MS Trying To Spur Vista Sales With Discounts
Ang writes "Is Microsoft having worries about selling Vista already? Ars reports that Microsoft has announced yet another 'discount program' for Vista, but these new discounts work out to only about 10% off list price — not much when you notice that retailers already sell Vista below list. To make matters worse, the discount program would still end up costing you $100 more than the older 'family' discount built around Vista Ultimate in some situations. Ars spends seven paragraphs explaining this convoluted offer. Is all of this complexity supposed to help sell Vista?" If you must buy Vista, it might be advisable to sit on your wallet for a while. The discounts are bound to get sweeter.
Last couple of times I've visited Costco there have been huge and nearly full Vista racks. It's pretty early in a product cycle for Vista to be in Costco... let alone in Costco and not moving.
Is Microsoft having worries about selling Vista already? ... To make matters worse, the discount program would still end up costing you $100 more than the older 'family' discount
Ok, then they're not worried about selling Vista, if the new discount program is worse than the old discount program. A rational person would draw the opposite conclusion: that they're confident in Vista sales numbers. At least, enough to reduce the incentive.
The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
Not buying Vista at all, ever, will save you the most money in the long run. Not to mention aggravation.
You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
Tom Peterson says "Free is a very good price!".
And I agree.
At this point, I have no interest in paying for Windows. I do, however, require at least one Windows box (currently XP64) for gaming and testing deployment of some of our enterprise applications at home. I also don't really care to go through the trouble of finding a viable crack on bit torrent or anything. I will probably buy it once there are games which I must have that demand DirectX10 for the coolest gaming experience -- and I will do so when I am in the process of building a new machine so that I can get the OEM version.
Even at that, I will not spend $200. I might spend $140. And that's for the full version (4gb+, multi-core, 64bit, etc). Otherwise they can just eat it. The only reason I ever need to jump off my solaris, debian or OSX boxes is to play games. Period.
So - in effect what the summary (and yes I glanced ad the convoluted link) is that an OS that is available in 7 different versions would have a complex discount scheme.
And Microsoft is suprised that people aren't jumping into this? Hell, it makes shopping for HDTVs simple in comparrision.
I still don't quite understand why people would rush to get Vista. XP works the same if not better, there's actually mature driver support (well, mature is a relative term when talking about ATI, NVidia et al), and you know the software you need works on XP. This reminds me of over a decade ago when we all rushed to get Windows 95 the day it came out, only to pummel our PC's into dust with all the problems it caused. Printers no longer printing, internet dialer no longer dialing, and of course the joys of our old 16-bit apps crashing half the time. It was painful. I ended up dual-booting back to classic Dos + Wfw311 for a while longer while the dust settled. Vista is going to be the same story... give it a year, for most users it will have stabilized and 3rd party support will be established. Right now it doesn't even know which end to poop from.
-Billco, Fnarg.com
... is that I switched to Vista about 2 weeks ago and am loving it. Despite all the negativity people seem to have about it I find most of that negativity comes from people who have never installed it or used it.
Haiku: Move along...
Sony is failing,
Windows Vista is failing,
Nothing to see here.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C1 bottles of beer on the wall. Take one down, pass it round... Oh, umm...
Microsoft makes most of its money through its OEM deals. I believe the number bandied about is that 80% of its Windows revenue comes not directly from the consumer, but from the "Microsoft tax" on nearly all computers sold. Also, the price MS charges OEMs for Windows is already a lot lower than that charged for an off-the-shelf version. A lot of Microsoft's revenue also depends on businesses and government, not consumers. These "discounts" seem more like the fevered imaginings of a marketing drone who wants to make Windows seem like a "sweet deal". It may not even be a ploy to make more sales in the consumer section, it might be just another trick to increase awareness of the Vista brand; nothing makes consumers perk up their ears like the word "discount", even if they are ultimately not interested in a new operating system.
Where is the "-1 WTF?" option?
More and more I'm seeing these types of stories pop up:
* "FREE AT LAST" by David Bond 03/19/2007
Quotes from the "FREE AT LAST" linked article above: (bold emphasis mine)
"But we were prepared for this Microsoft gambit. Why, we asked, after thousands of dollars already expended, should we feed the Microsoft maw again? Why this kilobuck penalty because we're getting a new machine? Made no sense."
"So down it came to the nut-cutting time. Brand-new computer, sitting here on top of the desk. Chicken-out, go with Windows, or take the Linux plunge. Let's see: $800 for Vista and Office 2007, single install, or Ubuntu, Firefox and Open Office, all for free."
IMO, I feel the title of that most excellent article pretty much sums up the growing change going on today. Why spend when a free and open alternative exists?
Apart from generating revenue, MS has to prove to share holders that the $5bn that was spent on Vista development was worth doing and they can only do that by showing an increase in sales vs XP. There must be a lot of shareholders wondering whether it would have been better to just put the money in the bank and ride XP for longer. After all, anyone not buying Vista would still buy XP, so what motivates spending $5bn?
Engineering is the art of compromise.
Is that it doesn't play nicely with AD domains. I know, we tried it and it failed miserably. Microsoft really dropped the ball on this one. I mean, even 2000 and XP could connect to both standard NT domains and AD domains. But Vista has issues, even going so far as completely screwing up the network settings. And friends in the market for a laptop are begging me to downgrade their machines to XP because critical applications they use will NOT run on Vista.
You have Vista Home, Vista Home Premium, Vista Business, Vista Enterprise and Vista Ultimate.
IMO, Vista Enterprise shouldn't exist with the bitlocker and other "enterprise" features being either made available in Vista Business or as some kind of add-on.
The "N" versions need to exist to comply with anti-trust rulings and really are just the normal versions with windows media player files removed from the CD/DVD
and the installer.
That would basically leave 4 editions of vista, Home Basic, Home Premium, Business and Ultimate
Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
How about "Buy Vista, and we'll throw in XP for free! XP! The operating system that works:
* High Productivity. None of those annoying UAC messages!
* Device Driver Compatibility. Hardware will work out of the box!
* Applications just work: Even Firefox! Even Visual Studio 2003!
* No DRM. Watch your movies and listen to your music when you want how you want.
* More efficient code, so works on today's hardware! Not only tomorrows!
* XP is cheaper and doesn't have a dozen different versions: 'Oh sir you'll need the Vista Sub Pro Business Home Basic Version!'
* Doesn't make you call Microsoft everytime you want permission to pee
Vista is to XP what New Coke(R) was to Classic Coke(R).
Coca Cola also couldn't sell New Coke and offered discounts and coupons to make New Coke cheaper in attempts to sell more of it.
Finally faced with reality, Coca Cola took New Coke off the market and replaced it with Coca Cola Classic or Classic Coke.
Once Microsoft figures out that Windows Vista is New Coke, maybe it will do the right thing and offer Windows Classic?
If I was Steve Ballmer or Bill Gates I'd offer the following:
Windows Classic 9X (Based on the Windows 95/98/ME code but with improvements and new drivers for Firewire, USB 2.0, SATA) aimed at the low end consumers market and for upgrades for low-tech and low end systems. Priced at $90USD and $45USD for an upgrade.
Windows Classic NT (Based on Windows 2000/XP code but with improvements and new drivers for Firewire, USB 2.0, SATA) The Home version for $129USD, the Business version for $179, and the Media Center version for $199
Windows Classic Server (Based on Windows 2000 Server/2003 Server code) with server applications, and starting at $300USD for a 10 client license, and offering varied prices based on the number of client licenses.
The Windows Classic 9X I would market towards the low end, people with older systems who cannot run modern operating systems. There are so many older 95, 98, ME systems out there that are not longer patched for security that it leaves them vulnerable to hackers and viruses. Having a new, low cost, version of Windows would stop the viruses and hacking, as well as fit their needs of a low cost operating system because they cannot afford to upgrade the hardware. Of course it won't run 2000/XP or Windows Classic NT software, but there is still plenty of Windows 9X type software out there.
The Windows Classic NT would be marketed towards modern hardware and people who want an OS with more features in it, who don't mind paying extra for it. The Home version is the very basics and the core of the Windows Classic NT OS. Business adds in more supports for networks, logging into a domain, running an ISS web server, etc. Media Center allows better control of media and creating media and sharing it with other devices as a server.
The Windows Classic Server is basically a File, Print, Web, Email, etc general server. I would keep a low cost of $300USD for 10 client licenses so that small businesses can afford it, and then charge more for more client licenses.
Now these Classic operating systems wouldn't have all the features of Vista, and Vista would be kept for those who want to run it. The Classic operating systems would allow security companies to write security software for them like antivirus, firewall, drive encryption, etc.
If Microsoft won't make Windows Classic 9X, just release all of the undocumented 9X API calls so some other company can write a 9X operating system from scratch to cater to those who want to run an older version of Windows.
Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
The Windows Classic 9X I would market towards the low end, people with older systems who cannot run modern operating systems
I hope at least in your own mind you were trying to be funny.
The Win9x code base with no security and roots to 3.1 and DOS is why developers have screwed up many applications still in use on XP.
Also consider XP runs well on 80MB and a 200mhz processor (faster than Win95 or Win98 did), it is time to let these computers die, as most Linux distributions won't even run on them.
I installed a free copy of Vista I got from Dell about 2 weeks ago as well, and immediately uninstalled it. I had made an image of my hard drive pre-upgrade with Norton Ghost so it was pretty easy to do so. I was actually pretty excited about Vista, and ended up being disappointed. My primary complaints include (there may have been more but I uninstalled too quickly to find them):
- they eliminated the expanding "All Programs" menu from the Start menu (wtf?), so instead you have to scroll up and down interminably on a little window in the Start menu. Think of it like using Start on your Blackberry. It's either that or use search to find your program.
- 10,000 shades of teal mixed with an unchangeable grey/black/silver Taskbar / Start menu = extreme nausea, plus there is no way to change it.
- Flip 3D is not useful because you have to use either a 3-key combo to use it or click on a little button on the taskbar to use it. I would have preferred just using my mouse scrollwheel...
- The "User Access Control" thing warned me 3 times in a row about WinRAR and I couldn't just approve the program...
- The start button is a lot harder to click on now since it's not synonymous with the corner - you have to visually find it.
I really liked IE until they screwed everything up in IE7, and now I've started using Firefox. I am wondering whether Vista will do the same thing and force me to start using a Mac and/or Linux. Linux still isn't an option though because the media copyright issues make it hard to use for multimedia applications. And a Mac screams "vendor lock-in". So maybe I'll just use XP forever...
- Do NOT, under any circumstances, upgrade an existing XP machine to Vista, even if it's Vista Supremo Premium Ultra-Capable.
- When you get a new computer, if it comes with Vista, that's when you'll upgrade.
- Do NOT buy a new computer just to get Vista, if your existing XP-based machine is working well enough.
Of course, Microsoft probably doesn't want me saying that...but screw 'em.Be who you are...and be it in style!
Many people dismiss this topic of optimization as a conspiracy theory, but I must admit that I am starting to believe that such techniques exist.
It is your personal duty to fight for what is right on a daily basis. Ignoring injustice is identical to approving
This new adjustment in their campaign is a refinement designed to bring the Vista Marketing program into greater conformance with the law that states a software product's marketing must substantially resemble the product itself. Compare for example the marketing of Apple (sleek, even snobbish, original, highly creative, and very effective) and Linux (homegrown, word-of-mouth, technically substantial and in-the-trenches results-based factology). Despite their best efforts, MS has yet to achieve in marketing the stunning combination of convolution, deception, irrelevance and ineptitude that their OS embodies. But they're working on it.
Titus Barik