Closure of RC2, Feedback Handling in the New York Times, and Licensing Information for Windows
As you've probably already surmised, downloads of Windows Vista RC2 for the Customer Preview Program (CPP) have now closed and the links are no longer active. We were bowled over by your response to RC2 -- in fact, we hit our download target (200K+) within 72 hours of propping the files! This is an incredible response.
Special thanks go out to everyone who participated in the CPP by downloading and installing this new build, and please keep the feedback coming -- it makes a huge difference.
If you want another take on how your feedback helps and how the team tracks it, check out this story in the tech section of the New York Times. (The story also has a good photo of the Life Cycle team -- that’s Sven Hallauer, Director of the Life Cycle team, in the black t-shirt, second from the left. For more from Sven on the process of getting builds out to the public and what RC2 is all about, check out this podcast).
The amount of information coming out of the Windows Team between now and business availability in November is going to be daunting, but we’re really excited about Windows Vista and we know you are, too, so we’ll do our best to give you as much detail as soon and as often as we can.
On that note, today MS.com published the retail license terms for Windows Vista; you can find them here. Two notable changes between Windows Vista license terms and those for Windows XP are: 1) failure of a validation check results in the loss of access to specific features (this is the SPP news you’ve likely been reading about this past week); and 2) an increase in our warranty period from 90 days to 1 year, which brings Windows in line with most other Microsoft products.
Comments
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The downloads for Windows Vista RC2 surpassed expectations (200K downloads in the first 72 hours!) andAnonymous
January 01, 2003
Techweb ran an article on how the public, free Vista RC2 download was closed. "As promised, MicrosoftAnonymous
January 01, 2003
This has got to be a mistake. (Why do I seem to say that a lot recently when reviewing an action takenAnonymous
January 01, 2003
Windows Vista RC2 (build 5744) was available internally late last week, and I'm writing to you from itAnonymous
January 01, 2003
When will beta testing for the next Windows "Fiji" start? Where should I keep a watch? Connect or Betaplace?Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
I fear Microsoft woul'd act here like the three monkeys" don't want to see, dont' want to hear and at last they don't want to speek to us. There are three simple questions from "bsdmonolith" and we only want three little answers with yes or no. But more than a "promise" from Nick White to explain until this week, we have nothing...Anonymous
January 01, 2003
They don't care. They have lawyers which are more feared than The Borg... ^^Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
Dear Mr. Nick White Can you explain a simple question, please? This could help to eliminate some rumours and possible misunderstandings. Will the EULA we are speaking from be valid for the FPP Version of Vista Ultimate or not? I have called the support and ask about this issue and they told me after a consultation with Redmond that only the EULA for the Enterprise Version is fixed and that the massive restrictions we can read in the published EULA are for the OEM and system builder licences. Can you confirm this statement?Anonymous
January 01, 2003
I know that beta 2 supports EFI and that the final release wont. Do RC1/RC2 also support EFI?Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
Hey Marshall and Guppy06: nothing ever gets done, inside MS or outside, by one person alone. As I stated before, I'm working with my colleagues to get a better idea of the true meaning behind the language in the EULA so I can share that with you and you can come to a more informed decision than could be made by taking only the interpretations currently being discussed on the internet (which are not fully informed and in some cases, flat wrong) into account. Stay tuned. And BTW, no offense taken -- you'll have to do more than that to offend me.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Bad news, procrastinators. Microsoft has shut the door on downloads for Windows Vista Release Candidate 2, according to the Windows Vista Team Blog: As you've probably already surmised, downloads of Windows Vista RC2 for the Customer Preview Program (CPP)Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
to kritscha: you´re right. The new licence won´t pass the EU. Maybe that´s the point why point 15 & 16 are missing in that licence description. But what will happen, will Vista not get shipped to Europe or will there be a diffrent Licence for the european versions? Especially the clause about reselling will harm german law. Simply said, such restrictions from the building company is not practicable in Germany.
- When you buy something you can resell it whenever you like, and 2) like wykinger said: When something you bought doesn´t work, like after second Hardwarechange, than it is broken and has to be exchanged for free by the Distributors or Developers. Well, maybe I should however buy a Licence, it could be the cheapest support ever made by MS ;-) Please think about it, ´cause you done a very good job on that new VistaOS. Don´t let the ship sink because of such annoying resriction-bullsh..
Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
There will be no such thing as "community death". In the gaming community case, developers will just switch to OpenGL and alternative OSes. OpenGL is now used for many popular games: Doom series, Quake series, World of Warcraft etc.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
Regarding the death of the pc gaming industry: OK let me rephrase that: How happy do you think harware OEMs are going to be with Microsoft when the Vista EULA diverts $50-65 BILLION USD from the OEMs to Microsoft? How did I arrive at that number? Based on Koroush Ghazi's estimates of 50-65 million "PC Enthusiasts" worldwide and assuming they significantly upgrade their systems 3 times per year (which translates to roughly $1,000 USD for two licenses of Vista Ultimate under this EULA). 50-65M Users x $1000 = $50-65B USDAnonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
I assembled my current system from various parts, both new and old (new motherboard, new microprocessor, new RAM), in 2003. Hopefully, upgrading it will be possible in the months to come, to something such as an Intel Dual Core. I was impressed enough with RC2 of Vista to consider purchasing it upon the January release--but why would I want to purchase it now, if I can only transfer this software to another computer one time? I don't know how long I'll have my current system...it could be 6 months, it could be a year, it could be a year and a half...so why would I want to waste a Vista activation on my current system at this point? I've been a Microsoft supporter for years, have defended Microsoft in newsgroups...but I can no longer justify defending Microsoft upon learning about the licensing restrictions. I'm very unhappy, and any desire to upgrade to Vista is gone now.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
I’d like to state for all of you who've contributed to the comments on this post, that your reactions have not gone unnoticed, but rather, we've heard you loud and clear on this issue. I cannot promise that we'll ultimately be able to devise a solution to any or all of your concerns around the Windows Vista EULA, but I would call your attention to our response to the issue of the new start-up sound.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Hey Marshall: you can rest assured that many, many of my colleagues, both senior and otherwise, are monitoring this conversation closely and will help me to provide readers with more information so that you're fully informed when making a purchasing decision. Please read the aforementioned comment again, as it says more than you imply.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Hi kritscha: the EULA you're referring to pertains to all consumer versions of Windows Vista: Home Basic, Home Premium and Ultimate.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
After thinking about it some more I don't see how that will stand in court. If a person buys an operating system then they can use it how they please. If I bought a computer, found it didn’t work, returned it, bought another and then six months latter I decide to upgrade then I should be allowed to use the same license. I don't care if it announces everyday over the net that I'm on comp A at this time but I should not be told what to do with my license.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/winvista_licensing.asp ^An article by Paul Thurrott on Vista licensing...Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Thanks nwhite. And at least MS is blatantly clear this time around in the licensing terms. And Thanks MS that making the choice of my next OS surprisingly simple. Will be some Linux variant and definitely not MS. Will be a steep learning curve. But as we all learnt from the financial industry, nothing, be it people or assets, cannot be replaced.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
If what I've read about the licence agreement is true (only getting to transfer the licence to another machine once) then this will be enough to make me stay away from Vista. I upgrade my machine on a yearly cycle, usualy graphics. hard disk one year, then motherborard/cpu/ram in alternate years. Sometimes sooner when there's a step change like PCI express.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
I have to agree with most of what has been said by others on the Vista license. If MS does not change this then I will stick with XP SP2. If I can't experiment with new hardware, or upgrade hardware, without having to purchase a new license, then its just not worth it. Oh well, beta testing Vista was fun till it lasted.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Dear Vista team, why can't you allow a user to deactivate a machine? Urge, the music download site suppointed by windows media player 11 allows 3 PCs activated with the same account simultaneously. But it allows you to deactivate 1 pc per month so you can continue using the same account on a new PC. Why can't this be done with Vista activation?Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
I can't edit my comment - can you edit it and remove the HTML and fix the link - remove %22. Maybe a note to say HTML is not supported would be good ;) http://worldcadaccess.typepad.com/blog/2006/10/microsoft_vista.htmlAnonymous
January 01, 2003
Hi Marshall: the issue is still being discussed and while I presently have nothing new I can share with the community, if and when that changes, I will post to the blog immediately. Please know that many of us are doing all we can to ensure your voices are heard.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
I'm an official dvds-mailed-to-me beta tester of Vista. I have yet to install it because of these awful license restrictions. I will get a FREE copy of Vista Premium. I will not install this either. I think Microsoft wants everyone to use Linux or a Mac. It's not like the company is broke. Between Vista's tight licensing and unreliable Genuine "Advantage"[sic], there's no way people who know what they're getting into will want to use it. Instead of mitigating their reputation, Microsoft continues to reinforce people's stereotype of them as a company who mistrusts and abuses their customers. When will they stop?Anonymous
January 01, 2003
This is totally insane, tommorow if I have multiple hard drive failures or some stupid DLL goes down the the drain and I have to re-install it, I need to pay for that !! I understand software is not cheap but making money out of people's problems is as good as looting them. I will NOT move from Whatever form of Windows I live with. Will definetly shift to Linux , you get plenty of free downloads with all utilities thrown in for FREE and there is no ACTIVATION required to use them, and yeah ! they dont crash 10 % of what my current windows does. You might have spent more time to strengthen the new release but I guess the licensing dept wouldnt have worked even a man-day to come up with such stupidity.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
nWhite. It is Friday now..... No hurries but any clarification with your team? Anything to share at all?Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
I think Microsoft has to do better with thier licencse because if I can not upgrade my computer 2 times without buying a new Vista then I may as well stay with XP! I think some one at Microsoft has GOOFED BIG TIME!Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Another thing...you'll probably say: "Well, €450 it's for the Ultimate edition"...you're right but for the basic Home I'm sure it'll costs NOT less than €200 which is a lot! Guys..the point is...I don't care to pay those moneys...I care of the fact that I want MY OWN WINDOWS VISTA to use with my private computers! Quite everyone have a Desktop and a Laptop...with this EULA I'm forced to buy 2 licences! At least, with XP I was able to use one computer at a time, with the same licence...but now :( I still think that private users should be able to buy a product and use it at least on 2 computers...expecially with an ULTIMATE version! What's the problem with it?! That's what I don't get... -.-Anonymous
January 01, 2003
I must agree with some of the earlier posters here. I'm not as concerned with the initial price as I am with not being able to upgrade my hardware as often as I like or need to. This is a deal breaker for me. I'll stay with XP Pro til the retail upgrade terms are more favorable.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
If the EULA needs to be "clarified" or "explained," then the EULA is flawed. The language of the EULA must stand on its own merits because it is all that is agreed to by the end-user. As curious as I may be to see these attempts at "clarification," these additional blog postings or press conferences or what have you cannot be a part of my purchase decision here because it is the EULA and the EULA alone that must be agreed to. If these clarifications, whatever their nature, are not to be a part of the EULA's binding language, then they aren't clarifications at all. And even if these further press releases move in a direction that I am happy with, if Microsoft is not willing to make them binding by putting them into the EULA, then I am not willing to bind myself to that EULA.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
I’ am broken but I think your right, and as I said… the three monkeys. Nwhite “promise” us that they explain there terms in the last week… they didn’t. They will never explain, because there is nothing to explain and they will never change the EULA, because it is so easy to pull out the money from the stupid consumers we are in there eyes. MS knows very well that they have the monopole for Game OS and they will us treading again and again with such restrictions, because they can… there is no alternative for gamers. Shame on you…Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
"The first user of the software may reassign the license to another device one time. If you reassign the license, that other device becomes the "licensed device," Could someone from the product team tell us exactly what the above quote means? I most certainly will need to tranfer the license to a new device more than once. If I am not allowed to do this, I will not waste my money on an operating system I can't use in a couple of years. I'm sure the pirates you are trying to stop will have no problem finding a way around this limitation, while the rest of us get burned.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Guppy06, well put. Let's hope whatever "new" information that nwhite is going to "inform" us with is included in the "new and improved" EULA. If not, maybe all of us reading the EULA needs to go back to school to learn how to interpret the EULA the MS way.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
It's been nearly two weeks, and I find I've grown bored with this. No word of a new EULA, and it seems the previously-mentioned "clarifications" aren't going to be coming any time soon either. Microsoft's dug in, their representatives have told several members of the press that the general interpretations of the odious parts of the EULA are correct, so there's nothing more to be done anyway. For 50% more than the Vista Ultimate license I was looking at, I can get a Mac Mini. Sure, the license may not be much better than what Microsoft is pushing with Vista, but building Macs isn't feasable for most people. As for my PCs, long-term I'm looking at Fedora and SUSE. However, the fallout from this EULA announcement has given me short-term concerns about the security of my XP installations. Early on, the "one transfer only" clause of Vista has been described by Microsoft as a "mere clarification" of the XP license, essentially saying that Microsoft's belief is that the XP license itself allows only one transfer, a threshold I passed a long time ago. Microsoft attempting to unilaterally and retroactively change the terms of the XP EULA in and of itself wouldn't cause me concern were it not for Windows Product Activation and Windows Genuine Advantage. WPA and WGA give Microsoft the power to enforce such retroactive changes to the EULA, leaving the user no recourse outside of a courtroom. Microsoft might not do it, but they seem to feel they would be justified to do so, and I don't doubt they have the desire. Where I was able to tolerate WPA and WGA insofar as they enforced the terms of the EULA as written, I find for the security of my machines and my own peace of mind that I must roll back to Windows 2000 until my transition to Linux is complete. And I'm half-tempted to attempt to return my XP Pro FPP and License Pak for a full refund, as I do not agree to the terms of what amounts to be a new EULA (since I see nothing in the old one allowing such a retroactive change without my consent). For those of you who are going to continue to wait with bated breath, have fun and try not to pass out.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
Guppy06, exactly. nwhite, no offense but this is not an issue a single person can fix. It probably takes the whole legal department to come up with these terms. You won't be able to give new additional info that is not on the EULA, unless, of course, that MS is changing the EULA. And fat chance of that happening.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
I will put it this way as I'm enough of the marketing babble. Q#1: Can I replace my motherboard infinite times and still use the same Vista I bought the very first time? Q#2: Can I replace any of my hardware infinite times and still use the same Vista I bought the very first time? Q#3: Can I buy a new PC, sell the old one, infinite times and still use the same Vista I bought the very first time? A#1: If any answers on those questions is NEGATIVE, I will NOT BUY Vista. For games I WILL use pirated copy and for work I WILL move to Linux+Java from Windows+.NET. nwhite, can you please answer my simple questions? I would appreciate it. Thank you.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Hey mhornyak, can I get your FREE copy of Vista Premium from you. I'll install it on my machine :-)Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
I think the most important point here (as someone mentioned earlier) is that the so called "small number" of enthusiasts in question are very often the people who work in the industry (I am a system builder for a small frim). There's just no way I could ,with clean conscience, recommend Vista to customers when it features this kind of draconian licencing. If Microsoft doesn't rethink this, they might find the knock on effect of alienating people such as myself hits them much harder (financially) than they expect.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
I think you guys at Microsoft really need to reconsider the amount of limitations that are put into the Vista OS. In the years that I've owned Windows XP, I have had software trip activation 1 time. I've had to reinstall many times, particularly this year, and I had to call support just to reinstall my OS. Now you're saying that I can't upgrade my computer and transfer my Vista license over? That has got to be the most outrageous thing I have ever seen--and for months I have been touting Vista to my friends, colleagues, coworkers, and VP of Technology at work. I've been a part of the beta program for well over a year, and I have seen Vista come a long way with product features that I have been touting to others as a really nice thing to have, especially Network Access Protection. I'm a single voice of computing in my company and social networking. I have worked intricately with the Vista OS and have a strong command of its new features and its upgrades. And my voice as I speak to others is highly respected. If I said one bad thing about the Vista OS, it could very well convince a very large amount of people to not buy the OS. Something as simple as a friend coming to me and asking if they should upgrade--up to whether or not the VP of Technology at work puts any financial thought into changing over the PCs before they are forced to. I think you guys should take a play from the id software book, notably Marty Stratton. In an interview regarding Quakecon 2006, Marty had stated that there is no real measure to the amount a "good showing" can have to that 1% of base. Your marketing teams can't measure it, but the effect is enormous. That 1% of consumer base is extremely powerful. We tell everyone whether or not a product is worth investing in, because our voice is trusted. We are the ones posting on forums, blogs, news websites, chat channels. We are the ones preaching it at our friends and colleagues. What we say matters--and if you think otherwise, you guys need a new marketing team.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Microsoft must be getting licensing advice from the Recording Industry and Hollyweird. I don't understand why the prices of these items are not just made affordable. Things sell when they are affordable. Make it an offer no one can refuse. vladdilla, you are right on the money, $150, and everyone upgrades.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Another point is that we, the “Pc enthusiasts” are your most common customer for your ultimate edition of Windows Vista. Who else should buy this expensive version? I can understand that Microsoft act with this restrictions for the OEM and system builder versions, but for retail? – This versions, I’ve to pay the full price was never be tied to a single PC. Why now? If someone here can understand german, there is something confusing in this license description. The points 15 & 16 are not included…. http://download.microsoft.com/download/f/a/5/fa5beb2f-9960-4cbb-883c-daaa4bbcef66/MicrosoftProductUseRights(Worldwide)(German)(Oct2006).doc If the link doesn’t work, please copy and paste.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Hey everyone: thanks for all your comments and know that I appreciate where you're coming from WRT our licensing terms. I wanted to let you know that I'm monitoring this conversation closely and plan to provide more information via this blog next week. Also know that my goal is for you have all the information at your disposal so that you can make educated decisions WRT purchasing and using Windows Vista.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
nWhite, if you are a Product Manager, don't you have some kind of influence in decision making?Anonymous
January 01, 2003
dedgar, not necessarily. According to the guidelines MS gave system builders, MS clearly consider a new motherboard as a new machine and not an upgrade. Although the guidelines pertains to XP OEM Licensing, there is nothing to indicate that MS considers differently with Vista. Let's say you upgrade next year to a i975 board for the Intel QX6700 (assuming you have a 975 board with an old VRM that does not support VRD11 now.....). MS will consider that as 1 transfer. Now, let's say you want to upgrade later in the year to Intel's X38 chipset (FSB1333), you won't be able to because that's a different motherboard. As far as MS is concerned, that will be ANOTHER TRANSFER. But of course, we enthusiasts consider that as upgrades.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
I reinstall windows at least once or twice a year. (Hopefully I won’t with Vista) I also upgrade parts of my machine every year. After reading through the new ELUA it became apparent that I will no longer be able to do this. If this is really the case then I might not buy Vista for quite some time. At least not till I get my new rig this coming winter or spring.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
someone: Keep an eye on this blog once we launch Windows Vista ;)Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
Microsoft needs to address the questions being asked in the comments in this forum. There are a lot of enthusiasts who change their hardware every few months. New motherboards, new videocards, additional memory. How will these users be affected? Secondly will there be a family edition of Windows Vista so that customers with families can install this onto two or three PCs?Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Hmmm.... well allegedly RTM is out next Wednesday so time is (apparently) short....Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
It is SOOO simple: nwhite just has to answer 3 simple questions... I will put it this way as I'm enough of the marketing babble. Q#1: Can I replace my motherboard infinite times and still use the same Vista I bought the very first time? Q#2: Can I replace any of my hardware infinite times and still use the same Vista I bought the very first time? Q#3: Can I buy a new PC, sell the old one, infinite times and still use the same Vista I bought the very first time? A#1: If any answers on those questions is NEGATIVE, I will NOT BUY Vista. For games I WILL use pirated copy and for work I WILL move to Linux+Java from Windows+.NET. nwhite, can you please answer my simple questions? I would appreciate it. Thank you.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
That way Vista should be it wont be allowed in Germany. Too much grabbing of personal data, to much sending back to MS (i´ll loop back all adresses from MS to 127.0.0.1 so what?) and best: if vista allows onely 1 HW-change, and i got to change secound time, and then Vista aint working anymore, it´s a fault of vista and then grips german warranty and you have to give me a new Vista. That may cause "outdated" Vistas at E-Bay en mass. On the other Hand, even Gamers,who have to change HW often, wont buy Vista. Thinking how MS beated IBM´s OS2??? OS2 was the better OS allready running at 32 bit, but MS Windows 3.1 with 16bit won. There was onely 1 reason for it: Games,games,games. What if Vista will be so bad to the Gamers? Answer: Another OS would grap its chance. Maybe not as good as Vista, but surely kicking Vista out of the market. And gaming can be done at consoles, too. Leaving games for gaming,theres no longer any reason not to use linux. So MS has slowly to start thinking what the cusomer want to have, cause its the customers money you depend on.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
Dear Mr. Nwhite I think most of us are bothering on point 15 of your EULA. (15. REASSIGN TO ANOTHER DEVICE. a. Software Other than Windows Anytime Upgrade. The first user of the software may reassign the license to another device one time. If you reassign the license, that other device becomes the “licensed device.) This point is more than clear. What should we interpret in the term “The first user of the software may reassign the license to another device ONE TIME.” There is no way for interpretation, or misunderstandings. It is clear MS will not allow us to change our hardware more than ONE TIME. If we do so, we must purchase a new copy/license of our Vista version. That the reason why we can’t accept your EULA. This should be the worst point of all your limitations for me. The WIN XP EULA never used a word that we only can change our hardware or “device” one time and now with Vista… What shall we do, to buy Vista and trust your or Mr. Paul Thurrott word that if we change our hardware more than one time that we only have to phone the support and our Vista copy will reactivated? Your EULA bring it to a clear point and if we accept the EULA we never have any change to demand the reactivation of our copy or rather to become our right…Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
And isn't it quite interesting that there is not a single neutral comment on the licensing terms (I am not hoping positive comments here....)Anonymous
January 01, 2003
And response to Paul from WindowsIT Pro: http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/winvista_licensing_reply.asp And now Paul's somewhat changed position: http://www.windowsitpro.com/Articles/ArticleID/93896/93896.htmlAnonymous
January 01, 2003
someone -- Y'know, I have yet to read anything official from Microsoft even confirming the existance of a Windows code-named "Fiji". All we know is that there is Vienna. Of course, once Vista ships, I do hope that the existance, or lack thereof, of Fiji is officially confirmed one way or the other.... (a note to the folks running this blog...)Anonymous
January 01, 2003
nWhite, We appreciate that you are trying to voice our concerns but ..... What I am afraid is that you are talking to a machine marked as deposit only at the bank. ie. It has no ears.......Anonymous
January 01, 2003
New start-up sound? Is that part of the new Vista EULA now? which section is that in?Anonymous
January 01, 2003
nwhite, THANKS for letting us know our comments are being heard - it really is appreciated. I've already said my peace above, but let me add this one more request - whatever you guys decide about this licensing clause, I really hope you'll go to greate lengths to explain the usecases, and the reasons for doing it that way!Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
I upgrade my PC 3-4 times a year and now with Vista I can't do that because Microsoft says I can't? This is the lamest thing MS has ever done. This info is all over the net. If it holds true, I doubt very much that Vista will hit that initial target base of 20%. I know I won't be buying it. I hate Jobs & Co., but my next purchase will be a Mac & OSX.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
So, I do the first steps. It seems Mr. Nick White or any other Microsoft employee wants to continuous this conversation about the EULA, or explains something. I have informed a consumer care TV show about the ongoing with the Vista EULA and Microsofts behaviour. I also consult a lawyer and he said that this EULA will never be accepting in Switzerland, because here you will buy the usufruct when purchasing the FPP Version... I hope this will open the eyes of the consumer here in Switzerland. I think 99.99% of all private Windows users never read more than the first sentence of the EULA, so they will never know what going on here with Microsoft and than, after they have change there hardware twice, the surprise will be great.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
I know that the EULA is valid for all Versions of Vista. I want to know wich licensemodell this EULA is for. FPP, OEM, System builder, Volumelicense wich? - if it's for the FPP than you will become some problems in the EU....Anonymous
January 01, 2003
What business would allow a supplier the power to deactivate a resource on which the company relies? WGA and activation effectively gives microsoft the power to hold companies to ransom. If they were to sue Microsoft for some reason then Microsoft could revoke their licences and shutdown their business, without having to go to court. This is an outrage! With regard to WGA on home users PCs the situation is even worse, because the don't have the influence or resources that a business may have. Microsoft has given itself the role of judge, jury, and executioner with this licence. They have the power to arbitrarily, and without proof declare a users licence to be breached, shutdown their computer and deny access to their data. The single PC restriction for the lifetime of the licence is totally unreasonable because the definition of what constitutes a PC differs in the minds of the user and microsoft. To a user their PC is that collection of parts that they currrently use, but if they change some of their parts it's still their PC. Having to buy a new licence for a PC just feels wrong when you already think you have one, and this will upset users no end. Please reconsider this licence!Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
Further info for those who thing Vista licensing and XP licensing is the same: http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=158Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
Paul Thurrott's article very eloquently explains what I've wanted to post on this blog since the flury of licensing comments began. What he failed to say explicity was "you're getting your undies in a bunch for nothing AND if you're part of the 5% PC enthusiasts group you can still install Linux if you don't like the EULA".Anonymous
January 01, 2003
So probably this the surprise MS has been planning for Vista...they'll support EFI after all.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Jim Allchin denies RTM next Wednesday so ignore the above.. :DAnonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
Can someone from the Vista team reply to this, just in case i'm getting hysterical over nothing???Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
what a shame after all of this time being with this project, i cannot get the rc2 to install, and to date NO help has been forth coming. Why????Anonymous
January 01, 2003
"FPP, OEM, System builder, Volumelicense wich? - if it's for the FPP than you will become some problems in the EU...." This kind of EULA can't go to EU. No way. It's impossible and will probably result in Vista being banned from EU market. If not banned, EULA will be changed. I doubt USA will enforce Microsoft EULA the air-strike way as they do with democracy.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 01, 2003
Hi ceejay: You'll want to check out the forums at http://forums.microsoft.com/TechNet/default.aspx?ForumGroupID=204&SiteID=17, as we cannot provide support via this blog.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Hey magamiako: I understand where you're coming from -- despite being small in numbers, you who read this blog are big in influence. In fact, that's the reason that I have a job :) My hope is that by continuing this conversation with you all here on the blog, I can become one of those "trusted voices" as well.Anonymous
January 01, 2003
Retail license terms for Vista are not found at http://download.microsoft.com/documents/useterms/Windows%20Vista_Ultimate_English_f1a20b7f-1937-4e77-81e1-6fc1e97c77cc.pdf