I am hearing that you can only install Vista once and if you upgrade memory etc.. you will need to buy a new license.
The only reason I switched from win2k to winxp was because win2k didn't support hyperhtreading well. Since the latest round of processors are simply dual core then I suspect that win2k will support them just fine. It has been along time since I even messed with win2k. Is it still supported somewhat? I am considering going back to it.
Well, I think that you would be forgiven for thinking that MS must have used Monte Carlo Simulation software to develop their EULA for Vista :D
The last I heard was that if you buy the retail version you can move it from one machine to another. Naturally you need a separate licence for each installation that you have, so to transfer it, you are required to remove it from the old machine.
If you buy an OEM version, it must be with a new computer or for a new computer. It can only be used once, and cannot be transferred. This brings us to the definition of "new computer". As per a memo I got from them a while back, this is defined (by MS) as a motherboard upgrade.
Now, with XP (in the UK) this means that you can replace like with like and have no problems. If you are forced to replace with a different board because you cannot get an identical replacement, I have always found that they will accept that reason, and activate it.
You have always been able to upgrade/replace all the other components such as RAM, drives, and so on.
The situation with brand name OEMs (HP, Dell etc.) is more complex as you no longer get a full version of the operating system..............just a "recovery disk" and/or "recovery partition".
Yes, Windows 2000 is still "supported" insofar as you can still get security updates and so on.
I don't think that it really needs much support though, as it is pretty mature and stable by now. I have it running on several machines, and have never had to contact MS regarding it.............you can find all you want on their knowledgebase.
My only caveat regarding old systems (assuming that they are stand alone) is that you need to be careful buying new peripherals and software, as they might not be supported.
I know several people who have bought USB devices and found that they won't work with Win 95 :eek:
I am still using W2k But every time I find some new software or hardware, I have to install Unsupported Microsoft stuff to get it to work. Examples are the newest version of DirectX and .Net 2.0 are required before Phrogram would run.
The latest version of DirectX 9C redist does not mention Windows 2000.
And then you still have to install the DRM stuff so MS can Validate the OS before downloading anything.
Still, I hope to use it for a while longer. I had another Seagate drive start failing on me this week. All the ATA drives I have are either Seagates just like the failing one or IBM Deathstars. After recovering the Bad Sectors with Seatools, I cloned the OS to the IBM. It is so loud that I ended up cloning the OS to another Seagate.
Hmmm,
I have just had a look on the Microsoft DirectX support site. Version 9.0C is supposed to support all Windows from Win 98 (first edition) through to XP.
Even if you have a redistributed version, that can only be done under licence...........Microsoft's "small print" will doubtless stipulate that it is distributed "as is"?
Actually people seem to report having a fair amount of success in getting MS to reactivate an OEM copy after changing motherboards ... anyway I bought an OEM copy of Home Premium as it was so much cheaper than the full version, it would be worth buying again if I upgraded significantly. I could go through two or three motherboards before the full version would become uneconomic.
The way my Vista install is going though, I don't think I'll be using it for very much longer. My hardware and software seems to be dying off very rapidly since I installed it!
IMO, giving M$ a call when you change hardware should take care of that issue. Every time I've reinstalled Windows OEM on my ever changing hardware, I've just called them, and everything has been OK.
Yes, that's what I've heard. Actually getting it to install in the first place would be progress though - I hope I might have fixed the issue with reformatting the drive, but I found nothing would uninstall or reinstall any more including Vista when I decided to start again. I'm getting "windows setup could not reinitialize the deployment engine. To install windows, restart the installation." Which is helpful.
Anyway I'll give it another go tomorrow.
Will I need to phone them up if I want to format my hard drive and install Slackware?
If I tell them to put Vista where the sun don't shine, will I need a license to put th Microsoft
cd in the microave? Stay tuned to this station. Will it run on a 386? Will the DRM police come and take my Mac away because I installed a compiler? Who is this rcgreen troll anyway?
Yes, "I am Windows thy God, I am a jealous God, and thou shalt have no other gods before me"Quote:
Originally Posted by rcgreen
Well, that would be grounds for divorce, or at least plea bargaining from murder1 to man2? I talk with you wife on IRC:DQuote:
Originally Posted by rcgreen
I spoke with William III the other day.......... apparently backwards compatibility to DOS 3.0 is not possible:eek: and it needs a "Pentium" whatever one of those is?Quote:
Originally Posted by rcgreen
The DRM police are not involved in vice......possession of a Mac is obviously an incurable perversity:eek:
Personally I have never had a problem reactivating an MS OS...
alakhiyar...you appear to whine alot about vista...and you havent even tried it yet....and your still running 2000.
XP is a far better OS then 2000....and I am sure Vista will surpass that....although I will not be installing it til its been out for about a year or so...some SP and hotfixes released and to ensure our 3rd party hardware and software vendors have all thier kinks worked out.
IMHO....if you dont like it...dont install it..use another OS :)
MLF
My rule of thumb is to not upgrade, but only buy the PC.
So, now I have an XP box for the first time. Luckily, I
haven't needed to reactivate. I tend to believe the negative
press and see DRM hiding under every new Windows version.
When Vista boxes become available used at steep discount,
maybe I'll see one come my way, two or three years, after the
early adopters have finished the real beta testing.
Win98 is looking more and more like a fine old Swiss watch.
I don't want to install Vista on a PIII-800 anyway.
You need serious resources for Vista - I find it's using almost a GB RAM just doing nothing very much.
I just spent 4k on a vista box. I figure if I am going to use it, I am really [b/]going to use it[/b]. The trend was smaller PCs.... this thing reverses that trend. It is bigger than any PC I have EVER owned. Even bigger than my old XT and 286. Bigger even then a VAX I had and an old Digital.
I have reactivated XP about a hundred times. Never an issue. Don't worry about it. If Vista isn't worth the money for hardware. Don't use it. XP will be around for a long time and directx 10 won't hit mainstream for another year. I would advice the dual boot option so you can use XP if necessary. I had systems crashing with XP SP2 let alone a whole new and radical platform.
Yes, I certainly wouldn't do away with XP altogether for a long time yet. Vista just gets so frustrating! All my PCs will run dual boot systems for the foreseeable future.
Thread moved to OSs since it is about OSs.
Last post being moved since it's kind of stupid to ask a question about something ina thread about something else. Start a NEW thread fi you have a question about Vista instead of trying to nab this one.
I replaced my ram without any problem. When I added a new hard drive I had to call and reactivate. There was absolutely no problem reactivating.
I think Vista has some sort of base score where it keeps track of peripheral changes. If you change your motherboard, or more than one component like I did, you have to call India for some help.