The real reason(s) behind Microsoft's move to exorcise WGA from IE7

By | October 5, 2007, 7:07am PDT

Summary: A day after Microsoft rolled out a refresh of Internet Explorer (IE) 7 that no longer requires Windows Genuine Validation (WGA) checks, industry watchers are speculating as to why the company did so. Why do you think the Softies made the move?

A day after Microsoft rolled out a refresh of Internet Explorer (IE) 7 that no longer requires Windows Genuine Validation (WGA) checks, industry watchers are speculating as to why the company did so.

The real reason(s) behind Microsoft’s move to exorcise WGA from IE7The IE team, for its part, will say nothing more than what it posted on October 4 to the IE Team Blog:

“Because Microsoft takes its commitment to help protect the entire Windows ecosystem seriously, we’re updating the IE7 installation experience to make it available as broadly as possible to all Windows users”

In other words: Microsoft was worried that “pirates” might not be protected by all the security goodness the company has added to IE, so it decided to remove piracy checks from the IE 7 download process.

Not surprisingly, there are other theories as to why Microsoft removed WGA from the browser. Perhaps Microsoft decided that WGA was enough of a deterrent to result in IE 7 failing to gain marketshare as fast as the company would like. From Ars Technica:

“The move (to release an IE 7 refresh sans WGA) is remarkable because it is the first time that Microsoft has removed WGA checks from a product in order to increase the attractiveness of that product. It’s difficult to see this as any but an attempt to get as many users as possible to install IE7, even those who have pirated Windows.”

According to data from the market researchers at Net Applications, IE 6.X currently has 42.75 percent of the worldwide browser market. IE 7 has 34.6 percent. Firefox 2.0 has 13.7 percent. Both IE 7 and Firefox 2 share is growing, Net Applications says (though given Firefox’s smaller user base, Firefox is growing more quickly).

I think Microsoft’s move to decouple WGA from IE7 as aimed less at attracting the “pirated software” crowd — as large as that contingent may be. Instead, I think Microsoft realizes that it is losing browser share to Firefox (and, a lesser extent, other competitors) primarily among more technical users. These kinds of users are more likely to be among those who are anti-WGA, I’d wager, equating repeated authentication checks with DRM.

[Poll=14]

Other reasons you think Microsoft might have pulled the WGA plug on IE 7? Do you expect the company to cut WGA from other products, too? If so, which ones?

(Microsoft Internet Explorer 7. Image by kk+. CC 2.0) 

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Mary Jo has covered the tech industry for more than 25 years for a variety of publications and Web sites, and is a frequent guest on radio, TV and podcasts, speaking about all things Microsoft-related. She is the author of Microsoft 2.0: How Microsoft plans to stay relevant in the post-Gates era (John Wiley & Sons, 2008).

Disclosure

Mary-Jo Foley

Freelance journalist/blogger Mary Jo Foley has nothing to disclose. WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get). I do not own Microsoft stock or stock in any of its partners or competitors. I have no business ventures that are sponsored by/funded by Microsoft or any of its partners or competitors.

Biography

Mary-Jo Foley

Mary Jo Foley has covered the tech industry for 25 years for a variety of publications, including ZDNet, eWeek and Baseline. She has kept close tabs on Microsoft strategy, products and technologies for the past 10 years. In the late 1990s, she penned the award-winning "At The Evil Empire" column for ZDNet, and more recently the Microsoft Watch blog for Ziff Davis.

Got a tip? Send her an email with your rants, rumors, tips and tattles. Confidentiality guaranteed.

83
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: The real reason(s) behind Microsoft's move to exorcise WGA from IE7
dfwekrwe1801-24353658626831248053446550489043 12th Nov
zcnfbp,good post!
0 Votes
+ -
Poll is broke
Magikx21 5th Oct 2007
I vote for one thing and it shows total votes: 1 and 100% to a different choice.
0 Votes
+ -
ditto
BR999 5th Oct 2007
same here
Of course even if more people install it, that doesn't mean that they use it. I let my PC autoupdate with IE7 a long time ago, but I don't use it, I use Firefox. They can say people have the product which is free installed big deal. Show me the usage statistics that is the only way to measure the browser adoption rate. Though also hardest to collect since you'd have to use the web logs from a large enough sampling of websites, and websites of all types.
0 Votes
+ -
Firefox All The Way
itanalyst 5th Oct 2007
I have IE7 on my Vista machine, but I still use Firefox on it....and considering I'm moving it back to XP later on this year I'll be on Firefox again without IE7 at all.
0 Votes
+ -
A number of companies try...
Anton Philidor 5th Oct 2007
... to monitor the browsers used to access a variety of websites as you suggest. Though given the difficulties of making users unique and identifying the browsers actually in use, the numbers are probably not very precise.

Still, there have been documented cases in which people have stated they use FireFox and anecdotal evidence of other users. The software has been successful enough in the anti-Microsoft market that Opera's growth potential has been significantly stunted. So FireFox has crushed the competition in its niche, no question.
0 Votes
+ -
"Anti-Microsoft Market"
John L. Ries 5th Oct 2007
You make it sound like it's such a bad thing. Like maybe it's immoral *not* to choose MS-products.

Maybe you can suggest to the appropriate elected officials that it should be a crime for consumers to discriminate against successful companies for non-economic reasons.
0 Votes
+ -
Buy what you like...
Anton Philidor 5th Oct 2007
... for any reason you choose. Identifying a market by its opposition to a product needn't indicate disapproval of those in the market.

Still, I can see your point. If the anti-Microsoft market was based on subjective factors and excessive feelings, then being part of that market would indicate someone was immoderate. While your thought may be true, I wouldn't make that accusation without better evidence. That would indicate I was immoderate, myself.

---------------- wink -----------------------------
0 Votes
+ -
I do
John L. Ries 5th Oct 2007
Seems to me, though, that you have a long record of insinuating that MS is entitled to its dominant position in the market and that it's somehow wrong to either compete against them, or to avoid doing business with them.

As noted long ago, it is not the duty of either governments or the general public to support successful businesses. Rather, a business is successful if it does a good enough job of providing goods and/or services that people want/need, that people will voluntarily give it sufficient patronage to allow it to be profitable. When any business stops doing that, then it has ceased to be successful, regardless of its ability to retain dissatisfied customers who feel they have nowhere else to go.

Indeed, the history of MS is a testament to the notion that grudging customers are the worst enemies of any business.
0 Votes
+ -
Servers
Anton Philidor 5th Oct 2007
I think Microsoft created the network effect for pc's when it was significant to the industry. That is people buy Windows for the applications, and application developers gain from having only one operating system for which to write, so they write for Windows.

That's an observation which even Judge Jackson had to accept, though he avenged himself by noting the "applications barrier to entry" for potential competitors.

That's probably the closest I've come to endorsing Microsoft.

Though I also think the criticisms of Microsoft should be well founded. People expect Microsoft products, and any dissatisfactions have not reduced sales much. And the company has gained substantial market share in servers among customers who/which are among the most likely to be disaffected.

There are greater complications than I discussed in that last paragraph, but it's reasonable to observe that Microsoft's reputation is not as bad as you've asserted. The most respected and admired brand name in the world (perhaps again this year) is Microsoft.
0 Votes
+ -
Seems to me...
John L. Ries 5th Oct 2007
...that as respected and widely admired a company as you claim MS to be would have many fewer legal troubles. Other companies would be afraid to sue them, for fear of offending their own stockholders and employees. Politicians would be eager to block any governmental action against them for fear of losing their jobs. Long ago, Walt Disney and the company that bears his name did have that sort of political clout (part of the reason for the current copyright mess), because he was really was that popular. Ironic that the national government with whom MS appears to have the best relationship is China (where the leaders don't have to worry about re-election and all political dissent is ruthlessly suppressed).

If MS' overwhelming market dominance was really a reflection of how popular the company is, then why is the free software movement such a threat to them? Why bother vilifying and impeding an irrelevant fringe group that has no chance to be otherwise (assuming you're right)? Why try so hard to insure the loyalty of OEMs and software developers if 90% of end users will choose MS products anyway, simply because they're the best software products on the market, given the prices?

If things are as you and others (particularly John Carroll) claim, then MS' behavior is completely irrational.
0 Votes
+ -
Your logic
xuniL_z 5th Oct 2007
doesn't fit reality.

Being well liked and working to keep it that way are not mutually exclusive. That is just a fact of life.

It would be very difficult to come up with any other situation where a company or a talent, for example, doesn't have to work hard, in a variety of ways, to maintain the size of it's following with competition in place.
0 Votes
+ -
You're correct
John Zern 5th Oct 2007
but it's reasonable to observe that Microsoft's reputation is not as bad as you've asserted[/i[

That's true. Microsoft is again one of the most respected companies in the world (though it does depend on who's doing the list, companies vary in ranking from list to list) but they do seem to be on all the lists.
0 Votes
+ -
Xunil: Companies don't play hardball...
John L. Ries 6th Oct 2007
...to remained well liked. MS' actions over the last decade have not been those of enormously popular and highly respected company striving to remain on top, but those of one that is afraid of losing its dominant position because the end user has no real loyalty to MS (it's merely the default).
0 Votes
+ -
I recalled something different as to the world's top rated brand name, so I looked
it up. For 2006, #1: Google, #2 Apple. Microsoft was #15.

Url source: http://blog.econsultant.com/2006-top-25-global-brands-
brandchannelcom

Now rated does not mean respect or admiration, so you may have a citation which
supports your assertion that Microsoft is the most respected and admired brand
(and casual assumption that it's number 1 again).

Now given that the estimated usage share of Firefox exceeds the installed base
rate of non-Microsoft desktops, it must follow that there are Microsoft customers
who prefer to use a non-Microsoft browser. I think you made some comment
about Firefox winning over the anti-Microsoft crowd (and perhaps I
misunderstood your point) but there are people who choose Microsoft for their
operating system (it's the applications, make sense to me), their office suite, and
choose Firefox (or Opera, to a lesser degree) for their browser. It doesn't feel as
though these people are anti-Microsoft in their entirety.

But let's go back to the question of the day: why was WGA validation removed?
Okay, to allow IE7 on unauthorized Windows installations makes sense to me.
What doesn't make sense is that this accounts for the (I gather) slow rate of
upgrade to IE7.

Given my rule of thumb that people say "Things are going well," when things
aren't because they need to fool others, themselves, or everyone, I'd have to say
VIsta, IE7, and Office 2007 are underperforming projections. Business as usual for
Redmond is still massively profitable, but something is changing out there.
0 Votes
+ -
John L. Ries: That's just bias
xuniL_z 8th Oct 2007
Too many companies to name if their dirty laundry was brought to light perceptions would change. Simply because they've not been put under the microscope yet doesn't mean it's not there. Apple, Google, Cisco, IBM, Phillip Morris, AT&T, Halliburton..the list is endless. Each of these companies in their own way has done everything it could to protect it's marketshare. Google has said publically that pushing the envelope and boundries in every nation on Earth is part of their business plan in which they plan to win more suits than lose.

IBM, forget about it.

Apple is a highly aggressive multi-billion dollar muti-national company that plays as hard as the best of them.


you're fooling yourself if you think this is somehow isolated to Microsoft. The Linux movement itself has behaved horribly in it's attempt to gain marketshare virtually trying to license proprietary code out of existence.

It's all in your mind.
0 Votes
+ -
i'm not anti-microsoft
notsofast 8th Oct 2007
those days ended a long time ago, but I do use firefox. Why? Because I think it's a better browser.

I think Firefox's user base encompasses many anti-MS types, but it also has a lot of tech savvy people, who liked Firefox better than IE6, simply because it had a better interface and arguably because it was perceived as more secure (which it probably was before it became popular and thus targeted by malware developers.

Personally, I don't think it's important to check if users are unique, so long as the site sample is broad in topics and thus they end up with a diverse set of users.

After all, isn't the most important thing how what percentage of page hits are from which browser? If I'm good for 20,000,000 page hits a day, using Firefox, (because I'm that fast) and m 200 siblings (who are exclusive to IE7) are good for 1 or 2 every few days, does it matter that 99.5% of users are on IE7?

Eh..maybe it does....I guess Advertisers like unique eyeballs....but with such low usage, they'll be lucky if anyone else from my litter sees any particular ad.
Personally, they can remove WGA from the OS next. Fat chance, I know. I still can't get my head wrapped around the idea that a technical error (on MS' part) can result in my system being shut off from afar.

Grrr. WGA was a bad idea and should be given a quiet burial ASAP.

You can leave OGA in for all I care. I can afford (usually) to lose Office for a day or so, but not the OS.
0 Votes
+ -
OMG
nucrash 5th Oct 2007
You can tell Microsoft to KMA. WGA was a huge PITA. AAMOF OEMs dont' install that POS because IE would change new systems to being DOA. ADN Microsoft will remove much of their DRM systems from Windows. IMHO, Microsoft will be better off. ATEOTD Open Source will have washed away part of Microsoft's Marketshare. ATYS to refute this will be pointless as I will not listen. TTL, other system has a BSOD.
0 Votes
+ -
BTDBA
zkiwi 5th Oct 2007
Translated to... Beaten to Death by Acronyms...

I will now amuse myself wondering if this (http://support.microsoft.com/kb/276304/en-us) is for real...
How long do you think it takes to log on anyway? I bet updates that require multiple restarts are a real bear - LOL!!!
0 Votes
+ -
And it's very well known
xuniL_z 5th Oct 2007
it takes very little to amuse you.


problems already taken care of with patches or service packs, for any other system, are not really problems..have you not noticed. So this is just a lame attempt at bringing up old news for you to what?....get some jollies?


Thanks for bringing so much to the table, you critical thinker you.
0 Votes
+ -
It having been fixed...
jasonp@... 5th Oct 2007
has absolutely no relevance on how funny the problem was to begin with. The only error code I can think of that I've personally encountered that rivals this one in any way is an old Microsoft Access error code that displayed nothing more than "!".
0 Votes
+ -
go and whinge somewhere else
mdsmedia 5th Oct 2007
You can't stand anyone mentioning anything anti-MS, even as a jonke. You're the first to jump to their defence in any situation, and you're the first to jump down anyone's throat who mentions anything critical of the Great Redmond God.

So please don't criticise someone else who might bring something up which IS amusing, just because it might not be pro your favourite company.
0 Votes
+ -
Don't get
xuniL_z 5th Oct 2007
your ******* in a bunch. i have as much right to criticise something or someone as you do, chief.

Feel free to leave me alone, for you are the only infamous for your putdowns of anyone's intelligence in which you don't agree with their opinion. This forum is full of examples of you doing just that, so get off that high horse of yours and get over yourself. You have no clue what my reasoning was the respond that way to begin with, as it in no way bothered me one bit.

zkiwi can post that i'm a liar, based on my opinion of something that doesn't involve scientific hard facts, a thousand times and it doesn't bother me one bit. Returning the favor is not something I do with malice jacka**. I was doing for a long time, and he knows it, playfully.

Why am i telling you any of this, go work on having a life so this stuff doesn't get you all worked up.
0 Votes
+ -
Nearly As Funny As
itanalyst 5th Oct 2007
Me emptying my text messages out of my "Wonderful" AT&T 8525 and coming back two minutes later and seeing I had 9999 messages in my inbox..but it was empty...

Thank God this phone has an exchange warranty, I'm getting a flipping Iphone.
0 Votes
+ -
A Flipping iPhone?
nucrash 6th Oct 2007
Now the iPhones really can do it all.

I bet that has to be a second generation iPhone.

That would probably protect the LCD.
0 Votes
+ -
Flipping..
JCitizen 8th Oct 2007
Come on nucrash. We know your just being sarcastic, but the newbies might think your flipping crazy! happy
0 Votes
+ -
10!
John L. Ries 5th Oct 2007
Nice to see that you're back in the humor business.
0 Votes
+ -
OMG, WABON, UBOK, R?
0 Votes
+ -
Here you go.
xuniL_z 5th Oct 2007
what happens when you try to DRWOAM.



http://www.flickr.com/photos/scriptingnews/152166797/
0 Votes
+ -
GSOD...
JCitizen 8th Oct 2007
Gray Shroud Of Death! Love it! grin
0 Votes
+ -
What?
OldMarine 8th Oct 2007
Can someone translate this for me ? This is not Facebook.
0 Votes
+ -
Your reasoning is the real reason...
JCitizen 8th Oct 2007
in my opinion, of why people are avoiding IE 7 in the first place. Slipping WGA into the updates without even a peep announcement has caused many of my clients to turn auto updates off permanently. It has definitely damaged the relationship with even the most gullible customers.

After that debacle no one will ever trust MS again. I don't think removing it from the browser with make any difference in the short run.

If Microsoft actually believes that atracting pirates to IE7 will make even 1% point difference; I feel they are deluding themselves. The only place in the world that might make a difference is in China; and even there I would think the majority of XP installations are legit or at least semi legit OEM machines.
0 Votes
+ -
Microsoft
tracy anne 8th Oct 2007
need to make everything on their OS dependent on WGA, it's the only way they will ever stop piracy. The more WGA the better, I say.
0 Votes
+ -
Firefox is the reason
BobF_z 5th Oct 2007
Remember before Firefox came along Microsoft said they wouldn't develop IE any further?, that the OS would provide web browsing?

Once Firfox appeared we suddenly get a redesigned IE which suprise, suprise matches a lot of what Firefox (ok, and Opera, etc) does with a new interface.

Removing WGA shows they are losing share to Firefox and others, after all as the author mentioned, the pirate market segment hasn't been a big target for Microsoft previously!
0 Votes
+ -
Put it in perspective
nwoodson@... 5th Oct 2007
Bottom line: Firefox comes in versions for everybody. IE doesn't. Until they actually port it....even beyond MAC...we're still going to laugh, point and talk about it like a dog.

We all know they were last to market with a lot of the features that they tout as great, many people will make that point. It just won't matter until people who want to use it independently of Win ____ (please don't choke) can use it.
0 Votes
+ -
The real reason...
jacarter3 5th Oct 2007
is irrelevant. Why use the stupidest web browser on the planet anyway? I have been using Opera almost 8 years and Firefox since it was available. IE should just be renamed IU (Internet Updater) as that's all it's good for.
it's less bloated and faster than FF. Compare for yourself.

Beyond that it's a great product that never crashes and gives users a great browsing experience.

It's a shame when someone becomes so hateful they start making remarks that are senseless. It's a "stupid" browser. In that case, I'm sure the feeling is mutual. Have you tried asking it?
0 Votes
+ -
HAHA, nice one!!!
NonZealot 5th Oct 2007
It's a "stupid" browser. In that case, I'm sure the feeling is mutual. Have you tried asking it?

Hehe, that made me laugh. happy And I prefer Firefox!
0 Votes
+ -
I don't like IE 7
voska 5th Oct 2007
I don't find it faster and I don't find it's a better expreince. I find it works just fine but I don't care for it. I like firefox better. Simple as that.
0 Votes
+ -
that's
xuniL_z 5th Oct 2007
nice. have a good day.
0 Votes
+ -
I set my cookie control to weed out extraneous crud; and block spycookies.
...gives users a great browsing experience.

Must be you've never done web development. If IE6 gives users a great browsing experience, it's because of the hard work that web developers have done to work around the browser's well- and abundantly-documented stupidity.

The OP is telling the truth and you're being ridiculous.

Personally, I can't wait for IE7 to completely replace IE6.


happy
0 Votes
+ -
huh??
xuniL_z 5th Oct 2007
i was talking about ie7.


i don't know their motive, i just like the browser. On my 6 year old Toshiba running XPSP2 it is a bit faster the Firefox in my experience. Not a huge difference, a very small one, but noticable over time. that's just my mileage. I'm not claiming that will be the case for anyone else.....just MHO.
0 Votes
+ -
Firefox is Superior!
chessmen 5th Oct 2007
The addons alone justify firefox over ie7. I use adblocker, nosquint, noscript, and colorfultabs. IE7 offers nothing that firefox can't do better (or faster).

IE7 really is the windows update browser you have to tolerate, not a functional tool.
0 Votes
+ -
Ok.
xuniL_z 5th Oct 2007
You sound like the man. I'm not here to argue, just give my opinion.

I think you'll be very surprised when FF 3.0 is released. Google has put it's claws into it and it will be optimized for Google apps. Reports that i've read so far claim it's becoming more noticably bloated and slower.


As for IE being a non functional tool, have you checked out the addins lately?

Again, on my machine IE7 is extremely fast. FF is fast by not as much as ie7. your mileage may vary.



By the way, get the Silverlight plug in. It's awesome. oh wait, it's from Microsoft....it must suck. sorry.


try out www.ddjvista.com for a cool look at what doctor dobb's journal is doing.
0 Votes
+ -
"that never crashes"?
balaknair 8th Oct 2007
you're talking about IE7?
Sorry, not in my (very brief)experience. Granted it probably crashes less often than IE6 on XP, but it used to crash at least once a week when I tried it with my Vista box. Since I ended up returning the Vista machine after a month(issues with both hardware and OS) I can't really say if IE7 is such a great browser or if it stinks, but oh yes it crashes. As far as I'm concerned, I'll stick with FF2 with NoScript and AdBlock Plus.
0 Votes
+ -
IE 7 bug reopens debate over patch responsibilities
Researchers argue over who to blame; Microsoft again denies there's a bug

http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?
command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9041278&intsrc=hm_list
0 Votes
+ -
Bill Gates explained it in 1998
shoktai@... 5th Oct 2007
I voted for "To try to grow IE 7???s marketshare by adding software pirates to the count"; to partially quote what Bill Gates said in 1998:

"we want them to steal ours. They'll get sort of addicted, and then we'll somehow figure out how to collect"

http://www.news.com/2100-1023-212942.html

The 'addiction' can only happen if IE7 gets a vast-majority market share like IE6 had.

Now look at http://members.shaw.ca/Limulus/files/w3sbw2-0706.png

The numbers from w3schools.com aren't necessarily indicative of the overall web, but I've found the trends they show are.

Compared to the IE5 -> IE6 transition which was rapid and fairly X shaped on the graph, the IE6 -> IE7 tansition has stalled, with IE7 having plateaued at a level *less* than IE6.

This is very bad for Microsoft, as it represents a prolonged vulnerable state. Since IE6 and 7 are different enough that they need to be treated separately by developers, the difference in market share between IE7 and Firefox is small enough that website developers must take the latter into account too and thus support it (even if you take the Net Applications numbers http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=6 to be fully accurate, and I don't, you'll note that the ratio of FF:IE7:IE6 is about 2:5:6. If it was all IE6, that would be 2:11) And if Firefox is supported, there will be less sites that are IE-specific, meaning less 'addiction' to IE.
0 Votes
+ -
The real reason...
JCitizen 8th Oct 2007
could very easily be your argument on web development.

Lay people always forget about the web development side of the story. I must admit I did too, temporarily. Thanks for the reminder.

If the web developers had an insurrection; IE7 would become an update application only; kinda like a handy paperweight that paper clips too.:p I appologize for not giving due credit to anyone on this thread who said "updater" first..
0 Votes
+ -
RE: The real reason(s) behind Microsoft's move to exorcise WGA from IE7
dfwekrwe1801-24353658626831248053446550489043 12th Nov
zcnfbp,good post!

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix