xp licensing

Discussion in 'Virtual PC' started by Steve, Feb 4, 2005.

  1. Steve

    Bill Grant Guest

    To the OP,

    The bottom line is this. It doesn't really matter whether you agree with
    the way Microsoft handles licencing, or whether you think it is fair or
    unfair. That is the way it is, and while pouring your heart out in a
    newgroup might make you feel better, it is unlikely to change anything.
     
    Bill Grant, Feb 1, 2008
    #21
    1. Advertisements

  2. Steve

    Tim Walsh Guest

    The license for Word or Office doesn't prevent you from running it multiple
    times on one machine, it restricts you from installing it on multiple
    machines. As a Programmer you know you can write your code to only allow 1
    instance of it to be run at a time. If Microsoft didn't want you to run it
    multiple times on a single machine the code would prevent it, not the
    license.
     
    Tim Walsh, Feb 1, 2008
    #22
    1. Advertisements

  3. Steve

    Paul Adare Guest

    Actually, unlike the license for an OS, the license for Office allows for
    the concurrent installation on 2 computers.
     
    Paul Adare, Feb 1, 2008
    #23
  4. Steve

    Tim Walsh Guest

    Your right Paul, it does allow for installation on 2 machines, I'd forgotten
    that little caveat.
     
    Tim Walsh, Feb 1, 2008
    #24
  5. Steve

    David B. Guest

    Only the retail version, and it must be one desktop and one laptop used by
    the owner of the license, OEM only allows a single install.
     
    David B., Feb 1, 2008
    #25
  6. It's bizarre to argue that each VM is a computer - it's a simulation of a
    computer on shared hardware. If I fire up several copies of my licensed Word,
    am I using multiple licences, or one? Just the one, I think.

    If MS wants to get into virtualisation in a big way they need to think this
    through more carefully - there are alternatives that have much more flexible
    licence arrangements. For virtualisation on servers one licence=one VM+one
    guest OS might be a reasonable proposition, because the VMs will have
    different users. But for a desktop PC to require a licence for each guest OS
     
    Neil Haughton, Feb 29, 2008
    #26
  7. This argument has been repeated here as nauseum and with the same result.
    Nada. No amount of arguing about it here matters. What matters is what MS
    decides. If you want more flexibility then use Windows Server 2003
    Enterprise Edition as a host. If you have a suggestion for a change in vm
    licensing for client hosts then tell MS.

     
    Colin Barnhorst, Feb 29, 2008
    #27
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.