Vista EULA -- "hardware partition" == "disk partition"???

I know, not another EULA question.. Is MS' "hardware partition" terminology
designed to cover "bootable disk paritions" specifically? If so, what is the
value of restricting the number of installs on a single hardware unit? You
can only (practically) run one OS at a time, so it shouldn't matter how many
installs you have on that machine, right?

Not sure if MS employees respond to threads here. If not, is there an
official vista forum where I can get a response from somebody from MS?

Or if anybody has links to clarifications of the whole "hardware partition"
terminology I'd appreciate those as well.

Also, I just read in one of the recent EULA threads hereabouts that the XP
EULA didn't allow install on more than one disk partition per license -- I
don't see this in the EULA at all, just references to installing on "a single
computer":

"1.1 Installation and use. You may install, use, access, display and run one
copy of the Software on a single computer, such as a workstation, terminal or
other device ("Workstation Computer"). The Software may not be used by more
than two (2) processors at any one time on any single Workstation Computer."

Kieth --

I can't answer that question. *I'd send that question to Nick White [MSFT]
because Nick plans to try to clarify the Eula very soon after going over
some of the questions raised by Robert McLaw's blog and the responses to
them and Nick is in a much better position to get that answer. You can
contact Nick through his blog (Nick is a developer on the Vista Launch team
at MSFT):
http://blogs.technet.com/windowsvista/default.aspx

To decipher the Vista Eula I think you have to get an attorney who has done
the Raiders of the Lost Ark 3 tour--and spent some time with the guru like
Uma Thurman in "Get Bill 2". You may get some clarification or more
confusder and confusder than ever with these links- it's going to be "fun
fun fun" though when the customers get "a hunk a hunka burnin' UAC and Vista
Eula (apologies to Elvis) and "Daddy takes the XP away".

I'd try to go item by item but I don't want to get hypnotized by reading the
Vista Eula worse than staring into a spinning Disco Ball this early in the
AM.

Vista's Enthusiastic Licensing Restrictions
http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase...sing_reply.asp

Longhorn Blogs Articles on Vista Eula
http://www.windows-now.com/search/Se...ts.aspx?q=eula

CH

"Keith" <> wrote in message
news:00C36DBF-0C40-4A2F-A681-...
>I know, not another EULA question.. Is MS' "hardware partition" terminology
> designed to cover "bootable disk paritions" specifically? If so, what is
> the
> value of restricting the number of installs on a single hardware unit? You
> can only (practically) run one OS at a time, so it shouldn't matter how
> many
> installs you have on that machine, right?
>
> Not sure if MS employees respond to threads here. If not, is there an
> official vista forum where I can get a response from somebody from MS?
>
> Or if anybody has links to clarifications of the whole "hardware
> partition"
> terminology I'd appreciate those as well.
>
> Also, I just read in one of the recent EULA threads hereabouts that the XP
> EULA didn't allow install on more than one disk partition per license -- I
> don't see this in the EULA at all, just references to installing on "a
> single
> computer":
>
> "1.1 Installation and use. You may install, use, access, display and run
> one
> copy of the Software on a single computer, such as a workstation, terminal
> or
> other device ("Workstation Computer"). The Software may not be used by
> more
> than two (2) processors at any one time on any single Workstation
> Computer."
>
>

> *I'd send that question to Nick White [MSFT]
> because Nick plans to try to clarify the Eula very soon after going over
> some of the questions raised by Robert McLaw's blog [...]

Excellent, thanks for the info, Chad! I'll keep my eyes open for that...

Keith wrote:
> I know, not another EULA question.. Is MS' "hardware partition" terminology
> designed to cover "bootable disk paritions" specifically? If so, what is the
> value of restricting the number of installs on a single hardware unit? You
> can only (practically) run one OS at a time, so it shouldn't matter how many
> installs you have on that machine, right?

With a product like VMWare I can have MANY copies
of Vista running simultaneously.

Steve

Hi,

A partition, hardware or disk, is a logical construct of the drive space, as
is a volume. Regardless of how many you have, it is still the same machine.

There are a few 'softies that frequent these groups, but as they do so they
do not offer anything official from Microsoft in the way of legal
interpretations of their OS's licensing. No one has seen the final version
of the license yet, but in the past it has been that you are allowed to
install and use one copy of the software on one machine. This would preclude
multiple installations to different volumes on the same machine, however
there is nothing in activation or WGA that would prevent it either. Plus,
one of the recommended data recovery methods recommended by Microsoft is a
parallel installation, which would seem to imply that using a second
installation on the same machine to safeguard against data loss is within
the terms of the license.

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/
Windows help - www.rickrogers.org

"Keith" <> wrote in message
news:00C36DBF-0C40-4A2F-A681-...
>I know, not another EULA question.. Is MS' "hardware partition" terminology
> designed to cover "bootable disk paritions" specifically? If so, what is
> the
> value of restricting the number of installs on a single hardware unit? You
> can only (practically) run one OS at a time, so it shouldn't matter how
> many
> installs you have on that machine, right?
>
> Not sure if MS employees respond to threads here. If not, is there an
> official vista forum where I can get a response from somebody from MS?
>
> Or if anybody has links to clarifications of the whole "hardware
> partition"
> terminology I'd appreciate those as well.
>
> Also, I just read in one of the recent EULA threads hereabouts that the XP
> EULA didn't allow install on more than one disk partition per license -- I
> don't see this in the EULA at all, just references to installing on "a
> single
> computer":
>
> "1.1 Installation and use. You may install, use, access, display and run
> one
> copy of the Software on a single computer, such as a workstation, terminal
> or
> other device ("Workstation Computer"). The Software may not be used by
> more
> than two (2) processors at any one time on any single Workstation
> Computer."
>
>

Steve de Mena wrote:

> With a product like VMWare I can have MANY copies of Vista running
> simultaneously.

Not using the same license you can't. Unless it is the Vista beta
license or an MSDN license.

If I understand the OP's question, it is can you have the same licensed
copy of Vista (or XP) installed on different partitions of the same hard
disk? In this situation the different installations cannot be run
simultaneously.

David Wilkinson

Rick Rogers wrote:

> There are a few 'softies that frequent these groups, but as they do so
> they do not offer anything official from Microsoft in the way of legal
> interpretations of their OS's licensing. No one has seen the final
> version of the license yet, but in the past it has been that you are
> allowed to install and use one copy of the software on one machine. This
> would preclude multiple installations to different volumes on the same
> machine, however there is nothing in activation or WGA that would
> prevent it either. Plus, one of the recommended data recovery methods
> recommended by Microsoft is a parallel installation, which would seem to
> imply that using a second installation on the same machine to safeguard
> against data loss is within the terms of the license.

More usefully, it would allow you to use one installation as a test
machine. Is this in fact allowed?

David Wilkinson

> There are a few 'softies that frequent these groups, but as they do so
> >they do not offer anything official from Microsoft in the way of legal
> interpretations of their OS's licensing. No one has seen the final version
> of the license yet

Try this:
http://download.microsoft.com/docume...3f722371fa.pdf

5 (a) The software will from time to time validate the software, update or
require download of the
validation feature of the software. Validation verifies that the software
has been activated and is
properly licensed. Validation also permits you to use certain features of
the software or to obtain
additional benefits. For more information, see
http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?linkid=39157.

15 (a). Software Other than Windows Anytime Upgrade.
The first user of the software may
reassign the license to another device one time. If you reassign the
license, that other device
becomes the ¡§licensed device.¡¨

Hope this helps.

"Rick Rogers" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Hi,
>
> A partition, hardware or disk, is a logical construct of the drive space,
> as is a volume. Regardless of how many you have, it is still the same
> machine.
>
> There are a few 'softies that frequent these groups, but as they do so
> they do not offer anything official from Microsoft in the way of legal
> interpretations of their OS's licensing. No one has seen the final version
> of the license yet, but in the past it has been that you are allowed to
> install and use one copy of the software on one machine. This would
> preclude multiple installations to different volumes on the same machine,
> however there is nothing in activation or WGA that would prevent it
> either. Plus, one of the recommended data recovery methods recommended by
> Microsoft is a parallel installation, which would seem to imply that using
> a second installation on the same machine to safeguard against data loss
> is within the terms of the license.
>
> --
> Best of Luck,
>
> Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP
> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/
> Windows help - www.rickrogers.org
>
> "Keith" <> wrote in message
> news:00C36DBF-0C40-4A2F-A681-...
>>I know, not another EULA question.. Is MS' "hardware partition"
>>terminology
>> designed to cover "bootable disk paritions" specifically? If so, what is
>> the
>> value of restricting the number of installs on a single hardware unit?
>> You
>> can only (practically) run one OS at a time, so it shouldn't matter how
>> many
>> installs you have on that machine, right?
>>
>> Not sure if MS employees respond to threads here. If not, is there an
>> official vista forum where I can get a response from somebody from MS?
>>
>> Or if anybody has links to clarifications of the whole "hardware
>> partition"
>> terminology I'd appreciate those as well.
>>
>> Also, I just read in one of the recent EULA threads hereabouts that the
>> XP
>> EULA didn't allow install on more than one disk partition per license --
>> I
>> don't see this in the EULA at all, just references to installing on "a
>> single
>> computer":
>>
>> "1.1 Installation and use. You may install, use, access, display and run
>> one
>> copy of the Software on a single computer, such as a workstation,
>> terminal or
>> other device ("Workstation Computer"). The Software may not be used by
>> more
>> than two (2) processors at any one time on any single Workstation
>> Computer."
>>
>>
>

"Rick Rogers" wrote:

> A partition, hardware or disk, is a logical construct of the drive space, as
> is a volume. Regardless of how many you have, it is still the same machine.

I think we agree here... though I'm under the impression that the term
"hardware partition" was invented by MS to cover, in particular, "disk
partitions". In all my years using computers and being a professional
software developer the Vista EULA is the first time I've ever heard of a
"hardware partition".

> but in the past it has been that you are allowed to
> install and use one copy of the software on one machine.

That's my understanding -- licensed for up to two CPUs on a single
"computer" (please see my earlier quote from the 1.1 section of the XP
EULA)...

> This would preclude
> multiple installations to different volumes on the same machine,

.... but this is the conclusion I've seen in other threads that I'm not
understanding... A "machine" (or "computer" or "workstation"...) is not a
"volume" or "partition", as you correctly inferred in your first statement.
So how does the XP EULA, for example, preclude installation to multiple
"partitions" on a single "computer"? The XP EULA specifically references
installation on "computers", not "partitions" or "volumes". I could have a
single machine with 20 partititions across 5 drives and install XP on each
one -- all installs are on a single "computer" and I can only use one of them
at a time on up to 2 CPUs.

Or maybe I'm just misreading your words.

In any event, I am curious about the interpretation of the XP EULA that I've
read around here, but more interested in this new "hardware partition"
terminology...

"Steve de Mena" wrote:

> With a product like VMWare I can have MANY copies
> of Vista running simultaneously.

I know. I was more interested in the multi-boot scenario. From a licensing
and piracy perspective, protecting against .0001% of the windows population
from running multiple installs simultaneously (on the same machine) is
probably way down on the list.

For multiple people to take advantage of a single license with something
like VMWare you'd need a bunch of KVM hardware, monitors, etc., an everyone
would have to physically sit in the same room. Or you could run sessions over
a network, which would be real fast.

For just a single person sitting in front of his machine, who cares how many
simultaneous OS runtimes you have going? It's like splicing your cable line
but instead of feeding each of your five neighbors you're plugging each line
into a switch box feeding a single TV in your living room. Sure you could
TiVO 5 programs at once, but who cares... the bigger problem is feeding the
lines to your neighbors.