SP2 RTM - only 180 day license?

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
35 answers Last reply
More about license
  1. 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.
  2. 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.
    >
    >
  3. 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.
    >>
    >>
    >
    >
    >.
    >
  4. 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.
    > >
    > >
    >
    >
  5. 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.
  6. 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?showtopic=1802
    -----

    "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
    >
    >
  7. 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?FamilyId=049C9DBE-3B8E-4F30-8245-9E368D3CDB5A&displaylang=en

    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.
  8. 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.
  9. 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.
    >
    >
  10. 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.
  11. 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.
    >
    >
  12. 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:OYoDP%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.
    >
    >
  13. 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
    >
    >
  14. 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
  15. 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?FamilyID=049c9dbe-3b8e-4f30-8245-9e368d3cdb5a&DisplayLang=en

    --
    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
    >
  16. 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.
    >>
    >>
    >
    >
  17. 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:OTH6OnxfEHA.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.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>
    >>
    >
    >
  18. 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:OYoDP%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.
    >>
    >>
    >
    >
  19. 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:OsLtgnxfEHA.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:OYoDP%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.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>
    >>
    >
    >
  20. 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
  21. 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
    >>
    >>
    >
    >
  22. 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?FamilyID=049c9dbe-3b8e-4f30-8245-9e368d3cdb5a&DisplayLang=en
    >
    > --
    > 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
    >>
    >
    >
  23. 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
    >
  24. 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
    >
    >
  25. 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
  26. 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:O61gPiyfEHA.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:OTH6OnxfEHA.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.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>
    >>
    >
    >
  27. 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:O61gPiyfEHA.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:OTH6OnxfEHA.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.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>
    >>
    >
    >
  28. 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:OsLtgnxfEHA.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:OYoDP%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.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>
    >>
    >
    >
  29. 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:O61gPiyfEHA.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:OTH6OnxfEHA.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.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>
    >>
    >
    >
  30. 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:O61gPiyfEHA.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:OTH6OnxfEHA.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.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>
    >>
    >
    >
  31. 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:OsLtgnxfEHA.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:OYoDP%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.
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>
    > >>
    > >
    > >
  32. 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
    >
    >
  33. 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
    >>
    >>
    >
    >
  34. 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:OsLtgnxfEHA.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:OYoDP%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.
    >> >>>
    >> >>>
    >> >>
    >> >>
    >> >
    >> >
  35. 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
    >>
    >>
    >
    >
Ask a new question

Read More

Microsoft License Windows XP