Not sure why this is happening...

[RavenDizzle]

I'm probably just overlooking something here, but heres whats happening:

I have an XP disc, genuine, build 2600 of xp pro sp2, oem. Came with my laptop, and since its oem, I was able to use it with my custom built desktop:) It already has IE7 and WMP11 on it, but when I slipstream SP3, IE7 is gone, as well as WMP11 and I'm left with WMP9 and IE6....

I thought "okay, I'll just slipsteam IE7 and WMP11 back into it". No avail. It just gives me some kind of prefetch error after the copying of the files and rebooting into graphical setup.

Whats going on here?

[Kelsenellenelvian]

#1 ouch, it doesn't quite work like that, sorry. (I am suprised SP3 slipstreamed in fine)

#2 You should "Clean" the disk out before slipping SP3 and the rest in. OEM disks include ALOT of junk.

#3 Remember SP3 is not final yet. You'll have to wait at least 10 more days to get the final version! Without the final version you'll have a timebomb disk that will quit working in 6 months or less.

To clean the disk:

Copy ONLY the i386 folder and the win51 files to a folder on your drive.

Open i386 folder and delete the svcpack folder and svcpack.in_, then hope the OEM didn't use some really funky type on integration for other stuff.

Using nLite (found on this forum) and Windows Media Player 11 (Also found here) slipstream, clean and update your cd. Then use it to make a bootable CD.

When did OEM licenses become transferrable? I was not aware that was legal now.

The End User License Agreement (EULA) for OEM software, including Windows XP, states that the software is licensed as a single integrated product in connection with the hardware. However, it's important to remember that the end user cannot see nor accept the electronic EULA until the software is installed on a fully-assembled computer system. So, even though the original OEM software unit may have been distributed with a component, like a hard drive, it isn't until the software is installed on a fully-assembled computer system that it becomes "married" to the hardware.

In general, OEM software may not be transferred from one system to another system. However, the computer system can certainly be updated with new components without the requirement of a new software license. The only exception to this is the motherboard 1. If the motherboard is replaced 2, the computer system is deemed "new" and a new license would be required. Other PC components may be upgraded, including a hard drive. Though if the hard drive 3 is replaced/upgraded, the operating system must first be removed from the old hard drive. To restate: the operating system is "married" to the computer system on which it is originally installed.

http://www.michaelstevenstech.com/oemeula.htm

Edited April 21, 2008 by Kelsenellenelvian

[RavenDizzle]

I own both the laptop and the desktop, I only use it on the desktop, as I use Linux on the laptop. Maybe against Microsofts little money hungry EULA, but nonetheless I own the license and I'll do with it as I please.

Edited April 22, 2008 by RavenDizzle

[Yzöwl]

Could you please give me the name of the OEM so that I can ask them, research or take a look at their disk.

Since IE7 and WMP11 are not integral with SP2, I'd be interested to find out exactly their method of integrating them into the installation!

[Kelsenellenelvian]

I own both the laptop and the desktop, I only use it on the desktop, as I use Linux on the laptop. Maybe against Microsofts little money hungry EULA, but nonetheless I own the license and I'll do with it as I please.

Actually you don't even "own" the license You have only rented it if you have read the EULA. MS still has the right at any time to deny you access to it. It's people like you that is the reason why piracy is so huge and the damned OS costs us soo much.

Edited April 22, 2008 by Kelsenellenelvian

[cluberti]

I own both the laptop and the desktop, I only use it on the desktop, as I use Linux on the laptop. Maybe against Microsofts little money hungry EULA, but nonetheless I own the license and I'll do with it as I please.

You do what you'd like, but you are incorrect in assuming "ownership" of the license. Also, I'm fairly certain you won't find further assistance with it here - you'll find that most of the people here tend to want to uphold the EULAs for products they use, or use alternative products. And the EULA says what you did was not legal.

[jaclaz]

It's people like you that is the reason why piracy is so huge and the damned OS costs us soo much.

Though I do agree that using a OEM version on another PC is a violation of the OEM EULA, I cannot see a direct cause/effect relationship with the cost of the OS.

I may of course be completely wrong, but I cannot see an actual economical damage to Microsoft.

If I get it right RavenDizzle actually bought:

a. a laptop with a XP OEM bundled (that he did not use/install)

b. a desktop (self-built) with no (MS) OS bundled

What if he had bought:

a. a laptop with no (MS) OS bundled

b. a desktop (self-built) acquiring as well a "generic" OEM license

I don't think that the amount of money actually entering Microsoft account would have changed sensibly, more probably if the second "way" had been chosen, Microsoft would have got some more bucks, as they surely sell the OS to the laptop manufacturer at a lower price, but how much is the difference?

And has it not MS by the "forced" bundling some other indirect return?

Problem is that while it is very easy to get, when you buy the components for your self-built desktop, to have bundled with it a MS OEM OS (and license), it is very difficult, not to say impossible, to buy a laptop WITHOUT a MS OEM OS license, if you want to.

Recently in Italy there was a judge sentence condemning HP to refund an estimated cost of the Windows XP (and Works) that came bundled with a laptop:

http://www.aduc.it/comunicato/aduc+versus+...stema_12651.php

http://www.aduc.it/generale/files/allegati/sentenza_hp.pdf

(ITALIAN)

and a similar one in France:

http://www.lemondeinformatique.fr/actualit...ound-24059.html

http://www.vnunet.fr/fr/vnunet/news/2007/0...e-nbsp-nouvelle

(FRENCH)

The amount of the refund for Windows XP established by the Italian judge was 90 Euros, while the amount established by the French one was 135 Euro.

jaclaz

Edited September 14, 2009 by jaclaz

[Kelsenellenelvian]

I was referring to his I don't give a s**t attitude... Not the actual use of an oem on another machine.

BUT you do have to remember that OEM licences do cost way less and have even been bundled with simple things like ide cables in the past just to thwart MS.

[cluberti]

b. a desktop (self-built) acquiring as well a "generic" OEM license

...

I don't think that the amount of money actually entering Microsoft account would have changed sensibly, more probably if the second "way" had been chosen, Microsoft would have got some more bucks, as they surely sell the OS to the laptop manufacturer at a lower price, but how much is the difference?

This is a "retail" OEM license, not a "royalty" OEM license. the royalty OEM licenses are bought in (serious) bulk by the vendor to preload on a machine, and are REALLY cheap per copy (due to the fact that they're buying a huge amount up-front). These cannot be moved from the machine they are sold on to another, period.

The "retail" OEM copies are in all actuality the same as retail copies that come with no support from Microsoft, and must be sold preloaded by an actual OEM (smaller OEMs, like Microsoft SystemBuilder OEMs for instance) - the old "sell with a power cord" trick is technically in violation of the EULA, but I don't see Microsoft actively discouraging sales of a product just to make a point (money is money ). These cost FAR more than royalty OEM copies, and as such, yes, the cost difference IS a big deal (a few dollars per license for royalty vs perhaps a hundred or more dollas per license with retail OEM).