PDA

View Full Version : Microsoft's Velvet Hammer: Win 7 RC to shut down every two hours


Moof1904
Feb 11, 2010, 11:27 AM
While it's not unreasonable that a free RC will stop working on a given date, it's amazing to me that the software will shut down every TWO HOURS beginning THREE MONTHS before the expiration. As far as I'm concerned, that makes the RC non-functional beginning March 1, not June 1! Talk about a velvet hammer.

From a Microsoft TechNet email:

Windows 7 Release Candidate Expires June 1, 2010 - Shutdowns Begin March 1
If you are still running the Windows 7 Release Candidate (RC), beginning March 1, 2010, your PC will start to shut down every two hours in preparation for Windows 7 RC expiration on June 1, 2010. To avoid interruption, you will need to reinstall an earlier version of Windows, or the final, released-to-manufacturing (RTM) version of Windows 7.

flopticalcube
Feb 11, 2010, 11:28 AM
You get what you paid for. Free OS for nearly a year is a good thing, no?

OllyW
Feb 11, 2010, 11:33 AM
It was made clear these were the conditions when you signed up to preview Windows 7.

What's the problem?

ARF900
Feb 11, 2010, 11:35 AM
Agree, with above. You got a free year of OS, suck it up and pay the money?

niuniu
Feb 11, 2010, 11:36 AM
Mmm I don't think you're going to get anywhere with this argument. It's clear, and not altogether unreasonable. Most companies would have you trial a product, then have you buy it On release. Whereas a lot of guys are still using 7 post-release.

I'm always in for a software freebie, more than I'd let on on these forums :D But you can't complain about situations like yours above!

agbot
Feb 11, 2010, 11:38 AM
These Win7 RC terms were published pretty much from day 1 so I can't say it should be much of a surprise to anyone. For people that didn't bother to read the terms for their free copy of Win7, it'll become quite clear on March 1st. :)

steve2112
Feb 11, 2010, 12:45 PM
Like everybody has said, it was clearly stated this would happen. Had they done something like just cutting it off, they would have caught a lot of flak from that.

Moof1904
Feb 11, 2010, 01:17 PM
I'm not suggesting that it should run forever (read my post) nor am I suggesting that they're doing something other than the fine print says they'll do.

My point is there are a lot less disruptive ways to warn people that the OS will stop working on 6/1. A big obnoxious pop-up would work. So would screen inversion or something else. Shutdowns every two hours for three months seems a less than ideal manner (and duration) to warn people.

MasterDev
Feb 11, 2010, 01:30 PM
I'm not suggesting that it should run forever (read my post) nor am I suggesting that they're doing something other than the fine print says they'll do.

My point is there are a lot less disruptive ways to warn people that the OS will stop working on 6/1. A big obnoxious pop-up would work. So would screen inversion or something else. Shutdowns every two hours for three months seems a less than ideal manner (and duration) to warn people.

1. It DID say all about the shut downs clearly. I thought that it was more clear than the actually main date.

2. If you're a REAL developer, you wouldn't be complaining. This (Windows 7 RC) was meant for developers to get ready for the RTM. So most developers don't even have the RC anymore.

velocityg4
Feb 11, 2010, 02:39 PM
It's annoying for people whom wanted a free ride:p.

I just went ahead and bought Win 7 Professional edition for my desktop. The funny thing is my computer felt faster and more stable running the RC. Too bad I could not just have bought Ultimate stuck in the key and kept running the RC.:rolleyes:

James L
Feb 11, 2010, 06:49 PM
I'm not suggesting that it should run forever (read my post) nor am I suggesting that they're doing something other than the fine print says they'll do.

My point is there are a lot less disruptive ways to warn people that the OS will stop working on 6/1. A big obnoxious pop-up would work. So would screen inversion or something else. Shutdowns every two hours for three months seems a less than ideal manner (and duration) to warn people.

Couldn't you solve this tomorrow by buying a copy?

MacDawg
Feb 11, 2010, 07:52 PM
I'm not suggesting that it should run forever (read my post) nor am I suggesting that they're doing something other than the fine print says they'll do.

My point is there are a lot less disruptive ways to warn people that the OS will stop working on 6/1. A big obnoxious pop-up would work. So would screen inversion or something else. Shutdowns every two hours for three months seems a less than ideal manner (and duration) to warn people.

In order to solve the 3 month / 2 hour shut down people just need to buy the OS
Problem solved

Woof, Woof - Dawg http://homepage.mac.com/k.j.vinson/pawprint.gif

Moof1904
Feb 11, 2010, 09:41 PM
Couldn't you solve this tomorrow by buying a copy?

I have a copy. That's not the point. And yes, they made it clear. That's not the point, either.

I'm just commenting about how disruptive something that's supposed to be a warning is. It seems a rather punitive warning, rather than just a warning that's intended to "help prepare for [the expiration] on 6/1."

That's like saying "you can borrow my car free for nine months but three months before it's due back to me it's going to shut down every two hours, for three whole months, so that you don't forget to buy your own car."

It just seems overkill, that's all.

MacDawg
Feb 11, 2010, 09:50 PM
It would be disruptive if the user had not been warned when the OS was downloaded and installed, but everyone knew it was coming, and that the "every 2 hour shutdown" was coming too. I think anyone who waited this long was seriously on borrowed time with a free OS anyway.

Woof, Woof - Dawg http://homepage.mac.com/k.j.vinson/pawprint.gif