Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

SP2 RTM - only 180 day license?

Last response: in Windows XP
Share
Anonymous
August 10, 2004 1:31:57 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Anybody else notice the 180 license in the SP 2 RTM license agreement?

Click Run, type winver click Ok. Click the End User License Agreement
hyperlink.

Joe
Anonymous
August 10, 2004 1:31:58 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Joe727 wrote:
> Anybody else notice the 180 license in the SP 2 RTM license agreement?
>
> Click Run, type winver click Ok. Click the End User License
> Agreement hyperlink.

I think you are seeing things - or you didn't install the RTM.

Nothing like that in the EULA I am looking at - on any of the machines I
have installed it on. Nothing about 180, one hundred eighty or anything
similar.

--
<- Shenan ->
--
The information is provided "as is", with no guarantees of
completeness, accuracy or timeliness, and without warranties of any
kind, express or implied. In other words, read up before you take any
advice - you are the one ultimately responsible for your actions.
Anonymous
August 10, 2004 2:04:35 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Here's a screenshot:

http://home.cfl.rr.com/jbmsbink/SP2%20EULA.jpg

Joe

"Shenan Stanley" <news_helper@hushmail.com> wrote in message
news:u$KQQBufEHA.704@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Joe727 wrote:
>> Anybody else notice the 180 license in the SP 2 RTM license agreement?
>>
>> Click Run, type winver click Ok. Click the End User License
>> Agreement hyperlink.
>
> I think you are seeing things - or you didn't install the RTM.
>
> Nothing like that in the EULA I am looking at - on any of the machines I
> have installed it on. Nothing about 180, one hundred eighty or anything
> similar.
>
> --
> <- Shenan ->
> --
> The information is provided "as is", with no guarantees of
> completeness, accuracy or timeliness, and without warranties of any
> kind, express or implied. In other words, read up before you take any
> advice - you are the one ultimately responsible for your actions.
>
>
Anonymous
August 10, 2004 2:04:36 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

You have a "Pre Release" version. Not the full SP2
Just read the screen shot you posted.


>-----Original Message-----
>Here's a screenshot:
>
>http://home.cfl.rr.com/jbmsbink/SP2%20EULA.jpg
>
>Joe
>
>"Shenan Stanley" <news_helper@hushmail.com> wrote in
message
>news:u$KQQBufEHA.704@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>> Joe727 wrote:
>>> Anybody else notice the 180 license in the SP 2 RTM
license agreement?
>>>
>>> Click Run, type winver click Ok. Click the End
User License
>>> Agreement hyperlink.
>>
>> I think you are seeing things - or you didn't install
the RTM.
>>
>> Nothing like that in the EULA I am looking at - on any
of the machines I
>> have installed it on. Nothing about 180, one hundred
eighty or anything
>> similar.
>>
>> --
>> <- Shenan ->
>> --
>> The information is provided "as is", with no
guarantees of
>> completeness, accuracy or timeliness, and without
warranties of any
>> kind, express or implied. In other words, read up
before you take any
>> advice - you are the one ultimately responsible for
your actions.
>>
>>
>
>
>.
>
Anonymous
August 10, 2004 3:49:39 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Did you notice the prefix in front of the word 'release'?

"Joe727" <nospam@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
news:%23Vaw7LufEHA.236@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Here's a screenshot:
>
> http://home.cfl.rr.com/jbmsbink/SP2%20EULA.jpg
>
> Joe
>
> "Shenan Stanley" <news_helper@hushmail.com> wrote in message
> news:u$KQQBufEHA.704@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> > Joe727 wrote:
> >> Anybody else notice the 180 license in the SP 2 RTM license agreement?
> >>
> >> Click Run, type winver click Ok. Click the End User License
> >> Agreement hyperlink.
> >
> > I think you are seeing things - or you didn't install the RTM.
> >
> > Nothing like that in the EULA I am looking at - on any of the machines I
> > have installed it on. Nothing about 180, one hundred eighty or anything
> > similar.
> >
> > --
> > <- Shenan ->
> > --
> > The information is provided "as is", with no guarantees of
> > completeness, accuracy or timeliness, and without warranties of any
> > kind, express or implied. In other words, read up before you take any
> > advice - you are the one ultimately responsible for your actions.
> >
> >
>
>
Anonymous
August 10, 2004 4:23:44 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

In news:%23Vaw7LufEHA.236@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl,
Joe727 <nospam@nospam.nospam> typed:

> Here's a screenshot:
>
> http://home.cfl.rr.com/jbmsbink/SP2%20EULA.jpg


Not everyone has this. I don't, for example. Apparently those who
installed over earlier versions have this there, but those who
didn't, don't.

--
Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
Please reply to the newsgroup


> "Shenan Stanley" <news_helper@hushmail.com> wrote in message
> news:u$KQQBufEHA.704@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>> Joe727 wrote:
>>> Anybody else notice the 180 license in the SP 2 RTM license
>>> agreement?
>>> Click Run, type winver click Ok. Click the End User
>>> License
>>> Agreement hyperlink.
>>
>> I think you are seeing things - or you didn't install the RTM.
>>
>> Nothing like that in the EULA I am looking at - on any of the
>> machines I have installed it on. Nothing about 180, one
>> hundred
>> eighty or anything similar.
>>
>> --
>> <- Shenan ->
>> --
>> The information is provided "as is", with no guarantees of
>> completeness, accuracy or timeliness, and without warranties
>> of any
>> kind, express or implied. In other words, read up before you
>> take
>> any advice - you are the one ultimately responsible for your
>> actions.
Anonymous
August 10, 2004 5:27:40 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

I have the RTM of SP2, and I have the 180 day license thing in my EULA :S

--
Paul Cyr

-----

The Debate Continues... www.xvsxp.com

Protect Yourself and Others in 6 Simple Steps...
http://davechalkconnected.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtop...
-----

"Joe727" <nospam@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
news:eCB7o5tfEHA.3932@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Anybody else notice the 180 license in the SP 2 RTM license agreement?
>
> Click Run, type winver click Ok. Click the End User License Agreement
> hyperlink.
>
> Joe
>
>
Anonymous
August 10, 2004 5:51:16 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Joe727 wrote:
> Anybody else notice the 180 license in the SP 2 RTM license
> agreement?
> Click Run, type winver click Ok. Click the End User License
> Agreement hyperlink.

Shenan Stanley wrote:
> I think you are seeing things - or you didn't install the RTM.
>
> Nothing like that in the EULA I am looking at - on any of the
> machines I have installed it on. Nothing about 180, one hundred
> eighty or anything similar.

Joe727 wrote:
> Here's a screenshot:
>
> http://home.cfl.rr.com/jbmsbink/SP2%20EULA.jpg

Well, since your screenshot not only clearly states "Prerelease version" as
well as the version is not the 2180 of the RTM, I again state - and with
your proof in hand - that you have installed the PRE-RELEASE and not the
OFFICIAL "Released to Manufacturing" Service Pack 2. (Build 2180)

It's great when people post pictures to prove my point for me. *grin*

Get the real thing next time:

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyI...

or

http://snipurl.com/8bqy

Good Luck to you!

--
<- Shenan ->
--
The information is provided "as is", with no guarantees of
completeness, accuracy or timeliness, and without warranties of any
kind, express or implied. In other words, read up before you take any
advice - you are the one ultimately responsible for your actions.
Anonymous
August 10, 2004 5:52:30 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Joe727 wrote:
> Here's a screenshot:
>
> http://home.cfl.rr.com/jbmsbink/SP2%20EULA.jpg


Also - no matter WHAT Microsoft says - I would UNINSTALL the prerelease
versions FIRST before installing the Full Release. Why take the chance?

--
<- Shenan ->
--
The information is provided "as is", with no guarantees of
completeness, accuracy or timeliness, and without warranties of any
kind, express or implied. In other words, read up before you take any
advice - you are the one ultimately responsible for your actions.
Anonymous
August 10, 2004 5:52:31 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

I absolutely concur about first uninstalling a pre-release version even when
Microsoft the version you have is an approved installation path. However,
we are seeing this anomaly on most systems wherein a legit version of RTM
SP2 was installed over a pre-release version approved for upgrade to SP2.

--
Michael Solomon MS-MVP
Windows Shell/User
Backup is a PC User's Best Friend
DTS-L.Org: http://www.dts-l.org/

"Shenan Stanley" <news_helper@hushmail.com> wrote in message
news:eqWtxswfEHA.632@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Joe727 wrote:
>> Here's a screenshot:
>>
>> http://home.cfl.rr.com/jbmsbink/SP2%20EULA.jpg
>
>
> Also - no matter WHAT Microsoft says - I would UNINSTALL the prerelease
> versions FIRST before installing the Full Release. Why take the chance?
>
> --
> <- Shenan ->
> --
> The information is provided "as is", with no guarantees of
> completeness, accuracy or timeliness, and without warranties of any
> kind, express or implied. In other words, read up before you take any
> advice - you are the one ultimately responsible for your actions.
>
>
Anonymous
August 10, 2004 6:49:19 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Michael Solomon (MS-MVP Windows Shell/User) wrote:
> I absolutely concur about first uninstalling a pre-release version
> even when Microsoft the version you have is an approved installation
> path. However, we are seeing this anomaly on most systems wherein a
> legit version of RTM SP2 was installed over a pre-release version
> approved for upgrade to SP2.

Yeah - I read a little more and came back to add this part because it did
seem to be a more common problem than I would have thought - surprising it
would not overwrite the EULA!

--
<- Shenan ->
--
The information is provided "as is", with no guarantees of
completeness, accuracy or timeliness, and without warranties of any
kind, express or implied. In other words, read up before you take any
advice - you are the one ultimately responsible for your actions.
Anonymous
August 10, 2004 6:49:20 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

It surprised the heck out of us, too!:-)

--
Michael Solomon MS-MVP
Windows Shell/User
Backup is a PC User's Best Friend
DTS-L.Org: http://www.dts-l.org/

"Shenan Stanley" <news_helper@hushmail.com> wrote in message
news:etX7gMxfEHA.3428@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Michael Solomon (MS-MVP Windows Shell/User) wrote:
>> I absolutely concur about first uninstalling a pre-release version
>> even when Microsoft the version you have is an approved installation
>> path. However, we are seeing this anomaly on most systems wherein a
>> legit version of RTM SP2 was installed over a pre-release version
>> approved for upgrade to SP2.
>
> Yeah - I read a little more and came back to add this part because it did
> seem to be a more common problem than I would have thought - surprising it
> would not overwrite the EULA!
>
> --
> <- Shenan ->
> --
> The information is provided "as is", with no guarantees of
> completeness, accuracy or timeliness, and without warranties of any
> kind, express or implied. In other words, read up before you take any
> advice - you are the one ultimately responsible for your actions.
>
>
Anonymous
August 10, 2004 6:56:30 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

So do we need to uninstall SP2, then reinstall or is there anything we
should be concerned about.

--
Good Day
Haus



"Ken Blake" <kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote in message
news:o YoDP%23wfEHA.3556@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> In news:%23Vaw7LufEHA.236@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl,
> Joe727 <nospam@nospam.nospam> typed:
>
>> Here's a screenshot:
>>
>> http://home.cfl.rr.com/jbmsbink/SP2%20EULA.jpg
>
>
> Not everyone has this. I don't, for example. Apparently those who
> installed over earlier versions have this there, but those who didn't,
> don't.
>
> --
> Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
> Please reply to the newsgroup
>
>
>> "Shenan Stanley" <news_helper@hushmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:u$KQQBufEHA.704@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>>> Joe727 wrote:
>>>> Anybody else notice the 180 license in the SP 2 RTM license
>>>> agreement?
>>>> Click Run, type winver click Ok. Click the End User License
>>>> Agreement hyperlink.
>>>
>>> I think you are seeing things - or you didn't install the RTM.
>>>
>>> Nothing like that in the EULA I am looking at - on any of the
>>> machines I have installed it on. Nothing about 180, one hundred
>>> eighty or anything similar.
>>>
>>> --
>>> <- Shenan ->
>>> --
>>> The information is provided "as is", with no guarantees of
>>> completeness, accuracy or timeliness, and without warranties of any
>>> kind, express or implied. In other words, read up before you take
>>> any advice - you are the one ultimately responsible for your actions.
>
>
Anonymous
August 10, 2004 7:24:18 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Hi Joe
I can't say I'm seeing that on any of my machines here, have you upgraded on
the final build over the top of an evaluation beta or release candidate
version?

Mark

"Joe727" <nospam@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
news:eCB7o5tfEHA.3932@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Anybody else notice the 180 license in the SP 2 RTM license agreement?
>
> Click Run, type winver click Ok. Click the End User License Agreement
> hyperlink.
>
> Joe
>
>
Anonymous
August 10, 2004 7:24:19 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Hi Mark.

Hmmm...

My EULA says that, too. I had downloaded SP2 RTM from MSDN on 8/6/04,
burned a CD from that, and installed SP2 from that CD, without first
uninstalling Build 2149 (RC1).

The WinVer screen says:
"Version 5.1 (Build 2600.xpsp_sp2_rtm.040803-2158 : Service Pack 2)"

And the EULA starts:
"180 Day License

"Prerelease Version of Service Pack 2 for
Microsoft Windows XP Professional, Home,
Media Center, or Tablet PC Edition"

Where did you get your copy of SP2 RTM, Joe?

RC
--
R. C. White, CPA
San Marcos, TX
rc@corridor.net
Microsoft Windows MVP

"Mark Salloway" <fatherjack@mvps.org> wrote in message
news:ewze9WufEHA.2764@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Hi Joe
> I can't say I'm seeing that on any of my machines here, have you upgraded
> on the final build over the top of an evaluation beta or release candidate
> version?
>
> Mark
>
> "Joe727" <nospam@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
> news:eCB7o5tfEHA.3932@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>> Anybody else notice the 180 license in the SP 2 RTM license agreement?
>>
>> Click Run, type winver click Ok. Click the End User License Agreement
>> hyperlink.
>>
>> Joe
Anonymous
August 10, 2004 7:24:20 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Mine says the same, 180 day license.
I downloaded SP2 from here
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyI...

--
Hope This Helps
Haus
Good Luck



"R. C. White" <RCWhite@msn.com> wrote in message
news:e%23sA88ufEHA.236@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hi Mark.
>
> Hmmm...
>
> My EULA says that, too. I had downloaded SP2 RTM from MSDN on 8/6/04,
> burned a CD from that, and installed SP2 from that CD, without first
> uninstalling Build 2149 (RC1).
>
> The WinVer screen says:
> "Version 5.1 (Build 2600.xpsp_sp2_rtm.040803-2158 : Service Pack 2)"
>
> And the EULA starts:
> "180 Day License
>
> "Prerelease Version of Service Pack 2 for
> Microsoft Windows XP Professional, Home,
> Media Center, or Tablet PC Edition"
>
> Where did you get your copy of SP2 RTM, Joe?
>
> RC
> --
> R. C. White, CPA
> San Marcos, TX
> rc@corridor.net
> Microsoft Windows MVP
>
> "Mark Salloway" <fatherjack@mvps.org> wrote in message
> news:ewze9WufEHA.2764@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>> Hi Joe
>> I can't say I'm seeing that on any of my machines here, have you upgraded
>> on the final build over the top of an evaluation beta or release
>> candidate version?
>>
>> Mark
>>
>> "Joe727" <nospam@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
>> news:eCB7o5tfEHA.3932@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>>> Anybody else notice the 180 license in the SP 2 RTM license agreement?
>>>
>>> Click Run, type winver click Ok. Click the End User License Agreement
>>> hyperlink.
>>>
>>> Joe
>
Anonymous
August 10, 2004 8:37:07 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Hi Michael - so, the EULA simply wasn't overwritten when I installed the SP2
RTM? BTW, I downloaded the RTM from the Microsoft IT website.

Joe

"Michael Solomon (MS-MVP Windows Shell/User)" <user@#notme.com> wrote in
message news:uBDnZAxfEHA.2012@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>I absolutely concur about first uninstalling a pre-release version even
>when Microsoft the version you have is an approved installation path.
>However, we are seeing this anomaly on most systems wherein a legit version
>of RTM SP2 was installed over a pre-release version approved for upgrade to
>SP2.
>
> --
> Michael Solomon MS-MVP
> Windows Shell/User
> Backup is a PC User's Best Friend
> DTS-L.Org: http://www.dts-l.org/
>
> "Shenan Stanley" <news_helper@hushmail.com> wrote in message
> news:eqWtxswfEHA.632@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>> Joe727 wrote:
>>> Here's a screenshot:
>>>
>>> http://home.cfl.rr.com/jbmsbink/SP2%20EULA.jpg
>>
>>
>> Also - no matter WHAT Microsoft says - I would UNINSTALL the prerelease
>> versions FIRST before installing the Full Release. Why take the chance?
>>
>> --
>> <- Shenan ->
>> --
>> The information is provided "as is", with no guarantees of
>> completeness, accuracy or timeliness, and without warranties of any
>> kind, express or implied. In other words, read up before you take any
>> advice - you are the one ultimately responsible for your actions.
>>
>>
>
>
Anonymous
August 10, 2004 8:37:08 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

It appears not to matter from where you downloaded it, as long as it is
legit. The problem seems to appear when a user has installed over a beta
build even if it was an approved upgrade path to RTM.

The RTM EULA is there, it's just not linked to the box that appears when you
use winver to determine your version.

--
Michael Solomon MS-MVP
Windows Shell/User
Backup is a PC User's Best Friend
DTS-L.Org: http://www.dts-l.org/

"Joe727" <nospam@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
news:o TH6OnxfEHA.3916@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Hi Michael - so, the EULA simply wasn't overwritten when I installed the
> SP2 RTM? BTW, I downloaded the RTM from the Microsoft IT website.
>
> Joe
>
> "Michael Solomon (MS-MVP Windows Shell/User)" <user@#notme.com> wrote in
> message news:uBDnZAxfEHA.2012@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>>I absolutely concur about first uninstalling a pre-release version even
>>when Microsoft the version you have is an approved installation path.
>>However, we are seeing this anomaly on most systems wherein a legit
>>version of RTM SP2 was installed over a pre-release version approved for
>>upgrade to SP2.
>>
>> --
>> Michael Solomon MS-MVP
>> Windows Shell/User
>> Backup is a PC User's Best Friend
>> DTS-L.Org: http://www.dts-l.org/
>>
>> "Shenan Stanley" <news_helper@hushmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:eqWtxswfEHA.632@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>>> Joe727 wrote:
>>>> Here's a screenshot:
>>>>
>>>> http://home.cfl.rr.com/jbmsbink/SP2%20EULA.jpg
>>>
>>>
>>> Also - no matter WHAT Microsoft says - I would UNINSTALL the prerelease
>>> versions FIRST before installing the Full Release. Why take the chance?
>>>
>>> --
>>> <- Shenan ->
>>> --
>>> The information is provided "as is", with no guarantees of
>>> completeness, accuracy or timeliness, and without warranties of any
>>> kind, express or implied. In other words, read up before you take any
>>> advice - you are the one ultimately responsible for your actions.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
Anonymous
August 10, 2004 8:37:34 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

That's exactly what I want to know.

Joe

"Haus" <youknow@Iwillslapyou> wrote in message
news:10hia2nrj9qrb30@corp.supernews.com...
> So do we need to uninstall SP2, then reinstall or is there anything we
> should be concerned about.
>
> --
> Good Day
> Haus
>
>
>
> "Ken Blake" <kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote in message
> news:o YoDP%23wfEHA.3556@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>> In news:%23Vaw7LufEHA.236@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl,
>> Joe727 <nospam@nospam.nospam> typed:
>>
>>> Here's a screenshot:
>>>
>>> http://home.cfl.rr.com/jbmsbink/SP2%20EULA.jpg
>>
>>
>> Not everyone has this. I don't, for example. Apparently those who
>> installed over earlier versions have this there, but those who didn't,
>> don't.
>>
>> --
>> Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
>> Please reply to the newsgroup
>>
>>
>>> "Shenan Stanley" <news_helper@hushmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:u$KQQBufEHA.704@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>>>> Joe727 wrote:
>>>>> Anybody else notice the 180 license in the SP 2 RTM license
>>>>> agreement?
>>>>> Click Run, type winver click Ok. Click the End User License
>>>>> Agreement hyperlink.
>>>>
>>>> I think you are seeing things - or you didn't install the RTM.
>>>>
>>>> Nothing like that in the EULA I am looking at - on any of the
>>>> machines I have installed it on. Nothing about 180, one hundred
>>>> eighty or anything similar.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> <- Shenan ->
>>>> --
>>>> The information is provided "as is", with no guarantees of
>>>> completeness, accuracy or timeliness, and without warranties of any
>>>> kind, express or implied. In other words, read up before you take
>>>> any advice - you are the one ultimately responsible for your actions.
>>
>>
>
>
Anonymous
August 10, 2004 8:37:35 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Well, no one has had it yet for 180 days so we really don't know for sure
what's going to happen. I can tell you that several MVPs have this issue
and thus far none of those with whom I have contact are uninstalling. We've
done some checks on those systems of the properties of Kernel32.dll where
Version should be 5.1.2500.2180 and the versions appear correct. No one
thus far is having any issues as a result of this.

--
Michael Solomon MS-MVP
Windows Shell/User
Backup is a PC User's Best Friend
DTS-L.Org: http://www.dts-l.org/

"Joe727" <nospam@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
news:o sLtgnxfEHA.1764@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> That's exactly what I want to know.
>
> Joe
>
> "Haus" <youknow@Iwillslapyou> wrote in message
> news:10hia2nrj9qrb30@corp.supernews.com...
>> So do we need to uninstall SP2, then reinstall or is there anything we
>> should be concerned about.
>>
>> --
>> Good Day
>> Haus
>>
>>
>>
>> "Ken Blake" <kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote in message
>> news:o YoDP%23wfEHA.3556@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>>> In news:%23Vaw7LufEHA.236@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl,
>>> Joe727 <nospam@nospam.nospam> typed:
>>>
>>>> Here's a screenshot:
>>>>
>>>> http://home.cfl.rr.com/jbmsbink/SP2%20EULA.jpg
>>>
>>>
>>> Not everyone has this. I don't, for example. Apparently those who
>>> installed over earlier versions have this there, but those who didn't,
>>> don't.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
>>> Please reply to the newsgroup
>>>
>>>
>>>> "Shenan Stanley" <news_helper@hushmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:u$KQQBufEHA.704@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>>>>> Joe727 wrote:
>>>>>> Anybody else notice the 180 license in the SP 2 RTM license
>>>>>> agreement?
>>>>>> Click Run, type winver click Ok. Click the End User License
>>>>>> Agreement hyperlink.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think you are seeing things - or you didn't install the RTM.
>>>>>
>>>>> Nothing like that in the EULA I am looking at - on any of the
>>>>> machines I have installed it on. Nothing about 180, one hundred
>>>>> eighty or anything similar.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> <- Shenan ->
>>>>> --
>>>>> The information is provided "as is", with no guarantees of
>>>>> completeness, accuracy or timeliness, and without warranties of any
>>>>> kind, express or implied. In other words, read up before you take
>>>>> any advice - you are the one ultimately responsible for your actions.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
Anonymous
August 10, 2004 8:37:36 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

In news:u6w8YlyfEHA.1188@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl,
Michael Solomon (MS-MVP Windows Shell/User) <user@#notme.com>
typed:

> Well, no one has had it yet for 180 days so we really don't
> know for
> sure what's going to happen. I can tell you that several MVPs
> have
> this issue and thus far none of those with whom I have contact
> are
> uninstalling. We've done some checks on those systems of the
> properties of Kernel32.dll where Version should be
> 5.1.2500.2180 and


Michael, a typo, I assume. That should be 5.1.2600.2180.


--
Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
Please reply to the newsgroup
Anonymous
August 10, 2004 8:38:01 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Yes, over SP2 RC2 21.49 Beta.

Joe

"Mark Salloway" <fatherjack@mvps.org> wrote in message
news:ewze9WufEHA.2764@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Hi Joe
> I can't say I'm seeing that on any of my machines here, have you upgraded
> on the final build over the top of an evaluation beta or release candidate
> version?
>
> Mark
>
> "Joe727" <nospam@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
> news:eCB7o5tfEHA.3932@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>> Anybody else notice the 180 license in the SP 2 RTM license agreement?
>>
>> Click Run, type winver click Ok. Click the End User License Agreement
>> hyperlink.
>>
>> Joe
>>
>>
>
>
Anonymous
August 10, 2004 8:38:33 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

That's where I downloaded from as well.

Joe

"Haus" <youknow@Iwillslapyou> wrote in message
news:10hhuetkeb7ru43@corp.supernews.com...
> Mine says the same, 180 day license.
> I downloaded SP2 from here
> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyI...
>
> --
> Hope This Helps
> Haus
> Good Luck
>
>
>
> "R. C. White" <RCWhite@msn.com> wrote in message
> news:e%23sA88ufEHA.236@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>> Hi Mark.
>>
>> Hmmm...
>>
>> My EULA says that, too. I had downloaded SP2 RTM from MSDN on 8/6/04,
>> burned a CD from that, and installed SP2 from that CD, without first
>> uninstalling Build 2149 (RC1).
>>
>> The WinVer screen says:
>> "Version 5.1 (Build 2600.xpsp_sp2_rtm.040803-2158 : Service Pack 2)"
>>
>> And the EULA starts:
>> "180 Day License
>>
>> "Prerelease Version of Service Pack 2 for
>> Microsoft Windows XP Professional, Home,
>> Media Center, or Tablet PC Edition"
>>
>> Where did you get your copy of SP2 RTM, Joe?
>>
>> RC
>> --
>> R. C. White, CPA
>> San Marcos, TX
>> rc@corridor.net
>> Microsoft Windows MVP
>>
>> "Mark Salloway" <fatherjack@mvps.org> wrote in message
>> news:ewze9WufEHA.2764@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>>> Hi Joe
>>> I can't say I'm seeing that on any of my machines here, have you
>>> upgraded on the final build over the top of an evaluation beta or
>>> release candidate version?
>>>
>>> Mark
>>>
>>> "Joe727" <nospam@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
>>> news:eCB7o5tfEHA.3932@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>>>> Anybody else notice the 180 license in the SP 2 RTM license agreement?
>>>>
>>>> Click Run, type winver click Ok. Click the End User License
>>>> Agreement
>>>> hyperlink.
>>>>
>>>> Joe
>>
>
>
Anonymous
August 10, 2004 9:17:07 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Yeah, I copied that from a message by one of our cohorts and just blazed a
long without checking.

Sorry.

--
Michael Solomon MS-MVP
Windows Shell/User
Backup is a PC User's Best Friend
DTS-L.Org: http://www.dts-l.org/

"Ken Blake" <kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote in message
news:e9ubA8yfEHA.3024@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> In news:u6w8YlyfEHA.1188@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl,
> Michael Solomon (MS-MVP Windows Shell/User) <user@#notme.com> typed:
>
>> Well, no one has had it yet for 180 days so we really don't know for
>> sure what's going to happen. I can tell you that several MVPs have
>> this issue and thus far none of those with whom I have contact are
>> uninstalling. We've done some checks on those systems of the
>> properties of Kernel32.dll where Version should be 5.1.2500.2180 and
>
>
> Michael, a typo, I assume. That should be 5.1.2600.2180.
>
>
> --
> Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
> Please reply to the newsgroup
>
Anonymous
August 10, 2004 9:23:26 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Here is my screen shot of the final RTM of SP2 that was installed over a
beta version of SP2 http://www.webtree.ca/windowsxp/images/sp2eula.jpg

--

Harry Ohrn MS-MVP [Shell/User]
www.webtree.ca/windowsxp


"Joe727" <nospam@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
news:eCB7o5tfEHA.3932@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Anybody else notice the 180 license in the SP 2 RTM license agreement?
>
> Click Run, type winver click Ok. Click the End User License Agreement
> hyperlink.
>
> Joe
>
>
Anonymous
August 10, 2004 10:35:44 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

In news:ufPSEizfEHA.2000@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl,
Michael Solomon (MS-MVP Windows Shell/User) <user@#notme.com>
typed:

> Yeah, I copied that from a message by one of our cohorts and
> just
> blazed a long without checking.
>
> Sorry.


Not a problem. I just wanted to set the record straight for
others reading this.

--
Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
Please reply to the newsgroup



> "Ken Blake" <kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote in message
> news:e9ubA8yfEHA.3024@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> In news:u6w8YlyfEHA.1188@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl,
>> Michael Solomon (MS-MVP Windows Shell/User) <user@#notme.com>
>> typed:
>>
>>> Well, no one has had it yet for 180 days so we really don't
>>> know for
>>> sure what's going to happen. I can tell you that several
>>> MVPs have
>>> this issue and thus far none of those with whom I have
>>> contact are
>>> uninstalling. We've done some checks on those systems of the
>>> properties of Kernel32.dll where Version should be
>>> 5.1.2500.2180 and
>>
>>
>> Michael, a typo, I assume. That should be 5.1.2600.2180.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
>> Please reply to the newsgroup
Anonymous
August 11, 2004 12:02:23 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

So, I do not need to UnInstall the 21.49 Beta and reinstall the RTM? Is
this correct?

Joe

"Michael Solomon (MS-MVP Windows Shell/User)" <user@#notme.com> wrote in
message news:o 61gPiyfEHA.2468@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> It appears not to matter from where you downloaded it, as long as it is
> legit. The problem seems to appear when a user has installed over a beta
> build even if it was an approved upgrade path to RTM.
>
> The RTM EULA is there, it's just not linked to the box that appears when
> you use winver to determine your version.
>
> --
> Michael Solomon MS-MVP
> Windows Shell/User
> Backup is a PC User's Best Friend
> DTS-L.Org: http://www.dts-l.org/
>
> "Joe727" <nospam@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
> news:o TH6OnxfEHA.3916@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>> Hi Michael - so, the EULA simply wasn't overwritten when I installed the
>> SP2 RTM? BTW, I downloaded the RTM from the Microsoft IT website.
>>
>> Joe
>>
>> "Michael Solomon (MS-MVP Windows Shell/User)" <user@#notme.com> wrote in
>> message news:uBDnZAxfEHA.2012@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>>>I absolutely concur about first uninstalling a pre-release version even
>>>when Microsoft the version you have is an approved installation path.
>>>However, we are seeing this anomaly on most systems wherein a legit
>>>version of RTM SP2 was installed over a pre-release version approved for
>>>upgrade to SP2.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Michael Solomon MS-MVP
>>> Windows Shell/User
>>> Backup is a PC User's Best Friend
>>> DTS-L.Org: http://www.dts-l.org/
>>>
>>> "Shenan Stanley" <news_helper@hushmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:eqWtxswfEHA.632@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>>>> Joe727 wrote:
>>>>> Here's a screenshot:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://home.cfl.rr.com/jbmsbink/SP2%20EULA.jpg
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Also - no matter WHAT Microsoft says - I would UNINSTALL the prerelease
>>>> versions FIRST before installing the Full Release. Why take the
>>>> chance?
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> <- Shenan ->
>>>> --
>>>> The information is provided "as is", with no guarantees of
>>>> completeness, accuracy or timeliness, and without warranties of any
>>>> kind, express or implied. In other words, read up before you take any
>>>> advice - you are the one ultimately responsible for your actions.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
Anonymous
August 11, 2004 12:02:24 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

I don't think that you need to uninstall. 2149 was the public evaluation
version and while I'm not in the group it's my understanding their
information was they could install over it. If that is the case I don't
think you need to uninstall.

However, if you are looking for an absolute ironclad guarantee, I can't give
you that, I have no idea what the impact of this will be if any. If the
only issue is a cosmetic one as shown in winver, you're fine. If there are
deeper issues that stem from this there's no way for us to know until the
end of 180 days.

That said, I'm a long time beta tester and no matter what Microsoft says or
approves, I never install a released version over any beta version.

--
Michael Solomon MS-MVP
Windows Shell/User
Backup is a PC User's Best Friend
DTS-L.Org: http://www.dts-l.org/

"Joe727" <nospam@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
news:u61h7ZzfEHA.3192@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> So, I do not need to UnInstall the 21.49 Beta and reinstall the RTM? Is
> this correct?
>
> Joe
>
> "Michael Solomon (MS-MVP Windows Shell/User)" <user@#notme.com> wrote in
> message news:o 61gPiyfEHA.2468@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>> It appears not to matter from where you downloaded it, as long as it is
>> legit. The problem seems to appear when a user has installed over a beta
>> build even if it was an approved upgrade path to RTM.
>>
>> The RTM EULA is there, it's just not linked to the box that appears when
>> you use winver to determine your version.
>>
>> --
>> Michael Solomon MS-MVP
>> Windows Shell/User
>> Backup is a PC User's Best Friend
>> DTS-L.Org: http://www.dts-l.org/
>>
>> "Joe727" <nospam@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
>> news:o TH6OnxfEHA.3916@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>>> Hi Michael - so, the EULA simply wasn't overwritten when I installed the
>>> SP2 RTM? BTW, I downloaded the RTM from the Microsoft IT website.
>>>
>>> Joe
>>>
>>> "Michael Solomon (MS-MVP Windows Shell/User)" <user@#notme.com> wrote in
>>> message news:uBDnZAxfEHA.2012@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>>>>I absolutely concur about first uninstalling a pre-release version even
>>>>when Microsoft the version you have is an approved installation path.
>>>>However, we are seeing this anomaly on most systems wherein a legit
>>>>version of RTM SP2 was installed over a pre-release version approved for
>>>>upgrade to SP2.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Michael Solomon MS-MVP
>>>> Windows Shell/User
>>>> Backup is a PC User's Best Friend
>>>> DTS-L.Org: http://www.dts-l.org/
>>>>
>>>> "Shenan Stanley" <news_helper@hushmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:eqWtxswfEHA.632@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>>>>> Joe727 wrote:
>>>>>> Here's a screenshot:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://home.cfl.rr.com/jbmsbink/SP2%20EULA.jpg
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Also - no matter WHAT Microsoft says - I would UNINSTALL the
>>>>> prerelease
>>>>> versions FIRST before installing the Full Release. Why take the
>>>>> chance?
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> <- Shenan ->
>>>>> --
>>>>> The information is provided "as is", with no guarantees of
>>>>> completeness, accuracy or timeliness, and without warranties of any
>>>>> kind, express or implied. In other words, read up before you take any
>>>>> advice - you are the one ultimately responsible for your actions.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
Anonymous
August 11, 2004 12:03:19 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

IC - Thanks

Joe


"Michael Solomon (MS-MVP Windows Shell/User)" <user@#notme.com> wrote in
message news:u6w8YlyfEHA.1188@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Well, no one has had it yet for 180 days so we really don't know for sure
> what's going to happen. I can tell you that several MVPs have this issue
> and thus far none of those with whom I have contact are uninstalling.
> We've done some checks on those systems of the properties of Kernel32.dll
> where Version should be 5.1.2500.2180 and the versions appear correct. No
> one thus far is having any issues as a result of this.
>
> --
> Michael Solomon MS-MVP
> Windows Shell/User
> Backup is a PC User's Best Friend
> DTS-L.Org: http://www.dts-l.org/
>
> "Joe727" <nospam@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
> news:o sLtgnxfEHA.1764@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> That's exactly what I want to know.
>>
>> Joe
>>
>> "Haus" <youknow@Iwillslapyou> wrote in message
>> news:10hia2nrj9qrb30@corp.supernews.com...
>>> So do we need to uninstall SP2, then reinstall or is there anything we
>>> should be concerned about.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Good Day
>>> Haus
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "Ken Blake" <kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote in message
>>> news:o YoDP%23wfEHA.3556@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>>>> In news:%23Vaw7LufEHA.236@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl,
>>>> Joe727 <nospam@nospam.nospam> typed:
>>>>
>>>>> Here's a screenshot:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://home.cfl.rr.com/jbmsbink/SP2%20EULA.jpg
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Not everyone has this. I don't, for example. Apparently those who
>>>> installed over earlier versions have this there, but those who didn't,
>>>> don't.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
>>>> Please reply to the newsgroup
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> "Shenan Stanley" <news_helper@hushmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:u$KQQBufEHA.704@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>>>>>> Joe727 wrote:
>>>>>>> Anybody else notice the 180 license in the SP 2 RTM license
>>>>>>> agreement?
>>>>>>> Click Run, type winver click Ok. Click the End User License
>>>>>>> Agreement hyperlink.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think you are seeing things - or you didn't install the RTM.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nothing like that in the EULA I am looking at - on any of the
>>>>>> machines I have installed it on. Nothing about 180, one hundred
>>>>>> eighty or anything similar.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> <- Shenan ->
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> The information is provided "as is", with no guarantees of
>>>>>> completeness, accuracy or timeliness, and without warranties of any
>>>>>> kind, express or implied. In other words, read up before you take
>>>>>> any advice - you are the one ultimately responsible for your actions.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
Anonymous
August 11, 2004 12:41:03 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

IC - thanks Michael.

Joe

"Michael Solomon (MS-MVP Windows Shell/User)" <user@#notme.com> wrote in
message news:%23nTDolzfEHA.3428@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>I don't think that you need to uninstall. 2149 was the public evaluation
>version and while I'm not in the group it's my understanding their
>information was they could install over it. If that is the case I don't
>think you need to uninstall.
>
> However, if you are looking for an absolute ironclad guarantee, I can't
> give you that, I have no idea what the impact of this will be if any. If
> the only issue is a cosmetic one as shown in winver, you're fine. If
> there are deeper issues that stem from this there's no way for us to know
> until the end of 180 days.
>
> That said, I'm a long time beta tester and no matter what Microsoft says
> or approves, I never install a released version over any beta version.
>
> --
> Michael Solomon MS-MVP
> Windows Shell/User
> Backup is a PC User's Best Friend
> DTS-L.Org: http://www.dts-l.org/
>
> "Joe727" <nospam@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
> news:u61h7ZzfEHA.3192@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>> So, I do not need to UnInstall the 21.49 Beta and reinstall the RTM? Is
>> this correct?
>>
>> Joe
>>
>> "Michael Solomon (MS-MVP Windows Shell/User)" <user@#notme.com> wrote in
>> message news:o 61gPiyfEHA.2468@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>>> It appears not to matter from where you downloaded it, as long as it is
>>> legit. The problem seems to appear when a user has installed over a
>>> beta build even if it was an approved upgrade path to RTM.
>>>
>>> The RTM EULA is there, it's just not linked to the box that appears when
>>> you use winver to determine your version.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Michael Solomon MS-MVP
>>> Windows Shell/User
>>> Backup is a PC User's Best Friend
>>> DTS-L.Org: http://www.dts-l.org/
>>>
>>> "Joe727" <nospam@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
>>> news:o TH6OnxfEHA.3916@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>>>> Hi Michael - so, the EULA simply wasn't overwritten when I installed
>>>> the SP2 RTM? BTW, I downloaded the RTM from the Microsoft IT website.
>>>>
>>>> Joe
>>>>
>>>> "Michael Solomon (MS-MVP Windows Shell/User)" <user@#notme.com> wrote
>>>> in message news:uBDnZAxfEHA.2012@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>>>>>I absolutely concur about first uninstalling a pre-release version even
>>>>>when Microsoft the version you have is an approved installation path.
>>>>>However, we are seeing this anomaly on most systems wherein a legit
>>>>>version of RTM SP2 was installed over a pre-release version approved
>>>>>for upgrade to SP2.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Michael Solomon MS-MVP
>>>>> Windows Shell/User
>>>>> Backup is a PC User's Best Friend
>>>>> DTS-L.Org: http://www.dts-l.org/
>>>>>
>>>>> "Shenan Stanley" <news_helper@hushmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:eqWtxswfEHA.632@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>>>>>> Joe727 wrote:
>>>>>>> Here's a screenshot:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://home.cfl.rr.com/jbmsbink/SP2%20EULA.jpg
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also - no matter WHAT Microsoft says - I would UNINSTALL the
>>>>>> prerelease
>>>>>> versions FIRST before installing the Full Release. Why take the
>>>>>> chance?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> <- Shenan ->
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> The information is provided "as is", with no guarantees of
>>>>>> completeness, accuracy or timeliness, and without warranties of any
>>>>>> kind, express or implied. In other words, read up before you take
>>>>>> any
>>>>>> advice - you are the one ultimately responsible for your actions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
Anonymous
August 11, 2004 12:41:04 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

You're welcome, Joe.

--
Michael Solomon MS-MVP
Windows Shell/User
Backup is a PC User's Best Friend
DTS-L.Org: http://www.dts-l.org/

"Joe727" <nospam@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
news:uZdKivzfEHA.2908@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> IC - thanks Michael.
>
> Joe
>
> "Michael Solomon (MS-MVP Windows Shell/User)" <user@#notme.com> wrote in
> message news:%23nTDolzfEHA.3428@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>>I don't think that you need to uninstall. 2149 was the public evaluation
>>version and while I'm not in the group it's my understanding their
>>information was they could install over it. If that is the case I don't
>>think you need to uninstall.
>>
>> However, if you are looking for an absolute ironclad guarantee, I can't
>> give you that, I have no idea what the impact of this will be if any. If
>> the only issue is a cosmetic one as shown in winver, you're fine. If
>> there are deeper issues that stem from this there's no way for us to know
>> until the end of 180 days.
>>
>> That said, I'm a long time beta tester and no matter what Microsoft says
>> or approves, I never install a released version over any beta version.
>>
>> --
>> Michael Solomon MS-MVP
>> Windows Shell/User
>> Backup is a PC User's Best Friend
>> DTS-L.Org: http://www.dts-l.org/
>>
>> "Joe727" <nospam@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
>> news:u61h7ZzfEHA.3192@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>>> So, I do not need to UnInstall the 21.49 Beta and reinstall the RTM? Is
>>> this correct?
>>>
>>> Joe
>>>
>>> "Michael Solomon (MS-MVP Windows Shell/User)" <user@#notme.com> wrote in
>>> message news:o 61gPiyfEHA.2468@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>>>> It appears not to matter from where you downloaded it, as long as it is
>>>> legit. The problem seems to appear when a user has installed over a
>>>> beta build even if it was an approved upgrade path to RTM.
>>>>
>>>> The RTM EULA is there, it's just not linked to the box that appears
>>>> when you use winver to determine your version.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Michael Solomon MS-MVP
>>>> Windows Shell/User
>>>> Backup is a PC User's Best Friend
>>>> DTS-L.Org: http://www.dts-l.org/
>>>>
>>>> "Joe727" <nospam@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
>>>> news:o TH6OnxfEHA.3916@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>>>>> Hi Michael - so, the EULA simply wasn't overwritten when I installed
>>>>> the SP2 RTM? BTW, I downloaded the RTM from the Microsoft IT website.
>>>>>
>>>>> Joe
>>>>>
>>>>> "Michael Solomon (MS-MVP Windows Shell/User)" <user@#notme.com> wrote
>>>>> in message news:uBDnZAxfEHA.2012@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>I absolutely concur about first uninstalling a pre-release version
>>>>>>even when Microsoft the version you have is an approved installation
>>>>>>path. However, we are seeing this anomaly on most systems wherein a
>>>>>>legit version of RTM SP2 was installed over a pre-release version
>>>>>>approved for upgrade to SP2.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Michael Solomon MS-MVP
>>>>>> Windows Shell/User
>>>>>> Backup is a PC User's Best Friend
>>>>>> DTS-L.Org: http://www.dts-l.org/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Shenan Stanley" <news_helper@hushmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:eqWtxswfEHA.632@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>> Joe727 wrote:
>>>>>>>> Here's a screenshot:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://home.cfl.rr.com/jbmsbink/SP2%20EULA.jpg
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Also - no matter WHAT Microsoft says - I would UNINSTALL the
>>>>>>> prerelease
>>>>>>> versions FIRST before installing the Full Release. Why take the
>>>>>>> chance?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> <- Shenan ->
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> The information is provided "as is", with no guarantees of
>>>>>>> completeness, accuracy or timeliness, and without warranties of any
>>>>>>> kind, express or implied. In other words, read up before you take
>>>>>>> any
>>>>>>> advice - you are the one ultimately responsible for your actions.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
Anonymous
August 11, 2004 1:06:58 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

I've read a few messages about this problem. Maybe someone would care
to advance their date/time properties +180 days, boot and see what
happens then post back. If you can ;) 


"Michael Solomon \(MS-MVP Windows Shell/User\)" <user@#notme.com> wrote in message news:<u6w8YlyfEHA.1188@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl>...
> Well, no one has had it yet for 180 days so we really don't know for sure
> what's going to happen. I can tell you that several MVPs have this issue
> and thus far none of those with whom I have contact are uninstalling. We've
> done some checks on those systems of the properties of Kernel32.dll where
> Version should be 5.1.2500.2180 and the versions appear correct. No one
> thus far is having any issues as a result of this.
>
> --
> Michael Solomon MS-MVP
> Windows Shell/User
> Backup is a PC User's Best Friend
> DTS-L.Org: http://www.dts-l.org/
>
> "Joe727" <nospam@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
> news:o sLtgnxfEHA.1764@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > That's exactly what I want to know.
> >
> > Joe
> >
> > "Haus" <youknow@Iwillslapyou> wrote in message
> > news:10hia2nrj9qrb30@corp.supernews.com...
> >> So do we need to uninstall SP2, then reinstall or is there anything we
> >> should be concerned about.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Good Day
> >> Haus
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> "Ken Blake" <kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote in message
> >> news:o YoDP%23wfEHA.3556@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> >>> In news:%23Vaw7LufEHA.236@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl,
> >>> Joe727 <nospam@nospam.nospam> typed:
> >>>
> >>>> Here's a screenshot:
> >>>>
> >>>> http://home.cfl.rr.com/jbmsbink/SP2%20EULA.jpg
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Not everyone has this. I don't, for example. Apparently those who
> >>> installed over earlier versions have this there, but those who didn't,
> >>> don't.
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
> >>> Please reply to the newsgroup
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> "Shenan Stanley" <news_helper@hushmail.com> wrote in message
> >>>> news:u$KQQBufEHA.704@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> >>>>> Joe727 wrote:
> >>>>>> Anybody else notice the 180 license in the SP 2 RTM license
> >>>>>> agreement?
> >>>>>> Click Run, type winver click Ok. Click the End User License
> >>>>>> Agreement hyperlink.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I think you are seeing things - or you didn't install the RTM.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Nothing like that in the EULA I am looking at - on any of the
> >>>>> machines I have installed it on. Nothing about 180, one hundred
> >>>>> eighty or anything similar.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> <- Shenan ->
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> The information is provided "as is", with no guarantees of
> >>>>> completeness, accuracy or timeliness, and without warranties of any
> >>>>> kind, express or implied. In other words, read up before you take
> >>>>> any advice - you are the one ultimately responsible for your actions.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
Anonymous
August 11, 2004 1:49:29 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Thanks Mike & Ken
I like Joe will continue on till things go up in smoke.....;)

--
Good Day
Haus



"Ken Blake" <kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote in message
news:%23$NcGO0fEHA.3428@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> In news:ufPSEizfEHA.2000@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl,
> Michael Solomon (MS-MVP Windows Shell/User) <user@#notme.com> typed:
>
>> Yeah, I copied that from a message by one of our cohorts and just
>> blazed a long without checking.
>>
>> Sorry.
>
>
> Not a problem. I just wanted to set the record straight for others reading
> this.
>
> --
> Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
> Please reply to the newsgroup
>
>
>
>> "Ken Blake" <kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote in message
>> news:e9ubA8yfEHA.3024@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>>> In news:u6w8YlyfEHA.1188@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl,
>>> Michael Solomon (MS-MVP Windows Shell/User) <user@#notme.com> typed:
>>>
>>>> Well, no one has had it yet for 180 days so we really don't know for
>>>> sure what's going to happen. I can tell you that several MVPs have
>>>> this issue and thus far none of those with whom I have contact are
>>>> uninstalling. We've done some checks on those systems of the
>>>> properties of Kernel32.dll where Version should be 5.1.2500.2180 and
>>>
>>>
>>> Michael, a typo, I assume. That should be 5.1.2600.2180.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
>>> Please reply to the newsgroup
>
>
Anonymous
August 11, 2004 2:54:06 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

LOL - a couple of smoked sausages.

Joe

"Haus" <youknow@Iwillslapyou> wrote in message
news:10hj293ldjemif5@corp.supernews.com...
> Thanks Mike & Ken
> I like Joe will continue on till things go up in smoke.....;)
>
> --
> Good Day
> Haus
>
>
>
> "Ken Blake" <kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote in message
> news:%23$NcGO0fEHA.3428@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>> In news:ufPSEizfEHA.2000@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl,
>> Michael Solomon (MS-MVP Windows Shell/User) <user@#notme.com> typed:
>>
>>> Yeah, I copied that from a message by one of our cohorts and just
>>> blazed a long without checking.
>>>
>>> Sorry.
>>
>>
>> Not a problem. I just wanted to set the record straight for others
>> reading this.
>>
>> --
>> Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
>> Please reply to the newsgroup
>>
>>
>>
>>> "Ken Blake" <kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote in message
>>> news:e9ubA8yfEHA.3024@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>>>> In news:u6w8YlyfEHA.1188@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl,
>>>> Michael Solomon (MS-MVP Windows Shell/User) <user@#notme.com> typed:
>>>>
>>>>> Well, no one has had it yet for 180 days so we really don't know for
>>>>> sure what's going to happen. I can tell you that several MVPs have
>>>>> this issue and thus far none of those with whom I have contact are
>>>>> uninstalling. We've done some checks on those systems of the
>>>>> properties of Kernel32.dll where Version should be 5.1.2500.2180 and
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Michael, a typo, I assume. That should be 5.1.2600.2180.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
>>>> Please reply to the newsgroup
>>
>>
>
>
Anonymous
August 11, 2004 4:14:01 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

I read someplace in the SP2 private ng's where someone did that and nothing
happened.

I think that it is not worth worring about.
(hope Bill don't give me 3 days in the electric chair)....;)

--
Good Day
Haus



"GMKrullen" <gmkrullen@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3ca8e1c8.0408102006.12819616@posting.google.com...
> I've read a few messages about this problem. Maybe someone would care
> to advance their date/time properties +180 days, boot and see what
> happens then post back. If you can ;) 
>
>
> "Michael Solomon \(MS-MVP Windows Shell/User\)" <user@#notme.com> wrote in
> message news:<u6w8YlyfEHA.1188@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl>...
>> Well, no one has had it yet for 180 days so we really don't know for sure
>> what's going to happen. I can tell you that several MVPs have this issue
>> and thus far none of those with whom I have contact are uninstalling.
>> We've
>> done some checks on those systems of the properties of Kernel32.dll where
>> Version should be 5.1.2500.2180 and the versions appear correct. No one
>> thus far is having any issues as a result of this.
>>
>> --
>> Michael Solomon MS-MVP
>> Windows Shell/User
>> Backup is a PC User's Best Friend
>> DTS-L.Org: http://www.dts-l.org/
>>
>> "Joe727" <nospam@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
>> news:o sLtgnxfEHA.1764@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> > That's exactly what I want to know.
>> >
>> > Joe
>> >
>> > "Haus" <youknow@Iwillslapyou> wrote in message
>> > news:10hia2nrj9qrb30@corp.supernews.com...
>> >> So do we need to uninstall SP2, then reinstall or is there anything we
>> >> should be concerned about.
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Good Day
>> >> Haus
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> "Ken Blake" <kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote in message
>> >> news:o YoDP%23wfEHA.3556@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>> >>> In news:%23Vaw7LufEHA.236@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl,
>> >>> Joe727 <nospam@nospam.nospam> typed:
>> >>>
>> >>>> Here's a screenshot:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> http://home.cfl.rr.com/jbmsbink/SP2%20EULA.jpg
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Not everyone has this. I don't, for example. Apparently those who
>> >>> installed over earlier versions have this there, but those who
>> >>> didn't,
>> >>> don't.
>> >>>
>> >>> --
>> >>> Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
>> >>> Please reply to the newsgroup
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>> "Shenan Stanley" <news_helper@hushmail.com> wrote in message
>> >>>> news:u$KQQBufEHA.704@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>> >>>>> Joe727 wrote:
>> >>>>>> Anybody else notice the 180 license in the SP 2 RTM license
>> >>>>>> agreement?
>> >>>>>> Click Run, type winver click Ok. Click the End User License
>> >>>>>> Agreement hyperlink.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I think you are seeing things - or you didn't install the RTM.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Nothing like that in the EULA I am looking at - on any of the
>> >>>>> machines I have installed it on. Nothing about 180, one hundred
>> >>>>> eighty or anything similar.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> --
>> >>>>> <- Shenan ->
>> >>>>> --
>> >>>>> The information is provided "as is", with no guarantees of
>> >>>>> completeness, accuracy or timeliness, and without warranties of any
>> >>>>> kind, express or implied. In other words, read up before you take
>> >>>>> any advice - you are the one ultimately responsible for your
>> >>>>> actions.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
Anonymous
August 11, 2004 5:00:06 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Yes, I loaded it right over SP 2 RC2 21.49 Beta.

Joe

"Mark Salloway" <fatherjack@mvps.org> wrote in message
news:ewze9WufEHA.2764@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Hi Joe
> I can't say I'm seeing that on any of my machines here, have you upgraded
> on the final build over the top of an evaluation beta or release candidate
> version?
>
> Mark
>
> "Joe727" <nospam@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
> news:eCB7o5tfEHA.3932@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>> Anybody else notice the 180 license in the SP 2 RTM license agreement?
>>
>> Click Run, type winver click Ok. Click the End User License Agreement
>> hyperlink.
>>
>> Joe
>>
>>
>
>
!