Given the EULA is a binding legal document, this is an oversight which seems careless in my opinion, and the confusion has only been reinforced over the years. XP's EULA wording does not state clearly enough the conditions under which it restricts the transfer of Windows XP from one machine to another by the same owner.
Both Paul and Microsoft have admitted that I have neither the legal training nor the patience.
Let's be clear about one thing before we go any further: I'm not here to get into an endless legal debate over End User License Agreement (EULA) wording. I'm here to try to put across the enthusiast's point of view, something which both Paul's original article and Microsoft may have lost sight of. I know from the emails I've received, and from comments I've read by other enthusiasts across the Net that Vista's explicit limitation on transferring only once to another machine in particular has caused genuine frustration, confusion and anger. Licensing Changes to Vista article I jumped at the chance, given that this issue really affects guys like me. When Paul asked me to write a reply to his
I'm what you might call a 'PC enthusiast': one of those guys who builds his own PC, regularly upgrading it to keep up with the demands of modern gaming. As you can probably guess by the site's name, I like to tweak and tinker with hardware and software. My name is Koroush Ghazi, and I run the site.