Microsoft Flip-flopping on Virtualization License 304
Cole writes "Microsoft came within a few hours of reversing its EULA-based ban on the virtualization of Vista Basic and Premium, only to cancel the announcement at the last minute. The company reached out to media and bloggers about the announcement and was ready to celebrate "user choice" before pulling the plug, apparently clinging to security excuses. From the article, "The threat of hypervisor malware affects Ultimate and Business editions just as much as Home Premium and Basic. As such, the only logical explanation is that Microsoft is using pricing to discourage users from virtualizing those OSes. Since when is a price tag an effective means of combating malware?" Something else must be going on here."
Price Tag (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Why bother? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Why bother? (Score:2, Funny)
UAC for management (Score:5, Funny)
Malware (Score:3, Funny)
Re:It's obvious (Score:4, Funny)
Re:It's obvious (Score:3, Funny)
Linux is the same way (Score:3, Funny)
The virtualizable version of Linux costs 2 and 3 times as much as the non-virtualizable version of Linux. Additionally, Linux has a restriction that each copy may only be running on one machine or disk drive at a time.
Re:Market Segmentation (Score:2, Funny)
Re:It's obvious (Score:2, Funny)
Hmmph!