about COA

  • Thread starter Thread starter Chiropter
  • Start date Start date
C

Chiropter

I seem to have just awaken from years sleep, but I ask for kind help
making me understand the concept of the COA.
I have been using Win 2000 and now wish to upgrade to Win XP Pro. I
understand that when I purchase a new package of MS OS these days, it
will come with COA which seems to limit its use to one computer only. I
have three computers for daily use with the same OS. Does this mean that
if I buy one new package of Win XP Pro, I can load it only to one of the
computers I own? What does "registration" mean with regard to the number
of computers owned by one person ?
Thanks a lot in advance.
Chiropter
 
Retail box o/s = one system, one licence, one registration
Its allways been that way for whichever MS o/s you use.
You can uninstall from one sys and install on another, assuming retail box,
you will likely have to use telephone activation and explain your
circumstances to MS.
 
Chiropter said:
I seem to have just awaken from years sleep, but I ask for kind help
making me understand the concept of the COA.
Click to expand...


The CoA, a.k.a. Certificate of Authenticity, is nothing new. It's
accompanied all legitimate Microsoft software packages for many years,
now. It's simply a document that verifies that the software license it
accompanies is a legitimate product, and not a counterfeit.

I have been using Win 2000 and now wish to upgrade to Win XP Pro. I
understand that when I purchase a new package of MS OS these days, it
will come with COA which seems to limit its use to one computer only.
Click to expand...


That's true, but this is nothing new. Just as it has *always* been
with *all* Microsoft operating systems, it's necessary (to be in
compliance with both the EULA and U.S. copyright law
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/117.html), if not technically) to
purchase one WinXP license for each computer on which it is installed.
(Consult an attorney versed in copyright law to determine final
applicability in your locale.) The only way in which WinXP licensing
differs from that of earlier versions of Windows is that Microsoft has
finally added a copy protection and anti-theft mechanism, Product
Activation, to prevent (or at least make more difficult) multiple
installations using a single license.

I
have three computers for daily use with the same OS. Does this mean that
if I buy one new package of Win XP Pro, I can load it only to one of the
computers I own?
Click to expand...


Correct, unless you elect purchase a separate WinXP license for each
computer on which you install it.

What does "registration" mean with regard to the number
of computers owned by one person ?
Click to expand...


Not a thing, really. Registration is entirely optional, and does no
more that purportedly facilitate support calls and enable you to sign up
for various Microsoft email announcements and newsletters.


--

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
 
Thank you very much for helping responses.
I have used from Win 3.1 through Win 2k. The only thing needed to
install them was to key in the Product Key code which was pasted on
their jacket or CD case. Although I do not know the precise internal
mechanism of new COA method, it seems that the COA system obliterates
repeated use of a newly purchased OS disks for installation. I do not
want to pay double and triple to install an OS in the computers owned by
me and situated in the same room. This has nothing to do with obtaining
a counterfeit copy or borrowing a legimate copy from a friend. These
days there are more than one computer in most of American families (one
for dad, one for kids, for instance). Enforcing the COA system then
appears only to make Microsoft's lucrative business even more lucrative
in addition to its practical monopoly worldwide. To me Windows 95, 98,
98SE, ME, NT, 2000, XP are essentially same with respect to their
capacity as an operating system. In other words, they are just small
improvement or upgrade. Microsoft would thus have sold them as just an
improved version (Windows Version 1, 2, 3, etc.) instead of giving them
a flashy new name. In reality Microsoft has touted as if a new
innovation was created while the reality is, sort to speak, some model
change. Why did I dare to upgrade to them then? That is because new
useful peripherals do not work with previous versions. In essence, I
think, Microsoft has exhausted its ingenuity and is unable to come up
with significant innovation. So they invented a way to sell more the
same version by enforcing the system of COA to which general consumers
like me has no say.
My exasperation aside, can someone tell me what will happen if I
diskcopy an installed harddisk to a new empty harddisk instead of
attempting to install OS using a COA-protected disk? Or if I connect
computers by way of LAN, will it work?
Microsoft's OS are sold in a variety of forms like:
OEM
OEM CD
in Retail Box
Retail EULA
with considerable differences in pricing.
If we are talking about completely new installation without previous
version, should any of the above be avoided?
Thanks again in advance
Chiropter
 
So you have three cars and only want to pay to insure one?
Better still buy one monitor and swap it amongst the pc's
 
DL said:
So you have three cars and only want to pay to insure one?
Better still buy one monitor and swap it amongst the pc's
Click to expand...

Your second point is a real bad example for your
argument.

Like many people I have several machines and, yes,
I do swap a monitor (and keyboard and mouse)
between them with a KVM switch. Who, in his right
mind, would want to use a separate monitor for
each of several machines in reasonable proximity
unless there were some overriding reason?

Are you suggesting I should do so to be "honest"
with the monitor manufacturers?

The insurance argument is no better: if you agree
to use only one car at a time (and lets face it,
its hard for one person to do anything else) the
risk for the insureance company is hardly more
than that for a single car and I don't see why a
single set of insurance shouldn't be written to
cover them all (for little more than the cost of
one) ... at least for collision, third party,
etc). It wouldn't actually suprise me if some
creative insurance companies were already doing
this. To have to insure the single-risk three
times is an insurance rip-off.
 
Who, in his right mind,
The person who buys one o/s and expects to be allowed to install on multiple
pc'c
 
DL said:
The person who buys one o/s and expects to be allowed to install on multiple
pc'c
Click to expand...

Or perhaps anyone with an ounce of common sense
regardless of whether they want to install mutiple
copies of Windows or whether they even use Windows

The two situations are simply not related although
you insist on seeing them that way.
 
Back
Top