Microsoft is high towards the EULA for Vista

[Donald L McDaniel]

The real problem is the so called "misconception" so
many users have had- the right to put your retail copy
on any machine so long as it wasn't on another machine,
and do so as many times as you wanted to.

There was no such "misconception" about the Retail license for XP,
sir. The Retail license terms are plainly spelled out in the Retail
EULA (which is DIFFERENT than the OEM EULA).

Nor has Microsoft EVER tried to change this "misconception" about the
difference between the OEM license agreement and the Retail license
agreement.

ONLY NOW that so many users are up in arms about this new license for
Vista, have they begin a campaign to "change this misconception".

Why? Because it is in THEIR best interest to CHANGE after the fact
the XP license.

 

[Donald L McDaniel]

I can, and I did transfer the licenses for XP from one machine to another
several times. MS has not complained about it once. It always activated
online without a problem.

The reason for this is simple, sir: No such License terms as KL and
Mr. Thurrott mention EVER existed for XP Retail.

They DO exist for the XP OEM edition.

Apparently, Microsoft is trying to wipe out all OEM licenses, and make
the "XP" license terms only apply to the OS "(Windows XP"), and not
for "XP Retail" and for "XP OEM".

But all users know the truth, because the XP "Retail edition" cost
almost $150 more than the "XP OEM edition").

And if the LICENSE terms were the same for BOTH, WHY does Microsoft
charge this huge premium for a "Retail edition"? Just to be able to
install XP "clean" on an empty HD? Crap, man, one can already do that
with either an Upgrade addition OR an OEM edition.

This crap does not hold water, nor will it if it every comes to a
court of law.

 

[RoadRunner]

If they think by what they are trying to pull off with this EULA will stop
piracy ? Think again , Infact I wouldn't be surprise if this new OS version
will top all the combine OS with towards piracy , I can see the amount to be
extremely high

 

[David Wilkinson]

http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/winvista_licensing.asp

read this before you make a decision

I see nothing in this article that indicates the author understands the
difference between an OEM and Retail license (or that he even knows
these concepts exist).

Therefore anything he says is meaningless.

The problem is the change in the RETAIL Vista license (relative to XP),
limiting transfer to only one machine.

David Wilkinson

 

[RoadRunner]

I think he does knows but it look like he doesn't really want to bring that
part to our attentions because he knows what we would think about Vista EULA

 

[David Wilkinson]

I think he does knows but it look like he doesn't really want to bring that
part to our attentions because he knows what we would think about Vista EULA

Did you read this rebuttal:

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=158

David Wilkinson

 

[BigK]

Now, if Microsoft wants to change the Windows licensees, that is their
right. But ONCE they stated the terms of a license of XP in writing
in a court of law (as they HAD to do to sell it), they are BOUND
forever by those terms, just as the user becomes when he installs the
software and activates it. They cannot reinterpret the terms after
the fact.

Unfortunately that is not true since the license states that the license can
change without notice. By using the software you agree to that so they can
in fact change it.

 

[BigK]

No ! That's what they want you to believe , so they can try to pull this
garbage off , Its cool , ITS PIRATE TIME . I will pay anyone that can make
Vista operate like XP when it comes to the transfer part , I rather pay a
few dollars then what MicroRip-off is trying to do

why don't software companies realize that pirates will find a way to pirate
and honest people will use it honestly. By putting all these restrictions
on software, they are tempting more and more people to become pirates. I'm
not condoning or suggesting that anyone do that, but it sure makes it more
tempting so I can gain the freedom to use the software I want to use the way
I want to use it. If my car had a GPS in it that would turn off the engine
if I started driving in another state to force me to buy a new car for each
state I drive in, then I'd pay some dude to hack my car's GPS. Same thing
with software.

 

[BigK]

The real problem is the so called "misconception" so
many users have had- the right to put your retail copy
on any machine so long as it wasn't on another machine,
and do so as many times as you wanted to.

That's what I believed. I have even seen MVPs in
this group and others, state that as fact. So, when
someone says nothing has really changed, to many
users, especially the "enthusiasts"- this new EULA
is an enormous change.

The question I have is regardless of the EULA does XP in fact allow this
without failing to activate? I've never tried it as all my copies for OEM
copies.

 

[RoadRunner]

Thanks for that link David , Though I knew there wasn't any restrictions as
to how many times you could transfer xp retail version , Reason as to why I
know this ? I have done it many of times and without any problems , Now it
seem Microsoft feel its there turn to rip people off with this restrictions
on Vista retail , totally sucks , I hope everyone that realize what
Microsoft is really trying to do , That they will only use pirate copies of
Vista and tell Microsoft as to what they can do with their software , I know
I will if they don't get there act together , To be totally honest I am
against piracy software but this direction they are try to take will make me
a first timer