Windows Licensing Hell

Kitsune · 03-02-2006, 09:55 AM

Future versions of windows will have licensing too prohibitive for me to run it at home. Multiple versions? Yearly subscriptions? This is all too annoying, too expensive! Oh, and if you <a href="http://bink.nu/Article6247.bink">swap a motherboard, you better be ready to pull your wallet out for the OS, too</a>.

Quote:

Generally, you may upgrade or replace all of the hardware components on your computer and maintain the license for the original Microsoft OEM operating system software, with the exception of an upgrade or replacement of the motherboard. An upgrade of the motherboard is considered to result in a "new personal computer." Microsoft OEM operating system software cannot be transferred from one computer to another.

It is going to get even stranger in my line of work with a rumored six to eight different, new versions of server available, many of them subscription based. The components for these will also be extra, it is rumored. Cluster? Extra. Web services? Extra. SQL capability? Extra. Domain controller? Extra. File sharing? Extra.

I thought it was annoying enough that terminal services was so restrictive as it is.

It was nice when this was all simple, but it is quickly becoming rediculous. I don't want to come home one day to find that I turn on my computer and can't access anything until I pay for it.

MS can keep their new software.

wolf · 03-02-2006, 10:12 AM

This is all revenge for that monopoly lawsuit (I've said the same thing with each anti piracy security revision).

dar512 · 03-02-2006, 10:32 AM

This is a big mistake for MS. It comes right at the time when alternatives like Linux and BSD are becoming viable options for many users. They're going to drive people right into their competitors arms.

wolf · 03-02-2006, 11:13 AM

People like you into their competitors arms.

People who call tech support when they can't find the any key will still need microsoft.

smoothmoniker · 03-02-2006, 11:28 AM

hmm, let's see. So far since the new year, I've installed one copy of OSX on 12 computers, and not only has the OS installed cleanly, but I've been able to migrate my user profile, along with all of my registered software (we're talking pro apps with series copy-protection).

That sounds like a reason to switch to me. Especially since the new intel architecture means game makers can make MS version games cross compatible with a few simple keystrokes.

dar512 · 03-02-2006, 12:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wolf

People like you into their competitors arms.

People who call tech support when they can't find the any key will still need microsoft.

Oh, I don't know. Knoppix and such are getting easier to install all the time.

And, as Smooth mentions, there's always OSX.

Kitsune · 03-02-2006, 12:16 PM

I carry around a Powerbook with me and pretty much live on OSX. The windows box hardly ever gets turned on, anymore, and was mostly just running as a file server.

The windows box is getting tossed. I'll figure out how to deal with working from home another time. If it is really important to the office, they'll loan me a windows box.

WabUfvot5 · 03-02-2006, 03:29 PM

It depends on what you use the comp for. If e-mail and net is all Linux is fabulous. If you need Photoshop for your job you're out of luck. Mac is a more viable alternative for most however. This is what happens when you get a monopoly. They can set any onerous terms and not worry about losing money.

glatt · 03-02-2006, 03:38 PM

So can you run OSX on a PC now that it's designed for Intel based Apple machines?

smoothmoniker · 03-02-2006, 07:23 PM

glatt - it's tweaky, but you can do it. check these guys out:

http://www.osx86project.org/

mbpark · 03-02-2006, 10:44 PM

I do know one thing:

Large Enterprises (and anything ending in .gov or .mil) pay a certain amount per seat for Windows and Office Professional on the desktop, Active Directory, and as many Windows Server licenses as you can possibly want. This price is negotiable, and actually mentioning that you're looking at Linux to cut costs will cause your MS rep to discount

.

However, the big ticket items, such as Project, Visio, Exchange Server Enterprise Edition (because you can't support a large business on Standard Edition), SQL Server Enterprise Edition, Windows Server Enterprise Edition, SharePoint Portal Server, and SMS/MOM will run even the largest business a large amount of cash.

Figure in the costs for antivirus and good backup software (think Symantec NetBackup, CommVault, or EMC/Legato), and you're looking at a really serious chunk of change.

In my job, I have to cost out servers for customers. Hardware is the least costly part of the equation for me, especially for database servers. Even at .EDU level pricing, Oracle still runs $60K for a quad-processor server, and SQL Server comes in at $25K.

Your average vertical-industry app will run in the $25K-$50K range too, to start.

When you also add in support costs, Linux and Windows do run neck and neck. When you add in administrative costs, it's not as bad, as Linux requires less administration.

A big part of the problem with Windows Vs. Linux is that traditionally, Windows boxes do less than their UNIX counterparts. Windows is also designed in such a half-assed and broken way with Terminal Services such that you can only have one or two people performing admin work at a time, with no decent Command Line Interface. A good portion of the time, you have to fire up VNC to get things done. Compare this to UNIX, where anyone with an X Server or SSH connection can get in and get work done without kludge hacks or worrying about being on console or not.

UNIX, with the notable exception of anything the SCO Group puts out, is designed to be touched less and to be used by more people. The UNIX boxes are also designed to be used for more than one thing. Your average Windows admin will have a ton of boxes doing one or two small things. Your average UNIX admin will have one box doing a ton of things

.

However, most of that software will still require licenses.

The point here: Windows costs a lot of money. Doing things the "right" way with UNIX in a large enterprise also costs a lot of money, even if you run Linux, because you still have to buy SW and support. Windows has a lot of added corollary costs for Antivirus software. Linux and UNIX still have those added costs (CommVault ain't cheap, and neither is Tripwire!). Windows Vista will cost a lot of money to upgrade to because you will have to upgrade the hardware as well.

I have a customer who had to get all new PCs just because of XP (they were a 2000 shop and moved to XP en masse when SP2 came out and was somewhat stable), and dropped over $1M on new PCs due to the fact that older Pentium 4 machines which flew on Windows 2000 Pro couldn't run XP Pro SP2 well. Vista is supposed to have the same level of performance hit that XP had compared to 2000. Ouch.

The vertical apps that people want which run your doctor's office, your hospital, even your government, run on Windows. If and when more of these apps, outside the Point of Sale realm, end up running on Linux/UNIX, then we'll see less of the assraping from MS. However, things will still cost a lot of money. The difference is that you'll spend a lot less on hardware, and won't be on a forced upgrade cycle with HW.

Microsoft does a few things right: Visual Studio (and Visual Foxpro - they can't kill this product no matter how hard they try, and you'd be surprised how many vertical apps are written in it!), Office (esp. Access), SQL Server, Exchange Server, and IIS.

They've made it dead simple to write the critical apps that businesses rely upon, and yes I consider Outlook/Exchange a development platform. When you can put a warm body in a seat and have something half warmed-over doing something you need cheaply under Linux or UNIX the same way you can with a Visual Basic or Foxpro developer, then you'll see Microsoft trying to fuck people over less. Java has a chance of doing this when they (the people that write the tools) learn how to make things less academic

. The Mono project may be the starting point for this, as well. OS X is the furthest ahead, and only needs better integration of existing UNIX tools with Apple's UI to make a run at MS, and an emphasis on a dead-simple programming language on the level of VB.

The final point: Do what you can to make things as dead-simple as MS has across the enterprise, and you'll see a less greedy MS.

Mitch

xoxoxoBruce · 03-03-2006, 08:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wolf

People like you into their competitors arms.

People who call tech support when they can't find the any key will still need microsoft.

Damn straight. OS? Does that mean outside.....I can get my email on the patio?

One of the guys at work decided to go DSL and got a self install kit. Couldn't get it to work because the was no place to plug it in to his PC.
Off to CompUSA to purchase an ethernet card, telling them it's an old PC running Windows 98. They convinced him an ethernet card would constipate his "antique" but they just happened to have this zoomy new model on sale for only $1700.
Fortunately, the sale didn't start until the next day and that night he saw an ad for The Geek Squad. $50 for the card and $50 install while-U-wait. Savings $1600, but if the Zoomy had been on sale, he'd never had known the difference.
Most peoples answer to any problem, is replace it with a new one....and whatever software comes with it. The masses will use unix when Dell installs unix.

Undertoad · 03-03-2006, 08:47 PM

People are buying a new PC now when their old one has too much spyware!

I'm trying Ubuntu next.

busterb · 03-03-2006, 08:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Undertoad

People are buying a new PC now when their old one has too much spyware!

I'm trying Ubuntu next.

UT I know someone who did that. I have a copy of Ubunto on dvd that I'll give a shot soon, after I learn? a little on Koppix

Kitsune · 03-04-2006, 09:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Undertoad

People are buying a new PC now when their old one has too much spyware!

I'm trying Ubuntu next.

I hadn't run a distribution of Linux or anything like it in many years because I had been really frustrated that Red Hat, SuSE, etc, all had horrible hardware support. (I've heard that has changed.) I threw the Ubuntu CD in, booted, and the PC came alive with full graphics, network, and sound all without my prompting. Ubuntu's interface was beautiful!

I was really impressed because it was actually easier than configuring a standard Windows setup at the time and it was worlds above the old hell of fighting with OSS drivers that made Red Hat so frustrating. Even most video worked, but when I found that a lot of codecs couldn't be found that would allow me to play a variety of DiVX variants, I gave up. Of course, even in OSX I can't play the newest Windows Media files and streams, but that's thanks to an ongoing DRM battle between Apple and MS.

03-02-2006, 10:12 AM	#2
wolf lobber of scimitars Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Phila Burbs Posts: 20,774	This is all revenge for that monopoly lawsuit (I've said the same thing with each anti piracy security revision). __________________ wolf eht htiw og "Conspiracies are the norm, not the exception." --G. Edward Griffin The Creature from Jekyll Island High Priestess of the Church of the Whale Penis

03-02-2006, 10:32 AM	#3
dar512 dar512 is now Pete Zicato Join Date: May 2003 Location: Chicago suburb Posts: 4,968	This is a big mistake for MS. It comes right at the time when alternatives like Linux and BSD are becoming viable options for many users. They're going to drive people right into their competitors arms. __________________ "Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain." -- Friedrich Schiller

03-02-2006, 11:13 AM	#4
wolf lobber of scimitars Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Phila Burbs Posts: 20,774	People like you into their competitors arms. People who call tech support when they can't find the any key will still need microsoft. __________________ wolf eht htiw og "Conspiracies are the norm, not the exception." --G. Edward Griffin The Creature from Jekyll Island High Priestess of the Church of the Whale Penis

03-02-2006, 11:28 AM	#5
smoothmoniker to live and die in LA Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 2,090	hmm, let's see. So far since the new year, I've installed one copy of OSX on 12 computers, and not only has the OS installed cleanly, but I've been able to migrate my user profile, along with all of my registered software (we're talking pro apps with series copy-protection). That sounds like a reason to switch to me. Especially since the new intel architecture means game makers can make MS version games cross compatible with a few simple keystrokes. __________________ to live and die in LA

03-02-2006, 07:23 PM	#10
smoothmoniker to live and die in LA Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 2,090	glatt - it's tweaky, but you can do it. check these guys out: http://www.osx86project.org/ __________________ to live and die in LA

03-02-2006, 12:16 PM	#7
Kitsune still eats dirt Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Tampa, FL Posts: 3,031	I carry around a Powerbook with me and pretty much live on OSX. The windows box hardly ever gets turned on, anymore, and was mostly just running as a file server. The windows box is getting tossed. I'll figure out how to deal with working from home another time. If it is really important to the office, they'll loan me a windows box.

03-02-2006, 03:29 PM	#8
WabUfvot5 Operations Operative Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 634	It depends on what you use the comp for. If e-mail and net is all Linux is fabulous. If you need Photoshop for your job you're out of luck. Mac is a more viable alternative for most however. This is what happens when you get a monopoly. They can set any onerous terms and not worry about losing money.

03-02-2006, 03:38 PM	#9
glatt ™ Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Arlington, VA Posts: 27,717	So can you run OSX on a PC now that it's designed for Intel based Apple machines?

03-02-2006, 10:44 PM	#11
mbpark Lecturer Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Carmel, Indiana Posts: 761	It's only half-bad if it's enterprise I do know one thing: Large Enterprises (and anything ending in .gov or .mil) pay a certain amount per seat for Windows and Office Professional on the desktop, Active Directory, and as many Windows Server licenses as you can possibly want. This price is negotiable, and actually mentioning that you're looking at Linux to cut costs will cause your MS rep to discount . However, the big ticket items, such as Project, Visio, Exchange Server Enterprise Edition (because you can't support a large business on Standard Edition), SQL Server Enterprise Edition, Windows Server Enterprise Edition, SharePoint Portal Server, and SMS/MOM will run even the largest business a large amount of cash. Figure in the costs for antivirus and good backup software (think Symantec NetBackup, CommVault, or EMC/Legato), and you're looking at a really serious chunk of change. In my job, I have to cost out servers for customers. Hardware is the least costly part of the equation for me, especially for database servers. Even at .EDU level pricing, Oracle still runs $60K for a quad-processor server, and SQL Server comes in at $25K. Your average vertical-industry app will run in the $25K-$50K range too, to start. When you also add in support costs, Linux and Windows do run neck and neck. When you add in administrative costs, it's not as bad, as Linux requires less administration. A big part of the problem with Windows Vs. Linux is that traditionally, Windows boxes do less than their UNIX counterparts. Windows is also designed in such a half-assed and broken way with Terminal Services such that you can only have one or two people performing admin work at a time, with no decent Command Line Interface. A good portion of the time, you have to fire up VNC to get things done. Compare this to UNIX, where anyone with an X Server or SSH connection can get in and get work done without kludge hacks or worrying about being on console or not. UNIX, with the notable exception of anything the SCO Group puts out, is designed to be touched less and to be used by more people. The UNIX boxes are also designed to be used for more than one thing. Your average Windows admin will have a ton of boxes doing one or two small things. Your average UNIX admin will have one box doing a ton of things . However, most of that software will still require licenses. The point here: Windows costs a lot of money. Doing things the "right" way with UNIX in a large enterprise also costs a lot of money, even if you run Linux, because you still have to buy SW and support. Windows has a lot of added corollary costs for Antivirus software. Linux and UNIX still have those added costs (CommVault ain't cheap, and neither is Tripwire!). Windows Vista will cost a lot of money to upgrade to because you will have to upgrade the hardware as well. I have a customer who had to get all new PCs just because of XP (they were a 2000 shop and moved to XP en masse when SP2 came out and was somewhat stable), and dropped over $1M on new PCs due to the fact that older Pentium 4 machines which flew on Windows 2000 Pro couldn't run XP Pro SP2 well. Vista is supposed to have the same level of performance hit that XP had compared to 2000. Ouch. The vertical apps that people want which run your doctor's office, your hospital, even your government, run on Windows. If and when more of these apps, outside the Point of Sale realm, end up running on Linux/UNIX, then we'll see less of the assraping from MS. However, things will still cost a lot of money. The difference is that you'll spend a lot less on hardware, and won't be on a forced upgrade cycle with HW. Microsoft does a few things right: Visual Studio (and Visual Foxpro - they can't kill this product no matter how hard they try, and you'd be surprised how many vertical apps are written in it!), Office (esp. Access), SQL Server, Exchange Server, and IIS. They've made it dead simple to write the critical apps that businesses rely upon, and yes I consider Outlook/Exchange a development platform. When you can put a warm body in a seat and have something half warmed-over doing something you need cheaply under Linux or UNIX the same way you can with a Visual Basic or Foxpro developer, then you'll see Microsoft trying to fuck people over less. Java has a chance of doing this when they (the people that write the tools) learn how to make things less academic . The Mono project may be the starting point for this, as well. OS X is the furthest ahead, and only needs better integration of existing UNIX tools with Apple's UI to make a run at MS, and an emphasis on a dead-simple programming language on the level of VB. The final point: Do what you can to make things as dead-simple as MS has across the enterprise, and you'll see a less greedy MS. Mitch

03-03-2006, 08:47 PM	#13
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	People are buying a new PC now when their old one has too much spyware! I'm trying Ubuntu next.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)