MS potentially could do anything to "DO" XP, stop
MS could potentially at her discretion do anything to the DO version of the corp. XP, just looking at recently what it does when you hit that start menu item called 'windows update' 1. It invoke the program called wupdmgr.
MS could potentially at her discretion do anything to the "DO" version of the corp. XP, just looking at recently what it does when you hit that start menu item called 'windows update'
1. It invoke the program called wupdmgr.exe, which pull a windowsupdate.asp webpage from MS V4 server(at least for my testing version of XP)
2. The .ASP page then download a cabinet file called IUctl.cab onto your machine.
3. wupdmgr.exe checks the updated verions of two dll files called IUctl.dll and IUengine.dll against the versions in your machine.
4. wupdmgr.exe will update any version older than build 1106 of these two files to build 1106.
5. wupdmgr.exe with these two dll files would then pull another webpage called GETMANIFEST.ASP which checks many things, including serial key/productID combinations on the target machine.
6. wupdmgr.exe refuse to update windows it pirated version(such as DO) found(at present), and close all dll and wupdmgr.exe
The funny part is when such procedures are carried out pre 9/9/2002 which is the release date of the XPSP1, MS still slips in the SP1 version(1106) of the files IUctl.dll and IUengine.dll
What MS could do is at anytime if she wish, slips in bew versions of IUctl.cab(hence IUctl.dll and IUengine.dll) onto a machine which requesting the windows updates. So, the lesson to be learn here is stop using the DO version totally, or never hit 'windows update' against if you insist on keep testing the DO. Cos, MS might have already investigated and data pooled the pirate keys in PreSP1 era, only to be use in a later stage at her discretion, such as diabling the XP installation or otherwise.
Be aware.
1. It invoke the program called wupdmgr.exe, which pull a windowsupdate.asp webpage from MS V4 server(at least for my testing version of XP)
2. The .ASP page then download a cabinet file called IUctl.cab onto your machine.
3. wupdmgr.exe checks the updated verions of two dll files called IUctl.dll and IUengine.dll against the versions in your machine.
4. wupdmgr.exe will update any version older than build 1106 of these two files to build 1106.
5. wupdmgr.exe with these two dll files would then pull another webpage called GETMANIFEST.ASP which checks many things, including serial key/productID combinations on the target machine.
6. wupdmgr.exe refuse to update windows it pirated version(such as DO) found(at present), and close all dll and wupdmgr.exe
The funny part is when such procedures are carried out pre 9/9/2002 which is the release date of the XPSP1, MS still slips in the SP1 version(1106) of the files IUctl.dll and IUengine.dll
What MS could do is at anytime if she wish, slips in bew versions of IUctl.cab(hence IUctl.dll and IUengine.dll) onto a machine which requesting the windows updates. So, the lesson to be learn here is stop using the DO version totally, or never hit 'windows update' against if you insist on keep testing the DO. Cos, MS might have already investigated and data pooled the pirate keys in PreSP1 era, only to be use in a later stage at her discretion, such as diabling the XP installation or otherwise.
Be aware.
Participate on our website and join the conversation
This topic is archived. New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast.
Responses to this topic
Yes, I agree with you completely. News as of late seems that MS is (Understandably) taking a big intest in protecting it's assets.
Any company can take control of any system once you install their respective software packages. Unless you have direct access to their source code for that particular application and have the knowledge to understand it, you will never *really* know what it does. If you are that paranoid, learn C/C++ and Java and go to Linux...
That statement doesn't just apply to the internet...
You basically have to never even be born to keep all your personal information private. I accept that and thats why I don't give a rats arse about privacy because I know I have none. Thats the reality, you can keep deluding yourself that you can keep your info private but in the end, it's all for nought.
Oh and about the "DO," since just about everyone using it now has a different product key MS are going to find it harder (although I'm not going to say impossible) to crack down on rogue keys. Of course, if MS examined the reasons why people are pirating their stuff and did something about it (much like the RIAA, but thats another debate entirely) WPA and other such forms of draconian licence enforcement (which, in the end, only hurts legitimate users. As they say, locks were made to stop honest people) wouldn't be necessary.
You basically have to never even be born to keep all your personal information private. I accept that and thats why I don't give a rats arse about privacy because I know I have none. Thats the reality, you can keep deluding yourself that you can keep your info private but in the end, it's all for nought.
Oh and about the "DO," since just about everyone using it now has a different product key MS are going to find it harder (although I'm not going to say impossible) to crack down on rogue keys. Of course, if MS examined the reasons why people are pirating their stuff and did something about it (much like the RIAA, but thats another debate entirely) WPA and other such forms of draconian licence enforcement (which, in the end, only hurts legitimate users. As they say, locks were made to stop honest people) wouldn't be necessary.
i dont care if they see my code, even if it is bluelisted, because im a nobody.
i use cracked software.. if i like it i buy it.
if i dont i delete it.
someone should start a poll to see how many peeps are using illegal copies of xp. 8)
(in this case though i really think ms is charging too much for an os but i like it and bought one anyway)
i use cracked software.. if i like it i buy it.
if i dont i delete it.
someone should start a poll to see how many peeps are using illegal copies of xp. 8)
(in this case though i really think ms is charging too much for an os but i like it and bought one anyway)
Thing is, it doesn't bug me. I honestly don't care. I know that no matter how hard I try I'm never going to be completely "invisible" so I don't bother.
As for MS protecting their property, I really don't have a problem with that. What I do have a problem with is the fact that, like the RIAA, they're just applying a "scorched earth" policy to casual piracy without investigating the real reasons why its happening and doing something reasonable about it.
I'm willing to bet that one reason why the casual piracy rate is so high is because a lot of people simply can't afford the insane prices MS charge for their stuff (c'mon how is USD$329 a reasonable price especially when you're on a low income?). If MS were to reduce their prices I'd bet that they'd see a reasonable proportion of their piracy problem go away. Of course, you're never going to get rid of that segment that aren't going to pay for software period but even MS themselves have admitted that much.
As for MS protecting their property, I really don't have a problem with that. What I do have a problem with is the fact that, like the RIAA, they're just applying a "scorched earth" policy to casual piracy without investigating the real reasons why its happening and doing something reasonable about it.
I'm willing to bet that one reason why the casual piracy rate is so high is because a lot of people simply can't afford the insane prices MS charge for their stuff (c'mon how is USD$329 a reasonable price especially when you're on a low income?). If MS were to reduce their prices I'd bet that they'd see a reasonable proportion of their piracy problem go away. Of course, you're never going to get rid of that segment that aren't going to pay for software period but even MS themselves have admitted that much.
The old "People only pirate software because it costs too much" arguement doesn't hold any water. Those that make copies of their friend's Office XP CD also copy their friend's $9 games. If a program costs more than $20, people justify stealing it because it is too expensive. If it costs less than $20, they justify theft by saying the company won't miss the couple of bucks they would have gotten. Theft is theft. It doesn't matter how you try to justify it.
Does Microsoft charge too much money for some of their products? Yes. The Standard versions should be much less expensive, at the very least. Does that give someone the right to steal it? No. Just use another program. That is how you'll force Microsoft to lower prices. By creating a competitive market. Buy the programs from "the other guy." If you just pirate Microsoft's software, the other companies still won't be able to compete, and software prices will remain high. You've got to give a company incentive to adjust prices. Increasing their market share, even through theft, isn't going to do it.
Does Microsoft charge too much money for some of their products? Yes. The Standard versions should be much less expensive, at the very least. Does that give someone the right to steal it? No. Just use another program. That is how you'll force Microsoft to lower prices. By creating a competitive market. Buy the programs from "the other guy." If you just pirate Microsoft's software, the other companies still won't be able to compete, and software prices will remain high. You've got to give a company incentive to adjust prices. Increasing their market share, even through theft, isn't going to do it.
Hey all
well, my pci.sys problem did not work even after trying a few things a friend said, so now i am trying to repair using the XP CD or even a fresh install.
SO! -
i put in my Xp cd - boot up form CD, Xp asks if i want to install any 3rd part scsi or raid driver shit F6, then ask to hit F2 to do that other repair option.
if i leave it, or hit F2, it then says:
Code:
This iS RIGHT at the start of the setup.
Now, i formated my D drive, there is NOTHING on it now, as well as my c drive (i put it in another comp to back up all my crap)
So my C and D drive are clean, nothing on em.
i burned a copy of XP and tried each disk, as well as well as a warez copy, same error.
the HD works fine in another computer - as i am now backing up 30g of stuff so i can delete the paritions and start from scratch (is an 80g drive) - hope that will work
Just curious if anyone had an idea's why it may be saying this??
Bad mobo? is what i am thinking........
This is my VAIO system below
well, my pci.sys problem did not work even after trying a few things a friend said, so now i am trying to repair using the XP CD or even a fresh install.
SO! -
i put in my Xp cd - boot up form CD, Xp asks if i want to install any 3rd part scsi or raid driver shit F6, then ask to hit F2 to do that other repair option.
if i leave it, or hit F2, it then says:
Code:
An unepected error occured (536854784) atd:\xpclient\base\boot\setup\arcdisp.c.
This iS RIGHT at the start of the setup.
Now, i formated my D drive, there is NOTHING on it now, as well as my c drive (i put it in another comp to back up all my crap)
So my C and D drive are clean, nothing on em.
i burned a copy of XP and tried each disk, as well as well as a warez copy, same error.
the HD works fine in another computer - as i am now backing up 30g of stuff so i can delete the paritions and start from scratch (is an 80g drive) - hope that will work
Just curious if anyone had an idea's why it may be saying this??
Bad mobo? is what i am thinking........
This is my VAIO system below
