[8800 GTS 320MB + Vista] vs [7900GS + XP]?

[WJA96]

OEM picks up on mobo change mainly. Don't worry though, I have Vista Home Premium, and managed to re-activate no problem after upgrading from nforce4/amd to 680i and a 6600 Just took a phone call, which lasted about 10mins, and all was sorted

Yes, but you've just confessed to using a copy of Microsoft Vista OEM and breaching the T&C's of the licence. That's software piracy because you should have bought a new copy, and by saying to another forum member, you don't need to worry, you're encouraging him or her to use illegal software, surely?

 

[mishima]

This is how I understand it;

XP/XP Pro would always reactivate 3 times.

Vista Full Product will always reactivate with hardware changes.

Vista OEM will activate only once online. After that you will have to speak to a human or automated voice system if you change the motherboard. Anything else should be fine and not require reactivation. When you get through to the Microsoft representative there is a question tree that you are taken through and unless you take the right branches at each step you are not allowed a reactivation code.

I believe that to give the right combination of answers would breach the rules of the forum, but I would suspect that the system is not unbeatable for the simple reason that as far as I know the person generating the reactivation code cannot see the make and model of motherboard you say you have. The automated system does know and it may be able to check from your hardware ID code. I don't think anyone outside Microsoft knows exactly how this is going to pan out long-term, but if in doubt, buy a full copy. With a full copy you can do pretty much anything and reactivate as long as you only use one copy at a time.

I had heard a rumour about this system but didn't actually believe it existed. How ridiculous.

 

[WJA96]

I had heard a rumour about this system but didn't actually believe it existed. How ridiculous.

Why? Bill Gates et al make their money selling software. Because his company make it, they decide how you can use it. You don't have to buy it, but if you do, you should use it as the licence dictates.

And every time you don't buy another OEM copy of Vista, you are taking OcUK's cut away as well, remember.

By pirating Vista, you are putting OcUK out of business! ROFL

 

[mcwildcard]

Yes, but you've just confessed to using a copy of Microsoft Vista OEM and breaching the T&C's of the licence. That's software piracy because you should have bought a new copy, and by saying to another forum member, you don't need to worry, you're encouraging him or her to use illegal software, surely?

I don't understand, if he's using the licence for the same one system, then surely he's not breaking any rules?

 

[WJA96]

I don't understand, if he's using the licence for the same one system, then surely he's not breaking any rules?

He's actually breaking several rules, and Microsoft are allowing resellers to break one too as technically OEM copies shouldn't be sold to end-users, only with the basis of a complete system, defined as - a motherboard.

OEM is designed to make sure any new computer sold is sold with a copy of Windows. This done for 2 reasons, firstly because they don't want to allow pirate copies to flourish and secondly because they don't want you to go over to open source.

So they sell OEM copies cheaply to resellers and system builders.

Enthusiasts, who want to build their own hardware, are licenced to change whatever they like, but they have to buy a full copy. I don't see what the issue is. Most gamers would cheerfully shell out £200-£300/year on new graphics cards but they mump and moan about having to pay for the operating system that holds it all together.

The OEM licence is very clear - it is tied to the original COMPUTER it was installed on, and the basis for that PC is the motherboard. Change the motherboard, get an new OEM copy.

 

[mcwildcard]

He's actually breaking several rules, and Microsoft are allowing resellers to break one too as technically OEM copies shouldn't be sold to end-users, only with the basis of a complete system, defined as - a motherboard.

OEM is designed to make sure any new computer sold is sold with a copy of Windows. This done for 2 reasons, firstly because they don't want to allow pirate copies to flourish and secondly because they don't want you to go over to open source.

So they sell OEM copies cheaply to resellers and system builders.

Enthusiasts, who want to build their own hardware, are licenced to change whatever they like, but they have to buy a full copy. I don't see what the issue is. Most gamers would cheerfully shell out £200-£300/year on new graphics cards but they mump and moan about having to pay for the operating system that holds it all together.

The OEM licence is very clear - it is tied to the original COMPUTER it was installed on, and the basis for that PC is the motherboard. Change the motherboard, get an new OEM copy.

Ah I see, but what would happen if the mobo died?

 

[t31os]

Here's an interesting question, I currently have a 7900GS + XP and I've been looking at notching up to an 8800GTS 320MB.
I'm happy with my current FPS on games (generally BF2142), but due to issues with the card I figured I may as well 'DX10 up' my system.
I've also been considering going up to Vista, but have been concerned by the drop in framerates that gamers are having due to the shoddy drivers available.
So my question is, in general, will the 8800GTS + Vista beat the 7900GS + XP for performance in games?
(Obviously in time the drivers will get better and it'll be a no-brainer, but I want to know how it stands currently)

Oh and I can't be bothered to set up a dual boot.

My system spec is thus:

E6300 @ 2.8GHz
2 x 1GB OcUK Value PC6400
GA-965P-DS3
Hanns-G 1440x900 Monitor
AC Silentium T1 Pro Case
500w Arctic Cooling PSU built into case

I have the same card and XP, i'm also having issues (still playable), could you be specific, would be helpful to compare.

 

[WJA96]

Ah I see, but what would happen if the mobo died?

If he replaces it with the same make and model, it won't even have to re-activate.

 

[mcwildcard]

If he replaces it with the same make and model, it won't even have to re-activate.

Sounds like the OEM will be adequate for me then, thanks for all the info

 

[mcwildcard]

I have the same card and XP, i'm also having issues (still playable), could you be specific, would be helpful to compare.

It's all here: http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=17699939&highlight=7900gs

 

[drunkenmaster]

He's actually breaking several rules, and Microsoft are allowing resellers to break one too as technically OEM copies shouldn't be sold to end-users, only with the basis of a complete system, defined as - a motherboard.

OEM is designed to make sure any new computer sold is sold with a copy of Windows. This done for 2 reasons, firstly because they don't want to allow pirate copies to flourish and secondly because they don't want you to go over to open source.

So they sell OEM copies cheaply to resellers and system builders.

Enthusiasts, who want to build their own hardware, are licenced to change whatever they like, but they have to buy a full copy. I don't see what the issue is. Most gamers would cheerfully shell out £200-£300/year on new graphics cards but they mump and moan about having to pay for the operating system that holds it all together.

The OEM licence is very clear - it is tied to the original COMPUTER it was installed on, and the basis for that PC is the motherboard. Change the motherboard, get an new OEM copy.

firstly, people who jump into every thread and point out any wrong doing, being backseat moderators and the like are always the most irritating, decent discussion killing, thread closing cause on all forums. you don't have to pipe up just for the hell of it.

also, its widely known that the stipulation for OEM installs is generally so people don't buy it, install on one computer and install 50 times on 50 different computers aswell that all run windows at the same time.

the PROGRAM within activation uses motherboard to tie the activation to it as its the least changed part in a system, simple as that. if you install it on other computers it makes it difficult as quite frankly it should. but if you phone M$ any amount of times 99% of the people will happily let you reactive if you give them a valid reason, if i've changed motherboard i've phoned said this and they've let me activate over the phone. so you are wrong, M$ have repeatedly let this happen.

the tying it to the motherboard is really the best way to limit the amount of systems a pirated copy is installed on, i haven't once been told by MS themselves that i can't use an OEM copy and reinstall on the same computer. because its an OEM licence, single user licence.

quite frankly many many many companies have terms and conditions writen in that they have no intent on inforcing, or care about, or even apply to any possible situation. the general intent is, if you buy one computer and have one computer in your house but you upgrade it thats fine. but that licence is intended for use in that computer only. if you buy a complete new system and sell off the first one then the licence isn't intended for the new system. theres nothing unfair about this, a game costs £30, the OS costs £65-130(in reality).

anyway this is how i see the t&c's and the intent behind them, and so far M$ has agreed with me at every step and every install over 8-10 years.

 

[WJA96]

firstly, people who jump into every thread and point out any wrong doing, being backseat moderators and the like are always the most irritating, decent discussion killing, thread closing cause on all forums. you don't have to pipe up just for the hell of it.

I count myself soundly scolded, chided and I promise I'll back-seat moderate no more.

Comments based on using Microsoft products for 8-10 years

Is this 8-10 years experience re-installing Vista? Are you, or do you work for, a Qualified Microsoft Reseller or System Builder? Have you been following (and it's been a very long path) the will-they/won't-they story of licencing for Enthusiasts and Normal users?

Up until now, Microsoft (and you'll notice that I never disrespect Microsoft by calling them Microshaft or M$ or any of the other derogatory things people who resent Microsoft's success call them) have used people to validate re-installs. That will change. An automated system is being introduced that will ask you questions and you press "1 for Yes, 2 for No" to answer a series of questions. This system won't allow you to lie to it because it will know what make and model of motherboard you have.

By taking a firm stand on Full Copy=Enthusiast, very open licencing vs. OEM copy=Normal users, no requirement to re-install on new equipment, Microsoft have let us pick whether or not we want to be able to change hardware. Yes, they've pre-loaded the cost up-front, but that's how they've decided to do it.

Now, I make my living selling products that run on the Microsoft Server Platform and I think it's a very good system and I don't bite the hand that feeds, so you'll have to forgive me if I think you should be less positive about software piracy, which is what we're talking about.

 

[snowdog]

WJA96, please stop turning threads into anti piracy threads .


Ontopic:

I recon 8800GTS will be still a lot faster in vista than 7900gs in xp, 8800 is a beast compared to 7900.

 

[WJA96]

WJA, please stop turning threads into anti piracy threads .


Ontopic:

I recon 8800GTS will be still a lot faster in vista than 7900gs in xp, 8800 is a beast compared to 7900.

OK Snowdo.

 

[spb251272]

Yes, but you've just confessed to using a copy of Microsoft Vista OEM and breaching the T&C's of the licence. That's software piracy because you should have bought a new copy, and by saying to another forum member, you don't need to worry, you're encouraging him or her to use illegal software, surely?

Whoah, come down off your high horse I haven't PIRATED anything! I paid for my copy, and I'm exploiting a loophole, which, I may add, I discovered on Anandtech.

Quote from Anandtech: -

We've also had several questions since our initial articles about what can be done with legitimate versions of Windows given that Vista has better activation controls than XP. Among other poorly kept secrets, it's known that Microsoft did not stick to the End User License Agreement for XP very well for OEM copies - while the EULA for an OEM copy of XP made it clear that it was for installation on a single machine only and tied to that machine (or rather its motherboard) for the rest of time, Microsoft has been letting XP users reactivate anyhow without trouble. As a result users who had purchased OEM copies of XP back in 2001 have continued to reuse it up through today, which is an excellent deal for them given the low price of the OEM versions spread over 5 years. While the EULA has not changed for Vista as far as this policy goes, there have been concerns and rumors that Microsoft will be clamping down on this practice.

To be fair, we have no way to predict exactly what Microsoft will do here. It's possible they will continue this policy, but that's not a good enough answer as they can change it at any time given that they control the activation system for Vista. Simply put, the only way to be sure that a purchased copy of Vista will be transferable to a new computer is to get a retail version, either as an upgrade or a full version. Going with an OEM version may work now, but it will always be a gamble on if/when Microsoft will clamp down on transfers./end quote

So please explain what is illegal about what I've done. Should I be expecting the police to turn up any minute? I really don't appreciate the confrontational attitude. I was simply giving some advice based upon my knowledge of what you can LEGALLY achieve with Vista OEM. There will also be a lot of people exploiting the loophole that lets you use it for 120 days without activation. Is that illegal? I don't think so.

I wonder how many people have downloaded vista and are using the crack to freeze the 30 day activation time limit? Now THAT is illegal.

 

[Tute]

It doesn't matter if it activates after a motherboard change. If you change it and then reactivate an OEM copy, you have broken the EULA for Vista, and therefore have broken the law.

You might not ever get caught, but that doesn't make it right. If Microsoft knew what you'd done and who you were, they'd remove your activation rights, and they would be well within their rights to do so.

 

[Deleted User 234324]

OEM Licence or not, the justification for installing it on another system/upgraded system is perfectly valid imho, sure you can go out and buy the full version if you feel your personal morals will be tainted but at the end of the day microsoft will always charge ridiculous money for their operating systems wether we like it or not.

There's is no competition, no choice in the matter you either buy there software or dont use a pc, i certainly wouldnt call linux/mac osx competition, windows dominates the market WATCH YOUR LANGUAGE! it wouldnt supprise me if 98% was winblows, 1% linux, 1% mac osx. It certainly feels that way sometimes.

Who cares about EULA's anyway, does anyone actually read them. Infact those that do need to chill out imho. The day average joe gets sued for breeching the EULA of a multi million dollar company i'll take notice.

 

[WJA96]

Whoah, come down off your high horse I haven't PIRATED anything! I paid for my copy, and I'm exploiting a loophole, which, I may add, I discovered on Anandtech.

Quote from Anandtech: -

We've also had several questions since our initial articles about what can be done with legitimate versions of Windows given that Vista has better activation controls than XP. Among other poorly kept secrets, it's known that Microsoft did not stick to the End User License Agreement for XP very well for OEM copies - while the EULA for an OEM copy of XP made it clear that it was for installation on a single machine only and tied to that machine (or rather its motherboard) for the rest of time, Microsoft has been letting XP users reactivate anyhow without trouble. As a result users who had purchased OEM copies of XP back in 2001 have continued to reuse it up through today, which is an excellent deal for them given the low price of the OEM versions spread over 5 years. While the EULA has not changed for Vista as far as this policy goes, there have been concerns and rumors that Microsoft will be clamping down on this practice.

To be fair, we have no way to predict exactly what Microsoft will do here. It's possible they will continue this policy, but that's not a good enough answer as they can change it at any time given that they control the activation system for Vista. Simply put, the only way to be sure that a purchased copy of Vista will be transferable to a new computer is to get a retail version, either as an upgrade or a full version. Going with an OEM version may work now, but it will always be a gamble on if/when Microsoft will clamp down on transfers./end quote

So please explain what is illegal about what I've done. Should I be expecting the police to turn up any minute? I really don't appreciate the confrontational attitude. I was simply giving some advice based upon my knowledge of what you can LEGALLY achieve with Vista OEM. There will also be a lot of people exploiting the loophole that lets you use it for 120 days without activation. Is that illegal? I don't think so.

I wonder how many people have downloaded vista and are using the crack to freeze the 30 day activation time limit? Now THAT is illegal.

OK - if you're so certain that what you have done is legitimate, publish your name and address and I'll get it checked out for you with FAST. I bet they make you buy a new licence though.

You may ask yourself why I'm so hot about people abusing EULA on software. The answer - I write software and sell it. Every copy that get's pirated, I lose out on. So when I discovered a big company using my software without any licences at all, I asked them if they would cough up. They declined and I joined FAST. Not only did they pay up, they paid up with interest.

I'm also a Microsoft reseller, but as I only sell to people who are buying SAP, I make no money on those licences. That doesn't mean that I don't know what number and type of each licence every PC in the install requires because I do. IT Managers (and Purchasing Managers) will give you all kinds of stories, but at the end of the day they have to pay up, because they want to avoid any interruption to their business.

Microsoft are threatening to clamp down, and anyone who thinks they'll be able to reactivate an OEM copy might well get a invitation to buy a new licence instead. That's all I'm saying. That's all I've ever said. If you breach the EULA, you deserve everything you get. The Anandtech quote simply says that Microsoft didn't rigidly enforce the policy before, not that it was a loophole, or that it was in some way legitimised by them not adhering to their own policy.

The 120 day issue isn't a loophole, it's a backdoor in the protection mechanism for journalists or testers, not for end-users. There are several unexpoited issues that could effectively render the whole process useless, but I'm not going to disclose them.

And that will be my last contribution to this, I think before Snowdog gives me any more grief.

 

[spb251272]

And that will be my last contribution to this, I think before Snowdog gives me any more grief.

Well if that means you're going to chill out and stop accusing people of breaking the law, then good

 

[WJA96]

I stand by my challenge. Tell us who you are and I'll get someone to audit your licencing for you.