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 |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
kurttrail wrote:
Leythos wrote: In article , says... And different MS employees tell a different story about at what point does upgrading components constitute a new and different computer. Leythos you really should just give it up! The OP actually talked to a MS employee and couldn't get a straight answer out of him. And why is that? Because MS rather keep the FUD surrounding when upgrading a computer turns it into another computer by defining it in the EULA. MS KNOWS if pressed their POST EULA FUD is in no way enforceable. What part of "my personal" did you miss - Hell, I even stated your and Alias's positions of being able to do anything you want. I've not made a statement as to one or the other being fact in this thread. You still talk about the motherboard fantasy as it it is part of the EULA. IT IS NOT A PART OF THE EULA! It is only binding on you in your delusions! NOT ONE END USER EVER AGREED TO IT! MS'S MOTHERBOARD NONSENSE HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH ANY AGREEMENT! You can play lawyer all you want, but the reality is that 'dems with the bucks make the rules. You want to take MickeyMouse on legally? Good luck! Even the DOJ couldn't sustain a real challenge to MickeyMouse's illegal activities. Gates has a war chest in the hundreds of millions of dollars to do whatever he wants in the legal arena. It's just like the RIAA, when they decide to slam a file sharer, most just cave in and settle out of court. The reality is, MickeyMouse can determine what it considers significant enough hardware changes to prevent a re-activation of the OS and thus force the end-user to purchase a new license. So EULA at the end doesn't mean squat. If you want to continue to be a slave of MickeyMouse you are forced to play by MickeyMouse's rules. That's always the way it's been with MS and always will be. Get over it! When you get fed up enough, you do have other options. Don't know whether you ever read chapter 7, but maybe you should ... http://www.euronet.nl/users/frankvw/...IhateMS_7.html "Microsoft doesn't care where you want to go today. You'll go wherever Microsoft tells you to go, period." -- ø¤º°`°ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°øø¤º°`°ø,¸¸ ,ø¤º°`°ø Windows is *NOT* a virus. Viruses are small and efficient. A brief overview of Windows' most serious design flaws http://www.euronet.nl/users/frankvw/...IhateMS_A.html |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
"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 |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
NoStop wrote:
kurttrail wrote: Leythos wrote: In article , says... And different MS employees tell a different story about at what point does upgrading components constitute a new and different computer. Leythos you really should just give it up! The OP actually talked to a MS employee and couldn't get a straight answer out of him. And why is that? Because MS rather keep the FUD surrounding when upgrading a computer turns it into another computer by defining it in the EULA. MS KNOWS if pressed their POST EULA FUD is in no way enforceable. What part of "my personal" did you miss - Hell, I even stated your and Alias's positions of being able to do anything you want. I've not made a statement as to one or the other being fact in this thread. You still talk about the motherboard fantasy as it it is part of the EULA. IT IS NOT A PART OF THE EULA! It is only binding on you in your delusions! NOT ONE END USER EVER AGREED TO IT! MS'S MOTHERBOARD NONSENSE HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH ANY AGREEMENT! You can play lawyer all you want, but the reality is that 'dems with the bucks make the rules. LOL! The Republicans control two out of the 3 branches of gov't, and the third is centrist. You want to take MickeyMouse on legally? Good luck! I don't have to. It is up to them under both copyright law and contract law to sue me. They don't sue me, my interpretation of the law is valid for me. Even the DOJ couldn't sustain a real challenge to MickeyMouse's illegal activities. Gates has a war chest in the hundreds of millions of dollars to do whatever he wants in the legal arena. It's just like the RIAA, when they decide to slam a file sharer, most just cave in and settle out of court. That's because the RIAA have been very smart to only go after those that distribute music over the web. They haven't gone after one person that has only downloaded. Distributing copyrighted material to others is a violation of copyright law. The reality is, MickeyMouse can determine what it considers significant enough hardware changes to prevent a re-activation of the OS and thus force the end-user to purchase a new license. They can't yet. All PA tells them that enough hardware has changed to required activation, not what exact hardware has changed. MS can not figure out if XP is on a totally different PC unless the person tells the PA phone rep that it is a totally different computer. So EULA at the end doesn't mean squat. If you want to continue to be a slave of MickeyMouse you are forced to play by MickeyMouse's rules. LOL! You are totally fooling yourself if you think I'm playing by MS's rules. That's always the way it's been with MS and always will be. Get over it! When you get fed up enough, you do have other options. Yeah, disable some of my hardware, and neuter some others, and run linux! Please! If I want to run a server I'll build a computer to run linux, but right now I want my multimedia computer, run my games and not castrate my system, so linux is not a realistic solution. Don't know whether you ever read chapter 7, but maybe you should ... http://www.euronet.nl/users/frankvw/...IhateMS_7.html "Microsoft doesn't care where you want to go today. You'll go wherever Microsoft tells you to go, period." LOL! FUD. An educated consumer knows how to protect themselves for the tyranny of the corporate elites. -- 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" |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
kurttrail wrote:
Don't know whether you ever read chapter 7, but maybe you should ... http://www.euronet.nl/users/frankvw/...IhateMS_7.html "Microsoft doesn't care where you want to go today. You'll go wherever Microsoft tells you to go, period." LOL! FUD. An educated consumer knows how to protect themselves for the tyranny of the corporate elites. I guess you're one of the few around here that advise others against getting the latest updates? Each update to the OS that you accept to place on your 'puter means you're going where Microsoft tells you to go. When MS decided to no longer support 95, or 98 or 2000 and eventually XP, to continue to have a secure system you're either going to upgrade to what MS gives you OR you're going to look for an alternative. It's as simple as that. And as long as you continue on the MS upgrade path, you're marching to MS's drum beat because if you're going to use their software, you have no other option. So cut the crap about what an independent individual you are. You have no independence with your computer as long as you're forced to take the updates or face corruption or malfunctioning of your computer. Haven't you ever considered that all these insecurity issues with Windoze is exactly what MS needs to enable it to keep you purchasing their next version? Again, there's a track record. I really think you should read that article. Especially the history lesson. Then you'll see that the leopard hasn't changed its spots. -- ø¤º°`°ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°øø¤º°`°ø,¸¸ ,ø¤º°`°ø Windows is *NOT* a virus. Viruses are small and efficient. A brief overview of Windows' most serious design flaws http://www.euronet.nl/users/frankvw/...IhateMS_A.html |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
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. 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" |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
In message VWWall
wrote: Bruce Chambers wrote: Woody wrote: from what Mike Brannigan , an MS employee and frequent poster , has been saying of late is that it's up to the oem to determine when the original machine is no longer the original machine . definately a major retreat from earlier interpretations of the ms oem eula . No, that's no "retreat." That's what the official policy, as stated by Microsoft employees, has always been. If I buy a keyboard with my OEM WinXP Pro x64, as one purveyor has been offering, can I change anything on the original computer on which I installed the OS as long as I use the same keyboard? Even stranger is the fact that the keyboard is not even included in the hash function used to indicate a change in OS installation. Am I missing something here? Yes, you're confusing licensing with activation. -- They'll say, 'You can't joke about rape. Rape's not funny.' I can prove to you that rape is funny. Picture Porky Pig raping Elmer Fudd. See? Hey, why do you think they call him Porky? -- George Carlin |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
"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. 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 |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
"Michael C" wrote in message
... [snip] I suspect that means that it can be installed on a completely new machine and will activate ok. Is that true? Microsoft and the product activation process will not prevent this, although it would be a violation of your EULA. In many cases the installation method for Windows on a brand-name computer will have been doctored -- keyed to the BIOS, for example -- so that it can't be installed on a different machine at all. I certainly wouldn't count on transferring Windows from your Compaq to a whole new system. As a user, I wouldn't expect this to be acceptable, either. Microsoft's rules are hazy, but so are mine. My hazy rules say that, if it's reasonable and honest, nobody will be coming after me for it. My hazy rules say that, if I replace my whole computer a piece or two at a time over a couple of years while using it continuously for the same purposes, it's still the same computer. (At fifty, I'm not using many of the same body cells I had as a kid, either.) And anybody who knows the business knows that upgrading the processor usually means upgrading motherboard and memory as well. It seems pretty doubtful that this kind of upgrade will draw a complaint. Microsoft is very clear about retail boxed versions: you can install it on another computer as long as you remove it from the first. It's much less clear about OEM, and the clearest part is that Dell isn't in the business of supporting software on a computer with no Dell parts left in it, while Microsoft isn't interested in solving problems on a copy of Windows Dell sold. You can probably activate it, but it will be an orphan. And Windows Update will still run, no questions asked. Why? Because of the recent assault of malware. A system not updated because the user was afraid to call Microsoft is a festering place for bad things. Also, a customer badgered or threatened is a former customer. Remember the question from Jurassic Park? People spent all this time finding out if they COULD, but never put a moment's thought into whether they SHOULD. Well, you probably could install an OEM copy of Windows on practically anything. Should you? I'm not too clear on that. Suppose you bought a machine with OEM Windows XP Home on it, and bought a retail upgrade to XP Pro. Is it now an OEM or a retail installation? Maybe you can then use that upgrade to upgrade another machine from Home to Pro as long as you revert the first one. Common sense goes a long way, even with Microsoft. -- P. |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
"Ron Martell" wrote in message
... 2. OEM licenses are much less expensive than their retail equivalents, and there is a reason for this. You get what you pay for. No, OEM you pay a fair price, retail you getting ripped. Michael |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
"Pelysma" wrote in message
news:bLgge.12238$U01.7624@trnddc07... Microsoft and the product activation process will not prevent this, although it would be a violation of your EULA. In many cases the installation method for Windows on a brand-name computer will have been doctored -- keyed to the BIOS, for example -- so that it can't be installed on a different machine at all. I certainly wouldn't count on transferring Windows from your Compaq to a whole new system. As a user, I wouldn't expect this to be acceptable, either. Just another good reason to avoid name brands. Why anyone would buy from a company that intentionally made things difficult for their customers is beyong me, but that's another story. Microsoft's rules are hazy, but so are mine. My hazy rules say that, if it's reasonable and honest, nobody will be coming after me for it. My hazy rules say that, if I replace my whole computer a piece or two at a time over a couple of years while using it continuously for the same purposes, it's still the same computer. (At fifty, I'm not using many of the same body cells I had as a kid, either.) And anybody who knows the business knows that upgrading the processor usually means upgrading motherboard and memory as well. It seems pretty doubtful that this kind of upgrade will draw a complaint. That's about how I work also. In this case the customer purchased XP and is only using 1 copy so is doing the right thing, imo. Michael |
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 |