Vista RC1 Product Key - anyone remember?

Discussion in 'Windows 64bit' started by Tony Sperling, Apr 23, 2007.

  1. I had the 64bit installed - it has since been removed, have the key written
    down safely.

    Now I found reason and space to try out the 32bit (different machine) can I
    use the same key now? The machine where the ISO's are stored (and the
    e-mails with the keys) is not currently in use. Moreover, the 32bit may be a
    coaster, may have to try the Beta2, but I only have the one key at hand -
    can it be reused for this purpose?

    I vaguely remember those keys remaining the same through the Beta versions -
    is that correct? As a sidenote, I do have TechNet's Download offers
    available are they still living and functional?

    TIA!


    Tony. . .
     
    Tony Sperling, Apr 23, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Tony Sperling

    John Barnes Guest

    The key was supposed to be able to be used for up to 10 installs, however, I
    was unable to reuse my key even when it was still in RC1. The same key was
    usable for both 32 and 64 bit versions of both beta2 and RC1 at one point.


    "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >I had the 64bit installed - it has since been removed, have the key written
    > down safely.
    >
    > Now I found reason and space to try out the 32bit (different machine) can
    > I
    > use the same key now? The machine where the ISO's are stored (and the
    > e-mails with the keys) is not currently in use. Moreover, the 32bit may be
    > a
    > coaster, may have to try the Beta2, but I only have the one key at hand -
    > can it be reused for this purpose?
    >
    > I vaguely remember those keys remaining the same through the Beta
    > versions -
    > is that correct? As a sidenote, I do have TechNet's Download offers
    > available are they still living and functional?
    >
    > TIA!
    >
    >
    > Tony. . .
    >
    >
     
    John Barnes, Apr 23, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Tony - The same key works for both 64bit and 32bit, but both are no longer
    legal - license to use all beta copies expires with the full availability of
    the released product, if I remember correctly.

    You can, however, use any RTM version to install for 30 days without a key
    at all.

    --
    Charlie.
    http://msmvps.com/xperts64
    http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel


    "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >I had the 64bit installed - it has since been removed, have the key written
    > down safely.
    >
    > Now I found reason and space to try out the 32bit (different machine) can
    > I
    > use the same key now? The machine where the ISO's are stored (and the
    > e-mails with the keys) is not currently in use. Moreover, the 32bit may be
    > a
    > coaster, may have to try the Beta2, but I only have the one key at hand -
    > can it be reused for this purpose?
    >
    > I vaguely remember those keys remaining the same through the Beta
    > versions -
    > is that correct? As a sidenote, I do have TechNet's Download offers
    > available are they still living and functional?
    >
    > TIA!
    >
    >
    > Tony. . .
    >
    >
     
    Charlie Russel - MVP, Apr 23, 2007
    #3
  4. Tony Sperling

    John Barnes Guest

    I checked the information that came in my RC1 box, and I can find no
    restriction except the expiration date of June 01, 2007. Of course there is
    the appropriate use admonition that it is only to be used for testing.

    "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Tony - The same key works for both 64bit and 32bit, but both are no longer
    > legal - license to use all beta copies expires with the full availability
    > of the released product, if I remember correctly.
    >
    > You can, however, use any RTM version to install for 30 days without a key
    > at all.
    >
    > --
    > Charlie.
    > http://msmvps.com/xperts64
    > http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >
    >
    > "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >>I had the 64bit installed - it has since been removed, have the key
    >>written
    >> down safely.
    >>
    >> Now I found reason and space to try out the 32bit (different machine) can
    >> I
    >> use the same key now? The machine where the ISO's are stored (and the
    >> e-mails with the keys) is not currently in use. Moreover, the 32bit may
    >> be a
    >> coaster, may have to try the Beta2, but I only have the one key at hand -
    >> can it be reused for this purpose?
    >>
    >> I vaguely remember those keys remaining the same through the Beta
    >> versions -
    >> is that correct? As a sidenote, I do have TechNet's Download offers
    >> available are they still living and functional?
    >>
    >> TIA!
    >>
    >>
    >> Tony. . .
    >>
    >>

    >
     
    John Barnes, Apr 23, 2007
    #4
  5. I am quite sure that I will take advantage of the chance to legaly upgrade
    my retail Win2K Pro, so I will try it out, all in all I should find a
    suitable target machine within that time-frame, and right or wrong I don't
    expect the Software Asso. . .(who's that on the door, now?)


    Tony. . .

    P.S.

    Thanks John, Charlie.
    -------------------------



    "John Barnes" <> wrote in message
    news:%...
    > I checked the information that came in my RC1 box, and I can find no
    > restriction except the expiration date of June 01, 2007. Of course there

    is
    > the appropriate use admonition that it is only to be used for testing.
    >
    > "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > Tony - The same key works for both 64bit and 32bit, but both are no

    longer
    > > legal - license to use all beta copies expires with the full

    availability
    > > of the released product, if I remember correctly.
    > >
    > > You can, however, use any RTM version to install for 30 days without a

    key
    > > at all.
    > >
    > > --
    > > Charlie.
    > > http://msmvps.com/xperts64
    > > http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    > >
    > >
    > > "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    > > news:...
    > >>I had the 64bit installed - it has since been removed, have the key
    > >>written
    > >> down safely.
    > >>
    > >> Now I found reason and space to try out the 32bit (different machine)

    can
    > >> I
    > >> use the same key now? The machine where the ISO's are stored (and the
    > >> e-mails with the keys) is not currently in use. Moreover, the 32bit may
    > >> be a
    > >> coaster, may have to try the Beta2, but I only have the one key at

    hand -
    > >> can it be reused for this purpose?
    > >>
    > >> I vaguely remember those keys remaining the same through the Beta
    > >> versions -
    > >> is that correct? As a sidenote, I do have TechNet's Download offers
    > >> available are they still living and functional?
    > >>
    > >> TIA!
    > >>
    > >>
    > >> Tony. . .
    > >>
    > >>

    > >

    >
     
    Tony Sperling, Apr 23, 2007
    #5
  6. In any case - whatever it is that has expired or not, the key is not
    accepted for any of the versions any longer.


    Tony. . .


    "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I am quite sure that I will take advantage of the chance to legaly upgrade
    > my retail Win2K Pro, so I will try it out, all in all I should find a
    > suitable target machine within that time-frame, and right or wrong I don't
    > expect the Software Asso. . .(who's that on the door, now?)
    >
    >
    > Tony. . .
    >
    > P.S.
    >
    > Thanks John, Charlie.
    > -------------------------
    >
    >
    >
    > "John Barnes" <> wrote in message
    > news:%...
    > > I checked the information that came in my RC1 box, and I can find no
    > > restriction except the expiration date of June 01, 2007. Of course

    there
    > is
    > > the appropriate use admonition that it is only to be used for testing.
    > >
    > > "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in

    message
    > > news:...
    > > > Tony - The same key works for both 64bit and 32bit, but both are no

    > longer
    > > > legal - license to use all beta copies expires with the full

    > availability
    > > > of the released product, if I remember correctly.
    > > >
    > > > You can, however, use any RTM version to install for 30 days without a

    > key
    > > > at all.
    > > >
    > > > --
    > > > Charlie.
    > > > http://msmvps.com/xperts64
    > > > http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    > > > news:...
    > > >>I had the 64bit installed - it has since been removed, have the key
    > > >>written
    > > >> down safely.
    > > >>
    > > >> Now I found reason and space to try out the 32bit (different machine)

    > can
    > > >> I
    > > >> use the same key now? The machine where the ISO's are stored (and the
    > > >> e-mails with the keys) is not currently in use. Moreover, the 32bit

    may
    > > >> be a
    > > >> coaster, may have to try the Beta2, but I only have the one key at

    > hand -
    > > >> can it be reused for this purpose?
    > > >>
    > > >> I vaguely remember those keys remaining the same through the Beta
    > > >> versions -
    > > >> is that correct? As a sidenote, I do have TechNet's Download offers
    > > >> available are they still living and functional?
    > > >>
    > > >> TIA!
    > > >>
    > > >>
    > > >> Tony. . .
    > > >>
    > > >>
    > > >

    > >

    >
    >
     
    Tony Sperling, Apr 24, 2007
    #6
  7. Tony Sperling

    John Barnes Guest

    It would appear they are restricting new and re-installations, but seem fine
    with continued use of the previous installs. If they wanted to, with the
    constant 'phone home' calls that Vista makes, they could disable them
    quickly if they wanted to.

    "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    news:%...
    > In any case - whatever it is that has expired or not, the key is not
    > accepted for any of the versions any longer.
    >
    >
    > Tony. . .
    >
    >
    > "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> I am quite sure that I will take advantage of the chance to legaly
    >> upgrade
    >> my retail Win2K Pro, so I will try it out, all in all I should find a
    >> suitable target machine within that time-frame, and right or wrong I
    >> don't
    >> expect the Software Asso. . .(who's that on the door, now?)
    >>
    >>
    >> Tony. . .
    >>
    >> P.S.
    >>
    >> Thanks John, Charlie.
    >> -------------------------
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> "John Barnes" <> wrote in message
    >> news:%...
    >> > I checked the information that came in my RC1 box, and I can find no
    >> > restriction except the expiration date of June 01, 2007. Of course

    > there
    >> is
    >> > the appropriate use admonition that it is only to be used for testing.
    >> >
    >> > "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in

    > message
    >> > news:...
    >> > > Tony - The same key works for both 64bit and 32bit, but both are no

    >> longer
    >> > > legal - license to use all beta copies expires with the full

    >> availability
    >> > > of the released product, if I remember correctly.
    >> > >
    >> > > You can, however, use any RTM version to install for 30 days without
    >> > > a

    >> key
    >> > > at all.
    >> > >
    >> > > --
    >> > > Charlie.
    >> > > http://msmvps.com/xperts64
    >> > > http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >> > >
    >> > >
    >> > > "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    >> > > news:...
    >> > >>I had the 64bit installed - it has since been removed, have the key
    >> > >>written
    >> > >> down safely.
    >> > >>
    >> > >> Now I found reason and space to try out the 32bit (different
    >> > >> machine)

    >> can
    >> > >> I
    >> > >> use the same key now? The machine where the ISO's are stored (and
    >> > >> the
    >> > >> e-mails with the keys) is not currently in use. Moreover, the 32bit

    > may
    >> > >> be a
    >> > >> coaster, may have to try the Beta2, but I only have the one key at

    >> hand -
    >> > >> can it be reused for this purpose?
    >> > >>
    >> > >> I vaguely remember those keys remaining the same through the Beta
    >> > >> versions -
    >> > >> is that correct? As a sidenote, I do have TechNet's Download offers
    >> > >> available are they still living and functional?
    >> > >>
    >> > >> TIA!
    >> > >>
    >> > >>
    >> > >> Tony. . .
    >> > >>
    >> > >>
    >> > >
    >> >

    >>
    >>

    >
    >
     
    John Barnes, Apr 24, 2007
    #7
  8. Yes, it would seem so. But I'm not complaining - I wasn't ready for Vista,
    it was too big a change in the midst of everything else that was going
    around here. After the relative painless and extremely agreeable contact
    with XP x64, I thought it would be a walk in the park. Now, I must make a
    decision without the chance to snoop on it.

    Right now, it feels like I'll be scraping the bare necessities off my fine
    old Win2K (Athlon XP 2400+) and relegate it to a pure Linux job, then have
    32bit Vista upgrade Win2K on the AMD FX-62 machine - keep XP x64 (naturally)
    and stop all testing there, have it do some real work!

    Then, perhaps I can revive the old Athlon 64 3000+ and have that one as a
    test bed, it has just been sitting there for the last six months and I just
    found out it has developed some really strange behavior. I think I will look
    for a 939 MB and rebuild it from scratch - it was a good machine and I think
    it deserves it.

    ("the plans of mice and men. . .") But thanks, anyhow!


    Tony. . .


    "John Barnes" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > It would appear they are restricting new and re-installations, but seem

    fine
    > with continued use of the previous installs. If they wanted to, with the
    > constant 'phone home' calls that Vista makes, they could disable them
    > quickly if they wanted to.
    >
    > "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    > news:%...
    > > In any case - whatever it is that has expired or not, the key is not
    > > accepted for any of the versions any longer.
    > >
    > >
    > > Tony. . .
    > >
    > >
    > > "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    > > news:...
    > >> I am quite sure that I will take advantage of the chance to legaly
    > >> upgrade
    > >> my retail Win2K Pro, so I will try it out, all in all I should find a
    > >> suitable target machine within that time-frame, and right or wrong I
    > >> don't
    > >> expect the Software Asso. . .(who's that on the door, now?)
    > >>
    > >>
    > >> Tony. . .
    > >>
    > >> P.S.
    > >>
    > >> Thanks John, Charlie.
    > >> -------------------------
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>
    > >> "John Barnes" <> wrote in message
    > >> news:%...
    > >> > I checked the information that came in my RC1 box, and I can find no
    > >> > restriction except the expiration date of June 01, 2007. Of course

    > > there
    > >> is
    > >> > the appropriate use admonition that it is only to be used for

    testing.
    > >> >
    > >> > "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in

    > > message
    > >> > news:...
    > >> > > Tony - The same key works for both 64bit and 32bit, but both are no
    > >> longer
    > >> > > legal - license to use all beta copies expires with the full
    > >> availability
    > >> > > of the released product, if I remember correctly.
    > >> > >
    > >> > > You can, however, use any RTM version to install for 30 days

    without
    > >> > > a
    > >> key
    > >> > > at all.
    > >> > >
    > >> > > --
    > >> > > Charlie.
    > >> > > http://msmvps.com/xperts64
    > >> > > http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    > >> > >
    > >> > >
    > >> > > "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    > >> > > news:...
    > >> > >>I had the 64bit installed - it has since been removed, have the key
    > >> > >>written
    > >> > >> down safely.
    > >> > >>
    > >> > >> Now I found reason and space to try out the 32bit (different
    > >> > >> machine)
    > >> can
    > >> > >> I
    > >> > >> use the same key now? The machine where the ISO's are stored (and
    > >> > >> the
    > >> > >> e-mails with the keys) is not currently in use. Moreover, the

    32bit
    > > may
    > >> > >> be a
    > >> > >> coaster, may have to try the Beta2, but I only have the one key at
    > >> hand -
    > >> > >> can it be reused for this purpose?
    > >> > >>
    > >> > >> I vaguely remember those keys remaining the same through the Beta
    > >> > >> versions -
    > >> > >> is that correct? As a sidenote, I do have TechNet's Download

    offers
    > >> > >> available are they still living and functional?
    > >> > >>
    > >> > >> TIA!
    > >> > >>
    > >> > >>
    > >> > >> Tony. . .
    > >> > >>
    > >> > >>
    > >> > >
    > >> >
    > >>
    > >>

    > >
    > >

    >
     
    Tony Sperling, Apr 24, 2007
    #8
  9. The problem with 939 mobos at this point is that it's getting hard to find
    CPUs for them that aren't way overpriced. And RAM is already in short supply
    as well - everyone is now moving to DDR2. I've got some existing 939 boxes,
    but won't be building any new ones. I just bought a small footprint 939 mobo
    to take the last of the food chain components to build a Windows Home Server
    test box. But so far, no joy on being able to run what I need there, so it
    may get pure XP x64 or Vista x64 and TiVo Desktop on it. Be the media server
    for home, with several older 100-300 GB drives in it.

    --
    Charlie.
    http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64

    "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Yes, it would seem so. But I'm not complaining - I wasn't ready for Vista,
    > it was too big a change in the midst of everything else that was going
    > around here. After the relative painless and extremely agreeable contact
    > with XP x64, I thought it would be a walk in the park. Now, I must make a
    > decision without the chance to snoop on it.
    >
    > Right now, it feels like I'll be scraping the bare necessities off my fine
    > old Win2K (Athlon XP 2400+) and relegate it to a pure Linux job, then have
    > 32bit Vista upgrade Win2K on the AMD FX-62 machine - keep XP x64
    > (naturally)
    > and stop all testing there, have it do some real work!
    >
    > Then, perhaps I can revive the old Athlon 64 3000+ and have that one as a
    > test bed, it has just been sitting there for the last six months and I
    > just
    > found out it has developed some really strange behavior. I think I will
    > look
    > for a 939 MB and rebuild it from scratch - it was a good machine and I
    > think
    > it deserves it.
    >
    > ("the plans of mice and men. . .") But thanks, anyhow!
    >
    >
    > Tony. . .
    >
    >
    > "John Barnes" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> It would appear they are restricting new and re-installations, but seem

    > fine
    >> with continued use of the previous installs. If they wanted to, with the
    >> constant 'phone home' calls that Vista makes, they could disable them
    >> quickly if they wanted to.
    >>
    >> "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    >> news:%...
    >> > In any case - whatever it is that has expired or not, the key is not
    >> > accepted for any of the versions any longer.
    >> >
    >> >
    >> > Tony. . .
    >> >
    >> >
    >> > "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    >> > news:...
    >> >> I am quite sure that I will take advantage of the chance to legaly
    >> >> upgrade
    >> >> my retail Win2K Pro, so I will try it out, all in all I should find a
    >> >> suitable target machine within that time-frame, and right or wrong I
    >> >> don't
    >> >> expect the Software Asso. . .(who's that on the door, now?)
    >> >>
    >> >>
    >> >> Tony. . .
    >> >>
    >> >> P.S.
    >> >>
    >> >> Thanks John, Charlie.
    >> >> -------------------------
    >> >>
    >> >>
    >> >>
    >> >> "John Barnes" <> wrote in message
    >> >> news:%...
    >> >> > I checked the information that came in my RC1 box, and I can find no
    >> >> > restriction except the expiration date of June 01, 2007. Of course
    >> > there
    >> >> is
    >> >> > the appropriate use admonition that it is only to be used for

    > testing.
    >> >> >
    >> >> > "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in
    >> > message
    >> >> > news:...
    >> >> > > Tony - The same key works for both 64bit and 32bit, but both are
    >> >> > > no
    >> >> longer
    >> >> > > legal - license to use all beta copies expires with the full
    >> >> availability
    >> >> > > of the released product, if I remember correctly.
    >> >> > >
    >> >> > > You can, however, use any RTM version to install for 30 days

    > without
    >> >> > > a
    >> >> key
    >> >> > > at all.
    >> >> > >
    >> >> > > --
    >> >> > > Charlie.
    >> >> > > http://msmvps.com/xperts64
    >> >> > > http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >> >> > >
    >> >> > >
    >> >> > > "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    >> >> > > news:...
    >> >> > >>I had the 64bit installed - it has since been removed, have the
    >> >> > >>key
    >> >> > >>written
    >> >> > >> down safely.
    >> >> > >>
    >> >> > >> Now I found reason and space to try out the 32bit (different
    >> >> > >> machine)
    >> >> can
    >> >> > >> I
    >> >> > >> use the same key now? The machine where the ISO's are stored (and
    >> >> > >> the
    >> >> > >> e-mails with the keys) is not currently in use. Moreover, the

    > 32bit
    >> > may
    >> >> > >> be a
    >> >> > >> coaster, may have to try the Beta2, but I only have the one key
    >> >> > >> at
    >> >> hand -
    >> >> > >> can it be reused for this purpose?
    >> >> > >>
    >> >> > >> I vaguely remember those keys remaining the same through the Beta
    >> >> > >> versions -
    >> >> > >> is that correct? As a sidenote, I do have TechNet's Download

    > offers
    >> >> > >> available are they still living and functional?
    >> >> > >>
    >> >> > >> TIA!
    >> >> > >>
    >> >> > >>
    >> >> > >> Tony. . .
    >> >> > >>
    >> >> > >>
    >> >> > >
    >> >> >
    >> >>
    >> >>
    >> >
    >> >

    >>

    >
    >
     
    Charlie Russel - MVP, Apr 24, 2007
    #9
  10. Tony Sperling

    John Barnes Guest

    With the 3500+ that I had, Vista was always having tasks hanging when I
    needed it for work (XP64 ran great). I moved to a 5200+ and works great
    now. I also did what Charlie is mentioning, I changed to an AM2 board and
    DDR2 memory. I had already made the move to all SATA and PCIe video cards
    last time. Many newer boards only have one dual channel IDE connection but
    support 6-10 SATA connections to handle the SATA CD/DVD hardware and HDs.


    "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Yes, it would seem so. But I'm not complaining - I wasn't ready for Vista,
    > it was too big a change in the midst of everything else that was going
    > around here. After the relative painless and extremely agreeable contact
    > with XP x64, I thought it would be a walk in the park. Now, I must make a
    > decision without the chance to snoop on it.
    >
    > Right now, it feels like I'll be scraping the bare necessities off my fine
    > old Win2K (Athlon XP 2400+) and relegate it to a pure Linux job, then have
    > 32bit Vista upgrade Win2K on the AMD FX-62 machine - keep XP x64
    > (naturally)
    > and stop all testing there, have it do some real work!
    >
    > Then, perhaps I can revive the old Athlon 64 3000+ and have that one as a
    > test bed, it has just been sitting there for the last six months and I
    > just
    > found out it has developed some really strange behavior. I think I will
    > look
    > for a 939 MB and rebuild it from scratch - it was a good machine and I
    > think
    > it deserves it.
    >
    > ("the plans of mice and men. . .") But thanks, anyhow!
    >
    >
    > Tony. . .
    >
    >
    > "John Barnes" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> It would appear they are restricting new and re-installations, but seem

    > fine
    >> with continued use of the previous installs. If they wanted to, with the
    >> constant 'phone home' calls that Vista makes, they could disable them
    >> quickly if they wanted to.
    >>
    >> "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    >> news:%...
    >> > In any case - whatever it is that has expired or not, the key is not
    >> > accepted for any of the versions any longer.
    >> >
    >> >
    >> > Tony. . .
    >> >
    >> >
    >> > "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    >> > news:...
    >> >> I am quite sure that I will take advantage of the chance to legaly
    >> >> upgrade
    >> >> my retail Win2K Pro, so I will try it out, all in all I should find a
    >> >> suitable target machine within that time-frame, and right or wrong I
    >> >> don't
    >> >> expect the Software Asso. . .(who's that on the door, now?)
    >> >>
    >> >>
    >> >> Tony. . .
    >> >>
    >> >> P.S.
    >> >>
    >> >> Thanks John, Charlie.
    >> >> -------------------------
    >> >>
    >> >>
    >> >>
    >> >> "John Barnes" <> wrote in message
    >> >> news:%...
    >> >> > I checked the information that came in my RC1 box, and I can find no
    >> >> > restriction except the expiration date of June 01, 2007. Of course
    >> > there
    >> >> is
    >> >> > the appropriate use admonition that it is only to be used for

    > testing.
    >> >> >
    >> >> > "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in
    >> > message
    >> >> > news:...
    >> >> > > Tony - The same key works for both 64bit and 32bit, but both are
    >> >> > > no
    >> >> longer
    >> >> > > legal - license to use all beta copies expires with the full
    >> >> availability
    >> >> > > of the released product, if I remember correctly.
    >> >> > >
    >> >> > > You can, however, use any RTM version to install for 30 days

    > without
    >> >> > > a
    >> >> key
    >> >> > > at all.
    >> >> > >
    >> >> > > --
    >> >> > > Charlie.
    >> >> > > http://msmvps.com/xperts64
    >> >> > > http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >> >> > >
    >> >> > >
    >> >> > > "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    >> >> > > news:...
    >> >> > >>I had the 64bit installed - it has since been removed, have the
    >> >> > >>key
    >> >> > >>written
    >> >> > >> down safely.
    >> >> > >>
    >> >> > >> Now I found reason and space to try out the 32bit (different
    >> >> > >> machine)
    >> >> can
    >> >> > >> I
    >> >> > >> use the same key now? The machine where the ISO's are stored (and
    >> >> > >> the
    >> >> > >> e-mails with the keys) is not currently in use. Moreover, the

    > 32bit
    >> > may
    >> >> > >> be a
    >> >> > >> coaster, may have to try the Beta2, but I only have the one key
    >> >> > >> at
    >> >> hand -
    >> >> > >> can it be reused for this purpose?
    >> >> > >>
    >> >> > >> I vaguely remember those keys remaining the same through the Beta
    >> >> > >> versions -
    >> >> > >> is that correct? As a sidenote, I do have TechNet's Download

    > offers
    >> >> > >> available are they still living and functional?
    >> >> > >>
    >> >> > >> TIA!
    >> >> > >>
    >> >> > >>
    >> >> > >> Tony. . .
    >> >> > >>
    >> >> > >>
    >> >> > >
    >> >> >
    >> >>
    >> >>
    >> >
    >> >

    >>

    >
    >
     
    John Barnes, Apr 24, 2007
    #10
  11. Luckily, though, the Athlon XP 64 3000+ that is currently in a 754 socket,
    should fit well in a 939 - I have had numerous indications at least, that it
    will. I understand that the entire family of sockets from around that time
    are all 940 pins that are wired differently, and only the AM2 is a 940 pin
    with a different pinout. Had I been better informed at the time, I would
    have bought a 939 from the start, I don't think I am going to have any
    trouble from keeping the board I have, but it does look like a fairly cheap
    way to extend it's life and extract a bit of extra performance. All the rest
    of the 'good' stuff I have in the AM2 FX-62 at the moment, but I want to
    stop using all my dual and tripple booting machines as test-beds on
    rotation, have one full time work-horse and a couple of funnies.


    Tony. . .


    "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > The problem with 939 mobos at this point is that it's getting hard to find
    > CPUs for them that aren't way overpriced. And RAM is already in short

    supply
    > as well - everyone is now moving to DDR2. I've got some existing 939

    boxes,
    > but won't be building any new ones. I just bought a small footprint 939

    mobo
    > to take the last of the food chain components to build a Windows Home

    Server
    > test box. But so far, no joy on being able to run what I need there, so it
    > may get pure XP x64 or Vista x64 and TiVo Desktop on it. Be the media

    server
    > for home, with several older 100-300 GB drives in it.
    >
    > --
     
    Tony Sperling, Apr 24, 2007
    #11
  12. I agree, the AM2 is really great. It's like somebody just found the
    light-switch. That is the reason why a perfectly functioning machine saw
    early retirement. And the reason why I want to revive it with the smallest
    amount of cost and effort - I would never go ahead and build such a thing
    from scratch today. I must have expressed myself vaguely there, I simply
    ment that moving everything else over onto a new board is the same work
    process as when building from scratch.


    Tony. . .


    "John Barnes" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > With the 3500+ that I had, Vista was always having tasks hanging when I
    > needed it for work (XP64 ran great). I moved to a 5200+ and works great
    > now. I also did what Charlie is mentioning, I changed to an AM2 board and
    > DDR2 memory. I had already made the move to all SATA and PCIe video cards
    > last time. Many newer boards only have one dual channel IDE connection

    but
    > support 6-10 SATA connections to handle the SATA CD/DVD hardware and HDs.
    >
     
    Tony Sperling, Apr 24, 2007
    #12
  13. Tony Sperling

    Ensor Guest

    Hi,

    > Luckily, though, the Athlon XP 64 3000+ that is currently in a 754
    >socket, should fit well in a 939 - I have had numerous indications
    >at least, that it will....


    Sorry, but this is *NOT* the case.... :-(

    I read your comment with a great deal of interest as I have a socket 939
    motherboard lying around waiting for a processor, and a spare socket 754
    processor. :) I just gave it a go, but the processor simply won't fit; I
    wasn't too surprised as my information was that it was a no-go anyway.

    >....I understand that the entire family of sockets from around that time
    >are all 940 pins that are wired differently, and only the AM2 is a 940
    >pin with a different pinout....


    Originally, socket 940 was used only by the Opteron processors, though I
    *think* the early Athlon FXs might have used it too?

    AMD changed from socket 754 to socket 939 mainly because s754 doesn't
    support dual channel memory. I don't know if there're any other differences
    between them?

    Socket AM2 is a slight variation on socket 939. The reason for this is that
    sAM2 processors use DDR2 memory, whereas s939 processors use DDR(1). Again,
    I'm not aware of any other differences between them.


    > Had I been better informed at the time, I would
    >have bought a 939 from the start....


    You and me both, I'm waiting for the dual core s939 processors to drop in
    price a little bit more before I get one.


    TTFN - Pete.
     
    Ensor, Apr 25, 2007
    #13
  14. Don't hold your breath. They will likely go up in price, not down. :(

    --
    Charlie.
    http://msmvps.com/xperts64
    http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel


    "Ensor" <none@localhost> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Hi,
    >
    > > Luckily, though, the Athlon XP 64 3000+ that is currently in a 754
    > >socket, should fit well in a 939 - I have had numerous indications
    > >at least, that it will....

    >
    > Sorry, but this is *NOT* the case.... :-(
    >
    > I read your comment with a great deal of interest as I have a socket 939
    > motherboard lying around waiting for a processor, and a spare socket 754
    > processor. :) I just gave it a go, but the processor simply won't fit; I
    > wasn't too surprised as my information was that it was a no-go anyway.
    >
    > >....I understand that the entire family of sockets from around that time
    > >are all 940 pins that are wired differently, and only the AM2 is a 940
    > >pin with a different pinout....

    >
    > Originally, socket 940 was used only by the Opteron processors, though I
    > *think* the early Athlon FXs might have used it too?
    >
    > AMD changed from socket 754 to socket 939 mainly because s754 doesn't
    > support dual channel memory. I don't know if there're any other
    > differences between them?
    >
    > Socket AM2 is a slight variation on socket 939. The reason for this is
    > that sAM2 processors use DDR2 memory, whereas s939 processors use DDR(1).
    > Again, I'm not aware of any other differences between them.
    >
    >
    > > Had I been better informed at the time, I would
    > >have bought a 939 from the start....

    >
    > You and me both, I'm waiting for the dual core s939 processors to drop in
    > price a little bit more before I get one.
    >
    >
    > TTFN - Pete.
    >
    >
     
    Charlie Russel - MVP, Apr 25, 2007
    #14
  15. Sorry to disappoint you, tony, but it won't work. Even if it would fit,
    which it won't, it wouldn't work. They are different electrically.

    --
    Charlie.
    http://msmvps.com/xperts64
    http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel


    "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    news:%...
    > Luckily, though, the Athlon XP 64 3000+ that is currently in a 754 socket,
    > should fit well in a 939 - I have had numerous indications at least, that
    > it
    > will. I understand that the entire family of sockets from around that time
    > are all 940 pins that are wired differently, and only the AM2 is a 940 pin
    > with a different pinout. Had I been better informed at the time, I would
    > have bought a 939 from the start, I don't think I am going to have any
    > trouble from keeping the board I have, but it does look like a fairly
    > cheap
    > way to extend it's life and extract a bit of extra performance. All the
    > rest
    > of the 'good' stuff I have in the AM2 FX-62 at the moment, but I want to
    > stop using all my dual and tripple booting machines as test-beds on
    > rotation, have one full time work-horse and a couple of funnies.
    >
    >
    > Tony. . .
    >
    >
    > "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> The problem with 939 mobos at this point is that it's getting hard to
    >> find
    >> CPUs for them that aren't way overpriced. And RAM is already in short

    > supply
    >> as well - everyone is now moving to DDR2. I've got some existing 939

    > boxes,
    >> but won't be building any new ones. I just bought a small footprint 939

    > mobo
    >> to take the last of the food chain components to build a Windows Home

    > Server
    >> test box. But so far, no joy on being able to run what I need there, so
    >> it
    >> may get pure XP x64 or Vista x64 and TiVo Desktop on it. Be the media

    > server
    >> for home, with several older 100-300 GB drives in it.
    >>
    >> --

    >
    >
     
    Charlie Russel - MVP, Apr 25, 2007
    #15
  16. Oh well - far better to be wrong AND disappointed, than having made a bad
    investment. So I'm stuck with the Asrock - which has been amazingly good
    anyway really, and I'll be benefiting from the continued use of a rather
    good AGP card to boot.

    Wrong, is alright too! But anybody know where the misinformation comes from?
    When I bought it it was widely described as being upgradeable, and Sandra
    sticks a note to it being upgradeable to 939. Is there a Generation
    difference specifically with the XP 64 3000+?


    Tony. . .


    "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Sorry to disappoint you, tony, but it won't work. Even if it would fit,
    > which it won't, it wouldn't work. They are different electrically.
    >
    > --
    > Charlie.
    > http://msmvps.com/xperts64
    > http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >
    >
    > "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    > news:%...
    > > Luckily, though, the Athlon XP 64 3000+ that is currently in a 754

    socket,
    > > should fit well in a 939 - I have had numerous indications at least,

    that
    > > it
    > > will. I understand that the entire family of sockets from around that

    time
    > > are all 940 pins that are wired differently, and only the AM2 is a 940

    pin
    > > with a different pinout. Had I been better informed at the time, I would
    > > have bought a 939 from the start, I don't think I am going to have any
    > > trouble from keeping the board I have, but it does look like a fairly
    > > cheap
    > > way to extend it's life and extract a bit of extra performance. All the
    > > rest
    > > of the 'good' stuff I have in the AM2 FX-62 at the moment, but I want to
    > > stop using all my dual and tripple booting machines as test-beds on
    > > rotation, have one full time work-horse and a couple of funnies.
    > >
    > >
    > > Tony. . .
    > >
    > >
    > > "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in

    message
    > > news:...
    > >> The problem with 939 mobos at this point is that it's getting hard to
    > >> find
    > >> CPUs for them that aren't way overpriced. And RAM is already in short

    > > supply
    > >> as well - everyone is now moving to DDR2. I've got some existing 939

    > > boxes,
    > >> but won't be building any new ones. I just bought a small footprint 939

    > > mobo
    > >> to take the last of the food chain components to build a Windows Home

    > > Server
    > >> test box. But so far, no joy on being able to run what I need there, so
    > >> it
    > >> may get pure XP x64 or Vista x64 and TiVo Desktop on it. Be the media

    > > server
    > >> for home, with several older 100-300 GB drives in it.
    > >>
    > >> --

    > >
    > >

    >
     
    Tony Sperling, Apr 25, 2007
    #16
  17. Which Asrock board do you have? Some Asrock boards can be upgraded to later
    processors with an add-on board in a special slot. See
    http://www.asrock.com/mb/index.asp?s=n for product details.



    "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Oh well - far better to be wrong AND disappointed, than having made a bad
    > investment. So I'm stuck with the Asrock - which has been amazingly good
    > anyway really, and I'll be benefiting from the continued use of a rather
    > good AGP card to boot.
    >
    > Wrong, is alright too! But anybody know where the misinformation comes
    > from?
    > When I bought it it was widely described as being upgradeable, and Sandra
    > sticks a note to it being upgradeable to 939. Is there a Generation
    > difference specifically with the XP 64 3000+?
    >
    >
    > Tony. . .
    >
    >
    > "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> Sorry to disappoint you, tony, but it won't work. Even if it would fit,
    >> which it won't, it wouldn't work. They are different electrically.
    >>
    >> --
    >> Charlie.
    >> http://msmvps.com/xperts64
    >> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >>
    >>
    >> "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    >> news:%...
    >> > Luckily, though, the Athlon XP 64 3000+ that is currently in a 754

    > socket,
    >> > should fit well in a 939 - I have had numerous indications at least,

    > that
    >> > it
    >> > will. I understand that the entire family of sockets from around that

    > time
    >> > are all 940 pins that are wired differently, and only the AM2 is a 940

    > pin
    >> > with a different pinout. Had I been better informed at the time, I
    >> > would
    >> > have bought a 939 from the start, I don't think I am going to have any
    >> > trouble from keeping the board I have, but it does look like a fairly
    >> > cheap
    >> > way to extend it's life and extract a bit of extra performance. All the
    >> > rest
    >> > of the 'good' stuff I have in the AM2 FX-62 at the moment, but I want
    >> > to
    >> > stop using all my dual and tripple booting machines as test-beds on
    >> > rotation, have one full time work-horse and a couple of funnies.
    >> >
    >> >
    >> > Tony. . .
    >> >
    >> >
    >> > "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in

    > message
    >> > news:...
    >> >> The problem with 939 mobos at this point is that it's getting hard to
    >> >> find
    >> >> CPUs for them that aren't way overpriced. And RAM is already in short
    >> > supply
    >> >> as well - everyone is now moving to DDR2. I've got some existing 939
    >> > boxes,
    >> >> but won't be building any new ones. I just bought a small footprint
    >> >> 939
    >> > mobo
    >> >> to take the last of the food chain components to build a Windows Home
    >> > Server
    >> >> test box. But so far, no joy on being able to run what I need there,
    >> >> so
    >> >> it
    >> >> may get pure XP x64 or Vista x64 and TiVo Desktop on it. Be the media
    >> > server
    >> >> for home, with several older 100-300 GB drives in it.
    >> >>
    >> >> --
    >> >
    >> >

    >>

    >
    >
     
    Dominic Payer, Apr 25, 2007
    #17
  18. As Dennis says - if it's asrock, they have some upgradeable boards - but you
    need a special add-on board/card to do it. I'm not sure the result would
    make sense financially, frankly, but it is possible.

    --
    Charlie.
    http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64

    "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Oh well - far better to be wrong AND disappointed, than having made a bad
    > investment. So I'm stuck with the Asrock - which has been amazingly good
    > anyway really, and I'll be benefiting from the continued use of a rather
    > good AGP card to boot.
    >
    > Wrong, is alright too! But anybody know where the misinformation comes
    > from?
    > When I bought it it was widely described as being upgradeable, and Sandra
    > sticks a note to it being upgradeable to 939. Is there a Generation
    > difference specifically with the XP 64 3000+?
    >
    >
    > Tony. . .
    >
    >
    > "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> Sorry to disappoint you, tony, but it won't work. Even if it would fit,
    >> which it won't, it wouldn't work. They are different electrically.
    >>
    >> --
    >> Charlie.
    >> http://msmvps.com/xperts64
    >> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >>
    >>
    >> "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    >> news:%...
    >> > Luckily, though, the Athlon XP 64 3000+ that is currently in a 754

    > socket,
    >> > should fit well in a 939 - I have had numerous indications at least,

    > that
    >> > it
    >> > will. I understand that the entire family of sockets from around that

    > time
    >> > are all 940 pins that are wired differently, and only the AM2 is a 940

    > pin
    >> > with a different pinout. Had I been better informed at the time, I
    >> > would
    >> > have bought a 939 from the start, I don't think I am going to have any
    >> > trouble from keeping the board I have, but it does look like a fairly
    >> > cheap
    >> > way to extend it's life and extract a bit of extra performance. All the
    >> > rest
    >> > of the 'good' stuff I have in the AM2 FX-62 at the moment, but I want
    >> > to
    >> > stop using all my dual and tripple booting machines as test-beds on
    >> > rotation, have one full time work-horse and a couple of funnies.
    >> >
    >> >
    >> > Tony. . .
    >> >
    >> >
    >> > "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in

    > message
    >> > news:...
    >> >> The problem with 939 mobos at this point is that it's getting hard to
    >> >> find
    >> >> CPUs for them that aren't way overpriced. And RAM is already in short
    >> > supply
    >> >> as well - everyone is now moving to DDR2. I've got some existing 939
    >> > boxes,
    >> >> but won't be building any new ones. I just bought a small footprint
    >> >> 939
    >> > mobo
    >> >> to take the last of the food chain components to build a Windows Home
    >> > Server
    >> >> test box. But so far, no joy on being able to run what I need there,
    >> >> so
    >> >> it
    >> >> may get pure XP x64 or Vista x64 and TiVo Desktop on it. Be the media
    >> > server
    >> >> for home, with several older 100-300 GB drives in it.
    >> >>
    >> >> --
    >> >
    >> >

    >>

    >
    >
     
    Charlie Russel - MVP, Apr 25, 2007
    #18
  19. Ah, yes - that's right, but it's not one of those I'm affraid (K8SA
    something, I believe?) no, Sandra was listing the CPU as fitting a 939
    socket, which is a bit puzzling. . .

    Tony. . .


    "Dominic Payer" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Which Asrock board do you have? Some Asrock boards can be upgraded to

    later
    > processors with an add-on board in a special slot. See
    > http://www.asrock.com/mb/index.asp?s=n for product details.
    >
    >
    >
    > "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > Oh well - far better to be wrong AND disappointed, than having made a

    bad
    > > investment. So I'm stuck with the Asrock - which has been amazingly good
    > > anyway really, and I'll be benefiting from the continued use of a rather
    > > good AGP card to boot.
    > >
    > > Wrong, is alright too! But anybody know where the misinformation comes
    > > from?
    > > When I bought it it was widely described as being upgradeable, and

    Sandra
    > > sticks a note to it being upgradeable to 939. Is there a Generation
    > > difference specifically with the XP 64 3000+?
    > >
    > >
    > > Tony. . .
    > >
    > >
    > > "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in

    message
    > > news:...
    > >> Sorry to disappoint you, tony, but it won't work. Even if it would fit,
    > >> which it won't, it wouldn't work. They are different electrically.
    > >>
    > >> --
    > >> Charlie.
    > >> http://msmvps.com/xperts64
    > >> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    > >>
    > >>
    > >> "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    > >> news:%...
    > >> > Luckily, though, the Athlon XP 64 3000+ that is currently in a 754

    > > socket,
    > >> > should fit well in a 939 - I have had numerous indications at least,

    > > that
    > >> > it
    > >> > will. I understand that the entire family of sockets from around that

    > > time
    > >> > are all 940 pins that are wired differently, and only the AM2 is a

    940
    > > pin
    > >> > with a different pinout. Had I been better informed at the time, I
    > >> > would
    > >> > have bought a 939 from the start, I don't think I am going to have

    any
    > >> > trouble from keeping the board I have, but it does look like a fairly
    > >> > cheap
    > >> > way to extend it's life and extract a bit of extra performance. All

    the
    > >> > rest
    > >> > of the 'good' stuff I have in the AM2 FX-62 at the moment, but I want
    > >> > to
    > >> > stop using all my dual and tripple booting machines as test-beds on
    > >> > rotation, have one full time work-horse and a couple of funnies.
    > >> >
    > >> >
    > >> > Tony. . .
    > >> >
    > >> >
    > >> > "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in

    > > message
    > >> > news:...
    > >> >> The problem with 939 mobos at this point is that it's getting hard

    to
    > >> >> find
    > >> >> CPUs for them that aren't way overpriced. And RAM is already in

    short
    > >> > supply
    > >> >> as well - everyone is now moving to DDR2. I've got some existing 939
    > >> > boxes,
    > >> >> but won't be building any new ones. I just bought a small footprint
    > >> >> 939
    > >> > mobo
    > >> >> to take the last of the food chain components to build a Windows

    Home
    > >> > Server
    > >> >> test box. But so far, no joy on being able to run what I need there,
    > >> >> so
    > >> >> it
    > >> >> may get pure XP x64 or Vista x64 and TiVo Desktop on it. Be the

    media
    > >> > server
    > >> >> for home, with several older 100-300 GB drives in it.
    > >> >>
    > >> >> --
    > >> >
    > >> >
    > >>

    > >
    > >

    >
     
    Tony Sperling, Apr 25, 2007
    #19
  20. Tony Sperling

    John Barnes Guest

    They were called daughterboards, but the only ones that seem to come up now
    are the 939 to AM2 boards.

    "Dominic Payer" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Which Asrock board do you have? Some Asrock boards can be upgraded to
    > later processors with an add-on board in a special slot. See
    > http://www.asrock.com/mb/index.asp?s=n for product details.
    >
    >
    >
    > "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> Oh well - far better to be wrong AND disappointed, than having made a bad
    >> investment. So I'm stuck with the Asrock - which has been amazingly good
    >> anyway really, and I'll be benefiting from the continued use of a rather
    >> good AGP card to boot.
    >>
    >> Wrong, is alright too! But anybody know where the misinformation comes
    >> from?
    >> When I bought it it was widely described as being upgradeable, and Sandra
    >> sticks a note to it being upgradeable to 939. Is there a Generation
    >> difference specifically with the XP 64 3000+?
    >>
    >>
    >> Tony. . .
    >>
    >>
    >> "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> Sorry to disappoint you, tony, but it won't work. Even if it would fit,
    >>> which it won't, it wouldn't work. They are different electrically.
    >>>
    >>> --
    >>> Charlie.
    >>> http://msmvps.com/xperts64
    >>> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:%...
    >>> > Luckily, though, the Athlon XP 64 3000+ that is currently in a 754

    >> socket,
    >>> > should fit well in a 939 - I have had numerous indications at least,

    >> that
    >>> > it
    >>> > will. I understand that the entire family of sockets from around that

    >> time
    >>> > are all 940 pins that are wired differently, and only the AM2 is a 940

    >> pin
    >>> > with a different pinout. Had I been better informed at the time, I
    >>> > would
    >>> > have bought a 939 from the start, I don't think I am going to have any
    >>> > trouble from keeping the board I have, but it does look like a fairly
    >>> > cheap
    >>> > way to extend it's life and extract a bit of extra performance. All
    >>> > the
    >>> > rest
    >>> > of the 'good' stuff I have in the AM2 FX-62 at the moment, but I want
    >>> > to
    >>> > stop using all my dual and tripple booting machines as test-beds on
    >>> > rotation, have one full time work-horse and a couple of funnies.
    >>> >
    >>> >
    >>> > Tony. . .
    >>> >
    >>> >
    >>> > "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in

    >> message
    >>> > news:...
    >>> >> The problem with 939 mobos at this point is that it's getting hard to
    >>> >> find
    >>> >> CPUs for them that aren't way overpriced. And RAM is already in short
    >>> > supply
    >>> >> as well - everyone is now moving to DDR2. I've got some existing 939
    >>> > boxes,
    >>> >> but won't be building any new ones. I just bought a small footprint
    >>> >> 939
    >>> > mobo
    >>> >> to take the last of the food chain components to build a Windows Home
    >>> > Server
    >>> >> test box. But so far, no joy on being able to run what I need there,
    >>> >> so
    >>> >> it
    >>> >> may get pure XP x64 or Vista x64 and TiVo Desktop on it. Be the media
    >>> > server
    >>> >> for home, with several older 100-300 GB drives in it.
    >>> >>
    >>> >> --
    >>> >
    >>> >
    >>>

    >>
    >>

    >
     
    John Barnes, Apr 25, 2007
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Vista Beta 2 Product Key Problems

    , Jul 1, 2006, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    458
    Dan Evans
    Jul 2, 2006
  2. Windows Vista RC1 Product Key

    , Sep 7, 2006, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    989
    Colin Barnhorst
    Sep 8, 2006
  3. =?Utf-8?B?THVpZ2k=?=

    Windows Vista X64 RC1 Product Key

    =?Utf-8?B?THVpZ2k=?=, Sep 9, 2006, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    651
    Andre Da Costa
    Sep 10, 2006
  4. Larry Hodges

    Non-Vista print drivers in Vista 64 RC1?

    Larry Hodges, Oct 24, 2006, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    741
    Aaron Kelley
    Oct 30, 2006
  5. swmmrpro

    Product Key for 64-bit vista

    swmmrpro, Jun 6, 2008, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    14
    Views:
    991
    Colin Barnhorst
    Jul 7, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page