
PC/Laptop OEMs would revolt
That's my take on it.
Microsoft won't change its licensing options to permit services providers to offer Windows 10 desktops-as-a-service (DaaS) on shared infrastructure. Redmond's rules divide the DaaS word into two categories. In the first, a service provider runs “dedicated” infrastructure that delivers DaaS for only one client customer and is …
Given the cutthroat competition in both the business and consumer markets, paying for the Windows license makes zero sense for the OEM if the customer is going to turn around and use own (on premises or in customer datacenter) or DaaS from a provider. In any case, Microsoft is the Tyrranosaurus in the room should they ever loosen up. After all, Microsoft doesn't have to pay a license fee to themselves should Windows DaaS happen, therefore Azure has that segment with a huge RESERVED sign on those tables. No, this is a frozen in amber situation.
Eventually a solution will present itself although you can bet a roll of hundreds that Microsoft will be looking at all the tactics that Oracle has used to date to captivate (enslave?) their market segment. [I've spent no small amount of time, and money for hardware, attempting Windows desktops on a BYOD client base here SO/HO. No way.)
If they can make an extra bit of cash from shafting their customers, the customers get bent over a table, ridden doggystyle with a Rodeo Cowboy yell, and laughed at as we end up with a scathing STD that requires months of treatment to deal with.
Don't want to get raped by Microsoft? Don't install Windows 10.
Want to be Microsoft's Bitch? Enjoy your copy of Windows 10 & ThatDigitalSpyingBitch!
*Dives for the FireProofBunker before the flame war erupts around me*
>Redmond's rules divide the DaaS word into two categories. In the first, a service provider runs “dedicated” infrastructure that delivers DaaS for only one client and is therefore allowed to offer Windows-as-a-service.
What is a "client"? is it a PC, a person or what? And what is "dedicated"?
I'm not sure what the state of Windows licensing is at the moment. If I have a PC in a shared area, various people (I presume) can rock up and log into it, one person at a time, but different people at different times. Can I do that with RDP being the virtual chair?
Meanwhile, The Linux Terminal Server Project marks 16 years of providing DaaS on shared hardware for the low low price of nothing per seat.
LTSP over the WAN is a lot like grinding off your genitals with an acid covered cheese grater while you're on fire and in hell. And fuck, that's just the shitty connectivity of the login, let alone trying to use the smegling thing!
Sorry mate, but Linux needs to get Weland/Weston front and center, with its freerdp server, and get all the bugs shaken out before it can compete with Microsoft on this.
@Trevor_Pott: upvoted for vividness metaphor.
"Linux needs to get Weland/Weston front and center, with its freerdp server"
@all: is there a distro that has this available even as alpha/proof of concept? Fedora 22 with a wayland session selected seems to handle its own desktop well already.
Coat: trying not to hijack Windows 10 threads but this is interesting.
@Trevor NX is great over a wan, was able to send video faster than rdp. Shame about the Moribund nature of support for OpenGL, ie version 1. It means some applications just will not work.
X2go was the implementation I preferred. Best of all its only, like grinding off your genitals with an angle grinder
Wherever you go.
Then they can offer more 'personalised' services to you. Well that's what their marketing dream is.
By using one account they can make sure that:-
1) You have paid your montly/weekly/daily tithe to Redmond
2) The tithe will ensure that you can only use the software you have paid for on any PC on the planet.
No logging on and using Office if you have not paid for it....
3) They can track your usage and if you exceed your agreed limits it will log you out on the spot
This is not far from some car Insurers. You agree an anual mileage. Exceed that by a certain % and they have grounds for invalidating your insurance.
This is IMHO where they are heading. Sort of Software DRM.
You will join the good ship MS-BORG (or will you?)
Microsoft's horrific approach to VDI is the reason I started to loathe their business practices in the first place. it is what led me to question them and the more answers I found to to my questions the less trust in Microsoft I was able to maintain.
Microsoft's views on LDI licensing are abhorrent. Putting the whole "Microsoft were late to the invasion of your privacy party but when they showed up they brought their A game" thing to one side...just for how they fuck us all on VDI licensing alone, I hope Microsoft fail. A pox on the houses of each and every one of them who had even the most tangential thing to do with this clusterfuck of halfwittery.
I totally agree. We used to offer virtual desktops (Horizon View), when delivering training on-site or on different locations, but officially, you need to pay up for each separate physical desktop that connects to a virtual desktop. Let's say you use the same desktops at three different locations, you have to pay 3 times the cost of a desktop. This is simply stupid and it totally kills any reason to offer desktops this way.
Windows Server 2016 brings a new type of RDP - "Personal Session Desktops" which seem to look more like a VDI session than an RDP session and could pull the rug out from under the VDI market for all but niche use cases. But since it's just a fancy RDP session one could assume that an RDP CAL licence would work.
Am fully expecting MS licencing (spits!) to break this logic though!
Paul