China Not Happy About MS anti-piracy tactics

[Hussein19891]

The most problem I see with people now a days is that they abandon morals and standards for instant gratification.

Obviously if they are pirating then it seems their morals are not holding them back. By the way not everyone holds the same morals and standards.

For some people pirating gives the same vibe as robbing a bank. While for others its like opening another can of pop.

If they feel that Pirating is justified then they are NOT abandoning their morales and standards.

 

[KSoD]

See the thign we are all forgetting is that China is making a profit from it. They are building PC's and then selling pirated copies of Windows on those PC's. So they are making a profit. None of them will ever say they do this. But i can almost guarantee that some of the people in China have bought a PC and didnt realize that it was pirated till they tried to update.

Not to mention they sell them from teh stores as pirated copies on CD's as well. So China has no right to gripe as they are not jsut pirating they are stealing. They are making copies and selling those copies.

They do the same thing with just about everything. DVD's are also pirated and sold. I know this first hand. I bought somethign from a site recently. Didnt know it was a chinese site till it read the shipping manafest. Sure enough got the package and copied DVD's. Sold for a profit.

While i do agree with somethings said by people here. Piracy hurts. Yeah people are pirating cause the software costs to much. But then the companies have to make back that money lost by piracy somehow to be able to pay the salaries of the people working for them.

Yeah Microsoft is one of the richest companies in the world. I wont argue that. But when you have over 60K people working there with salaries at about 100K each you wont be in business for long if you dont make back some of the money you lost.

Granted not everyone there makes that kinda money. I only gave that number cause my bro in law went to work for them and started at $110K with signing bonus money and more. Plus Mirosoft pays in full the health insurance. That is a big chuck of change there.

So whiel the prices are high. Piracy doesnt help bring it down. At least from looking at it from a certain point of view. IT can be argued that they can make more by having a lower price and selling more copies legally. But we wont know if they would make enough to cover costs. As Oreo said it cost $6 billion to make Vista. If they sold every copy at $100 would they make their money back? We will never know.

 

[Apokalipse]

See the thign we are all forgetting is that China is making a profit from it.

Well, making a profit from piracy is not the same as the act of pirating software.

So whiel the prices are high. Piracy doesnt help bring it down.

If the prices were lower in the first place, more people will be buying them instead of pirating them.
And therefore, less piracy.

It seems that it's some sort of magical concept that companies just don't seem to realise works.

 

[KSoD]

I understand. But as i pointed out. There is no guarantee that they would make the money back that they need from the cost of development.

Yes lower prices would mean less piracy. But that doesnt constitute them making any kind of profit from it now as well.

 

[Apokalipse]

I understand. But as i pointed out. There is no guarantee that they would make the money back that they need from the cost of development.

Yes lower prices would mean less piracy. But that doesnt constitute them making any kind of profit from it now as well.

Then again, if prices are halved, they might get triple the sales.

But suppose it turned out exactly even, what do they have to complain about?

But the point is, companies are still often selling products for far more than they're actually worth. Even if they did lose a bit of profit from reducing their prices to a reasonable level, they're stil more than likely to have a successful business.
Only, with consumers not getting screwed.

It reminds me of the South Park episode, where the celebrities are no-longer able to have their dreams, like buying their own private Island, because pirates aren't paying them.
The businesses are so often complaining that they are getting $X instead of $Y because of pirates. But then, $X is still far more money than most people would know what to do with anyway.

 

[KSoD]

I am not trying to say that they wouldnt make their profit or anything like that. I am just saying that there is no way to prove without a doubt that if the prices were lowered that there would be more sold.

I mean some people pirate software that is only like $20 cause they cant pay for it. So even if Windows was $100 they would still pirate it. Yes they may sell 4 other copies that might not have been pirated and made enough to cover that one. But there is no difinative way to say that if prices were lowered that Piracy would slow down so much that they would sell more copies.

I have said it multiple times. I do agree that Windows shouldnt be so expensive. Same for Office. I do think that they should be $100 for Ultimate Retail and $75 for Office Ultimate Retail. I think that enough would be sold for them to make the money back.

But there is no way to prove it.

 

[Apokalipse]

I am not trying to say that they wouldnt make their profit or anything like that. I am just saying that there is no way to prove without a doubt that if the prices were lowered that there would be more sold.

I mean some people pirate software that is only like $20 cause they cant pay for it. So even if Windows was $100 they would still pirate it. Yes they may sell 4 other copies that might not have been pirated and made enough to cover that one. But there is no difinative way to say that if prices were lowered that Piracy would slow down so much that they would sell more copies.

I have said it multiple times. I do agree that Windows shouldnt be so expensive. Same for Office. I do think that they should be $100 for Ultimate Retail and $75 for Office Ultimate Retail. I think that enough would be sold for them to make the money back.

But there is no way to prove it.

They can prove it by lowering the prices of something and seeing how sales are affected.
I mean, they're no-longer going to support XP after a while. If they lowered the price of XP, it could test how sales will be affected.

 

[zedman3d]

Ah, the EULA. A contract which we can technically disagree to, but which companies try and force us to agree to anyway.

I am intrigued by this post. Please explain it further?
Thanks.

 

[Trotter]

Ah, the EULA. A contract which we can technically disagree to, but which companies try and force us to agree to anyway.

I am intrigued by this post. Please explain it further?
Thanks.

When presented with the EULA during installation, you can either agree to it and ALL of its terms by accepting it and installing the software, or you can disagree with it and say no and not install the software. There is not "wiggle room" or debating the matter... you either accept it or you can't install.

 

[Apokalipse]

I am pretty sure that you can legally not agree to it.
But usually, they package installers so that the only options are to agree, or not install.
Which can sometimes be modified, to remove the EULA.

the EULA's usually exist because they want users to agree to conditions that aren't in the law.