Thanks. I do have the full version and I guess I just need to find the right
person at Microsoft. I was really disappointed to get my new machine built
(AMD Dual Core 4400, Geforce 7300GT, 3 gigs of ram, 160 gig HD) install Vista
try to authenticate and it wouldnt let me. So if what you say is true its
just a case of finding the right person at Microsoft. I'll try again.

"Justin" wrote:
[color=blue]
> "Jim" <Jim@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:B657249D-E5DB-40B9-8B77-ECB73B98F46A@microsoft.com...[color=green]
> > Like a lot of people when I installed Vista on my computer I found that it
> > was underqualified for Vista. My CPU was too slow (Athlon 1.5gig)and my
> > hard
> > drive was too small (25 gig). So I made the decision to build a new
> > system
> > so I could take advantage of the cool features of Vista. What a shock
> > when I
> > found Microsoft would not authenticate Vista on my new computer - even
> > though
> > I had salvaged the old computer. It said I could only install on one
> > machine
> > (my old one) and I needed to buy a new copy of Vista for my new machine.
> > The
> > guy said they are really clamping down on piracy. I tried to explain that
> > this wasnt piracy but an honest effort to get the most out of Vista. I
> > did
> > not prevail. Faced with a new machine without an operating system I
> > turned
> > to my neighbor who is a computer guru and he loaned me a cdrom with a copy
> > of
> > a funny sounding program called Ubuntu? I installed it on my new dual
> > core
> > machine and is really great and it FLIES. He also gave me a copy of Open
> > Office as my wife is an elementary school teacher and needs to do a lot of
> > stuff for school. It to is amazingly fast and does everthing we need to
> > do.
> > I am not happy with Microsoft but at least I found a workaround. My
> > neighbor
> > said the workaround wont help for games as they need Vista or XP but I
> > play
> > games on my Xbox so no problem there.
> >
> > Jim[/color]
>
> First, let's qualify the problem. WHAT VERSION of Vista did you buy? Was
> it OEM?
>
> If it was OEM then yes, you screwed yourself when you installed it on the
> old machine. No getting around that one.
>
> If it was full retail then there is no reason AT ALL that you could not
> reinstall on upgraded hardware and who ever you spoke to lied to you.
>
>[/color]

Frank wrote:
....[color=blue]
> No I'm not rich. I have a small business and Vista is a part of my
> business expense. I must be able to interface with the rest of the
> business world otherwise I'm dead in the water, so to speak. I can't
> efficiently or effectively do that with any distro of linux.[/color]

The majority of the business world stay with WinXP SP2 - at least, as
long SP1 for Vista is not out. So could you;-)

Roy

DanS wrote:[color=blue]
> Frank <fb@nospamm.cmm> wrote in
> news:#EUpm4kkHHA.3388@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl:
>[color=green]
>> Jim wrote:
>>[color=darkred]
>>> I would have prefered Vista too. Don't get me wrong. I am not
>>> saying Ubuntu is better than Vista - its just that I can't afford to
>>> buy a second copy right now. Maybe later I will. You must be rich,
>>> Frank![/color]
>> No I'm not rich. I have a small business and Vista is a part of my
>> business expense. I must be able to interface with the rest of the
>> business world otherwise I'm dead in the water, so to speak. I can't
>> efficiently or effectively do that with any distro of linux.
>> Frank[/color]
>
> Based simply on a lack of drivers for your video card.
>
> Next time, do the proper research FIRST before trying to install an OS on
> hardware that doesn't have the proper drivers.
>
> (Sound familiar ?)
>
>[/color]

Frank is a business man, not a researcher;-)

r c

"Roy Coorne" <rcoorne********.com> wrote in message
news:uSNLzNlkHHA.5024@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...[color=blue]
> DanS wrote:[color=green]
>> Frank <fb@nospamm.cmm> wrote in
>> news:#EUpm4kkHHA.3388@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl:[color=darkred]
>>> Jim wrote:
>>>
>>>> I would have prefered Vista too. Don't get me wrong. I am not
>>>> saying Ubuntu is better than Vista - its just that I can't afford to
>>>> buy a second copy right now. Maybe later I will. You must be rich,
>>>> Frank!
>>> No I'm not rich. I have a small business and Vista is a part of my
>>> business expense. I must be able to interface with the rest of the
>>> business world otherwise I'm dead in the water, so to speak. I can't
>>> efficiently or effectively do that with any distro of linux.
>>> Frank[/color]
>>
>> Based simply on a lack of drivers for your video card.
>>
>> Next time, do the proper research FIRST before trying to install an OS on
>> hardware that doesn't have the proper drivers.
>>
>> (Sound familiar ?)
>>
>>[/color]
>
> Frank is a business man, not a researcher;-)
>
> r c[/color]

And time is Money.... ;-)

On 5/9/2007 8:24 AM On a whim, Frank pounded out on the keyboard
[color=blue]
> Jim wrote:
>[color=green]
>> I would have prefered Vista too. Don't get me wrong. I am not saying Ubuntu
>> is better than Vista - its just that I can't afford to buy a second copy
>> right now. Maybe later I will. You must be rich, Frank![/color]
>
> No I'm not rich. I have a small business and Vista is a part of my
> business expense. I must be able to interface with the rest of the
> business world otherwise I'm dead in the water, so to speak. I can't
> efficiently or effectively do that with any distro of linux.
> Frank[/color]

Hi Frank,

Curious by your comments. What did Vista do to "interface with the rest
of the business world" that XP or W2K can't do?

Of every business I work with (all with 25 or more workstations), none
have any plans involving Vista for the long term. The only ones I've
seen are individuals, and most of those aren't real happy with their
personal decisions, due to the amount of time they've spent on a new OS
with no real benefits.


--
Terry

***Reply Note***
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.

ray wrote:

[color=blue]
>
> I beg to differ. Installed Linux on the public access internet computers
> at the local library two years ago. Since then we've added five more Linux
> seats. The patrons adapted easily without instruction, and we've had no
> complaints. The director previously was called to the floor several times
> per day to help patrons with internet difficulties - since Linux, no
> calls. It just works and everyone is quite happy. The machines are usually
> very busy from opening to closing every day. Installed OpenOffice.org,
> AbiWord and Gnumeric and most frequently used browser plugins and all is
> cool. Count now is: 9 Linux seats, 1 MS.
>
>[/color]
Get real! If you think running 9 seats of linux for Internet users in a
small library is statistical proof one could use to extrapolate any kind
of marketing evidence that linux is for the masses, you’re only fooling
yourself.
Frank

Roy Coorne <rcoorne********.com> wrote in
news:uSNLzNlkHHA.5024@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl:
[color=blue]
> DanS wrote:[color=green]
>> Frank <fb@nospamm.cmm> wrote in
>> news:#EUpm4kkHHA.3388@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl:
>>[color=darkred]
>>> Jim wrote:
>>>
>>>> I would have prefered Vista too. Don't get me wrong. I am not
>>>> saying Ubuntu is better than Vista - its just that I can't afford
>>>> to buy a second copy right now. Maybe later I will. You must be
>>>> rich, Frank!
>>> No I'm not rich. I have a small business and Vista is a part of my
>>> business expense. I must be able to interface with the rest of the
>>> business world otherwise I'm dead in the water, so to speak. I can't
>>> efficiently or effectively do that with any distro of linux.
>>> Frank[/color]
>>
>> Based simply on a lack of drivers for your video card.
>>
>> Next time, do the proper research FIRST before trying to install an
>> OS on hardware that doesn't have the proper drivers.
>>
>> (Sound familiar ?)
>>
>>[/color]
>
> Frank is a business man, not a researcher;-)
>
> r c[/color]

Not relevant.

Many of the people here that have Vista running clean & smoothly on their
PC blame people here having problems for 'not doing the proper research
and making sure you have all the proper Vista drivers available for your
hardware BEFORE upgrading a PC to Vista.' (And NOT saying that Frank had
told this to people looking for help.)

I am just making an observation that this is another point that Vista and
any Linux distribution in common.

And pointing out that it was his fault Ubuntu didn't work. ;)

"DanS" <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a.n.e.t> wrote in message
news:Xns992B77E178B7Dthisnthatadelphianet@216.196.97.142...[color=blue]
> Frank <fb@nospamm.cmm> wrote in
> news:#EUpm4kkHHA.3388@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl:
>[color=green]
>> Jim wrote:
>>[color=darkred]
>>> I would have prefered Vista too. Don't get me wrong. I am not
>>> saying Ubuntu is better than Vista - its just that I can't afford to
>>> buy a second copy right now. Maybe later I will. You must be rich,
>>> Frank![/color]
>>
>> No I'm not rich. I have a small business and Vista is a part of my
>> business expense. I must be able to interface with the rest of the
>> business world otherwise I'm dead in the water, so to speak. I can't
>> efficiently or effectively do that with any distro of linux.
>> Frank[/color]
>
> Based simply on a lack of drivers for your video card.
>
> Next time, do the proper research FIRST before trying to install an OS on
> hardware that doesn't have the proper drivers.[/color]

I know this is hard for you to understand but in some cases INSTALLING is
the research. The difference here is that Frank isn't making bold claims of
linux based on that one experience. He simply gave his findings.

I understand what you MEANT to imply with that comment but it was unfounded.

"DanS" <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a.n.e.t> wrote in message >
[color=blue]
> Many of the people here that have Vista running clean & smoothly on their
> PC blame people here having problems for 'not doing the proper research[/color]

WRONG! 99% of the time people are blamed for not doing research when they
come to this NG and "RIP VISTA A NEW ONE" when the plain simple fact of the
mater is they clearly had poor drivers.

Frank id not RIP LINUX A NEW ONE.

Apples and oranges buddy.

Roy Coorne wrote:
[color=blue]
> Frank wrote:
> ...
>[color=green]
>> No I'm not rich. I have a small business and Vista is a part of my
>> business expense. I must be able to interface with the rest of the
>> business world otherwise I'm dead in the water, so to speak. I can't
>> efficiently or effectively do that with any distro of linux.[/color]
>
>
> The majority of the business world stay with WinXP SP2 - at least, as
> long SP1 for Vista is not out. So could you;-)
>
> Roy[/color]

We only run six total computers and only bought 3 Vista seats. Two of
the Vistas are dual/triple booting XP Pro, (2 x32, 1 x64), 4 XP Pro
seats (3x32, 1x64) and are running WHS beta 3 which is basically a SBS.
We also run Win98SE on VirtualPC 2007 for some older stuff that a few
clients still have.
So far so good.
Frank

"Terry" <F1ComNOSPAM@pobox.com> wrote in message
news:ulwcWXlkHHA.1340@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...[color=blue]
> On 5/9/2007 8:24 AM On a whim, Frank pounded out on the keyboard
>[color=green]
>> Jim wrote:
>>[color=darkred]
>>> I would have prefered Vista too. Don't get me wrong. I am not saying
>>> Ubuntu is better than Vista - its just that I can't afford to buy a
>>> second copy right now. Maybe later I will. You must be rich, Frank![/color]
>>
>> No I'm not rich. I have a small business and Vista is a part of my
>> business expense. I must be able to interface with the rest of the
>> business world otherwise I'm dead in the water, so to speak. I can't
>> efficiently or effectively do that with any distro of linux.
>> Frank[/color]
>
> Hi Frank,
>
> Curious by your comments. What did Vista do to "interface with the rest
> of the business world" that XP or W2K can't do?[/color]

When did XP and W2K come into the discussion? They where talking about
linux and windows in general. No one said Vista performs where XP and W2K
can't.

"Roy Coorne" <rcoorne********.com> wrote in message
news:OU5vHNlkHHA.5024@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...[color=blue]
> Frank wrote:
> ...[color=green]
>> No I'm not rich. I have a small business and Vista is a part of my
>> business expense. I must be able to interface with the rest of the
>> business world otherwise I'm dead in the water, so to speak. I can't
>> efficiently or effectively do that with any distro of linux.[/color]
>
> The majority of the business world stay with WinXP SP2 - at least, as long
> SP1 for Vista is not out. So could you;-)
>
> Roy[/color]

I agree, before I retired last Dec. we were still using XP SP1 at work. They
were just beginning to switch to SP2.

The usual approach is to set up a few trial PCs running the new OS/software,
and try out all of the business software apps that need to run. Get all the
bugs worked out offline, before rolling out the updated OS platform to all
users for business use.

"Frank" <fb@nospamm.cmm> wrote in message
news:OFt0zZlkHHA.4848@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...[color=blue]
> ray wrote:
>
>[color=green]
>>
>> I beg to differ. Installed Linux on the public access internet computers
>> at the local library two years ago. Since then we've added five more
>> Linux
>> seats. The patrons adapted easily without instruction, and we've had no
>> complaints. The director previously was called to the floor several times
>> per day to help patrons with internet difficulties - since Linux, no
>> calls. It just works and everyone is quite happy. The machines are
>> usually
>> very busy from opening to closing every day. Installed OpenOffice.org,
>> AbiWord and Gnumeric and most frequently used browser plugins and all is
>> cool. Count now is: 9 Linux seats, 1 MS.
>>
>>[/color]
> Get real! If you think running 9 seats of linux for Internet users in a
> small library is statistical proof one could use to extrapolate any kind
> of marketing evidence that linux is for the masses, you’re only fooling
> yourself.
> Frank[/color]

Although he brought up a valid point. Linux desktop is pretty much for
internet use and 99% of the time that's all people report using it for :)

"Jim" <Jim@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:8E7841D1-8E0F-4EE7-B96D-7E824DA9A588@microsoft.com...[color=blue]
> The "guy" was someone in sales[/color]

Don’t ever believe sales guys :)
[color=blue]
> and he said that I have to buy a separate copy
> for each machine I have.[/color]

While that's true, that has nothing to do with your upgrade. After you
upgraded did you have two different machines of which you wanted to run
Windows twice?

[color=blue]
> He said that this is not a new policy but Microsoft
> has always had this policy. Since I already had put it on my old machine I
> could not put it on another machine.[/color]

Another machine would be a whole second computer. Not an upgraded one.

"Jim" <Jim@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:FE02B19D-5347-4193-AE4B-F5D16C412596@microsoft.com...[color=blue]
> Thanks. I do have the full version and I guess I just need to find the
> right
> person at Microsoft. I was really disappointed to get my new machine
> built
> (AMD Dual Core 4400, Geforce 7300GT, 3 gigs of ram, 160 gig HD) install
> Vista
> try to authenticate and it wouldnt let me. So if what you say is true its
> just a case of finding the right person at Microsoft. I'll try again.[/color]

I'm guess there was a miscommunication with the first guy you spoke to.

If I understand you correctly, you upgraded your old machine? So you are
left with only ONE computer? Not TWO computers right?

If you told them you had an old computer and you built a new one he might
have mistaken that as you now have TWO computers that you want to install
Windows on.