FSX requires new activation after hard drive swap, real...

[Guest tdragger]

Okay, I retract my statements on activation. Clearly I'm not informed enough to provide assistance. I will refrain from posting on the topic. I apologize for the confusion I may have caused.

[n4gix 4,961]

>>>Okay, I retract my statements on activation. Clearly I'm not>informed enough to provide assistance. I will refrain from>posting on the topic. I apologize for the confusion I may have>caused.This is so tragically funny! It reminds me of the "Great Debate" about the meaning of "is..." :-bla

[Toys_R_Us 0]

My copy has gone on the shelf unactivated. I am very sorry I opened the package. I may try to sell it, but probably won't.I know I will need at least two additional activations as computers improve. It is my opinion that this product is not ready for prime time, since they openly say it was built for computers three years away. I'm going to save my activations for that time when I will need them. I can live with FS9 and add-on's (since it is essentially mandated that I have to) until I see a simulator/computer combination that actually works without a multitude of tweaks, graphics file swaps, and other changes.I have a substantial following on a website which I Administer, and have recommended this product as a strong "DO NOT BUY" at this time, for reasons which among other things include this policy. My readership is mostly new to this hobby, and simple could not effectively run the simulation without first giving up on it because of unacceptable performance. They simply are not "into it" as much yet, as the folks here are. Please note - I have always been a very strong MS supporter on this website forum, so any negative remarks or recommendations I make are not without a great deal of thought.Bob (Las Cruces, NM)

[Pete S 7]

It seems to me that people continue to misrepresent the activation limits on FSX!No ONE EVER SAID THAT YOU WILL BE LIMITED TO ONLY 2 ACTIVATIONS! What was said is that you are limited to installing (activating) the software on 2 systems. There is a big difference between activation and binding same program on 2 different systems!As far as I have understood you can activate your software to your hearts content, on these 2 systems ONLY! Just as in WinXP you may reach a point where you will have to call the activation center and tell them that your on line activation doesn't work and you will usually get a new activation limit. They may ask you why you need to activate your software so many times, and I don't think that should bother any legitimate user of the software. Pete S.

[Guest Ozzie]

Hmmm - this actually does raise some interesting questions that perhaps do need addressingAfter ready all of the various points put forward - I personally do not in anyway condone software piracy - BUT equally I do not condone or support any organisation that charges "subscriptions" to infest my machines as I choose to upgrade them and report back to some database my changes in choicesIf anyone wishes to - they can come and analyse all my 3 machines and find that I have complied explicitly with the EULAS (Yes - I am one of those Strange people that actually read them and do NOT like the more recent ones) - That is why the only M$ software on my latest machine is the OS and FS9 (the fact that I also run the No-CD crack is just to protect the money that I actually PAID for a product that is obviously prone to failure) - the older machines run LEGAL, PAID FOR copies of 98SE Word 95 and Office 2000 and since I am also aware of the "activation" BS with the later versions of Office I choose to migrate over to Open Office as needs ariseWhat I personally think (having worked for the ****'*) is that they are trying to bring in some sort of subscription service - IF I PAY for an OS - then I expect under the laws of the country I live in to be able to remove it from a machine that no longer suits my needs and transfer it to my replacement machine and obtain a different OS for the discarded machine - the same applies for my legally paid for disks of FSTHat is the LAW in my countryThis is starting to smack of a different abuse of the LAW process whereby an organisation can demand that they get paid continuously for the use of the same product as needs changeIt needs to be clarifiedWho in their right mind would buy a car based upon the premise that any repairs to that car would involve a new fee for the pleasure of driving it IF anything went wrong with any of the components

[Toys_R_Us 0]

PeteI think every body gets that. It's just that many if not most of us are going to make more than 2 system changes in the next three years.This is an avid bunch they're screwing with, and they're absolutely forcing us into the "unmentionable alternative" (on this website). Look at the machine spec's that people have here. It's obvious, they buy new equipment as it comes along ! And that's my situation too!!!This is not a simple "office progam" as one Aces team member pointed out is his rather weak rant about MS policy right in this thread. It is a powerful high-tech game that was built for each iteration of computers that is expected to come out in the next three years. The Aces team needs to have the fortitude to go to MS management and point that out. It's just that simple, and what they did, in my opinion, is not acceptable to this FS community. We deserve better FOR THE LOYALTY WE HAVE SHOWN FOR OVER 25 YEARS !Bob (Las Cruces, NM)

[ConstVoid 111]

The EULA for FSX, which is in the Microsoft Flight Simulator X main folder, states:TRANSFER TO ANOTHER DEVICE. You may uninstall the software and install it on another device for your use. You may not do so to share this license between devices.Now it doesn't explicitly state that you can do this transfer more than once, but also it doesn't explicitly limit the number of times you're allowed to do it.The EULA for Windows Vista DOES explicitly limit this to one transfer only, which is why many people, myself included, are currently of the opinion that this alone will be reason not to upgrade to Vista. Over the time that I've had XP, I've had a number of disk failures, I've upgraded motherboards, CPU etc. etc., so I've had to reactivate XP a number of times. Most of those times the reactivation was straightforward over the 'net, but I've also been forced to do it by phone about three times now. Two of those were just a case of (slowly) punching the product number into the keypad, but the last time I had to speak to someone from Microsoft and explain my reason for reactivation. Once I'd confirmed that this copy of windows was only in use on one machine he readily gave me the new activation code.In short, I don't see activation in FSX as any sort of problem. As for Vista...........

[Pete S 7]

HUH? (Scratching head!) I guess your spelling of MS says it all!Pete $.

[Guest jbrians]

Your scenario will work fine. We are aware that people upgrade their computers once and a while, potentially more than twice in 2 years, and the system is designed to account for that.Forgive us for not giving you an exact technical specification of how our anti-piracy technology works. :)

[Pete S 7]

Ian, Apparently a lot of people are confusing FSX with Vista, then.MS tried to tell us that FSX activation works same as the present MS applications activation, but some are insisting on limits that are being speculated about Vista, even though it has not been released yet, so it's just speculation.Pete S.

[Sonar5 3]

Pete, With Vista, It's not speculation as they have released their license agreement. Go read it for yourself, and take note about the ONgoing Validation, and what happens to the OS, when it fails for whatever reason.No Revalidation, it will allow only limited acces to Vista.And guess what.. With Vista, there are limits, and that is a FACT, not speculation.Regards,Joe

[Guest Ozzie]

Hehehe - good ta see ya PeteI haven't changed - just names

[Guest Ozzie]

Oh! - I hadn't bothered with THAT one as it is still in the pipe (dream) oops - line - funny though - thats sort of what I was told about 10 years ago when they tried to perform the Lobotomy - that's sort of why I resigned from an extremely well paid job because I had some ethics that have done me well over all these years

[Guest jrowsell]

>It seems to me that people continue to misrepresent the>activation limits on FSX!>>No ONE EVER SAID THAT YOU WILL BE LIMITED TO ONLY 2>ACTIVATIONS! What was said is that you are limited to>installing (activating) the software on 2 systems. There is a>big difference between activation and binding same program on>2 different systems!Ok I understand this. My dilemma.. Is the new hard drive I just installed on the SAME machine enough to trigger the magic hash formula that MS uses to deem that the hardware has significantly changed. I hope your are right and it isn't the case with just a hard drive swap. But how do I the consumer know that when I click yes to activate that a) I've just re-activated and since its the same machine with a new drive that the it still counts as 1 activation or :( just used up another 2nd computer activation? I guess I'm left with trying and hoping that if sceario "b" happens then when I upgrade my pc next year I don't have to call MS to plead my case. FSX needs better activation information displayed to the end user is what needs to be done. So you know you've activated 1 or 2 computers and how many activations on each. I think that would be a good thing to know as an end-user instead of being left in the dark.Jeff

[Guest allcott]

>Your scenario will work fine. We are aware that people>upgrade their computers once and a while, potentially more>than twice in 2 years, and the system is designed to account>for that.>>Forgive us for not giving you an exact technical specification>of how our anti-piracy technology works. :)Thanks Brian. What you have said here is enough and I have duly saved and printed it out in case of future problems. Allcott