Warning! Do not download before hiding your IP with a VPN!
Your IP Address is .   Location is
Your Internet Provider can see what you are downloading!  Hide your IP ADDRESS with a VPN!
We strongly recommend using a reliable VPN client to hide yourself on the Internet. It's FREE!
Hide me now!
Releaselog

Microsoft: piracy rate of Vista is half the XP

Microsoft said it’s seeing piracy rates for Windows Vista that are half those of Windows XP. The decline in piracy rates is largely due to the fact Vista is much tougher to fake than XP. Microsoft VP, Mike Sievert, said: “Piracy rates are lower because it’s harder.” There are a variety of reasons for that, including the fact businesses no longer have volume licence keys that can be used to activate an unlimited number of machines. Another is the fact Vista machines that aren’t properly activated pretty quickly become basically unusable once they enter “reduced functionality mode”. For Microsoft, the gains have been significant. In its last profits call, Microsoft said five percentage points of Windows growth could be attributed to gains in piracy.

But Microsoft is making the experience a little less harsh for those running pirated versions of Vista. With Service Pack 1, Microsoft is doing away with reduced functionality mode in favour of putting prominent notifications on systems that are not found to be genuine. Non-genuine systems with SP1 will display a warning at start-up that the system is not properly activated. Users will have the option to “activate now” or “activate later”, though the second option won’t show up for a time. Users will also have their desktop background changed to white and a prominent notification placed in the lower right hand corner saying that the machine is not genuine.

Still, in a significant change, those with non-genuine or non-activated copies of Vista will still be able to use their systems. Also with SP1, Microsoft is closing two key loopholes that pirates have used to evade Microsoft’s security measures. One involves mimicking the process used by large computer makers to pre-activate their Vista machines, while the other extends the grace period that customers have to activate their machine, in some cases extending it for decades. Nice, but does Microsoft really think noone will crack it?

Source: Zdnet, Silicon 

Comments

Feel free to post your Microsoft: piracy rate of Vista is half the XP torrent, subtitles, samples, free download, quality, NFO, rapidshare, depositfiles, uploaded.net, rapidgator, filefactory, netload, crack, serial, keygen, requirements or whatever-related comments here. Don't be rude (permban), use only English, don't go offtopic and read FAQ before asking a question. Owners of this website aren't responsible for content of comments.
  1. HoratioDUKEz
    December 4th, 2007 | 11:09

    vista sucks

  2. CooLMaN
    December 4th, 2007 | 11:10

    Vista piracy rate is lower due to the fact it sucks and no one wants to use it, stupid.

  3. Manfea
    December 4th, 2007 | 11:13

    Is it that it is harder (i found a working crack very quickly) or is it that fact vista slows down systems so much people are staying with XP?

  4. Reverend
    December 4th, 2007 | 11:13

    @2 Agreed. Haha.

  5. JoshuaMH1
    December 4th, 2007 | 11:13

    Yeah, I agree with CooLMaN.

    It will always be crackable, just less people want it.

  6. Lopez
    December 4th, 2007 | 11:17

    SP1 will be cracked even in its beta period :D

  7. 08/15
    December 4th, 2007 | 11:18

    just imagine if vista was uncrackable and people started to check out alternative operating systems?

  8. CelestialP3nso
    December 4th, 2007 | 11:21

    Ubuntu Rules….just hopping to find a way to run Directx games…I DONT WANT WINE!

  9. Obscurax
    December 4th, 2007 | 11:21

    Lol this article made me laugh :) . Especially the part where microsoft states the “Ooo so good” protection.

  10. KeViN
    December 4th, 2007 | 11:25

    Nice way to prevent piracy MS… doing a OS nobody cares lol

  11. EoN
    December 4th, 2007 | 11:27

    Maybe M$ should leave the protection part to the monkeys…
    It seems they are smarter than humans. lol

  12. atlas
    December 4th, 2007 | 11:30

    I have solved the world’s trash problem! Stick it in Sievert’s mouth!
    MY GOD this is hilarious. In other news:

    MS Cancer rate is HALF that of MS AIDS. “The new cancer strain is a testament to MS security,” Mike Seivert informs us. Sievert would not further comment as he was bleeding from the rectum and a short distance away, wooden ships set sail for sweden, leaving a resounding “YARRR” to echo upon the waves.

  13. fungus
    December 4th, 2007 | 11:31

    vista is a lot easier to crack than xp and microsoft don’t seem to be able to detect it yet unlike xp with it’s constant new versions of wga

  14. anon
    December 4th, 2007 | 11:34

    what a joke, they think they are winning… only reason piracy rates are so low is coz no one wants to use Vista till they have to… many many ppl are still happy enough with XP

  15. CrystyXp
    December 4th, 2007 | 11:38

    I use Vista ! I like vista ! And in Game , the performance is more greate that in XP ! i am sure that in max 2 years XP users will have Vista instald in Computers ;) ) ;)

    :wave:

  16. Trell
    December 4th, 2007 | 11:38

    I had exactly the same thought as CooLMaN when I read that BS statement from Micro$oft. I don’t know who M$ are trying to kid, but if they want to pat themselves on the back for their ‘great anti-piracy job’, and fool themselves that it’s ‘cos of their ‘brilliant security measures!’ It just means that they’ll get complacent. Still, it’s some of the best f**ked-up logic I’ve ever seen!

    Next Week: Microsoft cures lung cancer by buying out tobacco companies and hiking the price of cigarettes to $2000, then, for an encore, prevents wars, famine and poverty by destroying the world. Well done M$!

  17. wtf
    December 4th, 2007 | 11:45

    whats this vista they mention?

    :P

  18. aka
    December 4th, 2007 | 11:51

    meh, i been using a cut down (hooky) version of vista i made myself for ages. dont get me wrong i agree with more of you guys. it does suck ass but its the sign of the times. in a year or 2 99% of next gen games will be vista only. mind you it doesnt stop me from dual booting xp pro lite :P

  19. LGx
    December 4th, 2007 | 11:55

    omg. microsoft should consider Vista is 2x lamer than XP. and if nobody wants a legit one, then who wants a haxed? :P
    with SP3 XP owns Vista, so they want to downgrade XP with SP4 maybe :)

  20. Lord Shoa
    December 4th, 2007 | 11:57

    Yes it is down to no one wanting vista as you can do so much more with xp without the bugs.

    One day we we will all be on vista but it will be on service pack 3 by then and most of the bugs will be gone as well.

    So I am sure there will be more than xp one day with hacked OS its that we are not stupid enough to upgrade just yet, seeing as xp runs 3x faster than vista with sp3 why would be want to.

    Yes sp3 is not out but beta testers say its 3x faster with this update than vista or was it 3x faster than it was when it was brought out of the clossset in 2001.

  21. doh
    December 4th, 2007 | 11:57

    why would anyone want to “pirate” that crap ?

  22. spar
    December 4th, 2007 | 12:00

    haha

    I know everybody already said it, but I gotta say it again

    The reason why people dont bother downloading Vista is cause its crap.

    not cause it “is much tougher to fake than XP”

  23. yingjai
    December 4th, 2007 | 12:01

    harder to fake? please. the oem trick never fails. what are they going to do? prevent all the major manufacturers from preinstalling vista?

  24. Anonymouzor
    December 4th, 2007 | 12:03

    They are ofc talking of the other kind of piracy where people sell fake boxes of windows, not internet piracy.. ;)

    The 2 are different but share the same name, cause alot of confusion..

  25. PRODUCT
    December 4th, 2007 | 12:05

    Vista is Garbage. No one wants it. Microsoft is a bunch of idiots.

  26. nikolica
    December 4th, 2007 | 12:07

    that’s because much more people use linux nowdays…

  27. KRIEGHOFF
    December 4th, 2007 | 12:07

    Its a turkey no matter how they try to dress it

  28. mr æ
    December 4th, 2007 | 12:08

    well its lower cuz,nobody wanst the damn thing.lol.
    how stupid are they.harder to crack,lol

  29. Noelie
    December 4th, 2007 | 12:13

    I liked Vista but I had problems with stuttering sound when I was downloading stuff and no matter what I tried to fix it I couldn’t. Then I found a registry hack to download SP3 (RC1) for XP and I’m delighted with it. Much much faster. Unless SP1 for Vista works miracles I won’t be going back.

  30. John
    December 4th, 2007 | 12:17

    Monkeys more clever than humans, damn!

    LOL..that definately true

  31. Internal
    December 4th, 2007 | 12:18

    Are they really that dumb

    XP = Stable, runs all games, more compatable with software

    Vista = Lowers your performance, makes alot of your games and software no longer work!!!!!

    Microsoft do your maths no one wants it cause it is a pile of sh1t

  32. sVista
    December 4th, 2007 | 12:22

    Friends the best Windows OS is Windows Server 2003 x86 & x64 and Windows XP x64. Vista is a disappointment:

    Vista = sVista (= σβήστα = greek word meaning erase/delete)

    lol

  33. crimson
    December 4th, 2007 | 12:26

    most pirates just have more “computer experience” then the average “stupid” user .. e.g less vista piracy

  34. me
    December 4th, 2007 | 12:26

    a big company like ms aren’t going to care if home users are using pirate copies, the majority of users will buy their pc form a shop with vista pre-installed

    if people have vista on their pc’s at home, larger companies are more likely to adopt it (everyone upgrades to newer os’s somewhere down the line)

    as long as the companies are licensed (dare i say, i’d like to think that most in the us / uk are) then ms will make their money

    ballmer said it himself, ms would prefer users to use pirated copies of windows than use another os

    majority wins, everytime

    for the record, i’m still using xp

  35. ViT
    December 4th, 2007 | 12:29

    Maybe because… hmmm let’s see… vista sucks real bad?! ;)

  36. slapdash
    December 4th, 2007 | 12:35

    waiting for winxp sp3 next year release..i heard this sp much great than vista sh*t…hasta la vista winxp sp3 ;)

  37. dudeman
    December 4th, 2007 | 12:36

    A question for Linux lovers:

    If I switch to Linux, how will I get to play my DX10 games and use all my music recording software and hardware?

    Yes I’m sure Linux is great for surfing and writing documents (what OS isn’t? loool!) but what about us who actually use applications other than firefox and openoffice? ROFLFMFOGMAOING

  38. SVISTA ENTELOS
    December 4th, 2007 | 12:38

    SVISTA NA PANE STON DIAOLO.. ORAIOS…
    XAXAXAA!

  39. mcf3778
    December 4th, 2007 | 12:39

    Vista! Will it play Halo 3? I’ll stick with my windows 95!

  40. ZV
    December 4th, 2007 | 12:43

    Hmmm, I actually thought Vista was much easier to crack than XP, it took a long time to crack XP but Vista went down pretty fast.

  41. EliteC64
    December 4th, 2007 | 12:49

    Ide rather you use a free copy of my software instead of putting money into another Companys operating system, Wow i believe it cause steve ballmer said so.

    Come here son i got a bridge to sell you.

  42. mr.Floppy
    December 4th, 2007 | 12:49

    @45 Xp got cracked almost instantly,with sp1 was a slight delay.

  43. munnavai
    December 4th, 2007 | 12:50

    link please!!!!!!!!!!!!

  44. dj
    December 4th, 2007 | 12:50

    lol agreeing with everyone saying it sucks thats why nobody bothers pirating it

  45. Z
    December 4th, 2007 | 12:54

    Suck confirmed.

  46. Crinan
    December 4th, 2007 | 12:56

    I bought my new system 9 months ago i looked into vista but stuck with XP for the simple fact its user friendly on all my software i just think its far better overall.Hopefully i won’t be forced to switch to vista for at least another 3 years fingers x’d.

  47. Dave
    December 4th, 2007 | 12:58

    “Microsoft: piracy rate of Vista is half the XP”

    Yeah , cause nobody wants that sh*t.

  48. adam
    December 4th, 2007 | 13:00

    The decline in piracy rates is largely due to the fact Vista is much tougher to fake than XP. Microsoft VP, Mike Sievert, said: “Piracy rates are lower because it’s harder.”

    Now that’s what I call spin! I wonder what their sales rates are compared to “piracy rates,” whatever the hell those are.

  49. bigk
    December 4th, 2007 | 13:00

    I actually found a loophole which lets you register windows vista ASAP over the phone. I can’t actually disclose any information, as it is a loophole that can be closed QUICKLY.

    I actually found this out by mistake, gives you a valid CD KEY and not too hard to do and absolutely free.

    I don’t think SP1 will have changed anything and may disclose my loophole ;-)

  50. Allexz
    December 4th, 2007 | 13:03

    LOL “harder to pirate”

    ROFL! :D It’s EASIER! Download+Activationcrack = “Original Vista”

    It’s basically even easier to pirate Vista, the only problem is that is slow and a pain in the ass. Vista that is.

  51. BitLover
    December 4th, 2007 | 13:04

    Agree with me@38.

    friend of my does work in pc shop and is saying; that most customers with preinstalled vista will be back to the shop after 3 to 12 weeks, asking that it is possible to downgrade Vista to XP, because Vista seems to have problems or is to slow or most of the programs just do not work as they should.

    Does MS investigate as well does numbers? Or they just counting how many Vista’s are went preinstalled out from the manufactures. Not to mention that many of those manufactures are forced to preinstall Vista and do not have the choice for XP.

    I think all this good news from MS about Vista is a marketing scam, in reality they know that Vista sales are not really as good as expected.

  52. PsYcHo
    December 4th, 2007 | 13:14

    lol xp is trash !!!
    Everyone likes virus and Spyware I Take It…

    Get Vista 64 Bit… If Your System Can Take IT…

    if not stay with Crud-XP…

    BTW Thx NoPE :)

  53. LMAO
    December 4th, 2007 | 13:22

    they can’t even get people to steal it.

  54. Big-Byte
    December 4th, 2007 | 13:27

    Vista is incompatible to older Games and Appz, but is it possible to use DX 10 under XP ???

  55. G
    December 4th, 2007 | 13:28

    Vista was crap…just like xp was at launch….its much much better now than it was at launch….give it a little more time it will be good…im using it Vista..together with dual boot xp pro….u will all be Vista soon….be happy with it…natural evolution…

  56. G
    December 4th, 2007 | 13:29

    Edit: Using Vista 64-bit…security IS BETTER than in XP….way BETTER…

  57. nitromeatbag
    December 4th, 2007 | 13:34

    Who the hell wants to pirate a OS so is a piece of crap.. seriously I tried vista 2 times since it was released. Just last week I tried it out again after telling myself not to give into hope that maybe with the patches the OS will be better, but it still sucks. Its the worst os since Windows ME.

  58. anonymous
    December 4th, 2007 | 13:38

    Does this mean SP1 will detect my DELL OEM version as illegal?

  59. r0x
    December 4th, 2007 | 13:39

    i am satisfied user with Windows Vista Premium 32bit OEM LEGAL :) . Its not expensive :) especially for you from USA, etc…

  60. UncertainGod
    December 4th, 2007 | 13:43

    Nobody gives a spoon about vista, that’s why it’s not getting pirated much.

  61. spin the black circle
    December 4th, 2007 | 13:44

    noone wants to use it before it is stable and fast, thats why the rates for piracy are low, dumbass micro.

  62. []D[][]\/[][]D
    December 4th, 2007 | 14:00

    vista suxs ya knaw wha i b saynz yo? i be back to x to the mutha f** P all day knaw mea? windaws just dont know how we do tis! i be on mac alls day yo… who knaw wha im b saynz?

  63. Jixx
    December 4th, 2007 | 14:01

    lower piracy rate?
    lower customer rate!
    M$: pirate==consumer

    sweet! i bet rite when none buys “Windows 7″ (yeah,that is the name of the next one) they’ll start to seed an “open home edition” on torrent.
    dx10 for vista only? screw you! wine will take that.
    32bitExe just for M$? hahaha. Apple will do that by the end of 2008!

    time to sell M$ stocks!

  64. Joe
    December 4th, 2007 | 14:02

    I’ve had no problem with it… it came pre-loaded on my new laptop, and even before I bought it I was like, “Geeze better get the XP disk ready”.

    I decided to give it a try, and to be honest I’ve had absolutely no problems with it. The laptop is pretty good though… 2.0Ghz Turion 64×2, 2 gigs of ram. What’s sad is that monitoring memory usage it takes up a gig (“48%”) by itself with just about no other programs running… It’s not slow at all though. I program and game and all that jazz too and I have not run in to one compatibility issue.

    I recall when I tried it on my P4 2.8Ghz 1Gig Desktop PC it raped it pretty hardcore so I went back to XP on that one.

  65. HigherIQ
    December 4th, 2007 | 14:04

    lol WOW. I’m making a pdf of this read and everyones post as good joke for people to email everyone lol. What a way to be ending the year (Micronuts joke).

  66. GriM
    December 4th, 2007 | 14:05

    na the reason vista piracy rates are so low is the OS “”SUCKS BALLS”" just like bill gates do’s

  67. john
    December 4th, 2007 | 14:07

    xp sp3 rulzzz…

  68. me
    December 4th, 2007 | 14:07

    Em vista is good, if u have pc to run it. So lamers who have 2gb of ram should forget it and return to theyr mister 10 years old XP(so fast)!
    I have x64 and have no driver issiues.
    Q6600 4GB ram 8800GTS and 1TB hdd, vista(on raptor 10k rpm) boots up in seconds and all programs start when u click them.
    When i had xp system it was so slowarse(coz of multicore), thats why i changed for vista buissness and no complaints! All games run as before and best thing is that it hasent shown any errors sins i installed it.
    So who doesent know: vista is based on server2003 so its secure

  69. Influenced
    December 4th, 2007 | 14:13

    I think 99% of people will agree vista sucks
    I didn’t even want to use xp when it first came out.
    But Hey, unless some1 wants to continue improving XP after MS call it quits.
    Vista may accidentally install itself against my best wishes.

  70. Delta Force
    December 4th, 2007 | 14:16

    XP SP3 Beta are already available (about 1 month)
    and i already using it.
    and no problem using it with pirated XP :)

    Upgrading to vista well i will wait until i got another computer. i don’t want new os and new slow down :)

  71. stole XP
    December 4th, 2007 | 14:20

    to get rid of vista on my new PC lmao

  72. cX
    December 4th, 2007 | 14:24

    CooLMaN
    December 4th, 2007 | 11:10
    Vista piracy rate is lower due to the fact it sucks and no one wants to use it, stupid.

    You are Correct My friend .

    LOL They actualy think that thier protection is what keeping pirates away from Vista ?

    ITS THIER CRAPPY OS !

  73. HollyWood
    December 4th, 2007 | 14:24

    @2 CooLMaN said it all… LOL

  74. Necro-File
    December 4th, 2007 | 14:25

    Much harder my ass; I have a pirated, WGA approved version of Vista Ultimate I’ve had since the operating system was first officially released. The decline is probably due to morons who think Vista isn’t as good as XP; The same idiots who though 98 was better than XP.

  75. ScytheNoire
    December 4th, 2007 | 14:26

    if MS wanted to fight piracy they’d release the OS at a reasonable price. make it the cost of the average PC game. then people wouldn’t care so much about pirating because the cost wouldn’t be out of proportion.

  76. me
    December 4th, 2007 | 14:29

    i’ve already posted once @38

    most of you are so childish, you were either 10 years old when xp came out, or have a bad memory

    everyone bashed xp when it came out

    microsoft os’s need time to ‘settle in’ the userbase is colossal, so many different hardware configurations that they need to adhere to, grow up

    posing things like “m$ vi$ta suxxorsszzz, xpee ruwleszzs!11lone” doesn’t help you put your misinformed point across

    vista is the next big thing, and will replace xp soon for most of you

  77. Vidivaldi
    December 4th, 2007 | 14:31

    “So lamers who have 2gb of ram should forget it and return to theyr mister 10 years old XP(so fast)!
    I have x64 and have no driver issiues.
    Q6600 4GB ram 8800GTS and 1TB hdd, vista(on raptor 10k rpm) boots up in seconds and all programs start when u click them.”

    Yea… sure… it sounds really good with an operating system that require 4gb to start work good… i seriously hope you didn’t get that system so you could run visty correctly because then you’ve got the whole lamer idea wrong.. LOL

  78. Poopie Dookie
    December 4th, 2007 | 14:32

    VISTA SUCKS!!! NOBODY WANTS IT!!!

  79. Belga
    December 4th, 2007 | 14:35

    When xp came, everybody were like “OMG IT SUCKS” and what is the situation now? So, I think vista is on the same line as xp was when it was released :)

  80. dnL
    December 4th, 2007 | 14:37

    meh I wrote a super long post and it didn’t even show up?
    w/e, so to be brief, I was forced to go over to vista b/c of some random reasons. Well anyways, at first I didn’t like vista at all but now I just can’t imagine myself going back to xp anymore, multitasking works way better on vista IMO. Like on xp, if one program hangs, the whole system gets often choppy but on vista I might not even notice it. And other than abit higher program compatibility and lower memory usage, are there any other reason why xp is better than vista?

  81. JOrge
    December 4th, 2007 | 14:40

    Jajaj it´s so bad that even free people dosen´t want it

    Very bad move the DRM crap,worst OS since millenium.

  82. Zordon
    December 4th, 2007 | 14:44

    @ 86 dnL
    I agree with you completely

  83. otli
    December 4th, 2007 | 14:45

    Harder to pirate? lol

    No: it just sucks, that’s why I haven’t change

  84. Fractal
    December 4th, 2007 | 14:53

    #68: “vista suxs ya knaw wha i b saynz yo? i be back to x to the mutha f** P all day knaw mea? windaws just dont know how we do tis! i be on mac alls day yo… who knaw wha im b saynz?”

    No. Git.

  85. 4FuK-S8kZ
    December 4th, 2007 | 14:53

    @80

    Well said!! – You beat me to it!!

  86. John
    December 4th, 2007 | 14:54

    Well its seemingly low, this because theres pirated versions they dont have a clue about. But as far as me using it, Ill just stick with XP. An operating system should allow the user to perform multiple task without requiring so much memory. To even have the flexiblity you would with XP when using vista you would need 2 gigs of RAM or more. Then what if you wanted to play those high end PC game titles. Like Gears of War or Crysis. Hell you would need like 4 gigs of RAM. Alienware.com does make it pheasable but with a hit to your wallet.

  87. Hot
    December 4th, 2007 | 15:00

    So many morons in this post :/

  88. Tux
    December 4th, 2007 | 15:01

    this is so funny..

    People prefer XP – vista sucks. the only reason they are making money on vista is because people are forced to buy it with lots of new PC’s.

    It’s been said 90 times already, just wanted to add to the statistic.

  89. satake
    December 4th, 2007 | 15:01

    Sign me in on the No Vista User!

  90. []D[][]\/[][]D
    December 4th, 2007 | 15:04

    @93 Hot

    Youz b da moron! sucha nub! nowz stfu… ya knaw wha i b sayns ya mee?

  91. Madferret
    December 4th, 2007 | 15:04

    to be honest I installed Vista when I had my old rig and thought it sucked big time (3.2ghz P4 1Gig made myself)

    until… i built my new quad core system q6600 2.4ghz 2 gig ram i thought I’d give Vista another chance and to be honest it bloody flys, I tried installing XP hoping for even more performance boost but it ran ‘Slower’ than it did when it had Vista on.

    bottom line in my opinion

    if you have a single core computer keep with XP

    if you have a dual or quad core machine Vista all the way ftw

    and btw build your own machine as pre-built computers (Dell,HP,Fujitsu etc etc) suck ass and you’ll always have a crap slow arse rig and hence I think a ‘majority’ of the comments on this thread are coming from people who have nice shiney cases with a hair dryer running there CPU

    rant over :)

  92. Jao
    December 4th, 2007 | 15:12

    some of my mates are forced to use Vista and they are constantly asking for advice from either me or others, everything is a problem, and only about half of programs work, vista is pretty awful, maybe when service packs are out it will be worth looking into.

  93. kebrus
    December 4th, 2007 | 15:28

    i have to agree with #7 (08/15)

    they obviously don’t want to people leave completely away from their OS, so they “made it a little harder to crack” but not completely (even though they probably couldn’t do it if they wanted to)

  94. masterfaster
    December 4th, 2007 | 15:33

    There is no need to go to Vista x64.

    Win2003/WinXP x64 are way better and safer and faster, because they have the kernel of a server OS.

    Do you actually test OSes before you write an opinion?

    But yes, Vista x64 is way better than Vista x86.

  95. dnL
    December 4th, 2007 | 15:38

    Got to agree with 99. Madferret.
    I’m also using vista on a single core amd and 2gigs of ram.
    And I also haven’t got any problems running the stated games.
    Also I’ve got no problems multitasking with only 2gigs of ram
    actually, it works smoother than it did on xp.

    But then again I’ve got to disagree with 97. Madferret :p
    Since there’s no problems running xp on a machine with a duo or quad core processor and no problems running vista on a single core processor.

    and 98. Jao:
    you need to get your facts straight, I don’t know what kind of software from ’98 you’re trying to run but I haven’t had any software compatibility problems while running vista, I know some have but those are pretty minor. I guess your friends are just too stupid to download the vista versions of software they want to install.

  96. ENT
    December 4th, 2007 | 15:42

    one year on XP still has 78% market share. In the month vista was released xp market share was 85%, vista now has 9% market share, this means only 7% of xp users have updated to vista with the rest coming from new computer sales.

    speaks for itself, the majority of people dont want vista
    source http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=10

  97. liquidmonkey
    December 4th, 2007 | 15:42

    yeah, this is crap.
    let’s ask this same ????? in another year when vista finally does go mainstream. until then its only honest users and companies who use it. once the gen public gets in on it they will be eating those words.

  98. chocolate nutz
    December 4th, 2007 | 15:53

    @66 – is that like geek humour then? man you need to get out more..

  99. December 4th, 2007 | 15:58

    my windows are original o:)

  100. paco
    December 4th, 2007 | 16:07

    It’s not noone. It’s no one. Get it right. But thanks for the post. I enjoyed it.

  101. Streakfury
    December 4th, 2007 | 16:10

    I quite like Vista. I’ve got a machine that runs it well, so some of the issues people have mentioned here I dont have trouble with.

    But I’ve noticed that there are still issues. Crysis, for example, keeps crashing on me (and yes, I’m using a legit copy of both Vista and Crysis) without warning.

    Overall though, you cant say it’s worse than XP. XP is still good in terms of compatibility with software etc, but you’d think that Microsoft would learn it’s lesson from XP, so why would they miss out things in Vista that they’ve fixed in XP?

  102. Reader01
    December 4th, 2007 | 16:10

    What a glorious headline :)

  103. Devildog
    December 4th, 2007 | 16:15

    i concur that the reason the piracy rate is half that of XP is that the OS runs half as well as XP lol. what dumbasses thinking its due to more stringent anti-piracy measures. Does M$ really believe their own hype?

  104. mupet0000
    December 4th, 2007 | 16:26

    Vista is NOT harder to get cracked. Infact its much easier. Monthly released build of vista OEM Ultimate come out pre-cracked as Genuine. Windows update works and so does everything else.

    I should know im using the October build :P

  105. stimpy
    December 4th, 2007 | 16:49

    who wants to use a cracked version of a crap os anyway

  106. dnL
    December 4th, 2007 | 17:18

    @ 103 ENT, wether people want or not, they will have to move to vista sooner or later, Microsofts move with the dx10 was quite smart ;) And I wouldn’t trust that site of yours either, considering the price of vista, most people just download cracked versions of vista and the ones who buy the OS are mostly larger companies and I don’t really care what OS some companies like to use so meh..

  107. WhiteVampire
    December 4th, 2007 | 17:18

    Vista sucks.. no one wants it.. so why bother?!

    end of discussion.

  108. blob
    December 4th, 2007 | 17:25

    does it work on XBOX 180

  109. embøl
    December 4th, 2007 | 17:47

    I agree with everyone who shares my statement.

    The real answer to why the rate is half the XP, is because vista is idiotproof (see all the warnings windows pops up with its OWN PROGRAMS?!?), slow, and ugly.

    Noone wants to download that, do they?

  110. kar2n
    December 4th, 2007 | 17:53

    I just wanted to say Vista Sux too…i had no idea that over 100 people would jump on a comment board just to proclaim …VISTA SUCKS!!!..well i kinda did…anyway…VISTA SUcks…resource hogging software…bah humbug…lol

  111. blob
    December 4th, 2007 | 17:58

    I put the Vista disc in my cd player but I hear no sound.
    Do I need the 64bit or 32bit?

    Thanks for the pointless comments.

  112. bill
    December 4th, 2007 | 17:59
  113. dnL
    December 4th, 2007 | 17:59

    @ 116. embol
    If you can’t even turn off UAC then you’ve got to be quite teh hax0r, huh? And no, vista isn’t uglier than xp, lol.

    @ 117. kar2n
    If you’re using a Pentium 2 from ’98, I guess it does hogg quite alot of resources, other than that it shouldn’t be a problem.

  114. mrcoolsoul
    December 4th, 2007 | 18:06

    Yep, XP sucked a55 when it first came out (seem to recall people complaining bout the Fisher Price interface, but once a SP or 2 were thrown at it and a few years passed, people wouldn’t want to be without it. Think of Vista as a work in progress and do the sensible thing which is stick with XP until Microsoft make the necessary changes, unless of course you really have to have DX10. In that case its dual boot or VMWare. IMHO

  115. blob
    December 4th, 2007 | 18:08

    Windows 3.1 FTW

  116. HigherIQ
    December 4th, 2007 | 18:15

    It’s funny to see some l337 wannabes here posting how Vista runs well if you have uber computer with 4gigs of ram, etc.
    Ya right. Go BS somewhere else.

    Most of us have tested Vista (and yes, we also have uber computers)… believe me, XP runs better. Sure Vista runs fine for basics (so do Macs lol), but obviously there wouldn’t be so many articles and people giving bad reviews about Vista if it was working as well as you wannabes claim.
    Just the other day, on the article about SP3 for XP, they talked about how much faster it was than Vista. Nobody is saying Vista doesn’t run… it’s just not as fast or smooth as XP. It will probably get there eventually, as was the case with XP, but in another 2 years the next OS flavor will be available, and am thinking it will be better to wait for than running Vista now.

  117. nin
    December 4th, 2007 | 18:33

    rotfl
    even ms should know how vista sucks

  118. chippxero
    December 4th, 2007 | 18:34

    Gotta say i agree with a lot of people on here.

    It’s pirated less as people don’t want it. The majority that did get it warned off a lot of the other people.

  119. dnL
    December 4th, 2007 | 18:37

    @ 123. HigherIQ
    If you mean I’m a 1337 wannabe (there isn’t many others defending vista). Then you should go read my earlier posts, so you don’t make a fool out yourself anymore.
    1. No, I don’t have an uber computer. I’ve only got a single core amd64 and 2gb of ram.
    2. Did I ever say vista runs better than xp?
    3. So vista runs fine for basics and benchmarks show that it runs fine for games, so where’s the problem?
    4. Vista might not be as fast as xp, but it’s smoother IMO.

    So I don’t know what you’re high on but please,
    do continue, I’m pretty amused at the moment.

  120. nexus
    December 4th, 2007 | 18:40

    ” Microsoft: piracy rate of Vista is half the XP”…

    because XP is less than half as crappy as Vista :P

  121. blob
    December 4th, 2007 | 18:44

    I agree that u ppl have no idea

  122. Fnx
    December 4th, 2007 | 18:52

    I’ve been using Vista for a little less than a year now, and I’m starting to regret it. The OS itself is pretty smooth and games work about as fast as in XP (although I had to install extra GB of RAM).

    Program and driver issues make me wanna go back to XP again, especially after reading about the SP3 speed boost :)

    My advice: Skip Vista and wait for Vienna, maybe MS will learn from it mistakes!

  123. busdriver
    December 4th, 2007 | 19:00

    uh-oh I have the oem pirated version

  124. Roasted Cashew
    December 4th, 2007 | 19:07

    Another reason I see is the magnitude of people out there with older computers and absolutely no wish to upgrade hardware or buy new computers to have a smooth running vista system. The enthusiasts market [gotta get the latest and greatest] share is relatively small compared to mundane mom and dad computer users.

  125. Fractal
    December 4th, 2007 | 19:25

    96: “Youz b da moron! sucha nub! nowz stfu… ya knaw wha i b sayns ya mee?”

    No. Git.

  126. dnL
    December 4th, 2007 | 19:31

    @ 129. Fnx
    I’ve been using 64-bit vista ultimate for half a year now and I haven’t had any driver issues but there’s been a couple program that I would’ve wanted to have but that didn’t support 64-bit vista, but there were other alternatives. I haven’t read about the SP3 that much, I guess I gotta do so.. :p

    @ 131. Roasted Cashew
    That’s a good point and I can’t say much about it, just that vista doesn’t require as much resources as people here think and that if your computer can run vista, it’s not a bad alternative. My computer is almost two years old and I can easily run vista and the newest games.

  127. [NZ]SoniKalien
    December 4th, 2007 | 19:40

    There are 2 types of people posting here: those who have tested Vista on their pc (properly) and those who are just saying Vista suxz because they think it makes them look cool.

    Well I love Vista (32bit). I’m running it just fine on my ‘underpowered’ pc – 3500xp (64bit), 1gb ram, 8600gt and a couple of sata drives. No dual core or fancy ram or anything. No problems with drivers, in fact it even picked up more than XP ever did.

    The real reason that M$ thinks that the pirate rate of Vista is half, is because it’s so much easier to crack than XP and they aren’t detecting (through WGA) the piracy.

    M$ and all you Vista haters – you’re misguided fools. Go sit in the corner.

  128. Nukem
    December 4th, 2007 | 19:41

    Ok everyone stop blogging for a second and read something:

    http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/01/29/xp-vs-vista/

    For those of you who can’t read, here’s a summary:

    1. 32bit Vista vs 64bit Vista = no great diff.
    2. Some compat. probs using Vista – no surprise there.
    3. No support for OpenGL in Vista = no good for gfx professionals.
    4. Some games e.g. UT2004 slower on Vista than XP.
    5. CPU-intensive apps e.g. vid encoding = ~20% slower on Vista.
    6. Aero doesn’t drain laptops batteries any faster.
    7. Vista runs considerably more services = more resource hungry. (Well it’s an upgrade, what do u expect?)

    “Vista is the better Windows, because it behaves better, because it looks better and because it feels better. But it cannot perform better than Windows XP.”

    “If you really need your PC to finish huge encoding, transcoding or rendering workloads within a defined time frame … stay with XP.”

    “Vista [uses technologies such as] SuperFetch and ReadyDrive … to make Vista feel faster and smoother [than XP}.”

    *** “No new Windows release has been able to offer more application performance than its predecessor.” ***

    So… Vista uses more resources to make itself look better and FEEL smoother (faster in multitasking) than XP. It handles app crashes better than XP.

    That’s it.

  129. Nukem
    December 4th, 2007 | 19:51

    By the way, it’s the same story with DX10.

    DX10 does not improve graphics in any great way. DX9 can do 99% of what DX10 can do. DX10 is an API upgrade, meaning the API code is more streamlined and better to program in. It has a few extra shaders.

    People have already gotten Crysis on XP to look almost exactly like Crysis on Vista, and it runs faster as well. The differences are extremely minor.

    http://www.crysis-online.com/forum/index.php?topic=11837.0

  130. FlyingElvi
    December 4th, 2007 | 20:45

    Vista is the most stable OS pre-SP1 that microsoft ever released.

    I love it for the Enhanced Video Renderer (EVR), the indexed Search and obviously DirectX 10. None of these are available on XP

    I can’t believe all the comments “Vista sucks” on a site where people download movies to watch but don’t have Vista to use the EVR !!!

  131. ENT
    December 4th, 2007 | 20:55

    @113, those are webstats they cant tell the difference between a legit and pirated version, all are included and people wont have to move to vista if they dont want to since game companies wont want to exclude the largest section of the pc market making DX10 a non issue

  132. z
    December 4th, 2007 | 21:03

    Harder to fake my ass, I had it cracked and updating 1 minute after I installed it.

    http://www.mininova.org/tor/858186 would make a nice accompanying post to this.

  133. mupet0000
    December 4th, 2007 | 21:21

    Trust me people, vista is not a sucky OS. Its not worth how much they charge though as it isnt much different from XP. Just looks a bit different.

  134. mr p
    December 4th, 2007 | 21:26

    lol @58 you said it best

    you win best comment award

    here take your free prize

  135. checksum
    December 4th, 2007 | 21:32

    My 2 generations old laptop(ubuntu) is outperforming my latest laptop(vista), in all the simple stuff like starting up launching apps etc.

    M$ really need to lift their game – the best thing they could do is what apple did – build a linux distro & slap their gui on top.

  136. Anonymous
    December 4th, 2007 | 21:52

    Lemons to lemonade (and a slap in the face for their consumer to boot).

    I think I’d draw and quarter my PR staff before they screw up and lose what was learned from South Park/Guitar Hero.

  137. dnL
    December 4th, 2007 | 21:53

    @ 139. ENT
    Sorry, my mistake, didn’t look at it, just thought it was “market share” lawl. And about the dx10, it makes a little difference so the hardcore gamers who can afford new computers will have computers that can easily run vista, so why not run it? Well anyways I’m getting kinda tired of this
    topic so cya.

  138. chris
    December 4th, 2007 | 22:29

    “The decline in piracy rates is largely due to the fact Vista is much tougher to fake than XP”

    Muahahaha that’s gotta be the joke of the year

    I could get Windows Vista for FREE (legally) and said no, thanks (admittedly, after trying a properly cracked version…)

    Vista = the ubercrap

  139. Kurt
    December 4th, 2007 | 23:01

    Okay, so I’ll admit, Vista is a pain in the ass and slow as hell, but I’ve gone from 1-2 virueses a week in XP to none since I’ve installed Vista about 8 months ago. Very, VERY secure. Always have McAfee running “just in case” but I don’t even think it works xD. Thanks Comcast. But that’s funny Microsoft thinks that once people get a pirated vista they’ll never go looking for ways to bypass activation and validation xD They’ll never learn

  140. thug_angel
    December 4th, 2007 | 23:47

    even if M$ provided vista as a freeware the user rate won’t go up..get over is M$ xp was the last and your best achievement..

  141. music
    December 4th, 2007 | 23:55

    pirates smart enough to not be bothered with vista, imho

  142. quack
    December 4th, 2007 | 23:55

    Heh… I don’t understand this new brand of MS Logic, why create a drastically flawed OS when you’re about to finally get round to having your last one work properly?

  143. Rick
    December 5th, 2007 | 00:19

    HAHAHAHA, VISTA SUCKS ASS THAT’s WHY IT’S LOWER….lol I BET MICROSOFT JUST CAME TO THAT ASSUMPTION JUST CAUSE.

  144. mivanx77
    December 5th, 2007 | 00:33

    We all know VISTA SUCKS… we should all go to Bill Gates house, punch him in the face, bring him to the offices and tell him to make an OS that is faster, lighter, and stable. Not fat, slow, and expensive.

  145. silentkills
    December 5th, 2007 | 00:53

    lawl…. i rckn its more like more pplz like using xp more than vista so no one cbf putting so much time and effort into it

  146. rlslog
    December 5th, 2007 | 01:54

    i have vista installed on a 256 mb /celeron 900 ghz works fine….

  147. nebula
    December 5th, 2007 | 01:59

    The piracy rate is low because nobody wants to install vista. They haven’t taken that into account.

  148. Madcotto™
    December 5th, 2007 | 02:00

    ok just wanted ad mine to the masses already, there a reason m$ and that is vista sucks. only good stuff gets copied to be copied is a great bit of Respect that vista wont have for a long time. come to me when it works

  149. []D[][]\/[][]D
    December 5th, 2007 | 02:21

    XP FTW i winz the intrawebz… ya kna wha i me sayinz yaaa mee!

  150. Asbestos
    December 5th, 2007 | 02:38

    The pirate community has a low priority on vista since it sucks so bad.

    If it maintained top on the list it would get cracked faster than saying youre gonna get sued for pirating.

  151. VistaDumBoy
    December 5th, 2007 | 02:47

    I think the WGA approved BIOS crack makes their sales look better.

  152. dubs
    December 5th, 2007 | 03:00

    I recieved a free full version of ultimate for participating in the vista beta and just recently went back to windows xp. i get almost double thr fps in my games under xp. there are some really cool features of vista but unfortunately ms decided to conentrate on going after the oooh ahh mac types that a great os was ruined out of the gate with all the bloat. heres to hoping for more service packs (i was running sp1 beta for vista)

    until then ill stick with xp. we wont even look at vista as a viable os till 2010 at the earliest. sux because we are a technology company that typicall lives on the cutting edge of technology. :/

  153. OFF
    December 5th, 2007 | 04:52

    All those claiming to be running Vista smoothly are just f****** r***** showing up their powerful machines… You suck. Go get a life.

  154. troof
    December 5th, 2007 | 05:26

    Hey can I post tech news too? I can read Engadget and re-post their stuff just like you!

  155. Anonymous
    December 5th, 2007 | 05:38

    bah… usenet is broken (not the binaries). Probably be switching to cheap cable and force a change in behavior.

    Got a pile of 50′s 60′s sci-fi to plow through anyways.

  156. philly
    December 5th, 2007 | 05:55

    I agree with everyone who says VISTA SUCKS!!

    I would rather stick with XP for another year (at least) until they fix that garbage they call an upgrade.

    WOW

  157. Fractal
    December 5th, 2007 | 06:47

    158: “XP FTW i winz the intrawebz… ya kna wha i me sayinz yaaa mee!”

    No. Git.

  158. alexs
    December 5th, 2007 | 09:14

    @166
    The reason why gamers choose XP instad of vista is due the over-rated memory usage that vista takes. XP takes 300-500MB max, while vista takes 800-1000MB memory. and a program that doesn’t work on vista, Mousefix (to decrease the mouse accuracy).

    Oh and by the way , vista is easier to crack than XP :) , we do not want vista this year or next year. Meybe in the next 3-5 years i’ll consider to change to vista. But not now, you dont need it anyways, why dont you need it? well if your an over-rated person that likes “better” security or better office programs, well probly. Vista will never be an Gaming OS!

    My point of view , you dont need Vista yet, you can still use XP for 3-5 more years!
    XP is far far better gaming OS

  159. Kusiami
    December 5th, 2007 | 11:32

    Its because Vista is half the OS XP is! hahaha

  160. asd
    December 5th, 2007 | 13:19

    @ 168. alexs

    Bad guessing on the numbers there.
    I’ve never had xp installation that used 300-500mb idle
    and no vista installation that has used even close too 800mb.
    I guess you simply don’t know what you’re talking about :p

    And in 3-5 years their new OS will be out…

  161. Nukem
    December 5th, 2007 | 14:17

    No seriously, stop blogging. I’ve already sorted it all out. No more needs to be said. Really.

  162. Big-Byte
    December 5th, 2007 | 15:40

    so it’s there a way to use DX10 under XP ???

  163. asd
    December 5th, 2007 | 17:21

    @ 171. Nukem

    I totally agree with you but I just had to >_<
    Since that guy was totally out D:

  164. majorG
    December 5th, 2007 | 18:45

    LiNuX rules!

  165. mrcoolsoul
    December 5th, 2007 | 19:07

    154…..WTF!!!! Hope that’s a joke. lol

    172. Not yet….but there is a project on the go to try and make DX10 work under XP. Wouldn’t hold my breath tho. In my opinion, as others have said on this post, programmers are just starting to squeeze the best out of DX9 at the noe. It’ll be a while before programmers learn how to get the potential out of DX10….and by that time MS will have rolled out their next OS which you’ll have to upgrade to for DX11.

  166. Big-Byte
    December 5th, 2007 | 20:30

    thank’s mrcoolsoul !!!

  167. alex
    December 5th, 2007 | 21:50

    Bad guessing?, i think YOUR wrong my xp is using 450mb IDLE and my vista on laptop takes 700-800 MB IDLE, By this i mean FRESH install , im not talking about your n00b toolbars etc installed. that will include over 500MB..

  168. embøl
    December 5th, 2007 | 22:02

    # 120

    didn’t say i couldn’t disable the uac, did i?

    I just stated that when the OS begin blocking it’s own services, programs, processes, whatever..

    - then rethink your great choice of getting Vista.

  169. Anonymous
    December 6th, 2007 | 01:15

    Crazy without a life line. Anyone else pulling up a chair, got marshmellows and weiners for all.

  170. KHAL3D
    December 9th, 2007 | 22:17

    loooooooooool pathetic!! hey MS, mark my words, when you force the world to use Vista by makin the only-for-vista users applications as u did with XP when we were using the previous OS’s, Vista will be cracked to da bone and u aint gonna be able to nothin about it! and you gonna find your lil statement upove embarrassing!

    till then, let’s stick to XP, and let’s give them sometime to fix the bugs in their stupid Vista! Peace

  171. Fvh597
    December 11th, 2007 | 19:21

    Hey guys, I am stuck with windows vista, does anyone know which is the best method to crack this program?

  172. somedude
    December 14th, 2007 | 13:29

    Obviously it’s because Vista sucks. Their argument doesn’t make sense. Once it’s cracked, it’s cracked – the people pirating it don’t have to do anything extra to get Vista as opposed to XP… well.. maybe they have to remove their brain.

  173. basIQ
    October 30th, 2008 | 22:50

    People who had it preinstalled, downgraded…why would you pirate it, if even the people who paid for it don’t want it….

    WILL IT BLEND??

Leave a reply

 

rent this ad space
Sitemap