Slashdot Mirror
Windows 7 To Come In Multiple Versions
Crazy Taco writes "Tom's Hardware reports on newly discovered screenshots that reveal Microsoft is planning to release their newest version of Windows in multiple confusing versions ... again. The information comes from the latest version of the Windows 7 beta, build 7025 (the public beta is build 7000), and shows a screen during installation that asks the user which version of the OS he or she would like to install. Who's up for guessing what the difference is between Windows 7 'Starter' and Windows 7 'Home Basic?'"
I've got big issues with artifically crippled software, where all versions come on the same install media.
It's like buying a car with 12 cylinders and having a switch hidden under the hood somewhere that controls the number of cylinders used. You buy the budget model, still have to cart around the weight of all 12 cylinders, but only get to use 4 of them.
- There is no point, it's like a sphere -
The confusion is quite ridiculous. I mean really, when the fscking salespeople need to look up tables to determine which windows versions include which features, you can tell someone somewhere in marketing has screwed the pooch badly.
Maybe MS is preying on the fact that most consumers will be too stupid to know they're buying more than they need, or too elitist to buy just what they will use instead of getting "Ultimate". Either way, they make more money.
I have nothing against them making money, but hawking feature incomplete operating systems at rock bottom price just to artificially create the appearance of choice drives me nuts.
You can't legislate goodness. Let each to his own destiny, by will of his freely made choices.
The XP Starter edition was a crippled version of XP intended to reduce piracy in countries where people couldn't afford full-priced versions.
It was limited to 800 x 600 resolution, classic mode only - no theming, only three applications running, and a network restricted to an internet connection, not home networking.
The press at the time called it "cut-rate," "cheap," "crippled," and "futile. Users in emerging nations ignored it and continued pirating XP.
Expect the Windows 7 Starter Edition to have similar restrictions.
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
Windows 7 is a marketing attempt to remove the negativity associated with the Vista marketing campaign and name. Instead of rolling out vista with a new service pack, they are rolling out "windows 7". In reality, windows 7 is a bunch of delayed features and vista bug fixes. They HAVE to keep the same versioning system as windows vista becuase of licensing tools already in place and the way the development teams are setup. The vista team is working on the Windows 7 stuff too, as opposed to having a seperate dedicated team (which will come later). So from a business standpoint, the internal resources have no need to be rearranged for a simple marketing change.
Trying to install linux on my microwave, but keep getting a kernel panic...
It's gotten so bad, it's not even any fun to mock them anymore - machine-gunning fish in a barrel is a challenge by comparison.
First of all, all of those flavors were available for Vista as well. Starter was only marketed for emerging markets.
Second of all, all of those builds have been available since the early days of Windows 7. This isn't something they recently added in to 7025, it's been there the entire time as a carry-over from Vista.
Just because these versions are randomly available in a pre-release version of an OS doesn't mean they'll still be there by the time it's actually released.
This game will waste your life. Don't clicky!
The confusion is quite ridiculous. I mean really, when the fscking salespeople need to look up tables to determine which windows versions include which features, you can tell someone somewhere in marketing has screwed the pooch badly.
After being in the Linux arena for several years, I ran into a client that needed a Windows solution. CDW was their preferred vendor. I called them for a quote....and spent the better part of my work day on the phone with the account rep, and some odd sort of Microsoft licensing rep trying to figure out the correct licensing for a handfull of workstations, and two servers.
Strange combinations of eOpen licenses for workstations, and server CALs, but then special CALs for having more than 1 server on an SBS network, and then a license for SQL, and then Office under some other 'open' license, plus a few standalone apps from the office suite for computers that only needed Word or PowerPoint, etc...
What a huge fucking nightmare. With all the time spent dealing with the licensing, a company could probably save money if Microsoft had a 'dumptruck licensing plan' where you simply drove them a dump truck full of money every 6 months and you could use whatever software in whatever situation.
My linux licenses are so much easier.
Server: $0
Workstation: $0
Database (MySQL or Postgresql): $0
Jabber collaboration server: $0
Development workstation (with any combination of vi, vim, emacs, openkomodo, kate, eclipse, etc...): $5
(Actually, my linux sales rep says 'Just kidding stupid, it's $0')
There's no place like
You know, I'd mod you funny ... but there's the nagging thought in the back of my mind that you're serious.
Which only has one version and a single standardized desktop environment. Clearly multiple versions of the same OS are bad.
Abandon All Hope, Ye Who Enter Here
My linux licenses are so much easier.
Server: $0
Workstation: $0
Database (MySQL or Postgresql): $0
Jabber collaboration server: $0
Development workstation (with any combination of vi, vim, emacs, openkomodo, kate, eclipse, etc...): $5
(Actually, my linux sales rep says 'Just kidding stupid, it's $0')
A fully functional server: Priceless.
$ make available
Presumably it's because it's been proven in multiple courts of law that Microsoft has no problem with illegal acts that extend its market share. Sauce for the goose, my friend.