Text 44545, 42 rader
Skriven 2008-03-18 19:47:00 av Robert Fowler (1:123/789.0)
  Kommentar till text 44543 av Charles Scaglione (1:123/789.0)
Ärende: Vista and Recovery.
===========================
Charles Scaglione -> Robert Fowler wrote:

 RF>> Failed laptops may be considered disposable (if not under extended
 RF>> warranty), but desktops not necessarily so.  That means that the
 RF>> Vista user may not be able to use his backup with modified hardware,
 RF>> and thus have to start over again from scratch, i.e., buy a copy of
 RF>> Vista and install it.

 CS> Call in activation for Vista "supposedly" works the same as it did with
 CS> XP.  The rule, however, for OEM versions is once the machine dies, so
 CS> does the copy of the OS.  No transfers allowed.  The modification to the
 CS> original EULA may only be for retail boxed copies, of that I'm not sure.

Call in activation assumes that Windows is bootable.  If the hardware
modifications are extreme, Windows may not boot at all.  In this scenario, you
don't even get to activation.

A "repair install" can overcome this and even activate, without the need to
call Microsoft.  I've experienced this firsthand.

There is clearly, IMO, a corrolation between the original changes in the
Vista EULA and the removal of the repair install feature.  The latter is
the real teeth in Microsoft's change in policy, regardless of Microsoft's
recant in the wording.

 CS> Anyway, it seems one needs a Harvard Law School degree to understand a
 CS> MS EULA.  :)

I believe that you are correct about the EULA and retail copies, although Paul
Thurrott states that the official Microsoft position is that Windows is
licensed to the machine, and not the individual.  This
precludes the notion that any transfers to other machines is authorized.
It has to be the same machine, even for retail copies.

Again, users are left to demur.

Regards,

Robert Fowler

--- Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060612)
 * Origin: The Eastern Star - Fidonet Via Your Newsreader (1:123/789.0)