Replies to post #62679 on Apple Inc (AAPL)

[BlueDjinn]

What a bunch of dicks. That'll put a hell of a crimp in Parallels.

On the other hand, CodeWeaver's CrossOver should do very well as a result.

[Tex]

re virtualization premium

Thoughts:
(1) The virtualization terms won't apply to Apple's Win-booting system, whether integrated with Panther or otherwise, because it's not a virtual machine; it's a real machine. But see the question about hypervisors, below: if Apple goes with a simultaneous-run system with switching, using INTC's new native hardware-supported partitioning scheme, the meaning of 'virtual machine' could get interesting.
(2) MSFT wants folks who want virtualization to enhance reliability to pay the "pro" license costs, and it'll be interesting to see how MSFT enforces this.
(3) MSFT doesn't actually target with this license term the server market that has demonstrated need for virtualization, as those folks run completely different versions.
(4) In case of war, I foresee MSFT installers deliberately obliterating data related to MacOS X, EFI, etc. while MSFT stands about shrugging and blinking in faux innocence.

MSFT's new term stomps folks who are using virtualization to enable single-machine multiple-OS tech support by having virtual installations of numerous OS versions on one box. I don't know how significant that market is, but ... bam.

MSFT will create a legal storm over what a 'virtual machine' is once technology to partition hardware to allow multiple simultaneous OSses gets mainstream. Is the hypervisor a virtual environment? Is time-sharing on hardware actually virtualization of hardware? Nuts.

But that's MSFT for ya.

Take care,
--Tex.

PS: re Bootz' AAPL/OMG race
Daaaaam.
Now, every lot in my portfolio is green, even the ones I got put at 80 in January. Craaaaazy.

PPS: tomm -- The barrel is hilarious. Many thanks :-)