How to boot a new MOBO.

Don't belittle your own powers!!!! You can vote in Australia (assuming you are of age and have not lost your Right to vote) and it is Australian Law that dictates how MS does business in Australia, not Microsoft. Just as the EU determines the same in Europe, Japan does so in Japan, China in China, etc.

Huh? Sociologically immoral laws? Laws that are against fraud and deception are immoral??? Wow! I think we have a different understanding of right and wrong.

Any company has the Right to set the price of the products they produce. And consumers have the Right NOT to buy it! That's how free societies work. And I emphasize once again, there are FREE alternatives!

OEM license terms are clearly stated. Retail license terms are clearly stated. OEM licenses are sold at a sizable discount from the retail copies. Is that immoral? Is it really immorral to put limitations on products sold at a sizable discount? NO!!! We may not like these "policies" but they are not immoral. Fraud is immoral. Deceiving others for personal gain is immoral. Knowingly helping others commit fraud and deception for personal gain is immoral.

And I say again, these OEM policies are NOT, by ANY means, limited to Microsoft.

 

Not on the package or in the store where they are for sale. In computer stores they just sit next to each other, one of them more expensive. 98% of computer users out there are a lot less knowledgeable than we are, and have no idea of the limitations on the license they just bought, because it didn't say "valid only for the original hardware" in large letters on the front of the package.

I think, though I could be mistaken, that's one of Eagle's main complaints, and I agree. It needs to be clearly stated in a lot more places, where it's considerably easier to find.

The main problem is that there aren't really any good alternatives to windows. Anyone who wants to use their computers as a means of earning an income, are stuck on this platform because there is no good CAD, accounting, or photo/video editing support in the free alternatives. And in that situation, it can be easy to become bitter that Microsoft will force you to buy three separate licenses for the three computers you use to run your small one-man business. Apple offers a family license that covers it, but then you are charged a premium for the hardware instead. Yes, I know all this is legal. I understand that part completely. What you don't seem to grasp, probably because I didn't explain it clearly enough, is that there are a lot of people, myself included, who understand this very well and dislike that it has to be this way. We would prefer that the laws were a little more flexible and understanding towards the consumer's needs. The requirement to call in for reactivation is a good example. It's an inconvenience to the people forced to do it, and I'd be astonished if it has stopped a single OS pirate yet. So instead of preventing software piracy, all it does it make most who have to suffer through it annoyed and irritated that they have to jump through hoops like this just to reinstall their legal copy.

The gaming industry is currently treating all their paying customers as potential pirates--if we weren't, why would they think they need to prevent us from copying the disk to the hard drive, or connect to a company server to validate the copy every time we start the game and try to load a save, which forces me to have an open internet connection to play a game with no multiplayer/online component at all? Microsoft has been going in the same direction for some time now, and it irritates me. People who don't know the difference between a retail license and an OEM one are a very small part of the piracy problem, not at all the most important one, and no amounts of reactivation limits are going to stop the Chinese bootleg factories from churning out millions of illegal copies per year.

So yes, I'm on BoldEagels' side, as I said before. I think the premises for how the legislation around DRM and software licensing works are based on morally questionable ideas, and I think Microsoft has been taking advantage of their dominance in the market to squeeze as much money as they can get away with out of their customers. I'm pretty sure that any other company in their position would have done that as well. I just happen to think it's immoral, regardless of who does it.

Anyways, I'm glad to see that you've at least started to be a bit more civilised about this. (The last cornerstone of society that you forgot too mention: civilized behaviour). There are a lot of ways you can make your points and defend your position without resorting to insults and accusations of theft, and that would also make it a lot more likely that you'll be listened to and taken seriously. Just try not to post while you're angry, 'kay?

 

I have several retail and unopened OEM Windows packages right here. For one, the OEM versions are not in boxes like the retail versions. Then on the front of this little booklet attached, it says clearly, "For distribution only with a new PC". If you go out to Newegg, for example, and click on the Specifications tab, you will see this disclaimer right up front (my bold underline added),

I agree there is much confusion over this and that is a CLEAR indication the rules and terms must be better communicated. But just like driving a car, negligence of the law won't get you out of a ticket.

That's not true at all! In fact, there are many who would argue the Mac offers the very best photo/video editing options. And yet clearly, Apple's licensing terms are MUCH more restrictive than Microsoft's. And accounting? Accounting software for UNIX systems is widespread and easily ported to Linux - as a simple search on Google will show in about 2 second there are hundreds of options out there. Okay, you got a point for CAD but how many folks does that affect? But even so, that's not a problem for once again, a simple Google search will show there are ways to Autocad on Linux.

I understand, and sympathize completely. But what you (collectively speaking) fail to grasp, continue to ignore, or at least dismiss, is that is still no excuse to break the law!

OEM licensing was created SPECIFICALLY so vendors and consumers have a cheaper option. But you guys seem to think it is still not fair. I mean if you are thirsty and go to a store and buy a 6-pack of beer, then drink the beer, is it fair to return the store next time you are thirsty and demand free refills because you did not realize, and the clerk did not tell you that you should have bought a full case in the first place? That's the same as with OEM and Retail. Yes, Dell and HP (the clerks) should make it more clear - but they do include the EULAs with all the paperwork - it is up to us consumers to read and understand it. It is not Microsoft's fault your PC vendor chose the non-transferable version, or that you, as a system builder, bought it instead of the full retail version.

Of course, but you got it backwards. DRM came about because serious immoral badguys, CD pirates were mass producing bootleg copies and selling them on street corners for $5. And BTW, the driving force for DRM came out of the music and movie industry, not software makers, not Microsoft - they just tagged along after the fact. But it is also extremely important to understand that pirated software is a MAJOR source and channel for malware distribution - DRM and other anti-piracy measures are also very much for our protection too.

Don't get me wrong, there are many things to dislike about Microsoft and I have no problems bashing them, when due. Even as an MS MVP. But bashing them over "industry wide" OEM restrictions is not a valid reason. Complaining about prices and corporate greed, that's valid. Sadly that's a bad side effect of free enterprise in democratic societies.

***

And for the record, I did not throw insults at anybody personally - but if you go back and look at what was directed personally at me, it is clear who threw the personal insults. And I did not accused anyone of theft. I said multiple times, IF you use OEM software illegally, that's stealing. The only direct statement I made was calling digitalocksmith's advice to lie "stupid advice" and that it was advocating fraud or stealing. I was reporting, NOT my opinion, but what the law says for which you guys attacked me, the messenger, because you did not like the message. Now your are attacking the laws and that's fine, but how about not lecturing me about civilized behavior without first taking a good hard look in the mirror. Okay?

 

One more thing. Merry Christmas everyone. I hope the holidays are good to you and yours, and the New Year brings good fortunes. I get to look forward to 14 - 16 inches of snow before tomorrow is over, and windchills with windchills near -15°F. Oh well. At least it will be white.

http://i195.photobucket.com/albums/z181/Digerati_Bill/Seasonal/Raindeer.jpg