Microsoft Yanks Windows 7 Download Tool
Microsoft has pulled the Windows 7 download tool from its online store do to GPL allegations.
Consumers wanting to upgrade to Windows 7--and don't have an optical drive--may be out of luck for a while. According to CNET, Microsoft has pulled the Windows USB/DVD Tool from its online Microsoft Store due to allegations that it makes improper use of open-source code. Microsoft said that it is now conducting an investigation on the matter.
"Microsoft is looking into this issue and is taking down the (Windows 7 updating) tool from the Microsoft Store site until its review is complete," the company said in a statement. "We apologize to our customers for any inconvenience."
The allegations appeared last week by Rafael Rivera on his Within Windows blog. He said that Microsoft's tool uses code from the Codeplex-hosted Image Master project which is licensed under the General Public License v2. Rivera says that Microsoft violates the GPL because it did not offer or provide source code for the modifications. Microsoft also "glued in some of their own licensing terms," he said.
Rivera initially reported that he grew suspicious of the tool while poking through its code. "I had a weird feeling there was just wayyyyyyyyy too much code in there for such a simple tool," he said. Currently there's no word on when the Windows 7 tool will return to the online store.
Follow me on Twitter here: http://www.twitter.com/exfileme
- Mystery Radeon HD 'X2' Card Spy Shots
- Apple Fixes Bug That Deletes User Accounts
- Xbox 360 802.11n Wireless Adapter Hits UK
- Nvidia CEO: Apple Uses the Best Technology
- Deals: $500 Off HP Laptops, MW2 Deals, Etc.
- ATI Radeon 5870 Card Has 2 GB, 6 Ports
- Report: Intel Announcing New Atoms in Dec.
- Blizzard's StarCraft II Beta is Delayed
- Latest Mac OS X Still Not Liking Intel Atom
- Google Offers Free WiFi in Airports this Christmas
- Confirmed: Apple Puts Wrench Into Hackintoshes
- Deals for Tuesday: Laptops, Blu-ray, HDTV, More
- Xbox Wireless N Adapter Out Now, Costs $100
- Bing Brings Hulu, YouTube and MSN Video
- On the Cheap: Best Buy to Sell $249 Laptop
- Kevin Smith: I'm Gay For Mac
- XP Users Aren't Really Jumping on Windows 7
- 16 TB Cloud Drive from Google Costs $4.1K/Year
'due to'
-ed
Now why am I not one bit surprised?
Used the tool myself to create a Windows 7 setup Flash drive for a system I was working on and the first thing I saw when running the tool was The Microsoft Store label on the dialog window.
The first thing that sprang to mind was WTF!!!
Granted, the tool was easy enough to use, but there was nothing transparent about it.
It was more like a Creating Windows 7 USB/DVD Setup for IDIOTS tool.
How much extra coding? Now I'm curious.
what a waste of time
'and WHO don't have an optical drive'
I looked at the "infringing" code... it was nothing more than one function that had a similiar name and provided a similiar function. How many different ways can you read bits from an ISO? This claim is not only false, but completely basless and just flat out wrong. The code looks NOTHING alike.
'and WHO don't have an optical drive'
Netbooks
If the source code was not offered publicly by Microsoft how did this guy look at it? Some sort of disassembler?
If the source code was not offered publicly by Microsoft how did this guy look at it? Some sort of disassembler?
On his Windows Blog, Rivera listed this tool as what he used.
http://www.red-gate.com/products/reflector/
RedGate offers a Free copy on their website.
Funny how the things that work the best seem to have legal issues surrounding them.
'and WHO don't have an optical drive'
fail....
Hope it's back soon, was a handy tool.
Sounds like all of Micrsoft's products
'due to'-ed
you beat me to it. D'oah!
That would be quite the hypocrisy, if they did it, not to mention rude.
Microsoft (like many other large corporations) would patent the air we breathe and the water we drink if they could.
And of course, they bitch about anything that remotely or seemingly infringes on their rights and patents, but they don't seem all that bothered with adhering to fair business conduct.
I looked at the "infringing" code... it was nothing more than one function that had a similiar [SIC] name and provided a similiar function. How many different ways can you read bits from an ISO? This claim is not only false, but completely basless [SIC] and just flat out wrong. The code looks NOTHING alike.
Did m$ offered you their sources, if you're so sure? Binary code depends largely on the compiler, so any comparison is useless.
If micro$uxx was sooo innocent, why did they pulled it?
It wouldn't be the first time m$ "borrows" without acknowledge, or proper credit.
m$ loves licensing terms just it they line up their pockets...
Just got off work and I guess I am tired. What is the no-no that is being implied here? Could some one put this in layman's terms?
'and WHO don't have an optical drive'
Netbook users
Though I could have saved $30 and ditched the DVD drive on my comp... mighty tempting.
I used this tool to install windows 7 when my old ass NEC DVD drive wouldn't recognize the windows 7 disc. It worked great.
Microsoft being this long on the OS and application and server business, you'd think they have programs for every conceivable tasks under the sun. Well, maybe except one and to those fellas who need to use this download tool, tough luck, this is the one they forgot to make on their own.
@skittle and anamaniac:
city_zen was posting a grammatical correction, not asking a question.
@papasmurf:
Programs written in languages that use just-in-time (JIT) compilers (e.g. .NET and Java) are much easier to reverse engineer because they are initially compiled into an intermediate language. They are compiled into native code by the run-time environment when they are executed.
For the netbook user and people whose optical drive is naff, instead of a downloadable file that you put on a USB, how about MS sell a retail copy of Windows on an SD card?
SD is certainly bootable, so why not? The form factor is way smaller and unless comparing to Bluray the capacity is way higher.
Distribute software on physical media via SD card FTW!!!
Just download HP's free USB tool. It'll put any CD/DVD/Floppy on a USB stick. Boots and loads just fine.
HP's USB Key Utility 1.3 link here: cp010617.exe
Enjoy.
Just download HP's free USB tool. It'll put any CD/DVD/Floppy on a USB stick. Boots and loads just fine.
Problem is you still need an optical drive to put the disk onto the USB, which does nothing for netbook users. Think download.
@SKITTLE, you are either NOT a programmer or not a smart one at that, so you shouldn't chime in on your knowledge, or lack there of, on such a topic. Are you just a M$ fanboy?
Everybody codes things differently, and not any two programs that perform the same thing should be coded EXACTLY the same way. Where many people get in trouble with is copying THE LOGIC! What do I mean by that? Every friggen Object creation, variable creation, logical statements, FOR-LOOP, condition checks, everything is pretty much all done in the same order! That is IMPOSSIBLE unless the source code was used or referenced! SHAME ON MICROSUCKS! Any programmer or smart person can see or even has had their code used in this manner without their permission! ***This is just too many lines of code with the same steps in logic...
Ironic I must say! M$ hates open source software and yet this is what?...the 3rd time I have seen M$ take from the FOSS community and slap their own license on it? What would they do after that? Say that ImageMaster stole M$'s idea? I am sure that M$ is doing an INVESTIGATION on ways of better techniques for concealing others' code as their own...
@papasmurf
"If the source code was not offered publicly by Microsoft how did this guy look at it? Some sort of disassembler?"
Yes, and the like. There was an old program back in the day called SoftICE that basically took apart code, and you could debug it right up to the point of serial authentication and reverse that to get a working key or as many keys as you would like. You could do things as to "edit" the code and bypass the authentication...and in some sense that's how cracks work
I love how my messages always get cut off short when it gets posted! I continued to say that I loosely explained myself so that those not so tech-savvy would understand my explanations.
@justafewords
I haven't looked much into this so called anti-reverse-engineering software that microsoft has out to help protect those programs you write using their compilers. I don't know much about it but my guess is they are trying to alleviate that program...but then again I'm not quite sure. It's kind of funny...this article makes me remember the time when people said that they would write their JavaScript code NOT in their HTML/PHP/whatever pages but in .js files so that people couldn't view their code...how long did that 'security' last? hahaha! Yes people still do and I still do for code organization purposes but I just still found that a little amusing...
'and WHO don't have an optical drive'
you're dumb
Is there a cost differance between the Windows version that you can download to a USB stick and a retail copy that you buy in store.
If they were making people pay extra for using an open source software then I can see an issue.
If not then it shouldn't matter if they use an open source software or not, and if they object to people using their open source software they shouldn't have made it free to use in the first place.
/rant
@M$losers:
Haha, yeah, any client-side scripting is fair game for copying. All you can rely on is the honor system. However, it really is better that way. That last thing you want is for websites to be transmitting binaries to your browser to execute or decrypt. Fortunately most of the good JavaScript libraries are licensed under LGPL, MIT, or Apache, so they can be used for almost anything.