Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Windows XP EULA Compared to GPL

Posted by michael on from the one-giveth-and-the-other-taketh-away dept.

cranos writes "The Sydney Morning Herald is running an article comparing the XP EULA to the GPL. Basically it's just reinforcing what we already knew but it could be a nice little piece to show your PHB next time."

5 of 420 comments (clear)

  1. mirror by oever · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here's a mirror of the pdf file.

    --
    DNA is the ultimate spaghetti code.
  2. Ugh, forget this idiot. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Just do a little searching on Sam Varghese and see what an idiot this supposed journalist is. His articles are little more than the whining of an ill-informed, angst-ridden gadget-geek.

    His "article" on Mono, for instance.

  3. "comparing"?!?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    What will they compare next?

    How about Max OSX vs. a bicycle?

    Or perhaps a puppy vs. lear jet?

    The GPL is not an EULA - it's a distribution license. Maybe if the MS EULA dictated terms under which you can distribute WinXP, then you might be able to compare them.

    I just have to ask - what's the point?

  4. There is an error in the article! by borgdows · · Score: 5, Informative

    WinXP EULA doesn't say...

    "cannot be used as a webserver or fileserver"

    but

    "shouldn't be ever used as a webserver or fileserver"

  5. Re:MS trying to make us violate their EULA? by Utopia · · Score: 5, Informative

    You are not in voilation.

    They are comparing the XP Home edition EULA.
    The professional version which you are using doesn't have that clause.