Replaced 939 mobo with AM2 mobo (and CPU + RAM), Windows XP needs reactivation, help

[Nothinman]

It's like buying a new car at a "discount" that you find out later can only be driven in your home state. Pay more if you want the Retail version you can drive anywhere. Consumers would be outraged over this, but what Microsoft is doing is OK?

If you know you're getting something at a discount then you should find out why, if you sign the paperwork without reading it then you deserve whatever you get.

 

[Smilin]

A couple more points that may help clarify:

1. If the OEM no longer carries your board and decides to replace it with a different model then your license is still valid. It would be silly to have to buy a new OS. Fair is fair.

2. The policy regarding an OEM being tied to hardware has existed as long as the OEM license afaik.

3. People began buying an OEM copy with an IDE cable and calling that cable "the computer". Some reasonable policy had to be put in place so the motherboard was chosen to represent "the computer". (CPU would have been a bad choice since those are upgraded frequently)

4. Activation is a way to *try* to ensure you don't run more than one copy at once. It applies to retail as well.

5. You *are* notified of the limitations both when you buy the computer and again when minisetup/oemsetup/eula happens. Like every other legal document from the GNU to the stuff on the back of your stadium ticket it's a pain to read. Blame the lawyers.


IMHO what MS is after: Sell a super cheap copy of the OS with a computer. By discounting it the understanding is you don't try to rip off MS by then transferring that from computer to computer. Getting ripped off by people won't keep you in business. See #3 above.

What MS is *not* after: mwhahaha we tricked you! Buy more copies!! ...that's some tinfoil hat stuff right there. Ripping off your customers won't keep you in business either. See #1 above.

 

[owensdj]

Nothinman, the OEM versions aren't "discounted." Show me anything from Microsoft that calls them a "discount" version. I don't have the statistics, but I'm pretty sure Microsoft sells a majority of their Windows desktop OS licenses as OEM, not Retail. Seems like OEM is the standard version and Retail is a license-enhanced version.

 

[bsobel]

Originally posted by: owensdj
Nothinman, the OEM versions aren't "discounted." Show me anything from Microsoft that calls them a "discount" version. I don't have the statistics, but I'm pretty sure Microsoft sells a majority of their Windows desktop OS licenses as OEM, not Retail. Seems like OEM is the standard version and Retail is a license-enhanced version.

Huh? The list price of Windows is based on the retail version. OEM versions are usually more than 50% less. How any reasonable person can call that anything less than a discount is beyond me.

 

[Nothinman]

Nothinman, the OEM versions aren't "discounted." Show me anything from Microsoft that calls them a "discount" version. I don't have the statistics, but I'm pretty sure Microsoft sells a majority of their Windows desktop OS licenses as OEM, not Retail. Seems like OEM is the standard version and Retail is a license-enhanced version.

Wow, your logic is astounding.

 

[Markbnj]

People began buying an OEM copy with an IDE cable and calling that cable "the computer". Some reasonable policy had to be put in place so the motherboard was chosen to represent "the computer". (CPU would have been a bad choice since those are upgraded frequently)

That's how I got XP Pro for my last build. Newegg was selling it for $144 with a cable. This was Sept. 2005. When I later swapped out the Gigabyte mobo for an MSI (same processor, memory, and peripherals) the activation window popped up, and was successful at online activation. Go figure.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: owensdj
Has anyone ever challenged Microsoft's motherboard change policy in court? I think it's appalling someone should have to buy another copy of Windows just because their motherboard broke. Some might say just buy the retail version, but I think it's ridiculously overpriced. I smell an expensive class action lawsuit over this in Microsoft's future.

You paid for one OS software license. You should be able to use it on one computer regardless of what hardware you change.

In a sane world, that would be true. But the computer world is filled with insane people, that work at rich and powerful corporations. They don't belive that you should get what you paid for - they believe in getting paid twice or more for the same thing. Look at what DRM and "activation" features on software actually mean for the real-world end-user. In many cases they end up paying multiple times for the use of one item. Piracy is a smokescreen.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

It's like buying a new car at a "discount" that you find out later can only be driven in your home state. Pay more if you want the Retail version you can drive anywhere. Consumers would be outraged over this, but what Microsoft is doing is OK?

If you know you're getting something at a discount then you should find out why, if you sign the paperwork without reading it then you deserve whatever you get.

You really think that consumers, who buy a PC WITHOUT ANY CLEAR DISCLOSURE THEY THEY ARE BUYING A "LIMITED USE" LICENSE to the OS software, "deserve what they get"?

I guess I personally wouldn't have so much of a problem with the current OEM limited-use software licenses, if such limitations are CLEARLY disclosed to the consumer. Most people think that when they buy a computer, they own it, including the normally unlimited right to use the software included with it. Books don't have reading limitations, Music doesn't have listening limitations, why does software come with usage limitions? It's contrary to ordinary consumer expectations, and therefore should be clearly disclosed, but ISN'T.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: Smilin
5. You *are* notified of the limitations both when you buy the computer and again when minisetup/oemsetup/eula happens. Like every other legal document from the GNU to the stuff on the back of your stadium ticket it's a pain to read. Blame the lawyers.

This is a good one. Show me ONE branded OEM computer system that ships with an OEM version of Windows, that CLEARLY DISCLOSES that the OS license is limited, and tied to the motherboard, and requires replacing the OS if the motherboard is changed/upgraded. At the time of the sale. Not afterwards.

Originally posted by: Smilin
IMHO what MS is after: Sell a super cheap copy of the OS with a computer. By discounting it the understanding is you don't try to rip off MS by then transferring that from computer to computer. Getting ripped off by people won't keep you in business. See #3 above.

More MS mind-warped babble - redefining the "re-use" of software that someone PAID FOR, as "ripping MS off". If you paid for it, then you certainly aren't ripping anyone off, and the normal expectation is that you can re-use it how you see fit.

It's perverse how MS tries to change that normal expectation, into one where people are required to pay, pay, pay again, to simply use the software that one already paid for.

Originally posted by: Smilin
What MS is *not* after: mwhahaha we tricked you! Buy more copies!! ...that's some tinfoil hat stuff right there. Ripping off your customers won't keep you in business either. See #1 above.

Tinfoil hat stuff? Excuse me? See how the MS viewpoint demonizes all other viewpoints? It's simply normal consumer expectations, nothing more. And by not clearly disclosing the limitations at the time of purchase, MS and the computer OEM ARE decieving the customer.

 

[Nothinman]

You really think that consumers, who buy a PC WITHOUT ANY CLEAR DISCLOSURE THEY THEY ARE BUYING A "LIMITED USE" LICENSE to the OS software, "deserve what they get"?

Yes, because 99% of the time those consumers never upgrade the motherboard so it's not even a limitation that they even care about.

Most people think that when they buy a computer, they own it, including the normally unlimited right to use the software included with it.

Most people also think they own the software itself instead of a license to use that software. Most people think that sharing MP3s is perfectly legal. Most people are idiots.

Books don't have reading limitations, Music doesn't have listening limitations, why does software come with usage limitions?

Books and music both come with copyright limitations though, you don't have 100% free reign with them. And you can use that OEM copy of XP for as long as you want on that one machine so it's not really a usage limitation.

 

[CrystalBay]

Originally posted by: Markbnj

People began buying an OEM copy with an IDE cable and calling that cable "the computer". Some reasonable policy had to be put in place so the motherboard was chosen to represent "the computer". (CPU would have been a bad choice since those are upgraded frequently)

That's how I got XP Pro for my last build. Newegg was selling it for $144 with a cable. This was Sept. 2005. When I later swapped out the Gigabyte mobo for an MSI (same processor, memory, and peripherals) the activation window popped up, and was successful at online activation. Go figure.

Yet HP or Whoever is paying a helluva lot less for OEM than buying OEM from Newegg ... I just buy the upgrade editions and all is square with me and my conscious..

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: VirtualLarry

Originally posted by: Smilin
What MS is *not* after: mwhahaha we tricked you! Buy more copies!! ...that's some tinfoil hat stuff right there. Ripping off your customers won't keep you in business either. See #1 above.

Tinfoil hat stuff? Excuse me? See how the MS viewpoint demonizes all other viewpoints? It's simply normal consumer expectations, nothing more. And by not clearly disclosing the limitations at the time of purchase, MS and the computer OEM ARE decieving the customer.

Excuse you? No. You're being a tard.

First, it's not the MS viewpoint it's MY viewpoint.

My viewpoint is such conspiracy theories are a bunch of tinfoil hat BS. If you want to call that "demonizing" your viewpoint whatever. It would be more accurate to say your viewpoint is just plain stupid. Accuse me of calling your viewpoint stupid and I'll admit guilt.

You won't find any software that has the full terms and conditions on the outside of the box. To do so you would have to make the box bigger. What you will find is a note saying that use of the software requires acceptance of the enclosed terms. You then get the option to read those terms and decline acceptance if you so choose. You'll then get a refund. This is the same with your OS, the games you buy, whatever. If you want to view the terms before purchase you can go online and do so. Don't even bother saying you can't. I'll just provide a link to disprove you....actually no I won't. It's not worth the effort to prove to a dripping retard that water is wet. As usual your arguments are weak and tiresome.

 

[bruceb]

XP Home Full Retail for $199

http://www.directron.com/xphomebox.html

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: Smilin

Originally posted by: VirtualLarry

Originally posted by: Smilin
What MS is *not* after: mwhahaha we tricked you! Buy more copies!! ...that's some tinfoil hat stuff right there. Ripping off your customers won't keep you in business either. See #1 above.

Tinfoil hat stuff? Excuse me? See how the MS viewpoint demonizes all other viewpoints? It's simply normal consumer expectations, nothing more. And by not clearly disclosing the limitations at the time of purchase, MS and the computer OEM ARE decieving the customer.

Excuse you? No. You're being a tard.

First, it's not the MS viewpoint it's MY viewpoint.

My viewpoint is such conspiracy theories are a bunch of tinfoil hat BS. If you want to call that "demonizing" your viewpoint whatever. It would be more accurate to say your viewpoint is just plain stupid. Accuse me of calling your viewpoint stupid and I'll admit guilt.

As far as "Buy more copies!!" goes - that's exactly what MS intended with the original Vista EULA terms, with the limitation of only a single license transfer (to a new device), even for retail-box copies. MS intended to squeeze upgraders for a new copy of the OS for every two mobos that the user went through. Only after a large outcry and at the last moment did MS capitulate, and revert the license transfer terms to something similar to what it had for XP.
That's something that you cannot deny.

Originally posted by: Smilin
You won't find any software that has the full terms and conditions on the outside of the box. To do so you would have to make the box bigger. What you will find is a note saying that use of the software requires acceptance of the enclosed terms. You then get the option to read those terms and decline acceptance if you so choose. You'll then get a refund. This is the same with your OS, the games you buy, whatever. If you want to view the terms before purchase you can go online and do so. Don't even bother saying you can't. I'll just provide a link to disprove you....actually no I won't. It's not worth the effort to prove to a dripping retard that water is wet. As usual your arguments are weak and tiresome.

Originally posted by: VirtualLarry

Originally posted by: Smilin
5. You *are* notified of the limitations both when you buy the computer and again when minisetup/oemsetup/eula happens. Like every other legal document from the GNU to the stuff on the back of your stadium ticket it's a pain to read. Blame the lawyers.

This is a good one. Show me ONE branded OEM computer system that ships with an OEM version of Windows, that CLEARLY DISCLOSES that the OS license is limited, and tied to the motherboard, and requires replacing the OS if the motherboard is changed/upgraded. At the time of the sale. Not afterwards.

I'm glad you're backtracking.

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: VirtualLarry

Originally posted by: Smilin

Originally posted by: VirtualLarry

Originally posted by: Smilin
What MS is *not* after: mwhahaha we tricked you! Buy more copies!! ...that's some tinfoil hat stuff right there. Ripping off your customers won't keep you in business either. See #1 above.

Tinfoil hat stuff? Excuse me? See how the MS viewpoint demonizes all other viewpoints? It's simply normal consumer expectations, nothing more. And by not clearly disclosing the limitations at the time of purchase, MS and the computer OEM ARE decieving the customer.

Excuse you? No. You're being a tard.

First, it's not the MS viewpoint it's MY viewpoint.

My viewpoint is such conspiracy theories are a bunch of tinfoil hat BS. If you want to call that "demonizing" your viewpoint whatever. It would be more accurate to say your viewpoint is just plain stupid. Accuse me of calling your viewpoint stupid and I'll admit guilt.

As far as "Buy more copies!!" goes - that's exactly what MS intended with the original Vista EULA terms, with the limitation of only a single license transfer (to a new device), even for retail-box copies. MS intended to squeeze upgraders for a new copy of the OS for every two mobos that the user went through. Only after a large outcry and at the last moment did MS capitulate, and revert the license transfer terms to something similar to what it had for XP.
That's something that you cannot deny.

Originally posted by: Smilin
You won't find any software that has the full terms and conditions on the outside of the box. To do so you would have to make the box bigger. What you will find is a note saying that use of the software requires acceptance of the enclosed terms. You then get the option to read those terms and decline acceptance if you so choose. You'll then get a refund. This is the same with your OS, the games you buy, whatever. If you want to view the terms before purchase you can go online and do so. Don't even bother saying you can't. I'll just provide a link to disprove you....actually no I won't. It's not worth the effort to prove to a dripping retard that water is wet. As usual your arguments are weak and tiresome.

Originally posted by: VirtualLarry

Originally posted by: Smilin
5. You *are* notified of the limitations both when you buy the computer and again when minisetup/oemsetup/eula happens. Like every other legal document from the GNU to the stuff on the back of your stadium ticket it's a pain to read. Blame the lawyers.

This is a good one. Show me ONE branded OEM computer system that ships with an OEM version of Windows, that CLEARLY DISCLOSES that the OS license is limited, and tied to the motherboard, and requires replacing the OS if the motherboard is changed/upgraded. At the time of the sale. Not afterwards.

I'm glad you're backtracking.

:roll:

"dell oem eula"...tada!...
http://www.dell.com/content/to...cs=04&l=en&s=bsd#Vista

How much easier do you want it?

You are unable to buy a dell without checking the box to agree to the terms. Let me repeat...you are *unable* to buy without agreeing to the terms. The terms are shown to you at the time you buy. I'll repeat for the deaf/dumb...The terms are shown to you when you buy.

Tiresome Larry. Face it, nobody is hiding the terms of the deal. If they were you could challenge it *and win* in court.

 

[nweaver]

here is an idea....

If you don't like the term/restrictions of the OEM license, then.....wait for it....wait for it....








DON'T USE THAT SOFTWARE.

Pretty neat concept, huh.

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: nweaver
here is an idea....

If you don't like the term/restrictions of the OEM license, then.....wait for it....wait for it....








DON'T USE THAT SOFTWARE.

Pretty neat concept, huh.

:thumbsup: That is some genius sh1t.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: Smilin
"dell oem eula"...tada!...
http://www.dell.com/content/to...cs=04&l=en&s=bsd#Vista

How much easier do you want it?

You are unable to buy a dell without checking the box to agree to the terms. Let me repeat...you are *unable* to buy without agreeing to the terms. The terms are shown to you at the time you buy. I'll repeat for the deaf/dumb...The terms are shown to you when you buy.

Tiresome Larry. Face it, nobody is hiding the terms of the deal. If they were you could challenge it *and win* in court.

Distorting the truth again, are we?

That "dell oem eula" is NOT displayed for the user, or even linked to, at the time of the sale.
There is no box to check to agree to "those" terms. There IS a box to check to agree to the "Dell Terms and Conditions", but that is NOT the same document that you linked. (How devious of you!) THAT document is at http://www.dell.com/content/to...~lt=popup&~section=012

So I repeat, the document that Smilin linked to, is NOT, I repeat, NOT shown to the purchaser at the time of the sale. In fact, it's NOT EVEN LINKED TO.

Dell does NOT clearly disclose, at the time of the sale, that the OS license is limited and tied to the motherboard. As I first asserted.

If the astute reader would like to verify this for themselves (how deceitful Smilin is), then follow these steps:

-----

Go to http://www.dell.com/
Accept cookies (for session, at least)

http://www.dell.com/
Click on "Home & Home Office"

http://www.dell.com/content/de...?c=us&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs
Click on "Desktops"

http://www.dell.com/content/pr...?c=us&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs
Underneath "Inspiron Desktops", click "Continue"

http://www.dell.com/content/pr...?c=us&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs
Underneath "Inspiron Desktops", click "Continue"

http://www.dell.com/content/pr...?c=us&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs
Underneath "Inspiron 530 Featured System", click "Buy Now"

This will take you to Dell's Cart system. Accept cookies (for session). You will also need to enable javascript.

On the cart summary screen, click "Checkout".

At the next screen, select "Guest Checkout".

Enter your shipping information. Click "Continue".

At the "Select a Payment Method" screen, underneath "Credit/Debit Card", click "Choose".

At the "Enter Credit Card Information" screen, enter your credit card details. Click "Continue".

You will eventually end up at the "Review and Submit Your Order" page. There are two sets of choices, one on "Export Compliance", the second on "Terms and Conditions of Sale".
(I assume that one has to click "I AGREE" for the sale to continue.) If you click on "Terms and Conditions of Sale", you end up at http://www.dell.com/content/to...~lt=popup&~section=012
Presumably, the first section, labeled "U.S. Terms and Conditions of Sale" applies. Reading downward, the only blurb about software is this:
"5 Software. All software is provided subject to a license agreement and you agree that you will be bound by such license agreement. "

No link is provided as to what those license terms are. There is no verbiage incorporating those license terms and conditions as a part of Dell's Terms and conditions, either.

Therefore, there is no clear disclaimer or indication, before the sale, that the license provided for the OS software is limited. Indeed, there is no indication on what said software license(s) contain, at all. It's just a blanket requirement to a agree to "an" agreement, with no indication of what that agreement is or what it contains. (In my opinion, that would be ripe to be thrown out of court.)

Again, there is NO disclaimer or indication, on the part of Dell, that the OS license is limited and tied to the motherboard, at the time of the sale.

Only that one is required to accept a nebulous "license agreement", with no indication of what it is or contains. Some among us might well consider that to be "hiding" those terms.

 

[VirtualLarry]

It should also be pointed out that even if the terms were linked to, it may well not constitute a legal agreement, unless the terms themselves were directly displayed, and forced to be agreed to, by the user, before the sale.

Reference: http://www.andrewpatrick.ca/jitcta/jitcta.html