re-installing XP Home

[Gene K]

Without repeating everything that has been said already, an OEM copy of XP
is tied to the original machine it was installed upon (the actual hardware
tie is to the motherboard and processor chip as I understand it). The
support for the OEM copy is provided by the computer manufacturer. When the
motherboard fries within the warranty period, you call the manufacturer to
repair the thing and attempt to resolve the license transfer. Outside the
warranty period, you spend money then grin and bear it.

 

[Daave]

If you go to a computer show or swap meet you can pick up a used
retail version of XP Home for $25 to $50 and use that to reinstall
your OS, I do it all the time. Just have to round up all the drivers not
included.

Would it be possible to run into this type of problematic scenario:

The person who sold you the used retail XP Home disc never took that OS
off his system, which he still uses. As far as Microsoft is concerned,
he still holds the license (the product key is tied to his motherboard)
and gets all the updates, hotfixes, etc.

You then install this legitimate OS on your machine. It's time to
validate and Microsoft says you can't (the license allows for only one
installation at a time).

Can you have Microsoft straighten out this situation (which would
necessarily entail invalidating the other OS)? How do you prove that you
have the physical disc? Then again, isn't the *license* the important
thing?

Should you get a receipt (stating you purchased the disc and, therefore,
the license) and fax it to MS?

 

[Bruce Chambers]

That IS ridiculous. My license to use the OS depends on the availability of
some chips or other hardware? How can Microsoft agree to that?

Why shouldn't Microsoft agree to it? After all, *you* agreed to it
when you purchased a pre-installed OEM operating system.


--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:



They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -Benjamin Franklin

Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. -Bertrand Russell

 

[Bruce Chambers]

Hmm, so Microsoft did not get any money? I think not.

They got money from the computer manufacturer, who passed his cost
(plus profit margin) on to you. You didn't buy the OS from Microsoft;
why do you expect them to support you?

"An OEM version is tied to the PC it was supplied with. The PC dies so does
the OEM."
But the PC is NOT dead. I just had to replace a part (Ok, an important part,
but a part nevertheless). Why does a replacement void my right to use the
software?

Because you didn't obtain the replacement part from the same OEM from
whom you purchased the license, and who was contractually bound to
support it. Had you contacted the computer manufacturer for support,
you wouldn't have had this problem.

How about this: next time you fill up your car you lose the right to drive
it because the gasoline is from a different manufacturer. Doesn't sound
right, does it.

Doesn't even sound relevant. The OS isn't the computer's "fuel."
Rather, it's the computer's engine. Does Ford provide warranty support
of service for one of their engines crammed into a Buick?



--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:



They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -Benjamin Franklin

Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. -Bertrand Russell

 

[arachnid]

I can't ask them now because I don't have all the information with me. But
they would surely say that they have to do what Microsoft tells them to do
with the OEM software.

What's really funny is that Balmer runs around dissing Linux because
(paraphrased), "there's nobody to stand behind Linux, but Microsoft stands
behind Windows"

But it doesn't matter. From everything I have heard here I am pretty
disappointed and will give Linux a try. At least they don't tie me to some
motherboard and let me hang out to dry.

Linux is a breath of fresh air after the oppressive atmosphere of Windows.
No DRM, now WPA, no WGA(N), no SPP, no viruses, no trojans, no spyware.
Applications are free and easy to install just by running down a list and
checking off what you want. You can install the OS and applications on as
many computers as you want, even copy the CD's and pass them along to your
friends or even post them to the Internet.

*However*, learning any new OS takes a little elbow grease. Linux isn't
Windows and it's not as easy as just installing Linux and having
everything work exactly as it does in Windows. It'll take a little work
and it'll be a little frustrating until you learn new ways of doing
things. But, how fun and easy is Windows for you right now?

If I haven't scared you off, here's the one I'd suggest you try:

http://www.ubuntu.com

If you have a Barnes & Noble bookstore nearby, they may have a copy of
Sam's "Ubuntu Unleashed" on their shelves. It's not a bad book for a
beginner. It'll cost around $30 and comes with the Ubuntu 6.06 DVD. A
newer version of Ubuntu was just released last week but the wrinkles still
need to be ironed out. I'd suggest staying with the more stable 6.06 at
least until mid-December.

If Ubuntu doesn't work to your tastes, you can find many other distro's at
http://www.distrowatch.com, but ask around the Linux groups (try
alt.os.linux) before getting any because not all are suitable for
beginners. Also Novell just "partnered" with MS so you probably want to
avoid their SuSE Linux.

You'll get better Ubuntu support on the official website, but if you
prefer Usenet there are enough users hanging out on alt.os.linux.ubuntu to
help with most questions.

 

[Guest]

I have done this several times without any problems with validation.

 

[arachnid]

As soon as one IP suite prevails against Linux, you are "hung out to
dry", as there isn't anyone to turn to. But enjoy it while it last.

LOL! SCO tried it and look what happened to them.

 

[Daniel Metzger]

LOL! SCO tried it and look what happened to them.

Except Microsoft has a lot more weight to throw around than SCO does.
However, I heavily doubt Microsoft would begin issuing lawsuits against
Linux in general, as long as Linux does not infringe on something
Microsoft uses, as many large companies use Linux, and I don't think
pissing them off by threatening to sue them for using Linux would make
those companies want to switch to Windows.

 

[arachnid]

Except Microsoft has a lot more weight to throw around than SCO does.
However, I heavily doubt Microsoft would begin issuing lawsuits against
Linux in general, as long as Linux does not infringe on something
Microsoft uses, as many large companies use Linux, and I don't think
pissing them off by threatening to sue them for using Linux would make
those companies want to switch to Windows.

It would also convince some very large companies that depend heavily
on Linux for their product lines to go on the attack. Patents are
complex and the wording can be tricky, so most of large software companies
are unintentionally (or otherwise!) infringing each other's patents.
Everyone overlooks that under a sort of gentleman's agreement that "I
won't go after you if you don't go after me". However IBM has a large
investment in Linux and would probably consider an attack on Linux to be
an attack on IBM. And they're not the only ones with so much invested in
Linux and open source.

Also, the open-source community has proven rather proficient at digging up
prior art with which to invalidate patents used to attack us. To use one's
patent portfoilo to attack open-source is to risk losing those patents -
and perhaps many others if we get mad enough to just want to make a
company bleed.

Microsoft can get away with slowing or even stopping the adoption of Linux
on consumer desktops (provided the antitrust regulators don't get
involved), but trying to kill Linux outright would be suicidal.

 

[Rex Ballard]

LOL! SCO tried it and look what happened to them.

The interesting thing is that attempting to go after Linux could
backfire in a really ugly way.
it's very possible that you could go after a Linux using company,
demanding huge payments for patent royalties, and suddenly find the
defendant going through the Linux history, the BSD historical archives,
and old microfiche and old usenet archives in google, and presenting
this prior art to the patent office, nullifying your patent. If you
continue to press your case, you could find yourself being faced with
extortion charges. Since you are now trying to collect on a patent
that has been proven not to be your orginal work.

It appears that this is what Palm has done. Palm used established
technologies, including established e-mail technology, but when NST
started coming after them after the blackberry lawsuit, they dumped a
boatload of prior art, on which they had based their solution, into the
patent office archives, and had the patent nullified. When NST
continued to press for payment, Palm filed for actions against NST.

 

[Rex Ballard]

One point worth mentioning is that Microsoft does have some patents, as
well as some technology that they probably could license to Novell.
Microsoft has licensed much of their libraries to provide enhanced
versions of WINE. Customers include Corel, Crossover, and Win4Lin.

I do hope that Novell fares better than Corel. But it looks like
Microsoft has been up to the same dirty tricks used against Corel.
They used proxy votes from mutual funds and capital funds, to push for
the replacement of the CEO who pushed very strongly for Linux, with the
COO, who was working with Microsoft on the deal, perhaps covertly.

Same tactic used on Caldera. Again, the price shot unusually high,
causing a huge sale, then crashed as soon as Microsoft's "puppet"
funds, finished snapping up the shares, giving Microsoft proxy control
of the company, allowing Microsoft to fire Linux champion Ransom Love,
and hire Daryl McBride.

Any time you see a sharp "spike" in the stock price, it's almost like a
signature that Microsoft is making their play through their puppets.

Keep in mind that using these types of puppet funds is not that
uncommon. Often, they are used to prevent "whales", big ticket
investors who have a reputation for successful trades, from being
"tracked" by brokers and having them "play against them", buying calls
before the rest of the market catches on, but before the buyer can fill
his buy order for thousands or millions of shares.

I don't know if this is legal, but it probably is a good way to avoid
having to make public SEC disclosures, and having to worry about claims
of interlocking directorates.

 

[John A. Bailo]

One point worth mentioning is that Microsoft does have some patents, as
well as some technology that they probably could license to Novell.

Yeah, i'm sure there is an icon format or two they could license.

But reality is that Novell owns Unix, owns OSX, owns BSD, owns W2K, Vista,
and so on.

Best bet is to acknowledge that...and *MOVE* *ON*

 

[Bob I]

LOL! SCO tried it and look what happened to them.

I thought the whole thing was hilarious, as it was pretty obvious that
they didn't have a chance in hell from the start that it was all bluff
and bluster.