Microsoft policy

[Guest Anonymous]

Microsoft recently made a change to the licence agreement saying that a new motherboard is equal to a new computer, hence you need to purchase a new Windows licence.

Here is what Microsoft has to say:

“An upgrade of the motherboard is considered to result in a “new personal computerâ€

[B16Enk]

:shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:

A). That M$ have the balls for that (OK not such a shock really).

. That you didn't identify your self Mr. Guest

C). Anonymous posting is possible......got to fix that!

Nice post btw, so much for the licensing terms.

I have changed Mobo 4 times with the same licence

[Sloan]

yikes! that was me that posted that. glad i could show that guests shouldn't be able to post! :oops:

[B16Enk]

Sorted

It could have stayed public, but a moderation hazard methinks

[Cold_Gambler]

What a load of shit. Because MS is really feeling the pinch because of people "re-using" their software when they upgrade to a new computer. :roll: :x

Another reason to build your own...

[DoubleTap]

By this logic, doesn't MS owe me money whenever I throw out an older PC because I am no longer using their software? Shouldn't I get some sort of deposit back?

Look, I understand companies have to protect their intellectual property, even MS. Fair enough. I understand the problem when someone buys 1 copy of XP and then proceeds to installinstall it on 5, 10, 20 PC's. That is unfair.

But if I am replacing a motherboard, its still essentially the same PC unit. To put it even more accurately, I am still only utilizing one license which I bought when I bought the OS. Just because I am upgrading the hardware that the OS runs on does not make it a new, or second license.

This is like having to pay the sales tax again on a old car when you replace the engine.

I think MS gets beat up a little too often just for being a big company, but then they do something like this and you realize why the flak pours in.

[B16Enk]

I'm still waiting for the dividend that on-line activation was supposed to produce, a reduction in the OS cost because piracy had been reduced thereby increasing revenue. Said revenue increase defraying the R&D cost and improving the ROI.

But then that isn't so profitable is it?

I wonder if this statement applies specifically to Vista?

As Vista has in-built encryption and uses TPM for Digital Rights Management this will be a reality.

Google producing a Linux based OS is good news, but what is really required is a bullet-proof MS Application compatibilty solution. When Linux can run any application built for Windows I can see the good ship MS foundering, and I for one will cheer.

However MS has the financial clout to embroil any company that were able to produce such compatibility in a mire of legal wranglings, no doubt claiming patent infringement and other IPR misdeeds.

If only 1C:Maddox would see the light and make it possible for IL2 and it's offspring to run on Linux, I for one would not miss Windows at home

[Cold_Gambler]

To put it even more accurately, I am still only utilizing one license which I bought when I bought the OS. Just because I am upgrading the hardware that the OS runs on does not make it a new, or second license.

Hammer

Nail

Head

:!:

[B16Enk]

Slightly OT, but ustilising the technology I think MS will beat us bloody with:

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=24638

It's a long read, but I get the impression the author isn't too keen on large corporations

[AMDfan]

I see it as little more then a pipe dream for MS, since there's no way they can tell whos changing out motherboards unless everyone tells them. I have changed out 2 motherboards in this PC, and use the same license. With WinVista expected to cost approx $400+/unit, I think they should be happy Linux hasnt stolen more business from them.