MS Promotion Site Flagged By MS Anti-Phishing 279
Stony Stevenson writes "Microsoft has launched a marketing campaign that lets any student at an Australian university buy the Ultimate edition of Office 2007, usual price $1,150, for only $75 — a discount of about 93%. But when students go to the promotion site, Microsoft Live OneCare pops up a warning that the site may be a phishing scam.
The warning reads: 'Phishing filter has determined this might be a phishing website. We recommend that you do not give any of your information to such websites. Phishing websites impersonate trustworthy websites for the purpose of obtaining your personal or financial information.'"
Re:Microsoft mistake lead to office price cut (Score:4, Insightful)
Is there an abundance of Office 2007 licenses in Australia that is causing this price drop or is demand so low that Microsoft has to practically give its products away there to move them off the shelves?
If this isn't clear evidence that companies like Microsoft are no more interested in anything like a "free market" than your average Republican congressman, I don't know what is. The only thing that's free is these corporations' desire and ability to fuck us over.
We are being played, friends.
And if MS white flagged all their advocates (Score:3, Insightful)
Because, you know (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Bill Gates Cyborg Icon (Score:1, Insightful)
Please note that I am not expecting very rich people to give all their money away. However, I am just not impressed by someone with 50 billion giving away 25 billion. You are still left with more freaking money than some smaller countries and more money than most could imagine or more money than you could spend in a life time.
Why in the world would anyone be impressed by a person who only gives out of their extreme abundance? For example, I have 100,000 barrels of soup. I go to my local soup kitchen, for the homeless, and give them 1,000 barrels of soup. I make the news as a great "philanthropist". However, Betty, who has spent 25 hours a week for the last 10 years working at the soup kitchen, is never mentioned. Why?
Please spare me the "rich person gave X amount" and that make them a good person. They only gave out of their abundance. Nothing more, nothing less.
This shows it's working (Score:5, Insightful)
A $1200 product being sold for $75 is probably either a) not a $1200 product, or b) a scam, so this seems to have worked well. Special academic discounts are a fringe case.
Re:On a related topic.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:This shows it's working (Score:3, Insightful)
Something like this *should* generate more false positives than false negatives, because the cost to the user from a false positive is less than a false negative.
Not true. The cost to the user from false positives is that they get trained to not believe warnings from security software. That can follow them around for the rest of their life, causing damage over and over again, even when they've switched software and even after Microsoft fix their bugs.
Re:Bill Gates Cyborg Icon (Score:4, Insightful)
Not true. It doesn't matter that he had an abundance, rather that he felt compelled to use it for the benefit of others. He may have benefitted the reputation of himself, or his company, but the gains for himself were not nearly as much as the gains of the recipients. It was inequitable, therefore it was charitable. There are plenty of rich people who sit on their money instead of putting it to good use.
All your shit talking does is discourage others from following his lead, because they're just going to say "Hey, I'm just going to get flack for it anyway -- fsck 'em."
Re:Bill Gates Cyborg Icon (Score:4, Insightful)
The fact is he's given more money to philanthropic endeavours than any other person. Ever. So get off your fucking high horse.
I saw this guy the other day give $20 to a homeless person. I went over to him and said "Hey you fuck, you earn over $50k a year and I just saw you give ONLY $20 to that hungry guy? You tight asshole!". Then I punched him in the face and took his wallet. Because we need less assholes like that.
Going by your stats Bill Gates has given to charity around 50% of the money he's EARNED. What proportion of the money YOU have EARNED have you given to charity?
Apparently you have some preconceived notion of how much money rich people should be left with after donating for their donation to "mean" something. Perhaps you should publish a "JimDaGeek guide to philanthropy" so the world's rich can learn from you.
Re:Microsoft mistake lead to office price cut (Score:3, Insightful)
Do you think you'll be able to get academic pricing of Office 2007 Ultimate Edition for $60? Or Vista for $10? Think again.
I had lunch with someone who does purchasing for a major University the other day and he's saying that MS isn't going that route this time. There will still be academic licensing, but it won't be anything like it's been in the past.
And my comments above aren't even directed only at Microsoft. They're just playing a game that's SOP in all of business these days. Put your customers in an impossible position, squeeze everything you can out of them while giving them less and less, repeat when necessary to your stock price. MS does it, Apple does it, Sony does it, Dell, HP. Name your company. Name your industry. Transportation, energy, telecommunications, financial. Media.
I repeat: The "Free Market" was always a fantasy - bait and switch where they don't even have to use bait. We are the consumables now.
Re:On a related topic.. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Does it .... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:On a related topic.. (Score:3, Insightful)