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.
The two best Linux distros for a new user are Ubuntu (or the derivatives) and Suse.
Ubuntu will even ship you a completely free CD if you want one.
https://shipit.ubuntu.com/
Exactly, but I am talking about running a VM on my personal laptop to test my projects (not work projects, for which I have a Windows computer at the office). Because my uses for Windows are fairly limited (and would be none if it were not a Windows-saturated world), the idea of paying an extra $100 or even $50 for "features" I don't need and the right to use it on my virtual hardware is one I resent.
I admit that part of the annoyance for me is that I feel like when I buy software, I should be able to run it on whatever I darn well please.
Does MS consider Apple's Boot Camp to be a virtual machine?
I sense an Apple MacBook Pro in my future!
OK can i play games like Oblivion with this OS????
MS hires very sharp people; it's not the programmers who are driving the licensing structure, however.
Thanks.
I don't think so. As I understand Boot Camp, it is basically a nice GUI to set up dual-booting.
Good point, My first Linux install was slackware.. WOW did I learn a whole lot quickly.. lol Big learning curve there.
I found redhat very easy to install and use, and will be running out this Christmas and picking up a cheapo machine from Fry's to run a Unix box once again. With all this junk MS is doing, it looks like any version of *nix is going to be worlds better then dealing with MS.
That's the question that came to mind for me. We have 3 machines in our home running Win XP (two Desktops and a Notebook). I generally reformat the hard drives on all 3 machines about once a year.
If Vista turns out to be too restrictive for reformating, etc, then after we run the wheels off these 3 machines, maybe we'll switch to Mac. They are more expensive machines, but guess I'll have to consider it.
I read the talk about Linux, and I am moderately geeky -- doing my own computer maintenance and so on, but I know and understand nothing about Linux. A few questions come to mind: How geeky does one have to be to learn to use Linux? Do you buy or build your own machine for it, and where do you get the software? Is it hard to learn to use? Can you use Windows Office, Quicken, Adobe Photoshop, Palm Desktop software, browse the Internet, .. and other commonly used software on Linux-based machines (for example, my wife takes college courses part time and must use Power Point)? And of course, I presume you can browse the Internet using Linux, download, etc.?
Read this very carefully: First, make sure your monitor is on.
I'm with you as far as not know about Linux is concerned. I've been able to run a Mac quite happily with no sense that I'm "missing" crucial interaction with Windows apps. Apple is even starting to come out with some apps that are taking one the MS Office environment, without the bloat.
How do I do that? I'm series!
Turn on a flashlight and check the power switch. I assume the power is out where you are.
Apparently one is not allowed to buy a new computer according to MicroSoft.
babu..mash here...http://linspire.com/
Wow. Microsoft's legal and marketing guys must be getting paid under the table by some rich Linux guys. I couldn't think of a better way to disenfranchise their customers, giving them a strong motivation to find something else.
Please recomment a fast linux that can run on older (p2/p3 256m ram) hardware. I'd love to move my webserver over to a linux box. But ever time I've tried linux it was just to damn slow to be useable.
MS isn't populated with complete idiots (Yes, I know this will generate numerous counter comments), they're just trying prevent users from reselling old licensed copies of Vista. If the end result is that the market starts seriously looking to alternatives to MS, then they may look for a new means of controlling the OS. And clearly the intention isn't to prevent Vista users from upgrading hardware. I'm not going to worry about it. If it comes down to it, I just won't upgrade to Vista, and if I buy a new machine I'll downgrade to 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.