RE: Has MS overstepping the mark with Vista licensing?

Permabanned
Joined
7 Oct 2006
Posts
132
Personally, I think Microsoft has totally lost the plot with the release of Vista and the licensing restrictions.

1) Retail copies of Vista only allowed one machine-to-machine transfer. If MS are considering a motherboard swap a machine-to-machine transfer then this is ridiculous.

2) Preventing VM applications run anything other than Business of Ultimate editions. I have no idea what this is all about? What exactly is the threat to MS if I wanted to run Windows 98, DOS, Linux or the Home Version of Vista in a VM machine? Why exactly do I need the business or ultimate editions?

* Had to update this to make a bit more sense.

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=159



3) The end of volume license keys. Each and every machine now has to pass the WPA and be activated in large corporations. Even if that means activating 10,000 machines. You can buy a server to do this for you though, but this is another layer of complexity, and another point of failure. It common knowledge that the WPA is not infallible. I cant imagine what would happen if a copy of Vista decides its been pirated whilst the CEO of a large multinational is giving a powerpoint presentation. I can, and its probably called the competition.

Now MS has a duty to its shareholders. Its losing billions trying to put SONY out of business with the XBOX. Its office system is under threat from GOOGLE, and office is such a mature product that there is probably no need to upgrade anyway. This leaves Vista. I doubt a lot of people are going to rush out on its release to upgrade. And the business community are already skeptical about upgrading to Vista. Especially considering the new licensing agreements. Its all very well saying some companies get the upgrade for free under the software assurance scheme, but I doubt they will flock to it until they have the compliance side ironed out. Nobody is going to chance their systems locking up due to faulty WPA.

MS are up against the wall. Im not saying they dont have a lot of money. But that can change. The public are a fickle lot, and no amount of money can save you if public opinion sways against you. Some great companies have discovered this to their cost.
 
Last edited:
I've just been wondering what real content does vista give us over windows XP, I'm relativly secure (hardware firewall, NOD32 AV etc) and have no love for the interface.
so that leaves DX10 yes? so make that vista only.
nice.
 
Is it the same activation as XP where you get 30 days or so? Or does Vista demand activation as soon as you start using it after an install, or it dies?
 
Well imo vista interface is nicer but you're right, nothing much, the new network engine seems to confuse my router and thats the only significant update apart from dx10.

If i could get dx10 on xp...
 
Slam62 said:
Well imo vista interface is nicer but you're right, nothing much, the new network engine seems to confuse my router and thats the only significant update apart from dx10.

If i could get dx10 on xp...
I give it about 2-3 months before you do. or can.
 
dark_matter said:
1) Retail copies of Vista only allowed one machine-to-machine transfer. If MS are considering a motherboard swap a machine-to-machine transfer then this is ridiculous.

please god no... I must have activated this copy about 30 times but the point is i BOUGHT it, i PAID for it.. that as far as I'm concerned proves its mine and thats an end to it.. surely they can tell if the key is being used on more than 1 machine simultaneously and just shut one off?

Oh hang on.. that means someone could just guess it and make my pc stop working..

nnngng.. I can't see a way round it, I understand why ms want to protect their assets but surely not like this? Or maybe we'll have to buy full retail copies rather than oems?

Either way I probably won't be jumping in both feet first, I quite like XP :)
 
dark_matter said:
3) The end of volume license keys. Each and every machine now has to pass the WPA and be activated in large corporations. Even if that means activating 10,000 machines. You can buy a server to do this for you though, but this is another layer of complexity, and another point of failure. It common knowledge that the WPA is not infallible. I cant imagine what would happen if a copy of Vista decides its been pirated whilst the CEO of a large multinational is giving a powerpoint presentation. I can, and its probably called the competition.

What happens with the likes of MSDN versions? Will they require activation also?
 
eXSBass said:
Just to finish off the obvious, if I could I wouldn't be buying Vista for another 5 years at least.
tbh, I'd NEVER install a V1 of any windows. classicaly its been SP3-4 that sorts out most of the bugs, XP seems ok with SP2, will vista be any good at SP0/1? doubt it.
I love windows, without it we wouldn't have the IT world we have today. but I hate being forced to update to a platform that I am unsure of.
I for one will be doing everything I can to get DX10 to work on windows XP (only started using windows XP as my main OS this week).
 
dark_matter said:
2) Preventing VM applications on anything other than Business of Ultimate editions. I have no idea what this is all about? What exactly is the threat to MS if I wanted to run Windows 98, DOS, or Linux in a VM machine? Why exactly do I need the business or ultimate editions?

It means you cannot run non Business/Ultimate versions in a VM, you should still be able to run a VM with Win98/Dos/Linux on the other versions of Vista.

dark_matter said:
3) The end of volume license keys. Each and every machine now has to pass the WPA and be activated in large corporations. Even if that means activating 10,000 machines. You can buy a server to do this for you though, but this is another layer of complexity, and another point of failure. It common knowledge that the WPA is not infallible. I cant imagine what would happen if a copy of Vista decides its been pirated whilst the CEO of a large multinational is giving a powerpoint presentation. I can, and its probably called the competition.

Doesn't bother me, nor most people, I won't be running a VLK version of Windows.

eXSBass said:
Just to finish off the obvious, if I could I wouldn't be buying Vista for another 5 years at least.

http://www.istartedsomething.com/20061017/dont-need-windows/

People always say this, it was said back when XP was released, yet I bet 99% of people reading this thread are now on XP ;)
 
Vai said:
It means you cannot run non Business/Ultimate versions in a VM, you should still be able to run a VM with Win98/Dos/Linux on the other versions of Vista.
Quite. And how many home users want to run Vista in a VM?
 
I've never activated my copies of Win XP.

I have two legal OEM copies, I just don't talk to microsoft to activate it. Come get me Microshaft.


Plus, with alll this **** Vista has, and the price tag. I probably get it eventually, but It won't be by buying it...


OS X > Windows. Forever.
 
Concorde Rules said:
I've never activated my copies of Win XP.

I have two legal OEM copies, I just don't talk to microsoft to activate it. Come get me Microshaft.


Plus, with alll this **** Vista has, and the price tag. I probably get it eventually, but It won't be by buying it...


*nix > Windows. Forever.
fixed
 
Concorde Rules said:
Gerroff.

All this kernal rubbish and compiling, I could never do with that.

I say again *nix/BSD> Windows forever ;)

what you think os x is based on?
foo.

FACT!

tbh, get ubuntu linux! Compiling? meh!
 
Vai said:
http://www.istartedsomething.com/20061017/dont-need-windows/

People always say this, it was said back when XP was released, yet I bet 99% of people reading this thread are now on XP ;)

Reason I purchased XP was because it was sensible. I needed features on it. I was getting sick of Windows 98SE. And building an uber system at the time was going to be pointless if I stuck 2000 on there. Even then, I purchased XP 3 years after it's release. Windows XP was sensible.

Now Windows Vista.
I have security in XP
I have games in XP
I have office in XP
I have a nice simple network in XP
To be honest, contradicting my previous post, I don't really need DX10, DX9 will do fine thank you
Whats there to upgrade to Vista for? ;)
 
VeNT said:
what you think os x is based on?
foo.

FACT!

tbh, get ubuntu linux! Compiling? meh!

:p


I have no reason to use linux, I love OS X, and I only have winblows for games :/ once tweaked and all the **** removed its reasonable :/
 
dark_matter said:
3) The end of volume license keys. Each and every machine now has to pass the WPA and be activated in large corporations. Even if that means activating 10,000 machines. You can buy a server to do this for you though, but this is another layer of complexity, and another point of failure. It common knowledge that the WPA is not infallible. I cant imagine what would happen if a copy of Vista decides its been pirated whilst the CEO of a large multinational is giving a powerpoint presentation. I can, and its probably called the competition.

Wooah! Where did this pop up from?

This will be an aggrevation for me, VLKs are the only reason why we can effectively image and distributed images across the netowrk. An end to non-activated Windows would bugger that up royaly!

And source? I'm hoping it's not true.

Burnsy
 
Back
Top Bottom