Vista "Retail" EULA blocks Multi installs

[ErrorS]

well, I just listed the hardware I used since WinXP was released.. my first PC was a Tandy1000 (forget what hardware it had), second was a 386, third was a 486DX5.. and so on..

[ErrorS]

Ohhh I forgot, only the website checked if your running a legal version: durrrh, why would the installer check?

If ur running a pirated copy, install WGA, and then try to install a SP you will not be able to install it. Trust me.

dude, you need to back off. There are WGA cracks on the internet.. it takes about 3hours for a WGA crack to show up.

I'm using Windows corp with an invalid key and my PC is fully updated, through windows update.. and yes, I am forced to install WGA just like everyone else.. but it takes me about 30 seconds to download some 500KB zip with a cracked version of genuine advantage.

Now, to be honest, I don't think MS is going to make it so easy in Vista.. we'll just wait and see

[DarkPretender]

dude, you need to back off. There are WGA cracks on the internet.. it takes about 3hours for a WGA crack to show up.

I'm using Windows corp with an invalid key and my PC is fully updated, through windows update.. and yes, I am forced to install WGA just like everyone else.. but it takes me about 30 seconds to download some 500KB zip with a cracked version of genuine advantage.

Now, to be honest, I don't think MS is going to make it so easy in Vista.. we'll just wait and see

Im glad to hear your ok with using illegal software.

PROPS!

[ErrorS]

huh? and how does that have anything to do with the discussion? good job twisting it around to make yourself look like less of an idiot.. wait, no.. not good job, you're doing a terrible job.

Like most people I choose to use stolen VLKs even though I own a valid license, just for convienance sake.. not that I should have to explain myself to you..

[Lupine]

Paul Thurrott recently wrote an editorial that, IMHO, marginalized the new licensing "clarifications" and, in doing so, marginalized enthusiastes. Here is a response to that editorial that very much reflects my own opinions (except that I actually am enjoying Vista PR2 except for the DRM crap).

http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/winvista_licensing_reply.asp

[DarkPretender]

Lupine,

You should listen to his podcast. Its free and very good, he talks alot about how his views have changed on the idea. Defiantly worth 50 mintues of my time.

[red_star]

Lupine,

You should listen to his podcast. Its free and very good, he talks alot about how his views have changed on the idea. Defiantly worth 50 mintues of my time.

I wouldn't listen Paul...who is that guy anyway?

Vista is going to be cracked in couple of hours after it is released, and community via torrent will get hands on before bussiness get the copy of it...and that's gonna be hilarious.

Cracking Windows Vista is matter of cracking dll files and registry...Vista is not magically different from Windows XP in term of files, registry...same concept...I call Vista Windows XP SP3 Edition with spyware bloated software under Aero crap.

Btw there is no piece of software which can't be cracked...and do you know why? Because the software is written by ordinary people
nothing more smarter then those who are cracking it....so get over it, calm down...and enjoy the show...

Speaking of EULA....

So, Microsoft ties EULA to PC machine, not to the owner of PC. What's wrong with those people...since when PC machines got personality?
Do you know why people are cracking software and everything?...it's payback because very same people are ripped by companies and other things on daily basis.

[Lupine]

Lupine,

You should listen to his podcast. Its free and very good, he talks alot about how his views have changed on the idea. Defiantly worth 50 mintues of my time.

I'm listening to it right now. Thanks!

[DarkPretender]

I wouldn't listen Paul...who is that guy anyway?

This just shows your iggnorance to the topics of Vista.


Paul Thurrott is one of the most well known reviews of the Windows system (and microsoft programs in general). He has several websites, stars on a new weekly podcast, and has alot of connections with microsoft developers. He knows ALOT about the Vista, XP, Xbox, and just about any major Microsoft product. When I say he has connections, I don't mean friends, I mean when he called up to enquire about the new licensing terms he got straight through with sombody and had a few hours of conversation with them. If you called microsoft and said you were red star and wanted to talk about the new EULA youd be lucky if they didn't hang up on you.

Does this mean his in the backpockets of Microsoft? Not really, hes just a MSDN subscriber that writes articles on the products. He absolutly roached Vista untill RC1, saying it would never be anything worth buying. You can read his over 100 articles on the Vista OS starting from when they first announced it. He takes Enthusiest to a new level. If there was one netural source to use as a go between customers and Microsoft developers directly HE is it.

Paul is da man!


OK! Now im going to expand on your other topics. No, Vista will not be cracked withen hours. If it is cracked, then your being lied too. Because RC1 and RC2 are public, the majority of "cracked" version for the first few months will be nothing more then repackaged version of this. All they need to do is change a few things and nobody would ever know the difference. This will be there base for "attacking vista" when they do start to crack it. Then they are all of a sudden gunna come into a ton of roadblocks that were NOT in RC1 and RC2 (another reason to make them public, false sense of the security, hackers are already claiming its easier then XP).

Ok so now lets talk about why it won't be cracked. So...you might have heard by now that Microsoft is not allowing the kernel to be patched at runtime. This is essentially how cracked versions work, at runtime it stops certain services from working while allowing the rest to work. Thats why without realizing it most cracked copies have features disabled that the normal user would never notice. So...Paul spoke about what would happen if the kernel was patched at runtime by a straight change of the hex code (since you obviously won't have the source code). Basically, there are several checks sort of like checksums that will check this during runtime and if there is a patch or change to the kernel you will get a BSOD and it will shut down. It will not run.

So how would a hacker get around this? Well go through about 100 million lines of hex code to change every single check point set into the runtime kernel and stop those for checking. Trust me, this will not be an easy task. Before it was easy to write a program that would patch the kernel so .dll wouldn't load or it would load a different .dll (part of the checksum system would compare the origonal .dll checksum to the one it attempts to run).

This is not going to be an easy task. For starters every update would require you to go back into the hex code to change the block to the new checksum to the new .dll they create.

The registry? Yeah...while it still exists it will probably be completly different then it is now. Paul eluded to the idea of making it virturalized in the final release. It won't play as big of a role you give it credit.

I assure you, this will not be an easy task and only the best hackers in the world would have the patients to pull it off.

O yeah, while software might be writen by average people there is a huge difference in how the XP kernel works and the new Vista one. The idea of not allowing patching of the kernel at runtime is not an impossible fiet to code, but think about the complexity of how hackers would need to crack windows. It changes the playing field ALOT.

[hobs0n]

Just read the article on winsupersite, good article. What I still dont know, as long as you dont upgrade the Motherboard and HDD at the SAME time its no problem?

[Lupine]

It is a problem. They've written "clarifications" that they get to interpret and selectively enforce. This simply continues Microsoft's ploy of punishing legal users and their draconian tactics simply encourage more and more people to find ways to circumvent the protections. Treat your own customers like criminals long enough and they will reward you by becoming what you fear most.

The Thurrott podcast on this brought up an interesting comparison. Microsoft presumes that their customers will pirate etc if given the chance and make using their product as difficult as possible (no family packs, high cost, activation, and now limited activation). Then look at OS-X. No activation. Legal to use on multiple computers (3 or 5?). Presumption of honesty. And they still sell millions of boxed copies.

Some say we should just "trust" Microsoft. Vista will actually be less intrusive w/ activation etc. They won't enforce their new EULA and all will be happy and fun. Sorry, but I'm returning the favor. I expect Microsoft to do its best to screw its users just like it expects us to screw it.

[hobs0n]

Well if this is true and it will work like this I WILL get a pirated version of Vista. Or hope Linux or OS-X gets more game friendly..

[DarkPretender]

Some say we should just "trust" Microsoft. Vista will actually be less intrusive w/ activation etc. They won't enforce their new EULA and all will be happy and fun. Sorry, but I'm returning the favor. I expect Microsoft to do its best to screw its users just like it expects us to screw it.

That is certainly one shitty way of looking at it. I mean, I really don't think in the Mission Statement for Microsoft it says "we want to screw the user". Its not the goal.

I truly believe Microsoft released the EULA on purpose to see the reaction. Now they have it and id be damn surprised if it isn't changed at this point.

Oh yeah, while people are bitching and moaning about this they STILL need to sit down and realize who this is really affecting. Honestly, how many people on this message board have upgraded there pc over and over and over again with XP and never seen a "call microsoft" when they reactivate? I am pretty sure the majority of the people. That being the case, the same exact thing will happen with vista. Unles your installing a new motherboard and harddrive every 6 months, your not going to be affected by this at all.

[nextbillgates]

Oh yeah, while people are bitching and moaning about this they STILL need to sit down and realize who this is really affecting. Honestly, how many people on this message board have upgraded there pc over and over and over again with XP and never seen a "call microsoft" when they reactivate? I am pretty sure the majority of the people. That being the case, the same exact thing will happen with vista. Unles your installing a new motherboard and harddrive every 6 months, your not going to be affected by this at all.

When you call Microsoft and re-activate XP, they'll ask you if it's the only computer you have Windows installed on. Although I've never actually answered 'no', I imagine that if I did, they would refuse to re-activate my key.

With Vista, they don't even have to ask. They've got the history of the key, and can see all of the hardware that it's even been licensed to. Transferring it to a 3rd PC is a violation of the license agreement, and the activiation rep may not re-activate it. In fact, they probably couldn't even if they wanted to.

[Lupine]

Perhaps you're right. Perhaps MS is testing the water with these changes and the released version will come with an entirely different EULA. But don't bet on it. Even Thurrott said that this is exactly what we'll see in the final version, so the only things left to see are 1) how MS will choose to enforce the new EULA and 2) a fully detailed list of which upgrades, single part or combinations, will result in a Vista paperweight.

I am a policy nut. If you're going to have a rule, enforce it. If you're not going to enforce it, don't write the policy. Anything else is messy and easily abused and/or misunderstood. The "don't worry about it Microsoft won't enforce it" perspective is sheer lunacy to me.

To further complicate matters, I am in a position where I recommend hardware/software purchases to customers. Several months ago I attended the AMD/Microsoft Tech Tour where they were flaunting all the new stuff Vista brought to the table and how it would be a financial boon for system builders because it would require some hefty computer upgrades. But now I see this new EULA and its almost an oxymoron. The OS shines on newer, better hardware but, at the same time, discourages buying newer better hardware! So this introduces some pretty interesting dilemmas for the system builder doesn't it. But lets take it to the next level. What about resellers like newegg. Or hardware manufacturers that cater to enthusiastes. Microsoft's EULA directly impacts the upgrade market by adding a huge cost factor to the upgrade process.

Here, I'll take it to a personal level. I did a minimum of four major upgrades to my home computers during the XP years (upgrades that included both motherboard & hdd). With Vista, the first upgrade is a "freebie" but the next requires a new license. I would undoubtably have used Ultimate on all three computers (my rig, wife's rig, HTPC and we won't count the laptop) so we're looking at an OS cost of $800 per computer and, as I've already used the grace on the second license, looking at another $400 per for the next upgrade. That is $2400 in OS costs over 5yrs and, unless MS is ready w/ its next OS at the end of 5yrs, the expectation of another $1200 for my next round of upgrades. And this doesn't include the upgrade costs themselves. I don't know about everyone else, but I simply wouldn't be able to afford that, and would have to either limit the number of computers I own, limit the number of upgrades I do, or find a different OS. I cannot pirate - I simply view it as wrong and, as an added motivator, it would put my entire business at risk.

This is how I'm starting to look at Vista and at Microsoft in general. I've recommended and installed their products for years. I didn't like Vista at all at first, but starting with PR1 I've really started to appreciate some of the things it brings to the table. But with this EULA? I will NOT recommend it to customers. I will recommend they hold onto their copy if XP as long as possible. I will NOT by additional copies for myself. I'll keep the single copy of Ultimate that Microsoft is sending me but will leave XP Pro on the rest of my systems. I will NOT reward a company for continuing to treat me like a criminal. Having to dial up MS for XP activation, while everyone and their dog who was pirating it sailed on by, was annoying enough. But this. This is too far.

[DarkPretender]

=/

My best advice is don't upgrade all the computers to Vista. I mean not everybody in the house would need it. Buy a single copy for your computer, if it is really this bad and after your second upgrade it won't activate then you always have XP to fall back on.

[sponga]

When you call Microsoft and re-activate XP, they'll ask you if it's the only computer you have Windows installed on. Although I've never actually answered 'no', I imagine that if I did, they would refuse to re-activate my key.

With Vista, they don't even have to ask. They've got the history of the key, and can see all of the hardware that it's even been licensed to. Transferring it to a 3rd PC is a violation of the license agreement, and the activiation rep may not re-activate it. In fact, they probably couldn't even if they wanted to.

That is the thing I kept wondering to myself seeing all these crazy articles on the internet and especially Slashdot and not one of them mentioned how you could call Microsoft like you did in XP. It even works with this random Dell a buddy gave to me so I gave them the serial number and just did a Dell Oem install on my comp with the key.

Just hoping that they will be lean on transferring the OS for some of us out; in that I mean we can call them like we did in XP for our key to get fixed.

[hobs0n]

Well written and well said Lupine

[sponga]

I will NOT reward a company for continuing to treat me like a criminal. Having to dial up MS for XP activation, while everyone and their dog who was pirating it sailed on by, was annoying enough. But this. This is too far.

But you do have to admit even though we sailed right through the initial XP installation; the Windows Update process was hell for pirates. If you cannot admit the countless forums filled with people asking about WGA not working on their pirated copy, the countless torrents having to be fixed and endless arguments of how to fix it. Funny I found my buddies Window Xp Home edition update perfectly when I went over to his house; but he had not updated it forever, so figures we pirates who are the most secure users are the ones left in the cold by Microsoft on the updates.

For that I think a lot of us who finally appreciate how the NT kernel and how stable Windows has been stabilized and makes working in it easier/quicker.; I think some of us are ready to cough up the dough. Especially those of us who have pirated copies since adam and eve.

[Lupine]

But you do have to admit even though we sailed right through the initial XP installation; the Windows Update process was hell for pirates. If you cannot admit the countless forums filled with people asking about WGA not working on their pirated copy, the countless torrents having to be fixed and endless arguments of how to fix it. Funny I found my buddies Window Xp Home edition update perfectly when I went over to his house; but he had not updated it forever, so figures we pirates who are the most secure users are the ones left in the cold by Microsoft on the updates.

For that I think a lot of us who finally appreciate how the NT kernel and how stable Windows has been stabilized and makes working in it easier/quicker.; I think some of us are ready to cough up the dough. Especially those of us who have pirated copies since adam and eve.

I know plenty of people using corp licenses that never encountered licensing, updating, activating issues. But that is a small point in the larger point. The point, IMHO, is that legal users get treated like crap by Microsoft, and the presumption of guilt is getting rediculous.

[0091/2]

I won't upgrade to Vista until alot of hardware and software/driver are made available for the OS.

[crash override]

I'm going to post something here that I posted for the masses before regarding the licensing.

This is straight from a trip I made to campus earlier this month and is not from anyone else.

"Everyone keeps reading the Vista license wrong.

You are allowed to transfer the license to other machines, but it can only be on one machine at a time.

Here's how it works.

Let's say you have Vista on a machine and that machine fails, you can then transfer it to a new machine as long as you remove it from the previous machine.

At that point in time the new machine is now the licensed machine. If it fails you can then transfer Vista to the new machine as long as you remove it from the previous machine.

In other words you only have the license to transfer it once per machine. That license extends each time you need to do it, but at no point in time are you allowed to have it on more than one machine at a time.

I had to check this out when I was up on campus and had it verified."

The EULA is the same now as it always has been. They just reworded it to clarify.

The only instance where this is not the case is Prebundled OEM Keys.

Those keys will not work on other machines at all. They are licensed to that specific machine only and will fail attempting to activate on another machine.

It really is that simple. So once again if your machine fails and you need to move it over to a new machine, that is still supported with this scenario and not just the one time.

If anyone has any questions about my veracity or my credentials I welcome the questioning and am willing to provide proof that I was just up on campus this month talking about these issues with the product teams.

[nextbillgates]

I'm going to post something here that I posted for the masses before regarding the licensing.

This is straight from a trip I made to campus earlier this month and is not from anyone else.

"Everyone keeps reading the Vista license wrong.

You are allowed to transfer the license to other machines, but it can only be on one machine at a time.

Here's how it works.

Let's say you have Vista on a machine and that machine fails, you can then transfer it to a new machine as long as you remove it from the previous machine.

At that point in time the new machine is now the licensed machine. If it fails you can then transfer Vista to the new machine as long as you remove it from the previous machine.

In other words you only have the license to transfer it once per machine. That license extends each time you need to do it, but at no point in time are you allowed to have it on more than one machine at a time.

I had to check this out when I was up on campus and had it verified."

The EULA is the same now as it always has been. They just reworded it to clarify.

The only instance where this is not the case is Prebundled OEM Keys.

Those keys will not work on other machines at all. They are licensed to that specific machine only and will fail attempting to activate on another machine.

It really is that simple. So once again if your machine fails and you need to move it over to a new machine, that is still supported with this scenario and not just the one time.

If anyone has any questions about my veracity or my credentials I welcome the questioning and am willing to provide proof that I was just up on campus this month talking about these issues with the product teams.

This is from way earlier in the thread, but I'll post it again:


Quote from XP EULA:

13. SOFTWARE TRANSFER. Internal. You may move the Software to a different Workstation Computer. After the transfer, you must completely remove the Software from the former Workstation Computer.

Quote from Vista EULA:

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.

Windows XP has always had a restriction on the number of computers that can hold a single license. It has never had a license transfer restriction. Vista does.

And while I'd like to believe that you have inside information regarding Vista's transfer restrictions, this brouhaha over Vista's license transfer langauge has gone on long enough that if we are indeed horribly wrong on what it really means, Microsoft would've gone on record to clarify it. They have not done so.

[maniac_35]

I already see my self a few months after I pick up a copy of Vista SCREAMING at Microsoft tech support on the phone trying to activate Vista after Re-formating my harddrive.

[stefanpi]

Vista a trojan horse infested with spyware

Im starting to have second thoughts on microsoft, i dont mind them restricting it so only one copy of Vista can be activated concurrently. That should keep piracy at bay and there will be only one copy per computer.

But now they want to control what hardware i buy and put into the machine. Whats next? are they going to control what programs i run and what sites i visit? Will they start censoring other stuff? Maybe implementing backdoors to read my documents? This "big brother" mentality is not good and will ultimately lead to the old Soviet-era.

Im a consumer and i dont mind paying for Vista but i dont want them peeking/spying into my computer from time to time and restricting/controlling what hardware i buy. The next step will logically be more spying and more controlling.

I wouldnt mind gaming on Linux/MacOS if they could just get a gaming api and support from gaming companies. There are several good apps for Linux like OpenOffice, Apache, OpenSSL, MySql, MaxDB, Mozilla and more so if they get gaming api ill swap.

To me Vista resembles a trojan horse infested with spyware, if we dont make our point now we will have to pay later when we have no more privacy at all and everything we do is closely monitored. Lets put this s**t in the same garbage can we put Sony's rootkit!!!

[stefanpi]

Maybe i went a little bit overboard on the last post (hadnt had lunch yet) but still i dont want anyone dictating what hardware im using and peeking into my computer from time to time. If they can limit the number of activated Vista installs to only one per copy then theres no need for this. And the problem we now are facing when swapping hardware, max 10 activations and one transfer = catastrophy for enthusiast users.

Im boycotting Vista as long as i can and if anyone else feels like i feel then id recommend the same. I guess boycotting on myself wont do any difference but if enough poeple do so it will hurt their sales and considering the amount of cash they put into developing Vista it might make them change their policy.

The competition in most computer areas are good:

AMD vs Intel
Nvidia vs ATI

But on the OS front there's:

MS vs ?

I hope we can get some serious competition from the Linux/MacOS side soon. It will benifit us all.

[Lupine]

Yeah, perhaps a little overboard. Although the inclusion of DRM means further encroachment on our lives. RIP fair use.

[argasek]

OpenOffice is beyond shitty. (...) and its database program is borderline non-functional.

Have you fallen from the top of a roof on your head?

lol, OpenOffice just gives you an _interface_ to a real database (like MySQL, PostgreSQL, etc.). You call Postgres non-functional? Joke of the week

[0091/2]

Yeah, perhaps a little overboard. Although the inclusion of DRM means further encroachment on our lives. RIP fair use.

Does that mean you can't rip cd's/dvd's anymore? Doesn't XP have DRM?

[Lupine]

Score one for the squeeky wheels.

http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?p=1334636234#post1334636234

[caveman-jim]

Aren't you glad you stirred up all this fuss 'The sky is falling! '

[Lupine]

Aren't you glad you stirred up all this fuss 'The sky is falling! '

Would love to take credit for that one - unfortunately all credit goes to Microsoft on that one.