Slashdot Mirror
Followup On Paying Twice for Windows
4/3PI*R^3 writes: "In a recent /. posting Paying Twice for Windows we read about how Microsoft contracts obligated businesses to pay twice for Windows if they used disk imaging software. Well, it appears there has been some backlash and Microsoft has modified their position (MS-Word doc) on disk imaging software. At least for Select and Enterprise customers. This still does not help the small shops that can't afford these licensing options."
Actually, they do provide this kind of functionality. We were a small shop and were able to make images that did this.
I wasn't in that section of the shop, so I'm not sure *how* we did it, but we did it.
Run. I like water. Push My rutabaga.
In my company, we recently did a software audit.
After re-reading updated licensing doc. we realized that we were woefully under licensed.
So, now, $16,000 later and nothing but some paper to show for it, we realized that we prolly could have converted our entire system from NT to 'nix or BSD for what we just dumped on licenses.
Actually, we have been discussing doing the conversion to full on *nix and documenting the whole thing for others to read as a reference/encouragement. Not that it will be easy mind you, we are a full on NT, IIS, SQL shop. *all* our apps are custom, written in VB, etc. etc.
Has anyone else done this and put it on the web? I'd like to see there experiances and such before we approch our boss with such an ambitious plan..
Run. I like water. Push My rutabaga.
If you're a newbie, go to a website for newbies or buy a book. It's still cheaper than support from MS. And you're about as likely to talk to a real human either way.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
You might want to ask a lawyer from your college, but Microsoft is on very shaky ground when they demand you have proper LICENSES... They can demand you have enough legit copies for all your machines, but being that it's all the same thing and if you buy fifty CDs, it's fifty identical copies, they can't claim that they're trying to sell a different version for each one, they hurt their case a bit.
Basically, this whole license bullshit has never been tested in court, Microsoft is just looking to bully people.
As long as you own Windows NT, install Windows NT. If they try to sell it to you again, decline.
You actually should say Americans, since in all of North AMERICA we mostly use US versions: trunk, gas.... however we do use the UK spelling sometimes in Canada, but we're sensible enough to use the right words....
--
Comment removed based on user account deletion
OK, now who's legal on their Ghost licenses as well. IIRC each license of Ghost applied to a SPECIFIC computer, not to user counts or anything of that ilk. So if you bought 10 PCs and 10 Ghost licenses you were done. If those 10 PCs burned/fell apart/got tossed and you got 10 new PCs you needed 10 new Ghost licenses.
As I understand it this is different than most packaged software; if I get a new PC I can reinstall the application as long as I erase it from the old PC.
So is everyone up to date on their Ghost licenses? Last people I talked to about this said "No" -- they bought enough licenses to cover the user base, but as they roll 20-30% of their PCs over every year they haven't been buying new licenses.
How did you do that? I find that Windows disables itself several times a Week.
It's cheaper for us to buy via Select than to allow the computer vendor to pre-load NT on the box, but we are still buying two OSes for each box. Windows 98 which is never booted (the tax) and then NT 4.0.
You know those SPA studies that claim loses from software piracy? They should conduct a study about how much companies waste on software licenses that are never used.
Along those lines, it's often really hard to keep track of various upgrade paths for different software packages (not limited to Microsoft) so large companies usually just don't bother. Need a new version, just buy it at regular pricing... More waste...
That's the biggest reason I love Linux stuff and use it whenever I can. One less licensing headache and administrative nightmare to worry about...
Ah, a world where I am not liable for my user's actions, where I don't have to run around and conduct audits on PC desktops to ensure license compliance...
Never happen... :(
Not from my point of view. I could understand if MS was pissed off because shops where cloning disks that allready have been registered. Otherwise what's their problem?
I don't think there's anything wrong with doing that, but you can't do it like that anymore. There may be other ways, but that one won't work.
Microsoft has changed the order of a Windows intall to prevent what you were doing. The later install routines won't even start copying the .CAB files until after you've entered the license number and registration information.
I don't know where the cutoff is, but I'm pretty sure it started somewhere around Win 98 SE.
But small business don't usually need or want to re-image things the way the big guys do.
Large companies usually do this because they have an approved set of software that their own IT people will be responsible for maintaining, and they want all the computers in the company to be the same. Also they want to install NT or 2000 instead of the Win98 that probably came from the OEM, so they can enforce domains and security and policies and all that other MSCE stuff.
I hate to use the phrase "TCO", but thats what it comes down to. That and the desire for control by the IT people, but thats another issue. In any case, all of this becomes important when you're talking about thousands of PCs, probably not all in one central location.
None of this is an issue in small companies. Or at least its a lot less of an issue. If you are a mom-and-pop operation with one or two computers, what is there to standardize ? What is there to control ?
I do see companies with 50-500 employees (a big range, that includes a lot of new startup companies) being screwed by this, though. They are just big enough to have an IT department (even if it consists of just one or two guys) and might start to want to re-image things. Of course these are exactly the same companies that are in a good position to embrace alternatives to M$....
where there's fish, there's cats
Anyone bother to check to see if the Word doc contained a tracking pixel???
Need Free Juniper/NetScreen Support? JuniperForum
Microsoft announced today that they intend to enforce their ownership of the trademark "MS". Anyone who holds a Master of Science degree will have to find some alternative, or pay a royalty each time they use "MS" on any document. They would have to pay twice gor using "MS" on a resume. "Just because we say so", a Microsoft spokesperson said.
The Multiple Sclerosis Foundation said it had been contacted by "about a bizillion lawyers" representing Microsoft, urging them to find another term for the disease, or face legal action.
Did someone actually pay for a copy of windows...shame on you :)
Got Rhinos?
Heh. Right.
I'll tell you what's not cost effective: crash-happy, virus-toting, document-self-destructing, upgrade-cycle-locking Microsoft Office.
I consider it the height of irresponsibility for an IT director to "standardize" on Windows. That's a lot of company profits flowing straight to Redmond or into the shitter due to lost productivity.
I should know I have to support that crap every day. What a sorry excuse for professional software.
"Free your mind and your ass will follow"
Even simpler. Stuff the unattended install script into the logon script that is executed on first luser logon. You will have to run some inventory checks by means different from SMS to determine that the machine has not been customized, though. But no rocket science here.
Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
http://www.sigsegv.cx/
Why pay once?
öööööööööööööööööööööööööööööööööööö
How Jaded Are You?
"Still doesn't help small shops"? Small shops never had this problem to begin with!
This problem ONLY affected LARGE shops, with SELECT and ENTERPRISE packages, no?
It wasn't that 'anyone who buys a system then disk-images a new copy onto it has to pay for both copies'.. it was that anyone who was on the select program had to do this. (because select involves support and other things).
Small shops were never affected in the first place.
Re-Imaging Licensed Microsoft Software Using Volume Licensing Media Corporate & Academic Select 345 Enterprise 45 -------------------------------------------------- --
Microsoft Select License and Enterprise Agreement customers can use volume licensing media to re-image Microsoft software products licensed via a finished goods channel, primarily OEM and retail, with an identical version of the software.
Based on customer feedback, Microsoft has changed its licensing policies to allow its Select License and Enterprise Agreement customers to use volume licensing media to re-image Microsoft software products licensed via a finished goods channel with an identical version of the product without the need to purchase a volume license.
Microsoft is always looking at ways to improve the simplicity, flexibility and fairness of its licensing practices in response to evolving customer needs and improvements in technology.
This change recognizes advances in how Microsoft Select License and Enterprise Agreement customers are deploying Microsoft software across corporate networks and helps to simplify and speed deployment of new Microsoft products.
The Change:
Microsoft Select License and Enterprise Agreement customers may use volume licensing media to re-image Microsoft software products licensed via a finished goods channel with an identical version of the product without needing to purchase a Microsoft volume license. The image can be installed locally or remotely over a network.
The Benefits:
Faster deployment of licensed Microsoft software products throughout an organization using the advanced deployment technologies now available for Microsoft products.
Reduction in Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) for Microsoft software through easier deployment.
Ability to create standard operating environment images, containing licensed Microsoft software, which can be deployed rapidly and efficiently.
Key Points:
Microsoft Select License and Enterprise Agreement customers may use volume licensing media to re-image Microsoft software products licensed via a finished goods channel, using a local or remote image over a network
Any licensed Microsoft software product contained in the product pool media received by the Select License or Enterprise Agreement customer is covered by this change
Microsoft software products covered by a volume license continue to be covered by the terms of the customer's Select License or Enterprise Agreement
Microsoft software re-imaged using volume licensing media but not covered by a volume license continues to be covered by the terms of the original End User License Agreement (EULA)
Q&A
QUESTION: What is volume licensing media?
ANSWER: Media supplied by Microsoft to Select License and Enterprise Agreement customers on a regular basis as part of the agreement.
QUESTION: What happens to support and warranty coverage for Microsoft products licensed via a finished goods channel that are re-imaged with volume licensing media?
ANSWER: Microsoft's Select License and Enterprise Agreement programs are separate from the support offerings available from Microsoft and its partners for Microsoft software products. Customers re-imaging software licensed via a finished goods channel using volume licensing media do so at their own risk and should investigate the contractual and support implications of re-imaging and make arrangements accordingly. Customers are not entitled to Microsoft support as a result of re-imaging using Microsoft volume licensing media and should discuss any impact to their existing warranty and support coverage with their current warranty and support provider.
Note: This Microsoft Volume Licensing Brief is provided for general informational purposes. For the terms and conditions governing your use of Microsoft software products, please refer to your licensing agreement.
III.IIVIVIXIIVIVIIIVVIIIIXVIIIXIIIIIIIIVIIIIVVIII
It's mainly the larger, enterprise wide re-imaging, which causes problems. Microsoft may check up on HP's licence issues and call them on it if they have violations. But small companies? I don't think Microsoft is going to spend the time or legal fees in tracking down a 30 person shop which has "illegal" re-imaged disks. But they may hunt down one or two to make an example of. Once this settles down a little, people will get back to business ignoring stupid license agreements.
Steven
-- I have marked myself unwilling to moderate-- I don't have other accounts to artificially inflate the karma of
I worked for a small shop that used 'ghost'
extensivly. We also had OEM preload disks that we customized so that windows install was totally non-interactive. The bulk of the time was spent by the CD copying the CAB files to the harddrive. So what we did is once our preload disk copied all it's cab files and its about to reboot we stop it there and clone the disk. Now turn the machine back on and the harddrive boots into the scripted windows installer. After the OEM audit stage the machine is shutdown awaiting for the customer to turn it on for the first time and enter their license info. Is there anything wrong with this?
Not from my point of view. I could understand if MS was pissed off because shops where cloning disks that allready have been registered. Otherwise what's their problem?
Peter
--
www.alphalinux.org
www.alphalinux.org
I like the following line from their document:
Microsoft is always looking at ways to improve the simplicity, flexibility and fairness of its licensing practices in response to evolving customer needs and improvements in technology
It seems like the document should also contain a line like:
Microsoft is always look at ways to improve our bottom line while raping you blind for the use of our mediocre products. We admit we got caught this time, but should the opportunity arise in the future we will gladly come at you, sans lubricant, again.
And they wonder why so many people in-the-know are such rabid supporters of the open-source/GPL/linux concept.
-This sig intentionally left blank
XML anyone?
No thank you, I hate Bloatocols.
I went down to my local car boot sale to get Windows 2000 for my two home computers and had to buy a whole 4 copies (at £15 each!!).
:)
At this rate it'll soon be cheaper to buy a legit copy.
Hasn't anyone else found this HTML version of the document on Microsoft's website?
b rief.htm
http://www.mi crosoft.com/enterprise/licensing/docs/re-imaging_
All these complaints and conversions to text or HTML by others, when just some mild searching would have found the official version.
When I first read car boot sale, I figured it was sales of siezed cars (after they've had the big yellow boot put on around the wheel). Of course, I got to the next sentence and it mentioned software... ok, there could have been software left in the car, and that was up for auction as well, but that didn't make a whole lot of sense... trunk seemed somewhat sensible, but it wasn't until our antagonistic friend started spouting and was answered that it was really clear.
also: car park => parking lot, not a place where cars grow from the ground...
>our version is the correct one in all cases
even more flamebaitesque than the previous post...
thru is not formal US english, but more vernacular (though (tho?) oxford just says: US var. of THROUGH)
US english (in it's many forms) is spoken by several hundred million people - a peer language rather than a dialect, I'd say (not that I'm a linguist).
Relax...
--
"It's tough to be bilingual when you get hit in the head."
(Normally I would use 'No Score +1 Bonus' for this post, but Taco has decided that my karma is too high, so go ahead and mod me down to 1)
Work for Change & GET PAID!
Prospecting Stinks. Stop Wasting Time on Cold Calling.
http://www.geocities.com/cgo hier/re-imaging_brief.html
They're now making this look like a good thing for themselves. "Look how we've simplified this for everyone". The fact that the original licence scheme was braindead in the extreme is conveniently ignored, of course...
--
"Microsoft is always looking at ways to improve the simplicity, flexibility and fairness of its licensing practices in response to evolving customer needs and improvements in technology."
Translation: Microsoft is always aware of how we are screwing our customers (though we will deny it if asked). When the uproar threatens to overturn our favorable cost/benefit ratio, we will make changes.
"This change recognizes advances in how Microsoft Select License and Enterprise Agreement customers are deploying Microsoft software across corporate networks and helps to simplify and speed deployment of new Microsoft products."
Translation: Although our customers were already deploying our software that way before this change, we need to find an excuse for making this license change now. Therefore, we are blaming our customers for this. They changed, you see, and being the responsive company that we are, we nobly changed with them. But only the big customers, you see, not the little guys who were the ones that couldn't afford this nonsense in the first place. But who cares about the little guys? We're Microsoft! We don't have to care.
"The Benefits: Faster deployment of licensed Microsoft software products throughout an organization using the advanced deployment technologies now available for Microsoft products."
Translation: Well, not 'faster' really, since they will keep doing what they were doing before, but we don't want to say that we're no longer screwing them as badly so this is how we will phrase it. Faster, yeah, that's it!
" Reduction in Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) for Microsoft software through easier deployment."
Translation: Uh, yeah, we're saving our customers money, you see! Yeah, aren't we great? And it's 'easier' this way because, *cough* they don't have to pay us twice -- uh scratch that from the record.
________________
________________
Private Essayist
You're right - until MS sets users up with a subscription model. Sure, the big companies will probably be able to get away with the non-subscription version of Windows 2002, but consumers and small companies won't. They'll be caught the first time they try to wipe a drive. It won't even be a matter of bringing out the (legal) hounds, it'll just be as simple as not giving a license key.
-- Ever notice that fast-burning fuse looks exactly the same as slow-burning fuse? I didn't... (Edgar Montrose)
Windows is a shitty OS because it is rushed into release and then SP'd to death. Windows is a shitty OS because it is written to make as many user decisions as possible...
I disagree. I think that Windows is a shitty OS because the primary intent is to make money, and not an operating system.
That's what you'd think would make sense. If you had bothered to actually READ the original article, you would have noticed that this is exactly what Microsoft's legal department says is NOT allowed - which is why this is an issue at all.
--
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
3)
:)
Television was developed by John Logie Baird, who was as the name suggests, Scottish.
Nane aw that english or american crap please.