Taken from another forum...
Personally, I think Microsoft has totally lost the plot with the release of Vista and the licensing restrictions.
1) Retail copies of Vista only allowed one machine-to-machine transfer. If MS are considering a motherboard swap a machine-to-machine transfer then this is ridiculous.
2) Preventing VM applications on anything other than Business of Ultimate editions. I have no idea what this is all about? What exactly is the threat to MS if I wanted to run Windows 98, DOS, or Linux in a VM machine? Why exactly do I need the business or ultimate editions?
3) The end of volume license keys. Each and every machine now has to pass the WPA and be activated in large corporations. Even if that means activating 10,000 machines. You can buy a server to do this for you though, but this is another layer of complexity, and another point of failure. It common knowledge that the WPA is not infallible. I cant imagine what would happen if a copy of Vista decides its been pirated whilst the CEO of a large multinational is giving a powerpoint presentation. I can, and its probably called the competition.
Now MS has a duty to its shareholders. Its losing billions trying to put SONY out of business with the XBOX. Its office system is under threat from GOOGLE, and office is such a mature product that there is probably no need to upgrade anyway. This leaves Vista. I doubt a lot of people are going to rush out on its release to upgrade. And the business community are already skeptical about upgrading to Vista. Especially considering the new licensing agreements. Its all very well saying some companies get the upgrade for free under the software assurance scheme, but I doubt they will flock to it until they have the compliance side ironed out. Nobody is going to chance their systems locking up due to faulty WPA.
MS are up against the wall. Im not saying they dont have a lot of money. But that can change. The public are a fickle lot, and no amount of money can save you if public opinion sways against you. Some great companies have discovered this to their cost.
Has MS overstepping the mark with Vista licensing?
Moderator: Dangerous Bob
<a href="http://bf3stats.com/stats_pc/madman045" target="_blank">
</a>
</a>Arhaaaa....enemy number 1 
MS have shown that they are adaptable and will seek out any business opportunity. Whether you consider that to be anti-competitive or not is open to a long discussion. Only recently we are looking at getting Business Intelligence software. Very expensive stuff previously, but now MS have moved in and have a product that is not only one tenth the price but is actually better!!! Yes they are killing the competition in some areas, but hey in many cases it's a natural thing because existing suppliers have been ripping people of for years. I guess you could say the same about Tesco?
I can't think that MS shareholders are anything other than happy. It is very difficult being number one in a market place because there is only one way to go. I don't see MS as the complacent lumbering giant that IBM was.
I don't particularly intend to defend MS, but without them it is fantasy to think we would be better off as consumers. Afterall we do have the option not to buy.
MS have shown that they are adaptable and will seek out any business opportunity. Whether you consider that to be anti-competitive or not is open to a long discussion. Only recently we are looking at getting Business Intelligence software. Very expensive stuff previously, but now MS have moved in and have a product that is not only one tenth the price but is actually better!!! Yes they are killing the competition in some areas, but hey in many cases it's a natural thing because existing suppliers have been ripping people of for years. I guess you could say the same about Tesco?
I can't think that MS shareholders are anything other than happy. It is very difficult being number one in a market place because there is only one way to go. I don't see MS as the complacent lumbering giant that IBM was.
I don't particularly intend to defend MS, but without them it is fantasy to think we would be better off as consumers. Afterall we do have the option not to buy.