Surprises Inside Microsoft Vista's EULA

Skibum

Senior Member
As will Vista be the next in a long line of Windows software that is used in my house. :rolleyes:
 

HoustonFirefox

Active Member
Windows XP is the last version in my house. Micro$haft has truly gone overboard with this. They are losing market share to Linux so how do they respond? Come out with 6 different versions, make up a EULA that nobody can read and spend the next 5 years suing people for violating the EULA.

My guess is that, about a year after Vista is out, Micro$haft update will disable all Windows XP installations and force them to Vista.

From the reviews I've read, Vista is a hardware hog that just puts window dressing (excuse the pun) on XP and doesn't really offer anything that should have been in XP to begin with.

Just my .02
 

Rupp

Senior Member
Do you truly think that Microsoft is worried about loosing market share to Linux? The average Joe will never be able to configure Linux. It is and will remain a hackers OS.

I love Vista and if you're are truly reading EULA's you are in the minority.
 

Tombo

Member
Rupp said:
Do you truly think that Microsoft is worried about loosing market share to Linux?  The average Joe will never be able to configure Linux.  It is and will remain a hackers OS.

I love Vista and if you're are truly reading EULA's you are in the minority.
I agree with you. Linux is a good hobby but it is not mainstream. Too many distros that take too much time to figure out. Its good for things like a router and other special purpose devices. I like them both for different reasons. For my computing I prefer windows. Vista is not great yet but it will be the best windows in a few years. Microsoft really has no real competition in OS software. If Apple can make a few bucks and keep the monopoly tag off of Microsoft I think Microsoft is happy( also they own a nice chunk of Apple). I actually think Microsoft at this point in time is at the top of their game. They wont be innovators like before but I think it is time for the OS and software world to stablilize for longer periods of time.

On the Eula problem, this is caused by litigation problems faced by Microsoft and a world that has blood sucking attorneys who make money leaching off of others. Watch Google. It bought YouTube and other companies which will invite lawsuits. You will soon see a Eula to search on their site. I was searching for something and some content came up that was very disturbing. I think I will never be the same again. I need an attorney to get some damages awarded to me. What I am trying to say in the end is success in this country causes companies and individuals to protect themselves. This hurts everyone. Blaming Microsoft is futile. Vote for candidates Tuesday that will bring tort reform.
 

huggy59

Active Member
Microsoft will always push new OS' to continue its income stream, which is reaching saturation and falling off in some of their markets. So, dry up the older OS and force users to move on and pay for upgrades, even as they delve into (or buy their way into) new markets to feed its hunger for increased income.

As for Linux being a hacker OS, I disagree. Given the right distro and the IT staff that supports it, it can easily replace Windows these days. There are many companies using Linux on the desktop, but those are not small businesses without IT staff to support it. It's just that MS Office does have a heck of a hold on the business offices of most companies.

Personally, I am now working for a non-profit company. If I could not get the significant savings from Microsoft we do enjoy because of our non-profit status, I would be putting Linux in the business on the desktops. As it is, I use Linux to control my network and for other purposes, mostly on the server side, with Windows on the user stations.
 

roussell

Active Member
Rupp said:
Do you truly think that Microsoft is worried about loosing market share to Linux? The average Joe will never be able to configure Linux. It is and will remain a hackers OS.

I love Vista and if you're are truly reading EULA's you are in the minority.
My company spends a lot with them, and we’re in bed pretty deep. But according to our M$ rep, yes they are worried about Linux. In Microsoft’s history, have they EVER gave away anything decent? Not until the last few years unless I’m missing something. Now for the first time they have free IDEs (.NET Express editions), they have released the source to Windows CE under a shared license and offer several other free tools and apps that are pretty decent. They also (in other countries) released stripped-down versions of XP that are fully intended to keep people from using Linux. Also look at the percentage of Linux servers on the internet, if LAMP (Linux, Apache, MySQL, PHP) servers weren’t around; then a lot of those installs would be M$. Are they worried? Of course they’re worried. Are they worried specifically about the US desktop/laptop market? Maybe not, but they should be if they continue to choke the people who buy their product.

As far as people not reading the EULAs… I’ll quote what the Police officer told me when I was pulled over and I didn’t know the posted speed limit. He said; “Ignorance of the law is no excuseâ€, and gave me my ticket.

Don’t get me wrong, I like Windows. 2003 Server and XP are some of the best products to ever come out of Redmond. I also enjoy the .NET development world; you can do a lot with a little (esp. using the free Express editions). I also believe in everyone making a buck for their work, and stealing Software is illegal (even if it’s Microsoft’s) and M$ does have a right to protect their product from thieves, but biting the hand that feeds has a nasty track record.

Interestingly, I searched for Ubuntu’s EULA and couldn’t find one. :D Their “Code of Conduct†is good enough for me. :rolleyes:

Terry
 

TCassio

Active Member
It seems that the least version one will need will be the Home Premium at $159 upgrade price. Okay price not bad. According to this article, you only get 2 installs, and thats it. We all know that hard drives fail and need to be replaced. We all also have been hit with a virus and had to reformat and reinstall. Well the next time something happens to your hardware you'll have to plunk down another $160 for the operating system you already own. Whats next, being charged per mouse click. :rolleyes:
 

Tombo

Member
TCassio said:
It seems that the least version one will need will be the Home Premium at $159 upgrade price. Okay price not bad. According to this article, you only get 2 installs, and thats it. We all know that hard drives fail and need to be replaced. We all also have been hit with a virus and had to reformat and reinstall. Well the next time something happens to your hardware you'll have to plunk down another $160 for the operating system you already own. Whats next, being charged per mouse click. :rolleyes:
After you install it the first time, spend about 80 bucks for a USB2.0 hard drive and make a complete image backup. Microsoft policies are helping you to be a better computer user in the end by backing up your software investment. If you are plunking down a 160 bucks to fix a virus on your computer or reinstall an OS on harddrive failure please do NOT blame Microsoft for making extra money for laziness.
 

TCassio

Active Member
Tombo,
You must own M$ Stock.
AS being in the computer industry for 30 years, I do have image backups. My concern is for the general public. It is very obvious to me that 90% of all computer users do not know what an image backup is or what an external USB hard drive is.

I guess as consumers we should be happy not to have any protection on our investment. I guess all people are perfect and never make mistakes (resulting in loss of there systems), and that all computer hardware will not fail.

I think M$ is taking advantage of the general public with there new EULA policies and I personally think its wrong.
 

huggy59

Active Member
Well, if they are going to make EULAs like that, then they should do away with the shrink-wrap liability disclaimer on software and stand behind it. Tit for tat. You think we'll see that in our lifetimes? No way.

And as far as virtual machines are concerned, the license technically says it's for one machine. So the definition of "machine" is changing because of the use of virtual machines. How is this any different than software like Exchange that is sold with CALs or other per-seat/per-user/per-mailbox/per-whatever licensing? Why would they NOT extend this same concept to the OS now that you can run multiple OS' on the same hardware?

Everyone got hot over the web because it allowed multiple people to use one box, and then the big software companies like IBM, Oracle, and other ERPs put their web licenses out... and it was the same - more access for more people means more costs and fees. Some of those measured in million$ or even billion$ for some installations.

Look, the whole model really isn't about the number of users. It's about the SUPPORT for the number of users. The concept of paying per-user is just a way to enforce the collection of enough money to support the product. This is called Commercial software.

Look at another model: Open Source is great; you copy and install and use the software free. But you want support? Either you deal with fellow users and some sort of open peer group as-they-can-spend-time-to-help developer access, or you pay for professional support. The software is free, the install is free, there are no per-anything fees, except you pay for premium support, or in some cases basic support.

Stoic businesses typically look at the company they are doing business with - are they solid, stable, here for the long-term, worthy of a law suit if they breach the contract, and liable? Open source often does not meet those standards.

So what am I saying? I'm going Linux in the future unless I or my business has a very good reason to go with MS. Three of those reasons are: cost, support, and compatibility. Today we get MS software at extreme discounts, which makes it very attractive to stay with them. Tomorrow???? Well, I've got Software Assurance, so we can go to Vista if/when we want, but when will that be, and why?

I've got 30 years in IT; I personally can handle the Linux equation, but if I got hit by a bus tomorrow, would my business (employer) be able to continue with Linux without me? I'll bet they could with the right support. At home I'm moving over to Linux. XP will be the last MS OS here for general use. I can't afford to keep buying updates and such for no significant reason, either. I still run 2000 on many of my machines because I just didn't see a need to complicate matters further by going to XP - it didn't gain me anything for what runs on these computers and how they are used.
 

ginigma

Active Member
To all of you complaining about the Vista EULA, why don't you read the Windows XP, NT, 2000, which ever version you have around. I'm sure you will find clauses just as restrictive.

For the record, I don't work for MS, I do own MSFT, I don't think Bill is evil, my home PC's include W2K, W98, WXP, Mac OSX, Linux Fedora Core 3, I do work for a huge corporation which uses a lot of MS products, as well as IBM, Sun, HP, Suse, etc. I think you get the idea.
 
Top