I have legal Windows software. I have not yet accepted the WGA agreement,
because so far I don't know what will happen in the future. If I agree to WGA
at the present time, Microsoft will link my present software to my present
computer. Let's say that I buy a new computer tomorrow because what was my
present computer has a hardware problem. I still have the Windows XP original
software. It won't be used anymore in my old computer and I want to install
it in my new computer. My fear is that Microsoft will think that the
computer-software legal link has been broken and will deny service to my new
computer with the old software. Please tell me if my concern is right or
wrong.

"Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" wrote:

> "Vagabond Software" <carlfenley-X-@-X-san.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:eoHTf0ZBFHA.2112@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> "Tom Penharston" <thinkpersuasion@netscape.net> wrote in message
> news:1106959280.619986.218910@f14g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...
> >
> > Windows Genuine Advantage
> > http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1754886,00.asp
> >
> > Instead of debating the merits of Genuine Advantage I'm writing this
> > post to get advice on configuration steps for brand new computers once
> > the initiative starts.
> >
> >
>
> >Keeping in mind that known and confirmed pirated copies will still be
> >freely >updated through Automatic Update...
>
> Why do you believe that pirated copes will be updated by Automatic (Windows)
> Update.
> The point of WGA is to ensure that only genuine legal Windows machines have
> access to our updates.
>
>
> --
>
> Regards,
>
> Mike
> --
> Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]
>
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
> rights
>
> Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions, please use these
> newsgroups
>
> "Vagabond Software" <carlfenley-X-@-X-san.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:eoHTf0ZBFHA.2112@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> "Tom Penharston" <thinkpersuasion@netscape.net> wrote in message
> news:1106959280.619986.218910@f14g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...
> >
> > Windows Genuine Advantage
> > http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1754886,00.asp
> >
> > Instead of debating the merits of Genuine Advantage I'm writing this
> > post to get advice on configuration steps for brand new computers once
> > the initiative starts.
> >
> >
>
> Keeping in mind that known and confirmed pirated copies will still be freely
> updated through Automatic Update...
>
> Your concerns seem a bit unfounded. Any home user that is behind even a
> mediocre broadband router is plenty safe for the purpose of automatic
> updates. On the other hand, any home user directly connected to the
> Internet without a router is playing worm-roulette regardless of whether or
> not they patch online or offline.
>
> I imagine the same is true for domain networks. What business has domain
> client computers in the DMZ?
>
> carl
>
>
>

"Luis Med" <Luis Med@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote
>I have legal Windows software. I have not yet accepted the WGA agreement,
> because so far I don't know what will happen in the future. If I agree to
> WGA
> at the present time, Microsoft will link my present software to my present
> computer. Let's say that I buy a new computer tomorrow because what was my
> present computer has a hardware problem. I still have the Windows XP
> original
> software. It won't be used anymore in my old computer and I want to
> install
> it in my new computer. My fear is that Microsoft will think that the
> computer-software legal link has been broken and will deny service to my
> new
> computer with the old software. Please tell me if my concern is right or
> wrong.

The issue is not whether your copy is legal, the issue is whether the XP is
OEM or retail. A copy of XP can be moved from one computer to another if it
is a retail copy (as long as it's first uninstalled from the computer it's
on). If the copy on the first computer is OEM, by it's license it's tied to
that first computer and cannot be moved to another one. This is not a WGA
issue.

--
Rock [MS-MVP User/Shell]

Thank you, Rock.

I didn't know that rule. Probably I was so excited when I got my new
computer that I missed that detail in the fine (or not so fine) print. OK,
not that I like it, but that's not the issue.

Then we are talking about OEM in my case. My worry is still the same.

Even if keeping the same computer, parts of the hardware may be changed in
the future; and the original+genuine+legal+wonderful Windows XP software will
have to be reinstalled. I still think that Microsoft will be fooled as soon
as some serial number doesn't match (let's say for example I changed my hard
disk or the motherboard). Microsoft will think that I am installing illegally
and will take every effort to make my life impossible (not that it's very
easy as of now) even if I paid for this OEM version when buying my computer.
If Microsoft were error-free I would sign the agreement immediately. But I
know by many frozen blue screens and other unforgettable experiences that
dear Microsoft sometimes makes mistakes. So, I still have the same fear
before signing the agreement because I want to feel as free in the future as
I do now. I don't see the interests of the consumer reflected in the
agreement.

This "what-if-I-reinstall" is still my concern. Can someone from Microsoft
reassure me everything will be fine?

"Rock" wrote:

> "Luis Med" <Luis Med@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote
> >I have legal Windows software. I have not yet accepted the WGA agreement,
> > because so far I don't know what will happen in the future. If I agree to
> > WGA
> > at the present time, Microsoft will link my present software to my present
> > computer. Let's say that I buy a new computer tomorrow because what was my
> > present computer has a hardware problem. I still have the Windows XP
> > original
> > software. It won't be used anymore in my old computer and I want to
> > install
> > it in my new computer. My fear is that Microsoft will think that the
> > computer-software legal link has been broken and will deny service to my
> > new
> > computer with the old software. Please tell me if my concern is right or
> > wrong.
>
> The issue is not whether your copy is legal, the issue is whether the XP is
> OEM or retail. A copy of XP can be moved from one computer to another if it
> is a retail copy (as long as it's first uninstalled from the computer it's
> on). If the copy on the first computer is OEM, by it's license it's tied to
> that first computer and cannot be moved to another one. This is not a WGA
> issue.
>
> --
> Rock [MS-MVP User/Shell]

You did not "buy the software", in the case of OEM you buy the right to
use the software on a particular machine. When the machine goes away, so
does the right to use the software. If you want to buy the right to use
the software on one machine today and then move it to a different
machine next month, then you may purchase it in the form of a Retail
license. You pay for the rights.

Luis Med wrote:

> Thank you, Rock.
>
> I didn't know that rule. Probably I was so excited when I got my new
> computer that I missed that detail in the fine (or not so fine) print. OK,
> not that I like it, but that's not the issue.
>
> Then we are talking about OEM in my case. My worry is still the same.
>
> Even if keeping the same computer, parts of the hardware may be changed in
> the future; and the original+genuine+legal+wonderful Windows XP software will
> have to be reinstalled. I still think that Microsoft will be fooled as soon
> as some serial number doesn't match (let's say for example I changed my hard
> disk or the motherboard). Microsoft will think that I am installing illegally
> and will take every effort to make my life impossible (not that it's very
> easy as of now) even if I paid for this OEM version when buying my computer.
> If Microsoft were error-free I would sign the agreement immediately. But I
> know by many frozen blue screens and other unforgettable experiences that
> dear Microsoft sometimes makes mistakes. So, I still have the same fear
> before signing the agreement because I want to feel as free in the future as
> I do now. I don't see the interests of the consumer reflected in the
> agreement.
>
> This "what-if-I-reinstall" is still my concern. Can someone from Microsoft
> reassure me everything will be fine?
>
> "Rock" wrote:
>
>
>>"Luis Med" <Luis Med@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote
>>
>>>I have legal Windows software. I have not yet accepted the WGA agreement,
>>>because so far I don't know what will happen in the future. If I agree to
>>>WGA
>>>at the present time, Microsoft will link my present software to my present
>>>computer. Let's say that I buy a new computer tomorrow because what was my
>>>present computer has a hardware problem. I still have the Windows XP
>>>original
>>>software. It won't be used anymore in my old computer and I want to
>>>install
>>>it in my new computer. My fear is that Microsoft will think that the
>>>computer-software legal link has been broken and will deny service to my
>>>new
>>>computer with the old software. Please tell me if my concern is right or
>>>wrong.
>>
>>The issue is not whether your copy is legal, the issue is whether the XP is
>>OEM or retail. A copy of XP can be moved from one computer to another if it
>>is a retail copy (as long as it's first uninstalled from the computer it's
>>on). If the copy on the first computer is OEM, by it's license it's tied to
>>that first computer and cannot be moved to another one. This is not a WGA
>>issue.
>>
>>--
>>Rock [MS-MVP User/Shell]
>
>

"Luis Med" <LuisMed@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:235FA5BE-90FB-4611-B046-61AC8C3DC651@microsoft.com...
>
> Thank you, Rock.
>
> I didn't know that rule. Probably I was so excited when I got my new
> computer that I missed that detail in the fine (or not so fine) print. OK,
> not that I like it, but that's not the issue.
>
> Then we are talking about OEM in my case. My worry is still the same.
>
> Even if keeping the same computer, parts of the hardware may be changed in
> the future; and the original+genuine+legal+wonderful Windows XP software
> will
> have to be reinstalled. I still think that Microsoft will be fooled as
> soon
> as some serial number doesn't match (let's say for example I changed my
> hard
> disk or the motherboard). Microsoft will think that I am installing
> illegally
> and will take every effort to make my life impossible (not that it's very
> easy as of now) even if I paid for this OEM version when buying my
> computer.
> If Microsoft were error-free I would sign the agreement immediately. But I
> know by many frozen blue screens and other unforgettable experiences that
> dear Microsoft sometimes makes mistakes. So, I still have the same fear
> before signing the agreement because I want to feel as free in the future
> as
> I do now. I don't see the interests of the consumer reflected in the
> agreement.
>
> This "what-if-I-reinstall" is still my concern. Can someone from Microsoft
> reassure me everything will be fine?
>
> "Rock" wrote:
>
>> "Luis Med" <Luis Med@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote
>> >I have legal Windows software. I have not yet accepted the WGA
>> >agreement,
>> > because so far I don't know what will happen in the future. If I agree
>> > to
>> > WGA
>> > at the present time, Microsoft will link my present software to my
>> > present
>> > computer. Let's say that I buy a new computer tomorrow because what was
>> > my
>> > present computer has a hardware problem. I still have the Windows XP
>> > original
>> > software. It won't be used anymore in my old computer and I want to
>> > install
>> > it in my new computer. My fear is that Microsoft will think that the
>> > computer-software legal link has been broken and will deny service to
>> > my
>> > new
>> > computer with the old software. Please tell me if my concern is right
>> > or
>> > wrong.
>>
>> The issue is not whether your copy is legal, the issue is whether the XP
>> is
>> OEM or retail. A copy of XP can be moved from one computer to another if
>> it
>> is a retail copy (as long as it's first uninstalled from the computer
>> it's
>> on). If the copy on the first computer is OEM, by it's license it's tied
>> to
>> that first computer and cannot be moved to another one. This is not a
>> WGA
>> issue.


Signing what agreement, I'm not sure what you're talking about.

You can reinstall an OEM copy on the same computer as many times as you
want. Again this has nothing to do with WGA. It's all in the license
agreement or EULA. Read it for the details. The issue is activation and
what hardware you change. On many OEM systems the XP version is BIOS locked
to the motherboard so it can only be installed on a motherboard from that
OEM, and there is no activation, it is already activated. If it's not a
BIOS locked version then it will need to be reactivated when the OS is
reinstalled. Then the activation with go through on the internet or if
needed you have to make a phone call. This has nothing to do with WGA.

If you don't want to install the WGA update, don't.

This is a peer to peer newsgroup, not official MS support. If you want to
talk to someone at MS, you have to call them.

--
Rock [MS-MVP User/Shell]

Luis Med wrote:
> I have legal Windows software. I have not yet accepted the WGA agreement,
> because so far I don't know what will happen in the future. If I agree to WGA
> at the present time, Microsoft will link my present software to my present
> computer. Let's say that I buy a new computer tomorrow because what was my
> present computer has a hardware problem. I still have the Windows XP original
> software. It won't be used anymore in my old computer and I want to install
> it in my new computer. My fear is that Microsoft will think that the
> computer-software legal link has been broken and will deny service to my new
> computer with the old software. Please tell me if my concern is right or
> wrong.

You can reinstall it on the same computer as often as you like. Don't
download or install WGA. It does you no good and is famous for false
positives.

Alias
>
> "Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" wrote:
>
>> "Vagabond Software" <carlfenley-X-@-X-san.rr.com> wrote in message
>> news:eoHTf0ZBFHA.2112@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>> "Tom Penharston" <thinkpersuasion@netscape.net> wrote in message
>> news:1106959280.619986.218910@f14g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...
>>> Windows Genuine Advantage
>>> http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1754886,00.asp
>>>
>>> Instead of debating the merits of Genuine Advantage I'm writing this
>>> post to get advice on configuration steps for brand new computers once
>>> the initiative starts.
>>>
>>>
>>> Keeping in mind that known and confirmed pirated copies will still be
>>> freely >updated through Automatic Update...
>> Why do you believe that pirated copes will be updated by Automatic (Windows)
>> Update.
>> The point of WGA is to ensure that only genuine legal Windows machines have
>> access to our updates.
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Mike
>> --
>> Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]
>>
>> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
>> rights
>>
>> Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions, please use these
>> newsgroups
>>
>> "Vagabond Software" <carlfenley-X-@-X-san.rr.com> wrote in message
>> news:eoHTf0ZBFHA.2112@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>> "Tom Penharston" <thinkpersuasion@netscape.net> wrote in message
>> news:1106959280.619986.218910@f14g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...
>>> Windows Genuine Advantage
>>> http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1754886,00.asp
>>>
>>> Instead of debating the merits of Genuine Advantage I'm writing this
>>> post to get advice on configuration steps for brand new computers once
>>> the initiative starts.
>>>
>>>
>> Keeping in mind that known and confirmed pirated copies will still be freely
>> updated through Automatic Update...
>>
>> Your concerns seem a bit unfounded. Any home user that is behind even a
>> mediocre broadband router is plenty safe for the purpose of automatic
>> updates. On the other hand, any home user directly connected to the
>> Internet without a router is playing worm-roulette regardless of whether or
>> not they patch online or offline.
>>
>> I imagine the same is true for domain networks. What business has domain
>> client computers in the DMZ?
>>
>> carl
>>
>>
>>

Thank you again, Rock. About:

> Signing what agreement, I'm not sure what you're talking about.

The WGA update comes with an agreement that one has to 'sign' (that is,
click a button that says "I agree").

After reading the EULA I understood that, with the WGA update, Microsoft
links some ID's of my hardware with the ID of my version of Windows XP. This
link will be stablished as the way to recognize if a particular version of
Windows XP is being installed in other computers, which is forbidden.

Again I try to explain my concern:
In my view, Microsoft's procedure is flawed because they didn't think that
my computer can have future changes in parts of its hardware. By 2010 I will
have a different motherboard or hard disk, with ID's that are different to
the ID's of my previous hardware, as registered in Microsoft's files dating
back to 2007.

Once the WGA update is installed, any future activation of the same Windows
XP could be hindered because of an obsolete hardware ID - software ID link. I
imagine that if I change my hard disk and reinstall Windows XP, I will
receive a warning from MS saying that I have an illegal copy of Windows XP.
Why? Because according to their files, my version of Windows XP should match
another hard disk.

I want the freedom to change some parts of my hardware in the future; it
still will be the same computer, but will Microsoft recognize it as such?

About:

> If you don't want to install the WGA update, don't.

I also understood that if I don't install the WGA update, I won't get some
important future updates. That's why this is for me a lose-lose situation and
I am seeking help.

About:

> This is a peer to peer newsgroup, not official MS support. If you want to
> talk to someone at MS, you have to call them.

OK, thanks, but sometimes people that work for MS write something here too.
There is Mike Brannigan in this same thread. He works for MS.
However your comments help me too, Rock, and I appreciate them.

Thank you also, Bob I. Your comment is very much like Rock's first one in
what it says. I understand that I didn't 'buy' the software. But as a MS
consumer with limited rights to use their software, I want to know my options
before I install or not the WGA update. I have already said its agreement
should be friendlier to the legal MS consumers who have paid some money to
use their products. I think Microsoft can build a better mousetrap than this
one.

Take care and thanks again.

Thank you, Alias. You are very right about the false positives in the WGA
EULA agreement.

"Alias" wrote:

> You can reinstall it on the same computer as often as you like. Don't
> download or install WGA. It does you no good and is famous for false
> positives.
>
> Alias
> >
> > "Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" wrote:
> >
> >> "Vagabond Software" <carlfenley-X-@-X-san.rr.com> wrote in message
> >> news:eoHTf0ZBFHA.2112@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> >> "Tom Penharston" <thinkpersuasion@netscape.net> wrote in message

> >> Why do you believe that pirated copes will be updated by Automatic (Windows)
> >> Update.
> >> The point of WGA is to ensure that only genuine legal Windows machines have
> >> access to our updates.
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> Mike
> >> --
> >> Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]
> >>

"Rock" wrote:

> Signing what agreement, I'm not sure what you're talking about.

The WGA update comes with an agreement that one has to 'sign' (that is,
click a button that says "I agree").

After reading the EULA I understood that, with the WGA update, Microsoft
links some ID's of my hardware with the ID of my version of Windows XP. This
link will be stablished as the way to recognize if a particular version of
Windows XP is being installed in other computers, which is forbidden.

Again I try to explain my concern:
In my view, Microsoft's procedure is flawed because they didn't think that
my computer can have future changes in parts of its hardware. By 2010 I will
have a different motherboard or hard disk, with ID's that are different to
the ID's of my previous hardware, as registered in Microsoft's files dating
back to 2007.

Once the WGA update is installed, any future activation of the same Windows
XP could be hindered because of an obsolete hardware ID - software ID link. I
imagine that if I change my hard disk and reinstall Windows XP, I will
receive a warning from MS saying that I have an illegal copy of Windows XP.
Why? Because according to their files, my version of Windows XP should match
another hard disk.

I want the freedom to change some parts of my hardware in the future; it
still will be the same computer, but will Microsoft recognize it as such?

About:

> If you don't want to install the WGA update, don't.

I also understood that if I don't install the WGA update, I won't get some
important future updates. That's why this is for me a lose-lose situation and
I am seeking help.

Take care and thanks again.

"Luis Med" <LuisMed@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote

> Thank you again, Rock. About:
>
>> Signing what agreement, I'm not sure what you're talking about.
>
> The WGA update comes with an agreement that one has to 'sign' (that is,
> click a button that says "I agree").
>
> After reading the EULA I understood that, with the WGA update, Microsoft
> links some ID's of my hardware with the ID of my version of Windows XP.
> This
> link will be stablished as the way to recognize if a particular version of
> Windows XP is being installed in other computers, which is forbidden.
>
> Again I try to explain my concern:
> In my view, Microsoft's procedure is flawed because they didn't think that
> my computer can have future changes in parts of its hardware. By 2010 I
> will
> have a different motherboard or hard disk, with ID's that are different to
> the ID's of my previous hardware, as registered in Microsoft's files
> dating
> back to 2007.
>
> Once the WGA update is installed, any future activation of the same
> Windows
> XP could be hindered because of an obsolete hardware ID - software ID
> link. I
> imagine that if I change my hard disk and reinstall Windows XP, I will
> receive a warning from MS saying that I have an illegal copy of Windows
> XP.
> Why? Because according to their files, my version of Windows XP should
> match
> another hard disk.
>
> I want the freedom to change some parts of my hardware in the future; it
> still will be the same computer, but will Microsoft recognize it as such?
>
> About:
>
>> If you don't want to install the WGA update, don't.
>
> I also understood that if I don't install the WGA update, I won't get some
> important future updates. That's why this is for me a lose-lose situation
> and
> I am seeking help.
>
> About:
>
>> This is a peer to peer newsgroup, not official MS support. If you want
>> to
>> talk to someone at MS, you have to call them.
>
> OK, thanks, but sometimes people that work for MS write something here
> too.
> There is Mike Brannigan in this same thread. He works for MS.
> However your comments help me too, Rock, and I appreciate them.
>
> Thank you also, Bob I. Your comment is very much like Rock's first one in
> what it says. I understand that I didn't 'buy' the software. But as a MS
> consumer with limited rights to use their software, I want to know my
> options
> before I install or not the WGA update. I have already said its agreement
> should be friendlier to the legal MS consumers who have paid some money to
> use their products. I think Microsoft can build a better mousetrap than
> this
> one.
>
> Take care and thanks again.
>


Mike Brannigan doesn't work for MS anymore and hasn't for some time.
Besides, the occasional MS employee that posts here does so on their own
time, not as officially representing MS.

I don't know what else I can tell you. A copy of XP can be reinstalled as
many times as you want on the same system. If activation is needed then do
so, either through the internet or by a phone call. The only question is
what constitutes a new computer. You can change any of of the hardware
components no problem. The only question comes in is the motherboard. Some
people maintain changing that is a new computer.

In the first place if your copy of XP is BIOS locked then you can't change
the motherboard to anything but a motherboard from the OEM. If the new
motherboard is from the OEM and BIOS locked activation isn't necessary.

If it's not BIOS locked and needs activation then the question is, does that
new motherboard constitute a new computer. MS has not defined what
constitutes a new computer. I have heard of some people who have had
activation refused because of this, though I don't know of anyone
personally. I do know of many that have changed motherboards no problem.

And none of this has anything to do with WGA. It's an activation issue.

--
Rock [MS-MVP User/Shell]

On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 18:32:04 -0700, Luis Med
<LuisMed@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

>I think Microsoft can build a better mousetrap than this
>one.

Probably could have if the "mouse trap" was actually designed to trap
a mouse in the first place. However, and a question for you.... Since
your basic run-of-the-mill Pirate can run rings around the infamous
malware WGA and is unaffected by it, and that the only people having
this thing continually updating and phoning home on their systems are
Honest paid for customers of M$, then what do you think the real
purpose of the infamous malware WGA is actually all about? Keep in
mind that M$ has already been caught red handed in a bunch of lies
about this thing from its demented conception.

Luis Med wrote:

> Thank you again, Rock. About:
>
>
>>Signing what agreement, I'm not sure what you're talking about.
>
>
> The WGA update comes with an agreement that one has to 'sign' (that is,
> click a button that says "I agree").
>
> After reading the EULA I understood that, with the WGA update, Microsoft
> links some ID's of my hardware with the ID of my version of Windows XP. This
> link will be stablished as the way to recognize if a particular version of
> Windows XP is being installed in other computers, which is forbidden.
>
> Again I try to explain my concern:
> In my view, Microsoft's procedure is flawed because they didn't think that
> my computer can have future changes in parts of its hardware. By 2010 I will
> have a different motherboard or hard disk, with ID's that are different to
> the ID's of my previous hardware, as registered in Microsoft's files dating
> back to 2007.
>
> Once the WGA update is installed, any future activation of the same Windows
> XP could be hindered because of an obsolete hardware ID - software ID link. I
> imagine that if I change my hard disk and reinstall Windows XP, I will
> receive a warning from MS saying that I have an illegal copy of Windows XP.
> Why? Because according to their files, my version of Windows XP should match
> another hard disk.
>
> I want the freedom to change some parts of my hardware in the future; it
> still will be the same computer, but will Microsoft recognize it as such?
>
> About:
>
>
>>If you don't want to install the WGA update, don't.
>
>
> I also understood that if I don't install the WGA update, I won't get some
> important future updates. That's why this is for me a lose-lose situation and
> I am seeking help.
>
> About:
>
>
>>This is a peer to peer newsgroup, not official MS support. If you want to
>>talk to someone at MS, you have to call them.
>
>
> OK, thanks, but sometimes people that work for MS write something here too.
> There is Mike Brannigan in this same thread. He works for MS.
> However your comments help me too, Rock, and I appreciate them.
>
> Thank you also, Bob I. Your comment is very much like Rock's first one in
> what it says. I understand that I didn't 'buy' the software. But as a MS
> consumer with limited rights to use their software, I want to know my options
> before I install or not the WGA update. I have already said its agreement
> should be friendlier to the legal MS consumers who have paid some money to
> use their products. I think Microsoft can build a better mousetrap than this
> one.
>
> Take care and thanks again.
>

There is no relevance between WGA and your future plans. What should
be evident from Rock and others who write about OEM vs. retail versions
of Windows XP in this newsgroup is that there are limitations in just
what can be done with the OEM version. Sure, hardware breaks but there
is a certain point beyond all reason when an original computer system
no longer exists. One of the tests is the bios-locked OEM version of XP.
It is released for specific makes and even models. A motherboard swap,
for example, may be sufficient grounds to rule that a "new" computer
exists, thereby "killing" the OEM versions of XP that came with the
original. The OEM branding would make it impossible for it to install
with any foreign (i.e., off-brand) bios, motherboard, chipset, etc.

OTOH, swapping CPU's, hard drives, VGA cards, NIC's, etc., as component
parts, may not result in a "new" computer and could well be defined as
"repair" of the original system and OS. Under these circumstances, the
OEM version of Windows XP may be allowed to persist. But all of this is
determined by the Product Key and Windows Product Activation (WPA). Of
course, this would not apply to the retail, boxed version.

And yes, what you want can occur. A better mousetrap does exist but it
may also be prohibitively costly to the average consumer...that is, you.
And it does away from the OEM version of any software in exchange for a
full-cost, wholly-owned, personal operating license with verification and
approval for utilization. Such setups have existed in the past, but not to
the level of sophistication that is available today. This brings to mind
of an OEM in the 1980's and its highly proprietary system that rejected all
but its own branded peripherals and OS. And can always happen again. You
really want all of this just to stretch the use of OEM software past its
legal boundaries?

Stan wrote:

> On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 18:32:04 -0700, Luis Med
> <LuisMed@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>
>
>>I think Microsoft can build a better mousetrap than this
>>one.
>
>
> Probably could have if the "mouse trap" was actually designed to trap
> a mouse in the first place. However, and a question for you.... Since
> your basic run-of-the-mill Pirate can run rings around the infamous
> malware WGA and is unaffected by it, and that the only people having
> this thing continually updating and phoning home on their systems are
> Honest paid for customers of M$, then what do you think the real
> purpose of the infamous malware WGA is actually all about? Keep in
> mind that M$ has already been caught red handed in a bunch of lies
> about this thing from its demented conception.

Interestingly enough, a better mousetrap does exist...but we don't
really want to go there, now do we? Imagine what an inconvenience it
would be if the licensing terms allow Microsoft and/or enforcement
agencies to set up "traps" for catching scofflaws and pirates, much
like a city's traffic enforcement detail. Of course, it means both
product registration and activation along with proofs of ownership.

OTOH, it might be worthwhile to let some of the inconveniences slip by
and get on with our lives. If it gets too inconvenient, well Microsoft
would certainly know it by the sudden migration from their product or
a serious sales slump.

And, BTW, there are many non-pirates who have the brains and knowledge
to run rings around WGA and escape from its clutches.

GHalleck wrote:
>
> Stan wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 18:32:04 -0700, Luis Med
>> <LuisMed@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I think Microsoft can build a better mousetrap than this one.
>>
>>
>> Probably could have if the "mouse trap" was actually designed to trap
>> a mouse in the first place. However, and a question for you.... Since
>> your basic run-of-the-mill Pirate can run rings around the infamous
>> malware WGA and is unaffected by it, and that the only people having
>> this thing continually updating and phoning home on their systems are
>> Honest paid for customers of M$, then what do you think the real
>> purpose of the infamous malware WGA is actually all about? Keep in
>> mind that M$ has already been caught red handed in a bunch of lies
>> about this thing from its demented conception.
>
> Interestingly enough, a better mousetrap does exist...but we don't
> really want to go there, now do we? Imagine what an inconvenience it
> would be if the licensing terms allow Microsoft and/or enforcement
> agencies to set up "traps" for catching scofflaws and pirates, much
> like a city's traffic enforcement detail. Of course, it means both
> product registration and activation along with proofs of ownership.
>
> OTOH, it might be worthwhile to let some of the inconveniences slip by
> and get on with our lives. If it gets too inconvenient, well Microsoft
> would certainly know it by the sudden migration from their product or
> a serious sales slump.
>
> And, BTW, there are many non-pirates who have the brains and knowledge
> to run rings around WGA and escape from its clutches.

Things have already progressed much farther than what you suppose could
happen. MS has already set itself up as the policeman, and has taken on
the added responsibility of being the judge and the jury. "Inconvenient"
is not the "correct" word to describe what has happened and continues to
happen.

--
norm

On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 22:43:59 -0700, GHalleck
<ghalleck@arrakian.mining.com> wrote:

>And, BTW, there are many non-pirates who have the brains and knowledge
>to run rings around WGA and escape from its clutches.

I'm a non-pirate that got the tools to get around the infamous malware
WGA. Both of my copies of XP are legal paid for copies but I took
issue with having to keep proving my honesty over and over and over
and over. Then when M$ got caught with their panties down around
their ankles when they got caught trying to slip a call home piece of
malware by as a critical update and lied about it until they were
forced by overwhelming evidence to the contrary to come clean, I took
all instances of the malware off my computer and got the tools used by
the pirates to get my updates. I haven't had their malware or its
updates on my two systems since they got caught in their lies 2 WGA
updates back but I have all of the critical updates I choose thanks to
the tools available to do so.

Ain't it a shame that we have to guard ourselves against the makers of
the OS we use like we do against all the other purveyors of Viruses,
Trojans, key loggers, dialers and other assorted pieces of malware out
there. Or, in other words, ain't it a shame that the makers of the OS
we use has no more moral integrity than the purveyors of Viruses,
Trojans, key loggers, dialers and other assorted pieces of malware out
there.

Unless you build your own system, most computers come with some version of
Windows included in the cost. So most users, even those who are running
"pirated" or "illegal" copies of Windows, originally paid for the Operating
System in some way. Almost all those "pirates" are running "corporate" or
"cracked" versions just to get around the stupid and annoying Activation and
WGA crap. You would think that MS would understand this. I've owned about a
half dozen computers, and they all came with a legal OS installed.


"Stan" <spamblock@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:7v8p03pjpnstiuso3va7e06d0aihd1q5vl@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 22:43:59 -0700, GHalleck
> <ghalleck@arrakian.mining.com> wrote:
>
>>And, BTW, there are many non-pirates who have the brains and knowledge
>>to run rings around WGA and escape from its clutches.
>
> I'm a non-pirate that got the tools to get around the infamous malware
> WGA. Both of my copies of XP are legal paid for copies but I took
> issue with having to keep proving my honesty over and over and over
> and over. Then when M$ got caught with their panties down around
> their ankles when they got caught trying to slip a call home piece of
> malware by as a critical update and lied about it until they were
> forced by overwhelming evidence to the contrary to come clean, I took
> all instances of the malware off my computer and got the tools used by
> the pirates to get my updates. I haven't had their malware or its
> updates on my two systems since they got caught in their lies 2 WGA
> updates back but I have all of the critical updates I choose thanks to
> the tools available to do so.
>
> Ain't it a shame that we have to guard ourselves against the makers of
> the OS we use like we do against all the other purveyors of Viruses,
> Trojans, key loggers, dialers and other assorted pieces of malware out
> there. Or, in other words, ain't it a shame that the makers of the OS
> we use has no more moral integrity than the purveyors of Viruses,
> Trojans, key loggers, dialers and other assorted pieces of malware out
> there.