Windows Xp To Vista

[Janson]

a friend in the year above me showed that my uni gives out free vista licenses. he ordered like 5 of the corporate bling bling edition ones.

I have never tried vista, but I'm sure it's good. Not really quite understood the whole 3d space-age stuff, but hey. i just don't see the point of the windows flying across the screen in 3d (which is pontless as windows are flat) instead of the mac osx exposé function, which tiles up all windows in 2d..

i'm just a big mac bummer i guess.

[Dan6061]

Inur - do you have the link to the test thingy, i can't seem to find it.

Would be interesting to see if it would work on my comp, doubt i'd buy it though.

Here.

Just ran the test.

There currently isn't any drivers for my wireless network adaptor, or my Networking controller.

I'll wait a while.

[Orgun_Donor]

Kris, the EULA for windows vista(doesn't matter what version or type) states that it can only be install on one machine, and you can not re-install it onto another unit. Thats just one of the reasons i will never buy it, i may be forced to run it, but would much prefer uBuntu.... if it was for the damn wireless support!

[Tomm]

1* yeh ok it was just a stupid dig really. just that, almost every single mac advert i see, is a petty dig at windows, and basically it has something fit/pretty/good looking representing mac. I was just making a joke based on how Mac's are portrayed by them self. I still don't think it has anything over xp though.

Yeah I know what you mean - "I'm a Mac". Urgh. But OS X is really lovely, and I reckon if people gave it a chance, they would realise this.

Kris, the EULA for windows vista(doesn't matter what version or type) states that it can only be install on one machine, and you can not re-install it onto another unit. Thats just one of the reasons i will never buy it

You haven't read the thread - That only applies to the OEM version. And to be honest, it's not going to affect that many people, so stop whining about it.

As for people just bagging Vista when they've not used it, that's just stupid. Philth - You've obviously got some beta version of the software - The real version's only been out a week. That's why it crashes.

[Fixed Pants™]

Here.

Just ran the test.

There currently isn't any drivers for my wireless network adaptor, or my Networking controller.

I'll wait a while.

Thanks.

My comp can run vista fine, just need to free up C: space... Most of my shiz works too.

[Broomer]

on my "vista capable" laptop, vista will have problems with my graphics card drivers and my wireless network card drivers and also problems with a handfull of components and software.

[munkee]

I dont get why everyone is being so shitty about windows being locked down to one machine. You bought one valid copy of windows for one pc, if you want more you buy more licences thats how life bloody works.

Edited February 10, 2007 by Spacemunkee

[PaRtZ]

I hope im not the only one who's skimmed through this thread thinking "wtf are they talking about" lol

My question is: is it really worth, spending money and buying it, when I don't have any troubles with XP at all?

[tank_rider]

I dont get why everyone is being so shitty about windows being locked down to one machine. You bought one valid copy of windows for one pc, if you want more you buy more licences thats how life bloody works.

Well thats what windowns wants, and if you buy the EOM version then thats perfectly understandable as its only meant to be for an original equipment pc which has one hardware config. However i plan on buying the full retail version once SP1 comes out, i have to buy the full versions as i don't currently have a legit version of xp :$ . With that i would expect to be able to install it on my 3 computers, as I own the license and therefore should be able to install it on the 3 PC's which I use, there's only one of me, so i can only be physically using one at a time, therefore it should't violate any license agreements. Thats how all other software license agreements work, so if M$ have moved away from that then thats their perogative i guess. Oh and btw, there's no real need for 99.9% of people to get the ultimate edition, the home premium will do everything your likely to ever need, thats the one i'll be getting having used xp pro and MCE.

[Fixed Pants™]

Talking to a friend at school, he and his relations are all comp programmers/hackers... He said vistas gonna be open source so people are gonna be able to get it illegally very soon after it's released. Or something like that.

[tank_rider]

Talking to a friend at school, he and his relations are all comp programmers/hackers... He said vistas gonna be open source so people are gonna be able to get it illegally very soon after it's released. Or something like that.

Certain parts of vista will be released open source so that programmers etc have more ability to work with it properly instead of using reg and kernel hacks which will not work in vista. Thats how I read all the information about the open source stuff. I highly doubt there will ever be a full version released open source, else someone would just remove the authentication stuff lol.

[munkee]

Well thats what windowns wants, and if you buy the EOM version then thats perfectly understandable as its only meant to be for an original equipment pc which has one hardware config. However i plan on buying the full retail version once SP1 comes out, i have to buy the full versions as i don't currently have a legit version of xp :$ . With that i would expect to be able to install it on my 3 computers, as I own the license and therefore should be able to install it on the 3 PC's which I use, there's only one of me, so i can only be physically using one at a time, therefore it should't violate any license agreements. Thats how all other software license agreements work, so if M$ have moved away from that then thats their perogative i guess. Oh and btw, there's no real need for 99.9% of people to get the ultimate edition, the home premium will do everything your likely to ever need, thats the one i'll be getting having used xp pro and MCE.

Other companies do it fine, in terms of having the actual software on a cd you only need the one, but then you buy the extra licence keys for other machines much like autocad works. I still think if you buy one copy, you should still have to pay for each machine you put it on or atleast get a deal on the other 3. Like i said.. just like autocad licences work

Anyway.. back on topic... can i get cheaper vista?

Edited February 10, 2007 by Spacemunkee

[tank_rider]

Other companies do it fine, in terms of having the actual software on a cd you only need the one, but then you buy the extra licence keys for other machines much like autocad works. I still think if you buy one copy, you should still have to pay for each machine you put it on or atleast get a deal on the other 3. Like i said.. just like autocad licences work

Anyway.. back on topic... can i get cheaper vista?

Your examples of CAD programs is exactly what i mean, it can be installed on as many machines as you want, but the number of licenses you have determines how many pc's can run it at once. I have 3 PC's, so long as im only using one at a time it's the same surely?

As for you getting the upgrade version, so long as you have an official version of XP (which you do) you can get the upgrade version. If you look on bit-tech theres a method of doing a clean install using the upgrade version too.

[munkee]

Awesome will do that now then. Can close topic unless people want to have a bit of a rant still p

Also.. i think im becoming a nerd:

Edited February 10, 2007 by Spacemunkee

[Greetings]

The only performance-related thing I realized when running Vista was that my HDD was working all the time, just like doing a defrag, even when the computer was idle.

[Krisboats]

Awesome will do that now then. Can close topic unless people want to have a bit of a rant still p

Also.. i think im becoming a nerd:

Ha ha, i think the nerdyness went out the window with being scared shitless

[Orgun_Donor]

Reinstallation blues

I saved the best for last. Most people never actually install Windows; instead, they just buy a new PC that has the OS pre-installed (of course, the fact that it's virtually impossible to buy a PC that doesn't have Windows already installed, so that Linux users end up paying the Windows tax, is a major problem, but that's an issue for another column).

But I'll bet that most of my readers are exactly the kinds of people that end up buying retail copies of Windows and installing them on many different machines - or virtual machines, as I discussed above. Windows Activation, introduced with Windows XP, insures that you don't install the same copy of Windows on more than one machine at a time. That's fine - annoying, but fine. But clause 15 of the new Vista EULA - "REASSIGN TO ANOTHER DEVICE" - goes way beyond that.

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."

b. Windows Anytime Upgrade Software. The first user of the software may reassign the license to another device one time, but only if the license terms of the software you upgraded from allows reassignment.

As I read this, you go to the store and buy a copy of Vista, which you install on a PC you had in your office. A year later, another PC becomes available that's a bit more up to date, so you decide to transfer your Vista license to that machine.

You're now finished with that Vista license. Done. Game over, man. Whether you shelled out $199 for Home Basic or broke the bank with the $399 Ultimate makes no difference. You've reassigned the license twice, and that's all that Microsoft allows.

That quote can be found here.

So im sorry but if you plan on buying vista be fairly carefull with it! And you will find that applies to both OEM AND Retail versions!

Ohh if you want to d/l the eula and look at it for yourself you can do here.

Edited February 10, 2007 by Orgun_Donor

[Krisboats]

That quote can be found here.

So im sorry but if you plan on buying vista be fairly carefull with it! And you will find that applies to both OEM AND Retail versions!

Ohh if you want to d/l the eula and look at it for yourself you can do here.

Actually i've just read through it and what he's written isn't whats written in the contract. The "reassign to another device" section actually states. With windows Anytime upgrade being a chance for users to upgrade their edition of Windows Vista by buying a license online and software other than anytime upgrade referring to all other retail versions of vista.

15. REASSIGN TO ANOTHER DEVICE.

a. Software Other than Windows Anytime Upgrade. You may uninstall the software and

install it on another device for your use. You may not do so to share this license between

devices.

b. Windows Anytime Upgrade Software. The first user of the software may reassign the

license to another device one time, but only if the license terms of the software you upgraded

from allows reassignment.

So from what i gather, you can buy windows vista and if you want to upgrade it you can do using the Anytime upgrade to move from say vista premium to ultimate, however this online purchase (while being cheaper) is only transferable to another device once. Where as going out and buying a new copy of vista ultimate will allow you to change it round.

EDIT: It aslo states that

Some changes to your computer

components or the software may require you to reactivate the software.

That bits the same as XP, upgrade a component and you have to re-activate the software. I've done it a total of 6 times with my copy of xp so far. And once when i *cough* looked away while my cousin installed it on his computer *cough*

Edited February 10, 2007 by Krisboats

[Orgun_Donor]

Well people like Tank are not going to be able to install it on their 3 machines, he can in stall it on one, then uninstall it and put it on another, then he as to buy a new version of vista. Thats what the EULA is stating.

14. SOFTWARE TRANSFER. Internal. You may move the Software to a different

Workstation Computer. After the transfer, you must completely remove the Software from the

former Workstation Computer. Transfer to Third Party. The initial user of the Software may

make a one-time permanent transfer of this EULA and Software to another end user, provided

the initial user retains no copies of the Software. This transfer must include the Software and

the Proof of License label. The transfer may not be an indirect transfer, such as a consignment.

Prior to the transfer, the end user receiving the Software must agree to all the EULA terms.

Unlike the Vista EULA, this states you can transfer between as many computers as you like, but can only transfer the EULA on once.

[Simon]

Er, EULA = End User License Agreement, as in, a person, not hardware.

[Krisboats]

Well people like Tank are not going to be able to install it on their 3 machines, he can in stall it on one, then uninstall it and put it on another, then he as to buy a new version of vista. Thats what the EULA is stating.

Unlike the Vista EULA, this states you can transfer between as many computers as you like, but can only transfer the EULA on once.

It doesn't mention anywhere about it being restricted to only changing once, other than when you purchase it online as an upgrade to your existing vista package.

Its exact words are.. "You may uninstall the software and

install it on another device for your use."

Device being defined as another computer or even another partition on the same drive. Except of course if you have the ultimate edition, in which case your able to store the installation files on a seperate drive for distrubution between other computers if you have the appropriate licenses.

Its clear enough for me.

Show me somewhere in the agreement where it says this only transfering it once thing applies to all copies (not just the Anytime upgrade copy) and i'll admit i'm wrong.

[poopipe]

license argument = bollocks. it's the same as the XP license by the look of it ie. 1 license to 1 machine.

Its only a couple of hundred quid, anyone who's complaining about it probably hasn't paid for their copy of XP anyway so they're just going to steal vista and it won't cost them anything.

Hardware requirements...

One of the machines we tested with vista at work is a 1.4ghz pentium 4 with 512mb RAM and a 64mb geforce 2. it runs ok, just not quickly.

We've also tested it on a fancy 3.something Ghz super-dooper-extreme-dual-edition-whatever-the-f**k-they-call-em-these-days-pentium with 2Gb of memory and a 512mb geforce 6800ultra and it runs very bloody quickly.

The carefully measured results indicate that on a shit computer it runs like shit and on a very bloody fast computer it runs very bloody fast.

[munkee]

license argument = bollocks. it's the same as the XP license by the look of it ie. 1 license to 1 machine.

Its only a couple of hundred quid, anyone who's complaining about it probably hasn't paid for their copy of XP anyway so they're just going to steal vista and it won't cost them anything.

Hardware requirements...

One of the machines we tested with vista at work is a 1.4ghz pentium 4 with 512mb RAM and a 64mb geforce 2. it runs ok, just not quickly.

We've also tested it on a fancy 3.something Ghz super-dooper-extreme-dual-edition-whatever-the-f**k-they-call-em-these-days-pentium with 2Gb of memory and a 512mb geforce 6800ultra and it runs very bloody quickly.

The carefully measured results indicate that on a shit computer it runs like shit and on a very bloody fast computer it runs very bloody fast.

Should be good on mine ultra nerd (me) now has WD raptor hard drive for cs:s load times

[paolo]

Why I will probably never buy Vista...

A) I dual boot Ubuntu and XP

You actually have to pay for Vista

C) The OS has way to much a hold of the computer. The more the OS controls stuff on it's own, the more a virus can take over the computer.

D) The ridiculous min requirements, if simply the OS needs 512mb ram, what the hell happens when you actually start to do something with the computer! Just comparing how slow my computer is under XP compared to ubuntu gives me the jyblies, I can't imagine it running even more useless stuff...

E)

Vista's fine print raises red flags for some users

Michael Geist, The Ottawa Citizen

Published: Tuesday, January 30, 2007

Vista, the latest version of Microsoft's Windows operating system, makes its long awaited debut today. The first major upgrade in five years, Vista incorporates a new, sleek look and features a wide array of new functionality such as better search tools and stronger security. The early reviews have tended to damn the upgrade with faint praise, however, characterizing it as the best, most secure version of Windows, yet one that contains few, if any, revolutionary features.

While those reviews have focused chiefly on Vista's new functionality, for the past few months the legal and technical communities have dug into Vista's "fine print." Those communities have raised red flags about Vista's legal terms and conditions as well as the technical limitations that have been incorporated into the software at the insistence of the motion picture industry.

The net effect of these concerns may constitute the real Vista revolution as they point to an unprecedented loss of consumer control over their computers. In the name of shielding consumers from computer viruses and protecting copyright owners from potential infringement, Vista seemingly wrestles control of the "user experience" from the user.

Vista's legal fine print includes extensive provisions granting Microsoft the right to regularly check the legitimacy of the software and holds the prospect of deleting certain programs without the user's knowledge. During the installation process, users "activate" Vista by associating it with a particular computer or device and transmitting certain hardware information directly to Microsoft.

Even after installation, the legal agreement grants Microsoft the right to revalidate the software or to require users to reactivate it should they make changes to their computer components. In addition, it sets significant limits on the ability to copy or transfer the software, prohibiting anything more than a single backup copy and setting strict limits on transferring the program to different devices or users.

Vista also incorporates Windows Defender, an anti-virus program that actively scans computers for "spyware, adware, and other potentially unwanted software." The agreement does not define any of these terms, leaving it to Microsoft to determine what constitutes unwanted software.

Once operational, the agreement warns that Windows Defender will, by default, automatically remove software rated "high" or "severe,"even though that may result in other software ceasing to work or mistakenly result in the removal of software that is not unwanted.

For greater certainty, the terms and conditions remove any doubt about who is in control by providing that "this agreement only gives you some rights to use the software. Microsoft reserves all other rights." For those users frustrated by the software's limitations, Microsoft cautions that "you may not work around any technical limitations in the software."

Those technical limitations have proven to be even more controversial than the legal ones. Last December, Peter Gutmann, a computer scientist at the University of Auckland in New Zealand released a paper called A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection. The paper pieced together the technical fine print behind Vista, unravelling numerous limitations in the new software seemingly installed at the direct request of Hollywood interests.

Gutmann focused primarily on the restrictions associated with the ability to play back high-definition content from the next-generation DVDs such as Blu-Ray and HD-DVD (referred to as "premium content"). He noted that Vista intentionally degrades the picture quality of premium content when played on most computer monitors.

Gutmann's research suggests that consumers will pay more for less with poorer picture quality yet higher costs since Microsoft needed to obtain licences from third parties in order to access the technology that protects premium content (those licence fees were presumably incorporated into Vista's price). Moreover, he calculated that the technological controls would require considerable consumption of computing power with the system conducting 30 checks each second to ensure that there are no attacks on the security of the premium content.

Microsoft responded to Gutmann's paper earlier this month, maintaining that content owners demanded the premium content restrictions. According to Microsoft, "if the policies [associated with the premium content]required protections that Windows Vista couldn't support, then the content would not be able to play at all on Windows Vista PCs." While that may be true, left unsaid is Microsoft's ability to demand a better deal on behalf of its enormous user base or the prospect that users could opt-out of the technical controls.

When Microsoft introduced Windows 95 more than a decade ago, it adopted the Rolling Stones Start Me Up as its theme song. As millions of consumers contemplate the company's latest upgrade, the legal and technological restrictions may leave them singing You Can't Always Get What You Want.

Michael Geist holds the Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law at the University of Ottawa, Faculty of Law. He can reached at mgeist@uottawa.ca or online at http://www.michaelgeist.ca .

� The Ottawa Citizen 2007

Comes to think of it, what are the actual advantages of vista !?

[Krisboats]

Vista can check the legality of the programs installed on it?

Thats not very good for most users, any software thats been "borrowed" from friends or downloaded can be remotely wiped from you computer by microsoft. Quite worrying really. Someone somewhere will have the ability to see every single porn video you own .

I don't actually know the benefits of vista, its "supposed" to be more secure, and theres DX10 support for new games, which vista's supposed to be designed to run better than XP. But for the average internet/msn/e-mail user i guess its just security and unneccessary fancy stuff.