The market for testing all kinds of software, even home market software will be hurt by the virtualization license restrictions. Does Microsoft not want us to test software on Home editions? While, yes this can be done on the business and Ultimate versions, generally there's regression testing on all supported OSes. Using virtual machines with their Undo disk capabilities is perfect for this kind of testing. But Microsoft licensing says Home editions must run on physical machines. This means using PXE or physical provisioning. That's just too high a burden for testers. The quality of software of Home edition will suffer as a result.
The market for testing all kinds of software, even home market software will be hurt by the virtualization license restrictions. Does Microsoft not want us to test software on Home editions? While, yes this can be done on the business and Ultimate versions, generally there's regression testing on all supported OSes. Using virtual machines with their Undo disk capabilities is perfect for this kind of testing. But Microsoft licensing says Home editions must run on physical machines. This means using PXE or physical provisioning. That's just too high a burden for testers. The quality of software on Home editions will suffer as a result.
Probably that would be final push for me to install Linux at home as main system. Anyway, I would have to buy Windows at retail, since I do not buy OEM systems.
I already use Linux most of the time anyway. In office about 75% of time, at home about 90% of time. (Special thanks go to VMware Player.)
In the end, I use Windows only to play games. Though now that were rare events, since I have bought Nintendo DS Lite ;)
But the writing on the wall for some time now is that Microsoft is going to the deep end and is trying to take all of it's user base with it.
I for one don't intend to follow.
I respect their need for control over piracy but do not respect their means of doing so.
I have been a die hard windows fan and administer thousands of windows systems including servers and directory services but the changes that are coming along with Vista are too much for me. Sure I'll support at work but I'll also start into Linux for my personal use and then start working it into the enterprise slowly.
Microsoft is just a bunch of programmers at heart and there is nothing they can do that others can't.
The same license transfer applied to Windows XP and is just clarified in the Vista EULA. That said I think piracy is a poor excuse to punish legitimate customers. Items I pay a lot more for I do not constantly prove that I did purchase. Product Activation, WGA etc etc is simply over the top. It only punishes the legitimate user while the pirates keep on their merry way. What if your car or home constantly required that you own it. Maybe your car wont start until you authorize with On Star at GM or you cant unlock your front door until you verify with the state or locality that it is in fact your home. I am a techie and constantly change and manipulate hardware coupled with the fact I build my own PCs. I can say I have no intentions of buying a second copy of Vista or anything else unless I plan to put it on two separate computers. Guess I will simply adopt pirate techniques to be a legitimate user. If on Ubuntu or SUSE handled games a little better&&.
This will just cause users who have never used pirated software to start! There will be a way around this shortly after the software is released. This will cause users who are legitimate users to start using pirated software!
I became a Windows XP pirate (in Microsofts extimation) because of this very type of license. I have no problem with the idea of paying for one copy and using it on one CPU at a time. But if I trash the PC and want to reinstall it on the new PC, how is this any of Microsoft's business. I had this problem with my MS Office where I couldn't reinstall it without begging on the phone to Microsoft... and after that experience, I decided I would never install software with activation technology... I bought a copy of Windows XP, left it in the box unopened as a backup, and installed a pirate copy of XP on the machine, and reinstalled it over an over and over as I needed to.
Borland had it right... treat the license like a book... only one user at a time...
Microsoft - Give away the software. Sell USB or Parallel dongles to allow the software to work on a single machine. Other companies have been doing this for years to protect their software. Why not you?
I thought that a dongle would be a good idea when I first heard about this but there are several problems. It would make notebook use a problem, unless they could find a way to make it part of the motherboard. I would imagine that a dongle would be easy to hack if Microsoft released one, I think the way XP validates licenses works and if they could improve on this and not tie legitimate customers hands people would be more receptive to upgrading.
Please don't bring back dongles. From someone who used to have 3 of these things piggy-backed on my parallel port, they are a pain in the butt. Limit my installs, but don't make me deal with hardware copy protection.
How do you attach a dongle to a virtual machine when Microsoft's own Virtual Server doesn't support accessing USB ports in virtual machines? If you use a parallel port dongle, then it can only be used by the host and not VMs.
Smart cards or something similar would work - just like with cell phones, etc. Some type of smart card technology would be an obvious solution - give away the software, sell the smart card.
They get lost or cause compatibility issues with other software that posts to the I/O sockets.
The last time I saw a dongle was 13 years ago and the pain at loosing one during a move or having them "short out" is still fresh whenever the D-word is mentioned.
...who has been through 3 or 4 major component upgrades since switching to XP (but only running my copy of XP on ONE machine), this, if true, seals the deal. No more Windows. I'll either switch to Linux or buy a Mac and use Bootcamp/XP for gaming. See ya Bill and Steve.
I think I wont buy Vista for long-time to come. Atleast 6 months after Visual Studio - Orcas is released. There is no incentive for buying Vista as soon as it is released given that there are certain work-arounds to be done for the Visual Studio 2005 to work on Vista.
I hope in the mean time MSFT comes to its senses and changes this limited installs.
Just a few years ago the majority of business users really had to run Windows, but no more.
MS is going to have to learn that people have real alternatives to Windows these days. The harder they try to hold on to their desktop monopoly the quicker they will lose it.
Right now Games are the only thing that keep me tied to Windows. On Linux, getting Windows apps to run is just not up to par. I am knowledgable enough to do it, but it is still hit and miss and complicated. Mac just don't have a good library either, and I HATE propritary hardware systems (otherwise I would buy a Dell).
So, I am stuck with Windows. I can only hope that companies will release PC games are dying, and - instead of jumping to consoles, port their games to Linux in a traditional fashion. Until then, PC gaming is either going to involve piracy or is going to be VERY expensive.
For anything other than Gaming, you can use Linux or a Mac just fine.
I think limiting vista in two machines is completely bogus. I regularly format my drive and do fresh installs so that my machines runs tip-top. I seriously am going to think about getting Vista soon.
I have been have power spike issues at home, and over the past 2 months I have had to replace 2 motherboard and several other pieces. In this time, I have had to contact MS 7 times to get new keys for XP. This process was frustrating enough, but under this I would have to buy windows vista 4 times! Just because parts are blown out. And BTW, XP sees a new, SAME MODEL, motherboard as a NEW motherboard.
I will never be upgrading to Vista, but I am worried what will happen when they decide to drop support for XP.
this is ridiculas. I hope the MPAA does not follow this same asinine logic.
Under the ms thinking, you buy a DVD and the license says that you can only play it in one DVD player ever. You get to "transfer" it to another player only once so if you want to play it in your bedroom you can only watch it there thereafter.
That would be insane but that is the same logic that they are using.
If they are truly "innovators" as they claim to be surely they can come up with a better way to verify that it is installed on only one PC at a time.
What happens if your motherboard dies? What about your hard drive? How do they define the PC that it is installed in? the main board, processor, HD, the case?
Most ppl above don't understand the new License regime
I am amazed at how most ppl (whom are claimed as enthu(s), leaders and tech wizards - by c|net) just don't understand the core of new License regime.
New License doesn't restrict you from installing Vista on same machine N number of time. What it's restricting is - HOW MANY MACHINES YOU CAN INSTALL IT UPON.
Which is pretty okay to combat piracy.
If your machine crashes, it's fine to Re-install Vista.. as many times you want. All you got to do .. is re-register your OS at MS Website/ through Phone.
The process gonna validate.. if the "CPU ID and Serial # combination" exists in the Database. If yes, it's fine. If NOT... MS gonna allow you this only twice and it will lock you out after that or what they call it as "reduced access" mode.
So, please get your records straight.
c|net.. you guys MUST validate each posting. It's ironical to read half-baked information on a webite like c|net. Please mentain your repo guys.
You talk like an authority about something you obviously know nothing about. I have been faced with this exact problem from simple hardware upgrades. While they may actually improve it and lock it down to the CPU, they still have a problem in that this is software and it needs hardware to run on. The hardware can break, but that should not *also* cause the software to stop working once the hardware has been repaired.
It is so sad to see people post comments for the world to see that show a complete lack of any grammar or spelling skills. Clearly "nonicks" does not understand basic sentence construction, let alone how to spell.
People are not going to pay attention to your point when your writing wouldn't pass muster in a grade 4 English class.
Really? You Have Access To Information The Rest of Us Don't?
So, let's assume you are correct for a moment. Say, I have an old computer and I decide to upgrade, but when I buy the machine I find out that it is a lemon. I then send it back for a replacement box. Under this scenario, I will then have to buy Vista again! Who is that hurting? Paying customers. Instead of Microsoft punishing clients, Microsoft should put some work into developing a proper software-based system to combat piracy. Oh, but wait, that would require proper development! They can't even get that right on the product itself!
A new machine does not mean you ran out and bought a new dell. If you swap motherboards, upgrade your cpu or hd you can have problems.
If anyone is willing to install Vista on more then one machine without paying extra then this limitation will drive them to get a free unrestricted copy of Vista. So it will increase piracy.
"What it's restricting is - HOW MANY MACHINES YOU CAN INSTALL IT UPON"
No, what it's restricting is how many times you can "transfer" it from one "machine" to another. You can still only run a copy on one machine at a time. The issue is what constitutes a "machine" - unfortunately for Winblows fanatics Micro$loth considers most hardware upgrades as a new "machine" and that's the problem.
"If your machine crashes, it's fine to Re-install Vista.. as many times you want. All you got to do .. is re-register your OS at MS Website/ through Phone"
My god, I hope you're full of it on that one. I never heard of having to re-register an OS because of a system crash. If that's truly the case - well, enjoy your slavery sheeple. I've already gone Linux because of these kind of draconian measures and the only way vista will ever make onto any machine I own is if it's pirated and necessary. Since the second provision there will never truly come to pass, I will never corrupt any system I own with this trashware.
"MS gonna allow you this only twice and it will lock you out after that or what they call it as "reduced access" mode."
No, they'll let you do this ONCE. Fried motherboard? That's one. Bad CPU? That's two. See the problem? The only way out of the trap at that point is to buy vista again? What if your ethernet card goes after that, or worse your motherboard again? No thanks, I'll stick with an OS that works for me and not the other way around.
"So, please get your records straight. c|net.. you guys MUST validate each posting. It's ironical to read half-baked information on a webite like c|net."
Irony at it's best. If they did what you asked for here, your own comments would have hit the bit bucket. Next time, use your brain instead of your winblows fanboy appendage.
I typically reinstall Windows once a year to refresh the systems on my home network. Typically the systems gets so bogged down from everyone installing and unstalling apps the registry gets cluttered and systems eventually come to a crawl. If Windows is released every five years, then I'm screwed.
Microsoft has the right to do what they want with their products.
Microsoft is a slave of capitalism. The ultimate right and power belongs to consumers, who will cast their votes with their dollars. MICROSOFT AND ANY OTHER COMPANY MUST YIELD TO THE WANTS AND NEEDS OF THE CONSUMER OR THEY WILL SUFFER THE SAME FATE OF ALL OF THE OTHER BUSINESSES WHO DID NOT LEARN THIS LESSON.
By purchasing a product, you the consumer are casting a vote in support of the company and their business practices.
If you buy product x from an individual or company who treats you like crap, then you are saying with your dollars that it is acceptable for the individual or company to treat you in this manner.
When sales and profits decline, Microsoft will listen.
Bill Gates is rather obviously, a very smart man, he has seen the writing on the wall and has wisely stepped aside, he knows what is coming.
Someone who thinks they are clever said (in all caps no less so that I wouldn't miss it which is a good thing because I am pretty dim): "The ultimate right and power belongs to consumers, who will cast their votes with their dollars. MICROSOFT AND ANY OTHER COMPANY MUST YIELD TO THE WANTS AND NEEDS OF THE CONSUMER OR THEY WILL SUFFER THE SAME FATE OF ALL OF THE OTHER BUSINESSES WHO DID NOT LEARN THIS LESSON."
Consumers also have a power: it's called FAIR USE and the LAW. If I buy a product, I OWN IT. You don' tget to tell ME what to do with it.
If I want to buy a copy of windows, well two (you'll see why, bear with me) and make a really cool, sexy bra for my girl with them (holographic bras are really sexy when you're a geek like me), then that's my right.
Next thing you know, Microsoft will try to tell ME that she only gets to wear the bra twice!
No way.
Actually, wait a second. I kinda DO prefer her bra-less but that is off-topic.
...OS market, like MS does, then you are forcing people to buy your product.
Think of the millions of dollars in software that just schools have invested in, that will only run on Windows. It is one thing to say, "Oh, you just don't have to buy it." It is quite another to say that you can afford to spend millions more in software for a new platform and operating system, when you already own Windows software. Does MS owe people who bought their product a duty not to make it obsolete, simply so MS can make more money? Yes, they do.
Whether you want to call it a monopoly or not, MS, effectively, has a monopoly on OS software everywhere in the world. They got it, defacto by getting to IBM first. Windows isn't the best selling OS because it is a great OS, it is the best selling OS because MS-DOS got to the IBM PC first and MS became the defacto standard by doing so. After that, they just sat back and raked in the money.
The number of Windows users who trash Windows just amazes me. I regularly use MacOS X, IRIX and Solaris and I find them more useful than Windows XP. [I prefer CLI Solaris to Windows, any day.] Unfortunately, most people don't realize there is a choice when they walk into Circuit City or Best Buy and there isn't any choice, it is either Windows or Windows.
Because of this, MS owes the market a duty not to practice predatory pricing tactics...
I bought a retail legal copy of XP Professional 2-3 years back. Since then couple of my motherboard died or got upgraded. Right now i am on my 3rd motherboard. With delays in Vista, i do not see when i will buy another legal copy of Vista. By the time probably i would be using my 4th motherboard. I install XP only on one system and I expect to have this flexiblity and option and not just 2 installs.
If this goes through, I am NOT BUYING Vista retail copy.
Yeah, what do you expect from an illegal monopoly? Why hasn't the U.S. government stepped in?
This is just to milk absolutely every last penny out of the Windows user community. Microsoft is afraid that if users buy a Mac to run Windows virtualized in the Mac OS, then eventually they'll realize how much better the Mac is and drop Windows for good. Likewise for Linux. Do yourself a favor and drop Windows now. Macs are what Windows aspires to be -- easy to use, elegant, and secure. Linux is good, too.
Push back against this insidious rights management now! Don't settle for software that puts their own interests far above their users' interests like Microsoft does. Use Macs or Linux instead.
Although I personally think Vista will eclipse Windows Millenium in terms of the greatest step backwards that's supposed to be an upgrade.... Most users who digest their own information and don't blindly accept all the slop that's force-fed them by the establishment will jump from the sinking ship that is Microsoft in favor of quality operating systems like Macs and Linux with this release even without such a horrible rights management anyway. This is sure to speed it up, though!
Is M$ out of thier head..?!?! I for one have updated to a newer computer but retained the old OS. What about replacing the hard drive..?? Where does M$ draw the line on the term "moving"..??? Well I know one thing for sure, Vista isn't going to be a headache for me because I switched to a Mac already and I SURE AM GLAD I DID NOW BEFORE I GOT STUCK WITH VISTA..!!!!
so if you get a virus or spyware and format to get rid of it, you have used your 1 reinstall ticket... now your hard drive dies, and you have to buy another copy to reinstall!!!
You can reinstall the OS as many times as you want on the same machine. The new liscense limits you to transfering the OS to a new machine to twice.
It's when you upgrade your computer, say a hardrive or motherboard, that things will get dicey. MS claims there is an algorhythm that determines what constitutes a "new" computer. Most people think a "new" computer means you go to the store and buy a new HP or Dell or whatever. But the fact is a new motherboard with a new processor is effectively a "new" computer, so a reinstall of the OS would constitute a "transfer" to a new computer.
Two new motherboards later, your OS goes into a restricted mode, and you'll have to call MS to get permission to reactivate vista. That's the Hell of it, right there. Who wants the hassle? Why would MS want the hassle?
as the license says you can transfer 1 time to a new PC. this will be a little bit different than the activation of win XP as it will probably uses hardware hases to activate and if certain items are different(mainly motherboard and NIC) then it may not activate. if you have to reformat and it is the same system then you shouldnt have a problem formatting as many times as you like( or dont like) since the hardware hash will be the same. although i could see someone creating a way to send that out with a pirated copy also but it would be harder to do. it really comes down to a more stringent verion of XP activation as it will probably keep a database of the HW hash tied to the product key. other than that there would really be no way of knowing if the PC is different or the same as before and they will have to hire people to answer the phones at tech support when the system crashes after 2nd install and that would really eat into the profits they will make. if they only allowed 2 installs even if it was same system then that would be opening up massive lawsuits since if a HD crashed then will the HD company buy you a new copy of windows since their HD crashed? i doubt it and there lies the lawsuit angle since why should I buy a new copy that i already have when my hard drive crashed after having it 3 months? i didnt make it crash, why is it my fault. just thinking of that makes me shake already.
Statistically, hardware runs out of steam sooner than software. All potential Vista buyers are looking to using it for the next 5 to 10 years (just like XP). Chances are users would want to transfer the OS more than once during that time to catch up with new hardware advances, while staying with Vista.
Five years ago, I was running a Pentium III 500Mhz, today Core Duo 1.83Ghz. I don't know about you, but I think that dramatic changes in hardware, require dramatic changes in OS system software...
Oh, wait, I already have that - I have been running MacOS X, with upgrades approximately every year, for the last five years.
There is a reason my Windoze boxes sit, unused, except when I am forced to use them under threat of death...
I'd like to know what crack-head at MS came up with this one...
The absurdity of this license change simply boggles the mind.
Firstly, it isn't just that simple. Windows is about as stable as a two legged table. I've lost count of how many times I've had to reinstall XP for this reason or that. The most common reason why I have to wipe Windows out and reinstall is because of 3rd party copy protection such as StarForce or SecuROM which gets installed without meaningful disclosure by some game publisher then wrecks the OS.
IS MS telling me they can guarantee some 3rd party publisher isn't going to mess up my install? I doubt it. And what happens when that third game I'm reviewing thrashes the OS? I have to pay another $400 for Vista again? FAT CHANCE. I'll have the my lawyer and the State Attorney General on that faster than a fly on horse dung. This draconian measure will simply lead to more lawsuits against MS for unfair business practices, consumer fraud, and violation of the statutes of warranties of merchantibility.
I posted once earlier on this story. I for one, have been contemplating a change to Linux for sometime. I use it on my laptop. However, I have been vascilating on my desicion in regards to Vista. This is just another reason for me to make the switch.
Having said all that, I think a few pieces of misinformation need to be disspelled. First off, users who reload a machine several times WILL NOT be impacted by this change. Again, I'm talking about a simple reformat/reload.
However, if you change out a major hardware component, such as a Motherboard or CPU; or several minor components such as a harddrive, videocard, and install more RAM--all at the same time--these kinds of changes WILL affect you.
While I also understand and respect Microsoft's licensing rights (though I disagree with how much I have to pay to acquire those rights), there has to be a line drawn somewhere with respect to licensing.
Look, I bought a $400 piece of paper (i.e. the Windows license). Why shouldn't I be able to apply that license to any computer hardware I like so long as I abide by the license rules of one copy per CPU at any one time?
Where this licensing scheme will backfire is with hardcore gamers who often buy many pieces of hardware within even a one-year period. I think M$ needs to get their heads out of the clouds (or where ever else it might be... ;) ) and come back to reality. Are they trying to alienate hard-core gamers and other power-users?
I bet if every hard-core gamer switch to Linux (if it were possible to do so and still play that awesome game), they would feel the squeeze. Well, wake up M$, because that's what's going to happen. When you ppol crazy stuff like this, this will call more attention to FOSS, more developers to FOSS, improving FOSS's quality and gain FOSS marketshare taking it away from you (MS).
As for me, you lost me a long time ago. I will start becoming much more active in Linux development (Mono for Linux anyone) and help improve the OS anyway I can; anything to have a free, open source alternative to an otherwise great operating system.
Before I get flamed for that last statement, a great OS is highly dependent upon one's needs for an OS. For examlpe, Windows is great because it IS easy. However, Linux is great because of it's maximum and limitless flexibility. It all depends on for how you want to use it.
I'm sorry to see such a powerful company to resort to such bullying of its consumers. If you want to stay relevant, you will change. Otherwise, you will quietly fade into the background (anybody remember DEC, UNISYS, Tandy, etc.?).
SONY started treating their customers like criminals, and look at them!
Aside from Vista itself (I don't care what anybody says, I've used it, it's AWFUL in so many ways. I do NOT need an OS telling ME I am stupid all of the time. I need an OS to get out of my WAY so I can get things done!), All of this DRM and copy protection MS is putting into Vista is going to backfire on them in a HUGE way.
What Microsoft has never seemed to figure out was that it was Window's openness (yes, including the ability to copy it easily) that made them #1 in the first place.
If Apple and Linux market share is what MS is after, they're going to get it alright, in exchange for their own.
Oh, and I keep reading "I tried Linux and it's great!" so ok, ok, I finally tried Linux. And guess what? It IS really really nice!
I tried Ubuntu and Suse (the open version) both. I was really, really impressed!
Microsoft, listen up: you're really screwing up. As for Vista, after 5 years of development, that's the BEST you can do? It's honestly THE most bloated piece of I-don't-know-what I've ever eXPerienced.
I'm one of those people who swaps motherboards, cpus and hard drives frequently or just does a clean install every now and then. I'm willing to pay for Vista Ultimate, but I'm not going to do it every few times I upgrade. This license is worthless to me and if implemented, I will refuse to waste my money. But I will run Vista regardless. We both have to make our business decisions.
Manage updates with the Download App
software will be hurt by the virtualization license restrictions.
Does Microsoft not want us to test software on Home editions?
While, yes this can be done on the business and Ultimate
versions, generally there's regression testing on all supported
OSes. Using virtual machines with their Undo disk capabilities is
perfect for this kind of testing. But Microsoft licensing says
Home editions must run on physical machines. This means
using PXE or physical provisioning. That's just too high a
burden for testers. The quality of software of Home edition will
suffer as a result.
software will be hurt by the virtualization license restrictions.
Does Microsoft not want us to test software on Home editions?
While, yes this can be done on the business and Ultimate
versions, generally there's regression testing on all supported
OSes. Using virtual machines with their Undo disk capabilities is
perfect for this kind of testing. But Microsoft licensing says
Home editions must run on physical machines. This means
using PXE or physical provisioning. That's just too high a
burden for testers. The quality of software on Home editions
will
suffer as a result.
I already use Linux most of the time anyway. In office about 75% of time, at home about 90% of time. (Special thanks go to VMware Player.)
In the end, I use Windows only to play games. Though now that were rare events, since I have bought Nintendo DS Lite ;)
I for one don't intend to follow.
I respect their need for control over piracy but do not respect their means of doing so.
I have been a die hard windows fan and administer thousands of windows systems including servers and directory services but the changes that are coming along with Vista are too much for me. Sure I'll support at work but I'll also start into Linux for my personal use and then start working it into the enterprise slowly.
Microsoft is just a bunch of programmers at heart and there is nothing they can do that others can't.
Borland had it right... treat the license like a book... only one user at a time...
Sell USB or Parallel dongles to allow the software to work on a single machine. Other companies have been doing this for years to protect their software. Why not you?
I would imagine that a dongle would be easy to hack if Microsoft released one, I think the way XP validates licenses works and if they could improve on this and not tie legitimate customers hands people would be more receptive to upgrading.
They get lost or cause compatibility issues with other software that posts to the I/O sockets.
The last time I saw a dongle was 13 years ago and the pain at loosing one during a move or having them "short out" is still fresh whenever the D-word is mentioned.
They're the bane of IT support!
PS - I am not a linux person but probably will be when XP is out of support.
I hope in the mean time MSFT comes to its senses and changes this limited installs.
MS is going to have to learn that people have real alternatives to Windows these days. The harder they try to hold on to their desktop monopoly the quicker they will lose it.
So, I am stuck with Windows. I can only hope that companies will release PC games are dying, and - instead of jumping to consoles, port their games to Linux in a traditional fashion. Until then, PC gaming is either going to involve piracy or is going to be VERY expensive.
For anything other than Gaming, you can use Linux or a Mac just fine.
I will never be upgrading to Vista, but I am worried what will happen when they decide to drop support for XP.
Seriously, how could you not have one of these after one motherboard, let alone two? Plus they're insured, so even if they don't work, they work.
"Fry me once, shame on you, fry me twice... somethin somethin bomb Iraq."
I hope the MPAA does not follow this same asinine logic.
Under the ms thinking, you buy a DVD and the license says that you can only play it in one DVD player ever. You get to "transfer" it to another player only once so if you want to play it in your bedroom you can only watch it there thereafter.
That would be insane but that is the same logic that they are using.
If they are truly "innovators" as they claim to be surely they can come up with a better way to verify that it is installed on only one PC at a time.
What happens if your motherboard dies? What about your hard drive? How do they define the PC that it is installed in? the main board, processor, HD, the case?
The more I deal with MS the more I hate them.
New License doesn't restrict you from installing Vista on same machine N number of time. What it's restricting is - HOW MANY MACHINES YOU CAN INSTALL IT UPON.
Which is pretty okay to combat piracy.
If your machine crashes, it's fine to Re-install Vista.. as many times you want. All you got to do .. is re-register your OS at MS Website/ through Phone.
The process gonna validate.. if the "CPU ID and Serial # combination" exists in the Database. If yes, it's fine. If NOT... MS gonna allow you this only twice and it will lock you out after that or what they call it as "reduced access" mode.
So, please get your records straight.
c|net.. you guys MUST validate each posting. It's ironical to read half-baked information on a webite like c|net. Please mentain your repo guys.
People are not going to pay attention to your point when your writing wouldn't pass muster in a grade 4 English class.
If anyone is willing to install Vista on more then one machine without paying extra then this limitation will drive them to get a free unrestricted copy of Vista. So it will increase piracy.
"What it's restricting is - HOW MANY MACHINES YOU CAN
INSTALL IT UPON"
No, what it's restricting is how many times you can "transfer" it
from one "machine" to another. You can still only run a copy on
one machine at a time. The issue is what constitutes a "machine"
- unfortunately for Winblows fanatics Micro$loth considers most
hardware upgrades as a new "machine" and that's the problem.
"If your machine crashes, it's fine to Re-install Vista.. as many
times you want. All you got to do .. is re-register your OS at MS
Website/ through Phone"
My god, I hope you're full of it on that one. I never heard of
having to re-register an OS because of a system crash. If that's
truly the case - well, enjoy your slavery sheeple. I've already
gone Linux because of these kind of draconian measures and
the only way vista will ever make onto any machine I own is if it's
pirated and necessary. Since the second provision there will
never truly come to pass, I will never corrupt any system I own
with this trashware.
"MS gonna allow you this only twice and it will lock you out after
that or what they call it as "reduced access" mode."
No, they'll let you do this ONCE. Fried motherboard? That's one.
Bad CPU? That's two. See the problem? The only way out of the
trap at that point is to buy vista again? What if your ethernet
card goes after that, or worse your motherboard again? No
thanks, I'll stick with an OS that works for me and not the other
way around.
"So, please get your records straight. c|net.. you guys MUST
validate each posting. It's ironical to read half-baked
information on a webite like c|net."
Irony at it's best. If they did what you asked for here, your own
comments would have hit the bit bucket. Next time, use your
brain instead of your winblows fanboy appendage.
And I'd rather write half-baked comments than to BE baked. I'm almost 14 years clean and sober now and loving it. I recommend it.
Microsoft is a slave of capitalism.
The ultimate right and power belongs to consumers, who will cast their votes with their dollars. MICROSOFT AND ANY OTHER COMPANY MUST YIELD TO THE WANTS AND NEEDS OF THE CONSUMER OR THEY WILL SUFFER THE SAME FATE OF ALL OF THE OTHER BUSINESSES WHO DID NOT LEARN THIS LESSON.
By purchasing a product, you the consumer are casting a vote in support of the company and their business practices.
If you buy product x from an individual or company who treats you like crap, then you are saying with your dollars that it is acceptable for the individual or company to treat you in this manner.
When sales and profits decline, Microsoft will listen.
Bill Gates is rather obviously, a very smart man, he has seen the writing on the wall and has wisely stepped aside, he knows what is coming.
Consumers also have a power: it's called FAIR USE and the LAW. If I buy a product, I OWN IT. You don' tget to tell ME what to do with it.
If I want to buy a copy of windows, well two (you'll see why, bear with me) and make a really cool, sexy bra for my girl with them (holographic bras are really sexy when you're a geek like me), then that's my right.
Next thing you know, Microsoft will try to tell ME that she only gets to wear the bra twice!
No way.
Actually, wait a second. I kinda DO prefer her bra-less but that is off-topic.
your product.
Think of the millions of dollars in software that just schools have
invested in, that will only run on Windows. It is one thing to say,
"Oh, you just don't have to buy it." It is quite another to say that
you can afford to spend millions more in software for a new
platform and operating system, when you already own Windows
software. Does MS owe people who bought their product a duty
not to make it obsolete, simply so MS can make more money?
Yes, they do.
Whether you want to call it a monopoly or not, MS, effectively,
has a monopoly on OS software everywhere in the world. They
got it, defacto by getting to IBM first. Windows isn't the best
selling OS because it is a great OS, it is the best selling OS
because MS-DOS got to the IBM PC first and MS became the
defacto standard by doing so. After that, they just sat back and
raked in the money.
The number of Windows users who trash Windows just amazes
me. I regularly use MacOS X, IRIX and Solaris and I find them
more useful than Windows XP. [I prefer CLI Solaris to Windows,
any day.] Unfortunately, most people don't realize there is a
choice when they walk into Circuit City or Best Buy and there
isn't any choice, it is either Windows or Windows.
Because of this, MS owes the market a duty not to practice
predatory pricing tactics...
If this goes through, I am NOT BUYING Vista retail copy.
This is just to milk absolutely every last penny out of the Windows user community. Microsoft is afraid that if users buy a Mac to run Windows virtualized in the Mac OS, then eventually they'll realize how much better the Mac is and drop Windows for good. Likewise for Linux. Do yourself a favor and drop Windows now. Macs are what Windows aspires to be -- easy to use, elegant, and secure. Linux is good, too.
Push back against this insidious rights management now! Don't settle for software that puts their own interests far above their users' interests like Microsoft does. Use Macs or Linux instead.
Although I personally think Vista will eclipse Windows Millenium in terms of the greatest step backwards that's supposed to be an upgrade.... Most users who digest their own information and don't blindly accept all the slop that's force-fed them by the establishment will jump from the sinking ship that is Microsoft in favor of quality operating systems like Macs and Linux with this release even without such a horrible rights management anyway. This is sure to speed it up, though!
The answer: Because they are bought and paid for.
computer but retained the old OS. What about replacing the hard
drive..?? Where does M$ draw the line on the term "moving"..???
Well I know one thing for sure, Vista isn't going to be a headache
for me because I switched to a Mac already and I SURE AM GLAD I
DID NOW BEFORE I GOT STUCK WITH VISTA..!!!!
am i the only one who thinks that is just stupid
It's when you upgrade your computer, say a hardrive or motherboard, that things will get dicey. MS claims there is an algorhythm that determines what constitutes a "new" computer. Most people think a "new" computer means you go to the store and buy a new HP or Dell or whatever. But the fact is a new motherboard with a new processor is effectively a "new" computer, so a reinstall of the OS would constitute a "transfer" to a new computer.
Two new motherboards later, your OS goes into a restricted mode, and you'll have to call MS to get permission to reactivate vista. That's the Hell of it, right there. Who wants the hassle? Why would MS want the hassle?
Five years ago, I was running a Pentium III 500Mhz, today Core
Duo 1.83Ghz. I don't know about you, but I think that dramatic
changes in hardware, require dramatic changes in OS system
software...
Oh, wait, I already have that - I have been running MacOS X, with
upgrades approximately every year, for the last five years.
There is a reason my Windoze boxes sit, unused, except when I
am forced to use them under threat of death...
Firstly, it isn't just that simple. Windows is about as stable as a two legged table. I've lost count of how many times I've had to reinstall XP for this reason or that. The most common reason why I have to wipe Windows out and reinstall is because of 3rd party copy protection such as StarForce or SecuROM which gets installed without meaningful disclosure by some game publisher then wrecks the OS.
IS MS telling me they can guarantee some 3rd party publisher isn't going to mess up my install? I doubt it. And what happens when that third game I'm reviewing thrashes the OS? I have to pay another $400 for Vista again? FAT CHANCE. I'll have the my lawyer and the State Attorney General on that faster than a fly on horse dung. This draconian measure will simply lead to more lawsuits against MS for unfair business practices, consumer fraud, and violation of the statutes of warranties of merchantibility.
Having said all that, I think a few pieces of misinformation need to be disspelled. First off, users who reload a machine several times WILL NOT be impacted by this change. Again, I'm talking about a simple reformat/reload.
However, if you change out a major hardware component, such as a Motherboard or CPU; or several minor components such as a harddrive, videocard, and install more RAM--all at the same time--these kinds of changes WILL affect you.
While I also understand and respect Microsoft's licensing rights (though I disagree with how much I have to pay to acquire those rights), there has to be a line drawn somewhere with respect to licensing.
Look, I bought a $400 piece of paper (i.e. the Windows license). Why shouldn't I be able to apply that license to any computer hardware I like so long as I abide by the license rules of one copy per CPU at any one time?
Where this licensing scheme will backfire is with hardcore gamers who often buy many pieces of hardware within even a one-year period. I think M$ needs to get their heads out of the clouds (or where ever else it might be... ;) ) and come back to reality. Are they trying to alienate hard-core gamers and other power-users?
I bet if every hard-core gamer switch to Linux (if it were possible to do so and still play that awesome game), they would feel the squeeze. Well, wake up M$, because that's what's going to happen. When you ppol crazy stuff like this, this will call more attention to FOSS, more developers to FOSS, improving FOSS's quality and gain FOSS marketshare taking it away from you (MS).
As for me, you lost me a long time ago. I will start becoming much more active in Linux development (Mono for Linux anyone) and help improve the OS anyway I can; anything to have a free, open source alternative to an otherwise great operating system.
Before I get flamed for that last statement, a great OS is highly dependent upon one's needs for an OS. For examlpe, Windows is great because it IS easy. However, Linux is great because of it's maximum and limitless flexibility. It all depends on for how you want to use it.
I'm sorry to see such a powerful company to resort to such bullying of its consumers. If you want to stay relevant, you will change. Otherwise, you will quietly fade into the background (anybody remember DEC, UNISYS, Tandy, etc.?).
Aside from Vista itself (I don't care what anybody says, I've used it, it's AWFUL in so many ways. I do NOT need an OS telling ME I am stupid all of the time. I need an OS to get out of my WAY so I can get things done!), All of this DRM and copy protection MS is putting into Vista is going to backfire on them in a HUGE way.
What Microsoft has never seemed to figure out was that it was Window's openness (yes, including the ability to copy it easily) that made them #1 in the first place.
If Apple and Linux market share is what MS is after, they're going to get it alright, in exchange for their own.
Oh, and I keep reading "I tried Linux and it's great!" so ok, ok, I finally tried Linux. And guess what? It IS really really nice!
I tried Ubuntu and Suse (the open version) both. I was really, really impressed!
Microsoft, listen up: you're really screwing up. As for Vista, after 5 years of development, that's the BEST you can do? It's honestly THE most bloated piece of I-don't-know-what I've ever eXPerienced.