The EULA only exists because of copyright!
An End User Licence Agreement is a licence to use their copyrighted work (the software)... If it weren't for that intellectual property right, anyone would be able to do anything with the software without a licence!
Under the same intellectual property right, there's nothing to stop a record label from including an EULA with Music CDs stating that you're only allowed to play the music in a Sony-branded CD player... as long as you see the terms of the licence before you buy the CD.
That's were the problem comes in for software EULAs... In common law jurisdictions, such an agreement is not legally binding unless both parties to the agreement derive "consideration", in which case the agreement is considered a "contract" (a legal agreement, enforceable in law).
But when you install the software and agree to the EULA, the software company does not derive consideration so no contract exists. The payment you made when you bought the software in a store is consideration in a separate and completed contract that you entered into with the store, so it's "past consideration" and in contract law past consideration is no consideration. Therefore, when buying software in this way, most EULAs are merely agreements binding in honour only.. not legally binding or enforceable.
Anyway, I can't wait until Microsoft get desperate and start playing the Apple game of trying to dictate what hardware you can use with their software. They could start a "Microsoft Certified Hardware" scheme and only certify the hardware of computer companies like HP and Dell if they agree to NEVER distribute systems with other operating systems, like Linux! And only certify peripheral devices if the vendor agrees to not distribute drivers for other platforms.
Then EVERYBODY would be crying foul, while Apple can get away with relative murder!