[fw] New Vi$ta licensing terms

  • Thread starter Thread starter Man-wai Chang ToDie
  • Start date Start date
http://www.maximumpc.com/article/Microsoft-s-Licensing-Madness
Click to expand...

M$ didn't just start getting ultra greedy. Even XP will "tilt" when
changes reach a certain mysterious point (it once happened to me when
I uninstalled a video driver prior to installing an updated version).
But a call to M$ is usually enough to get back in business.

This Vista restriction is ominous, though. I build my own computers
and make hardware and software changes rather often. Limiting system
reassignments to only once would force me to abandon my #1 hobby or
pay M$ through the nose to keep it going. I made a decision even
before Vista was released to snub it and stick with XP as long as I
can.

Thank goodness I've passed the point of caring about games!

Larc



§§§ - Change planet to earth to reply by email - §§§
 
To what extent has the "Vista Only" machines
been recended ? For example, the Compaq Presario
is Vista Only ... with no drivers available for XP ..
and they will void any warranty if you try to install
XP. As I understand it, Vista Only means "NO
BIOS" is needed for anything .. mobo, video card,
.... it is already in Vista. And M$ has total
ownership of that hardware. Which says to me
I will not even be able to go to vendors like NewEgg
and buy a video card that is Vista Only, and build
my own machine. I will ONLY be able to buy a
Vista Only PC from a certified Microsoft Builder
.... like HP. Compaq Tech ( Shhhh ! ) told me
that in the future, the video cards for Vista and
Dx10 will be embedded on the mobo, and that
is why ATI ( and NVidia ) are getting in bed with
AMD and Intel .... embedded video hardware.
And that is also why Microsoft is now writing
video games ... and/or diverting video gaming
to the consoles. I also heard rumor that Vista
Sp1 was aimed at Vista Only hardware. M$
had to retro-fit Sp1 to Vista Compatible, and
it did not work. So, they have pulled it off the
shelves. Another rumor: ( you'll like this one ):
HP owns Compaq ( the beginning of Vista Only ),
and now HP has the Federal Contract to supply
PCs to the Feds. The Feds refused to upgrade
from IBMs Win2K. They have never used XP.
This one will go all the way to the White House.

johns
 
johns said:
To what extent has the "Vista Only" machines
been recended ? For example, the Compaq Presario
is Vista Only ... with no drivers available for XP ..
and they will void any warranty if you try to install
XP. As I understand it, Vista Only means "NO
BIOS" is needed for anything .. mobo, video card,
... it is already in Vista. And M$ has total
ownership of that hardware. Which says to me
I will not even be able to go to vendors like NewEgg
and buy a video card that is Vista Only, and build
my own machine. I will ONLY be able to buy a
Vista Only PC from a certified Microsoft Builder
... like HP. Compaq Tech ( Shhhh ! ) told me
that in the future, the video cards for Vista and
Dx10 will be embedded on the mobo, and that
is why ATI ( and NVidia ) are getting in bed with
AMD and Intel .... embedded video hardware.
And that is also why Microsoft is now writing
video games ... and/or diverting video gaming
to the consoles. I also heard rumor that Vista
Sp1 was aimed at Vista Only hardware. M$
had to retro-fit Sp1 to Vista Compatible, and
it did not work. So, they have pulled it off the
shelves. Another rumor: ( you'll like this one ):
HP owns Compaq ( the beginning of Vista Only ),
and now HP has the Federal Contract to supply
PCs to the Feds. The Feds refused to upgrade
from IBMs Win2K. They have never used XP.
This one will go all the way to the White House.

johns
Click to expand...


---------------


It is time that the government intervened and stopped this
monopolistic nonsense by Microsoft. I'm ready to dive into
Linux, though I think it is overly complicated and not user
friendly. I would love to see a competing operating system
arise and knock the Microsoft tyrant square on its ass.

Ed Cregger
 
It's like trying to paper train an old dog.
No matter what the government says or
does, M$ is going to pee on the carpet,
and that is that.

What IBM did for the government was right.
They took Linux, and developed their own
version for their servers. I don't know why
they did not complete the transition to the
Federal PCs. Instead, they hacked W2k
to talk to their servers and left it there.
Dell was able to sneak one past them,
and got the contract, but Dell tech support
really fell on its face, and the Feds got
tired of nothing working at all, and Dell
making excuses. IBM got it back briefly,
but then HP edged them out ?????
What you want already exists at IBM.
They just need to complete the transition
to IBM Linux, and make it work on decent
hardware. If HP shoves Vista down the Feds
throats, I would support "nationalizing" the
computer industry. It is too critical to our
way of life now. Tell M$ to go write video
games for the Xbox500.

johns
 
Man-wai Chang ToDie said:
http://www.maximumpc.com/article/Microsoft-s-Licensing-Madness

--
@~@ Might, Courage, Vision, SINCERITY.
/ v \ Simplicity is Beauty! May the Force and Farce be with you!
/( _ )\ (Xubuntu 7.04) Linux 2.6.24.2
^ ^ 19:38:01 up 9 days 9:38 0 users load average: 1.10 1.05 1.01
ºî ´© (CSSA):
http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_pubsvc/page_socsecu/sub_addressesa/
Click to expand...


That article is from October 2006, and the quote was taken out of
context and refers only to the anytime upgrade versions. Here's
a direct quote from the EULA.

15. REASSIGN TO ANOTHER DEVICE.

a. Software Other than Windows Anytime Upgrade. You may
uninstall the software and install it on another device for your use.
You may not do so to share this license between devices.

b. Windows Anytime Upgrade Software. The first user of the
software may reassign the license to another device one time,
but only if the license terms of the software you upgraded from
allows reassignment.
 
Ian D said:
That article is from October 2006, and the quote was taken
out of
context and refers only to the anytime upgrade versions.
Here's
a direct quote from the EULA.

15. REASSIGN TO ANOTHER DEVICE.

a. Software Other than Windows Anytime Upgrade. You may
uninstall the software and install it on another device
for your use.
You may not do so to share this license between devices.

b. Windows Anytime Upgrade Software. The first user of
the
software may reassign the license to another device one
time,
but only if the license terms of the software you upgraded
from
allows reassignment.
Click to expand...


I'd rather they go back to the old days when once purchased,
you could install it on as many devices as you pleased.

I don't blame them for not wanting you to share it with
friends and customers. It would be illogical to think
otherwise, but I resent having to pay for each computer that
I own.

It should be easy enough for them to track a customer's
license and ensure that that license only is submitted for
activation from the same web address.

Ed Cregger
 
In message <[email protected]> "Ed Cregger"
I'd rather they go back to the old days when once purchased,
you could install it on as many devices as you pleased.
Click to expand...

When, exactly, were those days? They sure weren't in the old mainframes
of the 70s, nor in the license of DOS and Windows in the 80s and 90s,
and most definitely not in 2000.
I don't blame them for not wanting you to share it with
friends and customers. It would be illogical to think
otherwise, but I resent having to pay for each computer that
I own.
Click to expand...

I happen to agree, and am gravitating heavily toward per-user licensing
rather then per-installation. Per-user is popular on PDAs, although
less common in the PC world.
It should be easy enough for them to track a customer's
license and ensure that that license only is submitted for
activation from the same web address.
Click to expand...

Web address? What exactly are you talking about?
 
johns said:
To what extent has the "Vista Only" machines
been recended ? For example, the Compaq Presario
is Vista Only ... with no drivers available for XP ..
and they will void any warranty if you try to install
XP. As I understand it, Vista Only means "NO
BIOS" is needed for anything .. mobo, video card,
... it is already in Vista. And M$ has total
ownership of that hardware. Which says to me
I will not even be able to go to vendors like NewEgg
and buy a video card that is Vista Only, and build
my own machine. I will ONLY be able to buy a
Vista Only PC from a certified Microsoft Builder
... like HP. Compaq Tech ( Shhhh ! ) told me
that in the future, the video cards for Vista and
Dx10 will be embedded on the mobo, and that
is why ATI ( and NVidia ) are getting in bed with
AMD and Intel .... embedded video hardware.
Click to expand...

Well your Compaq Tech was close. The CPU (central processing unit, or
microprocessor) will eventually be obsolete. Truth is, it is already
obsolete. GPUs, or graphics processing units (the microprocessor on the
video card, some of them already built into motherboards) are getting so
powerful that they can handle all the CPU functions (as well as GPU
functions) quite easily. Eventually, it will be redundant to install a
"video card" and a "CPU".

When you only need one chip to perform both functions, what is the point of
an expansion card to mount it on? That's why the video chip will soon be on
the motherboard. Will it be built into the motherboard? Possibly. When
you are upgrading the GPU and CPU (which will soon be both on one chip), the
cost of upgrading the motherboard is negligible on top of that. So we very
well could see motherboards with everything built into them soon. Even
storage!!! Kiss the hard drive goodbye... solid state storage isn't cheap
enough for mainstream yet. But it's just a matter of time.

So your compaq tech knew half the story, but he didn't understand, or didn't
explain, the reasoning behind the embedded video. Now you know... the CPU
is going the way of the dinosaur. And this has nothing to do with Vista, or
even Microsoft. The hardware is changing. GPU will replace CPU
oon. -Dave
 
I'd rather they go back to the old days when once purchased,
you could install it on as many devices as you pleased.

I don't blame them for not wanting you to share it with
friends and customers. It would be illogical to think
otherwise, but I resent having to pay for each computer that
I own.

It should be easy enough for them to track a customer's
license and ensure that that license only is submitted for
activation from the same web address.
Click to expand...

I am in complete agreement with you.

I will never purchase software that requires registration or becomes
inoperable if it is not registered. Product activation is intolerable. I
paid for my software and as long as I limit the use of it to myself and
those who live under my roof I will do with it whatever I dam well please.

The courts let software makers put anything they want into the EULA and now
we are suffering the consequences. The result is that we no longer own that
which we have paid for.

I am unable to understand how anyone can stomach asking Microsoft's
permission to upgrade or modify their hardware. What if car makers limited
how many passengers you could carry or the number of miles or where you
could drive? It's insane.

If current trends continue many products will contain some type of
software. If we as consumers want to retain any of the rights that we
traditionally associate with ownership then we must vote with our dollars
and reject products that impose onerous and unfair terms. Microsoft
products should be first on our list of rejects.

I just built two identical WIN98SE PCs. I intend to find a replacement for
Windows and still continue to use the compatiable software I currently own.
I will eithier suceed in this goal or I will use my current machines until
they become inoperable at which time I will cease owning computers. I am
dead ****ing serious.
 
I am in complete agreement with you.

I will never purchase software that requires registration or becomes
inoperable if it is not registered. Product activation is intolerable. I
paid for my software and as long as I limit the use of it to myself and
those who live under my roof I will do with it whatever I dam well please.

The courts let software makers put anything they want into the EULA and now
we are suffering the consequences. The result is that we no longer own that
which we have paid for.

I am unable to understand how anyone can stomach asking Microsoft's
permission to upgrade or modify their hardware. What if car makers limited
how many passengers you could carry or the number of miles or where you
could drive? It's insane.

If current trends continue many products will contain some type of
software. If we as consumers want to retain any of the rights that we
traditionally associate with ownership then we must vote with our dollars
and reject products that impose onerous and unfair terms. Microsoft
products should be first on our list of rejects.

I just built two identical WIN98SE PCs. I intend to find a replacement for
Windows and still continue to use the compatiable software I currently own.
I will eithier suceed in this goal or I will use my current machines until
they become inoperable at which time I will cease owning computers. I am
dead ****ing serious.
Click to expand...

The honest truth is that M$ is NOT an honorable company. Their income
is first and their customers are last! It's extremely difficult to
respect their copyright rights when they are in no way deserving of
that respect. I'm sorry another company has not produced a suitable
OS to replace Windows (don't kid yourself: Linux simply doesn't fill
the bill no matter what any of its lunatic fans may claim). Vista is
nothing more than an armed bandit, taking money without returning
acceptable benefit to the user.

If ever a company has richly deserved ultimate defeat, it is M$!!!

Larc



§§§ - Change planet to earth to reply by email - §§§
 
DevilsPGD said:
In message <[email protected]>
"Ed Cregger"


When, exactly, were those days? They sure weren't in the
old mainframes
of the 70s, nor in the license of DOS and Windows in the
80s and 90s,
and most definitely not in 2000.
Click to expand...

***I could install DOS on as many computers as I wanted.
Legally? Well, that's a different matter. I care about the
real world, not their legalise.
***
I happen to agree, and am gravitating heavily toward
per-user licensing
rather then per-installation. Per-user is popular on
PDAs, although
less common in the PC world.


Web address? What exactly are you talking about?
Click to expand...

***All right, I used the wrong term. Why? Because I'm
getting old and have a bad case of CRS Syndrome. There I go
again, I can't remember the name. The identifying number for
your account that begins with 207... Oops, just remembered
that that changes constantly these days. I'm sure they'll
think of something. <G>
***

Ed Cregger
 
The honest truth is that M$ is NOT an honorable company. Their income
is first and their customers are last! It's extremely difficult to
respect their copyright rights when they are in no way deserving of
that respect. I'm sorry another company has not produced a suitable
OS to replace Windows (don't kid yourself: Linux simply doesn't fill
the bill no matter what any of its lunatic fans may claim). Vista is
nothing more than an armed bandit, taking money without returning
acceptable benefit to the user.

If ever a company has richly deserved ultimate defeat, it is M$!!!
Click to expand...

Sorry about this post. It's not completely mine. A relative who had
my permission to use my computer edited a post I had written to make
the language stronger than I had intended. I incorrectly assumed he
had sent it without making any changes.

Larc



§§§ - Change planet to earth to reply by email - §§§
 
Back
Top