You're right about Server Editions, Nigel Smith, but the OP says he licensed the Desktop Edition.
As for the "soak the (presumed) rich installation" policy, which was instituted by Dantz before it was acquired by EMC, IMHO the recent failure of that "value pricing" policy in general is what led to the StorCentric acquisition. It appears business customers no longer needed to license Server Editions, because they were now using Linux machines as their servers. Retrospect Inc. put a yellow-colored note into the Windows 15.1 Release Notes saying "Linux Client: In a future update, Linux clients running on server-level Linux distributions will be treated as server clients". However, as I cautiously mentioned elsewhere on these Forums, the opinion of experts I solicited on the Ars Technica Linux forum was that it would be impracticable to distinguish server-level Linux distributions—which shot down extending the "soak the (presumed) rich installation" policy.
I have never questioned Windows administrators' need for the Dissimilar Hardware Restore Add-On, just its different "value pricing" levels in the Online Store.