Sign in to follow this  
mgh

Thinking of upgrading to Vista? Read this...

Recommended Posts

MS is apparently really gooing to limit the installation flexibility of Vista. The OS can only be transferred to another machine once. Bad news for those of us who like to tinker a bit. Who's going to pay $300 for an OS that can only be transferred once? Sheez...See: http://www.techweb.com/wire/software/193300234Doug

Share this post


Link to post
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Well, if I understand this correctly...I think you can count me out of purchasing Vista then. I'm a Linux Certified Professional, so I'm comfortable with using Linux and I enjoy it. A major reason I got interested in Linux was because Win95/98/98SE/ME were unstable and messy. I purchased and run WinXP because MS finally came up with a stable OS of good quality, and so I can run MSFS of course. Now they come up with a policy that will turn me away from their OS.The good news is that FSX runs on WinXP and so I guess WinXP is what I'll be sticking with for the next few years in order to run FSX, because I will not allow myself to be what I feel is, taken advantage of. You can be almost certain that I would be a person that would purchase more than 'one' new computer system during Vista's lifespan.Furthermore, I think this might somehow be illegal. If it isn't it, such a shackle should be made illegal. I think it's time that the Government stands up for the rights of us consumers and drags M$'s butt back into court. Apparently the slap on the wrist they got last time was not sufficient enough punishment to make them see the light and correct the error of their "let's play the monopoly card" bullying ways.If I did not understand this new license scheme correctly then I retract the above, including my M$ insult, and will happily continue to support MS by purchasing their Vista OS, as long as it's stable and of good quality like WinXP is. I will not be taken to the cleaners though.EDIT: Thank you for the heads up Doug. :) Don't be surprised if this gets moved out of the 'FSX' forum.Regards,OneTinSoldier

Share this post


Link to post

> I'm a Linux Certified Professional, Great. If you are ... this is my question. I have a laptop (Dell, Precision M90) with Linux Red Hat Enterprise (latest) installed. This is for my work. I don't know how to change the screen resolution. I don't have root password (only my admin does) but even he could not figure out how to change screen resolution. He went to Application/SystemSettings/Display and changed resolution, restarted and there was no change. Also, my screen is 9 x 14.5 - I would like to know what would be the native resolution for this screen, whatever my current resolution is - everything is stretched horizontally and characters are slightly blurred (in horizontal direction). I would appreciate your help or advise.Michael J.

Share this post


Link to post

I read this earlier in the week. Last time I heard, Vista was supposed to be the platform for bringing gaming back to PCs and away from consoles. So why this move? Has that man not got enough of our money, already, that he can afford to say "well, ####, why not let them upgrade all they want."

Share this post


Link to post

I would hope the mods would leave it here for a day or so. I think it's an important issue considering that all the performance eggs seem to be in the Vista/DX10 basket right now.Doug

Share this post


Link to post

Who told you that? I've been running Vista since pre-beta 2 and I'm running Build 5744 with BOTH FS9 and FSX running without error.

Share this post


Link to post

ya know something...its almost a catch 22 in a way because the software people in an attempt to curb piracy are in fact at the same time biting the hand that feeds them by making their paying customers suffer with these rediculous anti-theft technologies, which in turn only ends up increasing the piracy to begin with.Either ill be buying OEM copies, other sources all together..or perhaps not at all at this point...that IS, if this turns out to be true.Im another one who's had quite enough of the game and am no longer willing to shell out my money only to have to deal with this sort of imprisonment...i feel its a violation of my consumer rights, or at least it SHOULD be made so!Dave

Share this post


Link to post

Complainer has installed DX10 but not DirectX 9, by the look of things.None of this matters as Vista is beta software, still subject to development (how rare is an RC2 from Microsoft? Very.) WHat does matter is that we have read promises from certain quarters that Vista and DX10 will bring massive performance improvements to FSX. There has been no proof of that, and now the claims are dependant on an OS that MS reserves the right to switch off at any time if it fails a single validation check? Just who do they think they are?Excuse me, but WHY does a properly validated piece of software require re-validation? I can understand it if changes have been made to the users system, but this article seems to suggest that MS reserve the right to invade my privacy whenever it suits them. And if their software falls over and gives a false reading (and thats not beyond the realms of possibility, Bill, is it?;)) I'm the one to suffer? I presume that if I had to have access to a clock function that was warning me to take medication, or of an important meetng that I must attend, and I suddenly found that, through no fault of my own, my computer decides to go on strike, then Bill and his cronies will be sending round the doctor and paying compensation for the meeting missed? I can see lots of litigation potential in an activation policy like that, as well as court action by governments.Why, you could even use that technique to bring governments down. Switch off all the goevernment issue licences, hold them to ransom, get what you want. Anyone got FSX running on Linux yet?Allcott

Share this post


Link to post

>If I did not understand this new license scheme correctly then>I retract the above, including my M$ insult, and will happily>continue to support MS by purchasing their Vista OS, as long>as it's stable and of good quality like WinXP is. I will not>be taken to the cleaners though.>>EDIT: Thank you for the heads up Doug. :) Don't be surprised>if this gets moved out of the 'FSX' forum.>>Regards,>>OneTinSoldier>I don

Share this post


Link to post

>Has that man not got enough of our money, already, that he can>afford to say "well, ####, why not let them upgrade all they>want."That man? MSFT is a public company. I and the other MSFT shareholders applaud MSFT's policy to stick it to you and make you pay up A LOT and OFTEN! MSFT is performing their corporate duty in bringing maximum profits to the shareholders. The only thing better than this is their apparent ploy to intentially reduce the FPS and overall performance of the release version of FSX when run on WinXP. This way MSFT can remove the artificial rate limiting code in the "Vista/DX10 patch" and will show a much larger performance increase in the upcoming Vista Vs. WinXp FSX benchmarks. Of course the additional eye candy and higher fps/performance will result in all you gamers running out to buy new NVDA cards (another of my holdings) and forking it over to run FSX on Vista! Gates is a genius and he, I, and all the other investors are making mad money.

Share this post


Link to post

How dare that man (Gates right?)donate all his fortune to good causes of the world? He gave 95% of his fortune away and he is still being called greedy!

Share this post


Link to post

Do you blame the airport security for the extra expense, time lost and inconvinience caused at airports or do you blame the terrorists? I don't think any of you appreciates the massive magnitute of the piracy MS is subjected to, despite all their anti-piracy efforts. If you knew about the rampant pirating of their OS and Microsoft office products, you'd have more underestanding. Think of so many offices who get one software and then copy it on multiple systems. They are not trying to make money on individual users like me and you or stick it to us as many think. (They won't.) Blame the terrorists ..oh I mean the software pirates for these policies!

Share this post


Link to post

Michael J,PM me and I'll see if I can help you out, but we'll keep the Linux tech support out of this thread. You probably won't get a response from me until ten days or so from now but I can give it a try at that time.Cheers

Share this post


Link to post

I contributed to a thread with a similar theme a month or two back and was roundly chastised for simply suggesting that Microsoft is behaving the way all monopolies do as well stifling innovation. The thoughts expressed in this thread have further confirmed that conviction. My point is that MS could choose to behave differently they just don't and no amount of blaming the software pirates can excuse this.Bruceb

Share this post


Link to post

Ok, I'm with ya'll on the whole piracy/protection debate... it's getting out of hand with all the DRM crap that is getting put into hardware and software that basically cripples our systems that we buy and keeps us from doing reasonable things with our media that be purchase.But guys, I think you're misreading the EULA. It only says that you can only transfer the license one time. That means that you buy it and install on your new system... Then 2 years down the line you do some upgrades that involves a motherboard change (it's ONLY MB changes that effect this), ok, there's your 2nd system.If you're reinstalling on the same system with the same hardware, it won't care, just like XP doesn't care now. It's only if the system config radically changes from install to install does it care.But I agree... 2 is still a bit limiting.--2002cbr600f4i

Share this post


Link to post

I am also. Although it's a little slower in Vista it still performs quite well.DougDell XPS Gen3 (3.6GHz/540FSB) | 2GB DDR SDRAM | 74GB SATA, 10k RPM (C: ) | 120GB SATA (D: ) | 512MB ATI Radeon X1900XTX (Catalyst 6.8) | Audigy 2 ZS Sound | MS Force Feedback 2 | WindowsXP Pro (SP2) | DirectX 9.0c

Share this post


Link to post

Well, if you read it on the internet, then it MUST be true.

Share this post


Link to post

Hopefully this will be an increasing trend,and cause micro$oft to rethink their insane policys. The people will only put up with so much:-) Type this into Google, Massachusetts revises IT policy to exclude Office XML format

Share this post


Link to post

Complete BS. :-fume If this is true, then I'll be moving to another OS and dealing with the issues (e.g., Linux). No way is MS going to get my money for something I can't transfer to new machines as I upgrade them. My XP has gone through a few new upgrades. It's mine, I paid for it.

Share this post


Link to post

>Complete BS. :-fume >>If this is true, then I'll be moving to another OS and dealing>with the issues (e.g., Linux). No way is MS going to get my>money for something I can't transfer to new machines as I>upgrade them. My XP has gone through a few new upgrades. >It's mine, I paid for it. I couldn't agree more with this. I have done a number of upgrade's and tinkering with my other older system since I have had XP. I have 2 home computers myself. And I was planning on a major upgrade when Vista came out. I am getting a little worried now on the upgrading part if after I am done spending the cash on os's I could have really built one #### of a system if I could have directed that money on hardware.

Share this post


Link to post

Same here. I've rebuilt my machine 3 times in the last year and half, which includes the MB change twice. I also have 3 computers in the home, and feel it's already outragously priced to have to purchase 3 licenses. I can live with that. But to pay for software in which it limits my installations to 2 on one machine. I will not spend my money unless I am guaranteed to be able to use it for the entire time I "Own" it. As I am expecting like many others, to upgrade my system again and again as new technology comes available. And if we, the home users, are not the target for this unacceptable limitation, then MS needs to come up with a better way.I just refuse to purchase without a guarantee.

Share this post


Link to post

If you look at this:INSTALLATION AND USE RIGHTS. Before you use the software under a license, you must assign that license to one device (physical hardware system). That device is the

Share this post


Link to post

Doesn't make any sense. You do realise that the 'software terrorists' had a cracked FS-X without any activation problems before we can even buy it in the shops.Companies that use illegal software are stupid. Its only a matter of time before they get an audit after which they can pay through the nose for al those licenses. Audits are much more effective then anti piracy measures.In the IT branch where I work there is little intrest in Vista. The focus is on Citrix, centralised management of all desktops and making applications available via internet & small handhelds. A desktop OS packed with activation and antipiracy 'features' isn't realy in our intrest.

Share this post


Link to post

> My XP has gone through a few new upgrades. > It's mine, I paid for it.Uh ... maybe you don't read these new EULAs.You are purchasing a license to USE the software but you never OWN it.Sort of like hiring a car - it still belongs to a company and is never owned by you.MS are not the only ones - Adobe are in the act too.It's a money making racket for sure - XP will be the last OS I buy from MS.Linux does the job beautifully except for games and once XP is too old to run newer games (when everything goes DX10) I'll just retire from gaming.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this