"VanguardLH" wrote in message
...
Bill Cunningham wrote:

You see because of this I will not buy a windows OS. OR anything
really from MS. If they want $20 maybe 25 dollars for it and that's
pushing it, I might buy it. It's not worth the red tape. The OS is
not that good. It's ok yeah. It comes on the computer and I'm not
throwing it out but I am not paying good money when there's other OSs
just as good. If not better. Windows focuses on the masses that can't
do anything from a cli so they need a gui. People that barely know
how to turn on a PC.

What was the point or goal of installing Windows 98 into a VM? There
must've been some reason you wanted Windows 98 instead of, say, Ubuntu
or Mint as the guest OS.

Windows 98 is a frankenjob of MS-DOS kernel and 98 kernel. There was a
CLI available (which I assume means the DOS kernel versus just a command
shell). If you don't really want Windows 98 in the VM and are looking
for a free DOS-type of operating system to run in the VM then you could
use FreeDOS in the VM.

"It comes [Windows 98 came] on the computer" sure sounds like it is a
pre-installed OEM license which means it is locked to that computer and
cannot be used in a VM. An OEM license doesn't care it if sits idle.
Having a spare and unfettered license to Windows to utilize it within a
VM is what stops a lot of users from using VMs running Windows: there's
the expense of another unfettered Windows license needed for the VM.
No, there is no Microsoft police that will come to arrest you nor will
they file a lawsuit. It's you deciding whether or not to comply with
the terms of the contract to use Windows. Lots of users find all sorts
of excuses to do what they want because they can get away with it. If
there is no perception of penalty, many people will steal. They have
adaptive morality which means they don't have any unless they fear
punishment. If you visit eBay, there are lots of sellers distributing
NFR (not for resale) versions Windows and all those sales are illegal.
eBay doesn't enforce their own rules because they want their
auctioneer's commission on sales.

Read the EULA carefully. Some users read more than what is specified
there and other users don't read it at all. For example, the EULA for
Windows XP only restricts that you cannot run a license for Windows XP
on multiple computers at the same time; i.e., only one installation
instance can be active at a time. You can actually install it on
multiple computers or multiple drives you swap into the same computer
but only one of those instances can be active at a time. We checked
with Microsoft and found putting it on multiple HDDs (so we had
different setups under which to test) was valid per the EULA and was
legit with them. The HDD that was currently inserted in the computer
was running the only active instance of the license. Microsoft has
adapted their EULA over time but back then the terms were more lax.
Often users read more than what was actually stipulated in the EULA. Of
course, you couldn't have both the host OS and the guest OS running the
same license of Windows because obviously there were 2 active instances
of that OS running. I haven't bothered to go find a Windows 98 EULA to
see its terms; however, since it looks like you only have an OEM license
of Windows 98 that was already pre-installed on the real computer then
the OEM license probably got "used up" and you cannot use it within a
VM.

An online search will find someone who saved a copy of the Windows 98
EULA to put online. http://ftp.sustech.edu/Books/linux-book/eula98.html
(don't which edition you have so I looked for a plain vanilla edition)
is one. Notice it says you can use the license on a single computer.
That does not restrict you from using the license on multiple computer
but only one of them can be running Windows 98 at a time. That means
you cannot have that license as both the host and guest OS. I didn't
see any conditions that differ use of the license between full and OEM
versions.

Again, the Windows 98 EULA would be the final authority as to how and
where you deploy its [OEM] license. So it could be you could reuse the
OEM license of Windows 98 that was pre-installed on your old computer
*if* the EULA doesn't have restrictions against such multiple
deployment. Go by what the EULA says, only what it says, and don't read
more in it that it actually says. You agreed to that contract, not to
someone's interpreted version of it. Licenses for later versions of
Windows do not retroactively apply to prior versions of Windows. You
are liable only to the terms of an existing contract, not all future
contracts or even any modifications to contracts (to which you don't
agree as a party to the contract).

Did you ever try to boot using the "ISO disc" using the host OS (the
real OS) to see if that disc was really bootable? In addition, you can
use IsoBuster (it has a crippled free version) to look at the contents
of an .iso file (that you would eventually burn to a disc to have a
bootable disc).

I do not know how long a copyright lasts until it needs to be renewed
and if things ever all evetually go public domain. It's a matter of just
looking up the law I guess. On MS's free ftp server you can download I think
dos 6.22 for nothig.

Bill