Comments on: Is need for control behind Microsoft's flip-flop?

A developer writes that virtualization represents a threat to Microsoft's control of the desktop and licensing restrictions are one way to try to maintain its grip.

[LarryLo]

In a word...Yes

There is no mincing words here, there is no further security risk associated with one ver of Vista over the others in a Virtualized environment.

To make an analogy MS is quite happy to rent you a house and you can decorate the rooms any way you want (so long as its not an oh so special HD room, for that you have to use their interior designer ;). But don't try to move to another house and hope to bring the contents of that room with....that... that will cost you.

Its simple protectionism, I would respect them more if they would just admit it, instead of trotting out weak excuses.

[asbuilts]

the same as apples?

Why can't I VM OS X? I would buy the new version in a second if I could VM it on my existing hardware ($129 for every version ;). I would love to try the Apple OS and see if I like it before I drop 2K on new hardware. Right now you can load Vista and run it for 30 days before it gets crippled and I'm guessing Mac users can do that now. Mac users scream they want to be able to run the MS OS but if you con only run the Mac OS if you buy Mac hardware. What's up with that?

[qwerty75]

re

"Right now you can load Vista and run it for 30 days before it gets crippled"

Vista is crippled out of the box.

[qwerty75]

MS is all about control

Controlling what its users can and can't do with the software.

Apple and OSS get out of the users way.

Comparing the decision on Apple to only support certain hardware, does not count as control. It is what the user can do on the OS that counts.

Don't like the default media player, web browser, chat program, email client, etc? In non-MS OS's you can actually uninstall them. You can not in windows, because MS doesn't want you to.

MS got where they are through control of its customers and OEM's. Not through building a better, more reliable and secure mousetrap.

If they relinquish that control, that would mean that they would actually have to put out quality products to survive. That is something they rarely do.

[anarchyreigns]

A crack will be available in no time at all!

...and Microsoft wonders why they have piracy issues. <rolls eyes>

[defishguy]

It's about competition

Control is just a perk IMHO. Looking at the facts as I see them.

1. Vista is not a satisfying upgrade from XP on older hardware.

2. Dell (and likely others soon) are already offering Linux as an OEM install at a discount compared to the Windows OEM machines.

3. Vista is difficult to pirate.

4. Without limitations of virtualization MS reasons that people will strictly buy the home basic edition to run some Windows software while using Linux for everything else.

Microsoft is making this move to prevent desktop competition not to prevent virtual Windows machines. Ultimate offers no security features that are exclusive to Ultimate so the security line is just a farse.

[mikeburek]

Showing off Vista

Well, if you have 2 Vista computers side by side, one with Ultimate and one with Basic, the Ultimate will look better since Basic doesn't support Aero at all (right?).

So if you are using another OS, such as Mac OS and with Parallels are using Vista Basic, that user will say "Hey, Mac OS is very pretty and Vista looks pretty plain. I'll stick with Mac."

But what Microsoft wants the person to say is "Wow, Vista is even prettier than Mac OS. I'm switching to Windows Vista."

So they just want to keep an "even" playing field in comparisons.

It's like when a car commercial for the Honda Civic says it has the most interior room for it's class. Sure, among little cars it might, but you can't compare it to an SUV's interior space.