OEM Windows

On 03/03/2012 15:50, Ken Springer wrote:
On 3/3/12 8:33 AM, BillW50 wrote:
This is all good and well from Microsoft's (or other developers) point
of view. But I often wonder why nobody ever mentions the injustice from
the consumers point of view?

As I have been burned many times by Microsoft and other software
developers. And lots of them offer a 30 day money back if you are
dissatisfied with their product.

Well I have taken up their offer dozens of times and I never ever got my
money back. Not once in decades of computer use. So what is the deal
with that? I've lost thousands of dollars from this nonsense over the
years. And I see nobody protecting the consumer about this problem.

This may be a fine line (not a lawyer here), but the difference may be
you are purchasing a license to use a product, with stipulations, and
not the product itself. Sort of like leasing a new car as opposed to
buying it. If you don't like the stipulations, it's your choice as the
consumer to not buy the license.

FU!


I suspect the average consumer, if not the vast majority, know about the
EULA. How many people ever read the EULA? Further, how many people do
you know that got a used computer from someone/somewhere, with no
original system CD's, restore partition, COA sticker, etc.?

On 03/03/2012 16:20, BillW50 wrote:
On 3/3/2012 9:50 AM, Ken Springer wrote:
On 3/3/12 8:33 AM, BillW50 wrote:
This is all good and well from Microsoft's (or other developers) point
of view. But I often wonder why nobody ever mentions the injustice from
the consumers point of view?

As I have been burned many times by Microsoft and other software
developers. And lots of them offer a 30 day money back if you are
dissatisfied with their product.

Well I have taken up their offer dozens of times and I never ever got my
money back. Not once in decades of computer use. So what is the deal
with that? I've lost thousands of dollars from this nonsense over the
years. And I see nobody protecting the consumer about this problem.

This may be a fine line (not a lawyer here), but the difference may be
you are purchasing a license to use a product, with stipulations, and
not the product itself. Sort of like leasing a new car as opposed to
buying it. If you don't like the stipulations, it's your choice as the
consumer to not buy the license.

Yes but you have to buy it first and open the package before you get to
read the EULA in the first place. And I haven't found anybody to take
back opened software yet. So you are damned if you do and damned if you
don't.

Well said! The EULA is nothing but piracy, pure and simple!


I suspect the average consumer, if not the vast majority, know about the
EULA. How many people ever read the EULA? Further, how many people do
you know that got a used computer from someone/somewhere, with no
original system CD's, restore partition, COA sticker, etc.?

Yes I know, that isn't right either. I even had to buy a upgrade version
of XP so I could run the Recovery Console, because my OEM discs didn't
have them back then. So that copy has never been installed anywhere. But
Microsoft still got the money for the license anyway.

On 3/3/12 3:27 PM, choro wrote:

FU!

Gee, that's nice and friendly. grin


--
Ken

Mac OS X 10.6.8
Firefox 10.0.2
Thunderbird 10.0.2
LibreOffice 3.5.0 rc3

On 3/3/2012 4:26 PM, Joerg Jaeger wrote:
My concern would be the motherboard. My understanding was that the
motherboard consitutes as a computer. I mean, does Win7 not collect
information and send it then to MS? I actually thought that is what
they are doing. So in my logic they would know what hardware i run the
copy of Win7 on.

No, Microsoft made it clear that you can exchange a defective
motherboard with an OEM license. You can upgrade with an OEM license
too. The common rule is something original must be kept. What is unclear
is how small of the original can you go. As does one original screw
count or what?

--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era) - Thunderbird v3.0
Centrino Core2 Duo 2GHz - 1.5GB - Windows 7

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote in message
...
In message , KCB writes:

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote in message
...
In message , VanguardLH
writes:
[]
Forgot to mention that the prices that I exampled were for the
Professional version. I don't waste my time with the Home editions.

Out of interest, why do you say that - what is missing from the home
editions that would make them a waste of your time?


Start here, then click the various tabs for more information:

http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/w...oducts/compare

Yes, I could have found that for myself: I was curious which feature(s)
YOU considered it a waste of time not to have.

To save others the time, the above page lists the differences as:

o XP mode only available in Pro
o company networks easier and more secure in Pro
o backup to a network only available in Pro
o BitLocker encryption only available in Ult
o language-switching only available in Ult

Here are others that you didn't mention, but I'm sure there are more. I
believe you were asking Vanguard, but the reason I like Pro is for the XP
Mode and Networking capabilities.
-Joining a domain only available in Pro and above
-Remote desktop is available to all, but can only connect to Pro and above
-File encryption in Pro and above
-Group Policy Editor in Pro and above

On Sat, 03 Mar 2012 22:27:24 +0000, choro wrote:

This may be a fine line (not a lawyer here), but the difference may be
you are purchasing a license to use a product, with stipulations, and
not the product itself. Sort of like leasing a new car as opposed to
buying it. If you don't like the stipulations, it's your choice as the
consumer to not buy the license.

FU!

FU? As in "Kung"?

--

Char Jackson

On 3/3/12 6:41 PM, Char Jackson wrote:
FU? As in "Kung"?

"Ah, Grasshopper." :-)

--
Ken

Mac OS X 10.6.8
Firefox 10.0.2
Thunderbird 10.0.2
LibreOffice 3.5.0 rc3

On Sat, 03 Mar 2012 14:26:33 -0800, Joerg Jaeger
wrote:

My concern would be the motherboard. My understanding was that the
motherboard consitutes as a computer. I mean, does Win7 not collect
information and send it then to MS? I actually thought that is what
they are doing. So in my logic they would know what hardware i run the
copy of Win7 on.

I seem to remember reading that Windows collects information about the
hardware that it sees *and then computes a hash* from that
information. Thus, MS would have no knowledge of the hardware you're
using, but they can see if it changes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hash_function


--

Char Jackson

On Sat, 03 Mar 2012 14:26:42 -0600, BillW50 wrote:

The last one was from Paragon (I like Paragon generally and I have
bought a lot from them). But the latest one restores a XP machine that I
had a dualboot XP and Windows 7 on it once. Now it only has XP on it and
I removed all traces of Windows 7 that I know of. But it restores a
previously working XP system and sets it up to boot Windows 7 instead.

1. Do a restore from that image.
2. Fix the odd booting issue.
3. Create a new image that incorporates the fix from #2.
4. Delete the problematic image.

That way you can stop telling us this same story over and over.

--

Char Jackson

I have to say that it does sound silly. I mean you would keep a screw
and its the original state.
Well, but if that makes it legal its well.
Though, does it now tie it to a hardware or not? I am still puzzled on
that issue.

On Sat, 03 Mar 2012 17:07:39 -0600, BillW50 wrote:

On 3/3/2012 4:26 PM, Joerg Jaeger wrote:
My concern would be the motherboard. My understanding was that the
motherboard consitutes as a computer. I mean, does Win7 not collect
information and send it then to MS? I actually thought that is what
they are doing. So in my logic they would know what hardware i run the
copy of Win7 on.

No, Microsoft made it clear that you can exchange a defective
motherboard with an OEM license. You can upgrade with an OEM license
too. The common rule is something original must be kept. What is unclear
is how small of the original can you go. As does one original screw
count or what?
--

Access denied....

On 3/03/2012 10:30 PM, Allen Drake wrote:
On Fri, 02 Mar 2012 18:27:49 -0800, Gene E. Bloch
wrote:

On 3/02/2012, noname posted:
Now i check my box and it says OEM System Builder Pack
and on the label it says Win Home Prem 7 SP1 64bit English 1pk DSP OEI
611 DVD.

I am confused right now.
But i want to be clear once more. Its not a new computer and it did
not came with the computer.
I bought it off a store and installed it. Everything works fine but
not sure if i can install it on a new pc or if i end up to have to buy
a brand new copy.

Many people have said it in this thread: OEM can not be transferred to
a new computer.

O-E-M CAN NOT BE TRANSFERRED.

On Fri, 2 Mar 2012 18:22:14 -0600, wrote:

noname wrote:

Right now i use a OEM but i was reading that OEM is bound to
particular hardware. That would mean that i can not install this OEM
on a new pc. Is this true?

Yes. This is your very first experience with any version of Windows?




Can not or should not? I have done it so maybe you care to clarify.


OEM version which you have can be purchased when you buy or build a new
computer without a pre installed OS.

You only get one serial number that can be registered. If you want it on
another PC you must talk to MS and either get another of them or
purchase if from them.

On 03/03/2012 22:39, Ken Springer wrote:
On 3/3/12 3:27 PM, choro wrote:

FU!

Gee, that's nice and friendly. grin

Bugger grin... sorry that IS a slip of the finger. Honest. I really
meant to say Bigger grin
But seriously why would I have to buy another OEM version of Windows if
my MoBo packs up even if I have to change my HDs from ATA to SATA
because I can't get any new Mobos to accept ATA HDs?

Fair is fair and MS deserve to get paid for the OS and I don't begrudge
paying a fair sum for the OS. In fact I have probably bought half a
dozen OEM versions of Win XP so far to say nothing of Win 3.1, Windows
95, 98, Millennium. I have never used any pirated software but aren't
these software companies inviting piracy with their inflated prices for
individuals building their own systems. Most of us do it for the love of
messing around with computers. To us it is a hobby and I see no logical
reason why I can't transfer my Win OEM to another machine so long as I
don't have more than one copy of it running at the same time?

How would you feel if you had to buy a new car if you had to replace
your carburettor, for example, because the car manufacturer's EULA
stipulated that you can't replace your carburettor?

In any case, the likes of Toshiba, Dell etc pay peanuts for their copy
of Windows whereas small dealers who buy in dozens pay through the nose
while the individual who builds his own computer pays a fortune?

I wonder how much MS charge DELL for example per copy of Windows and how
much I, for example, have to pay for an OEM copy? Probably 1,000 % if
not more of what DELL have to pay for a copy. Something's not right here.
-- choro

Look, there is one rule that is both fair and simple. You buy and OEM
version and this should give you the right to run the OS on one machine
and not install it on more than one machine at any moment in time.

That would be both fair and simple both for MS and for the customer.

What they have done with MS Office, in that if you buy the Student/Home
version, you can run it on up to 3 machines, is both fair and simple.
That was a good positive move by MS. It just doesn't make sense to
charge a home user hundreds of dollars for ANY edition of MS Office.

Let me also add here that I am definitely against piracy and abhor it.
But do I welcome freeware? Of course I do. But I would rather pay a
reasonable sum for any software if it does a better job and if I am
going to make use of it for several years.

Sometimes I feel people have got their priorities wrong. I think people
should also donate at least some money to freebies just to show their
appreciation. I, for example, have started making a yearly donation to
Wikipedia and some other such setups. They DO deserve it.

Though beware of Registry Cleaners and certain AV programs that try to
get a free ride on the backs of freebies and lumber your computer in
stealth!
-- choro

On 04/03/2012 02:35, Joerg Jaeger wrote:
I have to say that it does sound silly. I mean you would keep a screw
and its the original state.
Well, but if that makes it legal its well.
Though, does it now tie it to a hardware or not? I am still puzzled on
that issue.

On Sat, 03 Mar 2012 17:07:39 -0600, wrote:

On 3/3/2012 4:26 PM, Joerg Jaeger wrote:
My concern would be the motherboard. My understanding was that the
motherboard consitutes as a computer. I mean, does Win7 not collect
information and send it then to MS? I actually thought that is what
they are doing. So in my logic they would know what hardware i run the
copy of Win7 on.

No, Microsoft made it clear that you can exchange a defective
motherboard with an OEM license. You can upgrade with an OEM license
too. The common rule is something original must be kept. What is unclear
is how small of the original can you go. As does one original screw
count or what?
--

Access denied....

On 04/03/2012 01:55, Char Jackson wrote:
On Sat, 03 Mar 2012 14:26:33 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

My concern would be the motherboard. My understanding was that the
motherboard consitutes as a computer. I mean, does Win7 not collect
information and send it then to MS? I actually thought that is what
they are doing. So in my logic they would know what hardware i run the
copy of Win7 on.

I seem to remember reading that Windows collects information about the
hardware that it sees *and then computes a hash* from that
information. Thus, MS would have no knowledge of the hardware you're
using, but they can see if it changes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hash_function

They certainly do spy on you. I remember once getting a windows popping
up saying that "This computer has changed a lot..." and requesting that
I re-register or else...

I am a computer addict for ****'s sake. Of course I will make changes to
my home-built computer. But I think that if you actually Register your
copy of Windows giving them your name and address etc, you get an easier
ride when you next install your Win OEM since they have got your full
details on their books. In a way I don't blame them with all the piracy
going on but as things are it is the pirates who get away with it while
honest enthusiasts have to put up with the bull****.
-- choro

On 3/3/12 10:55 PM, choro wrote:
On 03/03/2012 22:39, Ken Springer wrote:
On 3/3/12 3:27 PM, choro wrote:

FU!

Gee, that's nice and friendly.grin

Bugger grin... sorry that IS a slip of the finger. Honest. I really
meant to say Bigger grin
But seriously why would I have to buy another OEM version of Windows if
my MoBo packs up even if I have to change my HDs from ATA to SATA
because I can't get any new Mobos to accept ATA HDs?

I agree, I don't know why a person shouldn't be able to do this.

But, that's our opinion. As it stands, the terms of a EULA is law.
(For the sake of this discussion, let's leave out a discussion of
whether EULAs are legal or not. That's a different question.)
Therefore, you have to (or at least should if you're honest, ethical,
moral, etc. :-) ) obey the law. What if my opinion was I should be
able to drive on the other side of the street? What if my opinion was,
I should be able to paint graffiti on your front door?

Should I be allowed to do that?

Fair is fair and MS deserve to get paid for the OS and I don't begrudge
paying a fair sum for the OS. In fact I have probably bought half a
dozen OEM versions of Win XP so far to say nothing of Win 3.1, Windows
95, 98, Millennium. I have never used any pirated software but aren't
these software companies inviting piracy with their inflated prices for
individuals building their own systems.

Agreed. Although, I'm not so sure the cost of some software is out of
line anymore. I remember paying $5,000 for software and hardware for my
early systems 30+ years ago. With inflation over those years, I wonder
how much money I spent in today's dollars.

Most of us do it for the love of
messing around with computers. To us it is a hobby and I see no logical
reason why I can't transfer my Win OEM to another machine so long as I
don't have more than one copy of it running at the same time?

I'd agree that (possibly) most of us that read newsgroups may do it
because of our interest in computers, but I seriously doubt that
perspective applies to the majority of users.

And I agree only one copy of it running at one time. Just to split
hairs for the purpose of discussion, does "running at the same time"
mean, one copy installed on a single computer, or multiple copies of the
same license on multiple computers, but only one computer turned on an
running at any one time?

It can get complicated! LOL

How would you feel if you had to buy a new car if you had to replace
your carburettor, for example, because the car manufacturer's EULA
stipulated that you can't replace your carburettor?

But a carburetor is a physical item. You can clean it, paint it, put it
on the shelf and admire it.

Not so with computer code. That's not physical, once assembled and
running, can you paint it? Set it on the shelf? It's intellectual
property, like music and stories in books.

Say you were someone like J. K. Rowling (Harry Potter), and you wrote
the first book expecting to sell a million printed copies. But, someone
buy a single copy, mass produces copies on a copy machine, and gives
away 950,000 copies. How much interest would you have in writing Book 2?

In any case, the likes of Toshiba, Dell etc pay peanuts for their copy
of Windows whereas small dealers who buy in dozens pay through the nose
while the individual who builds his own computer pays a fortune?

True, but the conditions under which the copies were sold are not
identical. There's always been a cost advantage to buying in quantity.

Also, if you use the Restore CD or image on a Dell, you'll likely find
the product ID that's on the hard drive does not match the sticker on
the machine. I just learned that a short time ago, and it surprised me.
I think that situation has to do with the buying in quantity, and that
particular product ID is unique to Dell or whomever. The small guy just
can't match the quantity issue.

I wonder how much MS charge DELL for example per copy of Windows and how
much I, for example, have to pay for an OEM copy? Probably 1,000 % if
not more of what DELL have to pay for a copy. Something's not right here.

It's quantity and free enterprise.

I really wish the contemporary computer "world" was like 30+ years ago.
You could go to a store and see IBM, Commodore, Apple, Atari,
Timex/Sinclair, Radio Shack, TI, (who else was out there......), and a
lot of models of each. But, not too many different OS's exist anymore,
compared to then.

It does seem to be moving back to that situation, though. It used to be
you pretty much had to go to an Apple store to see Apples. PC's were
like trash on the street, pretty much everywhere.

But Apple seems to be branching out, you can now buy them at Micro
Center stores (the one in Denver, CO, USA has a real nice Mac section),
and Best Buy (cheesy Mac area), and there are a few remaining Apple
retailers (there's one here in Colorado Springs, CO).

I wish places like Micro Center and Best Buy would set up some Linux
machines, so consumers could have the opportunity to see and evaluate 3
OS's. Although I don't think, personally, that Linux is quite ready for
the general public from what little I've seen.


--
Ken

Mac OS X 10.6.8
Firefox 10.0.2
Thunderbird 10.0.2
LibreOffice 3.5.0 rc3