Would someone clarify exacty how the licensing works for FSX, and

[Guest RGH]

Hi taildrager.When you uninstalled did you just use add & remove or did you remove it all from your PC.RegardsRex

[Randall 85]

Maybe I'm just out to lunch but it seems to me tdragger said your can install on two machines, not you can only install twice. He said he reactivated his install dozens of time with the same key. I don't follow this idea of having only two installs then you have to repurchase the software. Where was this said?Randall

[Paul Kane 0]

Hi Randall,Yes, I can reinstall 100 times (just pulling that number out of the air) on my current machine. Then I can upgrade my computer and install 100 more times on that machine. Then I upgrade my CPU and motherboard. That counts as a third machine and the install will prevent you from activating again. I think? That is the answer I'm waiting for. I'm hoping I'm wrong. I wouldn't like the idea of having to re-purchase another key at full price to go though the process again.Now, granted some here will happily run their FSX on only one or two "machines" during the life of this version. I understand that. But there are others who upgrade their equipment on a fairly regular basis and this could be a problem. Especially coupled with the possiblity of Vista having the same activation scheme.....

[Randall 85]

Gotcha! Thanks.Randall

[Lars Peter Hammer 0]

Well, I'm also interested in knowing when/what constitutes for a new machine.Just to add to the confusion, maybe is a number of factors and not a specific hardware change.A new motherboard + CPU might not be an update if you still are using some previously detectable hardware, maybe even using the same IP address to activate will help?I'm a beta tester for different flighsim vendors - and that sometimes involves pulling out equipment at inserting old hardware in order to check if that will brake anything with the software. I would hate it if that someday could render my flighsim useless until I either buy a new serial number or convince a supporter that I'm not a pirate.I guess we are in the dark at the moment. I wouldn't dare to upgrade my hardware before I know what I have in store for me.I'm actually enjoying FS X - and I hadn't planned on entering FS X discussion, but this conserns me a bit.

[Paul Kane 0]

>I hadn't planned on entering FS X discussion, but this conserns me a bit.Same here Lars...and I'm on some of the same beta teams you are as well. I hadn't even thought of the "beta testing" aspect of this...hummm

[Lars Peter Hammer 0]

>I'm on some of the same beta teams you are as wellI know :-) - That was what actually triggered my consern.

[Guest allcott]

The issue of activation will become much more inmportant to simmers who regularly change or swap out hardware once we're forced to install Vista, which will force most of us, coincidentally, to change or swap out hardware:http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/winvi...nsing_reply.aspAnother aspect of Vista activation is that it no longer appears to be a `one time deal` like XP (allowing for the repeated one time deals to reactivate Windows after major upgrades), instead it decides where and when it will check your activation - and if it doesn't like what it sees you're out. Vista switches over to very limited functionality while you plead your case to a MS `official` who, like as not, is in Kathmandu and has no knowledge of any application outside of the one he or she has been trained in. We've already seen several cases of farce over activating something as comparatively simple as FSX, and this new policy will surely alienate only the very people who might otherwise be expected to be the core customer for the new OS.So, MS delivers FSX, a product which it becomes quite apparent is leading you by the hand to the computer store, wallet open. But you didn't know that until after you installed FSX. Thats ONE.So you dash off to the store and grab some more ram and a new graphics card and run back home to try and get some level of reasonable performance from FSX under XP. Oh, but you have to reactivate. That's TWO. In a month or two the wallet has to be opened again to buy Vista, DX-whatever. Maybe you can't upgrade, or don't want to upgrade to a new DX10 card at this point (and who would until the real benefits for FSX are proven?). So the new OS means a new activation of FSX. That's THREE. A couple of months later and you decide to make the leap to DX10, once the benefits are finally proven by benchmarks, not hearsay. Thats another reactivation - for both FSX and Vista and makes FOUR. AND that's before you start considering the needs of beta testers and computer junkies who like tweaking, modding and installing new stuff all the time.At this point you have actiavted FSX FOUR times and Vista TWICE. Are MS really suggesting that unless I come up with a good reason to someone who's first language isn't English, and I can explain my needs satisfactorily, I might need to buy the OS again and have the FSX reactivation denied?At this rate FSX is going back in the box, never to see the light of day again. It's just becomeing too much trouble to own it, through no fault of my own.The fact is that the arse-about-face release dates of FSX and Vista hacve casued this and at the very least MS should zero out any activations that involved Vista and FSX for at least twleve months AFTER Vista is released, so that no activations involving those products count against the total of `acceptable` activations while qwe try to get `acceptable` performance. Either that or a proper phoneline and online support that employs people who don't come to work by donkey and learn technical support by rote, who are trained to `fast track` all FSX users so that we dont' have to jump through the hoops that those who are responsible for their own problems have to. We have chosen to be primary customers for a `Windows Showcase` product, don't make us the bloody victims, instead show us the confidence and support for a paying customer who is effectively being a beta tester, whatever The Company might say.Allcott

[Guest 2002cbr600f4i]

GRRRR... As tdragger (and others around the web) have repeated, activation ONLY cares if you make a *SUBSTANTIAL* change to your system (read- "you changed the motherboard!" Change graphics cards, ram, possibly even CPU and it won't care one bit.)So, if you install on your XP rig that's one. You upgrade to Vista, but same MB, still ONE. You change the MB out next year, ok, that's 2. You reinstall Vista on the same MB, still TWO.Now, how many of us have done the EXACT same thing with XP over the last 5 years? Um, quite a few I bet. YEs, XP does care about hardware changes and will complain if the MB is changed out. IF you go over the number of activations it locks out. What happens? You call MS, explain that you changed to a new machine, that the old hardware is ditched and not being used anymore (recycled, whatever) and they say "Ok, fine, here's your new code."All they're trying to do is make sure you're not using the same key on 100 machines SIMULTANEOUSLY. I actually LIKE that it's going to do periodic checking. That will allow it to say "Hmmm, we've gotten 5 'phone home' attempts from machines all using the same key, with 5 different hardware configs in a 1 week period. This is obviously a pirated copy, DENIED." Far be it from me to be happy about DRM, I HATE the stuff (BIG reason I refuse to buy an IPod and use Itunes!) But at the same time, I don't have a problem with MS trying to protect it's IP as long as it's through relatively non-invasive mechanisms, and this *SEEMS* to be (I stress SEEMS because what we're being told could be vastly different than the reality when we get our hands on it...)My only beef is that with something like XP/Vista, if they're going to do this sort of thing to reduce piracy (which is good) that they'd lower the #### price a bit! $200-400 for Vista in INSANE and is exactly the reason people pirate it. If they charged more like $30 they'd have a LOT less piracy and make just as much money because of the lower amount of pirated copies being used.Stop being Chicken Little and running around screaming "The Sky Is Falling!" until we see what it's really like and how easy/hard it is to get the key unlocked in situations where it's been locked. What I've seen of the XP process tells me it's more of the hassle factor of having to call than a serious problem.--2002cbr600f4i

[Mace 1,964]

Yes, two installs is no good.I *know* a person can simply call Microsoft and resolve the problem (I've done it and seen it done, lots of times) but the point is, two installs is simply insufficient.RhettAMD 3700+ (@2.5 ghz), eVGA 7800GT 256 (94.47), ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2 GB Corsair XMS 3-3-3-8, WD 250 gig 7200 rpm SATA2, CoolerMaster Praetorian

[Sonar5 3]

Can you say Class Action?

[Sonar5 3]

>Hi Randall,>>Yes, I can reinstall 100 times (just pulling that number out>of the air) on my current machine. Then I can upgrade my>computer and install 100 more times on that machine. Then I>upgrade my CPU and motherboard. That counts as a third machine>and the install will prevent you from activating again. I>think? That is the answer I'm waiting for. I'm hoping I'm>wrong. I wouldn't like the idea of having to re-purchase>another key at full price to go though the process again.>>Now, granted some here will happily run their FSX on only one>or two "machines" during the life of this version. I>understand that. But there are others who upgrade their>equipment on a fairly regular basis and this could be a>problem. Especially coupled with the possiblity of Vista>having the same activation scheme.....Umm, Windows Vista has a totally different License SCHEME, and yes it is a scheme after my review of the License.We have an interesting thread about Vista over here in Hangar Chat:http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=sho..._id=28765&page=I suggest you all read it, as well as follow some of the links in it. (Please keep in mind the license scheme for Vista is VERY Different than FSX)I would also be very surprised to see any comment from MS on this.(Vista Scheme). I don't think they want milions of hobbyists who do upgrades like we do to run their product understanding their licensing scheme.But we're a smart bunch eh?BTW - if you think the licensing scheme with FSX is goofy, (which I think it's actually fine and mimics xp to a certain extent), wait until you get a load of Vista's license with the word DEVICE Occuring 67 times, and then good luck defining device as it relates to you changing certain UNNAMED Compononets which may require you to BUY ANOTHER BOX OF VISTA...... Oh and Two procesors, too?????Try that one on for size.....Regards,Joe

[Guest Stoopy]

Perhaps the word that would dispell some confusion is "concurrent".....does that apply or no?Simply bringing this up as I understood that past FS EULA's allowed for two -concurrent- installs, one on a main simming rig and one on a laptop for instance.Is that perhaps what was meant or is this an incorrect assumption?And thanks in advance for your time and effort in replying.Cheers!

[Guest capncrazy68]

I am in aggreement here. With XP, I have to call every single time I reinstall, even without changing any device. And as a beta tester, yes it is annoying. Also being an ammateur computer builder, I try out different combinations at times before I get to the end result. I will run out of my 2 installs rather quickly. I've already reinstalled Vista Beta versions twice, now running both Vista RC1 and XP on the same machine. Same machine, same user, different components. And for XP, I get a different activation key every time, and I can't count how many times anymore. What's the point in that?My point, if it's just like XP and a simple explanation will resolve the issue like some have suggested, then why the difference in XP not having a so called "limit" and Vista and FSX having that limit? They already get $80 for FSX, and what $300-400 for Vista. Am I that big a threat to them? NO, it's the piracy going on that is the problem, yet by MS limiting us to 2, that only increases the piracy. How do they even know the accurate count of it anyways if it's pirated? MS has a monopoly here, and are cleary exploiting that. They own FSX and the only OS that it runs on, so we are forced to use their product or get out of the game. I for one, am not willing to simply quit my hobby like some others have mentioned. Absolutely not. Piracy may be my only option, if they refuse to re-activate what I purchased. I may not Own rights to the software, but I will own my copy of it. If I pay for something that I cannot use, I will expect my money refunded, or demand a guarantee that my usage will not be interupted prior to purchase. Or I will revert to piracy.You are telling me that Microsoft cannot find a better way to do this? Piracy is not and never will be impossible. If they realize that, and the fact that WE are supporting them financially, they should come up with a feasable and satisfying compromise in their solution. Making the customers unhappy is not good for business. Hopefully this will be resolved soon.My two cents anyways,Jim

[Murray_CHYZ 1]

Listen up guys and I will tell you what will happen after the 2nd install (the 3rd)...The install program will tell you that you have reached the install limit... just like XP does now.It will present you with a screen that has a long list of numbers... just like XP does now.This screen allows you to choose the country you live in and gives you a toll free number to call... just like XP does now.You call the number, wait in a cue, tell the nice person who answers what happened (i.e. you upgraded your PC). That person asks you a few simply to answer quesions (i.e are you installing this program on more than one computer). They then ask you to read the long list of numbers. They read you another long list of numbers which you type into the boxes provided on the screen in front of you. They tell you to click next... and, Bob's your uncle!How do I know this... I have gone through this with FS10 2 nights ago, and, have done this with XP about 7 times... I never get an argument!