Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Runs Out Of Windows XP Family Licenses
TrAvELAr writes: "'There is a backlog,' says Mark Croft, lead product manager for Windows XP. According to this article on IDG, Microsoft has underestimated it's popularity of the new Windows XP family license. In an effort to slow piracy within single households, Microsoft has introduced the family license which will allow the user to install multiple copies of it's Windows XP operating system at a slightly discounted price of a $10 savings. Croft also states that the savings reflects the cost of Microsoft not having to produce another disc."
On the contrary, Apple's liscense is less forgiving in respect to multiple single family installations.
From the MacOSX Liscense:
2.A. This Liscense allows you to install and use one copy of the Apple Software on a single Apple-Labelled computer at a time. This Liscense does not allow the Apple Software to exist on more than one computer at a time, and you may not make the Apple Software available over a network where it could be used by multiple computers at the same time....
Apple does not offer $10 off of MacOSX for single families wishing to install OSX on more than one computer. Additionally, if you own a non-Apple Mac clone the liscense does not allow you to install it even if you purchased a copy of OSX for it.
The major difference here is that there is no copy protection on MacOSX.
I would also disagree with your assertion that Apple makes "second rate" software. Especially if WindowsXP is considered "first rate" perhaps you meant to say "smaller" software maker.
Wow, your ignorance on this subject really shows through! But this this is Slashdot, you can always expect people to be ignorant about things Microsoft.
Having actually been through this process, I can tell you that it involves placing a call to an 800 number, waiting about 1 to 2 minutes for a rep to answer, reading them a number, them reading you back a number, and you're done. No questions asked. I'm not saying I like the process, I'm just telling it for what it is.
But of course, having *never used* Windows XP you wouldn't know anything about this.
As the reg points out, these licence packs don't seem to have been distributed in Europe. Which could explain why nobody is currently able to buy one. If the press release were truthful (what, from M$?), it would point out that M$ forgot to print any family pack licenses, and that accounts for a very tiny backlog of clued owners looking for a slight savings.
Its just another PR ploy to get free press by implying that XP is a strong seller, even though the figures seem to be based on early sales to OEMs and distributors, who were forced to pay for large shipments to keep their contracts with M$. Only the register seems to be looking at the numbers of XP copies actually being sold by distributors to end users, any other press outlet who relies on M$ marketing money is printing verbatim the press releases shoveled at them.
At one disti I know, the sales channel manager was lamenting the USD$20 million in XP stock they were forced to buy, which may take them more than 6 months to offload, instead of the vaguely promised 3 weeks. They're hurting, but that's what happens when a convicted monopolist is allowed to continue their abuse.
the AC
Hemos is like...sci-fi fans;he thinks technology is cool, but he hasn't bothered to understand the science it's based on
so they'd sell a copy of Win98SE for $89.95, but they paid $80 for it. (actually, for 98se, i think staples payed $82.25 for it, but i don't recall exactly).
now, i'm not sure how much of that $82 MS actually sees from the sale, but staples only sees about $5-10 for each software sale
Brian Voils
"A university is what a college becomes when the faculty loses interest in students."
> So this version doesn't report its CD key by some means, e.g. when you go to the M$ website
.nfo for the release never said. However, later another release was made of another activation-less version of WinXP, which was listed as being the Corporate version copied from a disc at one of the big OEMs. Comparing the files in each release down to CRCs, it was found that the Corporate release and the Devils0wn release were bit-for-bit identical.
> for updates, where M$ could compare the CD key against a database to see if there are any
> duplicates, then remotely disable the software?
That particular version, called the Devils0wn release or the Corporate version of XP, is actually Microsoft's own version for large OEMS or very large corporations, which is "pre-activated" the moment you enter an accepted CD-Key. For obvious reasons, HP or Compaq or any other huge organizations cannot send icrosoft a big list of machines that need to be activated, and enter the activation codes into each. Instead, this version of Windows is already activated, so that as soon as a customer enters a valid CD-Key off his license--just as he would when buying a new PC from a big OEM--the machine is fully-functional and does not need to be activated again. It might need to be re-activated if you make the required number of changes to your system, but that makes no difference since you can just reinstall at that point and not reactivate.
There were actually two releases, the first being the Devils0wn edition, which came out weeks before XP was even available retail. there was some debate about whether it was the corporate version or an internal final build--the
These releases are not to be confused with the various patches that are floating around to patch retail versions of XP to bypass product activation. They are the "real thing"--the pre-activated XP Pro sold by Microsoft for bulk use by large corporations and OEMs.
Chasing Amy
(We all chase Amy...)
"The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws"-Tacitus