Sell Your Computers, Keep Paying MS For Licenses

An anonymous reader writes "Microsoft Licensing 6.0 requires a company to pay up on software maintenance when the computers that are covered under the license are sold off. Here's the kicker though: MS is no longer obligated to provide maintenance even though the contract is paid up! Read the Infoworld article."

Comments

What happens with licences on dead computers?

[The Fanta Menace]

I've often wondered - I've got a Sony Vaio, which came for a licence for Windows ME (which I don't use anyway). But when the laptop eventually dies, does the licence die with it?

Or am I allowed to move it to another computer?

Re:What happens with licences on dead computers?

[anon*127.0.0.1]

Which raises another interesting question... if a "computer" is actually just a collection of interchangeable parts, and if a licence is bound to one "computer"... which part of that computer is the license bound to? The whole thing? If I swap out the floppy drive, is it now a new computer? What if I rip everything out of the case and replace it with different stuff? What if I take everything out and drop it into a new case so that I'll have more room? What if I upgrade the Mobo and processor and keep everything else?

I just thinking about ways to weasel an OEM licence into a new system... if I take the floppy out of an obsolete computer and drop it into a new system, can I claim that the "computer" the software licences were attached to went transferred along with the floppy drive? Logically of course not, but legally may be another matter.

How these guys "won" the "OS Wars"...

[Bug-Y2K]

...is beyond me.

Maybe Apple was right with their (globally lambasted) "Lemmings" super bowl ad in 1985. Business just blindly walked off the cliff and right into Gates/Ballmers' bank accounts.

Of course I suspect if history had been different and we'd all ended up buying Apple's the result would not be that different. We'd have a Steve Jobs/Borg head icon instead perhaps. =)

At least we didn't all buy Amigas... then we'd all have to off ourselves for being such bleating wankers.

heh.

Major headache

[EZmagz]

For the last few months I've been doing short-term contract work for a major HMO in the area dealing with this kind of shit on a day-to-day basis. Let me tell you, it's a headache.

We purchase all of the new PCs we order with a Microsoft EA SA agreement. It's a nightmare trying to keep track of which boxes at which location have what version OS on them, what kind of upgrades they're covered up through, and so on. There's a dedicated guy just for our department that does nothing but dealing with licensing.

For anybody who's never taken the time to read through some of these contracts, print one out sometime or read through the EULA next time you upgrade Windows and be prepared to be suprised. Honestly, MS plays by their own rules.

The crappy thing is there is no real alternative. There's over 50,000 computers in this organization. Switching these boxen over to linux isn't an option (sorry guys, I love linux as much as the next guy, but the average 50 year-old in HR ISN'T going to be able to use it). And as expensive as dealing with MS is, it's still cheaper than buying 50,000 Macs and running OSX on them. Besides, most propritery medical apps only run on Windows from what I've seen.

Re:remember.....

[Arcturax]

You honestly think one can't do buisiness using a Macintosh? Mac OS X is every bit as usuable as Windows, some may argue more so. There is certainly Mac software to fill about any need you can think of, and free high quality development tools just in case you find the odd thing that someone isn't currently supporting on the Mac.

Don't believe me? Go to VersionTracker and take a look at all the software you could ever want for that platform.

True Apple does have licensing as well, but it's not near as arduous as Microsoft's, that and Apple supports open source far more than Microsoft ever has or ever will.

When you factor in software and hardware costs, using the Mac isn't so much more expensive given that even though the hardware costs more, you get far better terms on licensing, that and your support costs are a lot less given that Mac's don't break down near as often as PC's. It may even be less, I remember a study which showed total cost of ownership of a network of Mac's was less than comparable PC's using Windows, but I can't remember where it was.

Wow, a lot of "Work Up" for nothing special...

[__aagmrb7289]

Someone spent a lot of time researching something pretty basic - if you sell a computer that has an "open license" (the license is not tied to the computer), Microsoft will allow the ownership of the operating system to transfer, but not the right to "free" upgrades. Umm, duh? Who, in their right mind, if they aren't giving way their software, would?

DAMMIT! STOP MAKING ME DEFEND MICROSOFT!!! ARGH!

Re:Linux Call the Manufacturer Day

[dr-suess-fan]

OK,

How does April 23rd sound ?

Seriously. It's fine to say 'we should', we see
that alot on slashdot (phone your political rep. etc.). Let's do something. Pick your favourite
vendor that doesn't support linux yet, call them
on April 23rd.

I think we (slashdot readers) have more influence
than we often think we do.

There is a good reason...

[Windcatcher]

...why the US Army rejected Windows XP. Under NO--repeat, NO--circumstances are they willing to enter a situation where a vendor can shut them down. If push comes to shove because of file-format issues, Microsoft can look forward to selling *ONE* XP computer to the Army until they can convert anything involved into open formats. Period. End of story. (yes, I am somewhat in the know on this)