Meanwhile, I will probably be loading new machines for stock with Ubuntu 10.4 or openSUSE to at least test them, and let the client end user decide what he or she wants to do – accept it with Linux on it or pay extra to have Windows installed instead. Fortunately, much of my business (such as it is in these trying times) is with those who load their choice of OS themselves, so I am thankfully spared all this gnashing of teeth.

Second, regarding the discussion, I understand that MS has every right what so ever to use which policy they benefit more. But, there is a mistake in naming the exchange between the end-user and retailers as selling and purchasing. It should be called renting on a stand price till ur motherboard fails or buy a new PC…. This what it is. cuz we will always use MS. and we will always buy a new computer eventually or upgrade them.
I prefer that MS sell license based on time period, then I will know what i’m paying for and what length of time.

Thanks for admitting that for some of us, the OEM Win7 policy is, at least in effect, “crappy”. Who likes to be the bearer of bad news? It is one thing to explain the difference between OEM and Retail to a client before I build the machine, but it is another to explain it when a client brings in one for repair or upgrade bought elsewhere. Most of them will be bringing in mass-produced boxes with OEM licenses. I would wager few will have understood the limitations beforehand.

Upgrades and repairs are now the major part of my business, due to saturation of the market and the sputtering economy.

Can you tell us how far the OEM license restriction applies – does it go beyond motherboards? Surely it can't cover power supplies – hard for M$ to detect a new one there. Although it is detectable, I assume you could upgrade RAM safely. But how about a hard disk upgrade or replacement? After doing this with XP, I often (but not always) have to re-activate. Any other maintenance icebergs out there you know of that might lead Microsoft to judge you are trying to “transfer” the Win 7 OEM license? Suppose someone brings in a machine with VGA built-in to the motherboard, and has it disabled and a high-powered graphics card installed – the motherboard has indeed changed (or rather dropped) functionality and become “different”. Will this require a new license?

I am not trying to badger you here and fully realize you are not the M$ legal department, but I really want to know. It is better to explore hypothetically than to spring a $100 surprise on a client after finding out by experiment.

There is in fact a version of your suggestion in place by MS call the “Anytime Upgrade”, however the way it works is horrible.

What would work is if Microsoft sold an OS future upgrade discount option, e.g. “For an extra $25 you pay for this Win license now, you will receive 50% off the next version of Windows in the future for the next 5 years.” On purchase in the future, your Product ID is validated for your old Windows, and 50% off is applied to the new license.

This is similar to purchasing an “Upgrade” edition of Windows now, but with a much larger discount.

And yes, tell your clients about why the System Builder's license of 7 may be a *bad* choice for them. Explain while it costs more for a full retail licence, it's transferable and can potentially save cash in the future (i.e. if mobo dies, license can be reinstalled without issue).

Is it crappy you have to explain this stuff to clients? Yes. It's a huge thorn in the side from the system builder's (i.e. you) perspective to have to sit the client down and describe licensing differences.

However I agree in the respect that MS to this day has too many damned versions of the same thing, confusing the crap out of everybody. It's bad enough there's Starter / Basic / Home / Pro / Business / Ultimate, but there's also a System Builder's license for each, and for each architecture (32 or 64-bit). That's a total of 18 difference licenses – and that's not even counting the server editions!

Trouble is, many lightning-damaged systems do not show symptoms to the end-user right away. It is therefore sometimes hard to prove lightning damage for insurance purposes. And, consider that if the machine is a couple of years old, most any motherboard replacement will be an effective upgrade. Replacing an obsolete original might be difficult.

If any Microsoft person in a position of authority happens to read this, I have a modest suggestion. Should they maintain something like the OEM Win 7 policy, why not modify it to charge a modest reactivation fee (say 20% of the purchase price)? This would seem a lot more reasonable than forcing purchase of an entirely new license, and just might be acceptable to many end users stuck with such a license and wishing to upgrade.

What do you think?

Relax. You may deserve some bouquets rather than all brickbats.

No intent to make comments inferring or outright accusing you of being “in bed with Microsoft”. Bet you dream about them a lot, though! That is as far as I will go negative on you – honestly, you are performing a service by bringing the issue out in the open. I'll bet not many folks peddling computers in the big box stores are so candid about calling their customers' attention to the fine print as you are. Intentionally or not, you have probably belled the cat for many reading our dialog on PC-Mech.

I merely asked whether you might have a possible conflict of interest. If you deny it, that is good enough for me. You certainly do give the appearance of going to bat for Microsoft, since your tone implies you are beyond merely stating the facts – your judgment that Microsoft's Win 7 OEM policy is just and fair seems apparent. If this is an erroneous impression, please accept my apologies.

It seems not only Microsoft does sharp practice in its own interest and against the consumer, but that it can count on some people with no stated material connection to Microsoft to back them up.

Meanwhile, I may have to explain this issue to clients asking me to repair or upgrade their computers. Many of the computers that people now buy elsewhere are probably Dells or some other discount label and have OEM Win 7 on them, and many will have issues with the cheapskate motherboards or the dinky power suppliy or inadequate cooling often also installed by the factory – all often causes of premature motherboard failure.

This puts me in a bad place when repairing proprietary computers (not my favorite job anyway, frankly), but in a good one when I explain how they could do much better with a white box machine built by someone who frankly discloses the issue here, and poses alternatives.

As far as Dave (the owner of PC-Mech, not me) goes, in spite of being an Apple user, he has done as much as anyone I can think of to help people (particularly novices) put together their own computers in his informative emails, websites, and other services offered. Last time I checked, you only do this in the PC world. Whatever the merits of Apple may be, it is a much more proprietary planet – and probably Microsoft envies that position.