Vista Licensing
Wasn't one of the original supposed advantages of the PC it's component flexibility? You could replace any piece, upgrade as you saw fit, etc. This was a touted advantage over Macintosh and other “closed box” architectures that didn't allow component swap, or didn't have third-party options. I guess it's no secret that Microsoft wishes it had that kind of control now. Ironically, the Mac is much easier to upgrade now than ever before.
The more I learn about Vista licensing, the more I am convinced that Microsoft is making this stuff up as it goes along. Some of it seems reasonable, much of it seems really half-assed. At least it's not as completely brain-dead as the Adobe scheme. I wonder what it's going to take to show the big vendors that not all organizations are neat vertical org. charts with locked-down networks and central IT groups? You would think they have never dealt with large educational institutions.
Commodore 64 -> Amiga 2000 -> Macintosh G3 and now Intel systems. I learned Windows out of necessity (and morbid curiosity), Linux because it seemed cool and really useful. I wonder how long it will take these new licensing systems to drive folks to the Mac and Linux in droves? Those of us who have been around a while should accept the refugees with open arms and a minimum of pity. Maybe a little.
Edit After activating a Vista install on Parallels, I think I “get” the volume licensing requirement now, and it’s not so bad. I certainly limits abuse of the keys.
