#242554 - 25/11/2004 14:19
WIndows XP licenses
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 25/06/1999
Posts: 2993
Loc: Wareham, Dorset, UK
|
Can anyone lay out the practical limitations of W XP licenses? I need to install a legit, previously registerd copy of XP on a different machine after a hardware failure. Also, how many times can you change the hardware configuration of a machine with XP installed?
_________________________
One of the few remaining Mk1 owners...  #00015
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#242555 - 25/11/2004 14:23
Re: WIndows XP licenses
[Re: schofiel]
|
pooh-bah
Registered: 14/01/2002
Posts: 2489
|
I was at a Microsoft workshop/conference about SP2 and the subject of upgrades came up. They said that a new licence was required if a CPU was upgraded.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#242556 - 25/11/2004 14:29
Re: WIndows XP licenses
[Re: schofiel]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 24/12/2001
Posts: 5528
|
The number of hardware changes allowed depends on the type of machine actually. Dockable machines like laptops have a higher number because you don't want it to have to redo the product activation every time you plug it in. Article on XP activationIt's no big deal about installing a previously registered copy of XP on a new machine if you're replacing the old one. If it does fail and say that you've already activated it then you just need to phone up the help line and they'll issue you a telephone unlocking code. Unless you're doing hundreds of installs in a very short space of time I doubt they'll care. It's not a OEM preinstalled copy of Windows is it?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#242557 - 25/11/2004 14:31
Re: WIndows XP licenses
[Re: CrackersMcCheese]
|
old hand
Registered: 23/07/2003
Posts: 869
Loc: Colorado
|
Quote:
I was at a Microsoft workshop/conference about SP2 and the subject of upgrades came up. They said that a new licence was required if a CPU was upgraded.
Given Google's ability to find specific strings of numbers and letters on the web, I'd say "required" is a fairly strong word for Microsoft's license.
Of course, this route should only be used if they try to screw you into paying for it, especially if you're just upgrading / repairing.
_________________________
Dave
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#242558 - 25/11/2004 14:37
Re: WIndows XP licenses
[Re: schofiel]
|
addict
Registered: 11/01/2001
Posts: 579
|
Its not as bad as you would think, install the lic it will come back invald call MS at the number on the screen and tell them what happened they will give you a new code, I have done it many times I upgrade my computer 3 or 4 times a year and always use the same Lic number,,, One of my side jobs is doing hardware evals and I am always changing something.
_________________________
______________________________________
Do not meddle in the affairs of Network
Administrators, for they are subtle and quick to
anger.
______________________________________
Worlds Lamest Wb Site (mine)
http://home.comcast.net/~jlipchitz/
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#242559 - 25/11/2004 14:58
Re: WIndows XP licenses
[Re: schofiel]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 08/03/2000
Posts: 12338
Loc: Sterling, VA
|
Same here. I've installed a few copies like this. All the reps need to hear is that "this is the only machine this copy is installed on." Then they'll be able to give you the number. And it's not a customer support situation where you have to wait for an hour to get someone on the phone. Once you fail the initial automated test, you're pretty much talking to a "human" in a couple minutes.
_________________________
Matt
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#242560 - 25/11/2004 15:02
Re: WIndows XP licenses
[Re: schofiel]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 18/01/2000
Posts: 5683
Loc: London, UK
|
Quote:
...legit, previously registerd copy of XP on a different machine...
As long as it's a retail copy, rather than an OEM copy, then there's no problem with this, as long as you're no longer using it on the old machine. Where you do run into problems is that OEM copies are licensed specifically for the machine that you purchased it with. Which means, for example, that I've got a copy of XP Home that I can't use (because I replaced it with retail XP Pro on that particular machine).
As the others have said, you might need to phone them up if on-line activation fails.
I've done it a couple of times, and I've never had to phone.
_________________________
-- roger
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#242561 - 25/11/2004 15:12
Re: WIndows XP licenses
[Re: Roger]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 08/03/2000
Posts: 12338
Loc: Sterling, VA
|
Quote:
Quote:
...legit, previously registerd copy of XP on a different machine...
As long as it's a retail copy, rather than an OEM copy, then there's no problem with this, as long as you're no longer using it on the old machine. Where you do run into problems is that OEM copies are licensed specifically for the machine that you purchased it with. Which means, for example, that I've got a copy of XP Home that I can't use (because I replaced it with retail XP Pro on that particular machine).
As the others have said, you might need to phone them up if on-line activation fails.
I've done it a couple of times, and I've never had to phone.
A while ago when I built a computer for my girlfriend, we needed to upgrade to XP to get the bluetooth keyboard and mouse to work. The only copy lying around was the OEM copy that came with her dad's Dell. It worked just fine!
_________________________
Matt
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#242562 - 25/11/2004 15:20
Re: WIndows XP licenses
[Re: Dignan]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 18/01/2000
Posts: 5683
Loc: London, UK
|
Quote:
The only copy lying around was the OEM copy that came with her dad's Dell. It worked just fine!
Yeah, it might work, but it ain't legal.
_________________________
-- roger
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#242563 - 25/11/2004 18:23
Re: WIndows XP licenses
[Re: schofiel]
|
addict
Registered: 13/07/2002
Posts: 634
Loc: Jesusland
|
I've installed xp on a couple of machines (after the first one failed) when prompted I just called Microsoft and they just wanted to make sure the os was only installed on ONE computer that is all. Also did this with Small Business Server 2003 a couple of times and again they just wanted to make sure it was only being used on one computer.
An oem version might have different restrictions though.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#242564 - 26/11/2004 05:31
Re: WIndows XP licenses
[Re: CrackersMcCheese]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 20/12/1999
Posts: 31597
Loc: Seattle, WA
|
Quote:
They said that a new licence was required if a CPU was upgraded.
Ah, now I remember the most important reason why I was sticking with Windows 2000.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#242565 - 26/11/2004 05:59
Re: WIndows XP licenses
[Re: tfabris]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 08/06/1999
Posts: 7868
|
Quote:
Quote:
They said that a new licence was required if a CPU was upgraded.
Ah, now I remember the most important reason why I was sticking with Windows 2000.
Your most important reason isn't in the up to date EULA. So I'm not sure why Phil was told this.
In general Windows 2000 and XP share the same sticky bits of the EULAs. XP is actually a bit better in regards to the EULA due to remote desktop being a big component, where as in 2000, it was a server only component.
I still don't see why you don't go to XP. You spend quite a bit of time getting 2000 just right, including your recent hack of dll files. From what I can tell of how you like Windows 2000, you could simply get XP to pretty much do the same with TweakUI and normal options in the OS. With MS releasing more and more XP only content, it is only a matter of time before one of those components becomes necessary to play games.
While I see no real reason to upgrade to Longhorn over XP for gaming, I still will do so early on just ot get the upgrade out of the way and all the small tweaks done to the system. Because sadly, I don't think the Windows stranglehold on the PC gaming market will be lifted by the time Longhorn ships. I'd rather decide when to upgrade, not be forced into it by some new game I want to play.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#242566 - 26/11/2004 06:20
Re: WIndows XP licenses
[Re: drakino]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 20/12/1999
Posts: 31597
Loc: Seattle, WA
|
Quote:
I still don't see why you don't go to XP.
This thread just reminded me that I'd have to call Microsoft each time I altered my motherboard, CPU, or disk drives. No thanks. I understand their desire to stop software piracy but if I can avoid that phone call by sticking with an older product, I will. I'd rather hack away at 2000 for as long as possible before having to actually wait on hold with them.
I'm currently not happy with their support people on an issue I'm having with XP Windows Update version 5, and our company firewall, at the moment. This does not increase my desire to make more telephone calls to them.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#242567 - 26/11/2004 06:30
Re: WIndows XP licenses
[Re: tfabris]
|
pooh-bah
Registered: 15/01/2002
Posts: 1866
Loc: Austin
|
ive never had to talk to them. i just put a new processor in, upgraded ram a couple of months ago and have swapped out video cards several times.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#242568 - 26/11/2004 16:10
Re: WIndows XP licenses
[Re: schofiel]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 21/05/1999
Posts: 5335
Loc: Cambridge UK
|
I'm pretty excited that my new office is going to be mostly Windows-free. The servers are all Linux, mail is IMAP, the pair programming machines are Linux, and each member of staff will have the choice of Linux, Windows, or dual boot. I'm hoping many will go with Linux only, which is something that has been made conceivable by brilliant improvements to OpenOffice over the last couple of years.
Sadly my desktop will have to be XP for Corel, PhotoShop, Dreamweaver etc (or maybe I should get a Mac!).
Rob
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#242569 - 26/11/2004 17:04
Re: WIndows XP licenses
[Re: rob]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 25/06/1999
Posts: 2993
Loc: Wareham, Dorset, UK
|
Well, you answered your own question there, really! Saw the beautiful Alloy cased G5 dual this last w/e, pretty DAMN nice actually. And it runs all the packages you've just mentioned, plus it's FBSD to boot! Can't loose. 
_________________________
One of the few remaining Mk1 owners... #00015
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#242570 - 26/11/2004 17:24
Re: WIndows XP licenses
[Re: schofiel]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 10/06/1999
Posts: 5916
Loc: Wivenhoe, Essex, UK
|
I've just discovered that these weighty G5s really hurt when you stub your toe on them...
_________________________
Remind me to change my signature to something more interesting someday
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#242571 - 27/11/2004 15:14
Re: WIndows XP licenses
[Re: tfabris]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 19/01/2002
Posts: 3584
Loc: Columbus, OH
|
Quote:
but if I can avoid that phone call by sticking with an older product, I will
I've had to do this twice now, and it literally takes less than a minute or two. No hold time...just a real person answering the phone, and writing down a number.
<tony scolding mode>
Let's be honest...the reason you're not upgrading probably has nothing to do with a one minute phone call on rare occasions. The massive numbers of testimonials of XP's superiority are overwhelming, evidenced both on this BBS and in the tech world at large. Your reticence probably has more to do with a comfort zone you're not willing to move beyond. Be careful...as someone that works in the tech industry, that can mean bad things for your future.</tony scolding mode>
Then again...lest the pot call the kettle black, I continue to gravitate toward the older technologies, languages, etc, that I'm comfortable with too. I only upraded to XP from my tweaked out Win98 SE box about a year and a half ago. No regrets here. Please do not interpret the above as a personal attack.
_________________________
~ John
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#242572 - 28/11/2004 02:24
Re: WIndows XP licenses
[Re: JBjorgen]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 20/12/1999
Posts: 31597
Loc: Seattle, WA
|
It's less of a "comfort zone" thing and more of at "new misfeatures cause specific discomfort" thing.
Every time I have to use XP for work-related stuff, I get irritated at the way it buries configuration features so far behind wizards that I can't find them.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#242573 - 28/11/2004 06:34
Re: WIndows XP licenses
[Re: tfabris]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 08/07/1999
Posts: 5549
Loc: Ajijic, Mexico
|
I get irritated at the way it buries configuration features so far behind wizards that I can't find them.
Even so, I am quite happy to trade one-time-only configuration difficulties for what appears to me to be rock-solid stability day after day. In the year and a half I have been running XP on my home computer, I have had exactly one forced reboot, and XP is the first operating system since I left Windows 3.1 that recognizes and has built-in drivers for my ancient HP II-CX scanner.
I was certain that I was going to hate XP with its warm and fuzzy UI -- but after the first week using it, I pretty much realized I could never go back to Win2K or Win98.
tanstaafl.
_________________________
"There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch"
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#242574 - 28/11/2004 13:59
Re: WIndows XP licenses
[Re: tanstaafl.]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 15/08/2000
Posts: 4859
Loc: New Jersey, USA
|
I have to agree with Doug on this. As you know I work in IT for a large company, so change is an inherently evil thing to be avoided. But with my new home machine, I had the choice. I went with XP because it was already mostly loaded (just needed that final boot configuration stuff). Between some of the desktop settings, TweakUI and my own backgrounds, I was pretty much able to stomp out that "Teletubbies OS" look and feel and get to a stable state. And it recognizes my USB2.0 properly along with my other devices, so I can finally transfer in high speed to things like the Carbon and Karma while not having to load (rather poor) software drivers for my multifunction printer. I have not yet found anything that does not work on it, and I have customized the configuration and admin stuff to what I like without too much issue. Lastly, running 2003 Server at the office and migrating from 2000 -> 2003, I had to go sometime... To quote Robin Williams - "It's not a pod. It won't hurt you." 
_________________________
Paul Grzelak
200GB with 48MB RAM, Illuminated Buttons and Digital Outputs
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#242575 - 29/11/2004 11:05
Re: WIndows XP licenses
[Re: tfabris]
|
addict
Registered: 23/12/2002
Posts: 652
Loc: Winston Salem, NC
|
I was happily running Win2k until it continually became so bogged down that it took nearly 5 minutes to boot up and shut down. After having to continually reformat to speed things up, I upgraded to WinXP and never looked back.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#242576 - 29/11/2004 11:10
Re: WIndows XP licenses
[Re: Cybjorg]
|
pooh-bah
Registered: 25/08/2000
Posts: 2413
Loc: NH USA
|
My only wish for XP is that the file explorer (explorer.exe) was more stable. I find that it hangs much more frequently than my W2k boxes, and does not respond to the task manager when attempting to kill it, where explorer.exe in W2k will always respond to a kill task request.
-Zeke
_________________________
WWFSMD?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#242577 - 29/11/2004 20:34
Re: WIndows XP licenses
[Re: tfabris]
|
addict
Registered: 03/08/1999
Posts: 451
Loc: Canberra, Australia
|
Quote:
...No thanks. I understand their desire to stop software piracy...
Interesting to think that, in fact, the last figures I heard said that private user sales accounted for only about 20% of the sales of Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Office. The rest is all sales to corporate and government accounts. Microsoft is more than happy to give a discount to these customers, knowing that they're still paying MS far in excess of what they'd get from retail sales.
So why, then, is it so important to Microsoft to stamp out piracy at all costs? It's not like it's costing them anywhere near what they're losing by discounting to corporate customers. So they're jumping up and down and making a big fuss over something which is happening anyway and is never going to go away.
I suppose what really surprises me is that Microsoft hasn't changed their slogan to "First time is free, man..."
Have fun,
Paul
P.S. I'm sticking with Windows 2000. Haven't had any problems with games, and I've only had one application that doesn't want to run under anything but XP (which is MixMeister, so I'm pretty pissed off, but I'll live with using the earlier version...)
_________________________
Owner of Mark I empeg 00061, now better than ever - (Thanks, Rod!) - and Karma 3930000004550
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#242578 - 29/11/2004 21:22
Re: WIndows XP licenses
[Re: PaulWay]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 20/12/1999
Posts: 31597
Loc: Seattle, WA
|
Quote:
So why, then, is it so important to Microsoft to stamp out piracy at all costs?
Because in some countries (such as asian ones), you can walk into street corner shops and buy a super-cheap copy of their products. In other words, pirates in Taiwan are making a living off of duplicating Microsoft CDs. That, to me, is a pretty good reason to try more advanced copy protection systems.
Quote:
P.S. I'm sticking with Windows 2000.
Today I was playing around with Windows Server 2003 for the first time, and I really like it compared to XP. Its default configurations are not nearly as irritating as the ones in XP, and it's got most if not all of the XP benefits.
Expensive, though...
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#242579 - 29/11/2004 23:39
Re: WIndows XP licenses
[Re: tfabris]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 08/06/1999
Posts: 7868
|
Quote:
Today I was playing around with Windows Server 2003 for the first time, and I really like it compared to XP. Its default configurations are not nearly as irritating as the ones in XP, and it's got most if not all of the XP benefits.
Expensive, though...
I was considering running this on my laptop recently since I have access to a legal copy. One big problem though. It identifies as a server product, so common antivirus or defrag solutions will want a server version to be installed. Another one was that System Restore is missing, but that can be added back in.
In either case, it becomes a toss up. Do I want to run XP and turn off the fuzzy gui? Or spend probably just a s long tweaking 2003 to act like a workstation?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#242580 - 30/11/2004 01:09
Re: WIndows XP licenses
[Re: drakino]
|
addict
Registered: 13/07/2002
Posts: 634
Loc: Jesusland
|
Quote:
In either case, it becomes a toss up. Do I want to run XP and turn off the fuzzy gui? Or spend probably just a s long tweaking 2003 to act like a workstation?
Well, 2003 doesn't run everything that I use with xp, such as Paperport (well it runs but the paperport printer drivers don't work and are not supported) so I wouldn't even consider running 2003 on a laptop...
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#242581 - 30/11/2004 08:02
Re: WIndows XP licenses
[Re: Jerz]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 18/01/2000
Posts: 5683
Loc: London, UK
|
Quote:
Well, 2003 doesn't run everything that I use with xp
When my shiny new Dell workstation turns up at some point this week, I'll be running Windows XP as my main OS, and 2K3 in a VM (might use VMWare, might use Virtual Server, not sure). 
_________________________
-- roger
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#242582 - 30/11/2004 08:16
Re: WIndows XP licenses
[Re: Roger]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 10/06/1999
Posts: 5916
Loc: Wivenhoe, Essex, UK
|
My development machine at ntl (who I am just leaving) was running NT4 Pro, Win2k Server and Win2k3 pretty much all the time. When any one of these was running full screen you would be hard pressed to know that it wasn't running natively. Mind you I did have 2GB of memory in the machine.
The advent of stable, high performance virtual machine software certainly does make maintaining different versions of software so much easier than it used to be.
I am even considering going this route if I ever get round to getting a colo box somewhere. I want to have both Linux and Windows available on my colo. Deciding which one to run natively would be a hard one though
I guess I could even run two copies of Linux, one stripped-down copy natively to act as a firewall and then run Windows plus the main Linux install under VMWare. Sounds like a lot to go wrong though...
...which makes me wonder how the new MS Virtual Server works. I wonder if you can bind the network hardware to one virtual machine and then have that virtual machine firewall traffic to the other ones. Hmmm, must look into that.
_________________________
Remind me to change my signature to something more interesting someday
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previous Topic
Index