If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
"kurttrail" wrote in message
... Kerry Brown wrote: "Leythos" wrote in message ... In article , says... the latest from mike brannigan is that it's the oem that determines when the original computer is no longer the original computer . so who built the computer , who bought the oem os and who installed the os on that computer determines the rules as far as i read it . Not that I want to get into this again, but if you go into the OEM site at MS, read around the documents, it seemed very clear to me that the OEM software is tied to the first computer it's installed on, and that the computer, by MS's documents on the OEM site, indicate that the Motherboard is the "computer". When I, as a personal choice, choose OEM, I limit the scope of the license to the motherboard. -- -- remove 999 in order to email me I was at recent MS OEM event and attended a session on licensing. The speaker was very clear that Microsoft's position was that changing the motherboard was not allowed as it defines the computer. She even said that in the near future activations will reflect this. Changing a motherboard will only be allowed under warranty and will always cause a phone in event. Later on she was asked about selling OEM software with qualifying hardware what qualified? She said anything that was essential to running a computer. She elaborated that that meant anything within the case, even a ram chip, and also a keyboard and mouse. Does anyone else see the inconsistency here? If someone from the licensing dept. is inconsistent when trying to explain to the mostly converted how is anyone supposed to make sense of it. My interpretation of the EULA is OEM software stays with the computer. If it's upgraded in any fashion over time it's within the EULA. If the computer is sold, given away, or somehow still in use and a new one is purchased then it's time for a new license. Kerry You can sell the computer with the OEM software. The EULA allows tranfers with the computer it is licensed with. That's what I meant. The OEM license stays with the computer. A lot ofpeople seem to think it's ok to sell the computer with the OS installed but keep the COA and use it with the new computer. As for the rest. MS seems schizo when it comes to when a computer becomes a new computer through upgrades. I see it as a legal issue. If MS defines it in its EULA, that is something that would be destined for a class action suit, and MS really does NOT want to be put in a position where it has to defend its rules when it comes to private non-commercial use. Especially since MS uses the OEM EULA to totally absolve itself any liability at all, and pawn it all off on the OEM. Doesn't make it easier for you and others in business selling computers preinstalled with OEM XP, or selling XP with hardware components to know what to do to sell it within the rules. I'd suggest next time you get licensing person explaning such things you cover your ass, and record it. -- Peace! Kurt Self-anointed Moderator microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea http://microscum.com/mscommunity "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron! "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei" |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
Bruce Chambers wrote:
T. Waters wrote: Sorry, Bruce, for sounding insulting. Accepted. In my mind, you sounded like some orthodox practioners of religion I know. For my clarification then, and so as to avoid such a misunderstanding in the future, could you tell me just how I "sounded" hypocritical? Surely the desire for integrity in one's business partners and other - even social - associates isn't dependent upon superstition. I guess it is just a question of priorities. For me, it is infinitely more important that people wash their hands after using the restroom than that they abide by the OEM rules in the MS EULA., and I mean this seriously. Not to discount your perfectly valid concern for sanitation and personal hygiene, does this mean that you don't care when people lie to you or break their promises to you? Set aside the subject of a Microsoft EULA - this comes down to basic honesty, period. It doesn't matter to whom a promise is made, with whom an agreement or contract is made, or what specifics the promise, agreement , or contract concerns. A broken promise is a broken promise. I don't see how a person who reneges on an agreement to anyone else - even an "anonymous" corporate entity - can be trusted to keep one with me; the reneger (is that a word?) has clearly and irrefutably demonstrated his untrustworthiness. Actually, the orthodox practitioners of religion I know are not hypocrites, but they spend what amounts to excessive time (IMO) "making God happy" when it seems to me he might not really care if, say, they turned on a light at the wrong time. As to the EULA, if I lend my car to a friend, and tell them not to park it in the bad part of town because of the risk of breakins, and they do park my car there while a gas attendant (Oregon) is filling the gas tank, I do not feel that my trust has been violated. They respected the spirit of my request, and that is what is important. On the other hand, if they parked my car and left it in the safe part of town, but on a street with, say, junkies hanging out on it, they would be abusing my generosity. Intent is everything. |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
"I don't see how a person who reneges on an agreement to anyone else - even
an "anonymous" corporate entity - can be trusted to keep one with me;" I can see how Waters interpreted Chambers as "religious". Chambers writes radical views. Trust involves information. Anonymity involves misinformation. The word "renege" is medieval latin. It is a poor choice of words. Bounce a check, void the OS?!? Microsoft is obviously a monopolizing conglomerate above regulation. Its asexual. To compare it with a human action is wrong. Especially when it refers to humans as end users... End of what? Humanitiy I say. |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
In article , kerry@kdbNOSPAMsys-
tems.c*a*m says... I was at recent MS OEM event and attended a session on licensing. The speaker was very clear that Microsoft's position was that changing the motherboard was not allowed as it defines the computer. She even said that in the near future activations will reflect this. Changing a motherboard will only be allowed under warranty and will always cause a phone in event. Later on she was asked about selling OEM software with qualifying hardware what qualified? She said anything that was essential to running a computer. She elaborated that that meant anything within the case, even a ram chip, and also a keyboard and mouse. Does anyone else see the inconsistency here? The motherboard is what they describe on the OEM site too. As for what you can sell OEM software with, I don't see where the purchase has anything to do with it as long as you understand the license is tied to the motherboard as defined above. They are making it easy to purchase, which has nothing to do with a license for use. -- -- remove 999 in order to email me |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 10 May 2005 20:37:14 -0600, Bruce Chambers
wrote: this comes down to basic honesty, period. It doesn't matter to whom a promise is made, with whom an agreement or contract is made, or what specifics the promise, agreement , or contract concerns. A broken promise is a broken promise. I don't see how a person who reneges on an agreement to anyone else - even an "anonymous" corporate entity - can be trusted to keep one with me; the reneger (is that a word?) has clearly and irrefutably demonstrated his untrustworthiness. You are being over simple-minded.... The fact that a person has or has not lied and/or broken an agreement says very little about that person's trustworthiness. Trustworthiness is also a matter of context and not only one of mere fact. During the Second World War there were Germans who put their lives on the line to disobey and/or circumvent direct orders that would have resulted in the death of innocent people. They accepted orders that they told authorities were carried out when in fact they had not been. They lied. They were being by your definition "dishonest". Are you seriously saying that if such a person was now, say, my neighbor that because of his "dishonesty" 60 years ago, under conditions of life or death, that such a person is not now deserving of my trust? Beowulf |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
"Ron Martell" wrote in message ... "Alias" wrote: You are saying one cannot upgrade a computer if you have an OEM licence and that by upgrading it, you lose the licence to use the software you bought for this upgraded computer. Scam, no matter how you slice it. Example. Last year I got a MoBo with an AGP 4x slot and it can only handle 266 RAM. I want an 8x slot and a motherboard that can handle 400 RAM and a faster 400 processor to go with it. With your theory, I would have to buy another copy of an OEM Windows XP to upgrade the same computer the first OEM was installed on and I say that is a scam if true, it is designed to make people buy software they already have and paid for. Now, I will buy the motherboard and new RAM and if I have to call MS, I will only give them the number, as is outlined in their FAQs and not feel like a thief or weasal but as a person who merely upgraded his computer and didn't want to be forced to buy something I already have again! Please explain how all of this relates to piracy, be it for profit or "casual". I am all ears. Some additional points that might be at least partially relevant to this discussion: 1. Surveys have shown that the vast majority of PCs go to the scrap heap or dumpster with their original hardware configurations intact. Upgraded systems are a small minority of the total. So the theory of the tyrannical majority applies and no one can upgrade their computers? 2. OEM licenses are much less expensive than their retail equivalents, and there is a reason for this. You get what you pay for. I haven't been able to find a retail copy of WinXP in Spain, only upgrades and OEMs. Alias Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada -- Microsoft MVP On-Line Help Computer Service http://onlinehelp.bc.ca In memory of a dear friend Alex Nichol MVP http://aumha.org/alex.htm |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
says... They accepted orders that they told authorities were carried out when in fact they had not been. They lied. They were being by your definition "dishonest". So, what you're stating is that honesty and integrity are relative to the personal views of the specific individual and not in relation to society? Either they lied or not, and either they are good to their word or not, and any other interpretation is a subjective measure of their integrity. -- -- remove 999 in order to email me |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
Leythos wrote:
In article , says... You cannot have MS (nor youself) further elaborate them in scope or terms after that contract is made. Actually, I can ask MS to clarify it in order to see what / where they are going or wanted to go, but it only matters to me as a means to understand what they wanted to do, not what I'm (or anyone) is bound to. What's funny, is that to be an OEM you are bound to more than just the EULA, and the OEM site is setup for OEM's and to allow people to become OEM's, and the site contains specifics about what they consider. At the same time, you (in the US) are not an OEM just by getting an OEM disk from an OEM, you are an OEM if you have an OEM agreement with MS, otherwise you're just an end-user of OEM software. So, one could reason that if you've read the OEM documents, signed on to be an OEM so that you could order directly from the MS OEM program (and not another OEM), that you would already know what MS has defined for it's definitions. You do realize that purchasing OEM software from an OEM does not make you an OEM, it only makes you a purchaser of OEM software. And more than likely the same can be said of the business that sold you the software. Walmart is just a seller of OEM Software, not a true OEM. -- Peace! Kurt Self-anointed Moderator microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea http://microscum.com/mscommunity "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron! "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei" |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
Ron Martell wrote:
"Alias" wrote: You are saying one cannot upgrade a computer if you have an OEM licence and that by upgrading it, you lose the licence to use the software you bought for this upgraded computer. Scam, no matter how you slice it. Example. Last year I got a MoBo with an AGP 4x slot and it can only handle 266 RAM. I want an 8x slot and a motherboard that can handle 400 RAM and a faster 400 processor to go with it. With your theory, I would have to buy another copy of an OEM Windows XP to upgrade the same computer the first OEM was installed on and I say that is a scam if true, it is designed to make people buy software they already have and paid for. Now, I will buy the motherboard and new RAM and if I have to call MS, I will only give them the number, as is outlined in their FAQs and not feel like a thief or weasal but as a person who merely upgraded his computer and didn't want to be forced to buy something I already have again! Please explain how all of this relates to piracy, be it for profit or "casual". I am all ears. Some additional points that might be at least partially relevant to this discussion: 1. Surveys have shown that the vast majority of PCs go to the scrap heap or dumpster with their original hardware configurations intact. Upgraded systems are a small minority of the total. 2. OEM licenses are much less expensive than their retail equivalents, and there is a reason for this. You get what you pay for. Yeah, you forced to pay over $100 for 2 outsourced to India techsupport phone calls! -- Peace! Kurt Self-anointed Moderator microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea http://microscum.com/mscommunity "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron! "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei" |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Interesting Memo | Brad Licatesi | Dell Computers | 13 | March 31st 05 06:16 AM |
Interesting benchmarks | johns | Ati Videocards | 5 | July 23rd 04 07:17 PM |
HP an interesting article | Mickey | Printers | 6 | May 27th 04 05:13 PM |
amd 64bits interesting? | Kriss | General | 9 | September 24th 03 09:00 PM |