I'm dual booting two Windows 10 TPs without any problems.
If I don't want to abide by the license agreement, I don't install the software. It's as simple as that. And, I'm with you; I need to worry about the hackers instead of Microsoft.
I wanted to set up a 2nd Win8.1 as a test bed - I only have one license. After failing a number of times I followed a trail of links through the muck and mire of MS licensing where I found a one clause statement saying you can do this but you have to share the cores. The number 3 is part of that memory - 3 multi-boots? I don't recall.
I tried to find the clause to use in a citation, but I failed to find it again ....
I'll image my Win8.1 system before upgrading to Win10, go though the upgrade process, then create Win10 install media using the ISO. Reconfigure the disk and clean install all of the OSes I use or test as a multi-boot system.
The question really relates to the previous OS license - is it still valid? I think it would have to be, otherwise a lot of happy MS customers won't be so happy any more - even taking into account that it is a FREE upgrade to Win10
If I have to sacrifice the previous OS license to get the free upgrade, I'll pass and purchase retail Win10. That solves the key issue for me.
The insider EULA is different from the Windows EULA which is different from the Office EULA ... MS is trying to simplify all EULAs and write them in plain language, but the lawyers ....
Mr E bought up a good point about capturing typing (I think it was in reference to Office) - it is done to improve spell checking.
Mark Phelps nailed it when he said We have given MS permission... - that's the legal end of it.
Words such as may and might have two different meanings
may - allow You may leave the table
might - possibly I might go to the game tomorrow
When the clause says "Microsoft may collect ..." and you accept the agreement, you are allowing MS to collect ... it doesn't necessarily mean they do collect or might collect. You are only authorizing MS to collect if there is a need. In the TP case, we know they are collecting data - and that's a good thing. In the case of a production release - WER is a good example.
All of the wording is more of a legal CYA than a threat to our privacy. That doesn't mean we should be complacent about privacy though.