The Providence Geek Dinner is back at AS220 (115 Empire Street, Providence, RI) on Wednesday, February 28, 2007. The fun starts at 5:30pm. I hope to see you there. See the Providence Geeks blog for details and RSVP.
I don’t think so, and here’s why. The EULA that this post refers to says (emphasis mine) “You may not use the software installed on the licensed device within a virtual (or otherwise emulated) hardware system.” I’m certainly not a lawyer, but it sounds like the scenario addressed is taking the copy of Vista that you’ve installed on your PC, and running that same copy under virtualization.
The EULA (yes, it’s titled Ultimate, but it includes terms for other editions) defines a licensed device:
Before you use the software under a license, you must assign that license to one device (physical hardware system). That device is the “licensed device.” A hardware partition or blade is considered to be a separate device.
And the prohibition against using Microsoft’s DRM within the virtual machine makes no sense unless you are talking about two identical copies (same activation key) of Vista running on top of each other.
So there’s some ambiguity here, and it would be great to get some clarity from the Vista team. But here’s the thought I keep coming back to: if you go out and buy a copy of Vista that you intend to run only under Parallels, the only thing that seems to remotely qualify as the licensed device is the virtual machine itself. Here’s how I think the legalese translates:
“You may not use the software installed on the licensed device within a virtual (or otherwise emulated) hardware system.”: You can’t take the copy of Vista you installed on your PC and run it under any kind of virtual or emulated system.
“You may use the software installed on the licensed device within a virtual (or otherwise emulated) hardware system on the licensed device.”: You can take the copy of Vista you installed on your PC and run it under virtualization or emulation, but only on the same PC.
At the moment, I’m obsessed with buying HD video online. My Xbox 360 lured me in, with HD movies and TV shows available to rent or buy. And Apple TV has got me so excited, I’m un-unwiring my house.
When news broke this morning that Wal-Mart was entering this market, I thought it could be pretty cool. I went to their website and checked the FAQ. The first thing my eyes caught was the compatibility with Windows Media Extender. But then I read “Technical Specification: 640 X 480 maximum resolution” and it all fell apart for me; that’s even lower resolution than a DVD. So until Wal-Mart catches up with the movies I can get on Xbox Live Marketplace (up to 720p and higher in some cases) and Apple TV (720p max), I can’t see why I’d want to buy movies that will look horrible on my TV. There’s been a lot of skepticism about the prospects of video downloads, and I think it’s all justified until you start talking about HD. Given the limited line-up of HD channels in my area, I am very hungry for high-def content. It’s a big opportunity for whoever can sign up lots of studios.