Posted on 10/13/2006 7:22:58 AM PDT by Señor Zorro
Microsoft has released licenses for the Windows Vista operating system that dramatically differ from those for Windows XP in that they limit the number of times that retail editions can be transferred to another device and ban the two least-expensive versions from running in a virtual machine.
The new licenses, which were highlighted by the Vista team on its official blog Tuesday, add new restrictions to how and where Windows can be used.
"The first user of the software may reassign the license to another device one time. If you reassign the license, that other device becomes the "licensed device," reads the license for Windows Vista Home Basic, Home Premium, Ultimate, and Business. In other words, once a retail copy of Vista is installed on a PC, it can be moved to another system only once.
The new policy is narrower than Windows XP's. In the same section, the license for Windows XP Home states: "You may move the Software to a different Workstation Computer. After the transfer, you must completely remove the Software from the former Workstation Computer." There is no limit to the number of times users can make this move. Windows XP Professional's license is identical.
Elsewhere in the license, Microsoft forbids users from installing Vista Home Basic and Vista Home Premium in a virtual machine. "You may not use the software installed on the licensed device within a virtual (or otherwise emulated) hardware system," the legal language reads. Vista Ultimate and Vista Business, however, can be installed within a VM.
Vista Home Basic, at $199 for a full version and $99 for an upgrade, and Vista Home Premium ($239/$159), are the two most-affordable retail editions of the operating system scheduled to appear on store shelves in January 2007.
Although the Vista team's blog did not point out these changes, it did highlight others. "Two notable changes between Windows Vista license terms and those for Windows XP are: 1) failure of a validation check results in the loss of access to specific features; and 2) an increase in our warranty period from 90 days to 1 year, which brings Windows in line with most other Microsoft products," wrote Vista program manager Nick White.
Specifically, the Vista license calls out the ramifications of a failed validation check of Vista.
"The software will from time to time validate the software, update or require download of the validation feature of the software," it reads. "If after a validation check, the software is found not to be properly licensed, the functionality of the software may be affected."
Vista's new anti-piracy technologies, collectively dubbed "Software Protection Platform," have met with skepticism by analysts and criticism by users. Under the new program, a copy of Vista that's judged to be in violation of its license, or is counterfeit, is disabled after a set period, leaving the user access only to the default Web browser, and then only for an hour at a time.
Not with Vista. This stuff is coded at the kernel level. No CD copying, no DVD backups, and only HDMI/HDCP enabled monitors will allow playback of HD DVD or Blu Ray movies.
Vista will never find its way onto any of my machines.
LLS
I am a computer professional and I am hard-pressed to understand any compelling reason for anyone to move from WinXP to Vista - other than strong-arm tactics from MS.
This is bad news for MS. I remember long ago when, as an early-on Mac owner, I first recognized that Apple was in trouble with it's Mac strategy. I was walking through a computer store looking at PCs and Macs and the software offerings for both as well as the interfaces. I thought to myself, "I can't think of a good reason to get a Mac - and I already own one!" My next thought was "Apple is in big trouble if I, someone who loves my Mac, can't think of a good reason to get another one."
I see this Vista thing the same way.
If you want to try Linux, there is a very easy way to do it. You can download LiveCD's of just about every flavor out there to test how your hardware will react. Simply download the ISO image, burn to CD being sure to use the ISO image tool in your CD burning suite, and you now have a bootable Linux CD that will allow you to boot up in Linux without making any changes to your computer. My favorite flavors are Knoppix, Gentoo, and Ubuntu, but your mileage may vary. For downloading the ISO images, you can go to:
www.knoppix.org
www.gentoo.org
www.ubuntu.com
I opted for Knoppix on my laptop to dual boot with XP Pro. I can boot into XP Pro, Sever 2003, or any of the above three flavors of Linux on my desktop machine.
I highly suggest the above scheme of using both XP and Linux for the time being. That way, you can test out software suites, and make sure you can operate in Linux as well as you can in XP. If you get into a tight spot, you can just switch back over to XP. When the time comes that you are confident that Linux is serving 100% of your needs, you can then be confident that a switch-over to Linux is a good move, and won't give you any headaches.
I like XP. I don't even really have any disdain for MS, but these liscensing schemes are getting ridiculous. Charging me twice the money for their latest OS, and cutting my usability down to one transfer is beyond arrogance. Luckily I've seen MS trending this way, and I've been boning up on Linux for about 18 mos now. I can say confidently that Vista will probably never enter my household, and it won't cause me a moments trouble.
Any Linux can, what's probably slowing it down is the desktop (Gnome, KDE, etc.), which can be too slow for an older system. If we're talking webservers, running a quick Slackware/Gentoo install WITHOUT X or any graphical system and running the system from the terminal would probably be the best option.
If you want/need a desktop, try a lighter-weight one like IceWM.
No it won't, the market already shows that people prefer Windows to Mac OS.
Not sure what you are doing but I have clients that are running webservers on 486's with 64 megs of ram and the speed is just fine. One problem I have noticed over the years that may also apply to you, is the video card.
Some cards will make Linux run very slow if you are using Xwindows. Try replacing the video card with one of those cheap 32 meg pci cards. You can always return the card if it doesn't work.
Also for you MIS people out there you might want to look into Linux/VMware. Using this combo you can install most OS's on a Linux server base, including server OS's, and use them remotely from a cheap desktop or the internet(vncserver+fairly good connection)
The other upside to this is that if an OS fails, if you are doing the proper linux file backups, it can be reinstalled and up and running in 30 minutes or less.
The more Billy messes with the average user, the more market share he's going to lose. He's about to lose me.
"No it won't, the market already shows that people prefer Windows to Mac OS."
With respect, it only shows that M$ was better at marketing and staying away from proprietary hardware.
Screw 'em. I'll stick with XP. Anyhow my three current computers run just fine on XP but choke on Vista... which I have downloaded installed and tried out
When will you folks learn that using M$ only shows your socialist bias? It's just like when a liberal calls President Bush a shrub. I believe in free trade and capitalism, what say you? Why don't you have a cute little phrase for Apple? They are far more proprietary and over-priced than Microsoft.
I make a living with *nix, but prefer Windows for my home computer because we use our home computer for more than surfing the web and writing letters.
I do not need a heavy weight desktop all I do is write code compile/test and run a few servers (apache/jboss/tomcat/mysql/etc) but I do want X-Windows to be available. I also want a nice interface to admin function like network configuration etc.
Not sure I am making sense here, but I think it is the heavy weight desktop that is slow not the OS. Now graphic card could be an issue. W2K does not like my grapic card either. LOL.
On my slower PII, with less than 200mb of ram, I use XUbuntu.
You should be able to use standard Ubuntu on a PIII with 256mb of ram just fine.
Ive also used Puppy Linux which is bare bones and very fast on old machines.
OK, this sort of crap has really done it for me.
I need a basic understanding of optional systems like Linux, etc. Is it an OS like Windows? Desktop, etc? DO I just do a clean build and install it instead of Windows?
Oh, and also, this will cut down on pirating...NOT! But that's ok, as they push more and more people away from being able to install Windows on seperate personal systems with only 1 purchase, people will find another option.
We already have the damn popup at home telling us we have an illegal copy of Windows, even though it isn't.
And all the crap that always has to be running in the background for the machine to work? Double Grr.....
A good book to go with your Knoppix is
Knoppix Hacks
100 Industrial-Strength Tips and Tools
By Kyle Rankin
from O'Reilly books. Buy it on line if you wish. Knoppix has been a great tool of rme, when restore goes wrong, for example.
This is ridiculous.
What about ugrade machines?
What about serial upgrades where over the course of the years EVERYTHING is swapped out but the case and then you swap the case.
If the OS was $4.99 perhaps. But when the OS costs more than the machine this makes no business sense.
This is what you have when an OS has a monopoloy.
I think I will try out your recommendations on an old p3 box. I only have one PC left that has VC++, once that dies I will lose my ability to compile C code, don't use C much any more but then I need C I need C (hard ware calls). So I need to get a another C development box ready to go.
I feel your pain, my new XP just started freezing up from time to time, and for the life of me I can not figure out why. I've uninstalled EVERYTHING, and it still freezes! It started freezing when I was checking out virus software. And I think the uninstall did not uninstall some invisable service that scans my stuff. Might be totally wrong about that since I can get any meaningfull info from task manager or msconfig. A Unix ps with proper arguments would tell me what I need to know.
No. On the contrary, this is specifically designed to prevent hardware upgrading so that Microsoft's profits won't taper off in-between OS releases.
How many years is it going to take Microsoft to release a new OS after Vista? 6? 10?
Where is their OS revenue going to come from if customers buy one copy of Vista and then transfer it in each hardware-upgrade they do for those 10 or so years? It's going to come from not allowing customers to upgrade their computers more than once....which is a lesson they learned from XP.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.