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/$159), are the two most-affordable retail editions of the operating system scheduled to appear on store shelves in January 2007.
Although the Vista team's blog did not point out these changes, it did highlight others. "Two notable changes between Windows Vista license terms and those for Windows XP are: 1) failure of a validation check results in the loss of access to specific features; and 2) an increase in our warranty period from 90 days to 1 year, which brings Windows in line with most other Microsoft products," wrote Vista program manager Nick White.
Specifically, the Vista license calls out the ramifications of a failed validation check of Vista.
"The software will from time to time validate the software, update or require download of the validation feature of the software," it reads. "If after a validation check, the software is found not to be properly licensed, the functionality of the software may be affected."
Vista's new anti-piracy technologies, collectively dubbed "Software Protection Platform," have met with skepticism by analysts and criticism by users. Under the new program, a copy of Vista that's judged to be in violation of its license, or is counterfeit, is disabled after a set period, leaving the user access only to the default Web browser, and then only for an hour at a time.
Well his experience, as well as mine, is it doesn't run well on older hardware. Especially not the newer versions, unless you get some stripped down version that might not even include a GUI.
Why is that? There's not anything the O/S on the disk drive needs to boot that's dependent on if the motherboard is original that I know of.
No, you are right. I did 2 system upgrades in the last year that involved a new motherboard, and both times I had to re-authorize Windows XP. The first time, I had to call because it wouldn't authorize online. It's effing ridiculous because the whole time I've had 2 systems and 2 purchased copies of WinXP. M$ is going to be even more unpopular for making people spend another $100 every time their MB craps out, after the first time...
I'd say get a good image backup product like Acronis, so instead of reformating you recover from backup.
I seriously doubt there's any way you'd have to re-register your windows if you had to replace your motherboard. atomdevil is creating hype and must be refering to a motherboard upgrade or system overhaul.
Looks to me like they're just saying if you want to and can afford Windows, you can run it. If you can't or don't, then don't. Nothing different than what Apple's position has been all along.
If you price an iMac against a pc and include the display and software not much of a diff.
The two best Linux distros for a new user are Ubuntu (or the derivatives) and Suse.
-
Have been doing some hands-on learning with Suse 10. Anyone familiar with the update process with Suse?
Is the Suse Linux distro vulnerable if not kept up to date? Any issues with updating? Etc?
Thanks!
Ping-O
I've never seen a single copy of Linux in any store, and I shop the best stores. I'd recommend Apple, instead, if you feel the need to change from Windows.
YAST should show the security updates. Most distros will keep crucial security updates coming for some time even after a new version has been released.
Most user-friendly distros can be set up to show an icon when updates are available.
Wait. I thought you just said they sold Linux on systems there? Yep, you did.
It's possible, they have little elsewhere to go but down. But thin clients and open source have been all the rage for a decade now, there's nothing earth shattering there. I'd say handhelds are the next frontier, and right now Microsoft is well positioned.
Nope. I said they sold Linux. Please brush up on your comprehension skills, child.
Yeah, and I'll bet you just go out of your way to look for it. Look, son...I know you missed out on Logic 101, but here's a big ol' clue for ya: just because you ain't seen something doesn't mean it ain't there.
Now stop wasting my time, boy. You were boring two messages ago.
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.