changeing to win 2000
John.H.
I have win 98se on my computers.But I want to change to win2000.My
question is Can I put win 2000 on more than 1 computer using the same cd
and product key.
John.H.
Grinder
Not unless you've paid for them and have some sort of volume license
key. In fact, even if you have a Windows 2000 key that's not being used
on another computer, it may not be legitimate to use on your target
system. Some licenses are "OEM" and are limited to the machine that it
originally came with.
Johnny B Good
from "John.H." <""bigjohn\"@no spam.com"> contains these words:
Ignoring the license terms issue, there is nothing to stop you from
doing exactly that (although there might be an issue if both machines
are on the same lan - but I don't think MS were as clever as Novell in
this regard).
The WPA nonsense only came in with the broken version of win2k (aka
winXP) so there is only your conscience to prevent you from breaking the
spirit of the terms of the product license in using the same CoA key on
more than one machine.
Although Jellybean's Keyfinder will discover the product key used on
all versions of windows from 98 onwards and also allow you to change the
key to another legitimate one on winXP, it fails to provide this feature
on win2k (presumably because there wasn't the dire need to counter the
WPA and WGA issues of winXP). This means that if you need two win2k
boxes set up in a hurry using just the one CoA, you don't have a means
to change one of them later in order to legitimise the 'extra' PC
without doing, at the very least, a repair install using the additional
key.
Although MS might prefer you to believe that an OEM key is not
transferable to a completely different machine, in practice, this is
impossible to enforce since you are at liberty to replace any and all
parts of a PC in order to effect a repair.
This leads to the "Grandfather's axe" effect (as in: "This is my
grandaddies original axe, only had three new handles and one new axe
head!"). As long as you're not using the OEM licence on more than one
machine at a time, you're complying with the spirit of the copyright
terms, which is all MS are really interested in. To try and enforce the
"It dies with the machine" licence condition would open up a whole can
of worms that MS would rather keep a tight lid on.
HTH
--
Regards, John.
Please remove the "ohggcyht" before replying.
The address has been munged to reject Spam-bots.
John.H.
> "John.H." <""bigjohn\"@no spam.com"> wrote:
>
>> question is Can I put win 2000 on more than 1 computer using the same cd
>> and product key.
> install as many concurrent copies as you please.
Thanks for the info.I know that with win 98se I can install it on as
many pc as I want.I have 2 pc that I want to change to win 2000 pro.
John.H.
John.H.
John.H.
Java Jive
presume, it's probably best at least to have the PCs accessing the
internet through the same router, otherwise the differing IP addresses
may cause interest at MS. However, unlike from XP onwards, there
isn't any software setup trap to tie an installation down to a given
hardware setup.
You need to pay attention to the minimum hardware requirements for
W2k, which are more stringent than for W98. My current W2k PC is 3GHz
P4 with 1Gb RAM and the system disk is 36Gb, and runs the OS very
sweetly.
Although perhaps a bit overkill for just two PCs, you may care to take
a look at a page on my website:
http://www.macfh.co.uk/JavaJive/Windows/WindowsImageBuilding.html
======================================
Please always reply to news group as the email address in
this post's header does not exist. Alternatively, use one of the
contact addresses at:
http://www.macfh.co.uk/JavaJive/JavaJive.html
http://www.macfh.co.uk/Macfarlane/Macfarlane.html
Bruce Morgen
productively in machines
with as little as 64MB of
RAM with CPUs as slow as
an ancient Pentium MMX
200. My current home
network disk space server
is an HP Kayak XM-600 with
a single Pentium III (both
the hardware and Win2K
support dual processors)
running at 600 mHz and
128 MB of RDRAM and it's
more than adequate -- so
much so that even though I
have lots of faster CPUs
"in stock" I haven't found
any reason to bother with
an upgrade.
Java Jive
audio or video, or run lots of complex apps multi-tasking, then you
will need a higher hardware spec than if you just browse the internet
or do a bit of word-processing.
Like any OS, W2k needs a certain minimum hardware spec, the precise
level of which will depend on both the precise nature of the tasks the
machine is set and the precise level of the user's patience. There is
a minimum hardware spec for W2k, I wouldn't advise going below it.
For me, a PII with either 64 or 128Mb RAM, I can't remember which, was
unacceptably slow.
On Sun, 02 Aug 2009 15:06:03 -0400, Bruce Morgen <edi...@juno.com>
wrote:
> Fwiw, I have used Win2K
> productively in machines
> with as little as 64MB of
> RAM with CPUs as slow as
> an ancient Pentium MMX
> 200. My current home
> network disk space server
> is an HP Kayak XM-600 with
> a single Pentium III (both
> the hardware and Win2K
> support dual processors)
> running at 600 mHz and
> 128 MB of RDRAM and it's
> more than adequate -- so
> much so that even though I
> have lots of faster CPUs
> "in stock" I haven't found
> any reason to bother with
> an upgrade.
======================================
John.H.
mb ram and 1.6 to 2.0 gz.But my question is can I install win 2000 pro
on both computers using the same cd and product key.as you know you can
do that with win98se software.
John.
John.H.
>> on both computers using the same cd and product key.
> course, each must have a unique name.
Thank you that is what I wanted to know.
John.
Johnny B Good
from Derald <der...@invalid.net> contains these words:
> "John.H." <""bigjohn\"@no spam.com"> wrote:
> >But my question is can I install win 2000 pro
> >on both computers using the same cd and product key.
> Again: Yes. As many as you want; all may be on the same network; of
> course, each must have a unique name.
That, of course, goes without saying. My point re the Novell fileserver
situation was that this alone might (possibly - but I suspect MS aren't
as clever as Novell were over this) not suffice if the licence key also
needs to be unique between networked win2k boxes. It's just something to
consider if you hit a problem over having two such win2k boxes using the
same CoA key on the same network segment.
I've never actually tested this scenario so you can provide some useful
feedback once you've gotten both boxes updated to win2k.
Regarding minimum hardware requirements, I updated an old Dell Latitude
notebook from win98 to win2k. Initially, it only had 64MB of PC100 sdram
but I took the precaution of replacing the single sodimm with a 128MB
one before attempting the win2k install. This had a 500MHz P3 cpu and a
6GB hdd which I later upgraded to a 10GB unit.
It's performance for modest tasks was quite acceptable, even to the
point of being able to replay MPG off air DVB-T recordings using
PowerDVD (but not with MPlayer which actually replayed the movies about
20% slower than normal playback speed).
I would have liked to have been able to upgrade to 256MB (which, I
reckon, would have been the 'sweet spot'), but the i440BX chipset MoBo
and its single sodimm slot (with no other soldered in memory) meant it
was rather limited as to the type of ram it would accept so I was stuck
with that 128MB limit. I wasn't going to pay premium prices on the
correct type just to max it out to its 256MB limit and I never did
manage to find any suitably priced sodimms of the correct type at the
usual bargain bits venues.
If you bear in mind the 'laptop slowness factor', there's no doubt a
desktop version of that hardware spec would have even better
performance.
Something like a 1.5GHz P4 with 512MB and a 40GB or larger disk drive
would undoubtedly match a winXP box with a 3GHz P4 and 512MB and similar
disk size for most tasks and, very likely, equal or better the boot time
of the SP2 or SP3 versions of winXP (it was only the original version of
winXP that had the edge in bootup speed).
No Mail
[snip]
> Ignoring the license terms issue, there is nothing to stop you from
> doing exactly that (although there might be an issue if both machines
> are on the same lan - but I don't think MS were as clever as Novell in
> this regard).
>
I've never had a problem, even when I had 6 machines running the same
W2K on the LAN.
> The WPA nonsense only came in with the broken version of win2k (aka
> winXP) so there is only your conscience to prevent you from breaking the
> spirit of the terms of the product license in using the same CoA key on
> more than one machine.
WGA is a big part of what's lading me to avoid Windows later than W2k.
[snip]
--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us
"I am no Christian." - Robert Browning (1812-1889)