Among Microsoft's new restrictions in the Windows Vista End User License Agreement (EULA) is that neither Windows Vista Home Basic nor Windows Vista Home Premium may be run in a Virtual Machine. Like Windows Rootkits there is a risk that a VM Rootkits gets installed unbeknownst to the consumer. Microsoft says that consumers don�t understand the risks of running virtual machines, and they only want enterprises that understand the risks running Vista on a VM. So Microsoft removes user choice in the name of security.

But this is a license restriction, not a technical one. So a consumer that wants to run Windows Vista under Parallels or VMWare on his or her Mac can purchase a Home SKU and install it on a VM in violation of the EULA (not that most of them will know it; who really reads the EULA?). The other option is to pay Microsoft $300 for Windows Vista Business or $399 for Windows Ultimate, instead of $200 for Home Basic or $239 for Home Premium. Does paying $60 or $100 more mean they understand the risks? We suppose that to Microsoft it does. Or maybe for the extra money, Microsoft just doesn't care as much.