____/ BearItAll on Wednesday 27 June 2007 11:55 : \____
> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
>> Microsoft's anti-virtualization stance: forget DRM, think Apple
>>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>> | Microsoft, I suspect, is terrified of a world in which standard,
>> | Joe-Consumer Windows can be virtualized and made to play second fiddle
>> | to Mac OS X, or even (say) Ubuntu Linux. No longer does Joe Consumer
>> | view the computing world as Windows versus all. Instead it begins to
>> | look like Windows versus Windows + alternative OSes.
>> `----
>>
>>
>
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070624-microsofts-anti-virtualization-stance-forget-drm-think-apple.html
>> http://tinyurl.com/2e6tpu
>>
>> The article is focused on Apple. In reality, ot's not about Apple, but
>> also about Linux. Apple users and investors might live in a bubble. No
>> school, datacenter, or government is moving to Mac OS just for fancy
>> graphics and excellent design.
>>
>
> To be fair to MS it was MS that put in the work to make a virtualiseable XP
> for Linux. so MS are not totally against this technology, either when it
> comes to virtualising Debian (and others) in a MS VM or the other way
> around.
>
> Ok so they probably would rather Vista was a VM host than a VM client, but
> for XP they seem to be playing the game fairly in this area and presumably
> are doing the same with their servers.
>
> In the end though do we really mind who is hosting, so long as its a stable
> host.
>
> I don't know if MS VM will prove as stable as UNIX/Linux hosted VM, but they
> are getting some good write ups in this area, the list of tested Linux
> systems is huge. MS have no real choice, web hosts have been going the way
> of VM machines for a while now, it is better for them and their customers
> for many reasons, MS have to play this game too.
You can run Linux virtualised under Vista Home Edition (server aside for the
moment, as Longhorn, AKA Server 2008, is a mess that led to dropping of very
basic virtualisation features). On the other hand, you need expensive Vista
licences (no OEM 'discounts' here) in order to make Linux the host. As I said
to Rex earlier, Microsoft totally bends Novell's arm on this one. It's rather
disturbing to watch.
At the end of the day, what would you want to virtualise Vista for? Windows XP
supports /far/ more applications and it is being patched more regularly. I
think Microsoft understands this. Combined with the problems in Server 2008,
the company has many reason to panic at this stage.
--
~~ Best of wishes
Roy S. Schestowitz | GNU is Not Universal (begin recursion)
http://Schestowitz.com | Free as in Free Beer | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Cpu(s): 26.0%us, 4.5%sy, 0.9%ni, 64.4%id, 3.7%wa, 0.3%hi, 0.2%si, 0.0%st
http://iuron.com - semantic engine to gather information
|
|
