VISTA EULA!!!

For everything that's not in any way related to PureBasic. General chat etc...
srod
PureBasic Expert
PureBasic Expert
Posts: 10589
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2003 4:35 pm
Location: Beyond the pale...

VISTA EULA!!!

Post by srod »

Bloody hell, Linux is now looking better and better!
As I read this, you go to the store and buy a copy of Vista, which you install on a PC you had in your office. A year later, another PC becomes available that's a bit more up to date, so you decide to transfer your Vista license to that machine.

You're now finished with that Vista license. Done. Game over, man. Whether you shelled out $199 for Home Basic or broke the bank with the $399 Ultimate makes no difference. You've reassigned the license twice, and that's all that Microsoft allows.
:shock:


http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/420/1
I may look like a mule, but I'm not a complete ass.
Killswitch
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 731
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 7:12 pm

Post by Killswitch »

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Microsoft changed their plans to do this...

(I'm trying to find the article I read about this!)

Edit:

This wasn't the same one, but it's got the same jist:

http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/21679 ... ta-license
~I see one problem with your reasoning: the fact is thats not a chicken~
Trond
Always Here
Always Here
Posts: 7446
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2003 6:45 pm
Location: Norway

Post by Trond »

Yes, they changed that.
User avatar
Progi1984
Addict
Addict
Posts: 806
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2005 1:01 am
Location: France > Rennes
Contact:

Post by Progi1984 »

Personnally, I may buy in 6 or 7 months a laptop... with no windows with no system ! I will install Ubuntu directly !
User avatar
GeoTrail
Addict
Addict
Posts: 2799
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 12:45 am
Location: Bergen, Norway
Contact:

Post by GeoTrail »

That article was written on october 27th, so clearly the writer isn't to up-to-date with the goings-on. Microsoft changed their license for Vista around october 15th. Atleast that's when I got the update for it.
You can now install Vista as you would with Windows XP. But if I remember correctly, you cannot active two copies after a certain ammount of time. So if you install a copy at work, which isn't a good idea anyways, then you can't install it again at your home PC the same day, but you have to wait a certain ammount of time before it can be installed and activated.
I Stepped On A Cornflake!!! Now I'm A Cereal Killer!
srod
PureBasic Expert
PureBasic Expert
Posts: 10589
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2003 4:35 pm
Location: Beyond the pale...

Post by srod »

Ah, I hadn't come across the fact that MS has altered the licence.

If they hadn't, Linux would have rocketted! :)
I may look like a mule, but I'm not a complete ass.
User avatar
netmaestro
PureBasic Bullfrog
PureBasic Bullfrog
Posts: 8453
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 5:42 am
Location: Fort Nelson, BC, Canada

Post by netmaestro »

(Nov 6, 2006) Editor's note: following publication of this article on Oct 27, Microsoft removed the Vista EULA from their website, modified the terms to address the transfer of licenses, and then recently made the document available again.
Yes, they backed off, but only in response to a massive angry backlash by customers. What we are left with now is fair imho, as you can transfer a license you bought as a boxed product an unlimited number of times. The OS you get with a new PC as OEM software is not transferable, but that's reasonable. As a customer you'll have paid next to nothing for it, as it's funded by all the "free" crap you get preloaded, and Microsoft takes a much lower price as well. The main problem with Vista, and one MS carelessly failed to consider, is that it won't run QuickSnap. How they could overlook this important detail is beyond me.
BERESHEIT
User avatar
GeoTrail
Addict
Addict
Posts: 2799
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 12:45 am
Location: Bergen, Norway
Contact:

Post by GeoTrail »

QuickSnap? What's that?
I Stepped On A Cornflake!!! Now I'm A Cereal Killer!
User avatar
netmaestro
PureBasic Bullfrog
PureBasic Bullfrog
Posts: 8453
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 5:42 am
Location: Fort Nelson, BC, Canada

Post by netmaestro »

BERESHEIT
Dare
Addict
Addict
Posts: 1965
Joined: Mon May 29, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Outback

Post by Dare »

netmaestro wrote:The main problem with Vista, and one MS carelessly failed to consider, is that it won't run QuickSnap. How they could overlook this important detail is beyond me.
LOL. :lol:
Dare2 cut down to size
User avatar
GeoTrail
Addict
Addict
Posts: 2799
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 12:45 am
Location: Bergen, Norway
Contact:

Post by GeoTrail »

I Stepped On A Cornflake!!! Now I'm A Cereal Killer!
Num3
PureBasic Expert
PureBasic Expert
Posts: 2812
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2003 4:51 pm
Location: Portugal, Lisbon
Contact:

Post by Num3 »

Dare wrote:
netmaestro wrote:The main problem with Vista, and one MS carelessly failed to consider, is that it won't run QuickSnap. How they could overlook this important detail is beyond me.
LOL. :lol:
LMAO :lol: :lol: :lol:
srod
PureBasic Expert
PureBasic Expert
Posts: 10589
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2003 4:35 pm
Location: Beyond the pale...

Post by srod »

I read somewhere that support was planned for QuickSnap in Vista Service Pack 1.

:twisted:
I may look like a mule, but I'm not a complete ass.
Num3
PureBasic Expert
PureBasic Expert
Posts: 2812
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2003 4:51 pm
Location: Portugal, Lisbon
Contact:

Post by Num3 »

srod wrote:I read somewhere that support was planned for QuickSnap in Vista Service Pack 1.

:twisted:
Yeah!
A quick fix will also be available for download ...350mb... No big deal :twisted:
Dare
Addict
Addict
Posts: 1965
Joined: Mon May 29, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Outback

Post by Dare »

:D
Dare2 cut down to size
Post Reply