Slashdot Mirror
Windows Vista To Come In 7 Flavors
Dionne writes "Microsoft is really milking it with this one: According to an Ars Technica report, there will be 7 versions of Windows Vista: Starter Edition, Home Basic Edition, Home Premium Edition, Professional Edition, Small
Business Edition, Enterprise Edition, and Ultimate Edition." From the article: "Windows Vista Ultimate Edition is a superset of both Vista Home Premium and Vista Pro Edition, so it includes all of the features of both of those product versions, plus adds Game Performance Tweaker with integrated gaming experiences, a Podcast creation utility (under consideration, may be cut from product), and online "Club" services (exclusive access to music, movies, services and preferred customer care) and other offerings (also under consideration, may be cut from product)."
You know, so that they can remain compatible with "windows" ? or is the new product a complete, linux based rewrite with the old front end?
Honestly folks, how many times has microsoft and its partners delivered a secure, clean and workable product?
Two of these three is ALWAYS missing:
Secure
Clean
Workable
Good Pricing
Value for money
But usually more than 2 missing. After my last "hunt" for drivers in windows XP and 2000, I don't even find them "well supported" anymore. But then again, I have exotic hardware, not a 499 + 500 dollar rebate PC from walmart.
~D
" What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
So much for the anti-Linux crowd saying there's far too many distro's...
Anyone know what the major differences are between the versions then? Will schools (which is where I make a living as a sysadmin) and businesses require Enterprise edition for networks or what?
I should RTFA, eh?
This is going to confuse the living daylights out of people, especially non-technical users.
Home users probably won't know what version they have, and that will complicate tech support calls of all types. It'll be difficult to help people calling for aide, regardless of whether they're calling Dell tech support or their nephew.
Developers will continually have to look up what features each system supports, and may very well just end up developing for the lowest common denominator in order to maximize support across all versions.
It was difficult enough trying to get average users to understand that Windows XP Home is different from Windows XP Professional. Hell, it's difficult enough to even remember all these names, let alone remember what features are different between each.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
So six of them have artificial limitations? That's gonna be hacked sometime just after the release day, methinks.
# cat
Damn, my RAM is full of llamas.
Seven? Haven't we been complaining about the difference between Home and Pro in XP? Now they're going to divide it up even more? I thought this was a software company not a marketing enterprise. All this is, is an atempt to milk more money out of less work. I'm dualing Mandriva and XP (for the wife) and I think as Mandriva updates, Winders ain't going to. Sorry, Bill.
As long as the average home user can get a cheaper version of their OS without the complex functions they won't ever need/use. But then I seem to be in the minority anyway, I have a legal version of XP and think the OS is a piece of software well worth paying for. Nice to see from the article that many of the features us geeks buy Pro edition of XP for are going to be included in the Premium Home edition of Vista, and that the "Pro" version is actually going to be aimed at business.
Am I the only one to think that this will be a nightmare for people in the support industry.
I'm already having a headache with 7 different editions of Windows 2003 Server and what limitations each one has. Now 7 desktop editions. Obviously they like the number 7.
Can't they just do like Apple and have 1 Client and 1 Server edition of the OS. Even RedHat has only 3 server editions and 1 desktop edition.
Nooo, MSFT has decided to milk us all the way with a product segmentation strategy. Well, I guess that they need all the money they can get with their revenues being stagnant in the past several years.
A hungry bear does not dance!
Ooo lets see... Educated Guess Time;
I predict that...
General people will buy the cheapest version that runs all applications. That version will be bundled with majority of the home computers. That will probably be the 'Basic' Home version. Don't expect it to be any cheaper than current Home Edition - MS has a monopoly, no reason to undercut in such situation. Premium crap will most likely be priced like today's Pro version, and will only sell to the crowd that today buys Media Center Edition.
If there are feature differences that matter to the applications (such as games or normal productivity apps) everyone will ignore crippled versions - bye bye starter ed. Dunno why MS can't figure this out.
Ultimate Edition will probably be sold to the Alienware/Dell XPS crowd that is too clueless. Rest will ignore the MS software clutter - especially since the ultimate edition has 'subscription' written all over it - the OS itself might work without one, but if it adds any downloadable extras, those will definitely want your personal information, and probably monthly fee sooner or later. I guess MS has gotten addicted to the mothly income it gathers from XBox Live subscribers. Someone has probably calculated how much they'd make if they could milk monthly fees from (some) Windows users as well.
As far as Warez goes - unless the 'Corporate Pro/Enterprise editions' are crippled in some way that matters to home user (lack of MCE features doesn't really qualify), that will be the version(s) that will make rounds - just like today. Additionally the 'Ultimate' version will be cracked to satisfy the 'Must have best version' crowd that previously cackled and downloaded warez versions of such gems as Win2003 Advanced Server for their home PCs so they could have the 'best' Windows. However, most won't want to bother with the extra bloat - or it will be ripped out of the Ultimate and plugged to a suitably modded Corporate version.
Just my 2 cents...
So besides buying an antivirus subscription and antispyware now the user will have to buy an OS upgrade to do much of anything.
Fork Vista. I'm SO glad to have started moving away from Windoze long ago.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
that Microsoft are releasing 7 editions of Vista to disguise the fact that they're not making something anyone actually wants or needs?
Overcompensation?
Why do you run your site on Linux?
Because they're not stupid zealots who has to use just 1 operative system to satisfy their ego? Because they're using a hosting company who runs linux?
Just to be on the safe side, everybody will buy the most expensive version they can afford. It's called "differential pricing".
And now he has you to thank for getting his websites mentioned in a +5 comment.
If you can't get 'em with quality, hit 'em with quantity!
Mac OS X
No, really. If Apple opens that up to all Wintel computer companies, it will rule them all. That is if they ever do.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
12345
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Is PalmOS a server operating system? Of course not! Hence a site regarding it should not be forced to run on PalmOS.
Indeed, it is important to use the best system for the job. When one touts Windows as the best system, then they should very well be using it themselves. If they aren't using it, then that is evidence to suggest it does not live up to their hype.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
Now if they made a sort of gaming edition, where I didn't have to deal with the rest of the OS. That's obviously for many people one of the few reasons why they have to use Windows rather than Linux, gaming.
So if they made a simple interface for gaming only, with a barebone Windows OS, I think dual booting would be more recommended. No?
When was the last time you used MS Windows?
Check out the soft drink aisle at your grocery store. Both Pepsi and Coke have subdivided their colas into countless combinations and permutations from { diet caffeine-free cherry vanilla with-lemon "One" etc. }. All of these variations consume so much shelf space that there is little if any room left for other competitors outside the Big 2.
This is the same game. To compete with Linux, they need an even cheaper version to run on the even cheaper machines. So they create a version that they can give away so the vendors can sell the kit for $399. The number of versions on shelves will likely only be three, the rest probably sold by site license. I admit to being confused by three home editions, but I suspect that is meant more as an upgrade path, to insure continuing revenue from the home user, rather than products offered for regular ales.
In the end notice they left pro as pro so those who need the lesser-toy version of windows knows what to buy. Everyhting else is there to allow kit vendors to increase profit and thereby remain loyal to MS.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
You only need 1 version of a desktop OS. Sure you may have *options* on top of that, but this is just marketing to make it sound more important and to suck even more money out of the consumer.
7? Sheesh.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Even if it does taste crap, 90% of the computer users will pirate it just to taste it.
If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
I think it's a general business trend, and I hate it. 4 or 5 flavors of Sprite, another half dozen Pepsis and Cokes (some multiplicity has always been tolerable here, but now it's just ridiculous. w/ lemon? w/lime? Those are already in there under natural flavors!) The Mars bar is now a Snickers with Almonds. Consolidation of brand names, as if it helps increase awareness instead of indifference, frustration, or confusion.
Were that I say, pancakes?
Backstory
I make my living as a software architect for a large national corporation using the Win32 platform. I've got over 15 years coding & design experience.
I started out with Borland products, but slowly migrated to MS products due to the following factors:
1) Tools were built by the makers of the OS
2) API Documentation
3) Microsoft's desire to support the development community
4) OS stability - Laugh if you like, but at the time there wasn't much else to run on an 8088.
Screw The Developers
Recently, Microsoft has decided that the development community needed more "options" - In other words, let's screw all of the MSDN Universal holders into "Upgrading" to a new type of subscription - Therefore changing the concept of "Universal" to mean "Kinda sorta, but not really". You no longer can get "EVERYTHING" any more.
Screw The Consumer
Next - They're moving on to Vista (what a STUPID name) with 7 different flavors. They are "creating" a compositing desktop using the graphics hardware and touting it as the next "New Thing(tm)". Instead of using a bitmapped desktop, they've gone to this "new innovation". Uh - Mac OSX has done this since day 1. Nothing new here.
Along with "Vista", they are incorporating many "new" things - Security concepts that are really just hacks on top of a horrible idea.
Fundamentally, Microsoft has refused to accept that they themselves perpetuate the security problems they currently have. Most Win32 developers have been bottle fed to accept that the local user has admin rights. They code everything with this assumption. Because of this, Microsoft has had a VERY difficult time securing the desktop. Microsoft has no choice but to try and design around a problem of their own creation.
Fact is you cannot secure a machine where there is, effectively, no security. I say "effectively" because if all users have all rights, then where is the security?
Combine the Two Above - Rinse/Wash/Repeat
This long diatribe is really to sum up that Microsoft has ignored the problems for so long, and is not even prepared to address them with the development community. Even their latest development "security" attempts are too little too late for such an egregious flaw.
And now, to top it off, they're going to attempt to baffle the world with bullshit by releasing 7 versions of an OS - What a fantastically stupid idea.
The downward spiral started many years ago, and will end with people like me leaving the platform for something that truly performs - For something not built on technical quicksand.
(BTW - I type this from my G5 Mac in my home where the last remaining PC is serving as print server and remote desktop to host VS.NET so that I can work at home - They're are now 4 other Macs in the house)
why? everyone will have the ULTIMATE from winbeta with a hack. after all, it will be the only one that will be able to play non-DRMed media files.
Most users will buy neopolitan and then only eat the chocolate out of it tho and complain about how much it cost.
I sure hope they have Office Vista too so that people will be even more confused nothing like 14 products with the same name. The whole naming Office and Windows the same is one great big butt f*ck for IT people.
Atleast once a month someone asks me to reinstall Office XP on their computer, means Windows XP and gives me the wrong CD and then blames me for making things too complicated and saying I knew what they meant.
Look how fractured office comes now? And why can't I just buy Word and Excel and none of the other ass programs? No if you want both of those goodies you have to move on up the ladder.
I sure hope the media goes ape shit over all of the confusions (they won't, they will herald it as the new wonder os)
Good companies have shown us time and time again, too many options confuse people and make them pissed off.
More confusion means more people using other OSes even if it isn't Linux/BSD it's better. So I welcome this new useless mash of chocolate and crap flavours down at the Microsoft campus and I hope they learn their lesson.
My God... When will the Slashdot crowd finally stop bashing MS products and Windows in particular? Yes, I completely agree, Win95/98/Me absolutely sucked, we know it by now, get over it already; Win2K/XP are way more stable; I haven't had a BSoD on WinXP for over two years (at least) and I'm using around 5 PC's with WinXP installed. Don't like the OS? Fine, but don't use every chance you get to level it; it's becoming old, tiresome, and annoying. If Linux were such a great alternative, I could definitely understand your rants, but it has quite a lot of flaws itself when put forward as an easy-to-install, easy-to-use desktop OS (you know, the thing people out there are actually interested in). Flamebait? Trolling? Maybe, but so is the zillionth "M$ sucks" post...
does ANYONE think this is a good idea?
Yes, since you ask. Microsoft, for example.
the ipod + itunes combo is an outstanding example of how simplicity, reliability, and having a complete system can win over consumers even if the device is overpriced at times, and if other MP3 players have more features.
It's also a perfect example of how having a complete range, covering a wide variety of price points and feature sets, is not actually a bad thing.
"I'd like an iPod, please."
"Certainly, sir, would that be a 20 GB iPod, a 60 GB iPod, a 2 GB iPod Nano, a 4 GB iPod Nano, a 512 MB iPod Shuffle, a 1 GB iPod Shuffle, or we have some special editions over there and some old stock including various iPod Minis over there..."
In fact, all in all there are probably several times as many different variations on the iPod as there will be on Windows Vista. So, uh, what was your point again?
...has been taking lessons from someone else who produces badly-conceived products.
Lest you think I'm trolling, I have a legitimate question: Why must there be so much stratification?
Guy Kawasaki was fond of using the analogy of sailors and passengers aboard a ship: "A passenger gets on a ship, plays shuffleboard, and eats at the captain's table. A sailor weighs the anchor, goes into the engine room, and gets grease under his fingernails." He said that a product that was deep, indulgent, complete, and elegant could appeal to both kinds of users.
What we have here isn't any of these things. Instead, it's what a marketer sees as a way to "add value" and provide "choice" and ultimately increase revenues, but what it will really produce is confusion, because no one is going to be really sure which of Microsoft's offerings will suit them best.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, write technology blogs.
I'm sorry but windows is *not* an "easy-to-install", "easy-to-use" desktop OS. Easy for whom? Easy how? Yes, it has a built in GUI, which has a start menu. But what is this ease you speak of?
From my personal experience with installation, I found that even tho windows is installed, the system is still quite useless after. Barely any drivers, and of course a very low quantities of programs. It never has a driver for *any* nic I ever owned, and I'm forced to use that sneakernet. Waste of time for no good reason.
With use, it seems that I do not have the control over the system as I would like it. Some software won't run unless you're an admin (biggest pissoff). I can't utilize the multiple partitions I have the way I want to (I can't just "mount" it and have it be a transparant part of the file system. Nope, I don't even know what the equivalant for that would be, and whatever that is, it should be part of the OS anyways)
If Word and the Word .doc format were much more elegant and less troublesome to use, I might pay $100 for it.
"I'm sorry but windows is *not* an "easy-to-install", "easy-to-use" desktop OS. "
Compared to Linux it is.
"Good companies have shown us time and time again, too many options confuse people and make them pissed off."
Yeah, Baskin Robbins and Campbell's soup really have a hard time.
Oh, wait you are making shit up
I mean, damn. It used to be you would just purchase Windows 95. Then they had the whole XP home and XP Pro thing (with anyone with more sophisticated computer needs than my Grandmother needing XP Pro). Now there are going to be seven versions (and anyone but the most casual user is going to have to spend a grand on the highest end version?).
Never mind that this goes totally against the principles of normal economics (i.e. the more people who buy something, the less the development cost per unit... and since development cost is the only real cost for software, making less-powerful versions of the software should actually be MORE EXPENSIVE since it requires more work/testing/etc.) But I guess normal economics do not apply when you are a monopoly.
And never mind that the new OS won't run on anything but high-end machines. And will be utterly crippled with DRM and bloated with a damn 3D vector interface.
Sorry Microsoft, if I am going to buy a high-end workstation, it is going to be a mac, and everything else is going to be running Linux or FreeBSD. I probably would have continued using Windows just out of habit and so I could run my old software, but for the money I save from buying the highest end Windows OS I should be able to save more money than I would using my old software.
I mean, is Microsoft activly trying to piss as many people off as possible? I realize that they are just trying to make money, and everyone is basicly selfish... but are they actually under the delusion that consumers are going to go along with this? Is the market for the computer illiterate novice really that big that they can alienate higher end users?
Well... they won't win the Test, they'll draw it. But they'll still take home the Ashes-- what a glorious day it will be. :)
About bloody time. It's been what? 15, 20 years now?
It all comes down to knowing what you're doing. If you know how to work around Windows' stupidity (Hey, I have a driver right in this folder... just fucking let me select it) then I guess Windows is fine. After you've loaded Anti-Virus that is. And a new web browser. And some anti-spyware software. And a firewall.
Now that 60% of your memory is used up, you can start thinking about which $500 applications you want. A word processor and spreadsheet maybe? $500. Maybe some photo editing software? $700. You get my point. Easy to use out of the box, sure. That's because it can't do anything out of the box... and you've already spent $150 on it!
I personally will stick with Linux which has no box and a new piece of software is just an apt-get away.
Even if you manage to do everything you want to do with free software under Windows, you still have to go out and find it every damn time you re-install. And you have to keep it up to date yourself, there's nothing that automates that. Easy to use indeed.
My other car is first.
I am sure they will have some tools to make activation easier, however, this will still make Linux look even better in the corporate world. People bitch about the sheer volume of Linux distros, but this puts that to shame. At least when you look at the different Linux distros, there are real differences in each, even if the core is the same.
7 different Windows has GOT to cause some confusion in the marketplace. This is another example of something that may look good on paper, but in reality, isn't. This will lead to people buying "the wrong" Windows, and being told they have to upgrade via a retail product from #4 to #3, for only $179, to use some software or feature. This WILL lead to some people seeking alternatives.
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
"Microsoft has removed most of the features that most pirates would want from those OSes. You won't see corporate licensing versions of Ultimate Edition."
... nice has a different definition.
I think they were refering to stability, since DVD authoring/ripping or any other "feature" can easily be done 3rd party. Granted it would be nice to have a stable OS that can natively rip DVD's however once you look at the pricetag
It's also been my experience that "pirates" take what they can get and are more interested in distributing than actually using the software they pirate. It's also more of the thrill to have something illegal than what the capabilities are. How many pirates do you know that distribute FreeBSD?
I think it would be nice that Windows could readily run 400+ days uptime like some of their Unix based competitors that are free. Instead one pays $1000+ US for Windows Server farming abilities (again can be done for free). I've lost count how many "Windows Preachers" I've told "*nix can do that to and it's free". Why not ditch windows and give that $1000+ to a *nix programmer. You get exactlly what you want and do something about the worlds unemployment rate at the same time.
Have you ever interacted with real, living people? There are plenty of pro-windows people who don't work for microsoft, and know what they are doing. Yes, they ocassionally bitch about a BSOD, but then I've been known to bitch about X locking up, or having to relaunch the finder. Doesn't mean they don't like Windows. Some people really do. Its not some giant MS conspiracy.
Why not fork?
It is a bald faced lie to say linux is hard to install.
Linux is hard to install on my computers.
Take my first home-built system, please: a 1.8GHz Celeron, 512MB RAM, onboard video, AGP GeForce4, Sound Blaster 5.1, using that wonderfully user-friendly, easy-to-install Ubuntu (4 or 5, same results):
On first boot, it defaults to displaying on the onboard video, giving a blank screen if the monitor is plugged into the GeForce4, even if the onboard video is disabled in the BIOS. It can be fixed, and it's not difficult if you already know how to reconfigure the X server.
On first boot, my nVIDIA card doesn't have the proper drivers installed. It certainly isn't difficult, but it requires a driver install, then a restart of the X server.
On first boot, my wireless card isn't properly detected. It can be fixed, and it's not difficult if you already know how to install and use Windows wireless drivers, and yours happens to be supported (in my case, not yet).
On first boot, my Sound Blaster 5.1 isn't detected as a sound card. It can be fixed, and it's not difficult if you already know how to recompile the kernel.
When installing Windows 2000, yes, I have to install drivers. The process for that: Double click, maybe reboot. You don't have to know a damn thing to do that. It is easier to install Windows 2000 on my computer; Linux is comparatively hard to install.
Note that I'm not saying that this is true for all computers, but it is true for my computer, and it disproves your assertion that it is a bald faced lie to say linux is hard to install.
I just said it, and it's true for me. Therefore, it's not a lie. If I'm a computer user who has a video card AND onboard video, and I try to install Ubuntu and get a black screen on first boot, yes, Linux is a bitch to install. If I'm a computer user who doesn't know how to recompile a Linux kernel to support specific, unsupported hardware, yes, Linux is a huge bitch to get to work. And if you don't have a wireless card that your distro of Linux natively supports, it can be a bitch to get it to work.
On my Dell? ATI video card drivers are bitchy. On my last homebuilt system? Sound is again a bitch to set up. The only computer I own on which Linux has never been difficult to install is my G3 iMac.
Many of those things aren't Linux's fault - hardware vendors are stupid, I know - but being faultless doesn't make it easier to install on some systems.
Unless you only mean that it's not difficult to get Linux to boot from the hard drive of a computer - and even then, there are problems that, for some, would make it hard to do - then no, for the most part and for many people it's not hard. But to say that "it is a bald faced lie to say linux is hard to install" just makes those who can't, for legitimate reasons, easily install it feel stupid.
Yay. I can't wait for those things to arrive at CompUSA. Now, in addition to keeping track of and stocking the many renditions of Microsoft Office, I'm now forced to keep track of seven different versions of Windows Vista? You know, I'm tempted to believe that it's impossible for Microsoft to release anything that's actually a legitimately complete product. Say what you will, but I guarantee you that Ultimate Edition will even require additional purchases for certain functionality.
You know, as much as it pains me to do so, I'm just gonna start carrying burnt Linux distros with me at work, handing them to any customer who asks about purchasing Windows.
An excerpt from the article:
One final note worth mentioning is that this strategy does remove the "corporate Windows XP" option from the hands of pirates. Volume licensing for Pro, SBE, and EE may still mean that there will be copies of Windows Vista out there that don't "call home" for Windows Product Activation, but as you can see, Microsoft has removed most of the features that most pirates would want from those OSes. You won't see corporate licensing versions of Ultimate Edition.
While I definitely agree that this is a smart idea on Microsoft's part, why even bother creating so many different versions? It's getting a little ridiculous.
No, I've met several of these Fanbois.
;-)
Many of them are auxiliary MS employees. This means they work in an MS shop, and have been trained on MS tools. They are blind to anything else, and simply see problems with MS products as 'The Way things Work'.
They ignore problems with MS products, or equate them with Marketshare problems of Linux/Mac. To them, although Windows may have its problems, Linux/Mac must obviously have more serious problems, or the software/hardware selection on those platforms wouldn't be so bad.
To these people, marketshare=success. Few experience true joy in their workplaces, and many do not have a good understanding of the various layers of abstraction in the computing world. They consider themselves power-users, but rarely understand what actually goes on in the system.
These people are usually in the middle bracket of computing knowledge. I find that 'noobs' are easy to convert to Linux or Mac; they don't know how to do it in Windows, so its simply for them to learn the Linux/Mac way. I find that true experts are also easy to convert. Help them solve a last problem or two, or given them a brief introduction, and a few weeks later they'll be showing you things you haven't figured out yourself later.
It's the people in the middle that carry the MS banner.
I just realized this will start the mother of all flamewars, but oh well
WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
Except different models of iPods are DIFFERENT. They aren't just the same model with different parts of it disabled in software.
To upgrade my Window's Vista laptop to run Windows 2000?
I think they were refering to stability, since DVD authoring/ripping or any other "feature" can easily be done 3rd party.
I thought about that, and then I realized something. I can also use those 3rd party apps on XP. Plus it doesn't have all that pesky DRM. I'll stick with what I've got.
To be blunt, people evangelizing about the issue suck the most because they have this delusional fantasy that they're going to change the world with their mindless FUD and rhettoric. They then get pissed off on the inside because their efforts to convert the masses are for naught. (like always) Then they get pissy and belligerent at all those that don't use the OS 'ordained by God Almighty' and further damage and discredit their crusade. You'd think people would've learned this a long, long time ago, but those people are closed minded and incapable of seperating the truth from their own fanaticism. Therefore, I don't think you really have to worry about their opinions. ;-)
Sure. You will need 5-10 CD's to install Windows. *IF* you are clueless enough, or simply do not know (and do not want to know) anything about computers.
Otherwise, you can put ALL of that on one DVD, and install it with no more than few reboots. All you need is program like UltraISO, and a guide like this. You know, you CAN slipstream SP2, and all the latest patches and drivers into Windows installation. And use simple unattend.txt file to set defaults to most installation options (CD key, keyboard setting, resolution, time zone).
BTW. I hate too HP's 200MB drivers... but do you know why it is that big? Because they include entire Apache Tomcat + Java RE with it!!!
Please someone send me a copy of latest RHEL. If you think that I can buy one copy of RHEL 4 and run it on several servers (even though I don't need Redhat's up2date/RHN services), you should most definately read the license conditions.
That is simply not (any longer) true. Yes, you CAN buy PC system with no Windows preloaded, ie. with FreeDOS, Knoppix or even Ubuntu. And you can buy it from top tier companies like Dell, HP or IBM (sorry, Lenovo).
The real question is, why does a user have to do this? It's pointless and a waste of time, since the software supplier should have already done that for you. The same goes for updates. Tracking security updates from 30 different vendors is idiotic, it should a one command/click thing, very much like apt-get or yum.
I feel so sig.
My Freespire installation seemed to go smoothly until I was presented with a login and password scenario. I thought maybe I had downloaded the wrong thing. As determined as I was, I went online to checkout what to do, and was taught I was supposed to enter "root" and login and something else as password (don't remember anymore). To be honest, I don't remember what happened after that, but it was enough to make me give up.
Have you ever installed windows?
This is not an issue with linux being too hard. This is an issue with you not understanding how to install an operating system. Most(if not all) linux distro's ask for a root password. Lets see what windows does.
Selling software wont make you money, selling a service will.