Windows XP forum: NOTE: Windows OEM licensing terms have changed!

My first question would be when it comes to validating your copy of an OEM on a self built PC how do they know if the PC is self build or purchased? They don't ask any pertinent questions, they just validate it.. If indeed it's a hard and fast rule concerning the use of the OEM why is there no effort made to determine who it is asking for validation?

As pointed out in the article you linked to, even using the M$ search engine he couldn't even find a retail version of the operating system he was looking for, only OEM versions. And the detailed information on the use was nowhere to be found. The average Joe will buy the OEM. I did. Knowing that it couldn't be used on another PC if/when that PC died.

Is this now just a hook M$ can/may/will use to declare your OEM copy invalid somewhere down the road and require you to purchase another license if you wish to continue using it? Or a way to force you to upgrade?

The whole thing sound devious and underhanded to me. I think this will just encourage more people to use cracked copies of the operating system they want.

@
\)/
Rose

by mid year 2010. My guess is it may "go to press" early. There is no mention of it's ability to run custom PC builds. Whether or not it will come in time to save the "mom and pop" PC build shops or Mass component distributors like Newegg is yet to be seen. They may not have to cash reserves to see them through in a difficult economy. Sound like Google needs a delay in M$'s plans.

The Google OS:

http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/07/introducing-google-chrome-os.html

It hasn't been released yet. Nothing but speculation at this point.

My guess is they'll go all-the-way with a Linux base, including the Linux hardware drivers (those work, by-the-way) and there chrome applications. I see it like this, you turn on your PC and go straight to the Internet bypassing the Desktop using the Google OS. Nearly all of us do that anyway or would like to, most of us good straight to our mail when we turn on our PCs. Everything in the Windows OS can be accessed from the taskbar. Looks like Google is side stepping the desktop and moving the taskbar to the top of the Window. Simpler easy, less time consuming then just open applications from there.

The Internet is such a low level application these days it's almost a joke, it's becoming an antique relic that runs at a nails pace, uses few PC resources and an intermittent connection. The high end these days are the virtual world communities, Second Life being there flag ship. Virtual Worlds are so far ahead of the Internet it pathetic.

1.) Google has already released a preliminary version for public download, though hardware configurations limit its potential userbase.

2.) They already stated that they have no intention of turning it into another full-fledged Linux distro. They are designing it specifically for accessing web applications through a simplistic, browser-centric OS.

Bottom line: If it's not an online application with online storage, you'd better have another operating system available.

John

This is exactly why my refurbishing shop went looking for an alternative to use. And to make it harder, when you sign the OEM agreement MS requires that you ONLY install Windows.

So when the contract was up we didn't renew it. Instead we have been installing "Replacement for Windows" when refurbishing. You can also get it for personal/hobbiest use and legally install it on as many computers as you like. It's called both R4W and "Replacement for Windows". It's somewhat like Windows 7 the way it uses icons on the taks-bar, so my customers love it.

In all honesty I'm not even sure all Microsoft's stipulations are even legal, but they did make it just too difficult for us to deal with them any longer.

If you mean that builder version MSFT has issued new codes. If you mean HP, that license dies with the motherboard.
Bob

Common causes of such validations woes are:
1.) An illegitimate installation, regardless of the user's knowledge. (Shady companies often sell illegitimate copies.)
2.) Another person using your product key, often through the use of key generators.
3.) Hardware changes that make it appear as if you have switched machines without re-activating.
4.) Software that interferes with WGA and other validation technologies.

These are issues that have long been faced; it's not an attempt to force an upgrade to Vista/7. Instead of attempting to circumvent the validation, let it validate. If it fails, call the toll-free number to have Microsoft resolve the issue. And as an alternative to reinstalling XP, perform a repair installation, an option that leaves your programs and files intact while repairing most OS corruption issues.

John

From what I've read, it seems that the final answer on this is not clear, with most of the confusion generated by MS misinformation. If it is true and becomes enforced, I foresee a lot of Open Systems OS converts in the future.

Windows XP, Vista and 7. It would seem that, in order to make this threat legitimate, MS would have to first stop etailers, retailers, etc. (I can also buy these as my local Microcenter) from selling individual media/license kits. Although signs in my local store clearly state that the software kits are "intended" for use on pre-built systems with the OS already installed, it makes no real sense to have open displays of these. To make this work without looking fuzzy, MS would need to yank all of these copies and make them available only through distributors who followed their rules. This would probably mean that a minimum number of licenses would be needed to make a purchase. OEM builders buy in bulk and hobbyists rarely would do that.

I bought on retail version of XP Pro (A whopping $400 too), an OEM version of XP Media Center, and an OEM version of XP Home. Does that make me a hobbyist or a builder?

With each one I built a whole computer, except the home version which is still unopened. I plan on putting that on a hodge-podge piecework computer with the fewest new parts I can buy. Probably donate that one to a needy family. At least they could use it to get the skewl work done...

Who else is tired of Microsoft raping everyone? They live extravagant lifestyles and we struggle to keep food on the table and a roof over our heads.

We need to toss out ALL copyright laws and start over, this time doing them in favor of the consumer.
Like having them expire 3 years after inception. This included movies, music, the works.
Innovation and creativity would no longer be stifled by unfair laws. Also, anything that once could have been copyrighted would be barred from obtaining a patent. Patents should expire every 5 years.

John, member bilyo posted in this thread and you answered. He's also posted his own discussion here;
http://forums.cnet.com/5208-6142_102-0.html?messageID=3214377#3214377

Both myself and Jimmy assured him that Microsoft couldn't make retrospective changes to their licensing terms, but bilyo raised an interesting observation. He pointed out that your post above mentions "These revised licensing terms apply to all OEM versions of Windows currently sold".

I can't believe that Microsoft means all XP OEMs sold from whenever in the past, and that's why the word 'currently' was used. But 'sold' can be in the past tense as well, so that 'currently sold' could apply to all OEMs that have been sold to date.

I know that interpretation has to be wrong, but is it?

Your insight would be most welcome. Really!

Mark

By "currently sold," I mean copies of Windows that you bought/buy from the time of the change onward; those licenses currently being sold. --- John Wilkinson

Since the licensing terms for OEM editions have already changed and are in effect then if I purchase an OEM copy of XP from any one of a dozen sellers today I have an illegal copy? Then why are they out there for sale? Are the sellers breaking the law?

And if I install an OEM copy on my home build PC will Microsoft validate it? And if they do doesn't that make it legal?

@
\)/
Rose

What about the OEM Pre-installation Kit or (OPK) that microsoft provides to system builders. What is it and don't you need it to install any OEM vs. of windows?

I think MS is just testing the waters and attempting to push the limits, hinting that they plan to nudge-out OEM licenses in the near future. That would be a shame, because big manufacturers like HP and Dell could, in theory begin to charge more for their machines if they attempt to secretly collude.

MS knows this won't fly, and would create bad press if forced. They just want to scare people.

What they really need to be more concerned about is piracy. Nearly everyone pirates here in Asia. I actually had a difficult time purchasing a legitimate copy of Vista for my wife's computer, and even it had been opened.

If MS puts these draconian OEM ideas into place, piracy will be encouraged, as will other OS's.