Vista - Microsoft Vista NEW one time only transfer

I would like to ask the Vista community to give Microsoft our complete
disapproval of item 15 a. as shown in their new license agreement for
Windows Vista home basic, home premium, and ultimate. Here is a quote from
this license agreement:

The first user of the software may reassign the license to another device
one time. If you reassign the license, that other device becomes the
"licensed device."

Many of us in the Vista community upgrade our PCs sometimes several times
within the space of a couple of years. This is completely unacceptable and I
will be writing the Microsoft board of directors about this subject.

http://download.microsoft.com/docume...a72651b7a3.pdf

Microsoft is attempting to punish ninety-five percent of those who are
rightfully using their product because of the five percent that are not.

It totally sucks
And all it's good for is to maximise MSFT's profits
and I'm sure there will be patches released by hackers to get around this
and people will use those patches. In other words they will be turning
ordinary people into criminals

"RR Johnson Jr" <johnson_robert@planet.nl> wrote in message
news:4532594d$0$2032$ba620dc5@text.nova.planet.nl...
>I would like to ask the Vista community to give Microsoft our complete
>disapproval of item 15 a. as shown in their new license agreement for
>Windows Vista home basic, home premium, and ultimate. Here is a quote from
>this license agreement:
>
> The first user of the software may reassign the license to another device
> one time. If you reassign the license, that other device becomes the
> "licensed device."
>
> Many of us in the Vista community upgrade our PCs sometimes several times
> within the space of a couple of years. This is completely unacceptable and
> I will be writing the Microsoft board of directors about this subject.
>
> http://download.microsoft.com/docume...a72651b7a3.pdf
>
> Microsoft is attempting to punish ninety-five percent of those who are
> rightfully using their product because of the five percent that are not.

"RR Johnson Jr" <johnson_robert@planet.nl> wrote in message
news:4532594d$0$2032$ba620dc5@text.nova.planet.nl...
>I would like to ask the Vista community to give Microsoft our complete
>disapproval of item 15 a. as shown in their new license agreement for
>Windows Vista home basic, home premium, and ultimate. Here is a quote from
>this license agreement:
>
> The first user of the software may reassign the license to another device
> one time. If you reassign the license, that other device becomes the
> "licensed device."
>
> Many of us in the Vista community upgrade our PCs sometimes several times
> within the space of a couple of years. This is completely unacceptable and
> I will be writing the Microsoft board of directors about this subject.
>
> http://download.microsoft.com/docume...a72651b7a3.pdf
>
> Microsoft is attempting to punish ninety-five percent of those who are
> rightfully using their product because of the five percent that are not.

I don't see anything in the license that prevents you from upgrading your
PCs as you describe.

Absolutely.

--
Paul Smith,
Yeovil, UK.
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User.
http://www.windowsresource.net/

*Remove nospam. to reply by e-mail*


"RR Johnson Jr" <johnson_robert@planet.nl> wrote in message
news:4532594d$0$2032$ba620dc5@text.nova.planet.nl...
>I would like to ask the Vista community to give Microsoft our complete
>disapproval of item 15 a. as shown in their new license agreement for
>Windows Vista home basic, home premium, and ultimate. Here is a quote from
>this license agreement:
>
> The first user of the software may reassign the license to another device
> one time. If you reassign the license, that other device becomes the
> "licensed device."
>
> Many of us in the Vista community upgrade our PCs sometimes several times
> within the space of a couple of years. This is completely unacceptable and
> I will be writing the Microsoft board of directors about this subject.
>
> http://download.microsoft.com/docume...a72651b7a3.pdf
>
> Microsoft is attempting to punish ninety-five percent of those who are
> rightfully using their product because of the five percent that are not.

"David Sanders" <news@nospam.sandersweb.net> wrote in message
news:%23ZWLHWH8GHA.2128@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>
> "RR Johnson Jr" <johnson_robert@planet.nl> wrote in message
> news:4532594d$0$2032$ba620dc5@text.nova.planet.nl...
>>I would like to ask the Vista community to give Microsoft our complete
>>disapproval of item 15 a. as shown in their new license agreement for
>>Windows Vista home basic, home premium, and ultimate. Here is a quote from
>>this license agreement:
>>
>> The first user of the software may reassign the license to another device
>> one time. If you reassign the license, that other device becomes the
>> "licensed device."
>>
>> Many of us in the Vista community upgrade our PCs sometimes several times
>> within the space of a couple of years. This is completely unacceptable
>> and I will be writing the Microsoft board of directors about this
>> subject.
>>
>> http://download.microsoft.com/docume...a72651b7a3.pdf
>>
>> Microsoft is attempting to punish ninety-five percent of those who are
>> rightfully using their product because of the five percent that are not.
>
> I don't see anything in the license that prevents you from upgrading your
> PCs as you describe.

Depends how you define "device".
If i swap the hard drive into a different Pc is that a different device?
Similary, if I buy a new hard drive to replace my current one and install
Vista onto that, is that a different device.
It has to be one or the other, otherwise neither the PC or the Hard Drive is
a device.

I suppose that what MS is after is a Vista retail license just like the OEM
license. A lot of money to be made that way. Next stop: pay for service
packs.

"Jason Cambre" <j_cambre@cox.net> wrote in message
news:535CF787-9D8C-402E-B829-8D1F76956076@microsoft.com...
>I agree that this is punishing the majority of users who are rightfully
>using Microsoft's software. With the tougher policies on Volume Licensing
>in Vista, why is it even necessary to change the user agreement this way?
>Most of the pirated instances of XP are running those Volume Licensed
>verions. Since Microsoft can deny features to any suspected abuser, I do
>not see it fit to limit the installation of a single genuine licensed
>instance of Vista to a device and ONLY it's one "upgrade." What upgrade
>means is certainly up to much debate as it's all very vague.

I've always been a cheerleader of Microsoft but does this mean if I upgrade
my motherboard and processor or in a worst case scenario I have to replace
my motherboard due to a fault why should I be limited to that being the only
device assuming the Vista software believes I have a different PC?

regards
Robert
"RR Johnson Jr" <johnson_robert@planet.nl> wrote in message
news:4532594d$0$2032$ba620dc5@text.nova.planet.nl...
>I would like to ask the Vista community to give Microsoft our complete
>disapproval of item 15 a. as shown in their new license agreement for
>Windows Vista home basic, home premium, and ultimate. Here is a quote from
>this license agreement:
>
> The first user of the software may reassign the license to another device
> one time. If you reassign the license, that other device becomes the
> "licensed device."
>
> Many of us in the Vista community upgrade our PCs sometimes several times
> within the space of a couple of years. This is completely unacceptable and
> I will be writing the Microsoft board of directors about this subject.
>
> http://download.microsoft.com/docume...a72651b7a3.pdf
>
> Microsoft is attempting to punish ninety-five percent of those who are
> rightfully using their product because of the five percent that are not.

See Paul Thurrotts justification on www.winsupersite.com Apparently MS
meant to have the same one time only EULA for XP but never got round to it!!
According to Thurrott and apparently Microsoft, this change is ok as it only
affects a small proportion of Windows users!!
It seems to me that this change does nothing to prevent piracy but only
succeeds in alienating those of us who are enthusiasts and like to build
their own machines and upgrade fairly often when as the hardware develops!

Alan


"Fuzzy John" <john@noemail.com> wrote in message
news:OmiqsAI8GHA.4304@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>I suppose that what MS is after is a Vista retail license just like the OEM
>license. A lot of money to be made that way. Next stop: pay for service
>packs.
>
> "Jason Cambre" <j_cambre@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:535CF787-9D8C-402E-B829-8D1F76956076@microsoft.com...
>>I agree that this is punishing the majority of users who are rightfully
>>using Microsoft's software. With the tougher policies on Volume Licensing
>>in Vista, why is it even necessary to change the user agreement this way?
>>Most of the pirated instances of XP are running those Volume Licensed
>>verions. Since Microsoft can deny features to any suspected abuser, I do
>>not see it fit to limit the installation of a single genuine licensed
>>instance of Vista to a device and ONLY it's one "upgrade." What upgrade
>>means is certainly up to much debate as it's all very vague.
>
>

Alan wrote:
> See Paul Thurrotts justification on www.winsupersite.com Apparently MS
> meant to have the same one time only EULA for XP but never got round to it!!
> According to Thurrott and apparently Microsoft, this change is ok as it only
> affects a small proportion of Windows users!!
> It seems to me that this change does nothing to prevent piracy but only
> succeeds in alienating those of us who are enthusiasts and like to build
> their own machines and upgrade fairly often when as the hardware develops!
>
> Alan

The key question for enthusiasts is how much upgrading of a computer is
too much; if there's a 120 day clean the slate feature; and, what is the
point system that will require reactivation on line or groveling to
someone in Pakistan on the phone. These, and many other, reasons are
good enough to convince me to wait a year or two for Vista. That, and
I'm happy with XP.

Alias
>
>
> "Fuzzy John" <john@noemail.com> wrote in message
> news:OmiqsAI8GHA.4304@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> I suppose that what MS is after is a Vista retail license just like the OEM
>> license. A lot of money to be made that way. Next stop: pay for service
>> packs.
>>
>> "Jason Cambre" <j_cambre@cox.net> wrote in message
>> news:535CF787-9D8C-402E-B829-8D1F76956076@microsoft.com...
>>> I agree that this is punishing the majority of users who are rightfully
>>> using Microsoft's software. With the tougher policies on Volume Licensing
>>> in Vista, why is it even necessary to change the user agreement this way?
>>> Most of the pirated instances of XP are running those Volume Licensed
>>> verions. Since Microsoft can deny features to any suspected abuser, I do
>>> not see it fit to limit the installation of a single genuine licensed
>>> instance of Vista to a device and ONLY it's one "upgrade." What upgrade
>>> means is certainly up to much debate as it's all very vague.
>>
>
>

RR Johnson Jr wrote:
> I've always been a cheerleader of Microsoft but does this mean if I
> upgrade my motherboard and processor or in a worst case scenario I have
> to replace my motherboard due to a fault why should I be limited to that
> being the only device assuming the Vista software believes I have a
> different PC?
>
> regards
> Robert

If so, then we know it isn't pirates they're after but our wallets.

Alias

> "RR Johnson Jr" <johnson_robert@planet.nl> wrote in message
> news:4532594d$0$2032$ba620dc5@text.nova.planet.nl...
>> I would like to ask the Vista community to give Microsoft our complete
>> disapproval of item 15 a. as shown in their new license agreement for
>> Windows Vista home basic, home premium, and ultimate. Here is a quote
>> from this license agreement:
>>
>> The first user of the software may reassign the license to another
>> device one time. If you reassign the license, that other device
>> becomes the "licensed device."
>>
>> Many of us in the Vista community upgrade our PCs sometimes several
>> times within the space of a couple of years. This is completely
>> unacceptable and I will be writing the Microsoft board of directors
>> about this subject.
>>
>> http://download.microsoft.com/docume...a72651b7a3.pdf
>>
>>
>> Microsoft is attempting to punish ninety-five percent of those who are
>> rightfully using their product because of the five percent that are not.
>