News - There will be no “full retail version” of Windows 8 on sale

[spoon_]

What's the point in buying it then? Activating OEM on different motherboard is not legal so why bother buying it in the first place? Both situations lead to the same result = its illegal and against the EULA.

[Pob255]

I really don't see why people are getting their panties in a knot over this, the only difference between 7 and 8 is non-x86 ARM cpu support and the new touch screen "app" driven interface (metro).
Great for tablets or smart phone but a desktop pc?

I don't know about you lot but I don't want that carp on my desktop or laptop.

[Apex]

People are missing the bigger picture here, by the way

The key difference between the OEM and Retail products is technical support. OEM you get OS support only from the PC vendor (which on a self-built system means you support yourself). Retail Windows you get OS support from Microsoft.

No Retail means no more support from Microsoft. For anyone.

That is something to get worrid about :/

[Apex]

What's the point in buying it then? Activating OEM on different motherboard is not legal so why bother buying it in the first place? Both situations lead to the same result = its illegal and against the EULA.

Like anyone really cares when it comes to Windows on what is or isn't legal.

The more they try to inforce their "vision" the more people find ways to bypass it regardless of the issues.

[miniyazz]

Personally, I'm surprised so many people here have paid for an illegal copy of Windows. I mean, what? How silly is that? Either pirate it for free or pay for the retail version like the rest of us, but paying for a cheaper version and using it illegally, presumably so you can pretend to yourself you're not pirating it? I don't get it.

[Jimbo75]

What's the point in buying it then? Activating OEM on different motherboard is not legal so why bother buying it in the first place? Both situations lead to the same result = its illegal and against the EULA.

I'll consider stopping when they threaten me with legal action. Or I'll just send them an email back saying "Hi I live in the EU, now bugger off".

[wasabi]

People are missing the bigger picture here, by the way

The key difference between the OEM and Retail products is technical support. OEM you get OS support only from the PC vendor (which on a self-built system means you support yourself). Retail Windows you get OS support from Microsoft.

No Retail means no more support from Microsoft. For anyone.

I'd be fascinated to know how many end users have ever gone to MS direct for support (as in ring them, not automated stuff). In 10 years working in IT I've contacted MS for a true support case once, and that was a SQL server / Sharepoint type issue. Genuienely interested - do you guys actually phone MS up?

[aidanjt]

Oh great so if I were to buy Windows 8 and wanted a fresh install and don't want the hassle of a OEM licence being null and void every upgrade then I would have to install Windows 7 then do the upgrade?

Actually, with the recent ECJ ruling that all software licenses must be transferable property, there'd be little difference between the OEM and retail licenses beyond support anyway. I'd rather they just rolled them together anyway.

Still, even if Win8 was fully supported for a reasonable price, I still wouldn't buy it (or even pirate it). It's still a crap OS.

[CCODEZ]

I'll Add my pennies worth...

Seems if theyre ditching the retail and going full OEM on the Os, who is to say they are not allowed or can't amend the Licensing agreement to better support that anyway, best of both worlds in cost and usability?

As for activation from a Win7 Pro POV *though even my parents Vista 32bit oem reinstalled on a couple MB upgrades with no issues* doing a full install/reinstall seems to activate fine really, it's only when you do a bios upgrade that activation seems to have a spaz fit and you have to call the angry automated woman. I mean damn, how many times have you installed windows, done your updates, its screwed up something and instead of rolling back your like *sod it I'll wipe and reinstall* no more than a week after you've JUST done one, still activates with no issues.

[brasco]

Personally, I'm surprised so many people here have paid for an illegal copy of Windows. I mean, what? How silly is that? Either pirate it for free or pay for the retail version like the rest of us, but paying for a cheaper version and using it illegally, presumably so you can pretend to yourself you're not pirating it? I don't get it.

Ouch, that's not patronising at all /sarcasm. I assure you I bought it with the assumption you could transfer it to an upgraded machine, I don't run it in parallel so I just assumed I owned it. Can you honestly tell me you read the EULA on everything you buy?! And it's not an illegal copy that's a ludicrous thing to say, It's OEM, which I'd assumed just came without the frills and support, breaking the EULA is obviously an issue but I haven't intentionally broken it.

[aidanjt]

Personally, I'm surprised so many people here have paid for an illegal copy of Windows. I mean, what? How silly is that? Either pirate it for free or pay for the retail version like the rest of us, but paying for a cheaper version and using it illegally, presumably so you can pretend to yourself you're not pirating it? I don't get it.

License conditions are not law. Licenses are fully transferable property.

[matts-uk]

In all seriousness, who really bothers or actually cares about what the contractual agreement is? In the real world, so long as it works everyone's happy. It may be illegal but your average man in the street, or even your average techy person doesn't care...

Well there's an argument that cuts both ways!

In all seriousness.

The vast majority of Windows PCs have traditionally resided on Corporate desktops, where the bosses running the company really do care about contracts and license agreements. Even in (most)small businesses, despite what the average techy might think, the bosses prefer the company operates within the law. The current Windows licensing model has been quite ridiculous for a few years now. In an attempt to protect revenues, Microsoft have extended different discount schemes, to different market sectors, all with different conditions. Whatever they might choose, many home and small business users find themselves in dubiously grey areas of the law when it comes to using Windows, because Microsoft has made it's licensing so unfathomably complicated they advise you take a training course to understand it.

Microsoft made a series of massive misjudgements leading up to the launch of Vista, which proved to be a compelling reason for people to start looking at the alternatives. Windows 7 is just the sticking plaster on the Vista wound, as Microsoft continues to lose significant market share to Apple and Linux. The rise of OSX in the home has been quite stunning, even though Apple shows little enthusiasm for developing the Mac range and despite techy's harping on, how Macs are too expensive. Meanwhile XP users persist in clinging to the OS they are familiar with, as long as they possibly can, in preference to the super new improved versions.

You don't need to be an industry expert to spot what has been going on. Windows users on the whole, have not been as loyal as Microsoft thought they would be and they are not upgrading as fast as the (old) revenue model needs them to. With Windows 8, I think what we are seeing is Microsoft trying to re-invent it's business, before it goes the way of IBM. It's happening on many levels, from de-emphasis of the UI, to software as a service, to simplified licensing.

Exactly what dropping retail will mean, we won't know until the license agreements and pricing are released. It looks to me that you will buy Windows 8 pre-installed, or you will buy OEM at a much lower price than current retail, or you will buy an upgrade. There may be a few losers but I would think the majority of Windows users will be better off and many will choose to avoid piracy in exchange.

And I don't know anyone who's ever received any support from Microsoft so that won't make much difference either.

Support has always been an important part of Microsoft's business. Microsoft are not going to stop supporting their products but they are just not going to offer a 90 day service along with a reduced priced license.

[MrBozack]

I tried Windows 8. I don't have a touch screen - I hated Microsoft's Metro design.

I'm sure touch screens are the future, but I don't think mankind is quite finished with the keyboard & mouse yet!

[crossy]

Interesting to hear all these "lucky" folks that reinstalled Windows7 (Vista doesn't count because it was crap) on a veritable plethora of different hardware and didn't have any activation issues. I, on the other hand, changed the OS disk and decided to reinstall W7HP (32bit) and had to phone through for an activation code.

Oh, and checking back, it looks like you can't guarantee that your OEM copy (which the note I have here says "must be sold with hardware") will reactivate - it's up to MS whether they let you or not, and there's nothing to say that they can't decide that your latest h/w update is really a new machine and tell you to go buy a new license.

That said, my W7Pro copy was bought in the pre-order sales, and was cheaper than an OEM copy. So if folks are really wanting to save money then I'd suggest keeping an eye open for those sales this time around and buying a copy or two, even if you're not going to use it for 6 months (or in my case 12 months!).

[spraint]

Is it just me or is Microsoft attempting to be Apple more and more these days....

It's just you. Apple doesn't have OEM licences per se. Each purchase via the AppleStore can be installed on as many computers as you like that you 'control'. Without activation or restriction. This also includes installation via VMs. Previous releases on DVD were sold on trust - either valid per the EULA for one installation or 5 if you bought the Family Pack, which cost about £10 more. Since there was no registration key or activation involved the number of actual installations was down to you.

I can't see Microsoft going down this route anytime soon or close to it.

Thank you. Some people don't realize you can reactivate an OEM copy of Windows on a different motherboard without issue. I've done it with Vista and had no problems at all. Besides, people have b!tched for years that the retail version of Windows was too expensive and needed to come down in price. An OEM copy is far cheaper and has everything included in the retail SKU except the cool box (if that matters).

I think Microsoft tightened things up in practice and not just in spirit after Win 7 came out and I remember reading in various forums that people who contacted Microsoft claiming their motherboard blew up were advised to contact their vendor. YMMV as ever. Certainly, the EULA excludes the motherboard as a valid upgradable component.

http://www.microsoft.com/OEM/en/lice...nsing_faq.aspx

Q. If my customer asks me to upgrade a PC with new hardware components, when is a new operating system needed? When would the PC be considered "new"?
A. Generally, an end user can upgrade or replace all of the hardware components on a computer—except the motherboard—and still retain the license for the original Microsoft OEM operating system software. If the motherboard is upgraded or replaced for reasons other than a defect, then a new computer has been created. Microsoft OEM operating system software cannot be transferred to the new computer, and the license of new operating system software is required.

If the motherboard is replaced because it is defective, you do not need to acquire a new operating system license for the PC as long as the replacement motherboard is the same make/model or the same manufacturer's replacement/equivalent, as defined by the manufacturer's warranty.

Which is why some people were told to contact their system builder - to have an identical motherboard put in.

[miniyazz]

Ouch, that's not patronising at all /sarcasm. I assure you I bought it with the assumption you could transfer it to an upgraded machine, I don't run it in parallel so I just assumed I owned it. Can you honestly tell me you read the EULA on everything you buy?! And it's not an illegal copy that's a ludicrous thing to say, It's OEM, which I'd assumed just came without the frills and support, breaking the EULA is obviously an issue but I haven't intentionally broken it.

Sorry, my post was not directed at you but rather at the number of people who have given the impression that they were fully aware of the different licensing conditions attached to OEM and Retail and chose OEM because it was cheaper and they could 'get away with it'.

License conditions are not law. Licenses are fully transferable property.

I'm not quite sure what you're saying here. No, this is not criminal law. Yes, this is civil law. These users have knowingly used something they had no right to by the contract they were bound to. If Microsoft were so inclined (obviously highly unlikely), they could sue them in the small claims court or similar for civil liabilities.

And what do you mean by your last sentence? It doesn't seem to make any sense here.