Hi, Looking at the .NET redistributable EULA, there are things in it like this: NOTE: IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A VALID EULA FOR ANY "OS PRODUCT" (MICROSOFT WINDOWS 98, [etc etc]), YOU ARE NOT AUTHORIZED TO INSTALL, COPY OR OTHERWISE USE THE OS COMPONENTS AND YOU HAVE NO RIGHTS UNDER THIS SUPPLEMENTAL EULA. It seems to me that this means that you can't install the .NET redistributable if you don't have a valid Windows licence. Is this a correct reading on my part? If you are using Wine to avoid having to purchase Windows, does this mean you can't use the .NET framework (and other bits with the same licence)? I it would be possible use Mono to run a lot of .NET stuff, but some .NET apps are linked with other C/C++ code and need Wine to run.
mcgd wrote:> Hi, > > It seems to me that this means that you can't install the .NET redistributable if you don't have a valid Windows licence. Is this a correct reading on my part? If you are using Wine to avoid having to purchase Windows, does this mean you can't use the .NET framework (and other bits with the same licence)? > >(Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer.) That's how I understand it. But pretty much anyone who's bought a computer in the past 10 years has a valid Windows license, whether they wanted it or not. (At least in the US--don't know about other countries.) I have at least 6, including one for Vista, which came preloaded on laptop I purchased a couple of months ago. The first thing I did when I got it home was replace it with Kubuntu. The EULA doesn't say you have to actually be using Windows.