Without diving too deep into history, let us resurrect the controversy that surrounded Microsoft's decision to limit Windows Vista virtualisation on Macs and Linux PCs. Microsoft cited security concerns, but nobody bought this argument. In fact, over time it became more apparent that this was more of a business decision (as in money-driven and rival platform-discriminatory, i.e. anti-competiive). Knowing that an 'enhanced' edition of Windows Vista does not stop malware or defend Vista's DRM core, Microsoft's argument was moot at best. To quote one article on this issue:

Software like Parallels Desktop for the Mac or Microsoft's own Virtual PC for Windows allow multiple operating systems to run simultaneously. When it announced licensing rules for Vista last year, Microsoft said that only Vista Business and Vista Ultimate could run as guest operating systems. The company said virtualization presents inherent security risks and that it hoped by limiting which versions of the OS could act as virtual machines, only sophisticated users and businesses would employ the tactic.

This was one of the gentler article that discussed the issue. The fact remains that the EULA is still ruthless, with a lot of flip-flopping and a recent rumour about change on virtualisation (it never materialised and a proposal was dumped at the last minute).

Here is where the news kicks in. While Ramji's words may have been taken out of context, have a look at this new article:

Microsoft Says No Windows Virtualization on Top of Linux

Microsoft will not allow Windows Vista or Windows XP to be virtualized on top of Linux, Sam Ramji, the director of Microsoft's open-source software lab, said at the annual LinuxWorld Conference and Expo here Aug. 7.

That's rather aggressive is it not? That's just what Ron Hovsepian envisioned -- Linux on top of Windows, not vice versa. Thanks, Novell.