Repair Computer, Repurchase OS?

An anonymous reader asks: "Recently, I have been bit by a computer repair on an e-Machines computer that involved a system board replacement. Though this was strictly a repair, not an upgrade, neither MS or e-Machines will provide for activation of the system. Why should a user have to purchase another copy of XP after repairing a computer? The system board is listed on the e-Machines website, but costs 4x what an off-the-shelf board with the same chip-set/capabilities costs, and furthermore is not actually available. The e-Machines rep even said repurchasing XP was my only option. This seems to me patently unfair and of questionable legality. Is it possible that there are enough disgruntled consumers bit by this problem to generate a class-action lawsuit?"

Comments

Ask to talk to their manager

[halivar]

It's amazing what you can get if you just bitch enough. Sometimes it's easier just to add another activation to a license to shut someone up.

Read your license agreement.

[Anonymous Coward]

You should do whatever your license agreement says you should do.

If you can't understand your license agreement, get a lawyer to help you read it.

If you don't like what it says, get a different OS vendor.

And please don't mod me down for trolling - it really is important for people to understand the licenses for the stuff they buy - otherwise groups like the RIAA can walk all over everyone. If people started taking EULAs seriously and tried to understand them, more companies would start using reasonable EULAs.

Time for a new computer

[SeaSolder]

So, if the replacement MoBo costs about 4x what other boards cost, then it is likely in the multiple-hundreds of dollars to replace the thing. My suggestion would tell eMachines to go to "the hot place downstairs", and purchase a new computer from one of the larger manufacturers. You can get them relatively inexpensively, and hey, you could even get one loaded with that abomination called Vista! On another note, you could also repair the computer, and use it to play around with Linux. I have noticed though, that a number of the budget manufacturers don't even include recovery disks with their computers, but rather they have a "recovery partition" on the hard drive. So this is all well and good, until the HD crashes, and your recovery partition is gone. I suppose this is just another case of "You get what you pay for".

Just pirate it

[Rix]

It's less work.

Re:Just pirate it

[the eric conspiracy]

In fact the ease of doing the illegal thing is probably slowing the uptake of Linux. If Microsoft were to become even more aggressive in enforcing its licensing provisions, and as well increasing OS prices, we would no doubt see more people and organizations turning to Linux.

The trend seems to favor this; every time I see a news item on Slashdot along these lines I give a small cheer. Let's hope that MS and DRM really make stealing Vista a much bigger big pain in the neck.

Re:increments

['nother poster]

Well, since many motherboards also supply your network and video IDs then a MB swap changes quite a few "major components" as far as XPs key checker is concerned.

Re:Have you actually talked to Microsoft?

[Anonymous Coward]

I deal with this frequently.

Try to activate online
When it rejects and gives you the phone number, call it
Enter the confirmation ID

When you finally get someone from Bangladesh on the phone, they will ask if this is the first time it's been activated, and how many computers it's been installed on.

REGARDLESS of what work you've done, tell them "It's a reinstall after a virus infection.. This is the only machine it's installed on"

They'll give you a long ass number to punch in, and you're done.

Easy compared to what?

[babbling]

When you say it's "easy", are you aware that previous versions of Windows didn't even need a special key that depended on hardware, and that you didn't need to call Microsoft to ask "can I please install the copy of Windows I purchased from you a couple of years ago?" only to be interrogated about why you need a new key.

I'm sure it's easy relative to what they could put you through, but can we please be absolute when using the word "easy"? Especially when Microsoft have gone out of their way to make it more complicated than it needs to be.

Re:Easy compared to what?

[n2art2]

You cannot be absolute with a relative word. The use of the word "easy" is an opinion and thus relative to the one making that opinion. I'm not a fan of Microsoft, but can we please not berate the grandparent for his use of the word "easy" when you obviously want to attribute it to a state of absolute that the word itself cannot attain.

Meaning. . . . Get over it.

Re:Easy compared to what?

[Buran]

Not only that but what about hearing-impaired people like me who find the phone an aggravation and want to be able to do it all online because it's a lot easier to read than it is to listen? Why can't we use the OS' automated activation tools? Why are we in some cases forced to call?

Seems to me like someone might have a good ADA case here -- why should I not be allowed to use something legally purchased because I am forced to jump through hoops that I can't jump through because of a physical disability? To me, this is as bad as a failure to install a wheelchair ramp.

Re:Easy compared to what?

[Anonymous Coward]

Isn't it great that the dishonest people with the pirated copies never have to worry about their activation keys? It's just the folks that do things the right way that get hosed.

Re:Easy compared to what?

[Blakey Rat]

And what if halfway through the call, suddenly an asteroid falls into their living room and then their phone line is cut off!

Seriously, I know Slashdotters are anti-social and hate talking to people, but can the damned excuses. Either you can use a phone, or you can use TTY. You can come up with crazy situations all day long, but it all comes down to that.

Re:Easy compared to what?

[Gr8Apes]

>>but can we please be absolute when using the word "easy"?

Actually, speaking absolutely, it *is* easy. Relatively speaking (in relation to how we think it should be) is when it becomes difficult. Actually, it's unbelievably complicated. Why do I need to call anyone when installing software? Needless complications imposed by the manufacturer is why.

Re:Easy compared to what?

[justfred]

Thus we have the inherent problem of most, if not all DRM - it makes things harder and more annoying for legitimate users, while crackers/thieves/mass copiers will easily find a way around it.

Personally I have less of a moral problem "stealing" things that are locked down, than things that are opened up. I pay for shareware and most of my entertainment. But having to jump through hoops to run Windows? That's why I recommend Unix or MacOSX. That and the fact that they're so superior.

Maybe Microsoft could spent more time properly engineering their software in the first place to make it worth buying, and less time trying to keep legitimate owners from "stealing" it?

It's like I said

[tkrotchko]

For all intents and purposes, there is no pirating of Windows XP. Yeah, sure, there is a handful of people who build their own and of those, a handful pirate Windows XP.

But if you have a Dell, HP, IBM, Lenovo, eMachines, regardless of what MS says about activation, that machine is licensed forever. It has to be, since none of those machines offers machines to the U.S. public without Windows. And yes, I'm aware of the Dell "N" series. I don't think it makes any difference.

That's the lie of the statement that 25% of all Windows installs are illegal. How can that be when almost every computer already comes with the license.