Cheap XP , OR, XP for multiple computers?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ryan Baillargeon
  • Start date Start date
R

Ryan Baillargeon

Ok, dont take me as an amature, but theres a few points i
need to make before asking this.

Windows upgrade cost around 150 in canada, the just
regular home edition for installing into a blank hard
drive is around 300.

I am currently building my PC piece by piece, with the
best i can get. But, just realising that i can buy a
computer for 400$ at some places, makes me wonder, how are
these companies installing XP for 300$, and only affording
the rest of the box for 100$, there would be no profit.

anyways, im looking for a cheap XP for a single system, or
for multiple systems.

is there a license required to purchase for multiple
systems?

and harsh point/question,
if you expect people to pay 300$ for a single
installation, i think there should be no surprises at the
illegal copies...and no, not all illegal copies are shut
down within a month. please give me useful answers, ive
had nothing but bad luck with this stuff.


Thank you very much,

PS. many programs require xp, there should at least be
extremely stripped down xp versions.

Ryan
 
Ryan;
The licensing terms for Windows XP are the same as all previous
consumer versions at least as far back as Windows 95.
One license, one computer.

The larger manufacturers sell their own custom OEM version of Windows
XP at a reduced cost.
That is one reason those computers are cheaper.
Often their versions will not install on any other computer.

Normally OEM is permanently tied to the original computer regardless
the condition of the original computer.
That and other reasons help keep OEM prices lower.

Often you can buy OEM at a local computer store.
Usually you need to purchase a piece of hardware such as a mouse or
memory.
Different stores may have different requirements.

The price has little to do with why people steal (pirate) licenses.
The price is just a convenient excuse the thieves use to justify their
actions.
Since it is a thieves nature, many would steal Windows regardless the
price.
 
Well first off, the upgrade CD can be used on a completely new
computer to perform a clean, full install (the full version of XP is
on the CD). If you have a legitimate copy of a previous version of
Windows (95 or better) and are not using that license on any other
machine, you are eligible to purchase the XP upgrade. Also, most
universities sell Windows for an educational price, so if you, or
someone in your family qualifies, that'd be another way to save some
money (I go to UC San Diego and puchased XP Pro upgrade from school
for $99USD). Finally, what I did on my most recently built computer
(put together two weeks ago), was just to go Linux, you can find
numerous free distro's at www.linuxiso.org (I recommend Mandrake or
Fedora for beginners).

Adios,
~Nick
 
Ryan Baillargeon said:
Ok, dont take me as an amature, but theres a few points i
need to make before asking this.

Windows upgrade cost around 150 in canada, the just
regular home edition for installing into a blank hard
drive is around 300.

I am currently building my PC piece by piece, with the
best i can get. But, just realising that i can buy a
computer for 400$ at some places, makes me wonder, how are
these companies installing XP for 300$, and only affording
the rest of the box for 100$, there would be no profit.

anyways, im looking for a cheap XP for a single system, or
for multiple systems.

is there a license required to purchase for multiple
systems?

and harsh point/question,
if you expect people to pay 300$ for a single
installation, i think there should be no surprises at the
illegal copies...and no, not all illegal copies are shut
down within a month. please give me useful answers, ive
had nothing but bad luck with this stuff.


Thank you very much,

PS. many programs require xp, there should at least be
extremely stripped down xp versions.

Ryan
Click to expand...

Hi Ryan.

When you purchase the parts to build your new computer inquire about
also purchasing an OEM version of Windows XP Home at the same time.
Most dealers that sell components will also sell you the OEM software.

That is what the low priced computers you were talking about come with
- OEM versions. These versions have restrictions and limitations in
the license that are not found in the regular retail licenses (No free
support from Microsoft, the license once installed cannot be
transferred to another computer, etc.).

The price for the OEM version should be about the same as that of the
Retail Upgrade version and very much less than the Retail Full
version.

Good luck


Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
--
Microsoft MVP
On-Line Help Computer Service
http://onlinehelp.bc.ca

"The reason computer chips are so small is computers don't eat much."
 
Greetings --

Help how? Are you suggesting that the OP needs to learn to lie
and steal?

Bruce Chambers
--
Help us help you:



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

Help how? Are you suggesting that the OP needs to learn to lie
and steal?

Bruce Chambers
--
Help us help you:



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





.
Click to expand...

I guess that depends what you read into the website,
Bruce. I see it as learning your fair use rights.

http://microscum.com/mmpafaq/
 
Greetings --

That web site has absolutely _nothing_ to do with "fair use." In
fact, it deliberately assigns a completely invalid definition to the
term, in a lame, transparent attempt by the author to rationalize his
own position in support of software piracy. (Or would be, if each and
every page at that site weren't labeled as a parody - meaning that no
one is intended to take anything said there seriously.)

Specifically:

"Fair use is a copyright principle based on the belief that the
public is entitled to freely use *portions* of copyrighted materials
for purposes of *commentary and criticism*. For example, if you wish
to criticize a novelist, you should have the freedom to quote a
portion of the novelist's work without asking permission. Absent this
freedom, copyright owners could stifle any negative comments about
their work."
(http://fairuse.stanford.edu/Copyright_and_Fair_Use_Overview/chapter9/index.html)
(Emphasis mine.)

"Judges use four factors in resolving fair use disputes, which are
discussed in detail below. It's important to understand that these
factors are only guidelines and the courts are free to adapt them to
particular situations on a case-by-case basis. In other words, a judge
has a great deal of freedom when making a fair use determination and
the outcome in any given case can be hard to predict.

"The four factors judges consider are:

1.. the purpose and character of your use
2.. the nature of the copyrighted work
3.. the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
4.. the effect of the use upon the potential market. "
(http://fairuse.stanford.edu/Copyright_and_Fair_Use_Overview/chapter9/9-b.html)

Feel free to peruse the entire article, which will make it
abundantly clear that there is no way that anyone could successfully
argue that installing a second copy of an operation system onto a
second computer, without the copyright holder's express permission,
for the sole purpose of not having to buy a second license, could
possibly meet the criteria of "Fair Use."

To read the actual law that defines "fair use:"

TITLE 17 , CHAPTER 1 , Sec. 107.
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html



Bruce Chambers
--
Help us help you:



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

That web site has absolutely _nothing_ to do with "fair use." In
fact, it deliberately assigns a completely invalid definition to the
term, in a lame, transparent attempt by the author to rationalize his
own position in support of software piracy. (Or would be, if each and
every page at that site weren't labeled as a parody - meaning that no
one is intended to take anything said there seriously.)

Specifically:

"Fair use is a copyright principle based on the belief that the
public is entitled to freely use *portions* of copyrighted materials
for purposes of *commentary and criticism*. For example, if you wish
to criticize a novelist, you should have the freedom to quote a
portion of the novelist's work without asking permission. Absent this
freedom, copyright owners could stifle any negative comments about
their work."
(http://fairuse.stanford.edu/Copyright_and_Fair_Use_Overvie
w/chapter9/index.html)
(Emphasis mine.)

"Judges use four factors in resolving fair use disputes, which are
discussed in detail below. It's important to understand that these
factors are only guidelines and the courts are free to adapt them to
particular situations on a case-by-case basis. In other words, a judge
has a great deal of freedom when making a fair use determination and
the outcome in any given case can be hard to predict.

"The four factors judges consider are:

1.. the purpose and character of your use
2.. the nature of the copyrighted work
3.. the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
4.. the effect of the use upon the potential market. "
(http://fairuse.stanford.edu/Copyright_and_Fair_Use_Overvie
w/chapter9/9-b.html)

Feel free to peruse the entire article, which will make it
abundantly clear that there is no way that anyone could successfully
argue that installing a second copy of an operation system onto a
second computer, without the copyright holder's express permission,
for the sole purpose of not having to buy a second license, could
possibly meet the criteria of "Fair Use."

To read the actual law that defines "fair use:"

TITLE 17 , CHAPTER 1 , Sec. 107.
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html



Bruce Chambers
--
Help us help you:



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





.
Click to expand...

That seems like a very extreme view, Bruce. And it
differes from my view. But if we all had the same view
the world would be an unintertesting place.
 
Bruce said:
Greetings --

That web site has absolutely _nothing_ to do with "fair use." In
fact, it deliberately assigns a completely invalid definition to the
term, in a lame, transparent attempt by the author to rationalize his
own position in support of software piracy. (Or would be, if each and
every page at that site weren't labeled as a parody - meaning that no
one is intended to take anything said there seriously.)

Specifically:

"Fair use is a copyright principle based on the belief that the
public is entitled to freely use *portions* of copyrighted materials
for purposes of *commentary and criticism*. For example, if you wish
to criticize a novelist, you should have the freedom to quote a
portion of the novelist's work without asking permission. Absent this
freedom, copyright owners could stifle any negative comments about
their work."
(http://fairuse.stanford.edu/Copyright_and_Fair_Use_Overview/chapter9/index.html)
(Emphasis mine.)

"Judges use four factors in resolving fair use disputes, which are
discussed in detail below. It's important to understand that these
factors are only guidelines and the courts are free to adapt them to
particular situations on a case-by-case basis. In other words, a judge
has a great deal of freedom when making a fair use determination and
the outcome in any given case can be hard to predict.

"The four factors judges consider are:

1.. the purpose and character of your use
2.. the nature of the copyrighted work
3.. the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
4.. the effect of the use upon the potential market. "
(http://fairuse.stanford.edu/Copyright_and_Fair_Use_Overview/chapter9/9-b.html)

Feel free to peruse the entire article, which will make it
abundantly clear that there is no way that anyone could successfully
argue that installing a second copy of an operation system onto a
second computer, without the copyright holder's express permission,
for the sole purpose of not having to buy a second license, could
possibly meet the criteria of "Fair Use."

To read the actual law that defines "fair use:"

TITLE 17 , CHAPTER 1 , Sec. 107.
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html



Bruce Chambers
Click to expand...
That is a very narrow view, Bruce. People who actually care to defend
their fair use rights don't automatically pull down their pants and bend
themselves over the table for greedy, criminal corporations such as M$
like you do. I would think you would respect people who stand up for
their beliefs and think for themselves, even if you may not agree with
their beliefs. I guess I was wrong about you. The below link is
another interpretation of the laws governing fair use rights. Those
who are open minded enough will follow the link and at least read it and
decide for themselves how they feel about the issue.

http://protectfreedom.tripod.com/fairuse.html

--
hermes
DRM sux! Treacherous Computing kills our virtual civil liberties!
http://protectfreedom.tripod.com/index.html
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html
http://anti-dmca.org/
http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/unintended_consequences.php

Windows XP crashed.
I am the Blue Screen of Death.
No one hears your screams
 
ebart said:
Hi Ron!
What do you think about OemCd ofer?

http://wjzgktxljjq.ciheaem.info/?udw30.vYy2BTM.uimrnr

Is everything OK with it?
Ed Bartnik Poland
Click to expand...

I would be very surprised to find that these prices were for
legitimate OEM versions. They are more typical of the prices charged
for counterfeits.


Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
--
Microsoft MVP
On-Line Help Computer Service
http://onlinehelp.bc.ca

"The reason computer chips are so small is computers don't eat much."
 
Back
Top