Virtualization: Not Possible with Vista Home, 2006-10-18 - Your reactions

[linathael]

Microsoft has just published on its license terms webpage the details of licenses for each Vista version. It contains 2 bad news, one targeting directly MacOSX and Parallels users:

- it will possible to install Vista only twice, so you will be able to change your hardware only once; after you will have to buy a new license.

- One can not use emulation or virtualization solutions with Vista Home (Premium and Basic). Parallels and soon VMWare will not be allowed to make this Vista version running on their system. One will need to acquire Vista Ultimate or Business (US$399 and US$299 respectively) to make it possible. It will for sure limit the usage to Pro users, probably a way for Microsoft to prevent PC users to buy a Mac or even considering switching...

Microsoft, in its battle against piracy, might generate so much frustration among honest customers, that the end it will lead to the opposite effect: push honest customers to get their software to work the way it is supposed to work, or look for hacked versions...

[translation by Linathael]

[moose]

Well, nothing to do with fighting piracy, everything to do with selling more copies of Windows...

[linathael]

Well, nothing to do with fighting piracy, everything to do with selling more copies of Windows...

well this is probably the way Microsoft wants to present it.
Limiting installation procedure on 2 different hardware is meant not to fight agaisnt piracy, but to sell as much license as possible and keep claiming that 90% of computers run on Win, only based on the number os license sold... this is where MS is fouling everybody around. number of licenses sold does not correspond to the number of computer running Win...
I wonder if adding a new graphic card will be considered as a new hardware configuration by Vista...

[moose]

Well, if you look at the small changes that could cause your computer's version of XP to be de-activated, forcing you to redo the activation online, I wouldn't be surprised if changing the graphics or network card would be considered a "new configuration"...
And what about changing your HD? Like you have VISTA installed on your PC, you want to buy a bigger HD and change the graphics card at the same time, not too unusual... like it's the SAME computer, but how will VISAT know? In the extreme case where I want to upgrade my CPU, HD, Network card, graphics card, it still the same COMPUTER... and I'm not even talking about upgrading to a new mobo...

[groovesys]

Microsoft has just published on its license terms webpage the details of licenses for each Vista version. It contains 2 bad news, one targeting directly MacOSX and Parallels users:

- it will possible to install Vista only twice, so you will be able to change your hardware only once; after you will have to buy a new license.

- One can not use emulation or virtualization solutions with Vista Home (Premium and Basic). Parallels and soon VMWare will not be allowed to make this Vista version running on their system. One will need to acquire Vista Ultimate or Business (US$399 and US$299 respectively) to make it possible. It will for sure limit the usage to Pro users, probably a way for Microsoft to prevent PC users to buy a Mac or even considering switching...

Microsoft, in its battle against piracy, might generate so much frustration among honest customers, that the end it will lead to the opposite effect: push honest customers to get their software to work the way it is supposed to work, or look for hacked versions...

[translation by Linathael]

This is slightly misleading. I read the EULAs and it appears that only Home Basic prohibits installation in a virtual environment. Home Premium, Business, and Ultimate allow installation, with some caveats:

"USE WITH VIRTUALIZATION TECHNOLOGIES. You may use the software installed on the
licensed device within a virtual (or otherwise emulated) hardware system on the licensed device. If
you do so, you may not play or access content or use applications protected by any Microsoft digital,
information or enterprise rights management technology or other Microsoft rights management
services or use BitLocker. We advise against playing or accessing content or using applications
protected by other digital, information or enterprise rights management technology or other rights
management services or using full volume disk drive encryption."

Either way, if you want to use Parallels or VMWare, you'll have to pony up more cash for Home Premium.

[sandbagger]

so did anybody really think Micro$oft bought VirtualPC for any of the bogus reasons it claimed at the time?

The purchase fit perfectly within the 3 Es of Redmond strategy - Embrace, Enhance, Eliminate. I don't think Microsoft saw this coming (Mac/Intel/Windoze) and is scrambling to keep Pandora in the box. That and screw the user for more money. But that's nothing new.

[linathael]

so did anybody really think Micro$oft bought VirtualPC for any of the bogus reasons it claimed at the time?

The purchase fit perfectly within the 3 Es of Redmond strategy - Embrace, Enhance, Eliminate. I don't think Microsoft saw this coming (Mac/Intel/Windoze) and is scrambling to keep Pandora in the box. That and screw the user for more money. But that's nothing new.

I totally agree concerning VPC
I partially agree for the second part.
They did not see it coming, and especially were thinking it would be a bigger danger for Apple than for PC manufacturers and MS.
At the end, Apple decided to align its prices to the competition when moving to Intel CPUs, demonstrating that one can have a great OS, using good CPU, good looking computer and being not really more expensive than a equivalent PC.
They try to preserve their profit and margins with such policies, but it will probably not work the way they want. I predict with the future "retirement of Bill Gates" the slow but constant decrease of MS monopoly over the coming years; simply because they refused to evolve.
If MS makes it expensive for Vista, it will also affect its PC users pool, and potentially push them to switch to linux or OSX.

[greg57]

Reminds me how I surprised I was when I discovered than Remote Desktop Connection doesn't work on my wife's laptop - because she doesn't have the "pro" edition...

[sandbagger]

I predict with the future "retirement of Bill Gates" the slow but constant decrease of MS monopoly over the coming years; simply because they refused to evolve.
If MS makes it expensive for Vista, it will also affect its PC users pool, and potentially push them to switch to linux or OSX.

and that's the irony, isn't it? Now Redmond is determined to eliminate the very thing that got them their market share they enjoy today - easy access to the Windoze OS. No, they won't learn and the inward spiral will continue. Watch Redmond try to tighten the screws more and more as revenues from new OS purchases continue to flatten.

Overall, the tighter M$ DRM is good for the Mac, and not just with CPU/OS sales. There was some early talk that some developers - Intuit comes to mind - might just drop their Mac versions entirely figuring folks could just virtualize the Windoze version for a few more bucks. But at $300+ it's beyond an inconvenience. On the other hand, as Mac market share grows (even slightly) they won't be able to easily drop Mac development. An overall win for the Mac community.

[greg57]

I hadn't thought about it that way but I guess you're right. Easy Vista virtualization could have killed development for Mac apps. Now they'll have to pull their fingers and go on making nice apps