Installing a copy of XP in a 2nd Partition.

[Bob M]

Is it possible, or even legal to install a 2nd copy of XP on one
computer in a 2nd partition?

In the licence verbiage that flew past while I was setting up my new
Gateway GT5064, I think I saw something saying that I can install no
more than 2 instances of XP on any one computer. This implies that it
is OK to install 2.

I have done this in thepast with W98, but there is a note on the
single CD that came with the computer that says "Process erases all
data and files from the hard drive". Do they really mean that or does
it just erase everything on the partition I just created for it?

Is it likely that one CD could hold the entire Windows XP Media Center
Edition 2005"?

 

[Carey Frisch [MVP]]

A Windows XP license can only be used on one (1)
computer. A second installation requires a second
license.

From the Windows XP EULA:

1.1 Installation and use. You may install, use, access,
display and run one copy of the Software on a single
computer, such as a workstation, terminal or other
device ("Workstation Computer"). The Software may not
be used by more than two (2) processors at any one
time on any single Workstation Computer.

Please read your End-User License Agreement by going
to Start > Run and type: WINVER , and hit enter. Then
click on "End-User License Agreement".

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

---------------------------------------------------------------------------­----------------

:

| Is it possible, or even legal to install a 2nd copy of XP on one
| computer in a 2nd partition?
|
| In the licence verbiage that flew past while I was setting up my new
| Gateway GT5064, I think I saw something saying that I can install no
| more than 2 instances of XP on any one computer. This implies that it
| is OK to install 2.
|
| I have done this in thepast with W98, but there is a note on the
| single CD that came with the computer that says "Process erases all
| data and files from the hard drive". Do they really mean that or does
| it just erase everything on the partition I just created for it?
|
| Is it likely that one CD could hold the entire Windows XP Media Center
| Edition 2005"?

 

[Alias]

A Windows XP license can only be used on one (1)
computer. A second installation requires a second
license.

He is talking about one (1) computer, Carey.

Alias

 

[Pegasus \(MVP\)]

I don't think the OP's intention violates the EULA. Hi is
trying to install WinXP on the same PC but in a second
partition. He is therefore dealing with one single PC,
and the software cannot run in two instances at any
one time.

About the technical side: If he specifies a different
partition then WinXP will be installed there without
erasing his current installation.

 

[Carey Frisch [MVP]]

"You may install, use, access, display and run ONE (1) copy of the
Software on a single computer"

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

---------------------------------------------------------------------------­----------------

:

| He is talking about one (1) computer, Carey.
|
| Alias

 

[DanS]

A Windows XP license can only be used on one (1)
computer. A second installation requires a second
license.

From the Windows XP EULA:

1.1 Installation and use. You may install, use, access,
display and run one copy of the Software on a single
computer, such as a workstation, terminal or other
device ("Workstation Computer"). The Software may not
be used by more than two (2) processors at any one
time on any single Workstation Computer.

Please read your End-User License Agreement by going
to Start > Run and type: WINVER , and hit enter. Then
click on "End-User License Agreement".

'You may install, use, access, display and run one copy...'

With the wording of that sentence, I can interpret this statement as ALL
of the above conditions must be true simultaneously.

If you have 2 copies of XP installed on one computer and are only running
one at a time, by way of multi-booting, there is no way all 4 conditions
can be met at the same time.

 

[Alias]

"You may install, use, access, display and run ONE (1) copy of the
Software on a single computer"

Disgusting. How in hell does that prevent piracy and what is the purpose
of that restriction?

Alias

 

[Rick \Nutcase\ Rogers]

Hi Bob,

This is a never ending point of contention about licensing. Physically, yes
it's possible, and actually quite easy to do. Is it legal? This has no clear
cut, easy answer. The bottom line is that you are only supposed to have one
installation per license on a given machine, this is the intent of the EULA.
However, in direct contradiction to this, even Microsoft recommends a
parallel installation to a different folder or volume as one means of system
recovery. To add to that, there is no way that activation will pose an issue
either, as you will be (re)activating the same license on the same
hardware - nothing illegal about that. The bone of contention is the "one
copy on one machine" interpretation of the EULA, and there is no one answer
you will get that is completely correct. Frankly, I do not think it is
outside the bounds of normal use to create a second installation on the same
system. It's not like you can use them both at the same time, nor are you
sharing a copy with a friend (the "sharing" that activation is mean to
curb).

As to your Gateway recovery disk, I suspect it is an image disk that
basically just wipes the disk and replaces it with a factory image. This
type of disk generally cannot be used to create dual installation.

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP

Windows help - www.rickrogers.org

 

[Bob M]

As to your Gateway recovery disk, I suspect it is an image disk that
basically just wipes the disk and replaces it with a factory image. This
type of disk generally cannot be used to create dual installation.

Thanks to all who replied.
I guess I erred in assuming that it was a CD that was supplied.
Apparently it is a DVD, as it conains 1.7GB of data. The Installed OS
takes up 7.3GB. I doubt that the DVD contains all of the extra
programs thet Gateway supplies with the computer.

Since this is not something I need to do, I probably won't. It worked
out nicely with W98, but it looks like I would need to buy an XP
install disk to do it properly.

 

[Guest]

If it isn't something you need to do, why waste everyone's time in responding
to a non-existent problem?

 

[Timothy Daniels]

If it isn't something you need to do, why waste everyone's
time in responding to a non-existent problem?

Seeing an MVP put in print that he thinks 2 installations
in one computer has no clear-cut illegality was worth the
read. I've felt that all along and so have most of the world's
PC users.

As for the OP's question, I think he should call Gateway
and ask if the recovery DVD will re-format the disk and
put the OS image in as partition 1 or will it put the OS into
a designated partition. If it's the latter, he's home free.

*TimDaniels*

 

[Timothy Daniels]

Disgusting. How in hell does that prevent piracy and what is the
purpose of that restriction?

Who the h... knows? Carey Frisch just uses direct quotes
because she can't keep a straight face when using her own
words. That part of the EULA has never been tested in
court to my knowledge, and the probable outcome is still moot.

*TimDaniels*

 

[Guest]

What part of "You may install, use, access, display and run ONE (1) copy of the
Software on a single computer" do you not understand? Any fair-minded Judge
would not even rule on this since the statement is easy to understand!

 

[Larry Samuels]

Hi Tim,

If you search around a bit on activation and dual booting you will find many
MVPs are opposed to the current wording of the EULA.

The growing use of Virtual PC and the use of dual booting to protect
important files from exposure to internet trash has changed the pc landscape
drastically in the last few years.
MS needs to adjust it's licensing for the home sector the way it is
currently adjusting it for the business sector to allow multiple installs on
virtual server.

PS-- it is not only MVPs arguing the case. There are quite a few MS
employees promoting licensing changes within the company.


--
Larry Samuels Associate Expert
MS-MVP (2001-2005)
Unofficial FAQ for Windows Server 2003 at
http://pelos.us/SERVER.htm
Expert Zone-

 

[DanS]

Hi Tim,

If you search around a bit on activation and dual booting you will
find many MVPs are opposed to the current wording of the EULA.

The growing use of Virtual PC and the use of dual booting to protect
important files from exposure to internet trash has changed the pc
landscape drastically in the last few years.
MS needs to adjust it's licensing for the home sector the way it is
currently adjusting it for the business sector to allow multiple
installs on virtual server.

PS-- it is not only MVPs arguing the case. There are quite a few MS
employees promoting licensing changes within the company.

And a few of them that seem pretty adament about obeying it word for word,
like they are pristine angels.

Sometimes it's quite a funny read.

 

[Timothy Daniels]

"Carey Frisch [MVP]" scratched out:

What part of "You may install, use, access, display and run
ONE (1) copy of the Software on a single computer" do you
not understand? Any fair-minded Judge would not even rule
on this since the statement is easy to understand!

I understand that sentence very well - it says what one
can do. It does NOT say what one CANNOT do or
MAY NOT do. For feeble minds, it does NOT say:
"You may not install, use, access, display and run
ONE (1) copy of the Software on a single computer."

But YOU, Ms. Fisch, add your own imaginings to
interpret the positive to include a negative. So yes,
a fair-minded judge would not rule on such a silly
interpretation as yours.

*TimDaniels*

 

[Timothy Daniels]

It's good to hear that reason still exists in the Microsoft world.
I use cloning to make backups for quick re-deployment if my
primary HD should fail or get corrupted and for archiving all
my myriad files. I strongly doubt that any judge would consider
that "pirating" or beyond fair usage for personl non-commercial
use.

*TimDaniels*