In response to the article, is anyone surprised by this revelation? Some might go so far as to say that Microsoft has intentionally designed products to make money from hacking and pirating; a perfect example would be the XBox; Microsoft doesn’t lose any money from modchips, as people still need to acquire an XBox, they lose nothing from the pirated games because they software developers still have to pay licensing and royalties, and there is the occasion where a modder has to buy a second XBox because of a fried motherboard!

Why would Macromedia (now Adobe) release the “trial edition” of their products on their website, when with a couple of keystrokes it can be changed to the full-fledged professional version? If college students can learn on their platforms even when they can’t pay for it, the up and coming job force is already an experienced and dedicated user of their product. In order to harness that experience, employers need to (legally) acquire their software, resulting in a larger purchase than the “pirate” would have made.

Still, you could do with keeping an ear a little closer to the ground.

I probably wouln’t have bothered but I was miffed that you didn’t feel it important to attribute your attention being drawn to the FSUM tool.

Sour grapes? Me? Nah!

Are you going to delete this comment like you deleted the disparaging comments posted to your Backtrack article?