Windows 8 on four computers

[Gordon]

Our household computer/network setup has three desktops, one laptop
and one Kindle. One of the desktop comptuers is a new HP Pavilion that
came with Windows 8 preinstalled.

I would like to install Windows 8 on the other computer but can't find
a store copy that will let me install it on more than one computer.
Why? Gordon

[Alias[_43_]]

On 12/24/2012 5:30 PM, Gordon wrote:
> Our household computer/network setup has three desktops, one laptop
> and one Kindle. One of the desktop comptuers is a new HP Pavilion that
> came with Windows 8 preinstalled.
>
> I would like to install Windows 8 on the other computer but can't find
> a store copy that will let me install it on more than one computer.
> Why? Gordon
>

That's because it's Windows and they have never allowed more than one
license per machine. You can use the same DVD on all machines but you
need a different product key for each one and having had paid for each one.

--
Alias

[BillW50]

On 12/24/2012 10:30 AM, Gordon wrote:
> Our household computer/network setup has three desktops, one laptop
> and one Kindle. One of the desktop comptuers is a new HP Pavilion that
> came with Windows 8 preinstalled.
>
> I would like to install Windows 8 on the other computer but can't find
> a store copy that will let me install it on more than one computer.
> Why? Gordon

Microsoft hasn't released a family pack for Windows 8 yet. But I guess
it doesn't really matter. As it is priced at $39.99 for the Pro version
for each machine, that is still cheaper than the Windows 7 family pack was.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6065/windows-8-upgrade-will-cost-just-3999

--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era) - Thunderbird v12
Centrino Core2 Duo T7400 2.16 GHz - 4GB - Windows 7 SP1

[ray]

On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 10:30:17 -0600, Gordon wrote:

> Our household computer/network setup has three desktops, one laptop and
> one Kindle. One of the desktop comptuers is a new HP Pavilion that came
> with Windows 8 preinstalled.
>
> I would like to install Windows 8 on the other computer but can't find a
> store copy that will let me install it on more than one computer. Why?
> Gordon

MS licensing. Most Linux distributions, on the other hand, are free to
install on as many machines as you want.

[Ken Blake[_4_]]

On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 10:30:17 -0600, Gordon >
wrote:

> Our household computer/network setup has three desktops, one laptop
> and one Kindle. One of the desktop comptuers is a new HP Pavilion that
> came with Windows 8 preinstalled.
>
> I would like to install Windows 8 on the other computer but can't find
> a store copy that will let me install it on more than one computer.
> Why?


The rule is quite clear. It's one copy (or one license) for each
computer.

There's nothing new here. This is exactly the same rule that's been in
effect on every version of Windows starting at least with Windows 3.1.


--
Ken Blake

[BillW50]

On 12/24/2012 10:42 AM, Ken1943 wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 10:30:17 -0600, > wrote:
>
>> Our household computer/network setup has three desktops, one laptop
>> and one Kindle. One of the desktop comptuers is a new HP Pavilion that
>> came with Windows 8 preinstalled.
>>
>> I would like to install Windows 8 on the other computer but can't find
>> a store copy that will let me install it on more than one computer.
>> Why? Gordon
>
> It's been that way always. One copy one computer.
>
>
> KenW

Actually that isn't true.

Microsoft Windows 7 Family Pack/ Home Premium Upgrade - Retail 3 PCs
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16832116775

--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era) - Thunderbird v12
Centrino Core2 Duo T7400 2.16 GHz - 4GB - Windows 7 SP1

[Andy Burns]

Ken Blake wrote:

> Gordon > wrote:
>
>> I would like to install Windows 8 on the other computer but can't find
>> a store copy that will let me install it on more than one computer.
>> Why?
>
> The rule is quite clear. It's one copy (or one license) for each
> computer.
>
> There's nothing new here.

Perhaps the O/P is thinking a "family" three-pack for Win8 might be
available, in the same way it was for Win7 ...

[BillW50]

On 12/24/2012 10:54 AM, ray wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 10:30:17 -0600, Gordon wrote:
>
>> Our household computer/network setup has three desktops, one laptop and
>> one Kindle. One of the desktop comptuers is a new HP Pavilion that came
>> with Windows 8 preinstalled.
>>
>> I would like to install Windows 8 on the other computer but can't find a
>> store copy that will let me install it on more than one computer. Why?
>> Gordon
>
> MS licensing. Most Linux distributions, on the other hand, are free to
> install on as many machines as you want.

Yeah... but what good is it? Even if I installed Linux on a million
machines, it still isn't as useful to me as one Windows machine. ;-)

--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era) - Thunderbird v12
Centrino Core2 Duo T7400 2.16 GHz - 4GB - Windows 7 SP1

[Andy Burns]

BillW50 wrote:

> Even if I installed Linux on a million
> machines, it still isn't as useful to me as one Windows machine. ;-)

My mum seems to cope with Gnome 2.x on an oldish fedora, I bet if I sat
her in front of a Win8 machine she'd just give up, sadly the same might
be true with Gnome 3.x

[Gordon]

On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 16:59:46 +0000, Andy Burns
> wrote:

>Ken Blake wrote:
>
>> Gordon > wrote:
>>
>>> I would like to install Windows 8 on the other computer but can't find
>>> a store copy that will let me install it on more than one computer.
>>> Why?
>>
>> The rule is quite clear. It's one copy (or one license) for each
>> computer.
>>
>> There's nothing new here.
>
>Perhaps the O/P is thinking a "family" three-pack for Win8 might be
>available, in the same way it was for Win7 ...
>
Right, this is what I had in mind. I don't mind paying for the
licenses but I would like to buy them for all my computers in one
bundle instead of having to buy a separate store bought copy of
Windows 8 for each computer, then get confused as to which one is
licensed for which computer???

What I was hoping for was one store bought copy of Windows 8 with one
registration number that could be applied to each of my comptuers.
Then, later, if I have to reinstall for some reason I won't get
confused as to which registration number applies to which computer.

[Andy Burns]

Gordon wrote:

> Andy Burns wrote:
>
>> Perhaps the O/P is thinking a "family" three-pack for Win8 might be
>> available, in the same way it was for Win7 ...
>
> Right, this is what I had in mind.

Given the pricing of Win8, it's probably cheaper to buy three singles
than it was for a single licence of Win7 anyway ..

[BillW50]

On 12/24/2012 11:03 AM, Andy Burns wrote:
> BillW50 wrote:
>
>> Even if I installed Linux on a million
>> machines, it still isn't as useful to me as one Windows machine. ;-)
>
> My mum seems to cope with Gnome 2.x on an oldish fedora, I bet if I sat
> her in front of a Win8 machine she'd just give up, sadly the same might
> be true with Gnome 3.x

I am sure. ;-) Even Linus Torvalds' own mother uses Linux. But Linus'
own sister and father uses Windows. For me to make Linux useful, I would
have to develop many drivers and applications. And that is far more
costly than just buying Windows and I am done. ;-)

--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era) - Thunderbird v12
Centrino Core2 Duo T7400 2.16 GHz - 4GB - Windows 7 SP1

[Alias[_43_]]

On 12/24/2012 6:13 PM, BillW50 wrote:

>>
>>> Even if I installed Linux on a million
>>> machines, it still isn't as useful to me as one Windows machine. ;-)
>>
>> My mum seems to cope with Gnome 2.x on an oldish fedora, I bet if I sat
>> her in front of a Win8 machine she'd just give up, sadly the same might
>> be true with Gnome 3.x
>
> I am sure. ;-) Even Linus Torvalds' own mother uses Linux. But Linus'
> own sister and father uses Windows. For me to make Linux useful, I would
> have to develop many drivers and applications. And that is far more
> costly than just buying Windows and I am done. ;-)
>

When was the last time you tried Linux? I use Netrunner, a KDE distro
that's a rolling release. It rocks and is very, very easy to use. Which
"drivers and applications" would you have to develop?

--
Alias

[Dave \Crash\ Dummy]

Ken Blake wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 10:30:17 -0600, Gordon >
> wrote:
>
>> Our household computer/network setup has three desktops, one laptop
>> and one Kindle. One of the desktop comptuers is a new HP Pavilion
>> that came with Windows 8 preinstalled.
>>
>> I would like to install Windows 8 on the other computer but can't
>> find a store copy that will let me install it on more than one
>> computer. Why?
>
>
> The rule is quite clear. It's one copy (or one license) for each
> computer.
>
> There's nothing new here. This is exactly the same rule that's been
> in effect on every version of Windows starting at least with Windows
> 3.1.

Yes, and of course we all ran out and bought separate copies of Windows
9x/2K for Mom and Dad and the all the kids.
--
Crash

"I'm told that Wagner's music is not as bad as it sounds."
~ Mark Twain ~

[BillW50]

On 12/24/2012 11:37 AM, Ken1943 wrote:
> Still only one install per dvd. I would have to buy 100 for 100 machines.
>
>
> KenW

I never bought the family pack. But my understanding is that it has one
install disc and one key. But it is good to install on up to three
computers. It sounds like Gordon has one of these. Maybe he can clarify.

--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era) - Thunderbird v12
Centrino Core2 Duo T7400 2.16 GHz - 4GB - Windows 7 SP1

[Sam Hill]

On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 18:21:45 +0100, Alias wrote:

> On 12/24/2012 6:13 PM, BillW50 wrote:
>>>> Even if I installed Linux on a million machines, it still isn't as
>>>> useful to me as one Windows machine. ;-)
>>>
>>> My mum seems to cope with Gnome 2.x on an oldish fedora, I bet if I
>>> sat her in front of a Win8 machine she'd just give up, sadly the same
>>> might be true with Gnome 3.x

So did my late mother, and she was 85 at the time. She had no trouble
whatsoever replacing Win98 after about an hour's training.

>> I am sure. ;-) Even Linus Torvalds' own mother uses Linux. But Linus'
>> own sister and father uses Windows. For me to make Linux useful, I
>> would have to develop many drivers and applications. And that is far
>> more costly than just buying Windows and I am done. ;-)
>
> When was the last time you tried Linux? I use Netrunner, a KDE distro
> that's a rolling release. It rocks and is very, very easy to use. Which
> "drivers and applications" would you have to develop?

That may mean he writes "Windows applications" [.EXE files] (or he's an MS
employee). I'll bet even a Mac would confuse him! ;-)

[BillW50]

On 12/24/2012 11:59 AM, Sam Hill wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 18:21:45 +0100, Alias wrote:
>
>> On 12/24/2012 6:13 PM, BillW50 wrote:
>>>>> Even if I installed Linux on a million machines, it still isn't as
>>>>> useful to me as one Windows machine. ;-)
>>>>
>>>> My mum seems to cope with Gnome 2.x on an oldish fedora, I bet if I
>>>> sat her in front of a Win8 machine she'd just give up, sadly the same
>>>> might be true with Gnome 3.x
>
> So did my late mother, and she was 85 at the time. She had no trouble
> whatsoever replacing Win98 after about an hour's training.
>
>>> I am sure. ;-) Even Linus Torvalds' own mother uses Linux. But Linus'
>>> own sister and father uses Windows. For me to make Linux useful, I
>>> would have to develop many drivers and applications. And that is far
>>> more costly than just buying Windows and I am done. ;-)
>>
>> When was the last time you tried Linux? I use Netrunner, a KDE distro
>> that's a rolling release. It rocks and is very, very easy to use. Which
>> "drivers and applications" would you have to develop?
>
> That may mean he writes "Windows applications" [.EXE files] (or he's an MS
> employee). I'll bet even a Mac would confuse him! ;-)

Hardly, I am well versed in RT-11, CP/M, MS-DOS, DR-DOS, GEOS, CS-DOS,
CBM-DOS, Geos Ensemble, Linux, Android, Mac, and Windows. Oh yeah, and
Palm-OS. MS employee? You got to be kidding? All of the stuff I have
commented about Microsoft since the 80's, they would never let me in the
door. ;-)

--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era) - Thunderbird v12
Centrino Core2 Duo T7400 2.16 GHz - 4GB - Windows 7 SP1

[Paul]

Gordon wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 16:59:46 +0000, Andy Burns
> > wrote:
>
>> Ken Blake wrote:
>>
>>> Gordon > wrote:
>>>
>>>> I would like to install Windows 8 on the other computer but can't find
>>>> a store copy that will let me install it on more than one computer.
>>>> Why?
>>> The rule is quite clear. It's one copy (or one license) for each
>>> computer.
>>>
>>> There's nothing new here.
>> Perhaps the O/P is thinking a "family" three-pack for Win8 might be
>> available, in the same way it was for Win7 ...
>>
> Right, this is what I had in mind. I don't mind paying for the
> licenses but I would like to buy them for all my computers in one
> bundle instead of having to buy a separate store bought copy of
> Windows 8 for each computer, then get confused as to which one is
> licensed for which computer???
>
> What I was hoping for was one store bought copy of Windows 8 with one
> registration number that could be applied to each of my comptuers.
> Then, later, if I have to reinstall for some reason I won't get
> confused as to which registration number applies to which computer.

Don't wait too long. The pricing of Win8 is already quite uneven.
(in terms of what people around the world are being offered,
and at what price). You should shop around before January 2013
is finished, because by then, they'll be using regular pricing
(whatever that is).

http://blogs.windows.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2012/07/02/upgrade-to-windows-8-pro-for-39-99.aspx

(5.2MB tool - has the option of ordering an electronic copy. The machine
you order from, the "bitness" should match the DVD image you want to download.
Use a machine already running a 64 bit OS, to order the 64 bit OS.
The 64 bit download is 2,896,756,736 bytes once it is converted to an ISO9660
file. The downloaded components live in C:\ESD . Don't panic, if you
think you selected the wrong option after the download is done.)

http://web.esd.microsoft.com/W8DL/WSEC5B1D8A9DFDFD92DFB736C5B1D8956B5B1D8/Windows8-UpgradeAssistant.exe

The offer we have here, is Win8 for $39.99, which is probably
comparable pricing to an older introductory family 3-pack. And
a license for MCE is available as well (you need TV tuners, IR blaster,
good AV output devices, to make that worthwhile).

You enter an email address here, and they send you a license key
for the MCE stuff. You add this to the OS after it is installed,
with "Add Feature". When you give it the feature key, the machine
does a double reboot while setting it up. It appears to be an
Anytime Upgrade style upgrade, in that I didn't see any
significant amount of broadband modem activity while it
was being applied. And the OS still starts up the same
way. I haven't had a chance to start MCE yet to have a look.
I've been installing things and running System Image for
the last little while.

http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-8/feature-packs

In terms of the install of Windows 8 Pro upgrade itself, you
don't have to "burn" any previous licenses. I installed on
a blank disk. After the first install (complete with entering
the 25 character key I purchased), I did an "OS refresh"
operation immediately after. Which basically does the install
a second time. And soon after that was finished, a trip to
the System control panel showed the OS was activated. You
don't have to install the OS on the same computer as you placed
the electronic order for it. So I appear to be able to continue
using my "qualifying OS". At least, until the next time I run
Windows Update, and something funny happens (just kidding).

After the System Refresh is finished, you end up with a "Windows.old"
folder. Since the OS I installed was brand new, there was nothing
in that folder worth keeping. Using Disk Cleanup, you can ask for that
to be deleted. Just look at all the available options, until
you convince the tool to look for Windows.old, and offer to
delete it.

Paul

[VanguardLH[_2_]]

"BillW50" wrote:

> On 12/24/2012 10:54 AM, ray wrote:
>> On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 10:30:17 -0600, Gordon wrote:
>>
>>> Our household computer/network setup has three desktops, one laptop and
>>> one Kindle. One of the desktop comptuers is a new HP Pavilion that came
>>> with Windows 8 preinstalled.
>>>
>>> I would like to install Windows 8 on the other computer but can't find a
>>> store copy that will let me install it on more than one computer. Why?
>>> Gordon
>>
>> MS licensing. Most Linux distributions, on the other hand, are free to
>> install on as many machines as you want.
>
> Yeah... but what good is it? Even if I installed Linux on a million
> machines, it still isn't as useful to me as one Windows machine. ;-)

As is typical with Linux proselytizers, they don't address the issue.
Use whatever OS fits your purpose, not the other way around. If you
have LPs then you get a record player. If you have DVDs then you get
that player. If you have Blueray then you need that type of player.
Figure out what you want to do and then find out what lets you do it.
Determine the tasks, find the apps (across any OS) that let you do those
tasks, and then decide on the OS. You might find one that does them all
or you might even decide on a couple different operating systems
utilizing the best of class functionality in each. The other way around
means you buy the player but don't know if there's anything yet to play
on it. Dumb. Use the best tool for the job.

Don't focus on the OS. Focus on what apps will do best what you want
and that'll decide the OS. For example, if you're a gamer and want the
largest selection available, are you really going to suffer the slowdown
of virtualizing Windows on Linux providing that all those games don't
require direct access to the real hardware? If you have a mission
critical business app that only runs on MS-DOS or Windows 98, are you
really going to trash your business by moving to an NT-based version of
Windows? If you want a super-reliable and robust file server that runs
on a platform with far less hardware requirements than demanded by
Windows, you sure you don't want to use Linux?

It's pretty clear the OP isn't asking for OS recommendations. He
already knows what he wants. A Linux proselytizer proffering an
irrelevant solution makes them look stupid and just as pathetic as a
Windows proselytizer flaming in the Linux newsgroups.

[BillW50]

On 12/24/2012 12:23 PM, VanguardLH wrote:
> "BillW50" wrote:
>
>> On 12/24/2012 10:54 AM, ray wrote:
>>> On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 10:30:17 -0600, Gordon wrote:
>>>
>>>> Our household computer/network setup has three desktops, one laptop and
>>>> one Kindle. One of the desktop comptuers is a new HP Pavilion that came
>>>> with Windows 8 preinstalled.
>>>>
>>>> I would like to install Windows 8 on the other computer but can't find a
>>>> store copy that will let me install it on more than one computer. Why?
>>>> Gordon
>>>
>>> MS licensing. Most Linux distributions, on the other hand, are free to
>>> install on as many machines as you want.
>>
>> Yeah... but what good is it? Even if I installed Linux on a million
>> machines, it still isn't as useful to me as one Windows machine. ;-)
>
> As is typical with Linux proselytizers, they don't address the issue.
> Use whatever OS fits your purpose, not the other way around. If you
> have LPs then you get a record player. If you have DVDs then you get
> that player. If you have Blueray then you need that type of player.
> Figure out what you want to do and then find out what lets you do it.
> Determine the tasks, find the apps (across any OS) that let you do those
> tasks, and then decide on the OS. You might find one that does them all
> or you might even decide on a couple different operating systems
> utilizing the best of class functionality in each. The other way around
> means you buy the player but don't know if there's anything yet to play
> on it. Dumb. Use the best tool for the job.
>
> Don't focus on the OS. Focus on what apps will do best what you want
> and that'll decide the OS. For example, if you're a gamer and want the
> largest selection available, are you really going to suffer the slowdown
> of virtualizing Windows on Linux providing that all those games don't
> require direct access to the real hardware? If you have a mission
> critical business app that only runs on MS-DOS or Windows 98, are you
> really going to trash your business by moving to an NT-based version of
> Windows? If you want a super-reliable and robust file server that runs
> on a platform with far less hardware requirements than demanded by
> Windows, you sure you don't want to use Linux?
>
> It's pretty clear the OP isn't asking for OS recommendations. He
> already knows what he wants. A Linux proselytizer proffering an
> irrelevant solution makes them look stupid and just as pathetic as a
> Windows proselytizer flaming in the Linux newsgroups.

Well said! ;-) I remember my mentors back in the early days said to pick
the applications that you want to run, then pick the OS that will run
them. Nothing really changed since then. ;-)

--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era) - Thunderbird v12
Centrino Core2 Duo T7400 2.16 GHz - 4GB - Windows 7 SP1

[VanguardLH[_2_]]

"BillW50" wrote:

> Gordon wrote:
>
>> I would like to install Windows 8 on the other computer but can't find
>> a store copy that will let me install it on more than one computer.
>
> Microsoft hasn't released a family pack for Windows 8 yet. But I guess
> it doesn't really matter. As it is priced at $39.99 for the Pro version
> for each machine, that is still cheaper than the Windows 7 family pack was.
>
> http://www.anandtech.com/show/6065/windows-8-upgrade-will-cost-just-3999

True, a cheap cost -- *if* you're upgrading. The OP said "install it"
which doesn't specify if he is upgrading or wants a full install. The
full version of Win8 Pro isn't as cheap as you mention. Also, I haven't
seen the $39.99 price you stated offered at online or retail stores
(where it's $69.99) and have only found it, so far, at Microsoft's store
but ONLY if you download it:

http://www.microsoftstore.com/store/msstore/html/pbpage.Windows_8_Pro
$39.99 download, $69.99 shipped

According to the Anandtech article (and the Windows blog to which it
refers), Microsoft download-only $39.99 promo period expires at the end
of Jan 2013. You have to download Win8 (from Microsoft) before the
promo expires to also get the free apps (none of them look like they're
worth the price or the value claimed):

http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows/app-offers

[Ken Blake[_4_]]

On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 11:05:57 -0600, Gordon >
wrote:

> On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 16:59:46 +0000, Andy Burns
> > wrote:
>
> >Ken Blake wrote:
> >
> >> Gordon > wrote:
> >>
> >>> I would like to install Windows 8 on the other computer but can't find
> >>> a store copy that will let me install it on more than one computer.
> >>> Why?
> >>
> >> The rule is quite clear. It's one copy (or one license) for each
> >> computer.
> >>
> >> There's nothing new here.
> >
> >Perhaps the O/P is thinking a "family" three-pack for Win8 might be
> >available, in the same way it was for Win7 ...
> >
> Right, this is what I had in mind. I don't mind paying for the
> licenses but I would like to buy them for all my computers in one
> bundle instead of having to buy a separate store bought copy of
> Windows 8 for each computer, then get confused as to which one is
> licensed for which computer???


Whether it's a bundle of three or three separate ones, it would still
be three licenses that you would have to buy, as I said. As far as I
know, there are no such bundles available for Windows 8.


> I don't mind paying for the
> licenses but I would like to buy them for all my computers in one
> bundle instead of having to buy a separate store bought copy of
> Windows 8 for each computer, then get confused as to which one is
> licensed for which computer???


Sorry, but I don't see any advantage at all. Why would you get
confused? You simply need to make a record of which product key goes
with each computer. You could even write the product key for each one
on a small piece of paper and tape it to the case of the appropriate
computer. In fact, that's what I do here, and I would recommend doing
just that.

--
Ken Blake

[Ken Blake[_4_]]

On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 12:42:40 -0500, "Dave \"Crash\" Dummy"
> wrote:

> Ken Blake wrote:
> > On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 10:30:17 -0600, Gordon >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Our household computer/network setup has three desktops, one laptop
> >> and one Kindle. One of the desktop comptuers is a new HP Pavilion
> >> that came with Windows 8 preinstalled.
> >>
> >> I would like to install Windows 8 on the other computer but can't
> >> find a store copy that will let me install it on more than one
> >> computer. Why?
> >
> >
> > The rule is quite clear. It's one copy (or one license) for each
> > computer.
> >
> > There's nothing new here. This is exactly the same rule that's been
> > in effect on every version of Windows starting at least with Windows
> > 3.1.
>
> Yes, and of course we all ran out and bought separate copies of Windows
> 9x/2K for Mom and Dad and the all the kids.


What you do is between you and your conscience. I don't really care
what you steal, as long as it's not from me.


--
Ken Blake

[BillW50]

On 12/24/2012 12:52 PM, Ken Blake wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 11:05:57 -0600, >
> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 16:59:46 +0000, Andy Burns
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Ken Blake wrote:
>>>
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I would like to install Windows 8 on the other computer but can't find
>>>>> a store copy that will let me install it on more than one computer.
>>>>> Why?
>>>>
>>>> The rule is quite clear. It's one copy (or one license) for each
>>>> computer.
>>>>
>>>> There's nothing new here.
>>>
>>> Perhaps the O/P is thinking a "family" three-pack for Win8 might be
>>> available, in the same way it was for Win7 ...
>>>
>> Right, this is what I had in mind. I don't mind paying for the
>> licenses but I would like to buy them for all my computers in one
>> bundle instead of having to buy a separate store bought copy of
>> Windows 8 for each computer, then get confused as to which one is
>> licensed for which computer???
>
>
> Whether it's a bundle of three or three separate ones, it would still
> be three licenses that you would have to buy, as I said. As far as I
> know, there are no such bundles available for Windows 8.
>
>
>> I don't mind paying for the
>> licenses but I would like to buy them for all my computers in one
>> bundle instead of having to buy a separate store bought copy of
>> Windows 8 for each computer, then get confused as to which one is
>> licensed for which computer???
>
> Sorry, but I don't see any advantage at all. Why would you get
> confused? You simply need to make a record of which product key goes
> with each computer. You could even write the product key for each one
> on a small piece of paper and tape it to the case of the appropriate
> computer. In fact, that's what I do here, and I would recommend doing
> just that.

You don't see the advantage? You even mentioned the advantage without
knowing it. *YOU* have to make a record of which product key goes with
each computer. While *Gordon* has no need to keep such a record. ;-)
Corporate licenses are the same way. One key for all of their computers.
Same advantage. They don't have to keep a record of which key goes with
what computer either. Plus you get a price break with either the family
pack or a corporate license to boot. ;-)

--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era) - Thunderbird v12
Centrino Core2 Duo T7400 2.16 GHz - 4GB - Windows 7 SP1

[Gene Wirchenko[_2_]]

On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 11:05:57 -0600, Gordon >
wrote:

[snip]

>What I was hoping for was one store bought copy of Windows 8 with one
>registration number that could be applied to each of my comptuers.
>Then, later, if I have to reinstall for some reason I won't get
>confused as to which registration number applies to which computer.

This might be of use to you:
http://www.magicaljellybean.com/keyfinder/

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

[KCB[_2_]]

"Ken Blake" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 11:05:57 -0600, Gordon >
> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 16:59:46 +0000, Andy Burns
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >Ken Blake wrote:
>> >
>> >> Gordon > wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> I would like to install Windows 8 on the other computer but can't
>> >>> find
>> >>> a store copy that will let me install it on more than one computer.
>> >>> Why?
>> >>
>> >> The rule is quite clear. It's one copy (or one license) for each
>> >> computer.
>> >>
>> >> There's nothing new here.
>> >
>> >Perhaps the O/P is thinking a "family" three-pack for Win8 might be
>> >available, in the same way it was for Win7 ...
>> >
>> Right, this is what I had in mind. I don't mind paying for the
>> licenses but I would like to buy them for all my computers in one
>> bundle instead of having to buy a separate store bought copy of
>> Windows 8 for each computer, then get confused as to which one is
>> licensed for which computer???
>
>
> Whether it's a bundle of three or three separate ones, it would still
> be three licenses that you would have to buy, as I said. As far as I
> know, there are no such bundles available for Windows 8.
>
>
>> I don't mind paying for the
>> licenses but I would like to buy them for all my computers in one
>> bundle instead of having to buy a separate store bought copy of
>> Windows 8 for each computer, then get confused as to which one is
>> licensed for which computer???
>
>
> Sorry, but I don't see any advantage at all. Why would you get
> confused? You simply need to make a record of which product key goes
> with each computer. You could even write the product key for each one
> on a small piece of paper and tape it to the case of the appropriate
> computer. In fact, that's what I do here, and I would recommend doing
> just that.

My previous store-bought copies came with license stickers to affix to
whatever machine had that copy of Windows. Doesn't Win8 provide that also?

[Ken Blake[_4_]]

On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 18:53:52 -0500, "KCB" >
wrote:

>
>
> "Ken Blake" > wrote in message
> ...

> > Sorry, but I don't see any advantage at all. Why would you get
> > confused? You simply need to make a record of which product key goes
> > with each computer. You could even write the product key for each one
> > on a small piece of paper and tape it to the case of the appropriate
> > computer. In fact, that's what I do here, and I would recommend doing
> > just that.
>
> My previous store-bought copies came with license stickers to affix to
> whatever machine had that copy of Windows. Doesn't Win8 provide that also?


Sorry, I don't know. My copy wasn't store-bought, but came from
Technet.


--
Ken Blake

[Alias[_43_]]

On 12/24/2012 7:10 PM, BillW50 wrote:
> On 12/24/2012 11:59 AM, Sam Hill wrote:
>> On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 18:21:45 +0100, Alias wrote:
>>
>>> On 12/24/2012 6:13 PM, BillW50 wrote:
>>>>>> Even if I installed Linux on a million machines, it still isn't as
>>>>>> useful to me as one Windows machine. ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>> My mum seems to cope with Gnome 2.x on an oldish fedora, I bet if I
>>>>> sat her in front of a Win8 machine she'd just give up, sadly the same
>>>>> might be true with Gnome 3.x
>>
>> So did my late mother, and she was 85 at the time. She had no trouble
>> whatsoever replacing Win98 after about an hour's training.
>>
>>>> I am sure. ;-) Even Linus Torvalds' own mother uses Linux. But Linus'
>>>> own sister and father uses Windows. For me to make Linux useful, I
>>>> would have to develop many drivers and applications. And that is far
>>>> more costly than just buying Windows and I am done. ;-)
>>>
>>> When was the last time you tried Linux? I use Netrunner, a KDE distro
>>> that's a rolling release. It rocks and is very, very easy to use. Which
>>> "drivers and applications" would you have to develop?
>>
>> That may mean he writes "Windows applications" [.EXE files] (or he's
>> an MS
>> employee). I'll bet even a Mac would confuse him! ;-)
>
> Hardly, I am well versed in RT-11, CP/M, MS-DOS, DR-DOS, GEOS, CS-DOS,
> CBM-DOS, Geos Ensemble, Linux, Android, Mac, and Windows. Oh yeah, and
> Palm-OS. MS employee? You got to be kidding? All of the stuff I have
> commented about Microsoft since the 80's, they would never let me in the
> door. ;-)
>

When was the last time you tried Linux? I use Netrunner, a KDE distro
that's a rolling release. It rocks and is very, very easy to use. Which
"drivers and applications" would you have to develop?

--
Alias

[BillW50]

On 12/24/2012 5:53 PM, KCB wrote:
>
>
> "Ken Blake" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 11:05:57 -0600, Gordon >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 16:59:46 +0000, Andy Burns
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>> >Ken Blake wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Gordon > wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>> I would like to install Windows 8 on the other computer but can't
>>> >>> find
>>> >>> a store copy that will let me install it on more than one computer.
>>> >>> Why?
>>> >>
>>> >> The rule is quite clear. It's one copy (or one license) for each
>>> >> computer.
>>> >>
>>> >> There's nothing new here.
>>> >
>>> >Perhaps the O/P is thinking a "family" three-pack for Win8 might be
>>> >available, in the same way it was for Win7 ...
>>> >
>>> Right, this is what I had in mind. I don't mind paying for the
>>> licenses but I would like to buy them for all my computers in one
>>> bundle instead of having to buy a separate store bought copy of
>>> Windows 8 for each computer, then get confused as to which one is
>>> licensed for which computer???
>>
>>
>> Whether it's a bundle of three or three separate ones, it would still
>> be three licenses that you would have to buy, as I said. As far as I
>> know, there are no such bundles available for Windows 8.
>>
>>
>>> I don't mind paying for the
>>> licenses but I would like to buy them for all my computers in one
>>> bundle instead of having to buy a separate store bought copy of
>>> Windows 8 for each computer, then get confused as to which one is
>>> licensed for which computer???
>>
>>
>> Sorry, but I don't see any advantage at all. Why would you get
>> confused? You simply need to make a record of which product key goes
>> with each computer. You could even write the product key for each one
>> on a small piece of paper and tape it to the case of the appropriate
>> computer. In fact, that's what I do here, and I would recommend doing
>> just that.
>
> My previous store-bought copies came with license stickers to affix to
> whatever machine had that copy of Windows. Doesn't Win8 provide that also?

All of my Windows 7 Home premium store bought copies have the sticker
stuck on the outside of the DVD case inside of the cardboard box. You
could I suppose peel it off and stick it on your computer. But it
probably won't be so sticky and might fall off. It might need help with
some tape.

My Windows 8 Pro store bought copies have a cute keycard (like a motel
keycard, but this is cardboard) with a sticker on the card slipped in a
slot inside of the cardboard DVD case. I suppose you could tape the
whole keycard on the computer. I also purchased one Windows 8 Pro by
download. All of get is one email with the key and that is it.

--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era) - Thunderbird v12
Centrino Core2 Duo T7400 2.16 GHz - 4GB - Windows 7 SP1

[ray]

On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 11:01:05 -0600, BillW50 wrote:

> On 12/24/2012 10:54 AM, ray wrote:
>> On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 10:30:17 -0600, Gordon wrote:
>>
>>> Our household computer/network setup has three desktops, one laptop
>>> and one Kindle. One of the desktop comptuers is a new HP Pavilion that
>>> came with Windows 8 preinstalled.
>>>
>>> I would like to install Windows 8 on the other computer but can't find
>>> a store copy that will let me install it on more than one computer.
>>> Why? Gordon
>>
>> MS licensing. Most Linux distributions, on the other hand, are free to
>> install on as many machines as you want.
>
> Yeah... but what good is it? Even if I installed Linux on a million
> machines, it still isn't as useful to me as one Windows machine. ;-)

Simply pointing out the licensing differences. If anything I said was
wrong, I'll happily apologize. BTW, I could swap OS's in your statement
and it would fit me.

[...winston[_2_]]

"Gordon" wrote in message ...

> Andy Burns wrote.. Perhaps the O/P is thinking a "family" three-pack for
> Win8 might be available, in the same way it was for Win7 ...

>
Right, this is what I had in mind. I don't mind paying for the
licenses but I would like to buy them for all my computers in one
bundle instead of having to buy a separate store bought copy of
Windows 8 for each computer, then get confused as to which one is
licensed for which computer???

What I was hoping for was one store bought copy of Windows 8 with one
registration number that could be applied to each of my comptuers.
Then, later, if I have to reinstall for some reason I won't get
confused as to which registration number applies to which computer.
>

One can purchase up to 5 licenses from MSFT.
Download version $39.99 (with ability to create DVD from iso file) or $69.99 with DVD

"Offer valid from October 26, 2012 until January 31, 2013 and is for individuals and small businesses needing to upgrade up to five
devices"
http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows/buy

Note:
- after purchase one will receive an email with a link to download
- when downloading -->>>> the architecture (32 or 64 bit) of the machine performing the download determines the architecture of the
o/s received (32 bit or 64 bit).

--
....winston
msft mvp consumer apps

[...winston[_2_]]

"Dave "Crash" Dummy" wrote in message ...

> Yes, and of course we all ran out and bought separate copies of
> Windows 9x/2K for Mom and Dad and the all the kids.

Licensing language changed with Vista and Win7 and again with Win8 yet throughout the entire evolution of Win95 to current the one
pc/device per license has been consistent...with the only other variation occurring in offering multi-pack 'family' licenses and XP
Mode (XPM) for Win7 Pro, Ultimate, & Enterprise.

Licensing, as previously mentioned, does not necessarily equate to what is technically feasible.

....winston
msft mvp consumer apps

[Dave \Crash\ Dummy]

....winston wrote:
>
>
> "Dave "Crash" Dummy" wrote in message
> ...
>
>> Yes, and of course we all ran out and bought separate copies of
>> Windows 9x/2K for Mom and Dad and the all the kids.
>
> Licensing language changed with Vista and Win7 and again with Win8
> yet throughout the entire evolution of Win95 to current the one
> pc/device per license has been consistent...with the only other
> variation occurring in offering multi-pack 'family' licenses and XP
> Mode (XPM) for Win7 Pro, Ultimate, & Enterprise.
>
> Licensing, as previously mentioned, does not necessarily equate to
> what is technically feasible.

I live alone and have one computer, so I never worried much about it. I did
have several separately bootable Windows 2000 partitions on the same
computer, though. I used them for backup and software testing. Should I
have bought a license for each partition? Would a single license allow
me to install Windows 7 or 8 on more than one partition in the same
computer?
--
Crash

"When you get to a fork in the road, take it."
~ Yogi Berra ~

[BillW50]

On 12/26/2012 2:28 PM, ...winston wrote:
>
>
> "Dave "Crash" Dummy" wrote in message ...
>
>> Yes, and of course we all ran out and bought separate copies of
>> Windows 9x/2K for Mom and Dad and the all the kids.
>
> Licensing language changed with Vista and Win7 and again with Win8 yet
> throughout the entire evolution of Win95 to current the one pc/device
> per license has been consistent...with the only other variation
> occurring in offering multi-pack 'family' licenses and XP Mode (XPM) for
> Win7 Pro, Ultimate, & Enterprise.
>
> Licensing, as previously mentioned, does not necessarily equate to what
> is technically feasible.
>
> ...winston
> msft mvp consumer apps

Another exception is using an older qualifying Windows and the key for
the OEM downgrade option. Thus you could have two or more computers
using the same key. Although they must be licensed individually from the
originally installed Windows to begin with.

--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era) - Thunderbird v12
Centrino Core2 Duo T7400 2.16 GHz - 4GB - Windows 7 SP1

[Ken Blake[_4_]]

On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 16:23:52 -0500, "Dave \"Crash\" Dummy"
> wrote:

> I live alone and have one computer, so I never worried much about it. I did
> have several separately bootable Windows 2000 partitions on the same
> computer, though. I used them for backup and software testing. Should I
> have bought a license for each partition? Would a single license allow
> me to install Windows 7 or 8 on more than one partition in the same
> computer?


No. You are supposed to have one license for each installation.
Whether the multiple installations are on multiple computers or one
computer is irrelevant.




--
Ken Blake

[...winston[_2_]]

"Dave "Crash" Dummy" wrote in message ...

....winston wrote:
>> Licensing, as previously mentioned, does not necessarily equate to what is technically feasible.

>
I live alone and have one computer, so I never worried much about it. I did
have several separately bootable Windows 2000 partitions on the same
computer, though. I used them for backup and software testing.
Q1. Should I have bought a license for each partition?
Q2. Would a single license allow me to install Windows 7 or 8 on more than one partition in the same computer?
>
Q1. Based on MSFT's licensing, Yes.
Q2. No for both (Win7 and Win8)

Also, as noted previously- Licensing changed with Win8 for the three available licenses available to the consumer.
OEM Pre-installed - one License stays with the pc.
- "we grant you the right to install and run one copy only on the computer with which you acquired the software (the licensed
computer)..."

Upgrade - one license per upgrade purchase, upgrades an existing qualifying o/s and nullifies/replaces the qualifying o/s license
with installation and use of Win8 license
- "we grant you the right to install and run that one copy on one computer (the licensed computer)"

Personal Use System Builder - one license for use on the pc or partition or virtual machine (keyword ***or***)
- "we grant you the right to install and run that one copy on one computer (the licensed computer) as the operating system on a
computer that you build for your personal use, or as an additional operating system running on a local virtual machine or a
separate partition, subject to the restrictions outlined under “Are there things I’m not allowed to do with the software?”".
- *Are there things.....* - "You may not install the software as an operating system on any computer except one that you are
building for your own use or as an operating system running on a local virtual machine or a separate partition.

It' all pretty clear, and as noted technically feasible (what is possible) is different than licensing.

--
....winston
msft mvp consumer apps

[Gene E. Bloch[_2_]]

On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 11:44:20 -0600, BillW50 wrote:

> On 12/24/2012 11:37 AM, Ken1943 wrote:
>> Still only one install per dvd. I would have to buy 100 for 100 machines.
>>
>>
>> KenW
>
> I never bought the family pack. But my understanding is that it has one
> install disc and one key. But it is good to install on up to three
> computers. It sounds like Gordon has one of these. Maybe he can clarify.

My Windows 7 Family Pack seems to do what you say, i.e., only one key. I
would guess that the Windows 8 setup is the same. I might be wrong, of
course.

The Windows 8 Family Pack was only $69 a month or so ago at the local
Microsoft store, but I don't recall if that was a time-limited price. I
also forgot if it was for an upgrade. At the time we decided not to get
it. I just got the $15 deal for a new Windows 7 box and so far haven't
decided to upgrade the old computers.

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

[Gene E. Bloch[_2_]]

On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 10:42:27 -0600, BillW50 wrote:

> Microsoft hasn't released a family pack for Windows 8 yet. But I guess
> it doesn't really matter. As it is priced at $39.99 for the Pro version
> for each machine, that is still cheaper than the Windows 7 family pack was.

The local Microsoft store was willing to sell me a Family Pack for $69 a
month or so ago. That was an upgrade, I think (just like my Win 7 FP
was).

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

[BillW50]

In ,
Gene E. Bloch typed:
> On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 10:42:27 -0600, BillW50 wrote:
>
>> Microsoft hasn't released a family pack for Windows 8 yet. But I
>> guess
>> it doesn't really matter. As it is priced at $39.99 for the Pro
>> version for each machine, that is still cheaper than the Windows 7
>> family pack was.
>
> The local Microsoft store was willing to sell me a Family Pack for
> $69 a month or so ago. That was an upgrade, I think (just like my Win
> 7 FP was).

This was for Windows 7 or 8 and what edition? At any rate, that is a
great price. Not even newegg had those prices.

--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era) - OE-QuoteFix v1.19.2
Centrino Core2 Duo T5600 1.83GHz - 4GB - Windows XP SP2

[...winston[_2_]]

"Gene E. Bloch" wrote in message ...

>
The Windows 8 Family Pack was only $69 a month or so ago at the local
Microsoft store, but I don't recall if that was a time-limited price. I
also forgot if it was for an upgrade. At the time we decided not to get
it. I just got the $15 deal for a new Windows 7 box and so far haven't
decided to upgrade the old computers.
>

MSFT has yet to release a 'Win8 Family Pack'
MSFT Stores have mostly been limited to offering 'Upgrade' versions with only a few select MSFT Stores selling the full version
Personal Use for System Builder (fka OEM System Builder).

--
....winston
msft mvp consumer apps

[Gene E. Bloch[_2_]]

On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 01:53:24 -0600, BillW50 wrote:

> In ,
> Gene E. Bloch typed:
>> On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 10:42:27 -0600, BillW50 wrote:
>>
>>> Microsoft hasn't released a family pack for Windows 8 yet. But I
>>> guess
>>> it doesn't really matter. As it is priced at $39.99 for the Pro
>>> version for each machine, that is still cheaper than the Windows 7
>>> family pack was.
>>
>> The local Microsoft store was willing to sell me a Family Pack for
>> $69 a month or so ago. That was an upgrade, I think (just like my Win
>> 7 FP was).
>
> This was for Windows 7 or 8 and what edition? At any rate, that is a
> great price. Not even newegg had those prices.

Uh - it's from Win 7 to Win 8.

I didn't get the edition information from the sales person. We had just
dropped into the Microsoft store on impulse as we walked past it at the
shopping center :-)

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

[Ken Springer[_2_]]

On 12/24/12 11:23 AM, VanguardLH wrote:
> "BillW50" wrote:
>
>> On 12/24/2012 10:54 AM, ray wrote:
>>> On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 10:30:17 -0600, Gordon wrote:
>>>
>>>> Our household computer/network setup has three desktops, one laptop and
>>>> one Kindle. One of the desktop comptuers is a new HP Pavilion that came
>>>> with Windows 8 preinstalled.
>>>>
>>>> I would like to install Windows 8 on the other computer but can't find a
>>>> store copy that will let me install it on more than one computer. Why?
>>>> Gordon
>>>
>>> MS licensing. Most Linux distributions, on the other hand, are free to
>>> install on as many machines as you want.
>>
>> Yeah... but what good is it? Even if I installed Linux on a million
>> machines, it still isn't as useful to me as one Windows machine. ;-)
>
> As is typical with Linux proselytizers, they don't address the issue.
> Use whatever OS fits your purpose, not the other way around. If you
> have LPs then you get a record player. If you have DVDs then you get
> that player. If you have Blueray then you need that type of player.
> Figure out what you want to do and then find out what lets you do it.
> Determine the tasks, find the apps (across any OS) that let you do those
> tasks, and then decide on the OS. You might find one that does them all
> or you might even decide on a couple different operating systems
> utilizing the best of class functionality in each. The other way around
> means you buy the player but don't know if there's anything yet to play
> on it. Dumb. Use the best tool for the job.
>
> Don't focus on the OS. Focus on what apps will do best what you want
> and that'll decide the OS. For example, if you're a gamer and want the
> largest selection available, are you really going to suffer the slowdown
> of virtualizing Windows on Linux providing that all those games don't
> require direct access to the real hardware? If you have a mission
> critical business app that only runs on MS-DOS or Windows 98, are you
> really going to trash your business by moving to an NT-based version of
> Windows? If you want a super-reliable and robust file server that runs
> on a platform with far less hardware requirements than demanded by
> Windows, you sure you don't want to use Linux?
>
> It's pretty clear the OP isn't asking for OS recommendations. He
> already knows what he wants. A Linux proselytizer proffering an
> irrelevant solution makes them look stupid and just as pathetic as a
> Windows proselytizer flaming in the Linux newsgroups.

+2

Very, very well said. You're approach is exactly how any project should
be approached. Determine the result you want, then determine what needs
to be done to accomplish the result. A man named Stephen Covey made
millions doing seminars to tell people just that.

When it comes to Linux solutions, I wish places like Best Buy would set
up a few popular Linux machines, I think low power low price solutions,
so people can have a better chance to make a decision.

Unfortunately, I don't think most consumers/shoppers have the knowledge
or interest is learning what they need to know to follow your
example/system. But with the current economy, having the low priced
Linux systems in stores might attract some sales that otherwise would
not happen.

--
Ken

Mac OS X 10.8.2
Firefox 18.0.1
Thunderbird 17.0.2
LibreOffice 3.6.3.2

[Gordon]

On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 11:44:20 -0600, BillW50 > wrote:

>On 12/24/2012 11:37 AM, Ken1943 wrote:
>> Still only one install per dvd. I would have to buy 100 for 100 machines.
>>
>>
>> KenW
>
>I never bought the family pack. But my understanding is that it has one
>install disc and one key. But it is good to install on up to three
>computers. It sounds like Gordon has one of these. Maybe he can clarify.
>
Bill, sorry I didn't catch this earlier. I bought a new HP Pavilion
with windows 8 pre-installed, then I upgraded my old computer to
windows 8 with a new single computer copy of Windows 8 I bought at the
local Office Max store. Gordon

[BillW50]

In ,
Ken Springer typed:
> On 12/24/12 11:23 AM, VanguardLH wrote:
>> "BillW50" wrote:
>>
>>> On 12/24/2012 10:54 AM, ray wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 10:30:17 -0600, Gordon wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Our household computer/network setup has three desktops, one
>>>>> laptop and one Kindle. One of the desktop comptuers is a new HP
>>>>> Pavilion that came with Windows 8 preinstalled.
>>>>>
>>>>> I would like to install Windows 8 on the other computer but can't
>>>>> find a store copy that will let me install it on more than one
>>>>> computer. Why? Gordon
>>>>
>>>> MS licensing. Most Linux distributions, on the other hand, are
>>>> free to install on as many machines as you want.
>>>
>>> Yeah... but what good is it? Even if I installed Linux on a million
>>> machines, it still isn't as useful to me as one Windows machine. ;-)
>>
>> As is typical with Linux proselytizers, they don't address the issue.
>> Use whatever OS fits your purpose, not the other way around. If you
>> have LPs then you get a record player. If you have DVDs then you get
>> that player. If you have Blueray then you need that type of player.
>> Figure out what you want to do and then find out what lets you do it.
>> Determine the tasks, find the apps (across any OS) that let you do
>> those tasks, and then decide on the OS. You might find one that
>> does them all or you might even decide on a couple different
>> operating systems utilizing the best of class functionality in each.
>> The other way around means you buy the player but don't know if
>> there's anything yet to play on it. Dumb. Use the best tool for
>> the job. Don't focus on the OS. Focus on what apps will do best what
>> you want
>> and that'll decide the OS. For example, if you're a gamer and want
>> the largest selection available, are you really going to suffer the
>> slowdown of virtualizing Windows on Linux providing that all those
>> games don't require direct access to the real hardware? If you have
>> a mission critical business app that only runs on MS-DOS or Windows
>> 98, are you really going to trash your business by moving to an
>> NT-based version of Windows? If you want a super-reliable and
>> robust file server that runs on a platform with far less hardware
>> requirements than demanded by Windows, you sure you don't want to
>> use Linux? It's pretty clear the OP isn't asking for OS
>> recommendations. He
>> already knows what he wants. A Linux proselytizer proffering an
>> irrelevant solution makes them look stupid and just as pathetic as a
>> Windows proselytizer flaming in the Linux newsgroups.
>
> +2
>
> Very, very well said. You're approach is exactly how any project
> should be approached. Determine the result you want, then determine
> what needs to be done to accomplish the result. A man named Stephen
> Covey made millions doing seminars to tell people just that.
>
> When it comes to Linux solutions, I wish places like Best Buy would
> set up a few popular Linux machines, I think low power low price
> solutions, so people can have a better chance to make a decision.
>
> Unfortunately, I don't think most consumers/shoppers have the
> knowledge or interest is learning what they need to know to follow
> your example/system. But with the current economy, having the low
> priced Linux systems in stores might attract some sales that
> otherwise would not happen.

Oh man! You know how many times this has been tried? It has been tried
over and over again and it always ends up with the same result. Linux
PCs just doesn't sell. Sure you can sell one here or there, but you
always end up losing money because you can't move your stockpile.

The largest attempt at selling Linux machines that I know of was when
Asus created the first netbook with their EeePC 700 series line back in
2007. While they were XP compatible and came with XP drivers and all,
but they all came preinstalled with Xandros Linux. They were selling
these things in the millions. This is the only success story of Linux
machines that I know of.

Microsoft got scared and came up with a new netbook OEM pricing that
made Windows more affordable with the lower prices of netbooks. Now Asus
started to offer either Linux or XP on their machines. And if you wanted
one with Windows, it costs about 50 bucks more. And the XP ones nobody
could keep in stock and the Linux ones just wasn't moving anymore. It
got so bad that Asus stopped configuring anymore with Linux
preinstalled.

And it isn't just Linux with this problem. IBM back in around 1990
stopped shipping machines with Windows and replaced it with OS/2. Then
the sales of IBM machines plummeted. Another computer manufacture in
Austria also stopped selling machines with Windows. Although they didn't
back off of their decision and they went bankrupt in about 6 months.

--
Bill
Motion Computing LE1700 Tablet ('09 era) - OE-QuoteFix v1.19.2
Centrino Core2 Duo L7400 1.5GHz - 2GB RAM
Windows XP Tablet PC Edition 2005 SP2

[BillW50]

In ,
Gordon typed:
> On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 11:44:20 -0600, BillW50 > wrote:
>
>> On 12/24/2012 11:37 AM, Ken1943 wrote:
>>> Still only one install per dvd. I would have to buy 100 for 100
>>> machines.
>>>
>>>
>>> KenW
>>
>> I never bought the family pack. But my understanding is that it has
>> one install disc and one key. But it is good to install on up to
>> three computers. It sounds like Gordon has one of these. Maybe he
>> can clarify.
>>
> Bill, sorry I didn't catch this earlier. I bought a new HP Pavilion
> with windows 8 pre-installed, then I upgraded my old computer to
> windows 8 with a new single computer copy of Windows 8 I bought at the
> local Office Max store. Gordon

Oh ok, thanks!

--
Bill
Motion Computing LE1700 Tablet ('09 era) - OE-QuoteFix v1.19.2
Centrino Core2 Duo L7400 1.5GHz - 2GB RAM
Windows XP Tablet PC Edition 2005 SP2

[Alias[_43_]]

On 2/2/2013 6:21 PM, BillW50 wrote:
> In ,
> Ken Springer typed:
>> On 12/24/12 11:23 AM, VanguardLH wrote:
>>> "BillW50" wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 12/24/2012 10:54 AM, ray wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 10:30:17 -0600, Gordon wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Our household computer/network setup has three desktops, one
>>>>>> laptop and one Kindle. One of the desktop comptuers is a new HP
>>>>>> Pavilion that came with Windows 8 preinstalled.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would like to install Windows 8 on the other computer but can't
>>>>>> find a store copy that will let me install it on more than one
>>>>>> computer. Why? Gordon
>>>>>
>>>>> MS licensing. Most Linux distributions, on the other hand, are
>>>>> free to install on as many machines as you want.
>>>>
>>>> Yeah... but what good is it? Even if I installed Linux on a million
>>>> machines, it still isn't as useful to me as one Windows machine. ;-)
>>>
>>> As is typical with Linux proselytizers, they don't address the issue.
>>> Use whatever OS fits your purpose, not the other way around. If you
>>> have LPs then you get a record player. If you have DVDs then you get
>>> that player. If you have Blueray then you need that type of player.
>>> Figure out what you want to do and then find out what lets you do it.
>>> Determine the tasks, find the apps (across any OS) that let you do
>>> those tasks, and then decide on the OS. You might find one that
>>> does them all or you might even decide on a couple different
>>> operating systems utilizing the best of class functionality in each.
>>> The other way around means you buy the player but don't know if
>>> there's anything yet to play on it. Dumb. Use the best tool for
>>> the job. Don't focus on the OS. Focus on what apps will do best what
>>> you want
>>> and that'll decide the OS. For example, if you're a gamer and want
>>> the largest selection available, are you really going to suffer the
>>> slowdown of virtualizing Windows on Linux providing that all those
>>> games don't require direct access to the real hardware? If you have
>>> a mission critical business app that only runs on MS-DOS or Windows
>>> 98, are you really going to trash your business by moving to an
>>> NT-based version of Windows? If you want a super-reliable and
>>> robust file server that runs on a platform with far less hardware
>>> requirements than demanded by Windows, you sure you don't want to
>>> use Linux? It's pretty clear the OP isn't asking for OS
>>> recommendations. He
>>> already knows what he wants. A Linux proselytizer proffering an
>>> irrelevant solution makes them look stupid and just as pathetic as a
>>> Windows proselytizer flaming in the Linux newsgroups.
>>
>> +2
>>
>> Very, very well said. You're approach is exactly how any project
>> should be approached. Determine the result you want, then determine
>> what needs to be done to accomplish the result. A man named Stephen
>> Covey made millions doing seminars to tell people just that.
>>
>> When it comes to Linux solutions, I wish places like Best Buy would
>> set up a few popular Linux machines, I think low power low price
>> solutions, so people can have a better chance to make a decision.
>>
>> Unfortunately, I don't think most consumers/shoppers have the
>> knowledge or interest is learning what they need to know to follow
>> your example/system. But with the current economy, having the low
>> priced Linux systems in stores might attract some sales that
>> otherwise would not happen.
>
> Oh man! You know how many times this has been tried? It has been tried
> over and over again and it always ends up with the same result. Linux
> PCs just doesn't sell. Sure you can sell one here or there, but you
> always end up losing money because you can't move your stockpile.
>
> The largest attempt at selling Linux machines that I know of was when
> Asus created the first netbook with their EeePC 700 series line back in
> 2007. While they were XP compatible and came with XP drivers and all,
> but they all came preinstalled with Xandros Linux. They were selling
> these things in the millions. This is the only success story of Linux
> machines that I know of.
>
> Microsoft got scared and came up with a new netbook OEM pricing that
> made Windows more affordable with the lower prices of netbooks. Now Asus
> started to offer either Linux or XP on their machines. And if you wanted
> one with Windows, it costs about 50 bucks more. And the XP ones nobody
> could keep in stock and the Linux ones just wasn't moving anymore. It
> got so bad that Asus stopped configuring anymore with Linux
> preinstalled.
>
> And it isn't just Linux with this problem. IBM back in around 1990
> stopped shipping machines with Windows and replaced it with OS/2. Then
> the sales of IBM machines plummeted. Another computer manufacture in
> Austria also stopped selling machines with Windows. Although they didn't
> back off of their decision and they went bankrupt in about 6 months.
>

You're right, the typical home user would prefer Windows or Apple.
Universities and governments, OTOH, use Linux widely.

--
Alias

[Ken Springer[_2_]]

On 2/2/13 10:21 AM, BillW50 wrote:
> In ,
> Ken Springer typed:
>> On 12/24/12 11:23 AM, VanguardLH wrote:
>>> "BillW50" wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 12/24/2012 10:54 AM, ray wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 10:30:17 -0600, Gordon wrote:
>>>>>

<snip>

>
> Oh man! You know how many times this has been tried? It has been tried
> over and over again and it always ends up with the same result. Linux
> PCs just doesn't sell. Sure you can sell one here or there, but you
> always end up losing money because you can't move your stockpile.
>
> The largest attempt at selling Linux machines that I know of was when
> Asus created the first netbook with their EeePC 700 series line back in
> 2007. While they were XP compatible and came with XP drivers and all,
> but they all came preinstalled with Xandros Linux. They were selling
> these things in the millions. This is the only success story of Linux
> machines that I know of.
>
> Microsoft got scared and came up with a new netbook OEM pricing that
> made Windows more affordable with the lower prices of netbooks. Now Asus
> started to offer either Linux or XP on their machines. And if you wanted
> one with Windows, it costs about 50 bucks more. And the XP ones nobody
> could keep in stock and the Linux ones just wasn't moving anymore. It
> got so bad that Asus stopped configuring anymore with Linux
> preinstalled.
>
> And it isn't just Linux with this problem. IBM back in around 1990
> stopped shipping machines with Windows and replaced it with OS/2. Then
> the sales of IBM machines plummeted. Another computer manufacture in
> Austria also stopped selling machines with Windows. Although they didn't
> back off of their decision and they went bankrupt in about 6 months.

Like most things, I'd bet it's more marketing and presentation than
anything else.

So, MS changed pricing so there was a $50 difference. Did Asus and/or
the retailers put up a sign saying Free Software? Then, if Open Office
or something was installed, also saying it was MS Office compatible?
Thus letting people know that while there was only a $50 difference,
they wouldn't have to buy software?

How about pointing out little to no malware out there for the Linux unit?

Speed differences that can be independently confirmed?

I see Dell also tried to sell Linux based machines. But, if you went
somewhere like Best Buy, did you get to see any Dells with Linux
installed? If you want the unknowing to consider Linux, you've got to
get systems on showroom floors so people will find out there's something
different.

In your Asus example, that price difference got the unknowing people's
attention. When that goes away, you have to have something else to get
their attention. If you don't do that, then you are just "selling to
the choir", which definitely won't do much to increase the user base
numbers.


--
Ken

Mac OS X 10.8.2
Firefox 18.0.1
Thunderbird 17.0.2
LibreOffice 3.6.3.2

[BillW50]

In ,
Ken Springer typed:
> On 2/2/13 10:21 AM, BillW50 wrote:
>> In ,
>> Ken Springer typed:
>>> On 12/24/12 11:23 AM, VanguardLH wrote:
>>>> "BillW50" wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 12/24/2012 10:54 AM, ray wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 10:30:17 -0600, Gordon wrote:
>>>>>>
>
> <snip>
>
>>
>> Oh man! You know how many times this has been tried? It has been
>> tried over and over again and it always ends up with the same
>> result. Linux PCs just doesn't sell. Sure you can sell one here or
>> there, but you always end up losing money because you can't move
>> your stockpile. The largest attempt at selling Linux machines that I
>> know of was when
>> Asus created the first netbook with their EeePC 700 series line back
>> in 2007. While they were XP compatible and came with XP drivers and
>> all, but they all came preinstalled with Xandros Linux. They were
>> selling these things in the millions. This is the only success story
>> of Linux machines that I know of.
>>
>> Microsoft got scared and came up with a new netbook OEM pricing that
>> made Windows more affordable with the lower prices of netbooks. Now
>> Asus started to offer either Linux or XP on their machines. And if
>> you wanted one with Windows, it costs about 50 bucks more. And the
>> XP ones nobody could keep in stock and the Linux ones just wasn't
>> moving anymore. It got so bad that Asus stopped configuring anymore
>> with Linux preinstalled.
>>
>> And it isn't just Linux with this problem. IBM back in around 1990
>> stopped shipping machines with Windows and replaced it with OS/2.
>> Then the sales of IBM machines plummeted. Another computer
>> manufacture in Austria also stopped selling machines with Windows.
>> Although they didn't back off of their decision and they went
>> bankrupt in about 6 months.
>
> Like most things, I'd bet it's more marketing and presentation than
> anything else.
>
> So, MS changed pricing so there was a $50 difference. Did Asus and/or
> the retailers put up a sign saying Free Software? Then, if Open
> Office or something was installed, also saying it was MS Office
> compatible? Thus letting people know that while there was only a $50
> difference, they wouldn't have to buy software?
>
> How about pointing out little to no malware out there for the Linux
> unit?
> Speed differences that can be independently confirmed?
>
> I see Dell also tried to sell Linux based machines. But, if you went
> somewhere like Best Buy, did you get to see any Dells with Linux
> installed? If you want the unknowing to consider Linux, you've got to
> get systems on showroom floors so people will find out there's
> something different.
>
> In your Asus example, that price difference got the unknowing people's
> attention. When that goes away, you have to have something else to
> get their attention. If you don't do that, then you are just
> "selling to the choir", which definitely won't do much to increase
> the user base numbers.

I am well versed with these Asus EeePC 700 series machines with either
Linux or XP SP2. They all came with a Celeron 900MHz underclocked to
633MHz. They sported a fan, but it was on the bottom side of the
motherboard and the CPU the the northbridge was on the top side. I
played with the fan control manually and I could only get the CPU to
change 10 degrees F max. The CPU and the northbridge was mainly cooled
by using the keyboard as a heatsink. Some have removed the fan for total
noiseless machine. I could see this working. The only thing I could see
the fan really helping is the RAM, WiFi, and the SSD. As they were on
the same side of the motherboard as the fan.

I used these machines with Xandros, Ubuntu 8.whatever, and XP SP2 or
SP3. And yes Asus disclosed what Xandros included including Open Office,
Thunderbird, and Firefox. The problem was Open Office was stuck at v2.0
(I think), Firefox was stuck at v2, and Thunderbird was stuck at v1.5.
If you wanted anything newer, you had to recompile the Linux kernel
source code. Worse, the Open Office spell checker didn't even work.

Another odd thing about Xandros EeePC is that you could uninstall any
app you wanted too. But it never really deleted. As everything was ear
marked as read only and that is all. And any changes had taken place
somewhere else. The only cool thing about this is that you could hit a
key at boot and say I want it restored back to factory and that
somewhere else would disappear.

Ok, so you say the hell with Xandros and you switched to Ubuntu. Ubuntu
even had a special distro just for the EeePC. Yeah how wonderful is
that? But XP ate about 20% or less of the processor at idle. But Ubuntu
and Windows 7 ate 50% of the processor at idle. Worse the 700 series
only had a 7 inch screen at 800x480 (scrollable to much larger under
Windows only), Xandros and Ubuntu was terrible at full screen videos on
this machine. Although I connected up an external monitor and XP handled
full screen videos flawlessly at 1440x900. That is 30fps. Linux on the
same setup could only do 0.5fps.

I thought maybe it was these machines. So I tried the same test on other
machines and no, Linux isn't so good on other machines either. Lots of
people will tell you that Linux will run on older and less beefy
machines. Run? I know it is more like crawl.

--
Bill
Motion Computing LE1700 Tablet ('09 era) - OE-QuoteFix v1.19.2
Centrino Core2 Duo L7400 1.5GHz - 2GB RAM
Windows XP Tablet PC Edition 2005 SP2