T
TIM
I CAN BUY THE OEM VERSION ALOT CHEAPER THAN THE RETAIL
VERSION. WHAT'S THE PROS AND CONS.
VERSION. WHAT'S THE PROS AND CONS.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
W
wojo
Read about 30 different threads in this NG on the subject.
PROS:
Cheaper
CONS:
No Microsoft support
No upgrades, only clean installs
OEM is only good for the computer you put it on, if you replace the
computer you need a new
OEM or retail XP
By the way, shut off your CAPS LOCK.
PROS:
Cheaper
CONS:
No Microsoft support
No upgrades, only clean installs
OEM is only good for the computer you put it on, if you replace the
computer you need a new
OEM or retail XP
By the way, shut off your CAPS LOCK.
K
kurttrail
wojo said:Read about 30 different threads in this NG on the subject.
PROS:
Cheaper
Yep, About half as expensive than the full retail version. Much Cheaper.
CONS:
No Microsoft support
LOL! What is MS suport really worth, when almost any answer they can
provide you is readily available on the net.
No upgrades, only clean installs
Most smart people wouldn't do an upgrade. There is just too much stuff that
can get screwed up with an upgrade.
OEM is only good for the computer you put it on, if you replace
the computer you need a new
A EULA claim that MS has no conceivable way to enforce. An OEM copy of XP
is sold with a piece of hardware. MS tying OEM XP to a whole computer to be
named later, flies in the face of the reality of the sale, of the copy of
software being tied to a piece of hardware. If MS ever tried to legally
enforce their OEM-Computer-to-be-named-later nonsense in a real court of
law, they would undoubtingly lose.
OEM or retail XP
By the way, shut off your CAPS LOCK.
Well that would be the second thing I agree with you.
--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"
J
John Doue
kurttrail said:wojo wrote:
Yep, About half as expensive than the full retail version. Much Cheaper.
LOL! What is MS suport really worth, when almost any answer they can
provide you is readily available on the net.
Most smart people wouldn't do an upgrade. There is just too much stuff that
can get screwed up with an upgrade.
A EULA claim that MS has no conceivable way to enforce. An OEM copy of XP
is sold with a piece of hardware. MS tying OEM XP to a whole computer to be
named later, flies in the face of the reality of the sale, of the copy of
software being tied to a piece of hardware. If MS ever tried to legally
enforce their OEM-Computer-to-be-named-later nonsense in a real court of
law, they would undoubtingly lose.
Well that would be the second thing I agree with you.
Does not MS enforce this Eula by making oem versions refuse to install
or be copied on a different machine (at least, of a different brand). Or
is this possible to circumvent?
O
Opinicus
Does not MS enforce this Eula
Nope. And it's never been challenged either so far as I know.
W
wojo
Occasionally it is, but for the most part your correct.
But it still doesn't change the fact that technically you can't do it, it's
still piracy. It isn't challenging to take most other programs you buy off
the shelf and install them on multiple computers at a time but it's still
illegal.
But it still doesn't change the fact that technically you can't do it, it's
still piracy. It isn't challenging to take most other programs you buy off
the shelf and install them on multiple computers at a time but it's still
illegal.
O
Opinicus
Occasionally it is, but for the most part your correct.
But it still doesn't change the fact that technically you can't do it, it's
still piracy. It isn't challenging to take most other programs you buy off
the shelf and install them on multiple computers at a time but it's still
illegal.
What we're talking about is not installing WinXP on more than one machine
but rather about installing an OEM version on the same machine when that
machine has been altered. What nobody can say for sure and what MS
studiously avoids saying is when the original machine has been altered to
such a degree that it is no longer "original" and the OEM version can no
longer be installed on it.
My OEM copy of WinXP has been through a hard disk crash, the installation of
a wireless keyboard and mouse, a mother board failure, and a case
replacement. Pretty soon the DVD drive and the CD writer are going to headed
for the Great Junkyard in the Sky as well. When they do, the only thing
"original" on this machine will be the monitor and the power cord. Am I
supposed to stop using my OEM copy of WinXP because of that?
B
Bruce Chambers
Greetings --
First of all, please unstick your CapsLock key. Posting in all
caps, as you have done, is the Usenet equivalent of shouting, and is
considered very rude. More importantly, posting in all caps makes the
post very hard to read, further reducing your chances of getting help.
There are some very important reasons that an OEM license costs so
much less than a retail license. OEM licenses are very limited:
1) OEM versions must be sold with a piece of hardware (normally
a motherboard or hard drive, if not an entire PC, although Microsoft
has greatly relaxed the hardware criteria for WinXP) and are
_permanently_ bound to the first PC on which they are installed. An
OEM license, once installed, is not legally transferable to another
computer under any circumstances. This is the main reason some people
avoid OEM versions; if the PC dies or is otherwise disposed of (even
stolen), you cannot re-use your OEM license on a new PC. The only
legitimate way to transfer the ownership of an installed OEM license
is to transfer ownership of the entire PC.
2) Microsoft provides no free support for OEM versions. If you
have any problems that require outside assistance, your only recourse
is to contact the manufacturer/builder of the PC or the vendor of the
OEM license. This would include such issues as lost a Product Key or
replacing damaged installation media. (Microsoft does make allowances
for those instances when you can prove that the OEM has gone out of
business.) This doesn't mean that you can't download patches and
service packs from Microsoft -- just no free telephone or email
support for problems with the OS.
3) An OEM CD cannot be used to perform an upgrade of an earlier
OS, as it was designed to be installed _only_ upon an empty hard
drive. It can still be used to perform a repair installation (a.k.a.
an in-place upgrade) of an existing WinXP installation.
4) If the OEM CD was designed by a specific manufacturer, such as
eMachines, Sony, Dell, Gateway, etc., it will most likely only install
on the same brand/model of PC, as an additional anti-piracy feature.
Further, such CDs are often severely customized to contain only the
minimum of device drivers, and a lot of extra nonsense, that the
manufacturer feels necessary for the specific model of PC for which
the CD was designed. (To be honest, such CDs should _not_ be
available on the open market; but, if you're shopping someplace like
eBay, eastern European web sites, swap meets, or computer fairs,
there's often no telling what you're buying until it's too late.) The
"generic" OEM CDs, such as are manufactured by Microsoft and sold to
small systems builders, don't have this particular problem, though,
and are pretty much the same as their retail counterparts, apart from
the licensing, support, and upgrading restrictions.
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
First of all, please unstick your CapsLock key. Posting in all
caps, as you have done, is the Usenet equivalent of shouting, and is
considered very rude. More importantly, posting in all caps makes the
post very hard to read, further reducing your chances of getting help.
There are some very important reasons that an OEM license costs so
much less than a retail license. OEM licenses are very limited:
1) OEM versions must be sold with a piece of hardware (normally
a motherboard or hard drive, if not an entire PC, although Microsoft
has greatly relaxed the hardware criteria for WinXP) and are
_permanently_ bound to the first PC on which they are installed. An
OEM license, once installed, is not legally transferable to another
computer under any circumstances. This is the main reason some people
avoid OEM versions; if the PC dies or is otherwise disposed of (even
stolen), you cannot re-use your OEM license on a new PC. The only
legitimate way to transfer the ownership of an installed OEM license
is to transfer ownership of the entire PC.
2) Microsoft provides no free support for OEM versions. If you
have any problems that require outside assistance, your only recourse
is to contact the manufacturer/builder of the PC or the vendor of the
OEM license. This would include such issues as lost a Product Key or
replacing damaged installation media. (Microsoft does make allowances
for those instances when you can prove that the OEM has gone out of
business.) This doesn't mean that you can't download patches and
service packs from Microsoft -- just no free telephone or email
support for problems with the OS.
3) An OEM CD cannot be used to perform an upgrade of an earlier
OS, as it was designed to be installed _only_ upon an empty hard
drive. It can still be used to perform a repair installation (a.k.a.
an in-place upgrade) of an existing WinXP installation.
4) If the OEM CD was designed by a specific manufacturer, such as
eMachines, Sony, Dell, Gateway, etc., it will most likely only install
on the same brand/model of PC, as an additional anti-piracy feature.
Further, such CDs are often severely customized to contain only the
minimum of device drivers, and a lot of extra nonsense, that the
manufacturer feels necessary for the specific model of PC for which
the CD was designed. (To be honest, such CDs should _not_ be
available on the open market; but, if you're shopping someplace like
eBay, eastern European web sites, swap meets, or computer fairs,
there's often no telling what you're buying until it's too late.) The
"generic" OEM CDs, such as are manufactured by Microsoft and sold to
small systems builders, don't have this particular problem, though,
and are pretty much the same as their retail counterparts, apart from
the licensing, support, and upgrading restrictions.
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
K
Ken Blake, MVP
In
Please don't yell at us. We can hear you if you type normally, in
mixed case.
The OEM version can only legally be sold with hardware, although
these days, any piece of hardware, even a power cord, qualifies.
Although if you get a complete generic OEM version, it contains
the same software, it has the following disadvantages as compared
with the retail version:
1. Its license ties it permanently to the first computer it's
installed on. It can never legally be moved to another computer,
sold, or given away.
2. It can only do a clean installation, not an upgrade.
3. Microsoft provides no support for OEM versions. You can't call
them with a problem, but instead have to get any needed support
from your OEM; that support may range anywhere between good and
non-existent.
TIM said:I CAN BUY THE OEM VERSION ALOT CHEAPER THAN THE RETAIL
VERSION. WHAT'S THE PROS AND CONS.
Please don't yell at us. We can hear you if you type normally, in
mixed case.
The OEM version can only legally be sold with hardware, although
these days, any piece of hardware, even a power cord, qualifies.
Although if you get a complete generic OEM version, it contains
the same software, it has the following disadvantages as compared
with the retail version:
1. Its license ties it permanently to the first computer it's
installed on. It can never legally be moved to another computer,
sold, or given away.
2. It can only do a clean installation, not an upgrade.
3. Microsoft provides no support for OEM versions. You can't call
them with a problem, but instead have to get any needed support
from your OEM; that support may range anywhere between good and
non-existent.
K
kurttrail
wojo said:Occasionally it is, but for the most part your correct.
But it still doesn't change the fact that technically you can't do
it, it's still piracy. It isn't challenging to take most other
programs you buy off the shelf and install them on multiple computers
at a time but it's still illegal.
Wrong. It is a contract dispute. It is not illegal to break the terms of
any contract in and of itself. If MS wants to legally enforce it's
unsubstantiated interpretation of it's OEM EULA on you, they'd have to sue
you.
Since they don't know what copy of XP is installed on which computer, the
chances of MS ever attempting to legally enforce it's EULA claims are highly
unlikely, and even if they tried, MS claims would not neccessarily be
enforced by a court, since its OEM "shrinkwrap license" term ties the copy
of XP to a computer that wasn't even part of the sale, instead of the
hardware it was sold with.
--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"
N
NobodyMan
I CAN BUY THE OEM VERSION ALOT CHEAPER THAN THE RETAIL
VERSION. WHAT'S THE PROS AND CONS.
Both versions allow you to turn off your Caps Lock key. That's all
you need to worry about first.
W
wojo
Actually you didn't DISagree with me about any of it, just commented that
the cons were really no big deal. For the most part I agree they aren't but
I do like having the control to decide for myself whether I want to do a
clean install or not.
the cons were really no big deal. For the most part I agree they aren't but
I do like having the control to decide for myself whether I want to do a
clean install or not.
W
wojo
Actually I thought we were talking about not being able to install the OEM
on a computer then removing it to sell the computer and buying or building a
new computer and using the same OEM disk. That is what I am saying you can
get away with but not legally.
on a computer then removing it to sell the computer and buying or building a
new computer and using the same OEM disk. That is what I am saying you can
get away with but not legally.
W
wojo
Didn't say it was likely, said you aren't supposed to do it.
Why am I being attacked here? Bruce & Ken posted almost the exact same thing
I did. LOL
Why am I being attacked here? Bruce & Ken posted almost the exact same thing
I did. LOL
K
kurttrail
wojo said:Didn't say it was likely, said you aren't supposed to do it.
Why am I being attacked here? Bruce & Ken posted almost the exact
same thing I did. LOL
They come the same propaganda/FUD tree.
--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"
W
wojo
Whatever Kurttrail all I ever see from you, for the most part, is basically
telling everybody to hack all they want. Why buy what you can steal etc...
You spend a lot of time on Warez sites don't you?
telling everybody to hack all they want. Why buy what you can steal etc...
You spend a lot of time on Warez sites don't you?
K
kurttrail
wojo said:Whatever Kurttrail all I ever see from you, for the most part, is
basically telling everybody to hack all they want. Why buy what you
can steal etc... You spend a lot of time on Warez sites don't you?
I tell people to follow copyright law, not MS's BS rules. The real hacks
are, MS for putting in technology to keep their paying customers from using
their very expensive copies of retail software, and those that are nothing
more the apologists for a predatory monopoly.
I advocate that people use the retail copies of software they buy in
accordance to copyright law & common sense, not according to the legally
unsubstantiated claims of a biased party, the copyright owner.
Should IBM just give in to SCO's unsubstantiated claims, or should they make
them prove them by the preponderance of the evidence? At least I give SCO
some credit for having the balls to bring them to a court in the first
place, although I do believe that they are trying to extort licenses before
the facts have been proven. MS is too cowardly to put it's claims in a real
court of law, and have had well over a decade to do just that.
I tell no one to steal anything, and since MS has $53 billion in just liquid
assets, the only one that would seem to be the thief is MS by using their
monopoly position to artificially maintain the 80% margin on their software
products.
Tell us all how a company that has such a big problem with their customers
"stealing" their software ends up with $53 billion in just liquid assets
alone.
Who are the *REAL* thieves, MS or it's customers? I don't see MS's
customers laughing their way to the bank, do you?
Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart wrote:
"The limited scope of the copyright holder's statutory monopoly, like the
limited copyright duration required by the Constitution, reflects a balance
of competing claims upon the public interest: Creative work is to be
encouraged and rewarded, but private motivation must ultimately serve the
cause of promoting broad public availability of literature, music, and the
other arts. The immediate effect of our copyright law is to secure a fair
return for an 'author's' creative labor. But the ultimate aim is, by this
incentive, to stimulate artistic creativity for the general public good.
'The sole interest of the United States and the primary object in conferring
the monopoly,' this Court has said, 'lie in the general benefits derived by
the public from the labors of authors' . . . . When technological change has
rendered its literal terms ambiguous, the Copyright Act must be construed in
light of this basic purpose." - http://laws.findlaw.com/us/422/151.html
MS has gotten way more than a fair return for the labor of it's employees,
so tell everyone how MS's BS EULA rules promotes "the broad public
availability" of copyright computer programs.
--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"
W
wojo
Actually in reading the posts you seem to want to rewrite the rules.
your right MS has a monopoly right or wrong it's because they have the best
product in my book.
53 Billion earned by selling a good product that the majority wants.
My concern is posts that more or less state that if an OEM's EULA says it
can only be installed on one computer and not be moved to another (and no
I'm not going to waste time copy and pasting a EULA quote here, just
summarizing) then you've said screw that I'll do it anyway becasue I can.
Their retail EULA says only on 1 computer at a time, as is the case with ALL
copyrighted software, but you say don't worry about it there are KeyGen's
available to allow you to install it so just do it.
My only beef with you is that you tell people that copyright doesn't matter
because YOU don't feel it's right or justified. Do you think maybe the cost
of MS software would be more reasonable if there weren't so many people out
there bypassing EULA and Copyright's just because they can?
Don't waste your time responding, I'm done with the subject. Although I
imagine others that feel the same way I do, there's always others telling
you the same thing I am telling you, will probably continue unless everybody
else has given up on you as well.
your right MS has a monopoly right or wrong it's because they have the best
product in my book.
53 Billion earned by selling a good product that the majority wants.
My concern is posts that more or less state that if an OEM's EULA says it
can only be installed on one computer and not be moved to another (and no
I'm not going to waste time copy and pasting a EULA quote here, just
summarizing) then you've said screw that I'll do it anyway becasue I can.
Their retail EULA says only on 1 computer at a time, as is the case with ALL
copyrighted software, but you say don't worry about it there are KeyGen's
available to allow you to install it so just do it.
My only beef with you is that you tell people that copyright doesn't matter
because YOU don't feel it's right or justified. Do you think maybe the cost
of MS software would be more reasonable if there weren't so many people out
there bypassing EULA and Copyright's just because they can?
Don't waste your time responding, I'm done with the subject. Although I
imagine others that feel the same way I do, there's always others telling
you the same thing I am telling you, will probably continue unless everybody
else has given up on you as well.
A
Alias
wojo said:My only beef with you is that you tell people that copyright doesn't matter
because YOU don't feel it's right or justified. Do you think maybe the cost
of MS software would be more reasonable if there weren't so many people out
there bypassing EULA and Copyright's just because they can? <<
I feel the same way about software as I do music CDs. If the price were low
enough, no one would make pirated versions. What's better, selling one thing
for $299 or 20 for $29.99?
The same holds true for cigarettes. Raising the tax will not discourage
people from smoking and will only give rise to contraband tobacco.
MS has a monopoly so they charge so much, to quote you, "because they can".
The fact that they whine about bootleg copies or people putting one Win 98
on ten computers is pathetic and, well, greedy.
Alias
W
wojo
Except that if it wasn't for the bootlegs and people putting Win 98 on ten
computers I still contend that the price wouldn't be so high.
But maybe your right maybe they prie it that way simply because they can.
That still doesn't change the fact that THEY created a product that
everybody wants and it is copyrighted. To say it's pathetic or greedy for
them to require you to only use it on one computer is like saying authors
shouldn't complain about plagiarism.
Think about it this way:
If everybody used bootleg copies of Windows or any other software for that
matter. Or bought one copy and installed it on all their computers and all
their friends computers etc.. then the company that creates the software
gets basically nothing for their efforts and hence have no incentive to
create a new better program. There is a reason you can't find much good
shareware around and if you do it's demo or only partially functional. If
you give people the opportunity to get it for free they will so why create
it in the first place?
computers I still contend that the price wouldn't be so high.
But maybe your right maybe they prie it that way simply because they can.
That still doesn't change the fact that THEY created a product that
everybody wants and it is copyrighted. To say it's pathetic or greedy for
them to require you to only use it on one computer is like saying authors
shouldn't complain about plagiarism.
Think about it this way:
If everybody used bootleg copies of Windows or any other software for that
matter. Or bought one copy and installed it on all their computers and all
their friends computers etc.. then the company that creates the software
gets basically nothing for their efforts and hence have no incentive to
create a new better program. There is a reason you can't find much good
shareware around and if you do it's demo or only partially functional. If
you give people the opportunity to get it for free they will so why create
it in the first place?
Ask a Question
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.