Oh Microsoft, please

[Peachy]

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=1561&tag=trunk;content

Many readers tell me they bought that software and installed it on their own new (or old) PC, happily saving a significant chunk of change in the process. According to Microsoft, they are violating the terms of the OEM System Builder license agreement, which says, in convoluted language, that you must install the software using the OEM Preinstallation Kit and then resell the PC to a third party. If you install that software on your own PC, you don’t have a “genuine” copy of Windows.

So, even if I can "legally" buy the software I can't "legally" install it on a PC unless I resell the PC? The gist of the confusion is that Microsoft apparently allowed you as the end user to do this because it considered you a System Builder. Now, apparently they've scrubbed the official web pages and burned all extant copies (actually the last claim is mine ) of any marketing documents that allowed this prior to Windows 7. And, contrary to Microsoft's "new" policy, their MVPs are apparently giving the wrong "answer" with respect to their official line.

[Guest LilBambi]

Every day I find more reasons to be totally annoyed with Microsoft. I really love Windows 7, but Microsoft is so idiotic to deal with I find myself glad I have several other options for my daily PCs.Sell it to your spouse for $1. And buy it back for $1 ... or give it to her, then have her give it to you.That makes about as much sense as their stupid policy. *sheesh*

[Frank Golden]

Every day I find more reasons to be totally annoyed with Microsoft. I really love Windows 7, but Microsoft is so idiotic to deal with I find myself glad I have several other options for my daily PCs.Sell it to your spouse for $1. And buy it back for $1 ... or give it to her, then have her give it to you.That makes about as much sense as their stupid policy. *sheesh*

I first saw this issue discussed over at the Win 7 Forum.http://windows7forums.com/live-rss-feeds/2...ndividuals.htmlThis issue is very disturbing to me because my plan is/was to purchase the OEM Home Premium DVD from NewEgg.By doing so I will save about $80.00, money I can use for something else.Excuse the language but Bill Gates etal are greedy bastages.I'm probably going to take the plunge and purchase the OEM but I wouldn't be surprised if M$ were to deactivate me in the future.

[striker]

deactivate?And how would they know you're your own manufacturer and using it your self..? Through miracles? Don't get infected with that MS baloney talk Frank, they just plain can't know. They're just trying to scare away those people using an 'older' (cough cough) machine in trying to convince them they do something illegal, with 'modifying' the eula or how this piece of crap is called. Yeah, whatever. Next they want you to go in the cloud. For money of course... Just let 'm go them selves into the cloud, dreaming of more, more money, more monopoly, more power, more...more... (yep, more blue screens, more viri, more attacks, that's what they will harvest. Psst: don't you tell 'm that!)

[Urmas]

Just imagine what'd happen if they decided to "go FOSS":

The professor of a Contract Law class asked one of his better students, "If you were to give someone an orange, how would you go about it?" The student replied, "Here's an orange." The professor was outraged. "No! No! Think like a lawyer!"The student then replied, "Ok. I will tell him - "I hereby give and convey to you all and singular, my estate and interests, rights, claim, title and advantages of and in, said orange, together with all its rind, juice, pulp and seeds, and all rights and advantages with full power to bite, cut, freeze and otherwise eat, the same, or give the same away with and without the pulp, juice, rind and seeds, anything herein before and hereinafter or in any deed, or deeds, instruments of whatever nature or kind whatsoever to the contrary in anywise notwithstanding.

[Guest LilBambi]

I hear ya striker ... they couldn't prove it one way or another ... unless it never leaves the IP address it was built on ... highly unlikely unless you are on a static IP that never changes at your house.Urmas ...

[Frank Golden]

deactivate?And how would they know you're your own manufacturer and using it your self..? Through miracles? Don't get infected with that MS baloney talk Frank, they just plain can't know. They're just trying to scare away those people using an 'older' (cough cough) machine in trying to convince them they do something illegal, with 'modifying' the eula or how this piece of crap is called. Yeah, whatever. Next they want you to go in the cloud. For money of course... Just let 'm go them selves into the cloud, dreaming of more, more money, more monopoly, more power, more...more... (yep, more blue screens, more viri, more attacks, that's what they will harvest. Psst: don't you tell 'm that!)

Hi Striker, it's probably paranoia on my part but awhile back M$ made their Windows Genuine Advantage a mandatory part of all windows install.One of the things WGA does is determine at Windows Update time whether or not you have a valid copy of Windows.To download and use the OEM preinstallation kit you need to be Microsoft Partner Network member.To enroll you need to provide info verifying you legitimacy as a company.So if you install without the OPK M$ will be aware of it and it would be easy, almost automatic for the bastages to invalidate your install the first time you do automatic or manual updates.Many folks here and at Win 7 forums seem to think that doing so would be impossible or a logistical nightmare.With WGA M$ has made such scenarios absurdly simple.A consequence of allowing them to shove WGA down our collective throats.The thing is the price reduction associated with using the OEM vs Full retail comes with restrictions that justify the difference, notably the lack of M$ support and the limit of use on one machine only.BTW, I attempted to enroll in the Microsoft Partner Network and ran into problems when M$ required me to provide my web site and other info I don't possess (don't have or need a website).As I said at the beginning of this post, I'm probably being paranoid here but I think when dealing with M$ it's probably justified.I've got a few more months to make up my mind (until the RC expires) so I will be watching this issue closely.

[lewmur]

To download and use the OEM preinstallation kit you need to be Microsoft Partner Network member.To enroll you need to provide info verifying you legitimacy as a company.

Frank;I think this is a reverse catch 22 on MS. It is supposedly illegal to install an OEM without using the preinstallation kit. But if you don't use it, MS has no way of knowing that you aren't a MPN member.So, it is like dual booting the XP license you used for the Win7 upgrade. It is technically illegal but quite easy to do. And the only way MS is going to know it is if you tell on yourself (by using the preinstallation kit) or, if you are a business, having a disgruntled employee report you.

[Frank Golden]

Frank;I think this is a reverse catch 22 on MS. It is supposedly illegal to install an OEM without using the preinstallation kit. But if you don't use it, MS has no way of knowing that you aren't a MPN member.So, it is like dual booting the XP license you used for the Win7 upgrade. It is technically illegal but quite easy to do. And the only way MS is going to know it is if you tell on yourself (by using the preinstallation kit) or, if you are a business, having a disgruntled employee report you.

OK suppose this Lew, by installing the OEM without the OPK the install "makes note" of this fact and reports this through Windows Genuine Advantage when you first do a Windows Update.Both drew and tblount have reported at Win 7 Forum that they have installed Win 7 without OPK with no issues.I'm assuming they have done at least one Windows Update on these systems.The fact that they have had no issues with activation is is comforting because one would think that if M$ were to refuse activation they would do so at the earliest opportunity.I'm guessing either the OPK isn't really required or you are right Lew that unless you tell on yourself etc. there is no worry.Ed Botts closing statement in the OP's linked article says it all.

Normally, I’m a firm believer in following the letter and the spirit of software license agreements. In this case, though, given Microsoft’s complete breakdown in communicating with its customers, I’m willing to make a major exception. I have no problem enthusiastically recommending these discounted copies of Windows for anyone building a PC for their own personal use. And I think someone at Microsoft should step up and formally approve that exception. It’s the right thing to do.

Since a computer is useless without an OS my use of the OEM technically, IMHO qualifies as "building a computer" for my use.The fact that I'm willing to do without M$ support and am comfortable with the limitation of using this software on this one machinejustifies the lower price without question.To me this is an excelent tradeoff whether M$ agrees with me or not. Edited November 17, 2009 by Frank Golden

[FuzzButt]

I think we can all come to an agreement here that this entire think stinks of lawyers and big business trying to get bigger. I believe they should implement one pricing policy for all versions. No matter the source, no matter the user.$99 Home Premium$149 Professional (per PC for the life of the product)$179 UltimateYou are allowed to use Home Premium and Ultimate on one PC at a time but it can be transfered to a new PC if needed. There will be no volume discounts or seat licenses. If you purchase a PC from a system vender they paid that $99-$179 for that version of windows same as the rest of us. I think this is fair to all. Ya I'd like a cheap copy but really don't think it is fair that OEM's are paying pennies for what costs us dollars. My 2 cents...

[zlim]

But apparently, MS decides what constitutes a system builder.

To download and use the OEM preinstallation kit you need to be Microsoft Partner Network member. To enroll you need to provide info verifying you legitimacy as a company.

According to MS, if you are a legitimate company, you have to have a website.

...M$ required me to provide my web site

I can't wait for someone to challenge that. I'm sure there are very good people out there building systems who do not need the added headache and expense of throwing up a website.How many parts constitute a build? If a builder takes an old computer and upgrades the motherboard and processor and a bigger power supply but not the case, no video card added, and installs the latest version of windows is that a system build? I can't wait to see the "parts" list of what is a system build and what isn't, according to MS. Theoretically speaking, if I were a system builder, I apparently, by the current MS rules, would not even be able to build a computer for myself because once I build it, I have to sell it. sheeeeesh Edited November 20, 2009 by zlim

[Frank Golden]

But apparently, MS decides what constitutes a system builder. According to MS, if you are a legitimate company, you have to have a website. I can't wait for someone to challenge that. I'm sure there are very good people out there building systems who do not need the added headache and expense of throwing up a website.How many parts constitute a build? If a builder takes an old computer and upgrades the motherboard and processor and a bigger power supply but not the case, no video card added, and installs the latest version of windows is that a system build? I can't wait to see the "parts" list of what is a system build and what isn't, according to MS. Theoretically speaking, if I were a system builder, I apparently, by the current MS rules, would not even be able to build a computer for myself because once I build it, I have to sell it. sheeeeesh

The OEM limitation of activating on only one machine is determined by the motherboard.You can replace all hardware but the MB. I you replace the MB the license is invalidated and you cannot activate.Trying to re-activate on a machine that has had the MB replaced is the same as trying to install on another different machine.M$ will not allow it.To me this is a huge limitation inherent to the OEM and with the lack of M$ support more than justifies the reduced price.M$ may disagree but agreeing to these limitations by purchasing the OEM should be all they need to know!After all they don't provide support.BTW, Imagine my surprise (yeah right) that my attempt to enroll in the Partner Program reached an impasse with the website question. If it hadn't ended there the next few required questions would have ended the attempt anyway.Enrolling in the Partner program is the only legal way to obtain the OPK.Sheeesh indeed.You know what, the more I think about it the more I'm considering forgoing the OEM in favor of the Win 7 Home Premium full (retail). It just means I have to save more pennies.Who knows the cost may have been reduced even more by then.It is presently priced at $183.49 US, down from MSRP of $199.99 US, this at Newegg.An added advantage to using the full retail is the fact that the retail has both 32 bit and 64 bit allowing me to try the 64 bit.I've tried the 64 bit RC and for the most part it worked ok. There were a few showstopper issues that may be fixed in the final.It would be nice to find out, something not possible with the OEM.I already use 64 bit versions of Ubuntu Hardy and Intrepid on this machine so I'm familiar with 64 bit OS's. Edited November 20, 2009 by Frank Golden

[striker]

Frank, go for 64bit. Especially with windows. You know the biggest fear are rootkits, they have no chance on 64bit, absolutely zero, nada, zilch. Why? Simple, they're not digitally signed and therefore windows refuses them to install. http://forum.avira.com/wbb/index.php?page=...5242#post855242http://forum.avira.com/wbb/index.php?page=...8292#post868292

[FuzzButt]

I remember on August 1st 2004 a lightning strike outside my home fried one of my PC's motherboards. I got a new one and reinstalled an OEM copy of XP Pro. Everything else was the same but the motherboard version. If that were to happen now I would surely have to add in a new license to windows in the insurance claim just so I would stay legal.

[goretsky]

Hello,Just to add a small comment about Microsoft's MVPs, it is important to keep in mind that Microsoft's Most Valuable Professionals program is an award given annually in arrears (that is, for their contributions in the previous year) to non-Microsoft employees for their technical contributions. While some Microsoft MVPs may resell Microsoft products or services, they are neither employees nor are they spokespersons for Microsoft. When it comes to a software license, it is always best to contact the vendor and/or your attorney if you have any questions.Regards,Aryeh Goretsky(a Microsoft MVP)

[hkspike]

A thought from a slightly different geographic perspective; here in HK you cannot yet buy an Upgrade version nor a Family Pack. There is no on-line store; merely a list of vendors. So the one place that might benefit from making it easy to be legal, actually will just tempt the locals into a pirate copy. Oh well. But I do like Win7 - though did anybody tell them how hard they make network file sharing?

[goretsky]

Hello,Not to detract from the thread (the discussion is, after all, about Microsoft licensing), but...

• I find Eudora Pro to be a superior email client to Microsoft Outlook. For that matter, I found mush on a SunOS 3.x workstation in the early 1990s to be a better email client.
• If you are doing digital content creation, you may want to consider using an Apple Mac with Adobe CS4, it is a popular choice for graphic and multimedia work and because it is broadly supported, you are likely to be able to get good assistance should you have a problem.
• BSD is a great operating system for firewalls and other security hardware.
• You can do a lot of amazing things with open source software....

I could go on, but the point I am trying to make is that Microsoft MVPs are not cookie-cutter templates who echo whatever talking points Microsoft would like them to say. They--we, that is--have opinions about good and bad technology, and we certainly share them, especially with Microsoft. I am always happy to help someone with a technology problem when I think I can do so by providing them with an answer or at least an unexplored direction in which to look. There's a difference between being a shill for someone's marketing department and being helpful. With that said, I find Microsoft's EULAs difficult to understand with only a casual read (except for this one) and certainly would not offer to interpret one for another party. But that pretty much goes for any other legal contract between two parties.Regards,Aryeh Goretsky

not so. if you are an mvp, you cannot have adverse ms views. if you wanna be an mvp, you cannot have adverse views. you must walk lightly on the hallowed grounds of ms.

[lewmur]

...With that said, I find Microsoft's EULAs difficult to understand with only a casual read (except for this one) and certainly would not offer to interpret one for another party. But that pretty much goes for any other legal contract between two parties.Regards,Aryeh Goretsky

Ahh, but there is the rub. The MS EULA has never been adjudicated to be a legal contract. Contracts are never legal when they are either unfair on their face and/or coerced. The MS EULA is both. So who really cares what it says?I don't know about the rest of the world, but just about every State in the U.S. has held that "the small print" in consumer product documents is unenforceable. Edited November 24, 2009 by lewmur

[goretsky]

Hello,After a brief detour to look up the specific meaning of adjudicated, it sounds to me (based on your explanation) that most, if not all, software companies' license agreements are invalid, then, because the parties involved have not appeared before a judge in a court of law. This seems unworkable to me, as it would increase the cost of even an inexpensive piece of software by hundreds or thousands of dollars (or even more). What exactly is it about Microsoft's EULA for Windows 7 that is unfair and/or coerced? Is there anything about it which is substantially different than other commercial software vendors' EULAs?Regards,Aryeh Goretsky

Ahh, but there is the rub. The MS EULA has never been adjudicated to be a legal contract. Contracts are never legal when they are either unfair on their face and/or coerced. The MS EULA is both. So who really cares what it says?I don't know about the rest of the world, but just about every State in the U.S. has held that "the small print" in consumer product documents is unenforceable.

[lewmur]

What exactly is it about Microsoft's EULA for Windows 7 that is unfairHow about the fact that, as you stated yourself, it can't be understood.most, if not all, software companies' license agreements are invalid, then, because the parties involved have not appeared before a judge in a court of law.All it would take would be for MS to sue ONE person for violating the EULA, and win, for the EULA's legality to have been adjudicated. Care to cite a case where they have done that? And, yes, "most, if not all. software co.s" EULAs are invalid.edit; Actually, MS would have to sue someone for violating each term of the EULA for that specific term to have been determined to be legal.

Edited November 25, 2009 by lewmur

[goretsky]

Hello,I have also not understood EULAs from Acronis, Adobe, Corel, IBM, Peter Norton Computing, Qualcomm, Symantec, Trend Micro and WordPerfect, to name a few. Microsoft is hardly unique in this case. I don't even understand my employer's own EULA: From time to time, I am asked questions that I need to go to legal for in order respond.Unfortunately, I have no idea if Microsoft has sued any individuals for violating the EULAs for their products. I know they go after counterfeiters, malware authors and spammers, though. Perhaps some of these cases cover issues with EULA violations?Regards,Aryeh Goretsky

What exactly is it about Microsoft's EULA for Windows 7 that is unfairHow about the fact that, as you stated yourself, it can't be understood.most, if not all, software companies' license agreements are invalid, then, because the parties involved have not appeared before a judge in a court of law.All it would take would be for MS to sue ONE person for violating the EULA, and win, for the EULA's legality to have been adjudicated. Care to cite a case where they have done that? And, yes, "most, if not all. software co.s" EULAs are invalid.edit; Actually, MS would have to sue someone for violating each term of the EULA for that specific term to have been determined to be legal.

[Frank Golden]

Well folks, due to my winning over $1000.00 at the casino last Saturday I'm now the proud owner of a Win 7 Home premium retail disc set. I decided to avoid the controversy over the OEM entirely.Everything is installed and running very well.BootRacer shows Win 7 booting to a full desktop in 53 seconds. W00T

[zlim]

Wow, congratulations!I got my first look at Win 7 last week when I had to set up someone's new Dell laptop (64 bit). She has also purchased two other desktops which I will deal with soon. Thank goodness it was the same to replace the background with something better than Dell's specialized Win 7 wallpaper. We gals go for cosmetic improvements first. Looking under the hood comes later.

[degustibus]

....snip"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic"-Arthur C. Clark

Clarke.

[Frank Golden]

Clarke.

fixed