Install Vista Upgrade Without Preexisting XP

Johannes K. writes "It has previously been claimed that to install Windows Vista from an upgrade DVD requires having Windows XP installed on your computer. DailyTech reports on a workaround: no previous version of Windows is required at all." Anyone know whether this workaround moots the finding by LXer that during upgrade Microsoft invalidates your original XP CD-key?

Much worse

[Mr. Samuel]

Anyone know whether this workaround moots the finding by LXer that during upgrade Microsoft invalidates your original XP CD-key?

It's actually much worse. I tried this trick and went out grocery shopping. When I returned, all the locks on my house had been changed.

Re:Much worse

[SmlFreshwaterBuffalo]

Are^H^H^HWere you married?

Re:

[MM_LONEWOLF]

Something tells me that Jason Fox had a hand in creating this OS. To quote him, "Tentacles locked and awaiting your command."

"Vista upgade cupon $60"

[RyanFenton]

Intentional or not? I wonder if this will end up increasing the value of Vista upgrade coupons on eBay, or if this will be patched before more are mailed out.

Ryan Fenton

Wow

[T-Bone-T]

Isn't this kind of thing one of the most basic ways to try to cheat the system? How could something this obvious slip through?

Re:

[Detritus]

You've been assimilated by the Borg. You're assuming that all customers are thieves and must be prevented from cheating by the vendor's software.

For many software vendors, everyone get the same installation media, regardless of whether it's a full version, upgrade, or special license.

Re:

[T-Bone-T]

Are you familiar with the saying "When you assume it makes an ass out of u and me"? In this case it is making an ass out of you. I didn't even hint that "all" customers are thieves. I'm just saying that if, for some reason, I decided to try to install the upgrade without actually upgrading this is probably the first thing I would try. This method isn't supposed to work. It is way too easy. It is so easy a caveman can do it. Most of the hacks I've seen involve changing registry values. Most of the pe

No evidence for XP key invalidation

[Sancho]

I've seen many blogs that proclaim that XP keys are invalidated after upgrading with Vista. They always link to a discussion of the EULA, which claims that the license is invalidated.

Is there any evidence whatsoever that Microsoft will invalidate XP keys for their WGA check (because they'll certainly still work to install the media) if you upgrade that installation of XP to Vista? Has anyone actually tried it?

Certainly, Microsoft could probably link the two installations, if you do an actual upgrade. If they can do that, what do you think they'll do to 'upgrade' copies that were installed using the Vista->Vista trick? Maybe they'll wait awhile, then decide that these copies are 'pirate' installations, and lock you out of upgrades (possibly drop you down to degraded mode) until you pay a fee to convert your installation to a Full install.

Re:No evidence for XP key invalidation

[teslar]

Is there any evidence whatsoever that Microsoft will invalidate XP keys for their WGA check (because they'll certainly still work to install the media) if you upgrade that installation of XP to Vista? Has anyone actually tried it?

Nope. And the clause itself is nothing new, as said even on the link provided in the summary - XP had the exact same one. But hey, it sounds shocking and just the thing Evil(tm) Micro$oft would do, so it must be true.

Re:No evidence for XP key invalidation

[toleraen]

XP had the exact same one

The only problem is that when you upgraded to XP, MS had no way of "deactivating" your old copy of Win98, since you weren't required to register 98 to use it. Now they have the ability to flat out deny your registration of XP the next time you install. It's probably still FUD, but who knows.

Re:

[phayes]

+1 insightful!

well, *i* know.

[Anonymous Coward]

installed vista upgrade over valid XP. attempted to install XP using same key on another computer - denied activation (the expected behavior, else activation would just be more useless than it already is). deinstalled vista, then attempted to install XP using the same key again - activation successful.

ta-da.

Re:

[toleraen]

When you say "deinstall"...do you mean you formatted and just installed XP, or is there a roll-back feature built into Vista that lets you drop back? More specifically, would there be data sent to MS saying you're no longer going to use Vista? If you just formated, I assume that your ability to restinall XP was due to the way MS registers your computer. They denied your install on another box because the hardware you had registered to that key differed from what you were installing on.

Re:

[gstoddart]

The only problem is that when you upgraded to XP, MS had no way of "deactivating" your old copy of Win98, since you weren't required to register 98 to use it. Now they have the ability to flat out deny your registration of XP the next time you install. It's probably still FUD, but who knows.

See, my fears with this are what I'm usually skeptical about with 'upgrade' installs of Windows operating systems.

They sell you the upgrade to go from the old and busted to the new hotness. You can only upgrade the old

Re:

[gfxguy]

Well, two days before Vista was released, I finally ran into a piece of software that wouldn't install on 2000 and required XP. So this is an incredibly interesting story to me. I ordred an XP-Pro upgrade from Newegg; one of the bonuses was that all XP packages until sometime in Febuary or March... maybe even April... entitle you to a Vista upgrade.

So I install my XP upgrade last night, but I didn't actually install it "over" 2000... 2000 was there, but I used the XP install to delete and recreate the par

Re:

[gfxguy]

Oh, I should probably have thought it out a bit more before responding...

If you can upgrade an unactivated XP, then you could buy the upgrade and use any old or pirated XP disc. But you asked about installing, and XP certainly lets you install.

Still, with this new hack, your fears should be put to rest. And to the guy who "asked slashdot", if it's a clean install, then it can't be tied to your old key (unless you got the upgrade to free, as I mentioned in my other post, in which case I still don't know).

Re:

[Criterion]

I seem to remember sometime in my past, when I was still working tech support, that while doing OS upgrades we always started from scratch, and it simply asked to see the disk from the prev version. Am I halucinating, or does anyone else remember doing this specific activity?

Re:

[semifamous]

It's not likely that they'll lock these out since this workaround actually came from Microsoft in the first place.

Though I imagine it's also not impossible for them to do something to discourage people from this...

Re:

[Sancho]

Most of their 'lockouts' are temporary, anyway. Call them, explain the problem, and it goes away. I guess they might not force the issue of the money, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if they don't make it slightly harder on people who use this trick. After all, it effectively cuts the price of Vista for people who are willing to install it twice in a row.

Easier way

[Agelmar]

If you bought Vista Ultimate, and have a 64-bit CPU, there's an even easier way... install Vista Ultimate 64-bit version.

The 64-bit DVD booted fine and let me do a clean install from the upgrade CD. I typed in my ugprade CD key, hit next, and it prompted me to accept the license. (The 32-bit CD would not let me do a clean install, I did try that out. It said I had to start the process from within windows.)

Re:

[rucs_hack]

since all you need is a basic xp install, isn't it simple just to do that first? It takes my machine 20 minutes to install xp.

Upgrade Process

[Nasarius]

Wouldn't the simpler way of ensuring a legitimate upgrade be to take your old XP key alongside the Vista upgrade key, then check them both with WGA? Considering that there's still no real Vista activation crack, it's probably even secure.

Instructions from the article...

[james_bray]

God I hate when submitters force you to read an entire article, so heres the important bit:

1. Boot with the Windows Vista Upgrade DVD.
2. Click "Install Now."
3. Do not enter a Product Key When prompted.
4. When prompted, select the Vista product edition that you do have.
6. Install Vista normally.
7. Once the install is complete, restart the DVD-based Setup from within Windows Vista. Perform an in-place upgrade. 8. Enter your Product Key when prompted.

Please Explain.

[Anonymous Coward]

God I hate when submitters force you to read an entire article....

Explain this "reading an article" to us here on Slashdot.

Re:

[fermion]

The game MS plays with upgrades is one of the annoying thing about dealing with their products.

The saving grace is that there is always a relatively cheap way around it, as long as you time is worth nothing.

I recall that in the time of diskettes, when installing MS software truly was a day long labor intensive task, the MS office upgrade software also needed a previous version already on the machine. This meant that if a hard disk died, installing office became a two day task. Install the old version

Re:

[3choTh1s]

Just to clarify as per the article. Number 7 should be Once the install is complete, restart the DVD based setup from Vista. Choose "Custom" install so that you can do a clean install.

Just saying perform a in-place upgrade could lead to misunderstanding and confusion.

That's the plan

[Nasarius]

After years of bouncing back and forth, I've finally decided to move everything over to Linux and ext2 or reiserfs partitions, even though I do Windows development professionally. With a Core 2 Duo processor, I can run XP in a VM fast enough for all my needs. KDE4 should be superior to Vista in every way once it's released this year. I'll probably even throw the KDE team some money.

Re:

[fotbr]

Sometimes linux just isn't an option. Seriously. As much as people here would like it to be the ultimate solution to everything, it isn't there yet, and likely never will be.

Sure, it'll do 90% of what I need to do. But it won't connect with the office due to propriatary software at the office, so its 100% useless for me.

Dual-booting is an extra headache I don't need and don't want to put up with, since outside of work I rarely do much besides some websurfing, and firefox and opera handle that task just f

Re:

[betterunixthanunix]

I've been using win2k with Qemu for a while now on my FC5 system. It works very well, at almost native speed with the Qemu kernel module. Running most Windows apps, including MS Office and Developer Studio, is not a problem -- only those that require odd hardware will require serious configuration. Just don't try running Vista, which is slow even at native speed.

Re:

[fotbr]

And what advantage does that give me? I'd still have to set up XP or (soon) Vista in a VM.

Its extra overhead so I can say I run linux. Quite frankly, I don't give a damn about being able to say I run linux, or have a mac, or whatever the trendy OS of the week is. The computer is a tool, nothing more. Sometimes, as much as it pains the linux crowd to hear it, Windows IS the better solution.

a step

[gEvil (beta)]

Well, it sounds like this is (half) a step in the right direction. I wonder how long it will be before someone finds a way to convert the "trial" install to a full version without needing to rerun the entire install process. It seems like there must be a way to run oobe.exe or something to validate/convert your trial version.

Re:

[Archangel Michael]

Exactly, a bit compare of two installs on the same machine should result in a Registry Hack to enable the OS. However, with WGA such an exploit would quickly be discovered and the offending OS disabled by Microsoft Remotely.

EULA is still unclear

[robosmurf]

I've still not managed to get a clear answer to whether the EULA for Vista means you can never re-install it.

The problem is that the upgrade version invalidates the agreement for XP, which means you are not allowed to re-install XP, which is needed to re-install Vista...

I suppose this work-around does allow you to re-install Vista, but they may well remove this in the future.

I submitted a support request to Microsoft about this a few days ago, but they haven't responded.

Re:

[gfxguy]

No no! If you haven't already lost your XP key by doing the install Microsoft's preferred way, you can use this "hack" to install Vista upgrade without having ANYTHING previously installed. Someone can build a brand new box and go out and buy the Vista upgrade and install it with this hack, you DON'T lose your XP key.

The last line of the article:

... this means that any retail upgrade DVD can be used as a fully functioning full retail copy of Vista.

Re:

[14CharUsername]

See this is where MS is stupid. They are making things a lot more complicated than they have to be. MS offers the upgrade version for two reasons:

1) People that have XP don't want to lose their files and apps when installing Vista
2) XP is good enough that people don't want to pay the full amount for Vista which is arguably only marginally better

So this upgrade fulfills reason #1, but for people that are in group 2) that want/need to do an install from scratch, they are making things more complicated than th

Re:

[robosmurf]

But that isn't what the EULA says. The EULA states that the Vista agreement invalidates the previous agreement. Thus, you don't have a legal right to install the previous version.

Re:

[Dunbal]

the Vista agreement invalidates the previous agreement. Thus, you don't have a legal right to install the previous version.


Or you could look at it another way - if the original agreement is invalid, then there are no limitations anymore. So you're free to do what you want with it. You could always draw up a new agreement, send it to microsoft, and include the words "not replying to this new licensing agreement constitutes your acceptance of these new terms and conditions...". But then

Re:

[taustin]

Actually, it's simpler than that. The legal enforceability of EULAs is questionable to begin with (see Adobe vs. Softman), but if the licence agreement is invalidated, then your use of the previous version is governed solely by Title 17, which means you have the fair use right to do pretty much whatever you want with your paid for copy, except make copies of it to give to others.

I wonder if Microsoft has realized this.

Re:

[ConceptJunkie]

Microsoft probably retains an entire legal firm just to figure these things out. The fact that they act like they don't know about it only means they don't think it's important.

I'm betting they spend more time and energy on legal matters than technical matters, after all, they aren't the biggest and most powerful software company in the world because their products are superior. They never were.

Obligatory fanboy remark

[drooling-dog]

Oh, my... Will the spyware require me to have a valid Fedora Core 5 license to install my new FC6? Or will I have to go out a buy a whole new laptop that can handle all of that awesome power?

Heh heh - Just kiddin'.

Re:

[sjwaste]

No, you'll just have to go buy all new hardware that's actually supported.

Sorry, my frustration is running high with the awful component out support for my Nvidia 6200 under Linux (MythDora). The output looks very blue and I can't figure out how to configure it properly, it looks fine on a monitor :)

Still asking questions? Ok here are MY suggestions

[gelfling]

Five years, a couple of hundred million dollars and they still do installs like it's 1989?

Dear Redmond;

A few tips on how modern install media should work:

1) Ask no questions except to put in the install key upfront. Run everything else with basic assumptions. Run the config AFTER installation.

2) Allow for the easy and well documented input of a param file to create an install script on the fly.

3) Do a hardware seek FIRST instead of preloading every old SCSI driver and whatnot. Look, you guys do a bad job of supporting that stuff anyway, so why bother?

4) Provide a tool to EASILY and automatically move the install CD to a thumb drive and install from there. We are building machines that have neither floppy drives nor CD drives either.

5) For god's sake provide some kind of reasonably good toolset to recover a drive from an alternate boot medium. Enough is enough already that your OS 'can't run' from Boot Floppies and whatnot to run critical tools like fixboot and fixmbr. Just write some damn tools that DO work. Or write a console that runs in toto from some source other than the install CD which many of us NEVER GET.

6) Learn to work with LILO already. Would it actually kill you?

7) Look at a calendar. This is 2007, start acting like there's been some improvement in installation tools in the last 20 years.

Re:Still asking questions? Ok here are MY suggesti

[webrunner]

1) Ask no questions except to put in the install key upfront. Run everything else with basic assumptions. Run the config AFTER installation.

Actually, I'd find this to be far more archaic and worse. A 2007 install should work the way you want it right out of the box. Everything should be changeable afterwards, but an install shouldn't bother installing internet components on a non-internet connected machine (for example).

It's not the 90s any more, only installing with 'basic assumptions' is no longer acceptable.

By the way, does Vista dump if you change your motherboard like XP does because of the IDE drivers only being changeable during an in

Re:

[giorgiofr]

does Vista dump if you change your motherboard like XP does because of the IDE drivers only being changeable during an install?

That has never been the case, you can simply disable your current drivers, swap mobo and it will work just fine. It will install the correct drivers on first boot. I've done it a few times in a row and it never fails. Well I suppose it would fail if you put in an unsupported chipset, in which case just install the drivers before the swap.

Re:

[giorgiofr]

Yeah, safe mode should really fall back to such drivers. I can not understand why they didn't design it to be failsafe. Maybe the recovery console might help in such cases? I don't know what drivers it uses.

Re:

[markild]

By the way, does Vista dump if you change your motherboard like XP does because of the IDE drivers only being changeable during an install?

Earlier today I read on a Norwegian tech site that vista is counting points for different hardware changes, and then, when it reaches 25, you will be booted and need to reactivate. This will be possible on the full retail version, but not the OEM version. (Dunno about upgrade)

Translation may be a bit off, didn't understand a few of the details

• CD-ROM/CD-RW/DVD-ROM (1

Re:

[gelfling]

Yeah but it's irrelevant. I don't want to babysit the installation so I don't forget to specify the timezone on installation step 132-b and all of the other silly interruptions randomly disbursed through the process. On the other hand the sometimes LONG LONG CHORE of specifying every nit like some Linux distros want is just insipid. don't ask me to choose the order of the disk paritions. I don't really care about a great deal of it. And to be fair, we should be able to run any number of complex post-install

Re:Still asking questions? Ok here are MY suggesti

[Nebu]

Five years, a couple of hundred million dollars and they still do installs like it's 1989?

Dear Redmond;

A few tips on how modern install media should work:

1) Ask no questions except to put in the install key upfront. Run everything else with basic assumptions. Run the config AFTER installation.

So you advocate the install media making its own decisions about how to repartition and reformat my harddrive? Sounds like a bad idea to me...

Re:

[gelfling]

No not unless you're a high end user. For the vast majority of the world that's simply not the case.

Re:

[Nebu]

I think the "Ask the user before irreversibly erasing all the data on the hard drive" software design guideline has priority over the "Don't bother the user with pesky questions" software design guideline.

Re:

[gelfling]

Print in great big letters on the box so that even a consumer can understand it: "This will wipe out whatever is on your computer already by default. If you don't know what 'Default' means, please look it up or get someone to help you."

I know we all laugh at crazy warning labels but let's get serious for a moment.

The real question is...

[ivan256]

Do you still have to hit F6 to install drivers, or can you load drivers from the screen that tells you it didn't find any storage devices?

Re:Still asking questions? Ok here are MY suggesti

[JustASlashDotGuy]

7) Look at a calendar. This is 2007, start acting like there's been some improvement in installation tools in the last 20 years.

It's 2007.. why don't you just image your machines?

How server process is this:
1) Network boot system
2) Image new server/pc
3) reboot and answer sysprep prompts

A new server/pc is ready in 10 only minutes.

People that try to complain about the window's installer make me laugh. They've already dumbed it down to where you only click 'next->next->finish', yet people still whine.

Re:

[jb.hl.com]

You forgot the part about starting the setup wizard and going through the setup wizard, which is quite a bit longer than 7 steps.

Alternative way to install from upgrade disc

[HxBro]

What you need is a copy of legitcontrolcheck.dll from any validated and activated copy of XP on a partition anywhere on your machine, then:

1.) create \windows\system32\ on any partition you want (even extended partitions)
2.) copy a validated 'legitcontrolcheck.dll file into the directory.
3.) you might need ntdetect.com and ntldr in the root, (try without)

(I've not tested this)

WV_SP1

[Sfing_ter]

This WILL be fixed with an install of Windows Vista - Service Pack 1 - Warm and Crunchy Edition. Freedom is irrelevant. Self-determination is irrelevant. You must comply. ~Collective
Why do you resist? We only wish to raise quality of life for all species. ~Locutus :)

On a good note, this means that you will be able to re-install a year later when the system gets bogged down, or have they moved the "Detect and Repair" to the operating system...hmmmmm

Will this cause Bill to run away from more interviews...

I wonder what the source looks like...

[192939495969798999]

I can just see it now: ... (somewhere in the vista source)

# upgrade check module

if 1=1 then #only for testing! remove in production! -boss
                        #heh heh, can you imagine if this made it into the gold master? -dilbert
                        #we don't have to imagine...*merged to gold master* - catbert ... (do upgrade)

Re:

[192939495969798999]

1=1 works for comparison in QBasic... isn't that what Vista was written in?

It's worse then you thought.

[Joe U]

If you choose to purchase an upgrade version of Windows Vista to upgrade XP, you will no longer be able to use that version of XP. Either on another system, or as a dual-boot option. The key will be invalidated, preventing activation.

Actually, it deactivates your XP Key.
Actually, it causes your XP CD to melt.
Actually, it sends all your personal information to Microsoft to make sure you don't re-install it.
Actually, it makes lawyers show up at your door if you touch the XP CD again.
Actually, it uses alien mind-ray technology to make sure you forget your XP key.

Actually, it doesn't do anything, it's just there to "legally" stop you from running both XP and the Vista upgrade at the same time.

Now stop making stupid assumptions. Remember, when you assume, you make an ass out of yourself (leave me the hell out of it).

Confirmed, and why this is important

[Lumpish Scholar]

WindowsSecrets.com's latest newsletter also has this information [windowssecrets.com]. "The secret is that the setup program in Vista's upgrade version will accept an installed copy of XP, W2K, or an unactivated copy of Vista itself as evidence of a previous installation." (Emphasis theirs!) They also address the ethics issues.

Why is this important? Because a clean Vista install is strongly preferred to an in-place upgrade install (munging your existing XP installation so it's now a Vista installation); but Microsoft does not allow this [microsoft.com]: "you cannot use an upgrade key to perform a clean installation of Windows Vista". This same Microsoft Knowledge Base article then provides a workaround, the same thing discussed by DailyTech and WindowsSecrets: "Start the installation from a compliant version of Windows, such as Windows Vista, Microsoft Windows XP, or Microsoft Windows 2000. After you have started the installation, you can select Custom at the installation choice screen to perform a clean installation."

I'm glad for this particular huge security hole, but it makes me wonder how many more they are.

Re:Use a dodgy XP key

[Turn-X Alphonse]

Unless MS note your fake XP CD-key is linked with Vista and cut you both off.

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

Does the XP install have to be activated before installing Vista? If it doesn't, MVF4D-W774K-MC4VM-QY6XY-R38TB should work. That's the System Locked Preinstallation [wikipedia.org] key used by many OEMs, so they can't exactly disable it.

Re:Use a dodgy XP key

[robosmurf]

You bought Vista right, so does it matter that you used to be a pirate?

Yes, it does. The upgrade version is significantly cheaper that the full retail version solely because it is an upgrade. Thus, you still don't legally have a valid agreement for the use of Vista.

Re:

[RxScram]

If you RTFA, you would see that this loophole actually lets you install the upgrade version with no previous version at all. Essentially, it's a mistake on Microsoft's part that allows the upgrade version to consider the "30 day trial" version of Vista as the previously installed version.

Is is painful, since you have to install vista twice (once for the trial, then once for the upgrade from the trial), but it does give you a steep discount from the "full" version, without requiring any old version at al

Re:

[Ubergrendle]

How long it is until MS fixes this loophole is anybodies guess, but as of right now, it works.

I'm guessing never. Here's why -- an upgrade CD boot install of the 30 day trial version will never have to connect to the net. You can then follow these instructions to activate a 100% valid Windows Vista key.

So unless Microsoft issues a patch, which refers to the registry which looks up a stored parameter of the original XP key, and disables your working copy of Vista AFTER its fully installed, there is no

Re:

[treeves]

. . .and the explicit instructions for how to do it are here: http://windowssecrets.com/comp/070201 [windowssecrets.com]

I'm not gonna do it since I have legal XP already, and I don't want Vista. But Brian Livingston (of windowssecrets.com) argues that Microsoft put this loophole in intentionally, so it's ethical to do. I have my doubts, but. . .

Re:What a solution.

[Sancho]

I don't know where you get the notion that

an XP->Vista install would take significantly less time

. I've installed both numerous times, and the Vista install is faster on the wall clock, but it's also less intrusive. It asks most of the questions up front, meaning I can go about other tasks until the install is complete.

Then, if XP keys are /really/ invalidated, there's the possibility of a user deciding to revert. They shouldn't be stuck with Vista if they decide that it sucks so much that they can't stand it. They should be able to reinstall XP with their previous key. That said, I've seen no evidence that XP keys are invalidated, just a bunch of people making that wild claim on blogs and then linking to a story which only talks about what the EULA says.

Re:

[Spazntwich]

I admittedly haven't installed Vista since the Beta 2, but at the time its installer was absurdly slow. I'm honestly impressed if the Vista install is now as quick or quicker than an XP install.

And everyone needs to shut up about XP keys being invalidated. Currently, it's a rumor, and a bunch of anti-MS idiots are running around spouting it like its gospel because they want to believe it.

Re:What a solution.

[gEvil (beta)]

I'm honestly impressed if the Vista install is now as quick or quicker than an XP install.

Choose your words carefully. It almost sounds like you're implying that an XP install is "quick".

Re:

[Sancho]

I'll have to be honest--all of my installations (for both OSs) have been in VMWare. It's possible that the unusual environment is the cause for my observations.

Nonetheless, the up-front questions make it worth it, to me, even if it turned out to be a little slower in the real world. Multitasking an XP install is pretty hard because of the context switch ("Ok, now I have to type in the key, ok, now they're asking me for the time zone--oh, it's reading from the disc some more, I can go back to something mor

Re:What a solution.

[robosmurf]

True, it is a rumour that the XP keys get invalidated.

However, the EULA does explicitly say:

13. UPGRADES. To use upgrade software, you must first be licensed for the software that is eligible
for the upgrade. Upon upgrade, this agreement takes the place of the agreement for the software
you upgraded from. After you upgrade, you may no longer use the software you upgraded from.

which does imply that you are not allowed to go back to XP.

And don't say that doesn't matter if the keys don't get invalidated. If you are going to
completely ignore the EULA, why are you not just pirating it in the first place?

Re:What a solution.

[geobeck]

After you upgrade, you may no longer use the software you upgraded from.

I've seen that on other software, and wouldn't be surprised if XP, 2000, and even Me (ugh) had that phrase. The message is that you cannot keep using your old software while simultaneously using the new package. For example, if you have ten licenses of AutoCAD 2006, and you buy ten upgrade licenses of AutoCAD 2007, you can't have twenty computers running AutoCAD--or even eleven because of the new hire who you didn't know about when you purchased your upgrade (but just try to tell that to your boss, who seemed like he was having teeth pulled when you convinced him to upgrade from R13 to 2002).

As for downgrade prevention, MS has had that built in at least since 2000. The CD will simply refuse to perform the downgrade, and you'll have to reinstall from scratch.

So everyone be quiet about the serial invalidation rumor. You're giving MS ideas for their next software release!

Re:What a solution.

[delinear]

And don't say that doesn't matter if the keys don't get invalidated. If you are going to completely ignore the EULA, why are you not just pirating it in the first place?

Because ignoring a EULA which hasn't been proven to have any force in law and probably isn't worth the bits it occupies on the disk is a lot different to downloading the entire software without paying for it and installing it without any kind of license? Most licenses have to stand up to a test of reasonableness at the very least before they can have any kind of binding effect - if I have a legitimate copy of XP and install a Vista upgrade, don't like it and go back to XP I'd not have a hard time arguing in court that it was unreasonable for the EULA to prevent me doing this. To say that I have to either accept a blatantly unreasonable EULA or download pirated software and these are my only options is just wrong, the third option is to contest the EULA (and the fourth is to use *nix of course... or is that the first?)

Re:

[MobyDisk]

If you are going to completely ignore the EULA, why are you not just pirating it in the first place?

Because people should be paid for their work. But corporate lawyers can't tell me how to use my personal computer. Are you saying that those two ideals are in conflict?

Re:

[jrockway]

Yes. If you do not agree with the EULA, don't tell Microsoft that you do (by using it). Switch to a product with a less restrictive agreement, there are PLENTY out there.

EULA vs copyright law

[Bananenrepublik]

If you are going to
completely ignore the EULA, why are you not just pirating it in the first place?

Unauthorized copying is forbidden by copyright law. OTOH I'm not aware of laws that make EULAs binding.

Re:

[ari_j]

This depends a great deal on where you are and where you get sued, among other factors.

Re:

[THESuperShawn]

The laptop I am typing on now dual-boots Windows XP AS WELL AS Vista "upgrade" using said Windows XP install as my upgrade permission. While I fully intend on going full Vista and being compliant on this box, I was not ready to risk losing apps that might not be Vista compatible yet.

My "upgrade" did not invalidate anything. I can still use Windowsupdate.Microsoft.Com on both boxes with WGA.

FYI...two separate partitions on the same box, booting using a custom boot loader.

Re:

[Ruprecht the Monkeyb]

Much faster. Surprisingly so. I don't know what team has been writing the installers for MS lately, but they've been doing a damn good job. The Office 2007, SQL 2005 and now the Vista installs have been much improved.

I did a re-install on Vista the other night (not because I had to, but because I wanted to test differences between 64 and 32 bit). I slicked the partition, and started the re-install. I looked over at the screen a few minutes later, and it had progressed so far I wondered for a second i

Re:What a solution.

[Jugalator]

Before, the installer installed individual files from the disc which cause among other things pretty bad seek times.

With Vista, the installer now simply decompress an image file to your hard drive.
One can read on about WIM here and how to create and manipulate such images yourself: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/windowsvista/aa 905070.aspx [microsoft.com]
A less technical article here: http://www.apcstart.com/3834/inside_vistas_new_ima ge_based_install [apcstart.com]

Re:

[Ruprecht the Monkeyb]

Thanks for the links. I knew they'd gone to an image-oriented process, but it was still impressive to see how efficient and seamless it was.

Re:What a solution.

[B'Trey]

This is only a benefit for people who don't have a legitimate claim to using a Vista upgrade license seeing as an XP->Vista install would take significantly less time.

Not necessarily. If an XP->Vista install does invalidate your XP key (an as yet unproven supposition), then what happens if your hard drive crashes and you need to reinstall Vista? Will it allow you to use the old XP key as an upgrade? Or what if you your install of XP is old and crufty and you can no longer find your install CD? This allows you to do a pristine install. It also means that once you upgrade, you don't need to keep the XP CD and key handy in case you have to reinstall.

Can you imagine if all of MS's OS's had this requirement?

"What are you doing?"

"Reinstalling. My hard drive crashed. I have to install Windows 3.1 from floppy, then upgrade to Windows 95, then upgrade that to Windows 2000, then upgrade that to XP and finally upgrade to Vista. I'll be finished in a couple of days."

Re:

[LiquidFiend]

"Reinstalling. My hard drive crashed. I have to install Windows 3.1 from floppy, then upgrade to Windows 95, then upgrade that to Windows 2000, then upgrade that to XP and finally upgrade to Vista. I'll be finished in a couple of days."

Still be quicker than Gentoo :P

Re:

[zero_offset]

Not necessarily. If an XP->Vista install does invalidate your XP key (an as yet unproven supposition), then what happens if your hard drive crashes and you need to reinstall Vista? Will it allow you to use the old XP key as an upgrade?

XP asks for the key long before it phones home. You have 30 days to request an audience with the validation servers. In the scenario you describe, it basically doesn't matter that the XP key has been invalidated because you'll presumably just install Vista over it as soon a

XP 64-bit invalidates XP Pro key

[SanityInAnarchy]

I seem to see a couple of comments around here that say that an XP->Vista doesn't invalidate the XP key. If so, this would be an improvement.

You see, you can get a free XP 64-bit upgrade for your XP Pro. I have a 64-bit processor, and I have a free (but legit!) copy of XP Pro, so at first it seemed like a win-win, but I was cautious -- I pirated it first, to test it out. Turns out that XP 64-bit broke half my games (the reason I have Windows in the first place) and half my drivers, and the other half ran

Re:

[SnowZero]

I wouldn't mind having Balmer over for dinner, as long as I first got a chance to firmly attach all my chairs to the floor. I could show him my collection of Linux machines.

Re:What a solution.

[MightyMartian]

I wouldn't mind having Balmer over for dinner, as long as I first got a chance to firmly attach all my chairs to the floor. I could show him my collection of Linux machines.

"I'm going to fucking kill your roast beef!!!"

Re:

[B'Trey]

No, you made a blanket statement that said this was only of use to people trying to cheat and do an upgrade without a legitimate XP license. I pointed out several situations where it would be useful for legitimate upgraders. Only one of them - the XP key being invalidated - was a "what if" that's rumor based and I specifically pointed that out in my post.

Re:

[riscthis]

Not that different from the current situation. My wife's XP machine regulaly trashes hard drives. I have to start from her HP recovery disc, install it, then install 35 "critical updates" before it realizes that Service Pack 2 is out there. Then I install SP2, and 65 more critical updates.

You can solve the SP2 problem by downloading and burning this [microsoft.com] before you next reinstall.

It's also a benefit

[rsilvergun]

for people with those damned OEM restore partitions who've had a harddrive crash. Or if you just never got install media.

Re:

[toleraen]

Shouldn't a DVD-ROM be the least of your Vista required upgrade worries?

Re:

[IHawkMike]

Try this [newegg.com]. Lite-on makes great drives and this DVD burner is only $28.99. You can save a whopping $5 if you don't need to burn.

Re:

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:

[tha_mink]

DirectX 10 is a marketing gimic to force people to upgrade, Directx 9.0c works fine for World of Warcraft, from what friends have told me, DirectX 10 is unstable while playing WoW so that's a good number of people that won't be upgrading.

Ok. So you're clearly a dummy. What else have you heard from your friends? I'm still trying to figure out if you're kidding or serious.

Re:

[toleraen]

what part of "it never touches your copy of xp" did you fail to understand?

Re:

[lcsjk]

Well, it worked until some *&^%$# told 80,000 /. users!

Re:

[MightyMartian]

Most reviewers don't see it as any great leap forward, and everyone is waiting for the damn thing to be hacked. Microsoft's reputation is so bad on OS security that nobody seems interested in anything else.

Re:

[pdabbadabba]

Yeah. We're called "Laptop Users". :)

Re:

[Pojut]

Touché, good sir. Touché.

Re:Pointless to do this to save money.

[gfxguy]

OEM license can't be moved to a new machine. Are you planning on any sort of complete upgrade over the next four years (including collectively replacing every component, even if not all at once)?

Then, according to MS, you're SOL. At some point, with either a completely new system rebuild or enough significant upgrades, your OEM license will be invalidated.

You could probably call up and beg MS, but they are under no obligation to issue you a new key or reactivate your old one.

Am I a genius and know all about this stuff? No, it's just what I understand to be the case after reading the comments from from linked article, where they raise the same question.

On a side note, I just bought XP-Pro. It comes with a free upgrade to Vista. If I can use that upgrade for a different system using this hack, then WOOHOO! A two-fer!