Quote:
|
Originally Posted by AssKoala
can you read
|
Well, this is what I read.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by AssKoala
Microsoft licenses Windows XP. . .
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by AssKoala
No, like I said, Windows is licensed on a "per-socket" basis . . .
|
Emphasis mine.
From those statements, all your techincal discussion followed. I assumed (reasonably) that all your techincal comments were based off the assumption that the licensing was the same as the technical specs. I requested (twice) for clarification - had you simply said "Yes, I've seen dual CPU-Usage on an XP Home box" or pointed to an article talking about it, I would have said "Hmm, learn something new every day".
As to RedHat, IBM, et all, first off, why is it "important" to note that (because it felt like you were trying to make some sort of point)? The impression you gave off was that RedHat, IBM and others were somehow behind the curve to Mircosoft in regards to multi-core licensing. When I saw you included RedHat in that list, it piqued my interest, so I did do a google search, and turned up that very same article about Oracle as you did. I had also found this
article that indicated that RedHat had a licensing model that treated dual-core processors as a single processor from *before* the launch of dual-core chips (as did IBM - and this
article indicates RedHat had that model *before* Microsoft adopted it). So, rather than simply be an ass and throw your argument back in your face, making some snide comments about learning how to google before making such odd statements, I was simply going to ask for documentation. Because who knows, I might have missed something and ended up looking like a fool.