Parallels & BootCamp = Two WinXP Licenses?

[selowitch]

Parallels is great but I can't game with it, so ideally I'd make a Parallels VM available for everyday use and reboot into BootCamp when I want to game. To do that, would I need two separate licenses for Windows XP?

[k squared]

Nope. But you will probably have to call to get another activation number. If the call center operator asks, just say you had to reinstall Windows.

[selowitch]

Nope. But you will probably have to call to get another activation number. If the call center operator asks, just say you had to reinstall Windows.Well, I previously installed WinXP on my last Core Duo iMac, then deleted the partition. So now I need two new activation keys. Can I ask for two of them at the same time?

[ghporter]

This is an excellent question. Technically, if you're running XP both under Parallels and natively through Boot Camp, you're still running it on the same hardware. The license is per computer, nothing else. So whether you'll have activation problems depends on how Parallels lets the "guest" OS contact the hardware; it really depends on what hardware the activation system "sees" when you run XP in Parallels. If it sees the actual hardware, you shouldn't need to reactivate because it's installed on the SAME hardware (and will generate the same hardware signature), though you may need to go through activation again because of where the activation key gets stored-Parallels' virtual partition versus the actual partition Boot Camp generates. It all depends...

[selowitch]

Hmmm. Well, it looks like I'm callling Microsoft Support. I'll report back as to what happens.

[Macola]

Hmmm. Well, it looks like I'm callling Microsoft Support. I'll report back as to what happens.

Been there, done that :)

http://forums.macnn.com/104/alternative-operating-systems/310218/xp-disk-2-computers/
http://forums.macnn.com/104/alternative-operating-systems/308523/move-xp-between-different-intel-macs/
http://forums.macnn.com/104/alternative-operating-systems/310654/xp-pc-mac-will/

Mods, maybe we should make this question a sticky...

[ghporter]

Good idea, Macola...

[selowitch]

Good idea, Macola...This thread isn't ready to be "stickied," IMO, because we don't have a clear, step-by-step solution for this issue yet.

[Macola]

How about this?

1. Install XP first using BootCamp. When prompted, enter the serial number.
2. Activate XP online (you don't need to register).
3. Install Parallels on the Mac partition and install XP from the same CD used previously, entering the same serial number.
4. Boot XP in Parallels, launch the Activation Wizard, and select activation by phone.
5. Call the toll-free number displayed, read off a very long sequence of numbers to the support rep.
6. S/he will read back an equally long sequence of numbers, which you should type into the labeled boxes on the screen. You may also want to write it down for future reference.
7. Follow the rest of the activation prompts and you're done.

Note that these steps are typical for OEM versions of XP. If you have a retail copy, you may be able to activate it a second time online, and not go through the phone process.

[selowitch]

5. Call the toll-free number displayed, read off a very long sequence of numbers to the support rep.
6. S/he will read back an equally long sequence of numbers, which you should type into the labeled boxes on the screen. You may also want to write it down for future reference.I failed to do that when I installed XP for Parallels. Can that "long sequence of numbers" be found in the Windows registry somewhere?

[ghporter]

Probably not. It's most likely there, but they're VERY careful about making it easy to find. It's probably encrypted if it's there. But you'll have that set of numbers you need DISPLAYED by XP. Clearer?

[selowitch]

Probably not. It's most likely there, but they're VERY careful about making it easy to find. It's probably encrypted if it's there. But you'll have that set of numbers you need DISPLAYED by XP. Clearer?Well, I did it in reverse. I installed XP via Parallels, using up my new activation string. Now I gotta do it for BootCamp; I'm on the phone with Microsoft right now; we'll see what happens.

I wish I could document to these folks that the license is indeed per-computer and not per-install, so that I'm entitled to install the same copy of XP for both Parallels and BootCamp on the same Mac. But all that is over the heads of the support reps, I imagine

EDIT: Okay, it worked! It really was as simple as asking for new activation key. I wonder what would have prevented me from simply installing XP on another computer with this key (not that I would ever commit that act of piracy; nevertheless, I am curious).

Anyway, this is really cool! I have Parallels for everyday use (like when I want [quite frequently] to test one of my webpages against IE for Windows) and Boot Camp for when my son and I feel like gaming. This will work great until they update Parallels to support 3D Video. Thanks, everyone!

Now this is a worthy of stickihood!

[ghporter]

The extremely long number you had to read off to MS is a unique signature for your hardware. If it had not been correct (or at least close-the system is flexible enough for minor hardware changes to be noted but not cause problems), they would have asked you more questions-"Are you SURE this is the same computer?" and they probably would not have given you a new key.

[selowitch]

The extremely long number you had to read off to MS is a unique signature for your hardware. If it had not been correct (or at least close-the system is flexible enough for minor hardware changes to be noted but not cause problems), they would have asked you more questions-"Are you SURE this is the same computer?" and they probably would not have given you a new key.Good to know. It works now. I can use Parallels or boot WinXP via BootCamp, no problem. Thanks!

[mikemako]

Just wanted to add my eXPerience:

I installed and activated Windows XP with Boot Camp about 6 months ago. Then a couple weeks ago I installed and activated the same copy of Windows XP through Parallels. There was no problem, and I didn't have to call Microsoft for a new activation key.

I bought this copy of Windows XP (Home Edition) through newegg.com for about $90. Do you think the reason I was able to activate it twice was because the installations were about 6 months apart?

[dazzla]

Yup, if it was within 24 hours they might've cared. Even if it fails activation just ring them and say you bought it for a computer which was damaged/broke etc and you've reinstalled on a new PC. They happily oblige.

[ghporter]

Just wanted to add my eXPerience:

I installed and activated Windows XP with Boot Camp about 6 months ago. Then a couple weeks ago I installed and activated the same copy of Windows XP through Parallels. There was no problem, and I didn't have to call Microsoft for a new activation key.

I bought this copy of Windows XP (Home Edition) through newegg.com for about $90. Do you think the reason I was able to activate it twice was because the installations were about 6 months apart?I think you could activate it twice because it was on the same hardware-and that's all Microsoft cares about. A lot of times people install XP on the same machine days, even hours apart (I've done that MANY times!), so the time between isn't an issue. Microsoft just wants to keep people from getting one copy of XP and install it on a bunch of different machines, so their activation system just pays attention to the hardware it's on.

[Macola]

I think you could activate it twice because it was on the same hardware-and that's all Microsoft cares about. A lot of times people install XP on the same machine days, even hours apart (I've done that MANY times!), so the time between isn't an issue. Microsoft just wants to keep people from getting one copy of XP and install it on a bunch of different machines, so their activation system just pays attention to the hardware it's on.

It's not the same machine, though. In Parallels, the virtual machine is quite different from the real hardware. Some people just seem to get lucky with this particular activation scenario--mostly, it's because it's a retail copy and not OEM.

[mikemako]

In my case it was an OEM copy, (WinXP Home Full Version for $90).

I guess it was just that, like the other poster said, the activations were several months apart.

[ghporter]

It's not the same machine, though. In Parallels, the virtual machine is quite different from the real hardware. Some people just seem to get lucky with this particular activation scenario--mostly, it's because it's a retail copy and not OEM.I've been pondering this issue for quite some time. Parallels has to get some sort of data from the hardware to know what it is-hard drive=Segate ST..., video card=ATI... and so on. This data is part of the vendor code data that the whole system has access to. Parallels must have a way to get this data to use it to figure out how to contact the hardware, so it might be available to software running under Parallels.

The best thing I can figure is that the approximation of hardware data that Parallels comes up with is "close enough" to not trigger a "reauthenticate" with Windows Activation. It's important to keep in mind that Activation is built with flexibility; you can change a certain percentage of the hardware without triggering an activation requirement, and that change is indeed time-sensitive. If you change too much too quickly, you WILL need to activate. So the big deal is "just what is Parallels reporting for hardware IDs." And I think it's "close enough" to what Windows will report while running natively to be "the same hardware" because it does NOT trigger a new activation most of the time.

Anyone with real information is very welcome to correct these suppositions-which is what they are. Einstein figured out the crux of the cosmos through "thought experiments," but I don't know if even he was up to figuring out Microsoft's arcana. ;)

[TheDizzle]

whats the point of telling them that your computer crashed and you need to reinstall it. its not like theres anything illegal or wrong with what we're truly doing... is there? or is that just kinda a way so its a quick explanation... oh well, whatever works

[Hi I'm Ben]

I think with the new version of parallels you can safely say you only need one license or XP to do this. If you're not already aware, the new version allows you to boot from the Bootcamp drive and use that version of windows.

[selowitch]

I think with the new version of parallels you can safely say you only need one license or XP to do this. If you're not already aware, the new version allows you to boot from the Bootcamp drive and use that version of windows.Now if I can just figure out how to keep it from asking me whether I want the "parallels configuration" or the "Windows XP configuration" every time I start up. Is there some way to delete the now-unneeded config?

[billv86]

How about this?

1. Install XP first using BootCamp. When prompted, enter the serial number.
2. Activate XP online (you don't need to register).
3. Install Parallels on the Mac partition and install XP from the same CD used previously, entering the same serial number.
4. Boot XP in Parallels, launch the Activation Wizard, and select activation by phone.
5. Call the toll-free number displayed, read off a very long sequence of numbers to the support rep.
6. S/he will read back an equally long sequence of numbers, which you should type into the labeled boxes on the screen. You may also want to write it down for future reference.
7. Follow the rest of the activation prompts and you're done.

Note that these steps are typical for OEM versions of XP. If you have a retail copy, you may be able to activate it a second time online, and not go through the phone process.

I recently had to do a "Repair" installation and had to call MS support for the 42 digit activation code. I've written the numbers down and was wondering if these numbers will work again if needed. Step 6 seems to indicate yes they will, and the appended note seems to say maybe they will.

[Macola]

I recently had to do a "Repair" installation and had to call MS support for the 42 digit activation code. I've written the numbers down and was wondering if these numbers will work again if needed. Step 6 seems to indicate yes they will, and the appended note seems to say maybe they will.

They should work on the same hardware, but I haven't tried it.

[billv86]

Thank you for the response.

[foo2]

Now if I can just figure out how to keep it from asking me whether I want the "parallels configuration" or the "Windows XP configuration" every time I start up. Is there some way to delete the now-unneeded config?

Edit the boot.ini file on c:\ and remove the line you don't want.

[runninkyle17]

MS Support are a bunch of morons in my opinion. You wait on the phone for 30 minutes and then you get disconnected. Wait another 30 minutes, same thing.

I just found a student edition of XP somewhere that does not require activation. I have four legal license keys to XP and I have four computers I am using them on. So I have not broken any laws, but frickin MS just pisses me off when they can't correctly implement activation of software.

I also have a copy of Vista Ultimate on the way and I know that is going to be a big pain since MS has thrown all this random protection stuff that no one can understand!

[ghporter]

...but frickin MS just pisses me off when they can't correctly implement activation of software.Considering the millions of people who have had zero problems with Microsoft's activation system, I have to believe it's something specific to you, not their systems. Sorry, but that's the way it is.

[foo2]

MS Support are a bunch of morons in my opinion. You wait on the phone for 30 minutes and then you get disconnected. Wait another 30 minutes, same thing.

I just found a student edition of XP somewhere that does not require activation. I have four legal license keys to XP and I have four computers I am using them on. So I have not broken any laws, but frickin MS just pisses me off when they can't correctly implement activation of software.

I also have a copy of Vista Ultimate on the way and I know that is going to be a big pain since MS has thrown all this random protection stuff that no one can understand!

I find MS Support excellent. MS and IBM are the two best in the business.

There is no student edition of XP that doesn't require activation. You appear to have a pirate edition of XP.

Activation works flawlessly for the vast, vast, *vast* majority.

If you're buying legally, Vista's protection shouldn't be an issue. It's been out (in Business form) for months, and I don't hear of serious issues.

[runninkyle17]

Well my problem is still that fact that with the four legal license keys that I have I have used them all for each of my computers. At least two of the keys have proven to be a problem when it comes to activation. This is just unacceptable and I refuse to waste hours of my time waiting for MS to fix the problem. I have been able to get through to their tech support once and that was an OK experience.

Maybe one day when I am completely bored and have time to waste, I will call up MS and get a proper activation code. Until then I still think MS needs to get their crap together with the whole activation thing.

[foo2]

Well my problem is still that fact that with the four legal license keys that I have I have used them all for each of my computers. At least two of the keys have proven to be a problem when it comes to activation. This is just unacceptable and I refuse to waste hours of my time waiting for MS to fix the problem. I have been able to get through to their tech support once and that was an OK experience.

Maybe one day when I am completely bored and have time to waste, I will call up MS and get a proper activation code. Until then I still think MS needs to get their crap together with the whole activation thing.

Until then you'll just pirate it, and post about your experiences in public forums. <sigh>

The time to get a human on the phone varies, but typically is in the 5-10 minute range. They'll immediately fix your problem. And if you can't produce any license documentation whatsoever, and you still insist on installing XP on machine after machine after machine (they do keep records of repeat piraters..erm..offenders...erm...callers) then you can buy a code for something like $20.

This isn't draconian by any stretch of the imagination.

[runninkyle17]

What is so hard to understand about what I am saying? I have four computers that I currently use in my house (my MBP, my wife's MB, my HTPC, and an old Acer laptop as a backup). I have four legal copies of XP. I had a copy of XP on my old Sony laptop, but I don't need that laptop anymore. So I restored the laptop to factory conditions with XP Home and installed XP Pro on my HTPC. I had to activate my copy and look at that it didn't work???!!!!!! Got on the phone, didn't get through. Tried again the next day, didn't get through. Finally got through, talked to a person for 5 minutes, then I got disconnected. After that I just gave up.

Like I said, one of these days when I have time I will call of MS and try to get an activation code. But I am still a little peaved that I have to waste my time doing this in the first place.

If you want to insinuate that I am stealing from MS, you are wrong.

[foo2]

When you post of a student edition that doesn't require activation, yes, that's stealing from Microsoft.

[ghporter]

When you post of a student edition that doesn't require activation, yes, that's stealing from Microsoft.Um... not necessarily. MS has a bunch of versions that don't require activation, including some student distributions. The MSDNe distribution, for example is usually without activation. Corporate, "campus-wide" licensed discs often lack the activation system as well.

runninkyle17, this is NOT a "bash Microsoft" forum. Your posts are, to say the least, unreasoned. You sound like you want what you want NOW and you expect a lot of people to jump through hoops for you just because you want it. The way you write in your posts, you sound like someone who would think that ANYTHING that kept him from doing "his thing" was unreasonable and probably mean. You don't even explain what "issues" you had with your "legal license keys" that are problematic. That would go a long way toward helping you with that.

[foo2]

Um... not necessarily. MS has a bunch of versions that don't require activation, including some student distributions. The MSDNe distribution, for example is usually without activation. Corporate, "campus-wide" licensed discs often lack the activation system as well.

Um...no.

There is ONE version of MS's (XP) CDs that don't require activation - the VLK edition, or "Volume Licensing" edition, sold in a variety of deals to a variety of customer groups. It isn't the "Corporate" edition, and whenever I hear someone talk about that, I know they've seen that word and that word choice from the piracy sector, because that's what the pirate sector calls the VLK edition.

All other editions require activation. A campus can be sold a VLK edition, but that would require the IT staff install the media, rather than the end-user (if the end-user purchased media himself, for his own ownership and installation, that cannot be the VLK edition).

MSDN requires activation too. Are you an MSDN subscriber? I get keys with all VLK'd software. The only workaround to this is if you use your VLK with MSDN media, but then, essentially, you're back to using the VLK "edition".

Microsoft Product Activation: Volume Licensing Activation FAQ - Software Piracy Protection (http://www.microsoft.com/piracy/activation_volumefaq.mspx) answers these questions and much more.

[runninkyle17]

Answer me this question though. I have four legal license keys and XP installed on four computers, so how exactly am I stealing from MS?

Also I have stated that I have tried to follow MS's rules and it has been a major waste of time. Is no one reading the statements that say I will call MS and wait around for hours when I have the time to do it? I am not trying to screw MS because XP has gotten a lot better over the years and I respect that. I know for a fact that MS has had problems with legal license keys being invalid when you try to activate them. This has been a problem for at least of couple of years. I understand that MS tries to fix the problem anyway they can, but I have had bad experiences with it. For all the people that have had good experiences then more power to them, but it is not unreasonable for me to report what has happened to me.

Like I said before, I am not stealing from MS and I don't feel bad if I have to use a workaround to get XP working until I have the time to call up MS and fix the problem. I cannot put my life on hold b/c MS screwed up something and I don't appreciate being insulted (even if it is by a moderator).

No where in any of my posts did I personally attack a member of this forum and yet two member saw fit to personally attack me. I believe that is unacceptable and I am sure there are other people out there who think the same way.

[Cold Warrior]

If you have four legit copies and are using them, I see nothing wrong with that, no matter how you get them working.

[ghporter]

Um...no.

There is ONE version of MS's (XP) CDs that don't require activation - the VLK edition, or "Volume Licensing" edition, sold in a variety of deals to a variety of customer groups. It isn't the "Corporate" edition, and whenever I hear someone talk about that, I know they've seen that word and that word choice from the piracy sector, because that's what the pirate sector calls the VLK edition.

All other editions require activation. A campus can be sold a VLK edition, but that would require the IT staff install the media, rather than the end-user (if the end-user purchased media himself, for his own ownership and installation, that cannot be the VLK edition).

MSDN requires activation too. Are you an MSDN subscriber? I get keys with all VLK'd software. The only workaround to this is if you use your VLK with MSDN media, but then, essentially, you're back to using the VLK "edition".

Microsoft Product Activation: Volume Licensing Activation FAQ - Software Piracy Protection (http://www.microsoft.com/piracy/activation_volumefaq.mspx) answers these questions and much more.In actual practice, VLK comes in a number of flavors. At my school, faculty, staff, and departments can buy ON DISC XP Pro that does not require activation, but the version the students can buy DOES require activation. I have seen this in action, and it's quite possible that MS doesn't do much to advertise "variations" on their standard volume programs. But NO ACTIVATION sold ON DISC does indeed exist.

Now, your discussion of the MSDN versions confuses me. Are you talking about needing a KEY (which every version I've seen does) or needing "activation" which prevents one from installing the same disc on more than one machine at a time? I am talking about the latter.

[foo2]

The latter. Students can't buy the latter, unless IT at the school administers and installs it.

[foo2]

Also, since the entire purpose of the VLK is to do away with activation, I'm not at all sure what else you're trying to say.

[John Gault]

runninkyle17, not meaning to insult you but your past experience aside activating xp takes ten minutes. Most call are routed to India so you might have had a problem with the call becouse of that (thought they ussually speak english very well and rarely do they have connection issues)
So I suggest you sit down this weekend with your computer, phone, and a beer and give then a call.
I have activated my copy of xp numerous times and have yet to have a problem ( legally for those you who care, though with Xp being an outdated program at this point who cares about legal and illegal.)
Good luck Runninkyle17. and remember breath.

[Cold Warrior]

Windows XP is far from outdated. I know it will be in use for many more years.

[physicsguy]

Does anyone know why it is that if I activate Windows XP under Parallels USING MY BOOTCAMP PARTITION UNDER PARALLELS (new feature), the activation is also valid when I boot natively into Bootcamp? And why it doesn't work in the opposite direction (activating first natively under Bootcamp requires a reactivation under Parallels even when booting from that same Bootcamp partition)?

Parallels advertises this as a sub-feature ("Activate once under Parallels") for its new feature of booting the Bootcamp partition. But is it just some lucky set of circumstances having to do with the way the hardware is seen, or did Parallels actually pull this off in a clever way? I tried getting an answer from Parallels "Customer Support," but the guy kept thinking I was complaining about something and kept referring me to Microsoft.

[sjohnson4343]

This thread is way too long.

I think you guys are missing something. When you call in and re-register, you are using another seat on your license. Microsoft allows you to install your OS twice. When you automatically re-register within a new OS, it connects to MS, sees if you have any other activations, if not activates and you're done.

There is a grace registration for problems. That's when you need to call in. If you meet the criteria, you get another activation code. If you've already installed twice, then no activation key and a new license, read: a new copy of Vista/XP is needed.

That's NOT a free registration you're getting. You're using both of your licenses that you can install on two PC's one one! You should only have to use one if you are in fact installing on the same PC.

[megasad]

Does anyone know why it is that if I activate Windows XP under Parallels USING MY BOOTCAMP PARTITION UNDER PARALLELS (new feature), the activation is also valid when I boot natively into Bootcamp? And why it doesn't work in the opposite direction (activating first natively under Bootcamp requires a reactivation under Parallels even when booting from that same Bootcamp partition)?
Can anyone confirm if this works for Vista as well? I have two XP Pro licenses, so it hasn't been an issue, but I shall be installing Vista soon, need for it to work in both Boot Camp and Parallels, but only have one Vista Business license. If this works, all shall be well.

[orthocross]

Nope. But you will probably have to call to get another activation number. If the call center operator asks, just say you had to reinstall Windows.

1) The Window EULA has ALWAYS stated that one MUST purchase TWO licenses to use TWO installations on the same machine.
2) Only Windows licenses previous to Vista may be used with virtualization software.
3) Advising folks to LIE to a Microsoft employee is obviously at least two crimes:
a) It would be seen as practicing Law without a license (if one is not a Lawyer), a crime as far as I know ( I am not a lawyer, so take this with a grain of salt, and consult one, if you want to be sure). This is NOT to be taken as legal advice -- it is only my opinion as a layman).
b) It would be seen as a conspiracy to defraud Microsoft, and they would not take this lightly, and may prosecute to the fullest extent of the law. Such conspiracy, as far as I know, would NOT be a civil infraction, it would more than probably be a felony under both local and Federal law.

I hope this opens a few eyes out there...

[megasad]

1) The Window EULA has ALWAYS stated that one MUST purchase TWO licenses to use TWO installations on the same machine...
Hokey doke. So, just so as I understand; if I install Vista using Boot Camp, activate it, and then try to use the Boot Camp partition with Parallels, Vista will want to be activated a second time.

If I do this with a second serial number, Vista will understand to use the second number whilst in Parallels and the first one in Boot Camp.

Have I got this right? It's not a huge deal for me to get the second Vista license, but I would like to be able to use the Boot Camp partition instead of a disk image when using Vista via Parallels.

[orthocross]

Sorry, my friend. The license for Vista allows you to use more than one instance of Vista on the same machine using virtualization technology such as Parallels Desktop for Mac or VMWare, but they must ALL be virtualized instances. In other words, if you want to install Vista on the same machine using both Boot Camp Assistant and Parallels with a single license, it would be a violation of the license. So you WOULD need two licenses if you wanted to do this.

But just to be sure, I strongly advise you to check with the Microsoft Legal department FIRST, or all you will get is advice such as you've gotten to LIE to their representatives, also a violation of the License. I do not advise those using Vista Business professionally to do this.

If your conscience is dead, and you are willing to tell a bold-faced lie to the MS representatives in the Activation Centre, you may be ok for a while. But Microsoft DOES do regular ON-SITE reviews of the licenses used professionally, and they can easily prosecute you for this if they discover you are using their software in an unlicensed manner.

If you wish to maintain any personal or Business Ethics, I would check with Microsoft Legal first about this.

NOTE #1
I AM NOT A LAWYER, AND ANY ADVICE I GIVE IS TO BE TAKEN AS PERSONAL ADVICE FROM A LAYMAN ONLY.
NOTE #2
You would be required to activate a second installation under Parallels for a simple reason: to the Activation Server, the License appears to be installed on two different machines at the same time, since, as far as I know, the Activation server is not yet able to distinguish the difference between a virtualized machine and a real one. So it would appear that you would be using the same key on two machines at the same time, which is, of course, a violation of the license agreement.

Donald McDaniel

[orthocross]

Hokey doke. So, just so as I understand; if I install Vista using Boot Camp, activate it, and then try to use the Boot Camp partition with Parallels, Vista will want to be activated a second time.

If I do this with a second serial number, Vista will understand to use the second number whilst in Parallels and the first one in Boot Camp.

Have I got this right? It's not a huge deal for me to get the second Vista license, but I would like to be able to use the Boot Camp partition instead of a disk image when using Vista via Parallels.

As an addendum to my comments, I would DEFINITELY NOT use two instances of the same OS using the Windows Partition (it is NOT a "Boot Camp Partition", it is a "WINDOWS" Partition created by the Boot Camp installer). This is HIGHLY DANGEROUS!!! Two instances of Windows SHOULD be installed on SEPARATE partitions/drives, and NEVER on the same one. (this is Microsoft's advice, and I'm sure they've seen all the ways an installation of Window can be screwed up.) Otherwise, your Programs and other Windows data folders will become confused very quickly (even if you install Vista in two separate folders, since there can be ONLY ONE "Program Files" folder per partition under Windows. While this is technically possible, it takes some heavy-duty knowledge of the Registry. It may even take actual hacking of the OS, which is a violation of the License (no backward-engineering allowed).

Additionally, even though the Parallels instance would use the same partition, both instances of Vista would use a SINGLE Registry, thus confusing the Registry and OS. This would cause nothing but headaches for you (or even a highly-skilled Microsoft engineer), I assure you.

Your best bet? Check with BOTH Microsoft Support AND Microsoft Legal before attempting this.

Donald McDaniel

[orthocross]

This thread is way too long.

I think you guys are missing something. When you call in and re-register, you are using another seat on your license. Microsoft allows you to install your OS twice. When you automatically re-register within a new OS, it connects to MS, sees if you have any other activations, if not activates and you're done.

There is a grace registration for problems. That's when you need to call in. If you meet the criteria, you get another activation code. If you've already installed twice, then no activation key and a new license, read: a new copy of Vista/XP is needed.

That's NOT a free registration you're getting. You're using both of your licenses that you can install on two PC's one one! You should only have to use one if you are in fact installing on the same PC.

Mr. (or Mrs./Mz.) Johnson: ANY license of Windows, EXCEPT so-called "Family Packs", and Volume Licenses (incorrectly called "Corporate" licenses, since anyone may purchase a multiple-user license, not just corporations), includes a SINGLE SEAT. PERIOD.

I understand that it has been a long tradition to think that a license to Windows includes the right to install it on both your Desktop and your Laptop (or two machines), but this has NEVER been a part of ANY single-user EULA. As far as I know, a retail copy of Vista Business is a SINGLE-SEAT license.

Additionally, this tradition began with a misunderstanding of the Microsoft EULA in general. A single-user Microsoft Office license DOES allow the SAME user to install the SAME license on both a single desktop and a single laptop, but both may NOT be running at the same time, and they must both belong to the same person. But this extends ONLY to the License for Office. PERIOD.

Unless, of course it is a volume license (requiring a minimum of 5 seats of either Windows or Office.) Unlearned folks misunderstood this to mean that, "if Office owners have this right, so do Windows Owners." But no such right exists for single-user licenses of Windows.

Don't believe me? Check with Microsoft Legal. They will clear up the confusion for you quickly.

Donald McDaniel

[orthocross]

1) The Window EULA has ALWAYS stated that one MUST purchase TWO licenses to use TWO installations on the same machine.
2) Only Windows licenses previous to Vista may be used with virtualization software.
3) Advising folks to LIE to a Microsoft employee is obviously at least two crimes:
a) It would be seen as practicing Law without a license (if one is not a Lawyer), a crime as far as I know ( I am not a lawyer, so take this with a grain of salt, and consult one, if you want to be sure). This is NOT to be taken as legal advice -- it is only my opinion as a layman).
b) It would be seen as a conspiracy to defraud Microsoft, and they would not take this lightly, and may prosecute to the fullest extent of the law. Such conspiracy, as far as I know, would NOT be a civil infraction, it would more than probably be a felony under both local and Federal law.

I hope this opens a few eyes out there...
Let me correct myself: I wrongly stated that only versions of Windows previous to Vista are licensed to use virtualization technology. I misstated myself. I MEANT to say any versions of Windows EXCEPT XP Home, Vista Home Basic or Vista Home Premium are licensed to use virtualization technology. XP Pro IS licensed for such use, as is Vista Business.

NOTE that the XP Home EULA was written BEFORE modern duall-core processors were on the market, and does not include the clause "licensed for two processors", as XP Pro does, so Home is not necessarily covered by the EULA.

BTW, this clause does NOT refer to two processors on two machines, it means a SINGLE machine with two cores, such as the Intel/AMD processors, which have both a floating-point processor core and an Integer processor core on the same die, or a normal CPU PLUS an FPU on different dies, in the same machine, as was the case until chips incorporating both processors on the same die were developed.

It has NEVER referred "two processors" in TWO or more machines. A SINGLE SITE LICENSES refers to a SINGLE MACHINE, not MULTIPLE MACHINES. Those using virtualization technology on the SAME MACHINE have only a SINGLE SITE license, UNLESS they install TWO single-site licenses.

ONE ("singlular) "SITE-LICENSE" for ONE (again "singular") MACHINE, unless the license is a multiple-site license, such as a Volume License.
That is, ONE "site" = "ONE discrete computer with two or more cores", NOT "multiple discrete computers".

Single-user licenses are licensed for a SINGLE discrete machine, whether it has one or more cores.

[ghporter]

That's a lot of posting for a new user!

Please note that it is and always has been the policy of the MacNN Forums to explicitly disallow any discussion of how to circumvent the requirements of any software and/or OS license agreement. We do not condone lying to Microsoft, nor do we allow discussions of how to "get away" with anything.

Lacking any specific guidance from Microsoft, I do not see a difference between installing Windows XP on an Intel Mac through Boot Camp and then also running it via Parallels. There is NO INSTALLATION involved in Parallels using the XP image on a Windows partition, therefore there is no violation of the EULA.

Note that I said XP. I am well aware that Vista's license has specific requirements about virtualization-and that only the Ultimate version appears to allow virtualization at all (though there is some pretty weird wording in those EULAs).

Further, EVERYONE reading this thread should keep in mind that it was originally about XP, NOT VISTA. Vista is too new and there are too few contributors with actual experience using it on a Mac to allow us to consider much of what is posted here authoritative.

[michaelper22]

Pre-reply disclaimers: I am not a Mac user, nor a Microsoft lawyer. But I found a useful piece of information (from some comment on the Lifehacker.com blog, don't remember which), and I think it would serve the community well.

One of the things that Windows Activation looks at is the MAC address of the computer's ethernet adaptor. By default, the MAC ("Media Access Control", not Macintosh) address of the built-in ethernet card, and the virtual one that Parallels creates are different. However, according to my source, there is some option in Parallels (probably in the VM's settings) that allows you to change that virtual MAC address.

What the source recommended doing was find the MAC address of the Mac's ethernet card, and then copy it into the respective option in Parallels. It seems like a viable solution, and according to him, it worked.

Probable origin of solution: Geek To Live: Virtualize AND dual-boot the same Windows on your Mac - Lifehacker (http://lifehacker.com/software/geek-to-live/virtualize-and-dual+boot-the-same-windows-on-your-mac-267905.php)

[dudeness2]

thank you for explaining the process :)

[ghporter]

For all the gory details on Windows Product Activation in XP, read the Technical Bulletin straight from Microsoft. (http://download.microsoft.com/download/2/1/6/21654b16-6c81-4d96-9390-5203cd43d07d/WindowsProductActivationTechnicalMarketBulletin.do c)

[hart]

Zombie Thread Back from the Dead.

OK, time has passed, maybe there has been further clarification. Anyone have more up-to-date information on this subject? I'm going to pass my iMac running Vista in Fusion on to my son and he'd rather run Windows in BootCamp for games.

I'm also about to install Windows 7 on a new iMac and maybe I can do this the "right" way from the start, whatever the right way is.

So any updates? Two licenses, one license, order of install?

[ghporter]

Win 7 has more stringent activation requirements than XP; if you are running two installations of Win 7, you MUST HAVE two licenses.

[hart]

Any info on Vista? It seems to be touchy about running the game my son plays in simulation (Roblox) but I hate to go through the whole reinstall rigamarole.

[hart]

Edit: according to VMWare's web site you can boot into your bootcamp partition as a virtual machine using Fusion. So, one install, one license. Therefore, if you need to run high-power system-intensive software you can use bootcamp to run Windows or if you just want to doodle around in Windows you can keep it up and running in Fusion.

But no info yet on whether this applies to certain versions of Windows and/or Fusion or if it applies to all.

http://blip.tv/file/2719793

Here is their helpful video on Windows and licenses:

http://blip.tv/file/2719920

[ghporter]

Vista sort of broke the ground for Win7's activation-you still need two licenses for running two different installations.

Both Fusion and Parallels let you run a VM based on a disk image. In that case, you're running ONE installation-with a different startup profile. If you have TWO installations (I said this before) you need two licenses.

[hart]

My question has been do you have to choose between the option of running via bootcamp and running at the same time as your mac OS if you don't want to buy two licenses and the answer is apparently no for Fusion.

It seems that Fusion can run the bootcamp installation as if it was a virtual machine at the same time as your Mac OS but it is, in fact not a virtual machine install. Plus you still maintain the option to run it in bootcamp. So you can have both options with one install and one license as long as you do the bootcamp install first.

Assuming I'm understanding VMware's information this means I (or someone with needs like mine) doesn't have to choose between the two ways of running Windows.

[ghporter]

You are understanding VMWare's information correctly. And as I said, Parallels will do this as well. I had problems with Parallels doing this if I installed the (frequent) MS updates while running it in Parallels, but that was a long time ago.