Surprises in Microsoft Vista's EULA

androthi writes "Scott Granneman takes a look at some surprises in Microsoft Vista's EULA that limit what security professionals and others can do with the new operating system. You want to post benchmarking results? Well, Microsoft may now have a say in it. Vista's EULA no longer shows up on Microsoft's software licensing page, but does still exist — also take note of Windows DRM deciding what you can and can not listen to, and Defender deciding and removing what it considers spyware automatically (by default)."

Comments

sined, sealed and delivered

[yagu]

To quote the Buckaroo Bonzai movie, Microsoft's locked in monopoly is sined, sealed and delivered. The EULA for Vista provides more evidence Microsoft is the 800 lb. guerilla that doesn't care about potential faceoffs on these issues any more. The article seems to think differently:

If you thought that the legal troubles the company faced in the late 90s would perhaps mellow it out, you were wrong. Far from it. The draconian limitations I've discussed could only be enacted by a monopoly unafraid of alienating its users, as it feels they have no other alternative. Microsoft may yet learn, however, that there are limits to what its users will bear. To paraphrase what my fifth-grade teacher often told his rambunctious class, "Beware the wrath of a patient user base." Security pros have already given Microsoft a deserved black eye over the never-ending string of gaffes and vulnerabilities streaming out of the company. It seems now as though another black eyes and a bloody nose may be coming, along with a final wave goodbye. There comes a point at which corporate hubris causes a fall, and we may be seeing the beginning of that collapse. If so, Microsoft will have no one but itself to blame.

I'm not sure how the article's author would see the user base reacting. Pick a different platform? How? At what expense? No, Microsoft has got this one in the bag.

I predicted in the late 90's if Microsoft didn't have to pay real consequences for their business practices, eventually they would be rolling out OSes at any price they wanted and noone would be able to do much about it. This was at a time where hardware dramatically was decreasing in price but Windows, all flavors, continued to sustain an amazingly different cost curve. I predicted eventually:

• Microsoft would put out an OS at around $400
• Their OS would eventually be the largest cost of a new machine

It looks like we're pretty close to both. I'll continue to do my development in my Linux world, but I'm guessing there will be a momentary raised eyebrow with Microsoft's Vista, Vista's EULA with it's almost amazing restrictions (especially compared with already draconian past EULAs) and then business as usual.

Might as well be hanged for a sheep as for a lamb

[Carnildo]

After reading the Vista EULA while installing a copy at work for compatibility testing, it became very obvious to me that the only way Vista would make it onto any computer I own is if I were to install a pirated copy of Vista Ultimate with all the anti-piracy features removed. I figure that since there's no way in hell I'm going to comply with the EULA, why follow copyright law, either?

Windblows

[Anonymous Coward]

At this point, Micro$haft will not be on my next machine. I pay waay too much money, for software that, despite 20 years of practice, CONSTANTLY crashes, and now, on top of all that, I'm being told what I can and can't do with this crap I paid (again) waay too much for?

AND I'm being told what I can and can't have on MY OWN COMPUTER? Screw that, RedHat, you've got my vote.

DirectX maybe not that significant.

[Kadin2048]

I'm really not sure of this. The gap between console gaming and PC gaming is getting narrower, and there's really nothing but inertia stopping a console manufacturer from using a keyboard and mouse as input devices instead of a dual-analog type controller.

Consoles have networking and multiplayer and downloadable games, which used to all be hallmarks of the PC ... they also have lower cost of ownership over time (less upgrades).

If the console manufacturers don't make it a pain in the ass to develop games (which has always been the bane of their existence in the past; more games come out for the PC than consoles for this reason, I suspect), then it just makes sense that would be the direction things go in.

Pretty much everything you can do with regards to games on a PC, you can do on the next generation of consoles. Windows may have the PC gaming market locked up, but that market may not be as big or as significant as they think it is.