Vista question about activations

F

forsberg78

Weaksauce
Joined
Aug 24, 2008
Messages
65
I've got the retail version of Vista Home Premium. On the Microsoft web site, it says:

"If you acquire Windows Vista via retail purchase (boxed product), it may only be installed on one computer at a time. You may choose to uninstall Windows Vista from the initial computer and install it on another computer. You will then be required to re-activate that copy of Windows on the new computer."

What does it mean by "uninstall" Windows Vista? For example, if my computer gets fried completely and I can't even access the hard drive anymore, how do I uninstall Vista?
 
That would count as an uninstall I would think. Microsoft don't want you to use one product key on more than one working computer at the same time.
 
mlewis said:
That would count as an uninstall I would think. Microsoft don't want you to use one product key on more than one working computer at the same time.
Click to expand...

Oh, so meaning if I have a new computer, I can re-activate it using same product key, its just that my old computer (even if I don't uninstall anything) will be deactivated?
 
Actually, all it means is that they want you to be honest and only ever use your copy/license of Vista for one installation, on one computer, at any particular point in time. 'Uninstall Windows Vista' is an absolutely meaningless term, because the OS cannot be 'uninstalled'. By saying that, Microsoft really means that they want you to wipe the old installation - format the drive or delete the partition or whatever - they just want you to remove it.

Your old installation will NOT be 'deactivated'. Microsoft won't tell you that, but it's true. They really have no means of determining that you have the license in operation on more than one PC at a time, and many people successfully do use a 'one install, one machine' installation license on more than one machine concurrently. They aren't legal in doing so, but they are 'successful' in doing so. It is in Microsoft's best interests if misconception about what does or doesn't happen exists, of course. If people 'think' that their old install would be deactivated they are less likely to try to 'beat the system'. I'm not saying this to encourage people to use illegal installs, by the way. Just wanting to see truth in what is said. Getting rid of that old install depends on your 'honour and integrity', not on some inbuilt detection check.

Same deal exists regarding the 'Upgrade' licenses. Popular myth suggests that when you qualify an 'Upgrade' with an existing install that previous license will be rendered unusable. Not so. I've run out a dual-boot installation with a Vista Upgrade license. The previous (technically the 'qualifying') install still works fine, and that license can still be used quite effectively on a new machine.




In the situation described in this topic (a full license re-allocated to a new machine or a new hard drive in the same machine) there is no detection and it us up to the user's honesty to ensure that the re-allocation doesn't end up with the license used for two or more installs.

In the 'Upgrade' scenario I've described, again it is up to the user's honesty. For example, on one if the Vista machines I've used an 'Upgrade' license for I still use the Windows XP license which was installed to that machine previously. It wasn't the license I chose to declare "null and void" to legitimise the Vista Upgrade license. I've re-allocated that XP Pro license to a multi-boot configuration, and declared a no longer wanted XP Home license to be "null and void" instead.

I actually 'own' about 10 XP licenses. Two of those I still actively use on a regular basis. Two I've declared no longer valid because I've used them to legitimise Vista Upgrade licenses. I've 'met' the legal requirements, so have a clear conscience. But the suggestion that the act of using an upgrade key de-activates an install or renders an install key unusable (in a practical sense) is just plain wrong. So is the suggestion that using a full install key renders a previous or other installation unusable.
 
Basically you can't have more that one 'active' copy at a time. It won't deactivate the other copy, you will, however, be in violation of the EULA....dum dum dum....dramatic reverb....



 
You can't 'legally' have more than one active installation of a license at any one time, anyways. "Can't" doesn't mean that it won't work if you blow a raspberry at the legalities and do it anyway!
 
EULAs aren't always legally feasible in the first place. It's something that consumers should speak up about more. $100+ for an OS & being limited by a lot is aggravating to many.
 
CrimsonKnight13 said:
EULAs aren't always legally feasible in the first place. It's something that consumers should speak up about more. $100+ for an OS & being limited by a lot is aggravating to many.
Click to expand...
Only being able to install a single license on a single computer is "limited by a lot"?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top