Moving Win XP from one PC to another?
divoch
sure what problems there are with installation of Win XP home Edition, i.e.
"taking it" from the old computer and installing it on the new or reusing
the old hard drive, particularly in terms of
a) dealing correctly with any legal and protection issues imposed by
Microsoft
b) actually doing it
I would like to reuse the hard drive from the old computer where the OS is
installed but I am not sure if that helps at all. I presume I could not
just connect an old hard drive to the new motherboard and expect it to work,
could I?
I have XP CD for my old computer .On the packet it says For distribution
only with a new PC and there is the lable with a key
Thanks for your help
Divoch
Bruce Chambers
> My desktop PC is dead. I would like to buy only the base unit but I am not
> sure what problems there are with installation of Win XP home Edition, i.e.
> "taking it" from the old computer and installing it on the new or reusing
> the old hard drive, particularly in terms of
> a) dealing correctly with any legal and protection issues imposed by
> Microsoft
> b) actually doing it
>
> I would like to reuse the hard drive from the old computer where the OS is
> installed but I am not sure if that helps at all. I presume I could not
> just connect an old hard drive to the new motherboard and expect it to work,
> could I?
Normally, and assuming a retail license (many factory-installed OEM
installations are BIOS-locked to a specific chipset and therefore are
*not* transferable to a new motherboard - check yours before starting),
unless the new motherboard is virtually identical (same chipset, same
IDE controllers, same BIOS version, etc.) to the one on which the WinXP
installation was originally performed, you'll need to perform a repair
(a.k.a. in-place upgrade) installation, at the very least:
How to Perform an In-Place Upgrade of Windows XP
http://support.microsoft.com/directory/article.asp?ID=KB;EN-US;Q315341
Changing a Motherboard or Moving a Hard Drive with WinXP Installed
http://www.michaelstevenstech.com/moving_xp.html
The "why" is quite simple, really, and has nothing to do with
licensing issues, per se; it's a purely technical matter, at this point.
You've pulled the proverbial hardware rug out from under the OS. (If
you don't like -- or get -- the rug analogy, think of it as picking up a
Cape Cod style home and then setting it down onto a Ranch style
foundation. It just isn't going to fit.) WinXP, like Win2K before it,
is not nearly as "promiscuous" as Win9x when it comes to accepting any
old hardware configuration you throw at it. On installation it
"tailors" itself to the specific hardware found. This is one of the
reasons that the entire WinNT/2K/XP OS family is so much more stable
than the Win9x group.
As always when undertaking such a significant change, back up any
important data before starting.
This will also probably require re-activation, unless you have a
Volume Licensed version of WinXP Pro installed. If it's been more than
120 days since you last activated that specific Product Key, you'll most
likely be able to activate via the Internet without problem. If it's
been less, you might have to make a 5 minute phone call.
> I have XP CD for my old computer .On the packet it says For distribution
> only with a new PC and there is the lable with a key
>
Which means you have an OEM license, and renders the question moot.
An OEM version must be sold with a piece of hardware (normally a
motherboard or hard rive, if not an entire PC) and is _permanently_
bound to the first PC on which it's installed. An OEM license, once
installed, is not legally transferable to another computer under _any_
circumstances.
--
Bruce Chambers
Help us help you:
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -Benjamin Franklin
Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. -Bertrand Russell
divoch
"Bruce Chambers" <bcha...@cable0ne.n3t> wrote in message
news:OCq4ngw6...@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> divoch wrote:
>> My desktop PC is dead. I would like to buy only the base unit but I am
>> not sure what problems there are with installation of Win XP home
>snip<
>> I have XP CD for my old computer .On the packet it says For distribution
>> only with a new PC and there is the lable with a key
>>
>
> Which means you have an OEM license, and renders the question moot.
>
> An OEM version must be sold with a piece of hardware (normally a
> motherboard or hard rive, if not an entire PC) and is _permanently_ bound
> to the first PC on which it's installed. An OEM license, once installed,
> is not legally transferable to another computer under _any_ circumstances.
>
Thank you for your rely and advice. I did not really expect it to be as
simple as "assembling" together new motherboard and an old hard drive with
OS and expect bit to work but then what if it was as simple as that -:)
As far as the licence is concerned I cannot accept that I would not be able
to re-use the software on another single computer when the first one dies.
Where does it say so? With what hardware does the OS actually need to be
associated? It does not sit on the motherboard and I want to reuse the hard
drive on which it is installed anyway. I have paid for that software
separately and so, as far as I am concerned , I have the right to use it on
one computer, which is all I want to do. Imagine this scenario:
I had my old PC with an 80GB hard drive and Win 98SE upgraded to Win XP (and
paid for it) and, say 60 days later, the motherboard dies. So I get a new
motherboard and want to reuse Win XP I have purchased recently. This is not
far from what has happened and hat I intend to do. I am certainly not
prepared to pay for the same software a second time round just because some
piece of hardare, like processor, on the motherboard failed!
Divoch
Bruce Chambers
>
>
> Thank you for your rely and advice. I did not really expect it to be as
> simple as "assembling" together new motherboard and an old hard drive with
> OS and expect bit to work but then what if it was as simple as that -:)
>
> As far as the licence is concerned I cannot accept that I would not be able
> to re-use the software on another single computer when the first one dies.
> Where does it say so?
It's clearly stated in the EULA (End User License Agreement) to whose
terms you agreed to be bound when you first installed the OS. (If you
clicked the <Agree> button without reading it, you're still bound.) To whit:
"Software as a Component of the Computer - Transfer. THIS LICENSE MAY
NOT BE SHARED, TRANSFERRED TO OR USED CONCURRENTLY ON DIFFERENT
COMPUTERS. The SOFTWARE is licensed with the HARDWARE as a single
integrated product and may only be used with the HARDWARE. If the
SOFTWARE is not accompanied by new HARDWARE, you may not use the
SOFTWARE. You may permanently transfer all of your rights under this
EULA only as part of a permanent sale or transfer of the HARDWARE,
provided you retain no copies, if you transfer all of the SOFTWARE
(including all component parts, the media and printed materials, any
upgrades, this EULA and the Certificate of Authenticity), and the
recipient agrees to the terms of this EULA. If the SOFTWARE is an
upgrade, any transfer must also include all prior versions of the
SOFTWARE."
> With what hardware does the OS actually need to be
> associated? It does not sit on the motherboard and I want to reuse the hard
> drive on which it is installed anyway.
Again, this is clearly stated in the EULA. The OEM license is bound to
the entire computer, and not to any single component:
"The term "COMPUTER" as used herein shall mean the HARDWARE, if the
HARDWARE is a single computer system, or shall mean the computer system
with which the HARDWARE operates, if the HARDWARE is a computer system
component."
> I have paid for that software
> separately and so, as far as I am concerned , I have the right to use it on
> one computer, which is all I want to do.
"... So far as I am concerned..." is meaningless. Remember, you didn't
purchased any software; you purchased a license to use someone else's
(Microsoft's, in this case) software for only so long as you abide by
the terms of that license. Furthermore, you paid a significantly
reduced price for the OEM license; with that lower price come fewer
features. Had you wanted additional features, such as transferability,
you should have purchased (and paid more) for a fuller-featured license.
Retail licenses are transferable.
> Imagine this scenario:
> I had my old PC with an 80GB hard drive and Win 98SE upgraded to Win XP (and
> paid for it) and, say 60 days later, the motherboard dies. So I get a new
> motherboard and want to reuse Win XP I have purchased recently. This is not
> far from what has happened and hat I intend to do.
On the contrary, repairing an existing computer is very, very different
from transferring the OS to an entirely new computer. And there's
nothing in the OEM license that precludes repairing the computer on
which it's installed.
> I am certainly not
> prepared to pay for the same software a second time round just because some
> piece of hardare, like processor, on the motherboard failed!
>
Nor would you have to do so. But this isn't your situation, is it?
You're simply trying to rationalize your way through doing something
that you already know is wrong (or you wouldn't fell the need to
rationalize it).
Ultimately, it boils down to whether or not you have any integrity.
There's no technical safeguard in place on a generic OEM installation CD
to enforce the license, so it finally boils down to is: Can a bank,
mortgage company, etc. trust your signature on a contract? Can you be
trusted not to renege on an promises you've ever made to anyone? If you
opt to violate the OEM EULA, then you've answered those questions with a
resounding "*NO!*" It's your choice.
divoch
"Bruce Chambers" <bcha...@cable0ne.n3t> wrote in message
do is or was clearly outside the boundaries of what I perceive the licence
states, I would take it as it is, I do not intend to break clearly stated
rules to save £50 or so. Although I am now clearer as to what the licence
says I still do not think it is a clear cut as you seem to imply. I do not
want to break the contract but I do not want to keep buying licences unless
I have to.
1) Firstly, the OS was installed into my "old" computer by a computer shop
on a new hard drive which they supplied. I did not need to activate anything
and so I did not accept or signed anything. They must have done it. You will
probably say that even in this case I am bound by it. I do not know that but
if you'd say so I would belive it, BUT even so:
2) If repair is OK then where is the boundary of that repair? If I change
faulty motherboard and re-install OS then that is presumeably OK? If it is
hard drive that failed and I replace it, I presume that is also OK? If I
replace both because I was not sure which was faulty, is that OK? If the
hard drive is OK but I change motherboard, because it was or I thought it
was faulty and also replaced my CD-ROM drive with DVD writer at the same
time because I would like to upgrade it at the same time, is that OK or not?
My current PC has developped in this peacemeal fashion, only floppy drive is
now original, even the case has been changed from the original Dell box, but
it is still only ONE PC with ONE operating system.
3) I quote from your writing: "You may permanently transfer all of your
drive from the current hardware etc. but not say base unit with motherboard
have I transferred HARDWARE? I am assuming of course that, at the end of
this "transfer", there would be only ONE computer with ONE OS.
Regards
divoch
Bruce Chambers
>
> Thanks Bruce for fairly detailed treatment of the subject.
You're welcome.
> If what I might
> do is or was clearly outside the boundaries of what I perceive the licence
> states, I would take it as it is, I do not intend to break clearly stated
> rules to save £50 or so. Although I am now clearer as to what the licence
> says I still do not think it is a clear cut as you seem to imply.
That comes down, I think, to the way different people have always read
and yet differently interpreted the same words. As you said, it seems
clear and straight-forward to me, from my perpective, and the way I
learned English. You, having probably had a different education and
certainly different experiences, read it with some "wriggle-room," as it
were.
> I do not
> want to break the contract but I do not want to keep buying licenses unless
> I have to.
That's understandable; very few people wish to spend more than
necessary. Also, please bear in mind that I am giving you my
understanding of the licensing conditions; I am neither endorsing or
condemning those terms, nor saying that I necessarily like them.
> 1) Firstly, the OS was installed into my "old" computer by a computer shop
> on a new hard drive which they supplied. I did not need to activate anything
> and so I did not accept or signed anything. They must have done it. You will
> probably say that even in this case I am bound by it.
Yes, that would be my contention. Had you not deliberately contracted
with the personnel of that shop to perform certain tasks (the
installation of the hard drive and operating system) for you? Were they
not then acting as your agents, with your permission to do whatever was
legally necessary to complete said installation? I think any first year
law student would be able to argue that you therefore gave them
permission to act on your behalf and to commit you to the terms of the
EULA. (Only if they installed the OEM license without your prior
knowledge or permission would you have some leeway in the matter, to my
mind.)
> I do not know that but
> if you'd say so I would belive it, BUT even so:
> 2) If repair is OK then where is the boundary of that repair? If I change
> faulty motherboard and re-install OS then that is presumeably OK? If it is
> hard drive that failed and I replace it, I presume that is also OK? If I
> replace both because I was not sure which was faulty, is that OK? If the
> hard drive is OK but I change motherboard, because it was or I thought it
> was faulty and also replaced my CD-ROM drive with DVD writer at the same
> time because I would like to upgrade it at the same time, is that OK or not?
> My current PC has developped in this peacemeal fashion, only floppy drive is
> now original, even the case has been changed from the original Dell box, but
> it is still only ONE PC with ONE operating system.
This is where it admittedly gets complicated. Some people believe that
the motherboard is the key component that defines the "original
computer," but the OEM EULA does not make any such distinction. Others
have said that one could successfully argue that it's the PC's case that
is the deciding component, as that is where one is instructed to affix
the OEM CoA label w/Product Key. Again, the EULA does *not*
specifically define any single component as the computer. Licensed
Microsoft Systems Builders, who are allowed to distribute OEM licenses
with computers they build and sell, are _contractually_ obligated to
"define" the computer as the motherboard, but this limitation/definition
can't be applied to the end user until the EULA is re-written.
Microsoft has, to date, been very careful _not_ publicly to define
when an incrementally upgraded computer ceases to be the original
computer. The closest I've ever seen a Microsoft employee come to this
definition (in a public forum) is to tell the person making the inquiry
to consult the PC's manufacturer. As the OEM license's support is
solely the responsibility of said manufacturer, they should determine
what sort of hardware changes to allow before the warranty and support
agreements are voided. To paraphrase: An incrementally upgraded
computer ceases to be the original computer, as pertains to the OEM
EULA, only when the *OEM* says it's a different computer. If you've
built the system yourself, and used a generic OEM CD, then _you_ are the
"OEM," and _you_ get to decide when you'll no longer support your product.
However, you're contemplating simultaneously replacing every single
component, but one. Perhaps a lawyer (like Bill Clinton, for example)
could sufficiently parse the English language to get away with calling
that an "upgrade," but I really don't think that such a claim would pass
the proverbial "reasonable person" test. The "man on the street" would
not say "You've upgraded your computer;" instead, he'd say "You've moved
the hard drive into a new computer."
> 3) I quote from your writing: "You may permanently transfer all of your
> rights under this EULA only as part of a permanent sale or transfer of the
> HARDWARE...."
Not really my writing, but a direct quote from the WinXP OEM EULA...
> So, again, if I keep monitor, keyboard, mouse, .....
The above external components would probably be irrelevant to the
discussion.
>.... floppy, ZIP
> drive from the current hardware etc. but not say base unit with motherboard
> have I transferred HARDWARE?
So, besides the hard drive, you're also going to be taking internal
diskette and zip drives from the current computer and installing them
into the new system? This further muddies the water, but does it the
overall action seem to be more of an upgrade....
> I am assuming of course that, at the end of
> this "transfer", there would be only ONE computer with ONE OS.
>
Which is, after all, Microsoft's primary concern.
divoch
It is interesting to discuss whether the meaning of the licence is entirely
unambigouos or not. Even you seem to agree that, when you are upgrading and
reusing some but not all the components it can get rather hazy. Without a
clear definition when an incrementally upgraded computer ceases to be the
original computer or without a court ruling on this matter it is then left
to us to guess what such a court ruling would be.
I also think that Microsoft's primary concern is that, when I purchase their
OEM OS, I install and use it only on ONE computer hardware. I also think
that, as long as I adhere to this principle, they would not be unhappy and
would not send their lawyers after me to argue the wording of their licence.
I personally feel morally justfied in reusing the licence in this way
regardless of whether I change only one or many components of my single
computer.
divoch