__/ [ John Bailo ] on Tuesday 27 February 2007 07:00 \__
> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
>> Microsoft Manager Says It Considered Banning Vista Virtualization
>
>> | point where the company seriously considered removing
>> | virtualization capability from Vista entirely.
>
> Good.
>
> Why would you want to virtualize an OS that nobody uses.
The better question may be:
"Why would you want to pay edition tax just to virtualise some
Windows-centric application?"
Don't forget that Microsoft warned that virtualising Vista would be insecure
unless you /unlock/ (I emphasise /unlock/, as in "make more buffer overflows
available to exploit) some features, i.e. choose premium editions. Of
course, nobody bought it. It seemed obvious that Microsoft uses "security"
excuses to promote and defend business decisions ('virtualisation tax').
Another part of the license is intended to put VMWare at a position of
disadvantage (limit VM transfer), which helps Microsoft penetrate the market
IE-style (they will also prebundle). Needless to mention, VMWare is
preparing to sue. It doesn't want to become Netscape 2.0.
--
~~ Best wishes
http://youtube.com/watch?v=bYsxaMyFV2Y http://youtube.com/watch?v=QNb7gPA1JFk
http://Schestowitz.com | RHAT Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
10:20am up 35 days 10:38, 7 users, load average: 0.44, 0.47, 0.36
http://iuron.com - Open Source knowledge engine project
|
|
