Vista?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Innes
  • Start date Start date
AJR said:
How about the following from the site: "Excellent Upgrade To Already Solid
OS Foundation.".
Click to expand...
Even a "full edition" is considered an upgrade from a previous installed
O.S.

Innes
 
It will install over the Beta RC1 though, won't it? Not sure about XP.

Michael D said:
It is the full oem version.
Click to expand...
That's what I figured to, but still its not realy clear!
Thanks for your responce.

Innes
 
It will install over the Beta RC1 though, won't it? Not sure about XP.

Michael D said:
It is the full oem version.
Click to expand...
That's what I figured to, but still its not realy clear!
Thanks for your responce.

Innes

Not sure about that one either, just came out of a chat with newegg, they
refered me to Microsoft, go figure!
In the meanwhile I still am not sure if this is a full or an upgrade
edition!
Helppppp

Innes
 
A "full edition" can be installed on a computer with no previous OS but a
"upgrade edition" is an upgrade from an older OS (that you must have) to a
more recent OS.
 
Colin Barnhorst said:
What is unclear about "for System Builders"?
Click to expand...

The definition .....

I build one computer for myself -- am I a system builder? Or do I have
to build multiple computers for sale?
 
You may be a system builder, but are you a System Builder?
Since this is in reference to Microsoft products, look to Microsoft's
website as to what they call a System Builder.
The answer to your question is there.
 
I know that -- it was a rhetorical question addressed at Colin's

<< What is unclear about "for System Builders"? >>
 
Colin,

While I almost always agree with your posts, this time I must disagree. A
system builder is anyone who builds systems. Just because Microsoft has a
partner relationship with some system builders that does not mean that only
those with that relationship are system builders.

The OEM license requires the system builder to support Windows. If you
install and delivery that copy of Windows to someone, you have accepted that
license and you are responsible. Let them call Microsoft with an OEM
license and get help if I am wrong. It will never happen.

Dale
 
You asked the question "What is unclear about .... " so I told you.

I'm with Dale on this. There is no volume requirement or VISTA
information on the page you indicate but digging down and for XP it
says

---------------------------------------------------------------
<< Windows XP Windows

XP Professional and Home editions for system builders are available in
packs of 1, 3, or 30.

The system builder who installs the Windows XP software is responsible
for supporting that software. >>
---------------------------------------------------------------

Of course there may be fine print but you can't even get to their step
by step guide through the links provided so I can't read the actual OEM
agreement.

So I could buy a 1 pack and I do support it -- and hundreds of others
sine I'm a sysop on Compuserve <g>
 
I have bought plenty of one-pack OEM OS versions and installed them... and
read the license agreement on the package (not the EULA because I wasn't the
end user).

There was no volume mentioned in the package. When I broke the seal on that
package I had agreed to the terms.

Dale
 
As has already been said...
There is a difference between "system builder" as you refer and "System
Builder" as Collin is referring.
Read about System Builders on Microsoft's website for more details.
 
That's what I just said. Your use of capitalization is actually less
accurate than my statement about system builders that have a partner
relationship with Microsoft. Not all "System Builders" or "system builders"
have a relationship with Microsoft. All system builders that have a partner
relationship with Microsoft have a relationship with Microsoft.

So now that the semantics are out of the way, are you agreeing or
disagreeing with the topic of the thread. That topic is whether a person
who builds systems (a system builder) that does not have a specific partner
relationship with Microsoft is bound by the license agreement on the wrapper
of OEM software when they install it on a PC?

Dale
 
Dale said:
That's what I just said. Your use of capitalization is actually less
accurate than my statement about system builders that have a partner
relationship with Microsoft. Not all "System Builders" or "system
builders" have a relationship with Microsoft. All system builders that
have a partner relationship with Microsoft have a relationship with
Microsoft.

So now that the semantics are out of the way, are you agreeing or
disagreeing with the topic of the thread. That topic is whether a
person who builds systems (a system builder) that does not have a
specific partner relationship with Microsoft is bound by the license
agreement on the wrapper of OEM software when they install it on a PC?

Dale
Click to expand...

Enquiring minds want to know. It should be an interesting answer.

--
Priceless quotes in m.p.w.vista.general group:
http://protectfreedom.tripod.com/kick.html

Most recent idiotic quote added to KICK (Klassic Idiotic Caption Kooks):
"idiot... no one here reads gook, i mean chinese (oops) so please stop
posting your dumb shit"

"Good poets borrow; great poets steal."
- T. S. Eliot
 
The capitalization is more accurate since it refers to the Microsoft program
by that name.
The other may apply to almost anyone.
Anyone who builds a computer may be a system builder, but a System Builder
is something different.
It is far more than semantics, Microsoft officially recognizes one and
possibly has no idea the other exists.

Are you a System Builder as recognized by Microsoft?
Or are you just a system builder?

You seem to have lost the topic of this thread, go back and read the post by
the OP.
It is about Vista and whether the one for sale is full or upgrade.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org
 
Back
Top