-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Guest operating system support: Microsoft's conflict
,----[ Quote ]
| That last sentence resonates with me. It does
| change the story when you are the OS maker.
| And it runs in direct contrast to what the
| goals of a hypervisor vendor should be. To
| me, that statement read, "To promote a
| unified support model between the many
| applications, OSes and marketing teams within
| Microsoft, we are imposing artificial
| limitations on Hyper-V support."
|
| We have seen Microsoft impose such limits
| this before, as it did in adjusting its
| virtualization licensing to limit the
| advanced VMware features that Microsoft's own
| virtualization products could not support. As
| soon as Hyper-V could support these features,
| Microsoft made its licensing models more
| friendly. Windows has been restricted to
| promote Hyper-V, and now Hyper-V has been
| restricted to promote newer Microsoft OSes.
`----
http://searchservervirtualization.techtarget.com/news/column/0,294698,sid94_gci1443339,00.html
Recent:
Why Microsoft is sabotaging desktop virtualization
,----[ Quote ]
| Analysis: Microsoftâs licensing makes VDI unaffordable, to keep its
| stranglehold on desktop Windows licenses intact
|
| [...]
|
| Thereâs no other way to cut this: Itâs simply way more expensive to license a
| Windows desktop OS for a VDI environment than it is to license one for a
| physical environment. Even if you upgrade to a new major OS revision during
| those three years by taking advantage of the Software Assurance plan included
| in VECD, youâre still paying more than you would if you did the same thing
| with a desktop client.
`----
http://www.infoworld.com/d/virtualization/why-microsoft-sabotaging-desktop-virtualization-066?source=IFWNLE_nlt_daily_2009-08-11
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAku6gXUACgkQU4xAY3RXLo5ntACdHlQ8OBOicROMteJQQBKKFffy
NVsAnicjW1btRV0Xp4GFbQuEMLrSgZRf
=Lg+/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
|