Right, I've downloaded and activated (woo) Win 7 ver 6801 - lovely

But just a quick question. My about windows tells me that this version expires on 01/07/2009 at 23:59 fair enough. BUT the licence agreement says it expires 01/08/2009.

So which one? I thought licence agreements were legally binding, thus MS would have to make it 01/08/2009.

I've attached the screenshot, but have a look for yourselves.



Casey

EDIT: Woo 1000th topic in this forum!

well, the winver thing hangs together with installation time afaik, but after first of august 09, you cant install it anymore, at least i guess so

mine expires on 2nd of FEB

That's strange...

I bet you have just edited out the expiration date by drawing a white box over it right?

mine expires on 02.07.2009 00:59

07/01/2009 17:59
MM/DD/YYYY, HH:MM

and? they will have public betas bye then...

mine dont have a date

you must run winver.exe to see the expiration date

Yes, and he has run Winver.exe hasn't he?

Shouldn't everyone has the same expiry date? In July 2009.

@Luckie, maybe your signiture should Vista SP2
I felt like saying it, don't take it as I don't like it.

no, he only klicks on the "?"->Info to get the infos about his windows.

@Xdude

yeah, I should update my signature very soon

You're brilliant, you caught me.

Maybe it's because I didn't get to that dialog by running WINVER. I figured it would be the same either way.

7/1/2009 here.

Well, I was thinking it would be extremely unlikely that you know someone from inside of Microsoft that could give you info on how to crack the timebomb or you knowing yourself how to.

So do we think then that the trial dae depends upon when we install, because I'm guessing most of you (like I) installed the day or day after it was leaked. But then the licence agreement gives the final possible day?

Still if it weren't for the facts that i) I wasn't really entitled to this and ii) there will be public releases anyway I'd be a bit annoyed at the discrepancy.

why doesnt someone figure out how to get rid of this timebomb? it annoys me I want to use this as a primary os if and only if it didnt expire.

just activate it and it will last until beta 1 comes out and you can just use that one.

why don't you do it yourself?!

A beta OS should not be used as a primary OS - it's illegal and also there may be bugs in it which comes as a part of beta (or even pre-beta in this case) testing.

yeah but the only company who puts a timebomb in everything beta os or office is MS.

because I dont have those skills to do it myself.

Then what gives you the right to complain about others not doing it?

someone on this forum may have more skills such as those...

the timebomb is integrated in the kernel so if we wanted to get rid of it then hacking the kernel would be required.

And why would we want to remove the timebomb in this build anyways? It's fine until July next year, and we will have many more builds to test with way before that date even comes along.

I see it pretty much pointless when we will have more feature complete builds being sent out soon enough before July 2009.

yeah but its better to hack the timebomb might be an workaround to the rc builds of 7 and the last leaked builds.

@ CP the "slmgr -xpr" on mine says: