My pc mother board has died - Install xp oem

Mistoffolees wrote:

Carey Frisch [MVP] wrote:
snip

JD - Microsoft (Expert):

Q: I hate to reiterate the meeting, but you said if you upgrade a mobo
in any pc you are required to purchase a new os correct?

A: Yes, the OEM OS is tied to the motherboard. So, if the motherboard
fails while under warranty the license remains intact. However, if you
are simply upgrading for feature or performance enhancements, you
would need a new OS license.

Roger Goh [msft] (Expert):

Q: I hate to reiterate the meeting, but you said if you upgrade a mobo
in any pc you are required to purchase a new os correct?

A: Yes, if you UPGRADE the mobo, you need to get a new OS because the
OS is tied to the mobo.

Ref:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/com...5_0222_sb.mspx



The "experts" being quoted are totally irrelevant since this
particular definition of "motherboard" and its link to the
Windows operating systems needs to be stated by an Officer of
Microsoft in public. Microsoft has never done this nor has it
published this fact for the open record anywhere. Where is the
evidence that is being asked throughout this thread? If it is
under a password-protected page to a select few who are also
bound by a NDA, then it is binding only to those who have an
association to Microsoft through this manner.


Carey will get back to you in an hour or so. He's out buying retail XPs
right now.

Alias

Rhonda Lea Kirk wrote:

In my personal life, I just do what I believe to be the right thing.
If I run into resistance, I start with a phone call or email, and I
work my way up to certified mail. I've never had the desire to sue
anyone, because most problems can be resolved without litigation if
everyone involved is reasonable.

What a breath of fresh air :-)
Makes a change from the serial litigators you see on the net.

Mistoffolees wrote:

The "experts" being quoted are totally irrelevant since this
particular definition of "motherboard" and its link to the
Windows operating systems needs to be stated by an Officer of
Microsoft in public. Microsoft has never done this nor has it
published this fact for the open record anywhere. Where is the
evidence that is being asked throughout this thread? If it is
under a password-protected page to a select few who are also
bound by a NDA, then it is binding only to those who have an
association to Microsoft through this manner.

As far as I know, I'm bound only to the agreement I accepted when I ran
the software.

It would be interesting if Microsoft tried to embroider that agreement.

I think a class action suit would make it too easy for the company. I'd
rather see every affected user file an individual complaint in small
claims court.

What a nuisance it would be for the legal department. grin

rl

Alias wrote:

You're reaching for straws, Carey. The question is when will you be
man enough to admit it so we can all move on.

I think he sincerely believes the position he's putting forth, Alias. He
can't admit to what he doesn't believe. That doesn't make him right, but
I've never known a "true believer" to be swayed by fact.

On the other hand, he is being asked to take the word of those who have
actually read the agreement over the word of "experts" from the company
that drafted the agreement.

I've seen this more than once--if you can make enough people believe the
agreement says something it doesn't, then it may not matter what the
agreement says, because most people don't read the agreement.

And everyone knows that the "common wisdom" is always right. :-|

Maybe this is one for Snopes.

rl

kurttrail Post license (kPL). By reading the post below, you are
subject to licensing terms that you have never agreed to, but are hidden
on a password-protected web page, that I'm not going give you the URL
to! [ And the page really exists! ;-) ]


Carey Frisch [MVP] wrote:

snip

JD - Microsoft (Expert):

Being employed by MS doesn't make them an "Expert," especially if they
wan't give a real name.

Q: I hate to reiterate the meeting, but you said if you upgrade a
mobo in any pc you are required to purchase a new os correct?

A: Yes, the OEM OS is tied to the motherboard.

If it was, then that should be clearly stated in the license. And it
is not.

So, if the motherboard
fails while under warranty the license remains intact. However, if
you are simply upgrading for feature or performance enhancements, you
would need a new OS license.

LOL! Since MS considers me my own OEM, my motherboard is under my
warranty. My warranty is good for as long as I'm alive, and I, as the
warrantor of the computer, am the one that determines what is a failed
motherboard.

Roger Goh [msft] (Expert):

Q: I hate to reiterate the meeting, but you said if you upgrade a
mobo in any pc you are required to purchase a new os correct?

A: Yes, if you UPGRADE the mobo, you need to get a new OS because the
OS is tied to the mobo.

Ref:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/com...5_0222_sb.mspx

LOL! MS provides its own experts. Of course MS cannot be trusted.
They are a proven IP infringers, and predatory monopolist, so I wouldn't
trust them to give me the right time, let alone trust them give me an
answer to any question regarding licensing.

It would be like IBM just giving up to SCO just because SCO's "EXPERT"
claims that IBM has violated the Unix license.

--
Peace!
Kurt Kirsch
Self-anointed Moderator
http://microscum.com
"It'll soon shake your Windows
And rattle your walls
For the times they are a-changin'."

Rhonda Lea Kirk wrote:
Mistoffolees wrote:


The "experts" being quoted are totally irrelevant since this
particular definition of "motherboard" and its link to the
Windows operating systems needs to be stated by an Officer of
Microsoft in public. Microsoft has never done this nor has it
published this fact for the open record anywhere. Where is the
evidence that is being asked throughout this thread? If it is
under a password-protected page to a select few who are also
bound by a NDA, then it is binding only to those who have an
association to Microsoft through this manner.


As far as I know, I'm bound only to the agreement I accepted when I ran
the software.

It would be interesting if Microsoft tried to embroider that agreement.

I think a class action suit would make it too easy for the company. I'd
rather see every affected user file an individual complaint in small
claims court.

What a nuisance it would be for the legal department. grin

rl



And this is why the Board and Officers of Microsoft have not
made such a public utterance. Microsoft's OS's from MS-DOS
through to Windows have depended on piracy and Bill Gates was
supposedly quoted on this fact in a recent LA Times report,
which also added that Microsoft condones such practice where
its market position is weak. It was mentioned that a Microsoft
OS operating in a computer means one less for its competitors.
Microsoft knows that "experts", particularly those from the
mid-1980's, are its "institutional memory".

But Microsoft really needs to consider what some of its MVP's
are saying publicly while advertising their status. It can be
misleading. Some should take the lead of a very noted one of
setting up a private, informative website and stop posting in
public forums. He probably gives one of the most informative,
unbiased and helpful assistance sites for Windows.

As for lawsuits, a class action might be the only way to go
since there is a floor for the filing of small claims in the
larger municipalities.

You owe me a new monitor for that one!
I'll never get the coffee off the screen.

--
Larry Samuels Associate Expert
MS-MVP (2001-2005)
Unofficial FAQ for Windows Server 2003 at
http://pelos.us/SERVER.htm
Expert Zone- www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/expertzone
"kurttrail" wrote in message
...
kurttrail Post license (kPL). By reading the post below, you are subject
to licensing terms that you have never agreed to, but are hidden on a
password-protected web page, that I'm not going give you the URL to! [
And the page really exists! ;-) ]


Carey Frisch [MVP] wrote:

snip

JD - Microsoft (Expert):

Being employed by MS doesn't make them an "Expert," especially if they
wan't give a real name.

Q: I hate to reiterate the meeting, but you said if you upgrade a
mobo in any pc you are required to purchase a new os correct?

A: Yes, the OEM OS is tied to the motherboard.

If it was, then that should be clearly stated in the license. And it is
not.

So, if the motherboard
fails while under warranty the license remains intact. However, if
you are simply upgrading for feature or performance enhancements, you
would need a new OS license.

LOL! Since MS considers me my own OEM, my motherboard is under my
warranty. My warranty is good for as long as I'm alive, and I, as the
warrantor of the computer, am the one that determines what is a failed
motherboard.

Roger Goh [msft] (Expert):

Q: I hate to reiterate the meeting, but you said if you upgrade a
mobo in any pc you are required to purchase a new os correct?

A: Yes, if you UPGRADE the mobo, you need to get a new OS because the
OS is tied to the mobo.

Ref:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/com...5_0222_sb.mspx

LOL! MS provides its own experts. Of course MS cannot be trusted. They
are a proven IP infringers, and predatory monopolist, so I wouldn't trust
them to give me the right time, let alone trust them give me an answer to
any question regarding licensing.

It would be like IBM just giving up to SCO just because SCO's "EXPERT"
claims that IBM has violated the Unix license.

--
Peace!
Kurt Kirsch
Self-anointed Moderator
http://microscum.com
"It'll soon shake your Windows
And rattle your walls
For the times they are a-changin'."

In summary, here are the facts regarding Microsoft OEM licensing,
whether it is a generic OEM or PC manufacturer's preinstalled OEM:

1. An OEM license is a single-use license.
2. An OEM license is licensed for use only on the first computer
it is installed and activated on.
3. An OEM license is non-transferable to a different computer.
4. An OEM license is permanently tied to the motherboard BIOS.
5. If a motherboard becomes defective, it must be replaced with
an identical make and model, otherwise the OEM license is invalid
and a new license is required.

--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows - Shell/User
Microsoft Community Newsgroups
news://msnews.microsoft.com/

Larry Samuels wrote:

You owe me a new monitor for that one!
I'll never get the coffee off the screen.

Sorry! I can't afford that right now, but I will give you the url to
the terms you accepted, but no one but you may look.

Ok, does everyone but Larry have their eyes closed?

Good.

http://microscum.com/kPL/

User Name: careyblowsdonkeys
Password: password

--
Peace!
Kurt Kirsch
Self-anointed Moderator
http://microscum.com
"It'll soon shake your Windows
And rattle your walls
For the times they are a-changin'."

kurttrail Post license (kPL). By reading the post below, you are
subject to licensing terms that you have never agreed to, but are hidden
on a password-protected web page, that I'm not going give you the URL
to!


Carey Frisch [MVP] wrote:

In summary, here are the facts regarding Microsoft OEM licensing,
whether it is a generic OEM or PC manufacturer's preinstalled OEM:

1. An OEM license is a single-use license.

You mean like toilet paper is supposed to be used only once? That must
get kind expensive!

2. An OEM license is licensed for use only on the first computer
it is installed and activated on.
3. An OEM license is non-transferable to a different computer.
4. An OEM license is permanently tied to the motherboard BIOS.

ROFL! That is not a fact according to any license that was agreed to by
BOTH parties.

5. If a motherboard becomes defective, it must be replaced with
an identical make and model, otherwise the OEM license is invalid
and a new license is required.

LOL! People get non-identical mobo replacements all the time,
especially those that buy long-term service agreement from their OEMs.

Facts?! Please! It is quite obvious that longer you keep this nonsense
up, the more you need to validate you feeble opinion by making up
"Facts."

You are such a liar that you cannot admit that the above "Facts" is
really just your opinion derived from the opinions of others.

--
Peace!
Kurt Kirsch
Self-anointed Moderator
http://microscum.com
"It'll soon shake your Windows
And rattle your walls
For the times they are a-changin'."

kurttrail wrote:
Larry Samuels wrote:

You owe me a new monitor for that one!
I'll never get the coffee off the screen.

Sorry! I can't afford that right now, but I will give you the url to
the terms you accepted, but no one but you may look.

Ok, does everyone but Larry have their eyes closed?

Good.

http://microscum.com/kPL/

User Name: careyblowsdonkeys
Password: password

You are in need of a spanking. laughing

rl

Carey Frisch [MVP] wrote:
In summary, here are the facts regarding Microsoft OEM licensing,
whether it is a generic OEM or PC manufacturer's preinstalled OEM:

1. An OEM license is a single-use license.

What do you mean by "single-use"?

2. An OEM license is licensed for use only on the first computer
it is installed and activated on.

True.

3. An OEM license is non-transferable to a different computer.

True.

4. An OEM license is permanently tied to the motherboard BIOS.

Only with branded OEMs. You *do* know the difference, don't you? A
generic OEM is *not* tied to the motherboard BIOS.

5. If a motherboard becomes defective, it must be replaced with
an identical make and model, otherwise the OEM license is invalid
and a new license is required.

False. I upgraded my motherboard, sound card, video card, NIC and 512MB
more RAM the other day and my generic OEM passed WPA and WGA with flying
colors.

Oops.

Alias

Carey Frisch [MVP] wrote:
In summary, here are the facts regarding Microsoft OEM licensing,
whether it is a generic OEM or PC manufacturer's preinstalled OEM:

1. An OEM license is a single-use license.
2. An OEM license is licensed for use only on the first computer
it is installed and activated on.
3. An OEM license is non-transferable to a different computer.
4. An OEM license is permanently tied to the motherboard BIOS.
5. If a motherboard becomes defective, it must be replaced with
an identical make and model, otherwise the OEM license is invalid
and a new license is required.

If it is not in the eula then it does not apply no matter what MS think.

ROTFLMFAO!!!

It hasn't happened in a long time, but remind me not to p*ss you off G


--
Larry Samuels Associate Expert
MS-MVP (2001-2005)
Unofficial FAQ for Windows Server 2003 at
http://pelos.us/SERVER.htm
Expert Zone- www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/expertzone
"kurttrail" wrote in message
...
Larry Samuels wrote:

You owe me a new monitor for that one!
I'll never get the coffee off the screen.

Sorry! I can't afford that right now, but I will give you the url to the
terms you accepted, but no one but you may look.

Ok, does everyone but Larry have their eyes closed?

Good.

http://microscum.com/kPL/

User Name: careyblowsdonkeys
Password: password

--
Peace!
Kurt Kirsch
Self-anointed Moderator
http://microscum.com
"It'll soon shake your Windows
And rattle your walls
For the times they are a-changin'."

Carey Frisch [MVP] wrote:
In summary, here are the facts regarding Microsoft OEM licensing,
whether it is a generic OEM or PC manufacturer's preinstalled OEM:

1. An OEM license is a single-use license.
2. An OEM license is licensed for use only on the first computer
it is installed and activated on.
3. An OEM license is non-transferable to a different computer.
4. An OEM license is permanently tied to the motherboard BIOS.
5. If a motherboard becomes defective, it must be replaced with
an identical make and model, otherwise the OEM license is invalid
and a new license is required.

Dear Carey,

With regard to items 4 and 5, it does not say that anywhere in the EULA
on my computer. I have the feeling that in item 1, you meant "user" not
"use," and items 2 and 3 are close enough to accept as accurate--at
least insofar as my EULA is concerned.

But, as I said, 4 and 5 are nowhere in the document, and I just read the
whole thing all over again (except the French, because French annoys
me).

My EULA does, however, say the following, and it is a paragraph that we
in the legal profession refer to as "boilerplate," because it is
something we always insert in every agreement in substantially the same
form as set forth below:

ENTIRE AGREEMENT; SEVERABILITY.
This EULA (including any addendum or amendment to this EULA
which is included with the SOFTWARE) are the entire
agreement between you and Manufacturer relating to the
SOFTWARE and support or other services (if any) and they
supersede all prior or contemporaneous oral or written
communications, proposals and representations with respect
to the SOFTWARE or any other subject matter covered by this
EULA. If any provision of this EULA is held to be void,
invalid, unenforceable or illegal, the other provisions
shall continue in full force and effect.

It doesn't matter what Microsoft says on any website. It doesn't matter
what company employees tell you or me or anyone. The EULA I accepted
supersedes it all. It says so in the EULA.

So if I change my motherboard tomorrow, for any reason, I will be
completely within my rights to reactivate my software, and God help the
licensing tech who gets in my way.

rl
--
You must be the change you wish to
see in the world. Mohandas K. Gandhi