Slashdot Mirror
MS Plans Low-Cost Windows for Brazil
Atryn writes "According to this C|NET article, Microsoft is planning to release its XP Starter Edition in Brazil. Could the pressure of Brazil's overtures toward Linux be forcing Microsoft Brasil to compete?"
The Brazilian government has launched an initiative called "PC Conectado" (Connected PC), via which it hopes to sell up to one million computers (each costs $300 - $400 U.S.) to lower-middle income Brazilians this year. The cost of the PCs will be partially subsidized by the government.
I wonder if MS can justify $400 million to secure 1 million Brazilian users. They might as well pay for the PCs with pre-installed Windows OS free of charge.
Is this excessive even by MS standard?
Rock that crushes, Paper & Scissors that don't matter.
Features cut from the various Starter Editions have included support for multiple user accounts; networked printers; the ability to personalize desktops with multiple looks and feels for different users; and support for screen resolutions above 800 X 600 DPI (dots per inch). Starter Edition also prevents users from launching more than three applications simultaneously.>
I didn't realise the Starter Edition was so crippled. I would consider that barely useful!
first they give you a free hit, sooner or later your hooked on the stuff.
serenity now!
If it didn't work in Asia, why would it work in Brazil?
Excuse me, I don't mean to impose, but I am the ocean
It is far too limited to be useful to anyone. Users who need to use the computer will pirate. Government will not be stuck with a stripped down almost unusable copy of Windows, when they could build their own hack of linux and use that on their boxen. The only people I would expect this could be useful for are Computer Manufactures.. who will just throw a copy of Starter on the computer for a bit less money.
Proceed with Format (Y/N)? Y
Sure, maybe, maybe some people just use Starter Edition for a while, then realize its limitations and decide to upgrade. If they can hardly afford a $300 computer, will they really be able to afford a $260 OS upgrade? Chances are, they'll talk to everyone about how they need an upgrade, until the kid from city hears about it and comes along with a CD-case full of cracked Windows CDs and installs it for $10.
$200 million to secure the *FIRST* 1 million users.
paintball
There would be no extra cost for Microsoft to sell them the full version for the same price. And they would be far more competitive with Linux if they did.
The only reason to sell a crippled version is to not undermine the market in the rich countries.
If they sell the same version for a substantially lower price MS will have a hard time explaining that difference.
I guess that this is obvious really.
But even if it is obvious, when you think about it, I believe it is enough of a smoke screen for people in rich countries to not question the prices of the full versions of Windows.
The Internet is full. Go Away!!!
Here in South America (I'm from Argentina) Linux is getting more and more attractive, specially after sucesive devaluations(1 U$s = 3 Pesos) Most of the budget PCs here come with diffrent flavors o'linux preloaded, but unfortunately ppl get a friend or pay a tech to install copies of Windows, due to the fact that it is the system the know how to use, either because they work in it or they are just plain used to it. I think Microsoft will eventually release these "crippled" versions everywhere, bundled or otherwise and finally, after ppls complaints will release a "less-crippled" version or reduced priced versions of the originals. It would be nice to introduce Linux in the corporate scene.It would make a lot of things easier.
And this doesn't even take distribution of wealth into account. According to the above mentioned source 25% of Brazil's population are below the poverty line. In reality, it's much more (they are notorious for not keeping track of economical data or even just plain making stuff up).
So you have a small upper class, a small middle class, a huge blue collar working class (with many people out of work) and a lot of people unaccounted for.
If you're living on $741 a month, do you really spend $36 on a license you essentially don't need (since there's no enforcement in Brazil). Also, consider that those $36 are 20% of your monthly income (not of your monthly disposable income).
I don't really get who the folks at Microsoft think their target audience is. The upper class can afford XP Pro/Home licenses. They've either already purchased those (probably OEM licenses) or simply don't care. Anyone outside that demographic just won't be able to afford a Starter license, even if they wanted to.
In countries like Brazil, Indonesia, Thailand, & Malaysia (the countries listed in the article, and I've been to three of them), you buy your software for $2 from a guy who burns CDs at the local Internet cafe. Microsoft says this is for the first time user, but it's really for the government and big corps who are actually concerned about whether they follow licensing rules. Microsoft's strategy for developing countries is to go: govt-> multi-national company->local company->middle class individual->everybody. They're still on the govt step.
Tristan Yates
Could the pressure of Brazil's overtures toward Linux be forcing Microsoft Brasil to compete?
You call a crippled OS that can only run three foreground apps at once competition? They're going to be laughed out of every government office they set foot in.
"The newly born animals are then whisked off for a quick run through a giant baking oven." --heard on Food Network
You got that one wrong - new strategy seems to be less for more, not less for less.
What's the problem with that? I run my 21" LCD at 1600x1200 and that's just a bit over 80x60DPI. This thing has ten times the reslolution of my system!
What? The article author is clueless about technology and just spouted some jargon? Come on, let's give her the benefit of the doubt and assume she uses a 1" screen.
-Ryan C.
If you're a foreign government and you're running everything on MS then your entire infrastructure is being controlled by a foreign power. Doesn't matter how well MS wants to play it is already at a disadvantage in that regard.
This is all funny to me because I've been using free and open source softare for a few years and I have a powerful GUI, tons of utilities, and can launch dozens of applications at the same time. Ubuntu with Kubuntu took a great deal less time to install than Windows does, and is a lot more fun. So in this case something free (in my opinion, anyway) is better than something merely cheap.
But the even more funny irony of this starter edition is that it actually required extra work to cripple it. It's not a product that required less work, it required the opposite (more). Think about that for a moment. No other industry could possibly work this way. To create this "cheaper" version Microsoft had to devote extra time and money to crippling it, packaging it and marketing it. To use the obligatory car-industry-versus-computer-industry analogy, it's a bit like building a complete Humvee, chopping off bits of it and selling it for the price of a used Yugo. It required all of the work of building the Humvee, plus extra time and money for a Yugo-equivalent crippling, and now sells for the Yugo price. I'll stick with my Sherman tank, and recommend Brazil does the same.
How much would you bet that Microsoft would prefer if people got pirate versions of Windows "Less-Crippled Edition" instead of trying, say, Linux?
I know I would, if I was in their shoes.
http://www.dieblinkenlights.com
If Microsoft does indeed have monopoly power (e.g., they face a downward sloping demand curve) then they would maximize their profits by price discrimination. Price discrimination means charging each group of customers the maximum amount that they are willing or able to pay for the product or service. This is the winning strategy for any monopoly assuming that they are not legally restricted from price discriminating. Thus, this type of behavior by Microsoft is not surprising, but rather entirely expected as per the textbook examples of unrestricted monopolies.
i live in a small country in northern europe, we aint exactly poor but we earn usually less money here than the european and american workers that have the same job.
most here people dont buy windows here, they use some pirate version or have chosen linux instead. cause they just can't afford to spend money on software. besides the local people here really have no respect for software as a product.
russia is right beside us, people there earn even less. bill gates in his wildest dream can't sell no windows starter edition over here (they have launched it there, but believe me, there is no progress on selling there). i wouldn't wonder if their government would use pirated versions of microsofts tools too.
brazil is somewhat on the same level of economy as russia. a big country, and no money whatsoever (at least on the hands of microsoft's target group).
if you give a brazillian a choice to buy a limited windows version, pirate a windows version or use linux, he will choose one of the two last, no doubt about it.
none is really interested in buying a limited version of windows in a country where a solid worker earns the fee of window's licence in 1-2 months.
I'd tell you the chances of this story being a dupe, but you wouldn't like it.
In Asia where MS has already launched the Starter Crap Crack-Whore Edition, most user simply wipe off starter edition and replace it with the $2.00 Pirate XP Pro.
Microsoft has received their money for XP Starter already. I doubt at that point they really care if they go and pirate XP Pro. Even if they put Linux on it, they're still paying the Microsoft tax when they buy a new PC.
This idiot 'redswinglinestapler' is copying comments from previous articles and posting them verbatim. Please add to your foes list and mod the shithead into oblivion whenever you get the chance.
Example, here's a comment I posted.
Spot the difference
For more incriminating evidence check out the user page
For all intensive porpoises your a bunch of rediculous loosers