Windows XP Activation?

[Jenny White]

Hi. I'm looking for clarification on the following, and I hope someone can shed some bright light.

Current system config:

IDE1-0: Boot disk
IDE1-1: CD Rom (I just replaced this IDE CD ROM a week ago as my other one died)
IDE2-0, Data1
IED2-1: Data2


I want to put a SATAII drive in, copy the data from Data1 and Data2 to this new drive. Then retire the two IDE Data drives altogether.

Configuring BIOS and connecting the drives etc, I understand. My system supports up to 2 SATA Drives and 4 IDE drives, so that is not an issue.

So my question(s) would be:

1) If I do this, is Windows XP going to yell at me to reactivate? I've already (over the past year or so) re-activated at least 2 times (could be 3, not sure).

2) Would I be safer / wiser to retire say Data2, wait for some period then retire Data2?

3) If number 1 above is true, would it be better to just bite the bullet and rebuild from scratch?

I believe I read on the web that it should be about 6 months for multiple changes to the system before XP barks at me.

Thank you for any clarification.

Jenny White

 

[Paul]

Hi. I'm looking for clarification on the following, and I hope someone
can shed some bright light.

Current system config:

IDE1-0: Boot disk
IDE1-1: CD Rom (I just replaced this IDE CD ROM a week ago as my other
one died)
IDE2-0, Data1
IED2-1: Data2


I want to put a SATAII drive in, copy the data from Data1 and Data2 to
this new drive. Then retire the two IDE Data drives altogether.

Configuring BIOS and connecting the drives etc, I understand. My system
supports up to 2 SATA Drives and 4 IDE drives, so that is not an issue.

So my question(s) would be:

1) If I do this, is Windows XP going to yell at me to reactivate? I've
already (over the past year or so) re-activated at least 2 times (could
be 3, not sure).

2) Would I be safer / wiser to retire say Data2, wait for some period
then retire Data2?

3) If number 1 above is true, would it be better to just bite the bullet
and rebuild from scratch?

I believe I read on the web that it should be about 6 months for
multiple changes to the system before XP barks at me.

Thank you for any clarification.

Jenny White

The activation recipe is here. There is a table here, which lists
the items taken into consideration. (I don't know where this
info originated - it is always possible other elements are
taken into consideration.)

http://aumha.org/win5/a/wpa.htm

The hard drive that is being tracked, is the one with WinXP on it.

The C: partition has two identifiers. There is the VolumeID (xxxx-xxxx).
And there is a serial number provided by the hard drive itself (mine is
eight characters). The VolumeID is normally a unique identifier (the OS
won't like it if two drives have the same value). The VolumeID can be
corrected with a utility, but I assume the original drive should be
disconnected before you attempt that.

(I use my copy of Everest, to get the VolumeID for each partition.)

http://majorgeeks.com/download4181.html

If you copy your C: from one drive to another, *disconnect* the
first drive, you can correct the VolumeID on the C: on the new drive
using this utility. I do this on my system, by using two OSes.
I have WinXP and Win2K. I boot into Win2K, clone, remove the
original drive, use VolumeID, then boot from the new WinXP drive.
Since the VolumeID is now correct, the only activation item
counting against me, is the new hard drive serial number.

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-ca/sysinternals/bb897436.aspx

So depending on how careful you are, cloning C: counts as
one or two items in the table of activation items.

Microsoft cares about the OS it sold you. Why would it
care about your data-only drives ?

If you've had to reactivate a couple times this year,
you should review the table of items in that article, and
figure out what triggered it. The only way to verify
tables such as the one in the Aumha article, is by
observation of the results.

Paul

 

[Jenny White]

Thanks for the link Paul, it's pretty much what I was reading prior to the
post.

I thought I was clear on my propose course, but in case not here it is
again:

I "Do Not Want to Clone anything". I simply want to place the SATA drive
into the system (with the existing drives). Copy all data from Data1 and
Data1 to the SATA drive and retired the two Data drives.

The drive with the OS on it will remain and will not change.

Most every post I've read suggests that the Volume ID is considered as a
Voted Change. If I understand what I read (and I paraphrase), if a Volume ID
(the S/N or Volume Code assigned by the manufacturer) has changed, I would
loose a Vote. I understand that XP allows the loss of 3 votes.

So if I've changed by CD Rom drive (Volume ID - S/N is different), add a
SATA drive and remove the two existing IDE Data drives, that would count as
a total of4 votes and I would then have to re-activate.

Is this correct?

Thanks again Paul/

 

[Paul]

Thanks for the link Paul, it's pretty much what I was reading prior to the
post.

I thought I was clear on my propose course, but in case not here it is
again:

I "Do Not Want to Clone anything". I simply want to place the SATA drive
into the system (with the existing drives). Copy all data from Data1 and
Data1 to the SATA drive and retired the two Data drives.

The drive with the OS on it will remain and will not change.

Most every post I've read suggests that the Volume ID is considered as a
Voted Change. If I understand what I read (and I paraphrase), if a Volume ID
(the S/N or Volume Code assigned by the manufacturer) has changed, I would
loose a Vote. I understand that XP allows the loss of 3 votes.

So if I've changed by CD Rom drive (Volume ID - S/N is different), add a
SATA drive and remove the two existing IDE Data drives, that would count as
a total of4 votes and I would then have to re-activate.

Is this correct?

Thanks again Paul/

If you're copying the data partitions off two drives, onto a third
drive, I don't see a reason for activation to consider that.

If you're moving C: from one of the drives, to the SATA, my guess
is that would be tracked. I've moved my C: once (from an 80GB drive
to a 160GB drive), and was not flagged for it. The rest of the
hardware configuration remained stable.

I add and remove drives all the time, from my system, and haven't seen
any complaints. I haven't heard of any mechanism, for me to monitor how
"close" I am to any activation limits, so for all I know, I could be
very close and not know it. But logically, I don't see a reason to
be tracking data drives. The objective of activation, is to associate
the license key with one computer, and find a means to determine whether
it is still the same computer or not. And the milling about of data
drives, is no concern to that. Any more than they'd be tracking
USB pen drives that I've connected.

Paul

 

[Jenny White]

OAK, thanks for the intel. After re-reading the web posts and your comments,
I've pretty much decided to go ahead.

Worst case, re-install with the OEM cd. Painful, but workable.

Thanks again.

Jenny

 

[C]

I believe I read on the web that it should be about 6 months for multiple changes to the system before XP barks at me.

Thank you for any clarification.

Jenny White

It's 120 days. If XP will stay on the same hard drive, activation will
not be necessary. Slave drives are not counted; change them as much as
you like.

 

[Mark Adams]

OAK, thanks for the intel. After re-reading the web posts and your comments,
I've pretty much decided to go ahead.

Worst case, re-install with the OEM cd. Painful, but workable.

Thanks again.

Jenny

There is no limit to the number of times you can activate on the SAME
computer. If you've run your activation score up due to hardware changes and
the machine prompts for activation, go ahead and activate. If activation
fails, you will be provided a telephone number to call for phone activation.
You may have to speak to a technician, but Microsoft will activate--- as long
as it's the SAME computer.

 

[Jenny White]

Thanks to all for the help and clarification. It's a pleasure doing biz with
you folks.

All went well and am now up and running.

Thanks again,

Jenny

 

[Jenny White]

WELL, WELL, WELL.

Since my last post, I enabled my Restarted the "Wireless Zero Config"
service and enabled my Wireless NIC and all of a sudden the "Windows
Activation Came Up!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

ABSOLUTLEY nothing else has change in my system since my post of Dec 11. The
wireless NIC has been in my system for about a year and it was only disabled
so that I could use my new router via a wired connection. The wireless
portion was simply to test a few things for a friend of mine while I was
configuring and testing his wireless router.

It's clear that Drives along with a new DVD/CD Rom at the same time, DO
figure into the mix. Those are the only new things added and I suspect
because the "Wireless Zero Config" service was restarted, XP says this was
all too new to be an "Original Activated Copy".

An annoyance at the very least.

I've re-read the threads and while I sincerely appreciate all the comments
and points, let's please make sure that we are Correct When answering a post
such as this.

I could imagine someone that was at the precipice of activation counts that
ran into something like this. It could render the system useless as a result
of mi-information, thereby prompting them to waste a bunch of unnecessary
time on the phone with MS.

Jenny

 

[Paul]

WELL, WELL, WELL.

Since my last post, I enabled my Restarted the "Wireless Zero Config"
service and enabled my Wireless NIC and all of a sudden the "Windows
Activation Came Up!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

ABSOLUTLEY nothing else has change in my system since my post of Dec 11. The
wireless NIC has been in my system for about a year and it was only disabled
so that I could use my new router via a wired connection. The wireless
portion was simply to test a few things for a friend of mine while I was
configuring and testing his wireless router.

It's clear that Drives along with a new DVD/CD Rom at the same time, DO
figure into the mix. Those are the only new things added and I suspect
because the "Wireless Zero Config" service was restarted, XP says this was
all too new to be an "Original Activated Copy".

An annoyance at the very least.

I've re-read the threads and while I sincerely appreciate all the comments
and points, let's please make sure that we are Correct When answering a post
such as this.

I could imagine someone that was at the precipice of activation counts that
ran into something like this. It could render the system useless as a result
of mi-information, thereby prompting them to waste a bunch of unnecessary
time on the phone with MS.

Jenny

Activation is a "secret recipe", and while well meaning folks can attempt
to document how it works, only the actual code in the Microsoft checker,
knows for sure. And that code could be changed at any time, on the
whim of Microsoft, pushed out as a "security update" or whatever.
And we'd be none the wiser.

It would take one hell of a lot of external observations of behavior, to
guess at how it works.

An important consideration in the table, is the MAC address of the NIC
being used. Perhaps re-enumerating a wireless interface, counts as
an entirely different MAC and NIC. Wireless is not addressed in the
Aumha article, so who really knows.

I recommend re-reading the Aumha article, because it addresses just
how important the NIC is, to activation. Even if, in fact, the network
interface isn't actually part of the motherboard.

"What does ‘substantially the same’ mean? WPA asks for ‘votes’ from
each of these ten categories: ‘Is the same device still around, or has
there never been one?’ Seven Yes votes means all is well — and a NIC,
present originally and not changed, counts for three yes votes! Minor
cards, like sound cards, don’t come into the mix at all. If you keep
the motherboard, with the same amount of RAM and processor, and an
always present cheap NIC (available for $10 or less), you can change
everything else as much as you like.

If you change the device in any category, you have lost that Yes vote
— but will not lose it any more thereafter if you make changes in that
category again. So, for example, you can install a new video display
card every month for as long as you like.

Perhaps if your motherboard had an Ethernet chip, and you left it enabled
in BIOS and Device Manager, but didn't connect it to anything,
the activation would use that as the "3 vote" thing. Maybe then, adding
or subtracting Wifi, wouldn't have mattered as much. The Aumha or any
web article, can't possibly cover all the corner cases, with any hope
of accurate prediction.

If activation came with an API, which showed your "current count",
as a user you'd be in a better position to determine what was
allowed or not allowed. I'm not aware of a way to do that, but
perhaps someone else knows.

Paul

 

[C]

WELL, WELL, WELL.

Since my last post, I enabled my Restarted the "Wireless Zero Config"
service and enabled my Wireless NIC and all of a sudden the "Windows
Activation Came Up!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

ABSOLUTLEY nothing else has change in my system since my post of Dec 11. The
wireless NIC has been in my system for about a year and it was only disabled
so that I could use my new router via a wired connection. The wireless
portion was simply to test a few things for a friend of mine while I was
configuring and testing his wireless router.

It's clear that Drives along with a new DVD/CD Rom at the same time, DO
figure into the mix. Those are the only new things added and I suspect
because the "Wireless Zero Config" service was restarted, XP says this was
all too new to be an "Original Activated Copy".

An annoyance at the very least.

I've re-read the threads and while I sincerely appreciate all the comments
and points, let's please make sure that we are Correct When answering a post
such as this.

I could imagine someone that was at the precipice of activation counts that
ran into something like this. It could render the system useless as a result
of mi-information, thereby prompting them to waste a bunch of unnecessary
time on the phone with MS.

Jenny

Each NIC is three points. Add the optical drive and you get the magic 7
that requires a reactivation.

 

[Jenny White]

Thanks for the enlightenment Paul. Well received.

Jenny

 

[Jenny White]

Hello "C".

Interestingly enough, I just got off the phone with Microsoft as we were
quite annoyed at this event. Even though we were not compromised in terms of
functionality, it was nonetheless a "Surprise".

In any case; yes indeed, the NIC being reactivated via the Zero admin tool
does in fact re-enumerate the NIC. The two new drives in concert with the
NIC being reactivated, convinced XP that this was in fact a different
machine. According to MS, even though the drives were new the firmware query
on the drives made XP believe them to be new devices on a "Potentially new
board".

The optical drive didn't figure into the equation as it is a USB device. My
bad on that one, I didn't mention that point. My apologies.

Also of interest, Microsoft (at least here in Canada) admitted (I'm
paraphrasing here...) that this was a fact that they were technically aware
of, but alas they felt (to some degree) that it was not of a significant
enough event (in terms of the many outweighing the few) to be considered a
scenario to which it would make sense allocate time/resources to modify the
system to handle such an obtuse event.

In fairness, I agree with these comments. As a developer, there does come a
point when one has to say "It works for the many, sorry about the few".

Again, thanks for the comments and it certainly was a learning event. So
that's a good thing.

Jenny.

 

[C]

Hello "C".

Interestingly enough, I just got off the phone with Microsoft as we were
quite annoyed at this event. Even though we were not compromised in terms of
functionality, it was nonetheless a "Surprise".

In any case; yes indeed, the NIC being reactivated via the Zero admin tool
does in fact re-enumerate the NIC. The two new drives in concert with the
NIC being reactivated, convinced XP that this was in fact a different
machine. According to MS, even though the drives were new the firmware query
on the drives made XP believe them to be new devices on a "Potentially new
board".

The optical drive didn't figure into the equation as it is a USB device. My
bad on that one, I didn't mention that point. My apologies.

Also of interest, Microsoft (at least here in Canada) admitted (I'm
paraphrasing here...) that this was a fact that they were technically aware
of, but alas they felt (to some degree) that it was not of a significant
enough event (in terms of the many outweighing the few) to be considered a
scenario to which it would make sense allocate time/resources to modify the
system to handle such an obtuse event.

In fairness, I agree with these comments. As a developer, there does come a
point when one has to say "It works for the many, sorry about the few".

Again, thanks for the comments and it certainly was a learning event. So
that's a good thing.

Jenny.

Did it activate on line or did you have to call?