid to figure out the amount of time that I've spent on this issue. I said in an earlier post that I don't want to "fiddle", but I'm starting to wonder whether the time I've spent "fiddling" with the WGA issue is more or less than the time I would have spent "fiddling" with installing linux.

verktyg · #21 Post by **verktyg** » Sat Aug 06, 2005 1:23 am

I could give a flying F#$% less about Mickeysoft's ~$200 USD per PC concerns!!!! That's CHUMP change for a business user!!!

I'm involved with software that's $500 to $5000+ USD per seat (Adobe Photoshop, Illustrator and PageMaker, Quark Express, SolidWorks, AutoCAD, Prophet21, MAS90, MAS200, Peachtree Premium, Crystal Reports, IBM AIX Unix and so on). These software companies have much less intrusive ways to attempt to prevent piracy! They've even done away with hardware dongles and developed software solutions to validation.

When Microsloth first released Win95 they had a snoop program that they tried to foist on users that would check all of the MS software on a PC and who knows what else. It was their first attempt at activation.

I remember reading an editorial in PC World magazine about it. One of their editors refused to let MS "inspect" her computer for whatever reason MS gave. They soon dropped the program.

I have a stack of legal MS Office 95, 97 and 2000, Win95, Win98, Win98 Upgrades, Win98SE, NT4, Win2k, WinXP and Win2003 CDs I keep track of which ones I install on a PC but I'm always swapping drives and so on. I try to keep my systems legal - what is legal - what is "it" (Bill Clinton)? This all to satisfy a company that has repeatedly been convicted buy the US government of felonious behavior!!!

I don't trust the motives of Mr. Bill's organization when it comes to snooping on my PCs!!!

leoblob · #22 Post by **leoblob** » Sat Aug 06, 2005 4:50 pm

This reminds me of (I think I have my facts straight?) when Intel introduced the PIII, didn't they have some sort of unique ID code for each individual processor? ... so they could, in theory, keep track of each one? There was such an uproar that PC manufacturers started letting you turn off this feature in your BIOS... later Intel dropped it completely.

If there's enough uproar on Microsoft's latest antics, maybe something will change. They may not care if we're annoyed, but they certainly will care if their sales $$ don't increase the way they'd like, and they think this validation issue is part of the reason.

(As for the $200USD per user, I would agree that this is not a huge sum of money. However, to the extent that "validation" prevents or inhibits your use of your own computer, that is a huge problem IMHO.)

dsvochak · #23 Post by **dsvochak** » Sat Aug 06, 2005 6:52 pm

There's another thread in this forum captioned "What's this Lenovo--Other hardware Thinkpad PM Device" that I find really interesting.

I'm writing this on a T23. The IBM Software Installer, The T23 Device Driver Matrix and the T23 System Utilities Matrix aren't finding a recent update to Power Management for a T23. Windows Update, however, is offering me an optional "Other hardware Thinkpad PM Device" update.

Is it possible that Microsoft is offering Thinkpad software updates before IBM/Lenovo? According to IBM/Lenovo I've got the latest Power Management "Device".

Another one of those things that make you wonder.

verktyg · #24 Post by **verktyg** » Sat Aug 06, 2005 7:23 pm

Windows Update offers updates for the MiniPCI Combo card in my T20 that are older than the ones that I installed from IBM. They may have the advantage of being MS certified for what that's worth.

dsvochak · #25 Post by **dsvochak** » Thu Aug 18, 2005 12:28 pm

My story, at least, has a happy ending. It appears that I qualified for the "complementary" replacement offer. Two envelopes arrived from MS, each containing a "Windows Genuine Advantage Kit for Windows XP Professional"--CD, product key, etc.

At this point, though, all the other concerns regarding privacy, activations, HIPA, etc remain unresolved. And, since even the US govt. got tired of suing MS, probably won't be resolved.

pipspeak · #26 Post by **pipspeak** » Thu Aug 18, 2005 8:53 pm

leoblob wrote:I find this whole development by Microsoft quite alarming. On the one hand, I DO feel they are entitled to be paid for each copy of each program or OS. They did the work... their work should not be pirated.

But on the other hand, if I have a LEGAL copy, I want to be able to uninstall and re-install it at will... as long as I only have one copy on one machine. If I decide to wipe my hard drive, I don't like the idea of asking their permission if I can use the software I legally own. And I especially don't like the idea of them collecting data about me or my computer.

A little OT, but I agree.. normally I'd just think that market forces would take over and folks would flock to alternatives created for people with views like ours. Sadly, market force mechanisms have pretty much broken down in the west and any significant change will likely take decades to come about (and no, I do not regard OSX and Linux as alternatives for 90% of PC users out there. Good as they might be, they have and probably will always have a limited audience).

I'm off to check my validation key!

redsdreads · #27 Post by **redsdreads** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 2:48 am

theres a great little program called [i]trixie[/i] that you can install and add a file to it to bypass this microsoft verification thing. and it works!

LtTPfan · #28 Post by **LtTPfan** » Sun Nov 20, 2005 1:43 pm

I found this thread interesting so thought I’d chime in with my observations as one of my sons is a Microsoft employee.

Microsoft appears a well paying company with excellent benefits. Working only four days a week, much of my son’s work is from home; he rarely goes to the office, but does have to travel to customer sites. This year he received a 10% raise and 27% bonus. MS is extremely family oriented, providing 100% medical coverage for pre and post-natal care, and pay all attorney fees for adoption, among many other benefits. Of course they can afford to with the exorbitant markup of their software. Employees pay ‘cost’ for any MS software, which is 90% off the retail price! Most MS hardware is 45-55% of retail. XBOX is an exception; it is sold at cost, the same price as everyone else; however, games are a flat $15.

Microsoft no longer buys or leases IBM computers, including Thinkpads. This is because IBM actively promotes Linux for their servers.

I recently took a page from Microsoft’s tactics with medical providers after seeing several medical bills in which MS, for example, paid only $260 of a $1340 charge, which was accepted as payment in full by the provider. Six months ago I suffered a massive heart attack and was treated at a local hospital, rather than a Veterans Administration hospital (I am a disabled veteran). The VA only paid about half the charges, and the hospital and doctors began collection efforts for the difference. I wrote them explaining the VA had paid amounts considered reasonable and customary, including those for some fraudulent charges and charges due to doctor inaction (why should I pay because a doctor doesn’t show up to discharge me). Avoiding extortion, I explained I’d rather forgo litigation, but their incessant attempts at collection served as constant reminder that I had a valid cause of action. The calls and letters ceased.

dokein · #29 Post by **dokein** » Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:03 pm

redsdreads wrote:theres a great little program called trixie that you can install and add a file to it to bypass this microsoft verification thing. and it works!

There is no need to install anything. When you go to the update page - when it prompts you for express or custom, paste the following in the address bar and hit enter.

javascript:void(window.g_sDisableWGACheck='all')

Then hit either express or custom. WGA bypassed.

EDIT: whoops i just saw sickofit posted the same information, just reiterating then...

Microsoft "Genuine Advantage Validation Tool"

Microsoft "Genuine Advantage Validation Tool"

Who is online