Vista 64 Ultimate Retail or OEM?

RoEy · 12 Feb 2009 at 14:13

Hi all,

Building my system next weekend and I want to know which of the two is the better choice? Apparently OEM doesn’t allow any hardware changes unless you want to buy another copy, which I can't see being the case. Surely you just give MS a ring and get a new code?

What's the benefits of retail? Whichever I choose to get; they're both mega over priced.

Hope someone can help.

RoEy

stoofa · 12 Feb 2009 at 14:22

Please read the sticky thread at the top of this forum - it will answer your questions.

Main difference between retail and OEM.

Retail:
Purchase license, license can be moved from machine to machine and can support the upgrading of any hardware any number of times.
License effectively lasts for the lifetime of the OS.

OEM:
Tied to the motherboard in use when originally installed.
Will support any hardware upgrades/changes with the exception of the motherboard.
Once you replace the motherboard your license is lost - you will need to purchase another.
License also cannot be transferred to any other machine.

Brian Stuart · 12 Feb 2009 at 14:39

RoEy said:
Hi all,

Whichever I choose to get; they're both mega over priced.

Hope someone can help.

RoEy

Vista HP approx £92. 1 years usage equates to 25p a day. Hardly overpriced.

Glaucus · 12 Feb 2009 at 15:11

Get retail. why do you want Ultimate?
Home premium is good enough for the vast majority of people.

OEM is linked to the mobo so if you change mobo you have to buy a new copy, where retail you can keep using.

With retail you'll also be abel to buy the windows7 upgrade when it's released. Rather than the whole thing.

Also look at 2nd hand copies of vista they can be had for as little as £40 by bidding but can't say where.

RoEy · 12 Feb 2009 at 15:13

stoofa said:
Please read the sticky thread at the top of this forum - it will answer your questions.

Main difference between retail and OEM.

Retail:
Purchase license, license can be moved from machine to machine and can support the upgrading of any hardware any number of times.
License effectively lasts for the lifetime of the OS.

OEM:
Tied to the motherboard in use when originally installed.
Will support any hardware upgrades/changes with the exception of the motherboard.
Once you replace the motherboard your license is lost - you will need to purchase another.
License also cannot be transferred to any other machine.

Thanks for the info. So what if you have a copy of OEM and let's say your motherboard dies after 2 months, then what? A friend of mine has just told me he has made numerous motherboard changes and just phones MS to be given another key.

Brian Stuart said:
Vista HP approx £92. 1 years usage equates to 25p a day. Hardly overpriced.

Look at the title of the thread, Ultimate...

I get what you're trying to say though.

RoEy

Morthoseth · 12 Feb 2009 at 15:19

While i realise i'm probably breaking the terms, my Vista ultimate OEM has installed on every motherboard i've had without problems? Not even had to phone or the like?

Brian Stuart · 12 Feb 2009 at 15:42

RoEy said:
Thanks for the info. So what if you have a copy of OEM and let's say your motherboard dies after 2 months, then what? A friend of mine has just told me he has made numerous motherboard changes and just phones MS to be given another key.

Look at the title of the thread, Ultimate...

I get what you're trying to say though.

RoEy

Sorry, missed the Ultimate bit. As Acidhell2 says Ultimate is not worth the money. If you replace the motherboard under warranty then you can reactivate and still be licensed but not if you replace for upgrade purposes.
If you plan on swapping motherboards frequently then Vista HP X64 retail would be your best bet.

RoEy · 12 Feb 2009 at 15:50

Morthoseth said:
While i realise i'm probably breaking the terms, my Vista ultimate OEM has installed on every motherboard i've had without problems? Not even had to phone or the like?

Sweeeet.

RoEy

stoofa · 12 Feb 2009 at 17:06

RoEy said:
Sweeeet.

RoEy

*Sigh*
If this is your plan then stop right now - do not "Buy" any copy of Vista, simply download yourself an illegal copy from the internet and have done with it.

If you buy OEM and swap your motherboard you are no more licence legal than somebody who pirates their copy of the OS.

So if you're planning on this route save yourself the money and just steal the OS now rather than later.

RoEy · 12 Feb 2009 at 19:09

stoofa said:
*Sigh*
If this is your plan then stop right now - do not "Buy" any copy of Vista, simply download yourself an illegal copy from the internet and have done with it.

If you buy OEM and swap your motherboard you are no more licence legal than somebody who pirates their copy of the OS.

So if you're planning on this route save yourself the money and just steal the OS now rather than later.

I think you my friend better wake up and 'smell' the coffee and I'll do as I please.

So let me get this straight...

If I were to 'buy' an OEM version of Vista and I happen to change my motherboard and proceeded to phone MS for a new code; this would make me equally dishonest as someone who illegally downloads it and pays nothing?

You're in cloud cuckoo land matey...

'Let him who is without sin cast the first stone......'

RoEy

Lagmeister · 12 Feb 2009 at 22:56

I think you mistake what you are buying here, you are paying for a license to use the software, you do not own the software outright and you must obey the terms of the license, in this case your install is tied to your motherboard.

So re-installing on a new motherboard means your are on the same level as a pirate who paid nothing, you pay extra for the retail license because it gives you more privelleges.

RoEy · 12 Feb 2009 at 23:13

Lagmeister said:
So re-installing on a new motherboard means your are on the same level as a pirate who paid nothing, you pay extra for the retail license because it gives you more privelleges.

Sorry, I'm not on the same level as a pirate. It's not surprising people do pirate though with ridiculous license agreements like that.

I bet most people who use the OEM version have or would re-install without purchasing another copy.

RoEy

datawrite · 12 Feb 2009 at 23:34

RoEy said:
Sorry, I'm not on the same level as a pirate. It's not surprising people do pirate though with ridiculous license agreements like that.

I bet most people who use the OEM version have or would re-install without purchasing another copy.

RoEy

Done this myself. Microsoft never said no when i told them it was a new Motherboard. Activated without any problems.

Daegan · 12 Feb 2009 at 23:40

RoEy said:
I bet most people who use the OEM version have or would re-install without purchasing another copy.

Most people with an OEM version are average users who will have had it packaged with an OEM supplied PC - unsurprisingly that's how the vast majority of OEM licenses are sold. Whether the license is transferable or not doesn't matter to them because they wouldn't upgrade a motherboard or try and transfer the license anyway.

csmager · 12 Feb 2009 at 23:46

datawrite said:
Done this myself. Microsoft never said no when i told them it was a new Motherboard. Activated without any problems.

And with Windows 98, you could buy an OEM copy and install it on 20 pcs. Did that make that legal too?

What you can do, and what the license allows are two separate things. Activated is not the same as licensed.

datawrite · 12 Feb 2009 at 23:47

Who actually checks that its licensed? Who actually really cares?

If Microsoft say yes, we can reactivate it no problem who is going to worry about that?

CaptainCrash · 12 Feb 2009 at 23:56

Lagmeister said:
So re-installing on a new motherboard means your are on the same level as a pirate who paid nothing, you pay extra for the retail license because it gives you more privelleges.

As I understand Microsoft's OEM licencing, you're allowed to install on a new motherboard in certain specific conditions (eg motherboard failure), but the new motherboard must be the same make/model or, if it's no longer available, one that's as close as possible in terms of specifications (ie, it shouldn't constitute an upgrade).

In practice of course it's virtually impossible to enforce, and it's hard to imagine how any new replacement for, say, a failed three-year-old mobo that's no longer on sale *wouldn't* effectively be an upgrade.

I think MS tacitly acknowledge this, hence the ease with which it's possible to install/activate with an OEM Vista key on a new motherboard... maybe not strictly within the letter and spirit of OEM licencing, but not IMHO worth losing too much sleep over. You could always jump up and down a bit on your old mobo if it makes you feel better...

RoEy · 13 Feb 2009 at 09:17

datawrite said:
Who actually checks that its licensed? Who actually really cares?

If Microsoft say yes, we can reactivate it no problem who is going to worry about that?

Too right.

CaptainCrash said:
As I understand Microsoft's OEM licencing, you're allowed to install on a new motherboard in certain specific conditions (eg motherboard failure), but the new motherboard must be the same make/model or, if it's no longer available, one that's as close as possible in terms of specifications (ie, it shouldn't constitute an upgrade).

In practice of course it's virtually impossible to enforce, and it's hard to imagine how any new replacement for, say, a failed three-year-old mobo that's no longer on sale *wouldn't* effectively be an upgrade.

I think MS tacitly acknowledge this, hence the ease with which it's possible to install/activate with an OEM Vista key on a new motherboard... maybe not strictly within the letter and spirit of OEM licencing, but not IMHO worth losing too much sleep over. You could always jump up and down a bit on your old mobo if it makes you feel better...

Very good post and totally agree.

OEM it is then.

RoEy

Morthoseth · 13 Feb 2009 at 10:16

At the end of the day, i gave Microsoft £200+, which in my books makes me better than the people who simply pirate operating systems, i have changed mobo once or twice simply because i needed to as far as upgrades went, as i see it - that is the same system. I suppose that isnt how Microsofts lawyers would see it, but i'm sure they would rather prosecute those who download the whole thing for free!

At least they had some money from me

RoEy · 13 Feb 2009 at 10:22

Morthoseth said:
At the end of the day, i gave Microsoft £200+, which in my books makes me better than the people who simply pirate operating systems, i have changed mobo once or twice simply because i needed to as far as upgrades went, as i see it - that is the same system. I suppose that isnt how Microsofts lawyers would see it, but i'm sure they would rather prosecute those who download the whole thing for free!

At least they had some money from me

Exactly the point I was making too.

RoEy