OSNews

and we'll continue to hear people like you complain tirelessly. Or is it just the usual OSS fundies trolling?

Even better when it is out, people will stop moaning about Vista and Office being late and moan about something else!

That "draconian new EULA" isn't new.

http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/winvista_licensing.asp

Bla bla bla...
Like you would buy these products at retail prices anyway. If you wanted to pay them, you'd probably go for the OEM.

and maybe Apple BootCamp)

That'd be like saying you can't use Windows Vista with GRUB. Boot Camp is not a virtualisation solution; it's just a glorified bootloader and a bunch of Apple-provided Windows drivers for the hardware. Nothing more.

Edited 2006-10-18 17:55

You're not allowed to use one Vista Home license in a VM if the same Vista Home license is already in use on a licensed device.
There's nothing that prevents you from making the VM a licensed device, and as far as I can recall, previous licenses haven't allowed you to use the same license on more than one device at a time either, but the Vista license contains language to make it clearer what is allowed and what is not.

http://osnews.com/permalink.php?news_id=16219&comment_id=172830

Same goes for you.

They're late already. Windows XP final was leaked and cracked 64 days before launch. Microsoft are running much closer to their deadline this time; much closer.

"and we'll continue to hear people like you complain tirelessly. Or is it just the usual OSS fundies trolling? "

Not complaining. I don't use Windows or Office (I guess that does make me an OSS troll,) so I don't care. I just find it incredulous that people are willing to spend so much money, and perform otherwise unnecessary hardware upgrades, just to get an OS that's essentially XP in new clothes (and off its diet) and an office suite that adds features that most people won't ever use! Ask most people what they use Office for, and you'll find that most haven't even scratched the surface of the available feature set. I guess those with the mindset of "keeping up with the Joneses" will be in all their glory on release day, regardless of common sense which says to let these two pass.

If you don't use all the features that Office offers, you could always get something simpler like MS Works, or something that likes to pretend to compete like OOo/SO.

Pretend to compete? You really don't understand open source.

OOo offers an office suite that's in continuous and faster development than Office/Office System. And they don't charge a single cent to boot, plus it's freely modifiable.

It competes if it's offering a commercial product (paid, adware, whatever), which they don't.

The only reason they care about compatibility with Office documents is that there are people who'd want to switch. Providing support for existing file types does not equate to competition all the time.

@cmost

I don't use Windows or Office...

Yes, you are complaining. I've been playing with Vista for about a week. And even thought the prophets of doom have been at it for a while, it's going to be a solid upgrade well worth the money for Windows users.

I just love the thing they did to the fonts.

"I just love the thing they did to the fonts."

New fonts, bundled with Vista....wait 'til the EU uncovers this new development. Personally I'm holding out for the cool desktop icons and mouse pointers.

;)

Edited 2006-10-18 19:13

I just love the thing they did to the fonts.

What exactly did they do to the fonts?

I'm not trolling, I'm seriously interested... Do you happen to know any urls with examples? Screenshots? Font samples?

"I just love the thing they did to the fonts...."

I know, aren't they great? They were leaked to the Internet several months ago and they look fabulous on my XP and Ubuntu boxes. Unfortunately, fonts are not a compelling reason to lay out so much cash. Sorry.

Troll about ANYTHING else regarding Vista but DON'T say Vista is "XP with new clothes on"

It shows how misinformed you are on the subject.

"Also, you may use Vista Home in a VM. You just need to buy a lisence dedicated for that VM."

There are no licenses available which can be bound to anything else then physical hardware.

If you disagree, please show me a link to one.

"There are no licenses available which can be bound to anything else then physical hardware."

http://download.microsoft.com/documents/useterms/Windows%20Vist...

One for starters. All the Vista licenses say is that if the Software is installed on a computer, then the same software can not be installed in a vm. Except in the case of Ultimate where you can use the same license that is installed on the machine in a VM as well.

let's see:

"2. INSTALLATION AND USE RIGHTS. Before you use the software under a license, you must assign
that license to one device (physical hardware system). That device is the “licensed device.” A
hardware partition or blade is considered to be a separate device."

Ok, so the "device" has to be real hardware. Next:

"You may not use the software installed on the
licensed device within a virtual (or otherwise emulated) hardware system."

So, wether I would install it inside the VM or outside, it would be installed on this particular device. So I would no t be allowed to use a VM.

@Ford Prefect

You're just reading it the way you want to. It clearly doesn't say what your suggesting. Read it again. And again.

RC2 was a limited release in terms of numbers rather than in terms of audience; i.e., Microsoft made it available for a certain number of downloads.