Skip to main content
gamedev.net
🔒 Locked

Sneaky Microsoft?

Started by Senses777 Sep 4, 2003 at 7:17 PM 24 replies 1k views
Original Post
Senses777
Senses777
Visual Studio .net 2003 is NOT protected. There is almost no protection on the DVD and there is NO cd key. This was obviously intentional, but why? I think they want to basically give this out for free to home users right now, since they wont really be losing much of a market as home users generally wouldn''t have paid the big bucks to get it anyways. This gets all the youngins using it, then, later on, when everyone starts going to work, etc, they will obviously want to use the microsoft compilers and IDE''s since they are used to them. But at work, you buy them, obviously. This is just like how SoftICE is barely protected, except I think in that case, they are waiting till they can release a REALLY good protection scheme, then all the crackers will be using softICE, and many will buy. I can''t take credit for that theory or even explain it properly however, since I got it from an article at Fravia''s site, if you know what that is.
"I want to make a simple MMORPG first" - Fenryl
DukeAtreides076
DukeAtreides076
quote:
Original post by Senses777
Visual Studio .net 2003 is NOT protected. There is almost no protection on the DVD and there is NO cd key.


Um...Yeah there is. There is a cd key for both 2002 and 2003. The 30 day trial version DVD is the one with no protection...
Senses777
Senses777
Then perhaps my sources are incorrect. I will test this and report back.
"I want to make a simple MMORPG first" - Fenryl
Senses777
Senses777
I just double checked and there is indeed no required CD-Key for Visual Studio .Net 2003.

Raduprv, your theory is my second one, however, I favor the one I stated because indeed, even puting a little protection on the software stops many people from getting it. Perhaps not the majority, but especially in microsoft''s case, it will prevent quite a few people from getting an illegal copy.
"I want to make a simple MMORPG first" - Fenryl
RenderTarget
RenderTarget
The smartest thing MS could do (and ever did) is to get people developing for Windows. If that means losing a bit of profit from Visual, it''s still worth it by far. They practically throw this stuff at people at trade shows and cons.

I like pie.
[sub]My spoon is too big.[/sub]
Senses777
Senses777
quote:
Original post by RenderTarget
The smartest thing MS could do (and ever did) is to get people developing for Windows. If that means losing a bit of profit from Visual, it''s still worth it by far. They practically throw this stuff at people at trade shows and cons.


That is another good reason, related to the first, good point!
"I want to make a simple MMORPG first" - Fenryl
Senses777
Senses777
quote:
Original post by Raduprv
Yes, that''s right, I think that a compiler should come for free, with every OS.
At least a command line compiler, and pay for the IDE, if you want.

Height Map Editor | Eternal Lands | Fast User Directory


Thats why windows comes with "Debug", haha, thats technically an asm compiler isn''t it? Or am I mususing the term "compiler"?

Really though, I totally agree with you. That IS what computers are for, after all. Every OS should come with at least a decent compiler.
"I want to make a simple MMORPG first" - Fenryl
Michalson
Michalson
quote:
Original post by Senses777
Thats why windows comes with "Debug", haha, thats technically an asm compiler isn''t it? Or am I mususing the term "compiler"?

Really though, I totally agree with you. That IS what computers are for, after all. Every OS should come with at least a decent compiler.


However the *vast* majority (almost all) of users are not programmers. Sticking a compiler in there is just asking for them to get into trouble or flood technical support with "How do I program?" calls. Perhaps including it on the CD, a little hidden away.

quote:
Original post by RenderTarget
The smartest thing MS could do (and ever did) is to get people developing for Windows. If that means losing a bit of profit from Visual, it''s still worth it by far. They practically throw this stuff at people at trade shows and cons.


This is a big reason for Microsofts success. They''ve always recognized that an OSis worthless unless it has software people want to use. IBM (which had OS/2 2.0 and OS/2 Warp 3.0 [both 32bit operating systems] released long before Windows 95) was giving developers the "privilege" of developing for the bargain price of $300 (assuming you got the SDK at a tradeshow [$20 discount], at the same time MS was giving SDK CDs to anyone who looked geeky), and Apple has had a long history of letting developers slowly inch toward it, feeling out the Mac market, then suddenly screwing them over (sueing them for some silly reason, locking them out with OS changes or with legal threats, etc).
DukeAtreides076
DukeAtreides076
You CAN get a free M$ compiler. Download the .NET framework sdk. It comes with C++(both managed and unmanged), VB.NET, C# compilers...
Tron3k
Tron3k
quote:
Original post by Michalson
However the *vast* majority (almost all) of users are not programmers. Sticking a compiler in there is just asking for them to get into trouble or flood technical support with "How do I program?" calls. Perhaps including it on the CD, a little hidden away.
This is true. However, how did many of us get started in programming? Perhaps it was with that little program called QBASIC that came with MS-DOS?
“[The clergy] believe that any portion of power confided to me, will be exerted in opposition to their schemes. And they believe rightly: for I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man” - Thomas Jefferson
Senses777
Senses777
Not me, I started with an illegal copy of Microsoft Visual C++ 6.

*grin*
"I want to make a simple MMORPG first" - Fenryl
Feral
Feral
basic in rom (C=64).. but yea I tend to think an os should come wiht a compiler too.

As for VS 2003 not protected so what? it''s not free so it''s useless.

...
Just because I can rip if off does not mean I should.
klems
klems
quote:
Original post by FeralofFireTop
basic in rom (C=64).. but yea I tend to think an os should come wiht a compiler too.

As for VS 2003 not protected so what? it''s not free so it''s useless.

...
Just because I can rip if off does not mean I should.
Yes it does, you know you want to!

"Shinji woke up in the bath and screamed loudly.
He immediately checked for the presence of his manhood and
sighed in relief when he confirmed it was still attached."
Conner McCloud
Conner McCloud
I have to agree with Michalson. Including a compiler standard goes against the very idea behind home versions of Windows. Even with the pro versions, most people wouldn''t need it. So make it available, but don''t bother bundling it in. Not to mention that doing actual Windows coding requires a sizable SDK, and Windows is pretty sizeable already.

As for protecting VS, why bother? The people that can make the most use of it will pay for it. The ones that can''t don''t really matter. So what if little Joey pirates VS to program a game that nobody will ever play anyhow?

CM
Conner McCloud
Conner McCloud
BTW...somebody posted a silly article a while back about how Microsoft allowed people to pirate Windows so they could build a user base. I don''t remember much, but it was the same thing you''re talking about now.
Senses777
Senses777
I wasn''t talking about the moral implications, I was telling you my theory.
"I want to make a simple MMORPG first" - Fenryl
flangazor
flangazor
Rename a file with the extension vbs and it is a visual basic script.

You can program on windows without a compiler.

Topic Locked

This topic has been locked by a moderator. New replies are not allowed.

Sign in to reply to this topic.