Vista to be Downloadable (Legally)

ubermiester writes "InfoWorld reports that Windows Vista will be available for legal download as of January 30th — the same day it will be available in retail stores. MS-NBC Online notes that, 'a relatively low number of computer users are likely to get Vista by downloading it from the Internet, but the mere availability indicates that Microsoft is fiddling with distribution methods for the extremely profitable franchise at the core of its business.' It will be available via the MS Marketplace site in conjunction with a Circuit City offering. Additionally, users who decide to 'upgrade' to a more expensive version of the OS can simply activate the features they want by unlocking them via online activation."

Comments

Get the facts first!

[Anonymous Coward]

Give this a read before buying Fista:

http://seclists.org/isn/2006/Dec/0107.html

Re:Get the facts first!

[VertigoAce]

First of all, as far as I can tell, that article only applies to HD-DVD and Blu-Ray content. For example, "since S/PDIF doesn't provide any content protection, Vista requires that it be
disabled when playing protected content." I tried this with DRM protected audio (streaming from Zune Marketplace) and sure enough it played on my surround sound system with no problems. Similarly, I played a DVD with DTS audio perfectly fine over the optical cable (Vista actually made this easier since it ships with a DVD decoder, unlike XP which requires you to purchase a 3rd party decoder). In other words there is no loss in functionality with respect to existing DRM-protected media (i.e. if it worked on XP it'll work the same on Vista).

So if these problems only apply to HD-DVD and Blu-Ray, I don't see them as a criticism of Microsoft and Vista, but rather to the content producers who demand these changes. As far as I know, Apple has not announced the details of commericial HD playback, but I'd be surprised if they produce something with significantly fewer restrictions. And obviously Linux won't be supporting these discs legally any time soon. It seems to me that the best option is to just continue ignoring the existence of these new discs and you won't be affected by any of this.

Re:Just a few?

[asills]

If they release the same version that got released via MSDN/Technet (one disc image with all versions on it), then it's 2.5GB for the x86 and 3.5GB for the x64.

Re:Good for the environment

[Trelane]

As much as some can hate Microsoft, this is good and others should follow.

Yep. Good thing Linux has been doing it for over a decade now. Nice to see Microsoft finally catching up. Now, if only they would get rid of the activation and Genuine (dis)Advantage crapola....

Vista already legally downloadble

[assassinator42]

Through MSDN. You download the ISO and they give you a product key. Will the new download service work the same way?
The bigger news is that Microsoft is also selling Office this way. I know I can't download Word/PowerPoint/Excel through MSDNAA, and I also believe that you can't download it from regular MSDN.

Re:Vista already legally downloadble

[Anonymous Coward]

Using it in a production environment is a violation of the End User License Agreement.

Re:A few problems

[NSIM]

Microsoft has been doing download distribution of VISTA along with license keys throughout the beta program, I would imagine that the system they will be similar. The activation key is created by a server at Microsoft and it's basically the same thing you'd get on the outside of shrink wrapped box. If I forgot the key I can go back to my Microsoft account and retrieve it, or I can keep a copy on a burned CD or whatever.

As for corrupted downloads, in the process of the Vista beta I downloaded probably 10-15 different copies of the DVD ISO as I progressed through various builds and never had a single corrupted ISO, so I don't see that being a problem. If it had been corrupt I would simply have gone back and re-downloaded. I don't see any reason why the new system would not work the same way since there is no danger from a user downloading multiple copies of the ISO.

Old news

[HaMMeReD3]

I guess most people haven't heard of msdn, where literally every microsoft product ever is available in downloadable form.

Besides, it's obvious now that vista is out that nobody cares.

Poorly designed code

[DrYak]

Various reason to explain the discrepencies :
- Poorly designed/optimized code will load all constants ('imediates' in machine code nomenclature) from 64 bits representations rather than 32 bits representations. In other words : all constants eats twice as much space as before.
- Prefixes : On 32-bits processors, you need to use an opcode prefix to specify you work on 16bits instead of 32bits. In 64-bits machine code you have an aditionnal prefix to specify 32bits instead of 64bits data width. In other words, you may need to add more prefixes to have the code work as intended.
- x64 architecture is more recent than x86 (although very similare not like IA64), and microsoft's compiler maybe less powerful at optimizing and/or compacting machine code for x64 than code for x86 (and Microsoft aren't bad at x86 optimization for what I've heard, mainly becuse they only have 1 main target to focus on)
- Some advanced functions are only available in 64-bits edition. (The kernel protecting functions that antivirus vendors have complained about is one example).

Note that : on most Linux distribution, the 32bits packages almost uses as much space as the 64bits packages. Therefore it is more a problem of Microsoft not being able to make a smaller install source for 64 bits, rather than inherent to the x64 architecture.

Re:Wow!

[x2A]

a) my guess is most people will burn it to disk, stick it on another partition... generally have more than one copy.

b) Linux folk have been downloading whole OS from the internet for ages, but even so, vista's the LEAST of the internets worries!

Re:Sounds like NT all over again

[The Warlock]

Also, the only differences between Server and Workstation were one registry entry, at least, according to e2.