Microsoft Virtual PC 2004 is now free and available for download from Microsoft.

Virtual PC 2004 SP1 runs on: Windows 2000 Professional SP4, Windows XP Professional or later, and Windows XP Tablet PC Edition or later

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/virtualpc/default.mspx

Regards,

Microsoft Virtual Server 2005 is also free now: http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserversystem/virtualserver/default.mspx ("http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserversystem/virtualserver/default.mspx")

...and so is the VMware server, strangely enough...

http://www.vmware.com/products/server/

...but it's approximately 5 times larger than the Micro$oft equivalent

Any Ideas why is it being given away?

Lack of market?
Soon to become outdated in Vista systems?

Because generosity flowing out of MS Heart?

Hardly.

Have you read M$'s stance on licensing VPC OSes?

http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=2649

In a nutshell, you need a separate license for each and every virtual PC. One box with XP + 2 VPCs running XP requires three retail XP licenses.

Even Vista Ultimate (which includes a stripped version of VPC) requires a second Vista license. Only the "Enterprise" edition comes with one additional license "free".

I am curious what their stance is on end of life OSes. You can't buy a Win95 (or DOS 6.22) retail license, so are all those products exempt?


Personally, I'm going to give it a toss with Linux, no licensing issues there.

Not true. See http://blogs.msdn.com/mikekol/archive/2006/07/12/662511.aspx ("http://blogs.msdn.com/mikekol/archive/2006/07/12/662511.aspx"):
"Third, we've announced a change in licensing for Windows Vista Enterprise (and Windows Vista Ultimate if it's under Software Assurance): Customers who deploy Windows Vista Enterprise have the ability to install up to four (4) copies of the operating system in a virtual machine for a single user on a single device. Even better, nothing in the license requires that Microsoft Virtualization technologies be used - if you want to use a competing product as your Virtualization solution, you still get the four extra installs for use with VMs."

Its still ridiculous that you would be limited to 4 VPCs, you have one CPU doing all the work.

Is Microsoft going to update the licensing terms for Word so that I can only open 1 (or 4) documents at a time before I need to buy more licenses?

And what happens if/when you need five VPC instances on one machine? Will there be a nominal extra license charge, or will you be forced to buy additional, full price, retail licenses.


Finally, that only applies to installing Vista in a VPC on a Vista host. If I want to run XP or 2000 then every VPC instance needs its own retail license, so my example (with three XP licenses required) remains correct.

M$ is certainly trying to get more $$$ from their OSs...

This is excellent news, bravo M$!

And about the licenses topic, I just think that free Virtual PC 2004 with some license limitation is MUCH better than no free Virtual PC at all.

Of course, this is just my 2c

Talking points:

If and when the plasticity of OS running in VM becomes common use, not an expensive toy for techies as it is now, M$ SHOULD change its licensing scheme accordingly.

If for instance a company has ~ 200 prepacked winXP with some specialized set of app preinstlled and packed in VM to be used by their personnel, Do they buy 200 licenses?

But remember, these VM are installed and uninstalled (Rather RUN!) like a cassette, depending on the flow of personnel and the operational needs. Do you pretend you are going to get royalties per installation??

Perhaps some VM are prepacked for technical chores, some for marketing, for representation, some for data collection. A single employee may need them alternatively or concommitantly during some business trip. Have you pay 3 new licenses?? I don't think so

When he gets to the hotel he does not run the VM but his own OS VM to watch some XXX movies and relax with some games. . . Another license fee??

An Operating system is an operating system is an operating system.

I am sure merchants dream they could charge you not only when you buy a DVD, but rather for everytime you play it. And if you watch it with some new friends, send them a fresh stash of royalties, one for every one that "enjoys the contents". . .
but such abuse defeats the purpose of buying a DVD in the first place, and would kill the DVD market in the long run.

This licensing issue is pretty much a subset of the Terminal Services licensing problems that have been going on for years. The TS licensing model is so complex that even some of the Microsoft customer account people don't fully understand it: they've had to go away, discuss with colleagues and try to find the exact answer. More than once I've come across licensing situations that couldn't be explained during one phonecall to MS, which IMO is ridiculous.

Anyway, the only people this actually affects is companies who must be license-compliant. Everyone else will take one look at it, get utterly confused and just go ahead with installing a couple of virtual machines off one copy anyway.

Back on topic, it's great that the software has been released for free though.

Didn't microsquid just buy vmware ?

Maybe I was wrong, think they bought winternals