Installing copy of Windows on 2 personal computers?

[Kevin]

Ok, here my problem.
I bought a copy of Windows XP Pro Upgrade. When i had my
Laptop about 3 weeks ago. Then I recently bought a
desktop and i'm trying to use the same copy on this
computer. Both computers i own so i thought it shouldn't
be a problem. I only use one at a time anyways. Just
wondering if there is a way that i can get it to work.
Everytime a log on i keep getting this restration notice,
and when i try to apply it. It doesn't work.

[carol]

you can not do this stupid.
when you load the software you will read (?) the
agreement and it will tell you only one xp per computer.
the rest of us had to get two copies of xp for two
computers so should you.

>-----Original Message-----
>Ok, here my problem.
>I bought a copy of Windows XP Pro Upgrade. When i had my
>Laptop about 3 weeks ago. Then I recently bought a
>desktop and i'm trying to use the same copy on this
>computer. Both computers i own so i thought it shouldn't
>be a problem. I only use one at a time anyways. Just
>wondering if there is a way that i can get it to work.
>Everytime a log on i keep getting this restration
notice,
>and when i try to apply it. It doesn't work.
>.
>

[John]

This question comes up everyday.
The end user licence agreement (EULA) that you SHOULD
read when you load the xp version states you agree to one
computer with one xp.
====You should read the agreement================
=================================================
>-----Original Message-----
>Ok, here my problem.
>I bought a copy of Windows XP Pro Upgrade. When i had my
>Laptop about 3 weeks ago. Then I recently bought a
>desktop and i'm trying to use the same copy on this
>computer. Both computers i own so i thought it shouldn't
>be a problem. I only use one at a time anyways. Just
>wondering if there is a way that i can get it to work.
>Everytime a log on i keep getting this restration
notice,
>and when i try to apply it. It doesn't work.
>.
>

[James]

I did this.
However only one can be updated. The other is standalone
computer in original environment. I can not update the
second so use it only for games. If I get second one on
the internet too many problems can happen.
Good luck on this.

>-----Original Message-----
>Ok, here my problem.
>I bought a copy of Windows XP Pro Upgrade. When i had my
>Laptop about 3 weeks ago. Then I recently bought a
>desktop and i'm trying to use the same copy on this
>computer. Both computers i own so i thought it shouldn't
>be a problem. I only use one at a time anyways. Just
>wondering if there is a way that i can get it to work.
>Everytime a log on i keep getting this restration
notice,
>and when i try to apply it. It doesn't work.
>.
>

[Rick \Nutcase\ Rogers]

Hi Kevin,

Sorry, the license doesn't allow for that. You need to copies of WinXP, one
per machine.

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers aka "Nutcase" MS-MVP - Win9x
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/
Associate Expert - WinXP - Expert Zone
www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/expertzone
Win98 Help - www.rickrogers.org

"Kevin" > wrote in message
...
> Ok, here my problem.
> I bought a copy of Windows XP Pro Upgrade. When i had my
> Laptop about 3 weeks ago. Then I recently bought a
> desktop and i'm trying to use the same copy on this
> computer. Both computers i own so i thought it shouldn't
> be a problem. I only use one at a time anyways. Just
> wondering if there is a way that i can get it to work.
> Everytime a log on i keep getting this restration notice,
> and when i try to apply it. It doesn't work.

[Bruce Chambers]

Greetings --

Let's apply a little common sense to the question, shall we? Does
your local grocer let you walk out of the market with three loaves of
bread when you've paid for only one? Can you drive two cars home if
you've paid for only one? Does your local clothier allow you to leave
the shop with two shirts if you've purchased only one? Have you
noticed a trend, yet? So where in the world did you ever get the idea
that software manufacturers would sell their product licenses any
differently?

As it has *always* been with *all* Microsoft operating systems,
it's necessary (to be in compliance with both the EULA and copyright
laws, if not technically) to purchase one WinXP license for each
computer on which it is installed. The only way in which WinXP
licensing differs from that of earlier versions of Windows is that
Microsoft has finally added a copy protection and anti-theft
mechanism, Product Activation, to prevent (or at least make more
difficult) the sort of multiple installations you're asking about.


Bruce Chambers

--
Help us help you:
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on
having both at once. -- RAH


"Kevin" > wrote in message
...
> Ok, here my problem.
> I bought a copy of Windows XP Pro Upgrade. When i had my
> Laptop about 3 weeks ago. Then I recently bought a
> desktop and i'm trying to use the same copy on this
> computer. Both computers i own so i thought it shouldn't
> be a problem. I only use one at a time anyways. Just
> wondering if there is a way that i can get it to work.
> Everytime a log on i keep getting this restration notice,
> and when i try to apply it. It doesn't work.

[Al Smith]

Let's apply a little common sense to the question, shall we?
If you want to do something like this - unless, maybe, you've
spent your entire life as a computer nerd and you can figure
a way around it by yourself - you're going to
have to get an operating system that is not produced by a
monopoly.

Therefore, I suggest you might consider Linux.



"Kevin" > wrote in message
...
> Ok, here my problem.
> I bought a copy of Windows XP Pro Upgrade. When i had my
> Laptop about 3 weeks ago. Then I recently bought a
> desktop and i'm trying to use the same copy on this
> computer. Both computers i own so i thought it shouldn't
> be a problem. I only use one at a time anyways. Just
> wondering if there is a way that i can get it to work.
> Everytime a log on i keep getting this restration notice,
> and when i try to apply it. It doesn't work.

[Bruce Chambers]

Greetings --

"Common Sense?" How laughable. You've just contradicted yourself.
If Microsoft really were a monopoly, there would be no alternative
operating system for you to recommend. Instead, there are several
alternatives, aren't there?


Bruce Chambers

--
Help us help you:
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on
having both at once. -- RAH


"Al Smith" > wrote in message
...
> Let's apply a little common sense to the question, shall we?
> If you want to do something like this - unless, maybe, you've
> spent your entire life as a computer nerd and you can figure
> a way around it by yourself - you're going to
> have to get an operating system that is not produced by a
> monopoly.
>
> Therefore, I suggest you might consider Linux.
>
>
>

[Al Smith]

"Bruce Chambers" > wrote in message
...
> Greetings --
>
> "Common Sense?" How laughable.

Hahaha. How laughable. You are wrong

You've just contradicted yourself.

No, I didn't.

> If Microsoft really were a monopoly, there would be no alternative
> operating system for you to recommend. Instead, there are several
> alternatives, aren't there?

No. There aren't.

The U. S. Justice Department found
Microsoft had obtained a monopoly position with its operating system.

>
>
> Bruce Chambers
>
> --
> Help us help you:
> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
> http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
>
> You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on
> having both at once. -- RAH
>
>
> "Al Smith" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Let's apply a little common sense to the question, shall we?
> > If you want to do something like this - unless, maybe, you've
> > spent your entire life as a computer nerd and you can figure
> > a way around it by yourself - you're going to
> > have to get an operating system that is not produced by a
> > monopoly.
> >
> > Therefore, I suggest you might consider Linux.
> >
> >
> >
>
>

[Photoman]

>
> Let's apply a little common sense to the question, shall we? Does
> your local grocer let you walk out of the market with three loaves of
> bread when you've paid for only one?

No, but I can play ONE DVD that I bought in as many players as I have, as
long as it isn't at the same time. This is a much closer analogy than your
bread or car one. You buy a license for XP and a movie.

[Dwight Stewart]

"Bruce Chambers" > wrote:
>
> Let's apply a little common sense to the question, shall we?
> Does your local grocer let you walk out of the market with
> three loaves of bread when you've paid for only one? Can you
> drive two cars home if you've paid for only one? Does your
> local clothier allow you to leave the shop with two shirts if
> you've purchased only one? Have you noticed a trend, yet?
> So where in the world did you ever get the idea that software
> manufacturers would sell their product licenses any differently?


Your analogy doesn't hold up. For example, if I buy a loaf of bread, my
whole family can share in eating that bread and we can do so anywhere in the
house, separately or together, and do so on any table or platform. When I
take the family for a ride in the automobile, I can drop them off at various
places for each to go about their business. When we share Windows at the
same time (to roam the internet, for example), we can all only go one place.
Likewise, an automibile is often licensed in both spouses name, is owned by
both, and can be used by either. And so on.

When it comes to a family, it's worth noting the law in most states
considers all property (including computers and software) to be jointly
owned. Certainly, the family's money was used to purchase that property. In
the future, we'll see how the courts handle the license issue as they
address family dispute cases. Will they treat software like a product (TV)
or a consumable (video tape)?


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

[Bruce Chambers]

Greetings --

Actually, it's your analogy that's out in left field. Your family
can all share a single PC with a single WinXP license. That wasn't
what the OP is asking about.

Can you buy a set of license plates for a single automobile, and
use them on every other car that your family members own/drive? Can
you take your family to a local restaurant, feed them all separate
meals from the menu, and pay for only one entree? If you purchase a
music CD, can you play it in multiple stereos systems simultaneously?

The simple point is, if one purchases a single product - it makes
no difference if its a meal, a loaf of bread, a service, or a software
license, one is entitled to only one of the product so purchased. If
a software license specifically permits multiple simultaneous use,
fine. WinXP's license does not permit this. It's really quite
simple - either one abides by the terms of agreements freely entered
into, or one does not. The latter person has no integrity, and is
someone with whom, I certainly will never knowingly do business, or
even associate.


Bruce Chambers

--
Help us help you:
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on
having both at once. -- RAH


"Dwight Stewart" > wrote in message
hlink.net...
> "Bruce Chambers" > wrote:
> >
> > Let's apply a little common sense to the question, shall we?
> > Does your local grocer let you walk out of the market with
> > three loaves of bread when you've paid for only one? Can you
> > drive two cars home if you've paid for only one? Does your
> > local clothier allow you to leave the shop with two shirts if
> > you've purchased only one? Have you noticed a trend, yet?
> > So where in the world did you ever get the idea that software
> > manufacturers would sell their product licenses any differently?
>
>
> Your analogy doesn't hold up. For example, if I buy a loaf of
bread, my
> whole family can share in eating that bread and we can do so
anywhere in the
> house, separately or together, and do so on any table or platform.
When I
> take the family for a ride in the automobile, I can drop them off at
various
> places for each to go about their business. When we share Windows at
the
> same time (to roam the internet, for example), we can all only go
one place.
> Likewise, an automibile is often licensed in both spouses name, is
owned by
> both, and can be used by either. And so on.
>
> When it comes to a family, it's worth noting the law in most
states
> considers all property (including computers and software) to be
jointly
> owned. Certainly, the family's money was used to purchase that
property. In
> the future, we'll see how the courts handle the license issue as
they
> address family dispute cases. Will they treat software like a
product (TV)
> or a consumable (video tape)?
>
>
> Dwight Stewart (W5NET)
>
> http://www.qsl.net/w5net/
>
>

[Dwight Stewart]

"Bruce Chambers" > wrote:
>
> Actually, it's your analogy that's out in left field. Your family
> can all share a single PC with a single WinXP license. That
> wasn't what the OP is asking about.


Actually, I think the OP was commenting about a family being asked to buy
multiple copies of a product. Lets face it, to do so is a huge strain on the
typical family budget ($200 for at least two copies of the OS, $700 for at
least two copies of Office, and so on). For most, the only answer is to use
only one computer. But, with that solution, the family is denied the use of
a second computer and Microsoft doesn't get the extra sale anyway (nobody
gains). A second, reasonably priced, "family" license would provide
Microsoft with a little extra money (which they seem to so desperately need)
and perhaps gain them a little positive publicity as well.

By the way, I noticed you switched from a general discussion about
families to my family alone in your reply above. This is not about my
family - my wife and I (no children) happen to own four computers (two Macs
and two PCs), each with fully licensed software.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

[Bruce Chambers]

Greetings --

Why does not being able to afford to upgrade every PC in the house
to WinXP deny anyone the use of the other PCs? There's no need for
every PC in a household to run the same OS, or even the same
applications (although the latter does facilitate file sharing).
Anyway, if a family cannot afford the software licenses for multiple
computers, then they can't really afford the multiple computers in the
first place. They need to re-examine their financial priorities if
maintaining the family's computers, which, after all, are luxury
items, is causing an economic burden.

Now, would I like to see something like the "family" or household
license program? Certainly, but there's not such thing at present.
That's a business decision for Microsoft to make.


Bruce Chambers

--
Help us help you:
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on
having both at once. -- RAH


"Dwight Stewart" > wrote in message
link.net...
> "Bruce Chambers" > wrote:
> >
> > Actually, it's your analogy that's out in left field. Your
family
> > can all share a single PC with a single WinXP license. That
> > wasn't what the OP is asking about.
>
>
> Actually, I think the OP was commenting about a family being asked
to buy
> multiple copies of a product. Lets face it, to do so is a huge
strain on the
> typical family budget ($200 for at least two copies of the OS, $700
for at
> least two copies of Office, and so on). For most, the only answer is
to use
> only one computer. But, with that solution, the family is denied the
use of
> a second computer and Microsoft doesn't get the extra sale anyway
(nobody
> gains). A second, reasonably priced, "family" license would provide
> Microsoft with a little extra money (which they seem to so
desperately need)
> and perhaps gain them a little positive publicity as well.
>
> By the way, I noticed you switched from a general discussion about
> families to my family alone in your reply above. This is not about
my
> family - my wife and I (no children) happen to own four computers
(two Macs
> and two PCs), each with fully licensed software.
>
>
> Dwight Stewart (W5NET)
>
> http://www.qsl.net/w5net/
>
>

[bla]

Ok, here my problem.
I bought a copy of Windows XP Pro Upgrade. When i had my
Laptop about 3 weeks ago. Then I recently bought a
desktop and i'm trying to use the same copy on this
computer. Both computers i own so i thought it shouldn't
be a problem. I only use one at a time anyways. Just
wondering if there is a way that i can get it to work.
Everytime a log on i keep getting this restration notice,
and when i try to apply it. It doesn't work.


From: Frequently asked questions about Microsoft Product Activation
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;302878


Q: Does MPA allow customers to install products on a portable computer and on a desktop computer?

A: Consumers may use the terms of the product's EULA to determine if this is allowed. Sometimes, the Microsoft EULA permits customers who are the primary users of Microsoft programs, such as Office and Word, to install one additional copy on their portable computers for their exclusive use. This does not apply to product licenses that are acquired with the purchase of a computer. These OEM licenses are single-use licenses that cannot be transferred to another computer. Windows XP can only be installed on a single computer. A new license is required if you install and activate the product on a different computer.



Q: What happens if you try to install and activate a product on more computers than the EULA allows?

A: Installation of the product on more computers than the EULA allows is a violation of the EULA. Technically, MPA does not limit the number of computers where the product can be installed. For example, you could install Windows XP on 100 computers, but activation would not be successful on 99 of those computers. If you installed Office XP on 100 computers, activation would not be successful on 98 of those computers. This limits the usefulness of the installations that are in violation of the EULA. Outside MPA, Microsoft does not know how many computers have Windows XP or Office XP family products installed.

[bla]

MPA = Microsoft Product Activation

EULA = End-User License Agreement