Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: [News] Vista Cannot Be Run Virtualised...

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Rick
on Fri, 13 Oct 2006 09:31:19 -0400
> flatfish+++ wrote:
>> On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 13:04:47 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>> ...Unless you pay a lot of money.
>>> Microsoft Vista licence restrictions hit hardware hard 
>>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>> | While the expensive versions of Vista, Vista Ultimate and Vista Business,
>>> | can be installed within a Virtual Machine environment, Vole forbids you
>>> | from doing so with the cheaper Vista Home Basic and Vista Home Premium.
>>> `----
>>> http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=35057
>>> Another way of punishing/suppressing users of VMWare, Xen, Parallels, Boot
>>> Camp...
>>> meanwhile, on the dual-boot front:
>>> Vista scoots to new boot, but it's still kinda rooted
>>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>> | While Microsoft would like the world to believe that anyone running Windows 
>>> | has no need of any other operating system, that attitude doesn't cut much 
>>> | mustard with many of its users.
>>> `----
>>> http://www.apcstart.com/site/akidman/2006/09/1656/vista-scoots-to-new-boot-but-its-still-kinda-rooted
>>> So, essentially, Microsoft now owns your hardware and controls the way it is
>>> being used. Not to mention DRM for your data, WGA, and TC...
>> Another pro linux post
> ... letting us know that Micorsoft wants to stop us from --paying-- for 
> a copy of Vista and running it under Linux.

Does lead to some interesting philosophical questions, it does.


I buy a copy of Microsoft Windows Vista (hypothetically
speaking, that is [*] ).  I might own a shiny new DVD disc.
I don't own the data thereon.  Am I authorized to even
look at it, as opposed to merely blindly sticking it into
a non-virtual machine setup (e.g., a blank PC) and thereby
installing it?

And once installed, I can only reinstall it once on
another machine.  (Does that include motherboard and
system disk upgrades?)  After that, I probably need to
buy another license.

Can't be too careful, I guess.

Now with Linux, I buy *nothing* -- the media costs maybe 2
cents, the packaging a dime or two, the software is free.
So what is that $29.99 good for?  Of course I do get time
for support so that I can call them up, but usually I for
one can simply Google so I'm not sure I need it, and can
download ISO images anyway.  (I'm not a complete n00b,

In a way, Linux is murkier -- but it's also far easier to
do what needs to be done without having to worry about
licensing, and that shiny disc (or duplicates thereof,
which AFAIK is perfectly legal for many of the distros)
can go a long way if a household has several machines --
or one has a small company.  Do that with Vista and one
might run afoul of either Microsoft's license checking or
US copyright law.

[*] there are additional issues if one buys an upgrade
version.  Presumably, Microsoft will offer such, at a
discount; during install the disk will loook for key
files and/or features present only in authentic Windows
XP installations.  It's a continuation of other upgrade
strategies Microsoft has successfully deployed in the past.

#191, ewill3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
/dev/signature: Not a text file

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index