Microsoft to Give Away Software

dptalia writes "In an attempt to suck up to the European Union, Microsoft has announced that it will give away software allowing multiple operating systems to run simultaneously. Microsoft says this is part of their strategy to make more software available through OSS." From the article: "Georg Greve, president of the Free Software Foundation Europe, said he had not seen the details of Microsoft's giveaway but cautioned against assuming it was motivated only by pragmatism or a new spirit of cooperation. 'If Microsoft were doing this for altruistic reasons, it would be a first,' Greve said. 'I think they are probably trying to get more machines on the Windows platform, and they may also be trying to improve relations in Brussels.'"

Comments

Maybe it will be rigged

[192939495969798999]

Maybe it will be rigged to make the other OS run more crappy than windows, so that Windows looks like the better os... then again, how would you possibly do that! /ducks

Re:Maybe it will be rigged

[hcob$]

Maybe it will be rigged to make the other OS run more crappy than windows, so that Windows looks like the better os... then again, how would you possibly do that!

Easy, make the "alternative OS" crash ever 5 minutes... instead of 10 :)

Re:Maybe it will be rigged

[PsychicX]

Hmm. Let's look at the post:

In an attempt to suck up to the European Union

While the *ahem* leaning of Slashdot are no secret, is it really necessary to loudly scream, "We are the Fox News of the Internet!" ? You'd think the editors would still at least have the decency to pretend that they're not blatantly anti-Microsoft.

Re:Maybe it will be rigged

[0xABADC0DA]

Welcome to Microsoft Bootcamper 2006!

Boot Progress:

Install Hypervisor [OK]
Detect Windows OS [FAIL]
Warning: Your system is damaged.
Repair by upgrading to Windows 2006 [Y/y]? No dammit!!!!
Set Memory Access Policy == slow [OK]
Set Network Reliability Helper == unreliable [OK]
Set Mean Time To Failure == 3600 [OK]
Transition to Grub [OK]

Re:Maybe it will be rigged

[192939495969798999]

Someone is taking things kinda hard... a 'troll' mod for a Windows joke on Slashdot?

Re:Maybe it will be rigged

[smittyoneeach]

ODERINT DVM METVANT
Let them hate so long as they fear.
Lucius Accius, Fragment
(170 BC - 86 BC)

Re:Maybe it will be rigged

[Anonymous Coward]

Easy, make the "alternative OS" crash ever 5 minutes... instead of 10 :)

Which Windows are you refering to, 95 or ME? ...I suppose those are about as useful on a desktop platform as Linux *ducks*

Re:Maybe it will be rigged

[jZnat]

It's just the Microsoft astroturfers with mod points again...

Re:Maybe it will be rigged

[wilder_card]

VERITAS VOS LIBERABIT

The truth shall set you free.

Jesus of Nazareth, (-12BC - 39AD, according to one theory)

Re:Maybe it will be rigged

[killjoe]

Fox is anti democrat. They are against half of the population of america.

Slashdot LEANS anti MS (It's debatable and I'll get back to that) so they are against one corporation.

What's wrong with being against a corporation which everybody, even their defenders acknowledge acts unethically? Not one person who defends MS stands up and says "MS is a beacon of light and hope to the world" it's always "Sure they have done some crappy things in the past, but they are doing this one thing OK" or "sure they acted unethically but all businesses do" or "sure they acted unethically but they should not have been prosecuted because the anti-trust laws are bogus". Nobody, not even the most ardent defender of MS disputes the fact that the company is unethical.

Why do you get so worked up MS anyway? It's just another corporation, there are thousands of corporations. If I said Nissan, maytag, or rockport was a crappy corporation or made crappy products would you have a knipshiin about that?

Now does /. lean anti MS? I don't think so. There are a dozens if not hundreds of MS trolls, astro turfers and shills here on /. Take a survey of the highest ranked posts and you will see that most of them are pro MS. Pro MS comments always get upmodded especially if the take the edge of by saying "sure they are unethical but.....".

Finally.

So what? I am sick of hearing this complaint. If you don't like people critizing MS then go to gotdotnet or any one of hundreds of web sites where people dance around singing holy holy holy about MS and Bill Gates. It's a big internet, there is room for everybody.

Re:Maybe it will be rigged

[mnmn]

So they will release MS LILO Vista for free downloading. Cool.

I cant wait till they release cfdisk.

Re:Maybe it will be rigged

[Typhon100]

Claiming slashdot and/or its readership doesn't lean anti-MS is one of the most insanely asinine things I've ever heard.

As for MS being ethical, I think they are. So there's one exception to your grand sweeping generalization. I would actually argue that most rational people think MS *is* ethical, and they also would agree that, in the past, MS was *not* ethical. Assuming MS is unethical now and forever, because once upon a time several years ago they abused a monopoly, doesn't give the impression that you're thinking critically about this.

If people get modded up for saying things like, "Well, to be fair, MS is a business...", its because they're the only ones who can overcome their irrational personal loathings long enough to have some perspective.

Re:Maybe it will be rigged

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a big internet, there is room for everybody.

No it's not and no there isn't. Don't you get it - tubes are limited in space, as opposed to dump trucks. If only the internet were a series of dump trucks.

Re:Maybe it will be rigged

[D4rk Fx]

Wow, You've managed to have an uptime more tha*CRASH* *Reboot* n 5 minutes in wi*CRASH* *Reboot* STUPID WINDO*CRASH*

Re:Maybe it will be rigged

[Schraegstrichpunkt]

I imagine it's part of their DRM/TC/lock-in strategy. Right now, you can run VMware on Linux, and use tools like usbsnoop to reverse engineer drivers, create virtual devices, and generally prevent the guest OS from doing things it shouldn't be. With Xen being free software, it will be even easier. Microsoft has always wanted to control the platform, and this is yet another attempt to garner that control.

Re:Maybe it will be rigged

[Anonymous Coward]

I am a former Microsoft employee, used to love Microsoft products, thought Windows 2000 was great and Windows XP moderately better, aside from the lack of an activation transfer feature. I thought it was great (well, once mks tools was installed for a proper shell), that is, until changes to the EULA came along with the service packs, and when Microsoft began suing their own customers. That is inexcusable.

Now, I was never against Linux, and in fact ran it from the beginning when you had to install it from floppies. The thing is, Windows had a huge head start on Linux and had improved rapidly (security issues aside) up to and including Windows XP and Win2K3, and Linux on the desktop, while a fun academic exercise, was a royal pain in the ass. One spent far more time tinkering, configuring, hacking code and applying patches than getting real work done. Around that time, when worms weren't so pervasive, I actually had a Windows box reach nine months of uptime when Win2K came out, and yes, it was a heavily used box.

Now the tables have turned. The OSS community have come together and they leapfrogged Windows in nearly every aspect imaginable. On the cross-platform front, there are vastly superior browsers centered around Netscape-derived projects (Mozilla/Gecko), vastly superior integrated desktop environments (KDE and to a lesser degree Gnome), and development tools are starting to gain ground on Visual Studio (Anjuta, Kdevelop).

It's to the point where I run Linux on servers and workstations at the office, and at home. Oh sure, there is the unavoidable need for a Windows machine or two, but they are by far in the minority. Why the switch? No worries about the BSA. No worries about tracking CALs, maintenance can be performed on a live system, PLUS Unix is herently far more secure. Not only that, but fire up Mandriva, Ubuntu, SuSE, Redhat, etc.and you have access to literally THOUSANDS of applications, all without having to worry about whether or not you'll have to hold ten minutes for re-activation, buy more licenses, or obtain the install disc. Lost or damaged your media? Microsoft will tell you "Go to the store and buy one" but with Linux I can just go download it.

Plus, have you ever used Konqueror? Compare that to explorer as a file manager, or to Apple's finder. Explorer is limiting, to put it very nicely.

When you come down to it, Windows sucks. What was it I liked so much about it? Everything works. Well, that is, you can get Windows drivers for everything. You can walk into CompUSA, pick ANY joystick, bring it home, and know it will work. Oh sure, the drivers in the box might be buggy, but just download the latest update. No problem finding drivers. No having to google for hours before you know which peripherals contain which chipsets, and whether or not the code projects exist and if they do whether or not they are mature enough and compatible with the kernel build you're running. (Oh Lord, I feel like I'm praising Microsoft. Well, they deserve it in this case).

I'm partial to Linux now, because Microsoft has stagnated so much. I cannot see the value in Office 2007 or even Office 2003 over Office 2000. I do not see any value in Windows Vista now that WinFS has been yanked. Oh sure, it'll be shiny, but who cares when OpenGL has been downgrated, your Fair Use rights are severely limited to the point where you might accidentally get DRM applied to your own media creations, let alone legally-purchased content you have Fair Rights to copy, and you can only activate twice, then after that hardwar5e drivers require re-purchase.

Microsoft has earned every bit of scorn they receive here, and I hope that the mainstream press reviews Vista and the conclusions come down to "WTF? DOn't waste your money upgrading. Upgrade to OS X or Linux instead."

Signed,

A former Microserf and diehard Windows fanatic who has come to the light side

Re:Maybe it will be rigged

[rucs_hack]

pre defined hard limits on hardware usage per OS for 'safety' perhaps.

Something that the experienced user could set with ease, but with a default setting that would downgrade processor performance or suchlike 'to prevent damage' which newbie users wouldn't even know about, and would see as poor performance.

That's probably fanciful, but if they can justify trying to make people re-buy an OS costing hundreds of pounds just because they've replace some hardware a few times, then I would not put it past them trying something.

Re:Maybe it will be rigged

[TheSeer2]

I know you're being sarcastic but a lot of people aren't. So either many of them are unreasonable or they really don't know how to use a computer.

Any decent person would probably not encounter a "crash" or something along those lines by Windows (Firefox crashes more than Windows, but then again, that isn't generally too much Firefox's fault but the fault of the shoddy websites that cause the crash...) any more than they would with Linux.

Re:Maybe it will be rigged

[LinuxIsRetarded]

Maybe it will be rigged to make the other OS run more crappy than windows

It doesn't take any rigging to do that.

Re:Maybe it will be rigged

[Anonymous Coward]

A shoddy website should not be able to crash your browser any more than shoddy programming should be able to crash your system. This isn't meant to be a bash against Firefox (which, btw, is my browser of choice) or Windows (which, unfortunately, is my OS of necessity). It all comes down to programming to catch rogue behavior and implementing better memory protection.

Re:Maybe it will be rigged

[lynx_user_abroad]

Assuming MS is unethical now and forever, because once upon a time several years ago they abused a monopoly, doesn't give the impression that you're thinking critically about this.

Have you ever heard the phrase "Fruit of the poisoned tree"?

Suppose, for example, that at one time I gained a large sum of money through addimittedly immoral means, but now I live a life of perfect morality, existing solely on the interest earned from the ill-gotten funds. Would one consider me to be a moral person?

If so, then one would subscribe to the philosophy that immorality does not exists unless you get caught. The alternative view would require one who profits through immoral action to be tainted until fully repented. This is exactly the view represented in a statement like "MS is unethical now and forever, because once upon a time several years ago they abused a monopoly"

Unless one would be arguing that MS has fully repented for the abusive actions which occured. (Not just the ones for which they were convicted.)

Re:Maybe it will be rigged

[drsmithy]

Why do you get so worked up MS anyway? It's just another corporation, there are thousands of corporations. If I said Nissan, maytag, or rockport was a crappy corporation or made crappy products would you have a knipshiin about that?

Because the Slashdot community, in general, is critical of anything Microsoft does not because it's objectively bad, but because Microsoft did it.

Now does /. lean anti MS? I don't think so. There are a dozens if not hundreds of MS trolls, astro turfers and shills here on /.

Saying Slashdot doesn't have distinct anti-Microsoft slant is ridiculous on its face. One need look no further than the Bill Gates/Borg icon to see that.

Take a survey of the highest ranked posts and you will see that most of them are pro MS. Pro MS comments always get upmodded especially if the take the edge of by saying "sure they are unethical but.....".

I see you're one of the people for whom "not blatantly anti-Microsoft" is equivalent to "pro Microsoft".

Re:Maybe it will be rigged

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem with your argument is that MS were caught, and because of that, have had to pay fines to the American government, European Commission, private groups filing lawsuits, et al., and have also had a considerable number of restrictions placed on their business activities (which do not apply to their competitors).

A more correct example would be that you: (a) gained a large sum of money, partly by doing something immoral, but mostly through activities considered moral; (b) were 'caught' in your immoral behaviour and then punished by the state, with the punishment deemed by those prescribing it to be sufficient for the immoral acts done previously (without of course taking away all of the money you had gained through moral activities).

Given that Microsoft were caught and punished, your logic implies that anyone who has ever done anything immoral (i.e. virtually everyone) can never be forgiven!

I think your attitude is one of the reasons Slashbots are so far from the mainstream when it comes to their view of Microsoft. To most people, Microsoft did something bad, but paid for it, and that's the end of the story. For Slashbots, 'M$' did something bad, so are 'teh evil' forever.

Re:Maybe it will be rigged

[bit01]

It's just the Microsoft astroturfers with mod points again+1...

---

New game: Spot the lying astroturfer on /.!

Re:Maybe it will be rigged

[pyrotic]

Microsoft is an eithical company, at least in the eyes of ethical fund managers. They don't pour shampoo into the eyes of little bunnies, export arms to dodgy dictatorships, fill landfill sites with toxic waste, target the poor and the vulnerable in their ad campaigns, etc. Sure this is relative, they could behave better. But you'd have to be a real geek to rank the destruction of Netscape with destruction of the ozone layer.

Re:Maybe it will be rigged

[killjoe]

"Because the Slashdot community, in general, is critical of anything Microsoft does not because it's objectively bad, but because Microsoft did it."

So what? It's just another corporation. People say bad things about all kinds of corporations. I have a friend who hates anything made by GM. He is constantly pointing out various GM cars and telling me what piles of shit they are. You know what I don't feel the need to jump up and down and defend GM. I just don't give a shit about GM the corporation and GM products. Who the fuck cares what anybody says about any corporation. It's not like they have souls or feelings to get hurt.

"Saying Slashdot doesn't have distinct anti-Microsoft slant is ridiculous on its face. One need look no further than the Bill Gates/Borg icon to see that."

I am just going by the moderation. Pro MS and pro windows posts get modded up to 5 more often then not.

Re:Maybe it will be rigged

[killjoe]

Well I am better then jeffrey dahmer and osama bin laden so that makes me ethical right?

The problem with comparing yourself to the worst of the world and patting yourself on the back for not being as bad as the most vile and evil person is that you end up being pretty vile and evil. You set low goals for yourself and you are likely to achieve them.

BTW I think the worst thing MS did ever was to fight SPF. We could have put a decent in the spam problem if MS had just accepted that standard instead of sabotaging it. That and the reltentless push and lobbying by MS for DRM are the two worst things MS has ever done.

Re:Maybe it will be rigged

[rtb61]

Editors are customers too. You don't have to be anti any supplier. As a customer if a product sucks, or the marketing blows, or the warranty is not worth the digital bits that delivered it, then, just like any other disatisfied customer you should express you true opinions of a product and the company that produces that product.

I can never understand why some people think it is wrong for customers to stick up for and to support other customers. I mean, we as customers will benefit by it and every cent of microsoft's profits are a customers cost and I absolutely don't have a problem with working to achieve the best results for my fellow customers and the closer to cost the corporations are forced to sell, the better off we all are and that is just plain common sence.

Re:Maybe it will be rigged

[Loko Draucarn]

Wouldn't he have said that in, say... Aramaic instead of Latin?

Re:Maybe it will be rigged

[drsmithy]

So what? It's just another corporation. People say bad things about all kinds of corporations.

The problem is not saying bad things about corporations, the problem is dismissing everything one particular corporation does for no other reason than a long-held bias against them.

I have a friend who hates anything made by GM. He is constantly pointing out various GM cars and telling me what piles of shit they are. You know what I don't feel the need to jump up and down and defend GM.

So if you _knew_ he was mistaken about one particular car being "bad", you wouldn't disagree ? Even if your friend's irrational bias was going to mislead someone else ?

I am just going by the moderation. Pro MS and pro windows posts get modded up to 5 more often then not.

But are overwhelmed in volume by anti-Windows and anti-Microsoft posts.

Re:Maybe it will be rigged

[Anonymous Coward]

You know? You're absolutely right. A little (true) story: I know of people south of the border who lived under the shadow of a drug lord's feud. The family of this man used to "give to the poor farmers" in times of need, droughts, hurricanes, etc. This way, they were seen as not being "totally evil" and in return got the confidence of the people. Truth is, they now own almost all of the good land, bought with drug money, became prosperous "agro-entrepreneurs" and the little farmers are either working the land that is no longer theirs as peons for a few pesos or migrated illegally to the U.S. End of story. There's always a wolf under the lamb skin.

Using the open source money making model

[Anonymous Coward]

The softwares free - it's the support that costs money.

Re:Using the open source money making model

[hcob$]

Also known as:

"The first one's always free"

Re:Using the open source money making model

[Anonymous Coward]

This is only said by people who have never approached a dealer and asked for free drugs.

yippee

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sure it'll be great software...

Interesting Decision

[Wiarumas]

An interesting decision by Microsoft. I am unsure of their intentions... I'm sure they aren't explaining their real intentions behind this move.

Re:Interesting Decision

[m0rph3us0]

You might want to consult their SEC filings for their intention. I don't think I might be too far off the mark by saying their intentions are to make money. Right now they are probably going to incur a cost of doing business in the EU (ligitation / fines) and I would hazard a guess that doing this is what they figure will minimize their losses (litigation / regulation / fines) and maximize their profits (selling software & services).

Re:Interesting Decision

[dgatwood]

Their intentions seem pretty straightforward to me. It's not about running other operating systems so much as running other Windows operating systems, with other OSes being a side effect that doesn't cost them any additional effort (except the struggle to put aside their lust for dominance for a little while).

The reason Microsoft stated for buying Virtual PC was so that they could build an emulation environment that would allow them to bundle enough of the old versions of Windows so that they could basically scythe out vast swaths of legacy code from their OS. I suspect this is the intent behind this effort as well. Why bother supporting all those 16-bit apps when you can emulate them in a VM? That's doubly important if they ever plan to support 16-bit code in 64-bit WIndows (which they currently do not).

Re:Interesting Decision

[ben there...]

FTFA:

Microsoft said it was relinquishing all license claims on its Virtual Hard Disk Image Format - new software that will allow computers running on rival products like Apple's OS X or Linux, its chief competitors in operating systems, to simultaneously run Windows.

So it sounds like MS is giving away a .img -like file format for use in virtualization products, possibly in an OSS-compatible license, although knowing MS, something will make it incompatible.

It's probably a good idea for MS. If they keep the disk image format to themselves, then gain almost nothing. But if they can make Windows easier to run through another OS by allowing other programs to use the technology, they sell more server licenses.

Re:Interesting Decision

[Anonymous Coward]

In an era of virtualization, Microsoft is desperate to stay as a "host OS" vendor. They are happy as long as other OSes are running on top of Vista. They are, however, very unhappy if other OS (such as Linux) is running beneath Vista. Therefore, they forbid Vista to be used as a guest OS by the license change reported recently. Along this line, distributing free virtualization software does make sense a lot.

Re:Interesting Decision

[KiloByte]

No, I would say it's nearly completely about controlling other OSes. How? Without allowing other OSes to run, any attempts to make TCPA mandatory would be instantly stopped by about every country. But now, they can provide VirtualPC for free, providing people with a way to run a free OS inside a sandbox fully controlled by Microsoft -- as they only way of using the new shiny hardware. And that's their master plan, full control over computing.

Re:Interesting Decision

[Monsuco]

That is because MS doesn't care in the sligtest what OS you actually use, from a buisness perspective, as long as you buy a license for Windows, they don't have any reason to care if you use it on a PC that multiboots linux and Windows. They probably should, from a buisness prospective, be a little more open. Take Virtual PC. I think from a buisness perspective, porting it to linux and OSX-Intel and even open sourcing it would be a good idea because from a buisness perspective, it encourages people to buy a license for Windows to multiboot and another license to run inside of Linux or Mac in case you may occasionally need a program or game, and don't want to reboot (and lets say Wine can't already handle it) into windows, you could always use Virtual PC. While they are at it, making a deal with Apple to trade NTFS support and in exchange they would get to support NTFS helps both of them now that Macs run Windows too. Supporting the EXT and Reiser systems would also help linux users who might consider a license to windows to multiboot with if it would write and read EXT2/3 or Reiser/4. Making Windows Swap aware would also help with both OSX and Linux multibooters. Windows Media could also be a good thing to port as it helps spread that format and allows for Linux users or Mac users to use Playforsure devices. They should also port Windows to Xen.

But back to virtual PC. MS might as well open source it and go beyond just making it free. There are several reasons to do this. First, it encourages people to use multiple copys of the same OS meaning more copys of Windows would be in demand. Second, it would make the FOSS community change their outlook on MS. MS would no longer be seen as the evil closed source company, they would be seen as the first company to release virtualization software that doesn't require an OS be ported that is FOSS. They also could OS Virtual PC for PPC since it really doesn't sell all that well and most people will just use QEMU or another cheaper, quicker, emulator and it encourages people to buy Windows. They also end up getting free R&D if they open it up and the EU will be happy.

Re:Interesting Decision

[Giometrix]

I'd certainly use it for more than one windows (non virtual) running on my machine. I currently refuse to buy games that insert a shim between the OS and the cdr because I consider it too risky, I can't afford to have my machine not work because some game company wants to protect their content. If I can have multiple Windows, then it wouldn't be so bad (still bad, but not as much). I currently dual boot boot Linux and Windows, but Linux is a lot nicer about letting me pick my own bootloader. I'm afraid to do what I discussed above in my current set up because I'm afraid a fresh second installation of Windows will overwrite the bootloader. Anyone have experience with this?

Re:Interesting Decision

[jZnat]

You could reinstall the bootloader after installing Windows.

I tend to not dual boot to avoid complications such as these. Maybe Grub will be able to substitute the entirety of the Windows bootloader?

Re:Interesting Decision

[Fallen Andy]

Bang on the nail. But it also has the interesting side effect of making it easier to try out other operating systems at practically zero risk :-)...

Right now, I'm installing dropline gnome in the slackware linux 11.0 I'm running under virtual PC 2004. Usual Amessdos + loadlin + monolithic kernel for minimum fuss... Andy.

Re:Interesting Decision

[Giometrix]

"You could reinstall the bootloader after installing Windows." Yep, that's what I did. The question is can I install Windows after I installed the bootloader (will it automatically overwrite the bootloader I manually installed there)?

Re:Interesting Decision

[Thundercleets]

Business as usual,
When the Windows monopoly cannot compete on merit it devaluates a strong competitors key product by offering a debilitated clone for nothing and then claims that it is charity.

Re:Interesting Decision

[drinkypoo]

Every time you install windows, even over the top of old windows, it will scrub your MBR in the process of rewriting the boot loader (to make sure it works, since you can't test it without booting.) I hope that answers your nonsensical question ("I just reinstalled my boot loader after installing windows, will windows overwrite my boot manager?" I mean, you answered yourself already.)

Re:Interesting Decision

[Giometrix]

Its not nonsensical. I didn't say I reinstalled my bootloader, nor did I ask if I could. I simply asked if there was a way to install windows without overwriting the MBR.

Re:Interesting Decision

[Karzz1]

Windows will overwrite the MBR (master boot record) and you will not see lilo/grub when you reboot; you will automatically go into a Windows boot. All is not lost however. I am not sure how you would overcome this with grub (LILO never gives me problems and thus I have been reluctant to convert to GRUB -- GRUB has given me fits in the past w/i2o drivers). With LILO, you can boot with a rescue cd (Ubuntu, Knoppix, Trinity Rescue CD, etc...), mount your partitions and re-run LILO with an entry in lilo.conf for your Windows partition. In some cases, it may be wise to create a separate, small partition for your /boot folder at the beginning of the drive, though it is only older machines that suffer the problem I am referring to.

For instance, lets assume your Linux partition is the first partition on the first IDE hard-drive (/dev/hda1) and your swap partition is the 2nd (/dev/hda2) while Windows occupies the rd(/dev/hda3). Once you have installed windows (and wiped out your MBR with a windows only MBR) you would:

1). boot from some type of linux rescue cd
2). mount your root Linux partition
2 a). create a directory to mount to -- mkdir /temp
2 b). mount the partition on your directory -- mount /dev/hda1 /temp
3). Just to be safe, mount some pseudo filesystems:
3 a). mount -t proc none /temp/proc
3 b). mount -o bind /dev /temp/dev
4). chroot to partition -- chroot /temp
4 a). refresh profile -- source /etc/profile
5). create/edit lilo.conf so that your boot entries look something like:


----snip----
#Linux bootable section
image = /boot/vmlinuz #use a real kernel from /boot
root = /dev/hda1
initrd = initrd #use a real initrd image from /boot *optional*
label = Linux
read-only
#windows bootable section
other = /dev/hda3
label = Windows
table = /dev/hda
----snip----

6). run LILO -- lilo

a). if you get no errors, reboot

It sounds like a lot of work, but really should only take a couple of minutes.

Re:Interesting Decision

[rp]

Yes, of course the intent behind making Virtual PC and Virtual Server free (and yes, they are *already* free) is to make people run more Windows operating systems.

But the point that you assholes don't seem to get is that Virtual PC and Virtual Server do not, in any way, limit you to Windows operating systems. The host system must be Windows, yes, but on my Virtual PC I have Solaris and SuSE Linux running happily alongside Windows Server, Windows XP and Windows 2000 (and concurrently, too) without any problem. All the software does is give you extra options, if you already have a Windows OS on whjich to host it. This ability is incredibly useful, I use it almost daily.

Jeez, you get very useful, very user-friendly software thrown at you for free and all you can do is complain.
If you don't want to use the software, for whatever reason, then just don't! There are plenty of alternatives available. But many of the posters here don't even have a rough idea what this software is capable of. I'm sorry but that's just pathetic.

Re:Interesting Decision

[Giometrix]

Very informative. Thanks.

Re:Interesting Decision

[drinkypoo]

Its not nonsensical. I didn't say I reinstalled my bootloader, nor did I ask if I could.

Nor did I imply that you did.

I simply asked if there was a way to install windows without overwriting the MBR.

No, you asked if it would overwrite your MBR. You didn't ask if there was a way to avoid it. And I quote:

The question is can I install Windows after I installed the bootloader (will it automatically overwrite the bootloader I manually installed there)?

Now, if you wanted to know if there was a way to install to install windows without overwriting the MBR, then perhaps that's the question you should have asked. Barring that, you should have avoided lying about what you said, because the question is already preserved for posterity.

On top of that, I also answered your unasked question in my comment above. Perhaps next time you could just display a little humility, accept that you did not ask the question you thought you did, and you could thank me for answering your question even though you could not compose it correctly. Not, mind you, that I expect you to do this.

Re:Interesting Decision

[donaldm]

One thing you can do with this which would not benefit Microsoft is to install this software on a Linux machine and run a virtual copy of MS Windows which to all intensive purposes is free. After-all it came with your PC so you will have a valid license. You should also be able to use Windows Update and play the latest games in a "sand-boxed environment", but for serious stuff you could use what normally comes with your Linux distro.

For a visualised MS Windows machine you could even go out and buy Windows Software but for the life of me I cannot see why (speaking as a normal user not from a business or corporate perspective), still at least you would have the option. You can even use this scenario to keep multiple copies of the OS and it should be legal providing you only run one copy at a time. This could start to get murky so any legal advice here?

Even a pirated (shock horror!) copy of MS Windows should be able to be run under a virtual machine and providing you don't try to update the OS via the web you can still run many Microsoft products (think games) although this would be illegal.

Of course if you cannot do this then the whole thing is a big con, because visualisation should allow you to do just what I have proposed.

OMG!

[Anonymous Coward]

Business selling windows attempts to drive consumers to windows! In other shocking news, compliance with onerous regulations now called "sucking up." News at 11!

Obligatory

[Rob T Firefly]

It's a trap!

Re:Obligatory

[gyranthir]

It definitely smells fishy to me...

Re:Obligatory

[Anonymous Coward]

Anything that smells that fishy has got to be trouble. (Insert sexual reference here)

vmware

[SwissCheese]

Maybe they are going to give away virtual server for free.... oh wait they already did.

Re:vmware

[Anonymous Coward]

yeah, they'll give away something they already gave, and have it work ONLY if windows is the underlying os. Smart move on their part, if it works, especially given the info that the lower end Vista won't run on it. Now, if they gave away a vmware virtual MS windows machine, with Linux able to be the host system, THEN I'd be interested.

A software to run multiple OS?

[flibuste]

Are M$ going to distribute LILO through their distribution channels? I like that!

Oh..wait...that's not it? Ah well..I never read the FA anyway.

Not altruism, competition

[the Gray Mouser]

At the very end of the article it mentions that IBM, Apple, and Sun are selling similar products.

Why buy theirs when you can get the same thing from MS for free?

Re:Not altruism, competition

[Amouth]

i don't know about Apple's but because IBM and Sun's version kicks the living daylights out of MS's ..

i run MS Virtual Server - while it is nice.. it is diffently aimed at small biz.. it would never scale to datacenters (well)

IBM has had it for many many many years.. and it works.. Sun also.. not aslong as IBM but just the same both kick ass in the datacenters...

Part left out?

[MECC]

"BRUSSELS Microsoft accelerated its efforts to persuade European lawmakers that it was changing how it does business by announcing Tuesday that it would give away software to enable computers to run multiple operating systems at the same time. and insure other operating systems run more slowly than windows, as well as report back to MS who's not running windows and why.

Doh!

Re:Part left out?

[lowe0]

You know, at this point, it's pretty obvious that there are people who simply will never want Windows. You don't want to pay for it, you prefer Unix, you have an irrational hatred of Microsoft, you have a rational hatred of Microsoft, whatever the reason.

Given this fact, why would Microsoft care to find out why those people don't run Windows, or to ruin their non-Windows experience? It'd be a waste of money chasing people who will never buy your product. Why would they go to all that effort to spite and/or research people who stand no chance of ever becoming profitable customers?

MS cares about their customers and their potential customers. Paranoid ABMers don't fall into one of those two categories.

Re:Part left out?

[MECC]

"MS cares about their customers and their potential customers"

That they care about potential customers is why they might want to know about people with a windows box running something other than windows. MS has always had a deep paranoid streak with respect to urban legends of a kid in a garage coming up with the 'next big thing' and displacing them. It is as irrational as it sounds, but they've always seemed to act as though that were a potential threat.

old news, same stuff

[iriki]

Just like what they IMHO did in the past with Netscape Navigator, and what they IMHO did a few months ago when they released a "windows update" which deleted Firefox bookmarks ;)

Re:old news, same stuff

[Anonymous Coward]

What you might want to do is create an "index" html file rather than using bookmarks. You can then point any web browser to your "index" page on a shared drive and have a common set of links you regularly visit. The only downside would be having to edit the HTML for any new links but on the upside, I can see the same links with any PC on the network (I guess a roaming profile could do the same thing but apparently when the company has 100K employess, roaming profiles isn't necessarily reasonable).

they released a "windows update" which deleted Firefox bookmarks

In this case, it might have been specific to your installation. I have Firefox at home and work and none of the updates from the last 2 years affected the few bookmarks that I do have. Do you have a link to anyone else reporting the deleted links problem?

Jim

Re:old news, same stuff

[Ash-Fox]

Might be of use to you.

They're not giving software away...

[Anonymous Coward]

UHHH

Its giving away (if you believe that) the data layout for its virtual hard disk (VHD) format used by VirtualPC and Virtual Server products.

I don't see anything about giving SOFTWARE away

Re:They're not giving software away...

[Jugalator]

Besides, MS has given away a lot of software in the past (for example, their compiler is free, and also the Express editions of their IDE's, the powertoys, WTL was even made open source, and so on), so even beyond the matter you bring up, it's a pretty poor title.

Re:They're not giving software away...

[adolf]

Microsoft has been giving away Virtual PC for some time now.

Wake up, Slashdot.

(-1, Retarded)

Awww.

[Funkcikle]

Poor old Microsoft. Like information, they just want to be free!

And they would have been able to be so if it weren't for those meddling European kids...

"Old Man Gates! It was you all along!"

"Embrace, Extend, Extinguish" all over again

[Iphtashu Fitz]

announcing Tuesday that it would give away software to enable computers to run multiple operating systems at the same time.

So now they're going to do to VMWare exactly what they did to Netscape and others?

Re:"Embrace, Extend, Extinguish" all over again

[TrappedByMyself]

VMWare Server is already free

http://www.vmware.com/products/server/

Summary is Totally Misleading

[mpapet]

FTFA:
Microsoft said it was relinquishing all license claims on its Virtual Hard Disk Image Format - new software that will allow computers running on rival products like Apple's OS X or Linux, its chief competitors in operating systems, to simultaneously run Windows.

They aren't giving anything away. In fact, they are going the other way allowing you to run other OS's. It will come as no surprise that it will be very easy to migrate to the MS crack pipe. But won't be able to go any other way.

Matusow said the decision was part of a Microsoft initiative begun in June to make more software available through so-called open source licenses, which enables independent designers to incorporate Microsoft products in their own software that they can then distribute for free.

This is a very good effor to subvert the term "Open Source" into something more business friendly for Microsoft. It appears as the submitter was correctly confused. Score one for Microsoft.

I'm guessing the reason is quite simple...

[Kjella]

With TCPA, Microsoft needs to be in control of the whole boot process. Any form of "untrusted" boot manager like LILO or GRUB to allow users to dual boot with Windows would probably break that chain:

BIOS -> LILO/GRUB -> Windows = No TCPA

With their bootloader you can either go:
BIOS -> Windows Boot Manager -> Windows = TCPA
BIOS -> Windows Boot Manager -> Other = No TCPA

The rest is just marketing fluff so this solution is adopted.

Re:I'm guessing the reason is quite simple...

[joe 155]

I was wondering what TCPA is, it turns out it's "trusted" computing Platform alliance ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_Computing_Pla tform_Alliance ). It certainly is an interesting idea you mention though, and possibly one of their reasons. I looked through the list of the companies which are doing trusted computing on the link above and it scares the hell out of me... if Intel and AMD are doing it it seems almost inevitable that sooner or later we'll be TC'ed...

Re:I'm guessing the reason is quite simple...

[Anonymous Coward]

Quite... hence the reason for Apple's bootcamp, as they put a TPM (AKA hardware DRM) in all their new machines.

Try explaining that to Apple fans though. Not only do they not understand what a TPM is, what it is capable of, and how much of a threat it is... they can't imahine that Apple would want to abuse it for anti-competive purposes. The poor poppets.

Re:I'm guessing the reason is quite simple...

[smallpaul]

This isn't bootloader software. It is virtual machine software. Your argument makes no sense in that context.

Re:I'm guessing the reason is quite simple...

[newt0311]

well... TCPA is not exempt under (US) cartel rules since it discriminates against non-members (they cant comm with anything TCPA) but that is only in an ideal world. I hope it never comes to pass. The applications and CPU have no buisiness hiding RAM from the OS unless that is BIOS RAM and applications have no buisiness encrypting files to the point where only that application and hardware config. can read it. If TCPA trashed these portions (i.e. there was no hidden RAM from the OS and encryption could accomodate hardware and software changes or atleast always have a garantee of exporting an unencrypted file) I would be more accepting but doesn't seem like that is going to happen.

Re:I'm guessing the reason is quite simple...

[foamrotreturns]

Trusted Computing in itself is not a bad thing - it's how it's implemented. TC could help you run a completely bulletproof server by signing all of your in-house code and the OS, but not allowing any other code to run, period. If it's secured on the hardware level, remote exploits become a thing of the past. The fact that Microsoft's vision for TC is a bit Orwellian doesn't mean the rest of us should shun the concept at its core.
TC doesn't kill computing. Microsoft kills computing.

Re:I'm guessing the reason is quite simple...

[philml]

Yep, this is virtual machine software rather than a bootloader, but the same logic applies -- people can now run xOS without having to use another bootloader.

Re:I'm guessing the reason is quite simple...

[Anonymous Coward]

Trusted computing hardware, as it is currently forumulated, is designed to work against the owner of the machine... not for him.

Make it so the owner of the machine knows the root key and can access anything he wants (including sub keys), and you have an excellent bit of security hardware. That won't happen though, because it takes away the main motivation for this hardware: bringing DRM to the previously open PC world.

Re:I'm guessing the reason is quite simple...

[bit01]

TC could help you run a completely bulletproof server by signing all of your in-house code and the OS, but not allowing any other code to run, period. If it's secured on the hardware level, remote exploits become a thing of the past.

Nope. In theory a non-administrator account can't compromise a machine either, particularly if their home folder/directory is made non-execute. TC is just as susceptable to bugs like buffer overflow as any other software security.

TC does add another tool to the security toolkit but it's mainly a way to restrict owner access to media by making the vendor the administrator rather than the owner.

---

DRM'ed content breaks the copyright bargain, the first sale doctrine and fair use provisions. It should not be possible to copyright DRM'ed content.

Re:I'm guessing the reason is quite simple...

[foamrotreturns]

It's not susceptible to buffer overflow if the processor is an Athlon64 or any of the other processors designed to prevent those. It's only being utilized as a tool to lock users out. Don't blame the crowbar - blame the robber. If you could control your TC hardware, you could lock your box down in an unprecedented fashion. I don't think the majority of companies on board with the initiative have plans to lock the TC hardware to Windows. If you purchase hardware, you can do what you want with it. I'd want TC hardware to handle the communication link between a fingerprint reader and the OS, for example.

The thing they're giving away...

[jginspace]

...according to TFA is: "its Virtual Hard Disk Image Format - new software that will allow computers running on rival products like Apple's OS X or Linux, its chief competitors in operating systems, to simultaneously run Windows" (that's a PITA to copy with IHT's javascript).

Don't get carried away. I think I read here last week that MS aren't going to allow Vista to run inside a virtual machine - am I correct? And there's Vista messing up the boot sector too. It looks like this is not a two-way street.

Re:The thing they're giving away...

[kilbo]

The article was very misleading. Microsoft's EULA says you can't install the same copy of the OS on both the physical machine *and* in a virtual machine running on that physical machine. This makes perfect sense since you are installing the OS twice. OTOH, the are giving you the ability to do this with Ultimate, in essence, giving you license to install it multiple times which is an expansion of their current licensing. You can, of course, buy two copies of the OS. One for the physical and one for the virtual machine, or just buy one copy and run it in a virtual machine running on Linux, etc.

Re:The thing they're giving away...

[JustASlashDotGuy]

Don't get carried away. I think I read here last week that MS aren't going to allow Vista to
run inside a virtual machine - am I correct? And there's Vista messing up the boot sector too. It
looks like this is not a two-way street.

I think you are recalling the licensing story that was posted on slashdot. Vista should run just
fine in a VM. We are already running the RC beta in a VM and it works great.

Re:The thing they're giving away...

[ocbwilg]

Don't get carried away. I think I read here last week that MS aren't going to allow Vista to run inside a virtual machine - am I correct? And there's Vista messing up the boot sector too. It looks like this is not a two-way street.

This is incorrect. The low-end versions of Vista (according to the current version of the EULA) aren't allowed to be run in a VM, but the higher-end versions not only can be run in a VM, but they will include a new version of Virtual PC and licensing to allow you to run up to 4 instances simultaneously.

Regardless, Microsoft has already made Virtual Server free if you run Windows 2003 R2, and Virtual PC has been free for awhile. How big of a step is it to release the specs for your VHD file? And how likely is it that it had already been reverse engineered by someone else to begin with?

Check out Microsoft's wrongdoing!

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds to me like M$ wants to infect Linux boxes with a virus of some kind.

Check out their misdeeds: http://malfy.org/

No Way!

[m0rph3us0]

It may be a suprise to some but corporations are modeled around capitalism. That is to deliver value to their shareholders, if OSS creates more value then they will do that. There is nothing wrong with self-interest. They are running a charity. I use free software because of the price/performance metric. When commercial software is more valuable I use that.

Re:No Way!

[Anonymous Coward]

Thank you for the sane and insightful comment. Unfortunately, I can virtually assure you that it will be completely lost in all of the Microsoft-phobic-mania that permeates Slashdot ...

You just wait..

[Channard]

Forget AOL CDs, we'll end up getting free copies of Windows XP in every paper and publication ever. Which wouldn't be a bad thing, as the one thing putting me off trading my Mac Mini G4 in for an Intel Core one is that I'd need to buy a new £199 copy of Windows XP if I wanted to Dual Boot it.

Re:You just wait..

[Anonymous Coward]

Ever hear of AntiWPA?

Re:You just wait..

[MonkeyBoy]

Meh, buy an OEM version of Windows XP, they should be 50% or less the price of a retail box.

If you can find a retailer willing to sell it to you without any strings attached, the retailer is the one on the hook with Microsoft. But the strings are pretty loose though on OEM now, you could buy a mouse with an OEM OS, and so long as the mouse is connected to the PC, you're legally fine.

Obviously different country, different rules, but from what I gather from my Brit friends this particular loophole exists over there too.

Re:You just wait..

[Sexy Bern]

£199? Ripped off, mate. You can get XP Home OEM for under £60. ebuyer, scan, dabs to name a few.

Re:You just wait..

[jZnat]

Wow, you can get a full version of XP Home for less than that in the states. Meh...

To the common platform

[nyabutid]

First they announce support for XPF an Adobe killer then this ... really why are they doing all these or is it that Web 2.0 is changing the computing culture? Me thinks that they have realized that to have an edge on Googazon they have to move to the service market but then get kick backs from their platform software.

TMNT

[bob301]

That was easy.
Yeah, a little too easy.

It's quiet.
Yeah, a little too quiet.

Look, there's raph.
Yeah, a littletoo Raph.

RTFA

[Lxy]

I read the FA 3 times, and the most I could come up with is out of this paragraph:

Microsoft said it was relinquishing all license claims on its Virtual Hard Disk Image Format - new software that will allow computers running on rival products like Apple's OS X or Linux, its chief competitors in operating systems, to simultaneously run Windows.

So it's giving away or opening up its disk format for some kind of Virtual PC-like product. There's no mention in the article of exactly what this means. Sounds like they're competing with Xen or VMware ACE possibly. Nowhere does it mention a free OS, so I'm assuming that part or all of the virtualization will be free (speech or beer, not sure which) but you still get to pay for the OS on top.

Viewpoints

[Jack Pallance]

Point 1: Microsoft makes an incredibly restricitve license, then appeases organizations by "loosening" the artificial terms to get some deals done. It's like when a car salesman has a sale where all cars are 70% off, one day after they have marked UP all of the cars 80%.

Point 2: Microsoft would never do anything without knowing they will make more money off of the deal in the future. Nothing is free if you have to pay more for other products needed to make it work (See also: Microsoft AntiVirus)

Point 3: Microsoft can give away all of their software for free today. Of course, the day after the deal is done, the Product Activation may stop working. Then Microsoft can charge for the "Genuine Advantages"

Re:Viewpoints

[khelms]

1.8 x .3 = .54 Sounds like a bargain to me!

Re:Viewpoints

[Anonymous Coward]

It's like when a car salesman has a sale where all cars are 70% off, one day after they have marked UP all of the cars 80%.

Let me get this straight, say you had a $10,000 car, marked it up 80% to $18,000, then cut the price by 70% off (-$12,600) to $5,400?
I'll take ALL you got!
You might want to use a different example cause that sounds like a stinkin DEAL to me!

a few differences

[Phantom of the Opera]

For one, VM Ware is really tight. The people who use VMWare are more technically oriented than the general browsing public. Netscape was big when it was attacked, but it was far from bug free.

Yes, they will try the triple E tactic. It is what they know. If they knew how to write good quality software and did that, this would be a different sort of competition.

Re:a few differences

[eMbry00s]

This isn't EEE. Here, they try to make people ignore other's products (by offering their own for free) long enough for the competitors to die off, whereafter they can ignore the issue content that they are the prime leader in that software field aswell - making them capable of leveraging their office and server software, which is where their money is at.

The EEE technique is about conforming to standards, and then extending their products to use those standards along with proprietary parts. Quench competition since they aren't allowed to use this patented technology, and then rule supreme again.

Different tactics, same anti-competitive bullshit.

Re:a few differences

[Natales]

Virtualization should not be, but it is, one of the biggest threats against Microsoft dominance, mainly because it relegates the OS to an application workload manager, where the app becomes the most important aspect and the OS is just the wrap for the app.

What they are doing now with their disk format is yet another "mee too" strategy regarding Virtualization. VMware already released its VMDK disk format specification to the open as a well as several other open standards (http://www.vmware.com/interfaces/faqs.html/) so anybody that wants to use it, can do it at no cost already. VMware already released its VMware Server product for free (as in beer), so Microsoft was forced to do the same with their VirtualPC stuff.

What's next? Virtual Appliances (http://www.vmware.com/appliances/), and with them, the rise of Linux in the Enterprise beyond the traditional mid to low tier level.

Of course they'll do whatever they can to combat that.
Disclaimer: I work for VMware.

IDC claim

[Intron]

According to the article, IDC claims that most of the dual-OS machines in the world are servers rather than desktops. I find that rather surprising. Most servers are intended for constant use, so I can't see them switching back and forth a lot. Whereas, I can imagine many people wanting to switch between Unix or Linux, and Windows on their desktop as they do different tasks.

Re:IDC claim

[Jussi K. Kojootti]

The article is not about dual-booting, it's about virtual servers (which no doubt are mostly used on servers).

Self-interest is fine...

[nine-times]

I don't need Microsoft to be altruistic. In the abstract, it's fine for Microsoft to be self-interested; I only have a problem with Microsoft when they're stupid and vicious. For example, Microsoft could see the looming threat that there are a lot of IT people who hate them and find their software frustrating, and Microsoft could make their software better and easier to use, and make the best software in the universe, all in order to keep their customers happy. This would be a good self-interested move, because it would inspire some brand-loyalty, and in the long-term it would keep them on-top. And that'd be fine.

As it is, Microsoft keeps being anti-competitive, screwing their customers on a daily basis and releasing service-packs with catchier graphics for $400 an update. This brings various governments down on them, and scorn from loads of users and IT professionals, which may well be their undoing one of these days. That's not sufficiently self-interested to be smart.

Re:Self-interest is fine...

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe, but it's more profitable in the short term. Welcome to the new capitalist society. When it starts making less money than you want, jump to something else.

Re:Self-interest is fine...

[Anonymous Coward]

I see your problem. You're under the misguided impression that "IT people" are MS's customers. IT is a customer of MS in the same sense that your local garage is a customer of car companies.

Re:Self-interest is fine...

[Anonymous Coward]

exactly

Re:Self-interest is fine...

[nine-times]

I don't know how you're putting that metaphor together. Are car companies making most of their money by selling directly to local garages? Do local garages hate putting up with crappy design choices made by car manufacturers?

Because I assure you, I am an "IT person", and in every single place I've worked, the network support and desktop support have plenty to worry about without Microsoft making it harder on us.

Holy shui...

[Jeian]

In an attempt to suck up to the European Union

Holy shui. Bias much?

Point 4:

[Anonymous Coward]

They also tighten up the licenses of their OS so that only the most expensive versions can be run under such an arrangement. See Vista license agreement on running under a virtual environment.

Giving away products a compatitor sells=dumping

[Anonymous Coward]

This is HORRIBLE!
If Honda started giving away motorcycles in the US, or Samsung memory ships - they'd be shut down for dumping products.

Microsoft is doing this to kill Xen/Suse and VMWare.

This is no gift - it's undermining competitors.

Re:Giving away products a compatitor sells=dumping

[nietsch]

No it is not. If you read the article (which has nice but useless paging system btw), you would have read that the are givving up any licencing claims they had on ther virtual disk format. (Ignoring the fact that software licences are not enforcable in the EU anyway).
So they are not giving software away, but leave it to the other manufacturers to figure out a way to read these windoze virtual HD images. So where exactly is VM-ware (gives away vm products) or Xen (is free from the very beginning) getting hurt?

So?

[hal2814]

"'If Microsoft were doing this for altruistic reasons, it would be a first,' Greve said. 'I think they are probably trying to get more machines on the Windows platform, and they may also be trying to improve relations in Brussels.'" So what? Do you think IBM is backing Linux out of the goodness of their hearts? No, they're trying to sell hardware. Likewise, Microsoft is trying to sell software and if they think this will lead to increased software sales, it's in their best interests to do it.

not allowed to - its in the licence!

[Anonymous Coward]

errr, the licence for Vista Home Editions specifically forbids running the
OS on a virtual machine.

so, which roadmap are they REALLY going down?

They still haven't told us much..

[ECXStar]

So what if they are opening up the format. MSFT still doesn't provide information on the VM tech behind this announcement. If they are describing their Virtual PC product, then it will have limited appeal since it only runs on Windows as a host and older PowerPC Macs. Makes a person wonder. Something new to compete with Parallels and VMware?

The software was already free

[PCM2]

Not only does VMware already give away VMware Server, but Microsoft Virtual Server is also already free. That's not the news.

This is a news story from an uninformed reporter who seems to be confusing software and standards. The announcement appears to be that Microsoft is "relinquishing all license claims on its Virtual Hard Disk Image Format." This, to me, sounds like less of an altruistic move than a competitive one -- because, of course, VMware's image format is already free.

Re:The software was already free

[termigan]

The interesting thing with the format being free is that VMware could well have a converter or interoperability mode to interoperate with Microsoft Virtual Server.

Re:The software was already free

[jaseuk]

VMWare already runs Microsoft Virtual Server disk images, see the tech specs on the free VMWare Server.

Jason

In other news

[Tim C]

In an attempt to suck up to the Slashdot editors, dptalia has submitted a biased, flamebait-filled summary of the article, apparently attempting to play off the old animosity between the MS fanboys and Linux zealots. Both of these sizable groups are known for their lack of logic, short tempers and propensity towards verbal violence. We'll bring you film of the ensuing flamewar right after these commercials...

Thomas Gray would be proud...

[megaditto]

Epitaph on a disk image format:

Here free from virii and Patch Tuesdays, lies
Virtual Hard Disk Image, the bane of admin's eyes,
Its stupid quirks won't rot another brain,
From Microsoft we'll ne'er buy again,
Few where the C.P.Us alotted to its breath,
Now let it sleep in peace its night of death.

Virtual machines of limited benefit. +1 Microsoft

[Anonymous Coward]

Essentially MS is giving away nothing of value (or very limited value) in consumer space in trade for EU goodwill?

Appears to be.

Virtual machines tied across virtual networks? The latest buzz.

And IF you want/need/could make good use of/ a VM would you want to build our from a MS base? Didn't think so.

Developers love the tech, of limited value in the server room and has almost no value in consumer space. [end item]

&& [end microsoft]

Great...

[Anonymous Coward]

Nobody should be running malware like Vista outside of a sandbox. Why don't they do everyone a bigger favor and not bother releasing it at all?

Woo Hoo

[jmn2519]

Free Microsoft Bob for everyone!!!

This is odd given the restrictions for Vista

[Maxo-Texas]

weren't we reading here recently that Vista will restrict doing this in a home environment?
Maybe i'm confused.

1. ?

[sparr0w]

1. Give away software 2. ? 3. Profit!... er..

Re:1. ?

[jZnat]

Seemed to work for Trolltech, MySQL, Red Hat, Novell, and many others...

Enlightened self-interest

[Pfhorrest]

"Georg Greve, president of the Free Software Foundation Europe, said he had not seen the details of Microsoft's giveaway but cautioned against assuming it was motivated only by pragmatism or a new spirit of cooperation. 'If Microsoft were doing this for altruistic reasons, it would be a first,' Greve said. 'I think they are probably trying to get more machines on the Windows platform, and they may also be trying to improve relations in Brussels.'"

News flash: companies tend to do things only when they have some (however distantly) self-interested reason to do them. Film at 11.

The question to be asked here isn't "is Microsoft doing this because they think they have something to gain from it?". Of course they are. The question is "does Microsoft doing this harm or benefit (or both, or neither) the rest of us, and in what way?".

Corporations are never altruistic. That doesn't mean they can't be socially responsible, if those in charge of the company are sufficiently enlightened to see that doing so is, in the long run, in their own self-interest. (Though public corporations rarely are so enlightened). If a company wants to do something to get on good terms with some country or another, then "well of course they benefit from not being in trouble" is hardly a condemnation of their acts.

What we've got to ask is whether those acts are just hand-waving "look at us we're good guys" minimal placation of the government, or if they're really doing something decent. More practically, we (users and developers) just have to ask "are the licence and price on this a good deal for us?" and then act on the answer to that. That said, given Microsoft's history, I'm leaning on the side of "No" for the probable answer to that. But that doesn't make this a bad deal because it's good for MS. It's a bad deal just because it's bad for us.

Free crap

[electrosoccertux]

Free crap is still crap. Would you want it anyways?

Er...

[Anonymous Coward]

Virtual PC and Virtual Server are already free.

dual boot or virtualized?

[Junta]

If they are talking about servers concurrently running more than one OS, then yes, fully expect that since servers frequently leverage virtualization to separate services or leverage services appropriate to disparate OSs without incurring hardware cost....

Dual booting servers is rare, but not unheard of. Servers in this case are farms that are repurposed frequently. However, at least the outfits I've seen, this is typically done using rapid image deployment, but having both images on drives and fitzing with the boot loader time is an important strategy when the servers must maintain persistant state across repurposing between a set of purposes, or when turn-around time is critical. Additionally, a software development company will more often than not offload the responsiblity of switching between test platforms to servers where they can be managed more by administrators and leave development workstations simple for the desktop.

That leaves some development workstations as the one population that IDC would particularly concern itself with (they don't care about the home market 'hobbyists'), and I still wouldn't doubt repurposed farm servers and development/test servers would outnumber those...

Hey, cool!

[benplaut]

Now I can run XP and Vista at the same time, thanks Microsoft!

So it's OK ...

[Original Replica]

... to give away software, just don't let them make cheap shoes.

Yes, such evil motives

[MikeRT]

They want to sell more software and improve relations with foreign governments that despise them. I thought that we all hated Microsoft this week because they have problems with obeying the EU and other governments. Now we hate them because they're trying to make concessions to them, even if they're not concessions that may have been asked for? Oh well, can't please everyone.

You know, I find it very ironic that they force them to unbundle Windows Media Player, but the EU doesn't promote its own home-grown apps like the VideoLAN client. In fact, it makes it legally dangerous to develop it. I for one don't trust even my own government to look after anything economics related on its own turf.

I would advise others to take a good, hard look at the double standards, inconsistencies, etc. shown in these cases before trusting the EU or other governments. Big business often exists BECAUSE of big government, so don't assume that just because a big business is at odds with the government right now that either of them are right. In the real world, two sides can be equally 100% wrong.

Timeo danaos et dona ferentes

[Anonymous Coward]

n/c

Not like Georg

[ClosedSource]

"Georg Greve, president of the Free Software Foundation Europe, said he had not seen the details of Microsoft's giveaway but cautioned against assuming it was motivated only by pragmatism or a new spirit of cooperation. 'If Microsoft were doing this for altruistic reasons, it would be a first"

Of course as president of the Free Software Foundation Europe since 2001, Mr. Greve has never received a penny of salary due to his well-known dedication to altruisism, so we can trust him.

Some altruism perhaps?

[TheFlyingGoat]

What would MS have to do to please all of you? In the past year they've adopted more open standards, turning on a software firewall by default, submitted their own open standards, released more software for free, and improved their security and standards compliance by focusing on those with Vista and IE7. Granted, each of these things wasn't done just to help the world... some of it was done to help Microsoft's market share and public perception. However, the end result is the same: MS seems to be getting more friendly toward OSS software.

Each thing they do is met with people saying they're JUST doing it to increase market share, or to trap customers into certain situations, or to extinguish competition. Hell, even the article about the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation donating TONS of money to good causes was met with people complaining about how Bill Gates made that money in the first place.

It's quite easy these days to purchase a computer without an operating system on it. It's just as easy to install non-MS software on a Windows system, setup a dual boot system, or set a non-MS program as the default handler for certain file types. It's been a while since I've seen a company go out of business because of Microsoft. In fact, many more companies are in business because Microsoft makes it relatively easy to program for their platform (look at all the crap software that's out there and tell me that it takes more than an idiot to make a Windows program). Lots of linux zealots say that they won't give MS the benefit of the doubt because of their past practices, but Microsoft's past practices now involve a couple of years of doing the right thing.

Sure, there's a few blemishes (genuine advantage, DRM) mixed in with that good stuff, but overall MS has been doing a decent job lately. Perhaps it's time you all try looking at it with a balanced outlook rather than immediately thinking the worst.

Re:Some altruism perhaps?

[JustNiz]

>> What would MS have to do to please all of you?

Err.. how about:
1) Allowing people to upgrade their PC hardware more than once before they have to re-buy Vista.
2) Take all the crappy DRM out of vista so we can play our own damn media
3) Get rid of the stupid Eula clause that says vista can only be used on a single screen.
4) Get rid of the stupid Eula clause that says vista can't be used in virtual machines
5) Not purposely outdate XP by making DirectX 10 vista-only

There's no such thing as altruism for Microsoft. Its all about making as much money as they can at any cost to the user. They always have and still continue to abuse the monopoly they have created.

Re:Some altruism perhaps?

[cyber-vandal]

Because:
(a) they're only doing it because of two very expensive legal actions against them by the governments of the US and the EU; and
(b) time and again they have shown that they can't be trusted; and
(c) habitual criminals don't tend to inspire trust.

Re:Some altruism perhaps?

[Tom]

What would MS have to do to please all of you?

Undo the damage they've done.

Well, that might be a bit much, even they can't pay that (that's the nature of monopoly rent - it's a net loss for the economy because the monopolists gain is smaller than everyone elses loss).

So, how about just going away and stopping to do more damage? That'd do for me.

Re:Some altruism perhaps?

[EvilSS]

Uh, if you actually read the EULA you would see that 1,3, and 4 are total BS. The /. story about it from a few days ago was almost completely wrong (Vista has a EULA was pretty much the only true part).

As for 2, nothing on Vista will stop you from using your own media player to play any format you like. If you don't like DRM, talk to the content publishers who use it.

Re:Some altruism perhaps?

[Anonymous Coward]

You talk as if evil practices are all in the past and MS has turned into some kind of user-friendly company.

It's quite easy these days to purchase a computer without an operating system on it.

You say it's easy to buy hardware w/o junk pre-installed. What's the point if I'm going to pay more for the *extra* service (NOT installing windows)? Thanks to big deals between MS and hardware vendors, such gems are hard to find, where-ever you go in this whole big world.

It's just as easy to install non-MS software on a Windows system, setup a dual boot system, or set a non-MS program as the default handler for certain file types.

Being happy that microsoft *allows* me to install non-microsoft software just doesn't cut it for me. Thanks a lot, but I do own the hardware. It's my right to install any software I like on it. So, yes, microsoft does the right thing by not actively preventing it just like all other OSes.

It's been a while since I've seen a company go out of business because of Microsoft.

What about AV vendors locked out of their own market recently? (assuming the need for an AV is logical in the first place)

In fact, many more companies are in business because Microsoft makes it relatively easy to program for their platform

What about puny attempts at locking people on Windows by coming up with interfaces which only they can comply fully (think .net)

What about the CRAPPY SOFTWARE that sometimes works and sometimes doesn't. See, machines are not very good with sometimes. It takes crappy companies to do that.

Nobody ever has a right to ask microsoft to do something out of altruism. That would be simply stupid. I think the majority of slashdot would be happy with microsoft (as you suggest) if it just kept to honest business practices, developing good products and not working behind the consumers.

Re:Some altruism perhaps?

[syousef]

Genuine advantage, and DRM are "a few blemishes" mixed in with a lot of good stuff???? And this is modded up on slashdot? Genuine advantage and DRM are a few blemishes the way Nazi war crimes are a blemish on humanity.It's not all good with a few bits of bad. Microsoft and many other companies have pretty much turned hostile against their own customer base. A few blemishes my left nut!

Re:Some altruism perhaps?

[Xtifr]

> What would MS have to do to please all of you?

ALL of us? There's probably nothing they can do. IBM still has fervent detractors after two decades of trying to improve their image. However, I see little sign that MS is even trying. This, as others have noticed, is a fairly trivial thing they've done here, misreported, and quite possibly designed as an attack on VMWare, not a generous giveaway.

> Each thing they do is met with people saying they're JUST doing it to increase market share, or to trap customers into certain situation, or to extinguish competition.

Yes, and IBM still gets a lot of that too. And available evidence suggests that it's still sometimes true for IBM, and still usually true for MS. MS has proven, repeatedly, that they're willing to lie, cheat and steal to get what they want. And they've proven that they're willing to give stuff away solely for the purpose of undermining their competitors. The fact is that they've been utter rat-bastards for nearly three decades, and it only looks like they're changing if you squint funny and try to ignore a whole lot of stuff.

> It's been a while since I've seen a company go out of business because of Microsoft.

Then you haven't been looking very hard. Of course, they're going after some tougher nuts these days. Symantec and Google aren't going to simply fold up and blow away at the first adverse wind. And Nintendo and Sony have a lot of experience with tough compettion. But a lot of smaller A/V companies (just as a for-example) are dropping off the map.

> Microsoft's past practices now involve a couple of years of doing the right thing.

While I agree that there are signs they're trying to do better (amazing what a major investigation by the EU will do), their current practices still involve lots of questionable stuff. They've got a long way to go before you can even begin to pretend that the balance of their behavior is "the right thing". And even then, it's going to be a long time before they make up for the harm they've done, and even longer before some people are going to be willing to forgive and forget. Again, just ask IBM about that last.

You seem to think that any little not-wrong thing they do should be an enough to make us forget all the harm they've done in the past, and all the harm they appear to be continuing to do. Well, sorry, bub, we're not that stupid or gullible. Maybe it's time you took a more balanced outlook instead of immediately assuming the best!

Re:Some altruism perhaps?

[ce33na66]

Going by way of the Commodore route would appease me.

Then again; maybe not. I had more respect for Commodore than I do Microsoft.

Re:Some altruism perhaps?

[c0d3h4x0r]

Slashdot fanboys, repeat after me:

Microsoft is neither good nor evil. Microsoft is just a business. A business's job is to make money.

Lather, rinse, repeat.

A business that makes decisions out of any other motivation is being stupid and will ultimately be beaten by competition. A business like that isn't really a business, anyway. It's something else, just trying to fool itself (and others) into thinking it's a business.

You'll never see Microsoft do something just to be a good samaritan, because that's not smart business sense. It's not about being "good" or "evil". It's about making decisions that ultimately make fiscal sense for the company.

Sure, a specific decision by a business might appear altruistic. Either it really is (and the business is stupid), or the business is smart and has fiscally strategic motivations (that the general public isn't privy to).

In this case, I'd guess Microsoft is begrudgingly giving a little bit of ground in order to avoid more legal troubles. Given how much money Microsoft has to spend defending itself in court (not to mention how much they'd lose in sales if Vista was blocked by the European Union) versus how much they'd lose by opening up this particular thing, it was probably a no-brainer.

Re:Some altruism perhaps?

[Aceticon]

The day the contracts between MS and the big PC manufacturers are such that PCs are priced without an OS and Windows is an extra option with it's own cost is the day MS will have done enough.

Until then they're just taking advantage of their monopoly position to screw us all up ... continuously - so don't expect most of us around here to give any big kudos for whatever small moves they take here and there to make the whole "get screwed my MS" process slightly less painfull ("Pull your pants down and prepare to take it again. Don't worry, this time you get a cookie").

Re:Some altruism perhaps?

[Obstin8]

"...Microsoft's past practices now involve a couple of years of doing the right thing. Sure, there's a few blemishes (genuine advantage, DRM) mixed in with that good stuff, but overall MS has been doing a decent job lately. Perhaps it's time you all try looking at it with a balanced outlook rather than immediately thinking the worst."

Remind me to ask you for your opinion five years from now. I have no doubt the response would be both entertaining and enlightening!

Re:Some altruism perhaps?

[Monchanger]

The other replies bring up lots of reasons we technical people don't like Microsoft. I don't like having to fix other people's computers all the time due to the whole spyware/virus weakness of Windows. Nor do I like it when my rather well taken care of machine at work needs to be restarted for no good reason. No, Linux and its applications aren't bug free. Yes, there's plenty of crappy software in the OSS world. Thankfully, distros like Debian and Ubuntu get rid of a lot of them, so its less often that one finds software that doesn't work right. On these points and more, the Linux crowd is right to complain, and no "free software giveaway"s or donations to various causes is going to change that.

Me, I'd start off by asking for less lying and bullying, which seem to be almost uniquely Microsoft's in the software world:
* No more saying "we can't remove the browser from the OS", when they have more than adequate resources to rewrite vast parts of the operating system.
* No bullshiting the EU saying they'll create thousands and thousands of jobs by releasing a piece of software which isn't that monumentally different from the one already out there.
* No more using the "user error" excuse whenever a user complains.
* No more purchasing of false research saying Windows is "cheaper" than Linux. It's not always cheaper. Sometimes it will and part of the time it won't. I know it's "just marketing" to say that you're the "#1 product", but these false studies are well beyond reasonable marketing.
* No more pushing businesses out of the market by buying their competitors and dumping their product, by attaching it to Windows for free. Healthy competition, actual innovation, and acquiring other companies is fine. Abuing a monopoly isn't.
* No illegaly funding rediculous lawsuits against IBM for Linux.
* Since the big builders like Dell are not allowed to sell lower priced computers (and don't tell me they don't want to- Wallmart sure did when Linux became ready for its customers) by not having to pay for a Windows license. Hardware manufacturers have no trouble ignoring Linux because there's no financial incentive to spend the extra few bucks. It's all very convenient for Microsoft, but not for me.

On that last note, when my computer's power supply fails, I get "you need to have the original operating system installed" from my very large warranty provider. On the day I get a different answer, that will be the day when I'll start hating Microsoft.

Re:Some altruism perhaps?

[Kris_J]

Get rid of the stupid Eula clause that says vista can only be used on a single screen.

Pardon?

But how legal is this OEM thing?

[Channard]

I have heard about that, but it seems legally dodgy at best. Certainly, the notice at Scan mentions it can only be sold with a computer. A computer, not a bit of hardware. And if it's not legal, why not just pirate it?

Re:But how legal is this OEM thing?

[Amouth]

it is legal to sell OEM software with a new Computer or major computer component. By major computer component most software vendors agree CPU,motherboard,HDD,Memory work.. but MS also says that a mouse counts (not a keyboard just the mouse)

Re:But how legal is this OEM thing?

[ncc74656]

I have heard about that, but it seems legally dodgy at best. Certainly, the notice at Scan mentions it can only be sold with a computer. A computer, not a bit of hardware.

I don't know about how things work over there, but here, places like Fry's and Newegg will sell OEM WinXP with things like power splitters, IDE cables, or even a bag of screws. If Microsoft had a problem with that, I'm sure someone would've ratted them out and they would've been stopped long ago.

Deja vu

[Anonymous Coward]

Isn't giving away software considered anitcompetitive behavior in Europe, and even in the US if you are a monopoly. Sears couldn't offer lifetime warranties on Craftsman tools in Germany.

Sheesh...

[tkarr]

Microsoft is doing something nice?? *gasp*! Let's not be happy no matter what they do! ;)

Viri and Worms R us

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes! I need an OS agnostic virus and worm vunerability point in all my pcs!

May I be the first to say...

[Nocturnal Deviant]

Whats the catch.

I mean come on free software and Microsoft aren't in the same reality....

whats the bet on ten different types of adware, spyware, and a New Great variation of Sony's Rootkit included....

Seems Easy to Me

[Geccie]

The answer is simple - Control

Its easier for others to use M$ format than for M$ to implement anyone's format - for anything

If others try to implement M$ format, there will be some bugs - they will be behind the curve. Better for M$ to be "Innovating" out in front

M$ can verify the images to make sure you've licensed all virtual OS images because they control the machine and the data format. As they've given away the VM, why use a competitor's product? Internet Explorer, Windows Media Player - Any of those ring a bell? Media player is just a platform for DRM and control!

Do you REALLY expect M$ to PROPERLY disclose a file format or API - Get real - anyone remember their XML doc format -

Even if they do disclose the data format - Do you REALLY expect them to follow their own specs? The only images that will reliably work will be MS images

Now M$ can sell you HDD images tailored for your Specific requirements - no need for you to own those nasty installation CDs

Limit copyright of software

[Cracked Pottery]

I don't see why for certain kinds of software, that it would be unreasonable to permit the free use of older software. Microsoft's investment in any DOS version has been paid for many times over. I wouldn't be surprised that IBM would release OS/2 to open source if it could. The new operating systems, such as Vista, are driving the sales of bigger faster better hardware, but a lot of utility can be realized from used hardware and the copyright laws should encourage that by releasing legacy software, in at least binary form, for free use.

Re:Limit copyright of software

[ClosedSource]

"I wouldn't be surprised that IBM would release OS/2 to open source if it could."

I would be surprised because IBM has passed on the opportunity to open source other software that they discontinued.

Re:Limit copyright of software

[kabz]

I'd imagine there's so much Windows code in there that this is just a non-starter.

IBM have a pretty good history of contributing to FOSS.

Re:Limit copyright of software

[ClosedSource]

Yes, but there are other products without the legal hurdles that IBM hasn't opened either.

Content-free article

[Michael Woodhams]

The summary was nearly content-free, so I read the article - and it added nothing not already in the summary.

Are they talking about a boot manager, or VMware-like software running under Windows? By "give away", do they mean bundled with Windows, or free($) download?

Microsoft Virtual PC

[JustNiz]

Microsoft have made Virtual PC available for free for a while now... The reason is that its basically not worth anything because its so crappy.

I can't believe they're trying to use free Virtual PC as some major bargaining chip to the EEC.

What I want to know is..

[qualidafial]

..will it be bundled with their e-mail tracking program?

VHD Specs

[arunkv]

The VHD specs mentioned in the article are available here.

Microsoft Allegiance comes to mind.

[badpazzword]

If Microsoft were doing this for altruistic reasons, it would be a first.

Sorry for staying on Microsoft side on this sentence, but "this story recalled me of when Microsoft gave away the source code of an "underdog" game of theirs, Allegiance (still developed and played by a small but loyal community at freeallegiance.org).

Well, yes, the dev needed a full four years to compile a working copy of the source (the original, buggy copy of it is still available here) and the EULA wasn't that great. But yet again I see no way Microsoft can make any profit out of that, at least now. It has no fluffy graphics, it has too keys for a port to XBox, it has a very steep learning curve (and still I think it's a great game).

Newsflash...

[EddyPearson]

Hell has frozen over. Goodnight London.

Well they *did* give away free stuff

[Anonymous Coward]

...in Apple's latest products, and Apple had to issue an apology for that! Free virus, anyone?

Not first post, but correct.

[Anonymous Freak]

MS released both Virtual Server and Virtual PC (for Windows only, not the Mac version,) for free (as in beer) months ago. This sounds like they are just touting it as a new thing to the EU regulators.

I must say, though, that I do find it ironic that you can call Microsoft for assistance in installing Red Hat on your (Virtual) PC.

Obligatory Manuel quote:

[grolschie]

"Qué?" ;-)

how about just...

[zogger]

...acknowledging that other operating systems might be there and NOT wiping them out in the MBR? Wouldn't that be at least a more reasonable first step? MS big probs is they got no respect for YOUR machine, they always operate on the assumption it is THEIR machine just because their crap is on there.

M$ 'multiple OSes at the same time

[Anonymous Coward]

It is called Virtual PC, by m$, and has been around for some time now. Where is the news in this?

Basic good-company product trashing by bad-company

[guruevi]

They bought out Connectix which created Virtual PC (let's not forget that boys & girls). They ook out the PowerPC support. They took out all Mac support. They took out all good functionality and copy-pasted their logo on it. They see it doesn't sell anymore and everyone's using different products. Now they are going to bring out the disk format to appease some people and next thing you know (next version probably) they are going to turn out and make some changes (maybe encryption) to the disk format and sell their product again.

In the mean time VMWare and Xen give out their products for free, keeping all customers happy and have much better functionality and support.

So what...

[1trickymicky]

If Microsoft want to give away free software for whatever reason, let them - people don't have to install it if they don't want... Its just like free newspapers/magazines that rely on advertising for their revenue.

no chance

[Sathias]

"Georg Greve, president of the Free Software Foundation Europe, said he had not seen the details of Microsoft's giveaway but cautioned against assuming it was motivated only by pragmatism or a new spirit of cooperation."

I don't think there is much danger of that happening here ;)

They want to be at the bottom of the stack

[Anonymous Coward]

This one is easy. They want to be at the bottom of the software
stack, run as many operating systems as you want, as long as
Windows runs at the bottom and control all things.

This is important for their restrictions management, and also
for up-stack software like MS Word.

THis is standard Microsoft tactics...

[argent]

It took them a while to catch on - they were livid when Microsoft Basic got pirated - but giving software away or winking at piracy for a while whenever they're faced with a market they're not yet dominant in... that's been a terribly effective tool for most of the company's existence.

And pretending that it's a sacrifice and convincing people that free copies of Microsoft software is a reasonable settlement for lawsuits has worked very well for them.

Internet Explorer, for god's sake.

Why are people showing anything but disdain for this appallingly transparent bargaining chip?

A Note to Billie G. and Stevie B.

[Anonymous Coward]

Deariest Billie G. and Stevie B.,

FUD = FUD

Toodles

sort of like

[dubiousmike]

giving a school Windows Movie Maker for their editing lab for free, which it is, because it should be.

Little do they know they are getting Windows 3.1

no, it doesn't need to be in control from boot

[r00t]

The new CPU features allow trust to be established after boot. Like this:

Tell the hardware where the security code is. The hardware locks out all writes to that area, including via DMA. The hardware verifies a digital signature on that area. The CPU then runs code in that area. The code checks the OS. Then the OS can run with trust, possibly in a virtual machine.

tinstaffl

[sundy58]

It's tanstaffl.

Gentlemen start your copiers

[klubar]

Maybe it will have a built in virus that will infect other operating systems. Damn.... Apple already did this.

But which OSes?

[jamar0303]

Which OSes would be used? If they only allowed older versions of Windows they wouldn'tbe in anyone's good books (especially WinME) but if say... OSx86 worked with this (full compatibility, like without having to search a million websites just to get my keyboard, webcam, and wireless to work) then they could gain some respect.

Re:Well

[senatorpjt]

No company is altrustic, but most realise that token displays of good will can also be good for business.

Hasn't anyone seen this story...

[Anonymous Coward]

On the 16th, this story ran on cnet (and probably others). Notice that the single transfer rule not only includes transfers from a PC to a virtual PC, but also simply moving a virtual PC file from one host OS to another. It would appear they are hoping that more people will adopt their VS HD file format, which will in turn drive sales of Vista with its embedded single transfer. Suddenly MS's possible market has increased.

Look closer, bub.

[Anonymous Coward]

"Hell, even the article about the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation donating TONS of money to good causes was met with people complaining about how Bill Gates made that money in the first place."

Nope, actually not their money. Have a CLOSE look at the Foundation's financial statements. They are actually only giving SOME of the returns on INVESTMENTS away..... equivalent to the tax breaks they got when donating the money to the Foundation. In other words: US taxpayer money.

So long, suckers!

Uh oh!

[Zareste]

Communism!