The ethics of installing Windows Vista

Posted: 03-08-2007, 08:13 PM

MICHAEL

Guest
Posts: n/a

http://windowssecrets.com/comp/070308/#reade1

By Brian Livingston

I reported on Feb. 1 that the upgrade version of Windows Vista accepts itself as a product it
can upgrade over, and on Feb. 15 that Vista has a built-in command that allows you to extend
its activation deadline from 30 days to 120 days.

Those articles were very popular with readers - the Feb. 1 story garnered a reader rating of
4.49 out of 5, the highest score of any article the newsletter has ever published - but that
doesn't mean that these reports aren't controversial.

Support for revealing the secrets of Vista

Most of my readers thought it was highly interesting that Vista doesn't perform even the
simplest test for a qualifying operating system before the upgrade version will install. Any
running Windows OS, from NT 4.0 to Vista itself, will do. Vista's complete lack of any
version-testing code makes it possible to clean-install the upgrade version of the new OS to a
blank hard drive - a capability that Microsoft claimed it had deliberately eliminated from the
product.

continued.....
http://windowssecrets.com/comp/070308/#reade1

Responses to "The ethics of installing Windows Vista"

jimmy fallon

Guest
Posts: n/a

RE: The ethics of installing Windows Vista

Posted: 03-08-2007, 08:53 PM

Yeah but what a pain in the ass it is to have to reinstall windows a second
time just to accomplish a clean install. I bought the goddamn xp, so it
should prompt me for the GD disc. NOW, after reinstalling Vista over itself
the screen saver freezes on me. Other wise not so bad... a real slap in the
face for those of us who just want to get to work.
jf

"MICHAEL" wrote:

> http://windowssecrets.com/comp/070308/#reade1
>
> By Brian Livingston
>
> I reported on Feb. 1 that the upgrade version of Windows Vista accepts itself as a product it
> can upgrade over, and on Feb. 15 that Vista has a built-in command that allows you to extend
> its activation deadline from 30 days to 120 days.
>
> Those articles were very popular with readers - the Feb. 1 story garnered a reader rating of
> 4.49 out of 5, the highest score of any article the newsletter has ever published - but that
> doesn't mean that these reports aren't controversial.
>
> Support for revealing the secrets of Vista
>
> Most of my readers thought it was highly interesting that Vista doesn't perform even the
> simplest test for a qualifying operating system before the upgrade version will install. Any
> running Windows OS, from NT 4.0 to Vista itself, will do. Vista's complete lack of any
> version-testing code makes it possible to clean-install the upgrade version of the new OS to a
> blank hard drive - a capability that Microsoft claimed it had deliberately eliminated from the
> product.
>
>
> continued.....
> http://windowssecrets.com/comp/070308/#reade1
>
>

Gary

Guest
Posts: n/a

Re: The ethics of installing Windows Vista

Posted: 03-08-2007, 09:33 PM

No there is nothing unique about the disk, it should ask for a qualifying
key.

"jimmy fallon" <jimmyfallon@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:8FEEE3E7-45D1-414D-B86F-3316046D27BC@microsoft.com...

> Yeah but what a pain in the ass it is to have to reinstall windows a
> second
> time just to accomplish a clean install. I bought the goddamn xp, so it
> should prompt me for the GD disc. NOW, after reinstalling Vista over
> itself
> the screen saver freezes on me. Other wise not so bad... a real slap in
> the
> face for those of us who just want to get to work.
> jf

jimmy fallon

Guest
Posts: n/a

Re: The ethics of installing Windows Vista

Posted: 03-08-2007, 09:54 PM

When I called microsoft about the issue of it wanting to activate a month
after installing, there fix was to load Vista on top of itself and then put
in the key code on the box.
jf

"Gary" wrote:

> No there is nothing unique about the disk, it should ask for a qualifying
> key.
>
>
> "jimmy fallon" <jimmyfallon@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:8FEEE3E7-45D1-414D-B86F-3316046D27BC@microsoft.com...
> > Yeah but what a pain in the ass it is to have to reinstall windows a
> > second
> > time just to accomplish a clean install. I bought the goddamn xp, so it
> > should prompt me for the GD disc. NOW, after reinstalling Vista over
> > itself
> > the screen saver freezes on me. Other wise not so bad... a real slap in
> > the
> > face for those of us who just want to get to work.
> > jf
>
>
>

Justin

Guest
Posts: n/a

Re: The ethics of installing Windows Vista

Posted: 03-08-2007, 10:30 PM

If you wait past the 30 days? That sucks. If you do it before the 30 days
you can activate from within Windows.

"jimmy fallon" <jimmyfallon@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:AFB242CA-2BD9-4B34-BD20-BD9E555348C4@microsoft.com...

> When I called microsoft about the issue of it wanting to activate a month
> after installing, there fix was to load Vista on top of itself and then
> put
> in the key code on the box.
> jf
>
>
>
> "Gary" wrote:
>
>> No there is nothing unique about the disk, it should ask for a qualifying
>> key.
>>
>>
>> "jimmy fallon" <jimmyfallon@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:8FEEE3E7-45D1-414D-B86F-3316046D27BC@microsoft.com...
>> > Yeah but what a pain in the ass it is to have to reinstall windows a
>> > second
>> > time just to accomplish a clean install. I bought the goddamn xp, so it
>> > should prompt me for the GD disc. NOW, after reinstalling Vista over
>> > itself
>> > the screen saver freezes on me. Other wise not so bad... a real slap in
>> > the
>> > face for those of us who just want to get to work.
>> > jf
>>
>>
>>

jimmy fallon

Guest
Posts: n/a

Re: The ethics of installing Windows Vista

Posted: 03-08-2007, 11:34 PM

no, that's within the 30 days...
jf

"Justin" wrote:

> If you wait past the 30 days? That sucks. If you do it before the 30 days
> you can activate from within Windows.
>
>
> "jimmy fallon" <jimmyfallon@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:AFB242CA-2BD9-4B34-BD20-BD9E555348C4@microsoft.com...
> > When I called microsoft about the issue of it wanting to activate a month
> > after installing, there fix was to load Vista on top of itself and then
> > put
> > in the key code on the box.
> > jf
> >
> >
> >
> > "Gary" wrote:
> >
> >> No there is nothing unique about the disk, it should ask for a qualifying
> >> key.
> >>
> >>
> >> "jimmy fallon" <jimmyfallon@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> news:8FEEE3E7-45D1-414D-B86F-3316046D27BC@microsoft.com...
> >> > Yeah but what a pain in the ass it is to have to reinstall windows a
> >> > second
> >> > time just to accomplish a clean install. I bought the goddamn xp, so it
> >> > should prompt me for the GD disc. NOW, after reinstalling Vista over
> >> > itself
> >> > the screen saver freezes on me. Other wise not so bad... a real slap in
> >> > the
> >> > face for those of us who just want to get to work.
> >> > jf
> >>
> >>
> >>

>

Justin

Guest
Posts: n/a

Re: The ethics of installing Windows Vista

Posted: 03-08-2007, 09:49 PM

"Gary" <Gary@somewhere.usa> wrote in message
news:#D1MqlcYHHA.3268@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

> No there is nothing unique about the disk, it should ask for a qualifying
> key.

I agree with that one.

The upgrade route is horrible.

Dweebs

Guest
Posts: n/a

Re: The ethics of installing Windows Vista

Posted: 03-08-2007, 10:38 PM

I tried installing Vista over Win XP RTM (no SP1 or SP2). Vista told me to
get lost, as it needed XP with SP2, so I had to download and install SP2
just to load Vista on a clean install. There's nothing on the ungrade box
that says it neexs SP2 - the upgrade box just says XP, so as far as I'm
concerned this Vista upgrade information on the box was false and misleading
for me.

Regards,
Dweebs
"MICHAEL" <u158627_emr@dslr.net> wrote in message
news:%23hJcv4bYHHA.4520@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

> http://windowssecrets.com/comp/070308/#reade1
> Most of my readers thought it was highly interesting that Vista doesn't
> perform even the simplest test for a qualifying operating system before
> the upgrade version will install. Any running Windows OS, from NT 4.0 to
> Vista itself, will do. Vista's complete lack of any version-testing code
> makes it possible to clean-install the upgrade version of the new OS to a
> blank hard drive - a capability that Microsoft claimed it had deliberately
> eliminated from the product.

Justin

Guest
Posts: n/a

Re: The ethics of installing Windows Vista

Posted: 03-08-2007, 10:46 PM

That's because XP RTM doesn't know if it's genuine. XP SP2 does. Vista
must install on a "genuine" install of XP.

"Dweebs" <dweebken@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:8B7AC769-6F53-45F5-AF6E-F3BE5DF0F55F@microsoft.com...

>I tried installing Vista over Win XP RTM (no SP1 or SP2). Vista told me to
>get lost, as it needed XP with SP2, so I had to download and install SP2
>just to load Vista on a clean install. There's nothing on the ungrade box
>that says it neexs SP2 - the upgrade box just says XP, so as far as I'm
>concerned this Vista upgrade information on the box was false and
>misleading for me.
>
> Regards,
> Dweebs
> "MICHAEL" <u158627_emr@dslr.net> wrote in message
> news:%23hJcv4bYHHA.4520@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> http://windowssecrets.com/comp/070308/#reade1
>> Most of my readers thought it was highly interesting that Vista doesn't
>> perform even the simplest test for a qualifying operating system before
>> the upgrade version will install. Any running Windows OS, from NT 4.0 to
>> Vista itself, will do. Vista's complete lack of any version-testing code
>> makes it possible to clean-install the upgrade version of the new OS to a
>> blank hard drive - a capability that Microsoft claimed it had
>> deliberately eliminated from the product.
>

Shane Nokes

Guest
Posts: n/a

Re: The ethics of installing Windows Vista

Posted: 03-27-2007, 12:16 PM

It's not misleading at all.

XP RTM is no longer supported.

In fact anytime a service pack is released that becomes the "supported"
version of that platform.

Read deeper into licensing terms and you shall find the answers you seek.

"Dweebs" <dweebken@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:8B7AC769-6F53-45F5-AF6E-F3BE5DF0F55F@microsoft.com...

>I tried installing Vista over Win XP RTM (no SP1 or SP2). Vista told me to
>get lost, as it needed XP with SP2, so I had to download and install SP2
>just to load Vista on a clean install. There's nothing on the ungrade box
>that says it neexs SP2 - the upgrade box just says XP, so as far as I'm
>concerned this Vista upgrade information on the box was false and
>misleading for me.
>
> Regards,
> Dweebs
> "MICHAEL" <u158627_emr@dslr.net> wrote in message
> news:%23hJcv4bYHHA.4520@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> http://windowssecrets.com/comp/070308/#reade1
>> Most of my readers thought it was highly interesting that Vista doesn't
>> perform even the simplest test for a qualifying operating system before
>> the upgrade version will install. Any running Windows OS, from NT 4.0 to
>> Vista itself, will do. Vista's complete lack of any version-testing code
>> makes it possible to clean-install the upgrade version of the new OS to a
>> blank hard drive - a capability that Microsoft claimed it had
>> deliberately eliminated from the product.
>

LinkBack

Thread Tools

Display Modes

Page 1 of 2

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads You may post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On HTML code is Off Trackbacks are On Pingbacks are On Refbacks are On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Installing Windows Vista	CHRUXIOS	Windows Vista Install & Setup	24	07-14-2007 05:46 PM
Installing Windows Vista RC1	Jeff	Windows Vista Install & Setup	5	02-09-2007 12:13 AM
Windows Vista Is Not Installing!!	TDE	Windows Vista Install & Setup	2	10-27-2006 01:53 PM
installing the Windows Vista pre-RC1	Carlos	Windows Vista	5	09-02-2006 04:11 PM
installing windows vista	dan	Windows Vista	8	06-16-2006 10:44 PM