Linked by Eugenia Loli on Fri 24th Nov 2006 11:29 UTC, submitted by Kenasai
Microsoft Consumers cannot run home versions of Windows Vista as virtual machines because virtualization is not mature enough for broad adoption, says Microsoft. They claim "that consumers don't understand the risks of running virtual machines, and they only want enterprises that understand the risks to run Vista on a VM".
Thread beginning with comment 185060
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
If you don't like it, don't use it ...
by MacTO on Fri 24th Nov 2006 19:45 UTC
Member since:

Nobody is forcing you to use Microsoft products, and there are plenty of alternatives on the market. Most of those alternatives even try to be compatible with Microsoft file formats, network protocols, file systems, and such. As for those of you who insist that you have to use Windows for work: you either aren't the decision maker (so don't worry about it), or it is the cost of doing business (though you can mitigate those costs by using alternatives when the option exists).

Oh, and there is one option that falls somewhere inbetween not using Microsoft and using Microsoft: using their products, but not upgrading unless it is necessary. If you did some research, you would probably be surprised at how much software still worked under Windows NT (which is over a decade old), and the situation is even better for 2000. Office 2003 uses the same file format as Office '97, and so forth.

For what it's worth, I did decide to "bite the bullet" and buy XP, even though my gut feelings told me that activation was a bad idea. My gut feeling turned out right: my copy of XP no longer activates (likely because I twiddle with hardware and operating systems too much).

Yeah, I know that I can call Microsoft up and clear the issue up (temporarily), but I don't like it as a matter of principle. After all, you bet there would be an outcry if people had to get authorization from the manufacturer to muck around with a physical commodity. But this funny culture has grown up around software where it is acceptable.

Browser: ELinks/0.11.1 (textmode; NetBSD 2.1.0_STABLE alpha; 80x25-2)

Reply Score: 1

iSteve Member since:

I'm not entirely convinced you're following the point. I am entirely convinced most of the OSNews readers are aware of the vast alternatives to most of the computing done on Windows.

The outrage is focused on the obviously artifical limitation in order to significantly pad revenues and taking the end user for a complete idiot by both doing this and by giving such an explanation, which is indeed an offense to intelect and capabilities of the end user [such as they are, of course:)]

Before anyone starts to argue that the end user is -- or may be -- in fact an idiot; I'm not going into such an argument, I would only point out that there are far more serious risks to soundness of Windows than running them in virtual environmnent, a feature most end users who fall into the category of 'idiot' probably never heard of or never considered for themselves in the first place...

Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.13) Gecko/20060809 Debian/1.7.13-0.3

Reply Parent Score: 1