They talked about this at a recent TS2 in the Q&A. This is the way I understand the new method:
Shop A builds PCs, and they run Sysprep on them before they ship (obviously) so that the customer puts in the key, etc. When Sysprep runs, it requires a "shop" key, which stays universal, it's not a Windows key, it just identifies the partner. If that user needs to get a major hardware change (warranty) it needs to be done by that shop, as if it goes anywhere else, they won't have the matching partner key. So, when something goes wrong with HP, HP or an HP Authorized shop can get the matching key, and do the repair. But otherwise, any repair would require a completely new licence because the key will not match the partner ID key which is rquired during the install. MS's argument basically boils down to: hey, it helps your shop in that you know people will come back, and it protects us against piracy and shops doing work while stealing your software for nothing, making their build cost less. On the other hand, it means that a lot of small shops will be in deep s*(& if they get asked to do any real work on say a tier-1 vendor (ala HP, etc.). The argument is: hey, it will help you sell an all new machine. Maybe, but it might just as easily piss off people that it's harder to get work done. -----Original message----- From: "Anthony Q. Martin" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2006 15:13:46 -0500 To: The Hardware List [email protected] Subject: Re: [H] MS gets serious about activation > why? I bought a copy with a PC...my hardware, I own it. I don't need > vendor support after i know the system works. why should anything be > tied to hardware and what makes hardware unique? Do we now consider a > PC to be a disposable unit...don't fix it, change it, or upgrade > it....just toss it out (OS and all) and get a new one? > > Ben Ruset wrote: > > Why should you? You didn't pay retail price for that copy of XP. It's > > sold at a discount and tied to the hardware. And the hardware vendor > > is the person who has to support the OS, not Microsoft. > > > > You want to shift your OS around to new PC's? Spend the $199 and buy > > the boxed copy of XP. > > > > Anthony Q. Martin wrote: > >> I kinda think this sucks, though. If I bought an OEM computer and I > >> decide to trash it, I feel as though I ought to be able to use the OS > >> on a new system. Is that unfair to MS? > > >
