MS Requiring More Expensive Vista if Running Mac 545
ktwdallas writes "Mathew Ingram from Canada's Globe and Mail writes that Microsoft will require at least the $299 Business version of Vista or higher if installing on a Mac with virtualization. Running the cheaper Basic or Premium versions would be a violation of their user agreement. According to the article, Microsoft's reasoning is 'because of security issues with virtualization technology'. Sounds suspiciously like a 'Mac penalty' cost that Microsoft is trying to justify."
Re:To hell with Microsoft (Score:5, Funny)
Re:So? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:But why? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:And it's still 1984... (Score:3, Funny)
Careful... Don't prove that is so or you might get yourself killed at the next zebra crossing.
Re:The "defectivebydesign" tag... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Sick and tired (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Sick and tired (Score:5, Funny)
Slashdot's response: God I hate Microsoft!
Apple: You may never, under any circumstances, on any hardware, at any time, for any reason, ever run OS X under virtualization. Period.
Slashdot's response: God I hate Microsoft!
Linux: It's free. Run it on whatever hardware you want. Run as many instances on as many machines as you damn well feel like. Treat it like it's yours to keep.
Slashdot's response: God I hate Microsoft!
Beginning to understand yet?
Re:Sick and tired (Score:5, Funny)
And if you at any point just express the desire to upgrade the hardware - to say nothing of the software - suddenly half your money will be spent on supporting legacy hardware.
Talk about vendor lock-in...