Vista virtualization move opens real doors

Microsoft's decision to allow Home versions of Vista to run inside virtual machines may have far-reaching benefits in the coming years.

The initial market for such virtual Vista machines is likely to be among Mac users looking to run Windows or within the ranks of hard-core PC enthusiasts. But the move could also benefit the average PC user who just wants a machine that's easier to use, says Woody Hobbs, CEO of Phoenix Technologies, a leading maker of the BIOS (basic input/output system) software that loads before a PC boots up.

Woody Hobbs, CEO, Phoenix Technologies

(Credit: Phoenix Technologies)

Phoenix has been working on HyperSpace, a technology that allows for a range of software from embedded Web browsers to media players to security programs, to run outside the main operating system. The company has been working to bring HyperSpace to market this year, but because the technology relies on virtualizing some components of the PC, Hobbs said, it was hampered by Microsoft's licensing rules, which limited Vista virtualization to the two priciest versions of the operating system. Virtualization allows a computer to run a single version of an operating system but seem to be running multiple copies.

"We'd like to think they are accommodating us but, nevertheless, we are happy with the change," Hobbs said in a telephone interview on Monday.

Hobbs said Microsoft could benefit too, given the fact that he feels Windows has been losing share to the Mac because consumers believe Apple's machines are simpler to run and manage.

Microsoft's change on the licensing front, Hobbs said, opens the door for significant changes to the PC landscape, such as having security software that can run before and after Windows runs, as well as a machine that can boot instantly for simple tasks such as DVD playback, while simultaneously running Windows. Some machines have a "fast boot" Linux option today, but the machine has to restart to boot into Windows, meaning that users can't easily switch back to the DVD and keep their place in the movie.

"It really makes it a much more intuitive usage model and starts to make the PC a little more friendly, a la the Mac," he said.

Phoenix announced the HyperSpace technology in November, but expects it will take until at least the back-to-school season before the first machines hit U.S. shelves, and probably the holidays before machines start to make sophisticated use of the non-Windows space for things such as Web browsing or e-mail.

The licensing change for Vista has been a long time coming. Microsoft was criticized before Vista's launch for its limitations, which allowed only the Ultimate and Business editions to run as guest operating systems within a virtual machine. In June, Microsoft briefed reporters that it would ease the restrictions, but pulled back at the last minute for unspecified reasons.

Parallels, which makes software that lets Windows run on a Mac and is among those that stands to gain most immediately from the decision, praised the move.

"We're glad to see that Microsoft is taking steps to increase the pace of the adoption of virtualization," Parallels' Benjamin Rudolph said in an e-mail interview. "This shows that Microsoft is committed to the virtualization market, and we think that this opens new opportunities for us to partner."

Rudolph, too, suggested that the change might help boost Windows' fortunes among those otherwise inclined.

"This move is a good thing for those computer users who aren't Microsoft customers (like Mac and Linux users) since they now have a cost-effective way to access Windows and its massive software library," he said, noting that Microsoft now has a shot at the 6 percent of desktops not running its operating system today. "This is a great way for Microsoft to effectively reach 100 percent of the desktop market."

[mtoc]

vista

vista needs a rewrite to bring it closer to mac
10.5 panther. also to be compatible with mac.
PC makers need a redesign of hardware. intstead of faster chips, how about more usefull and more reliable chips. computers calculate; people think.
which may be why Apple is doing so well!

[krushyou]

uhhh

You do realize that Apple and Wintel boxes use the same hardware and chipsets right?

Open up your Apple get familiar with the parts I am sure you will see seagate, asus, core2duo - all parts in a pc.

The only major difference in an Apple pc now is the operating system.

[outpostprime]

err

Apple's computer business isn't all that much. They probably have a good 5~8% of the market as they always have. They are only doing good with the Ipod franchise which includes the Iphone and Itouch. If it wasn't for those, apple would be bankrupt right now.
Apple hardware is lacking vs PC hardware. I've seen new $1000+ macs with ATI x1300's for graphics which is already very old and low end. Normal PC's have a much wider range and cheaper hardware then macs do because they are missing apples little "chip". The very same "chip" that keeps MacOS from running on non-chipped PC's. I can build a PC with a Geforce 8800GT 512MB for under a grand.

[ColdMast]

ughhh?!

don't drink the Kool-Aid.

[inachu]

How?

Too allow this to happen will every Vista machine need SP1??

What mechanisim was used to deny the install in the first place?

Can the computers be in stand alone off the net to do this or on?

[Ina Fried]

re: how

This is a change to the licensing terms for Vista. There was never a technical means by which Microsoft prevented the home versions from running inside a virtual machine. It was just a violation of the licensing terms.

So, this won't require SP1 or any other update.

I'm not sure what you mean by your last question, but if the question is whether a computer needs to have an Internet connection to run Vista in a virtual machine, the answer is no.

Hope that helps,
Ina

[Penguinisto]

Not seeing it.

Most folks don't even know what the acronym "VM" stands for, much less what to do with or how to use it.

Vista is a [b]client[/b] OS. Most (not all, but most) of the VM action occurs with [b]servers[/b] (obviously excepting developers and sysadmins).

Besides, the only reason I'd have for Vista in a VM is for compatibility testing. If it's a resource hog on bare metal, I don't expect it to suddenly become light and fast on a VM instance. The fundamental problem is still there, and is only exacerbated by the fact that now the OS has to share its resources with something else on the box.

/P

[nyurbiz]

Granted, Vista has higher hardware requirements...

If you are savvy enough to be running VM and multiple OSes you will have the hardware. Else you are a dumb-dumb.

[Seaspray0]

Dunno

"Most folks don't even know what the acronym "VM" stands for, much less what to do with or how to use it."

Probably so. But the idea is interesting. VM's are proving to be useful.

[the_piano_man]

Virtualization in Vista. . . so what?

Linux has had this for a while. It's called User Mode Linux. It's free. Just look it up with Google. As usual the Redmond Golem can't get out of it's own way; and is still producing an overpriced morally deficient, ethically blinding and technically broken product they call software. Through this they discourage sustainable practices by planned obsolescence and maintain their stranglehold on their sheep-like followers. What a bunch of . . . . never mind.

[veggiedude--2008]

product activation

Microsoft has very special product activation code in their OS. I
guess this is where most of its R&D and innovation went into. The
update probably relaxes the code to accept multiple 'copies' when
running via a VM.

[TGallag69]

VM Vista.....

Nice. So where's the VM OS X??

Everyone complains MS keeps Vista so it can't be run as a Virtual Machine.

So where's Apple's move to allow their OS to run on a Windows Machine???

[RayGentry]

very good question

I was wondering when someone was going to point that out. It's funny that people complain that vista can't be run on old machines, run in a vm, or loads of other stuff, but are ok that apple only allows you to run it on their box w/ their little chip. VM? no way. Honestly, who thought a prettier OS that still runs programs for xp wasn't gonna take a little more juice to run. I spent $500 bucks, give or take, and have a system that runs vista as well as my old one ran XP. I enjoy it and think it's a good OS. Sure I could suggest some improvements, but i'm happy. I'm glad that they loosened licensing restrictions so people can run vista how and where they want.

[B.E2]

Linux can Play DVDs

Original Post said

Microsoft's change on the licensing front, Hobbs said, opens the door for significant changes to the PC landscape, such as having security software that can run before and after Windows runs, as well as a machine that can boot instantly for simple tasks such as DVD playback, while simultaneously running Windows. Some machines have a "fast boot" Linux option today, but the machine has to restart to boot into Windows, meaning that users can't easily switch back to the DVD and keep their place in the movie.

This is FUD, this implies that Linux can't play DVDs, which is can play DVDs, MP3, OGG(a open standard), and any other media format.

[Seaspray0]

Format is not free

The MP4 format that is used to record the DVD is a proprietary format, not open source, nor free. DVD playing software that is sold today includes the license. This is the reason the codec is not included with windows, including vista (they didn't want to have to pay the licensing fee for every copy of windows). If someone says it's free, I would say they are violating copywrite laws.