Slashdot Mirror
MS Confirms Six Different Versions of Windows 7
darien writes "Microsoft has confirmed that Windows 7 will be offered in six different editions. In a seeming admission that the numerous versions of Vista were confusing to consumers, the company says that this time its marketing will focus on just two editions — 'Home Premium' and 'Professional.' But the reality is more complex, with different packages offering different subsets of the total range of Windows 7 features."
Since Vista worked out so good for them they had to follow their 'success'. Seems like some people never learn.
I would hesitate to use the strong language of "confirmed" as the sites in the summary just link to other PCPro articles and it's all PCPro. I can't seem to find any really formal news release or website with Microsoft's official stance on this. I think this is a bad decision but they know their business better than I do.
... are they really going to use the same marketing strategy they did with Vista?
From Paul Thurrott's site (which breaks each version down by feature--don't ask me how he got them).
Here's the most reliable source I can find where it is revealed in a Q&A with the general manager for Windows at Microsoft.
The AP has picked it and quotes passages from the Q&A session. So I think the majority of this is coming from a Q&A session with Mike Ybarra, general manager for Windows.
Which gives me pause and causes me to wonder
My work here is dung.
*TOTALLY* buying a 'windows 7' capable pc and suing when I can't run the most bells-and-whistles-ful version that exists. Anyone else game? We can start planning the class action lawsuit now!
That aught to clear things right up, thanks Paul.
/sigh
I guess one will probably be stripped down for netbooks.
Starter Edition: A lightweight version for netbook computers, that will only be capable of running three applications concurrently.
Maybe someone can educate me here: are EeePCs and subnotebooks so underpowered that they can only run three programs at a time? It seems like a purely artificial limit repackaged as a "performance" feature.
Being a computer scientist means you tell people how computers should work, not that you know how they actually work.
I guess when you're Microsoft accounting is more important than marketing.
...and I will be buying none of them.
I have never understood why Microsoft does this. Well, beyond the "make more money" aspect but that's because they're a company in the business of making money. The thing is, I just don't understand _how_ this leads to them making more money. In my mind, having one-and-only-one version of your operating system seems so much more efficient and cost-effective. It reduces the cost of pressing the discs, packaging, marketing - everything. It reduces the headaches of support (it outright eliminates the question of which version of the OS a person is running and thus what features they have access to, for example). In every way, it seems like it would cost Microsoft MORE to offer different versions of their OS which surely more than offsets any additional money they may make from doing it so I just don't understand why they do it. I'd love for someone to offer a flash of insight to explain what I'm obviously missing but, on every level, it just seems like the wrong choice.
I was expecting 7 versions to justify the names?? :-)
~Once you have your choices narrowed down, the rest will fall into place.
What's so hard to understand? First off, they list - in a concise paragraph - what each version is. Second off, grandma-sue who barely knows how to use e-mail is not goign to perform an upgrade so she doesn't need to understand. People who perform upgrades, a task that is timeconsuming, will either 1) research, 2) pay someone (or ask a friend), or 3) buy a new computer and take what it comes with.
BTW - there will be 12 versions, not 6. They forgot to mention 32 bit vs 64 bit.
This is beneficial. Not everyone needs ultimate. Grandma who barely checks e-mail doesn't need every single bell and whistle. Emerging markets - those who can barely afford computers - I doubt they will be buying the latest and greater computers or the latest and greatest games...do you really need the latest and greatest in drivers if you don't have a video card for it? If 6 versions of windows is too complex I wonder what the author feels like when he goes to buy a car.
I do not support "The Man". I also do not support your irrational stupidity
To me, at least, Windows has just become a front end. Windows - The welcome mat to the Internet, endless web services and a few essential applications. Frankly Windows deserves to be about 100Mb big and start in 0.33 seconds. I note this because I've also read that there will be a few versions of Windows 7, perhaps not as many as the silly number of Vistas available, but enough to cause concern. See, I'd be happy with the Windows 7 (insert real name here) Ultra-skinny-super-deluxe-lite version please. Price it around £30 ($42 - at this precise moment), please add your own browser, security and web apps. Think of it as going to Subways, choose the boring brown roll of an OS, then add all your own funky, juicy, meats, salads, peppers and sauces.
If he's the Walrus then can I be a penguin please?
Even so, why can't they just make one version, sell it at the cost that they'd sell Ultimate, and have an interface during install that shows the different "versions" and a quick explanation of the features included, the intended platforms, etc.
Beyond that, there should be a method to "upgrade" your install to one of the higher versions if you decide you need the added features and that your hardware can support it. Since you've already payed the price for a full Ultimate copy, there would be no need for extra costs to do this.
Granted, it would be nice just to have one version, plain and simple, but as a IT employee at a university, I'm going to want some sort of either version options or feature options so I can only install what I need on campus machines and not eat up disk space with things the students won't ever use.
I didn't really do the Vista thing, but it was my impression that everyone was really fucking confused about all the different versions and which one did what, possibly including Microsoft guys themselves? So the way this reads, Windows 7 will be pretty much the same in this regard, except they'll ignore most of the versions for the purposes of simplifying advertising, pushing the "fancy/expensive" versions while the lesser versions probably are what comes pre-installed on your pre-assembled computers. Or so it seems.
I think the (sarcastically) better idea would be if they let you buy something that boots into a browser-capable environment for $30 and then nickle-and-dimed you on everything else. Looks like you're trying to write a letter. To use the letter assistant, please have your credit card ready... Or something.
Even as you read this, your pants are strangling your loins! Aaa!
Some people keep pointing out that these editions are equivalent to GNU/Linux having hundreds of distros. They are not the same, however.
The difference is: every edition, except the Ultimate version of Windows, is hobbled to make more money from the consumer. With GNU/Linux, none of the distros are hobbled. Generally distros are created to fill a particular niche, or just because the maintainer is doing it for fun.
Finally, there is no confusion for desktop-using newbies: simply use Ubuntu.
Starter Edition: A lightweight version for netbook computers, that will only be capable of running three applications concurrently.
Great, so one of the slots will be used by your Virus scanner, another by the Spyware checker leaving you with one slot left to run an app of your choice!
Summation 2
Why do they always forget Doc?
How much extra does it cost MS to segregate the versions? Why not just ship the ultimate cd and ask, during installation or upgrade, whether the user wants a basic installation, a home media center installation, or a professional installation? There's already a widget in the control panel (or whatever they'll call it in this edition) that allows the installation of microsoft programs.
Wouldn't it be cheaper to simply send a single CD out?
(Yes, you'd miss the fanbois shelling out an extra $100 so they could say they bought "ultimate"; is it really that big a loss with most licenses going out through OEMs for nominal fees?)
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
will they codename the 7 versions as Sunday, Monday, ..., Saturday? and the marketing line to be "What do you want Today?"
Because grandma is going to know the difference between BSD and Developer Tools or how to set that up? If MS lists their version description just like in the article then it will be VERY easy for people to figure out. More then likely grandma will stick with Vista and only upgrade if her grandchild tells her to and then he will make the decision on which version.
/. wil be confused.
I am pretty sure nobody here on
I do not support "The Man". I also do not support your irrational stupidity
Which one works?
Why are there going to be different 32/64 bit disks? How is it that Apple can make a installer DVD with 4 different platforms (Intel/PPC, 32-bit/64-bit) but the 800 lb gorilla still has a different "64-Bit Edition"? Are fat binaries that hard to work with?
Is there a reason Microsoft cant put BitLocker, AppLocker, Cornerstone, Direct Access, Branch Cache etc into Windows 7 Professional and then just have Enterprise be a volume license product (like XP pro corp was for XP pro)?
Is it purely a case of "those who need it can pay extra for Ultimate and get this stuff, those who dont shouldn't have to pay for it"? (i.e. money) Or is there more to it?
>Which gives me pause and causes me to wonder ... are they really going to use the same marketing strategy they did with Vista?
Microsoft has not learned. They think that Vista is good. They even have studies that they did internally that proved that Vista is fine. These were real user studies, no fakes. What they think is a problem is that Vista got a bad rep. And that is the flaw of their thinking. They are being mule headed.
Vista like Windows 7 will be a dud! I read in ZDNet how they have X versions, but more than 80% will be two main versions; Home Premium, and Professional.
This leads me to ask WTF are you doing releasing the other ones? So Microsoft is going waste money for less than 20% sales on 5 additional versions. Go for it Microsoft you guys are DUMB!
I have to admit once Bill G left Microsoft has had absolutely no tech vision or guidance! And Ray Ozzie is no role model...
"You can't make a race horse of a pig"
"No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
Windows XP Home
Windows XP Pro
Windows XP Starter
Windows XP Media Center
Windows XP Tablet PC
Windows XP 64-bit
Windows XP Embedded
Windows Vista Starter
Windows Vista Home Basic
Windows Vista Home Premium
Windows Vista Business
Windows Vista Enterprise
Windows Vista Ultimate
Windows Vist 64-bit
Windows Vista Embedded
Windows 7 Starter Edition (for emerging market and netbook users)
Windows 7 Home Premium (Media Center equivalent)
Windows 7 Home Basic (for emerging market customers only)
Windows 7 Professional (the business SKU for home users and non-enterprise licensees)
Windows 7 Enterprise (for volume licensees)
Windows 7 Ultimate (for consumers who want/need business features)
So upon release, we could see TWENTY ONE different versions of 3 OSes floating around the IT world.
What a flipping nightmare.
from TFA:
"[...]Windows XP users will have to perform a clean install of Windows 7, however, while Vista users will be able to keep their existing applications and data with an upgrade install."
I guess many CIOs/expert users will balk at this... In the office, I am perfectly productive on a 3 years old AMD processor, 512MB ram and a 120 MB hard disk....why should I spend money on a new (...) operating system, more ram, more processor, a new version of office, all to do the same things as before, just not any faster?
Add to this that I cannot upgrade and pray, but I must Fdisk and install....then recover all the other programs, wait for them to say "sorry, no compatibility",restore old settings, rinse/lather/repeat.
...Oh wait....I cannot register XP anymore......$%&/£%@Â#!!!!!!!!!
Do not tell the redmond guys, but IMHO their onlt chance is working hard at a version that not only looks like XP, but WORKS exactly like XP. No use trying to impose a change for change's sake, people might say bad things like "Ubuntu" or "wine".
"If a boss demands loyalty, give him integrity. But if he demands integrity, give him loyalty." (John Boyd, 1927-1997)
I know there's also Mac OS X server, but the difference in price tag still helps to make it an easy choice for consumers.
I presume the Windows versions will be priced differently too - otherwise, what would be the point in buying an inferior version?
Which is the version that won't randomly crash?
of course they dont give any indications of costs
Not troll, just wrong. I learned the hard way that Apple doesn't quite adhere to the "all OS versions come with everything" standard. Recently, I was using my MacBook and I wanted to some quick calculations involving logarithms. So I looked in the Apps folder for Mac's calculator program. I opened it and set it to scientific. Then, thinking it would have the basic features on its bundled calculator that come with Windows, I opened the help feature and looked for the keyboard shortcuts (which I prefer using and which make a big difference when you're not using or don't have mouse availabe).
Nothing came up.
When I asked about that on a Mac help forum, first, they called me an idiot for claiming there are no keyboard shortcuts on Calculator. Then, after a while, I was able to convince them that there really weren't, partly because another poster confirmed that 10.4 doesn't have the Calculator shortcuts. Their solutions:
1) You idiot, if you need to calculate logarithms, you should have a real, pocket calculator. ... exactly the dilemma Mac fans love to say you'll never have.
2) You need to upgrade to a better OS version (10.5)
Yes, I can understand if I want a feature that's completely new to Macs, like Time Machine, but *keyboard shortcuts on the calculator*? Something available over ten years ago on Windows? Basic functionally typically found on all programs? Considering Mac users' insistence that all Mac apps have easy keyboard shortcuts?
Information theory is life. The rest is just the KL divergence.
7. Windows 7 Total Shit Xtreem
oh yes, the "Extreme" craze of the late 90's is making a comeback retro future style!
There are some differences from the Vista versions, if the reports are to be trusted. Most importantly, Home Basic is only being sold to developing countries. The difference between Home Basic and Home Premium was the most confusing aspect of the Vista versions that I saw. Furthermore, Professional will now include everything that is in Home Premium (including Windows Media Center), in addition to the ability to join a domain, etc, which eliminates the main reasons why anyone bought Ultimate Edition.
Say what you like, but at least Apple keeps it simple for the consumer.
I don't think they have much of a choice.
Had to reply to myself since I got the other one modded as flamebait. THis is in protest to the moderation system. People mod you down with things like troll/flamebait when they don't agree with what you say - it doesn't matter if what you say is not a troll/flamebait message.
I do not support "The Man". I also do not support your irrational stupidity
I love how this "topic" is a whipping boy for Linux zealots. Ubuntu alone has Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Edubuntu, Xubuntu, and probably more that I don't even know about. If you want to see real madness though, go over to Opera's linux download page here.
It's amusingly ironic that the same folks who evangelize linux on the desktop are the same people who would claim that 6 versions of Windows is confusing to end users. Maybe if ya'll stopped worrying so much about what Microsoft did and actually started pointing out the flaws in your own platform, you'd make some progress.
Similes are like metaphors
More is better..
So using that logic Linux is better than Windows by a large factor, after all we have more than 200 (being very conservative) distros. :D (sorry had to get that quick jibe in)
Anyhow I reakon the only version worth getting will be the professional version (bang for buck)
Oh great, 12 MORE platforms to test our product on.
What about Itanium? Will there be a Windows 7 for Itanium?
EXISTING COMPUTERS
If the computer goes in for repair, or to have malware removed, part of the service is an upgrade to the latest and best version of Windows the system will support. [Note that saving your data is not part of the service.]
All this is depressing, given that perfectly good Thai Linux distributions exist. The trouble is that Windows is all anyone knows. I have converted a few souls to Linux and they mostly end up liking it (especially on Netbooks) but it is an up-hill struggle.
I know VISTA had 32/64 bit included in retail, but OEM was still divided into 32bit and 64bit versions. Is that split going to continue?
Peter asked, "Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me and I forgive him? As many as seven times?" Jesus said to him, "I do not say to you seven times but seventy times seven."
Now just substitute "Customer" for "Peter", "Microsoft" for "my brother", and "Ballmer" for "Jesus", and you've got Microsoft's strategy.
Oh, yeah, it's not easy to pad these out to 120 characters.
From TFA
And that means that a single version - Home Premium - will be offered to consumers, with a separate version - Professional - offered to businesses. Both the Home Professional and Business SKUs will contain discrete features that aren't overlapped to the other.
It sounds like Windows 7 Starter, Enterprise, and Ultimate will only be available as OEM, VLK or as upgrades. I personally don't mind the multiple SKUs, as I use features that most users wouldn't use at the same time, such as Remote Desktop and Media Center. There are very few home users that will know about, let alone use the RDC features of Vista/7, but will use MCE. While very few businesses will use the MCE features, but use RDC. While we can complain as much about Microsoft's pricing, they are a business, and it does make sense for them to charge for additional features.
Seriously. Different markets, different computers, different users... why should they ALL have the _same_ OS?
Linus Torvalds comes out and says that having hundreds of versions of Linux is a good thing because of different markets, computers, and users, and everyone is like "No duh."
Microsoft makes an OS with a mere 6 versions and suddenly everything is too complicated, a hassle, the upper versions are all malware and the lower versions are all underpowered. Where's the consistency?
I, for one, wish there were MORE choices. I'd like a PERFORMANCE version that's light on the GUI, light on all of the crapware features, but still able to run tons of stuff. Maybe some people want the pretty GUI but not the extra features... maybe some people want the features but not the GUI.
I guess you could have just ONE OS with all of the extra features as add-ons, but what the hell does Joe Sixpack or Grandma Sue know about computers? They'll get the "Home" version for their personal PCs, the "Light" for their netbooks, and the "Business" for their workstations and its almost the same thing.
I don't see much of a problem, except that there's not _enough_ customization.
Ugh. People already (rightfully) complain about Vista being a bloated monstrosity, particularly in terms of hard drive space consumed.You really want Microsoft to invent and use some 32/64-bit "universal binary" format? It made sense for Apple because they were straddling two entirely incompatible platforms. But x86-64 runs x86 just fine. What MS could do is pack both 64-bit and 32-bit binaries on one DVD. But I'd bet they couldn't fit it all on one DVD-5.
I'm developing spyware for Windows 7 using the beta in a VM on Linux :P
I'll be rich in hours!
Since Ultimate will have all features, I hope it has the "only able to run three apps at once" feature from Starter.
Also, in Starter, does the idle process count as one of your three apps?
they make? Most people will downgrade to Windows XP for $150 more, or just get an OEM XP disk from an online source like pricewatch.com for $89 and reformat the hard drive anyway?
Might as well not sell an OS with the system and let the user decide. Only give the driver disk for many OS formats.
How about Windows 7.0 Classic Edition which is based on the XP codebase instead of the Vista codebase? Now that version, I'd buy.
Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
*shakes head*
7 different versions? OMFG
Does it REALLY need to be more than one, or two versions? Absolutely not.
It would make more sense to have a version that 99% of the people would end up wanting (ie. the household user), then either selling a version with weird features the household population will never use. Or even better make those odd features free-plug-ins, or hell charge for them.... but 7 versions is really just poor management decision and marketing.
I am open source, and Linux baby!
FWIW - Only 2 editions, Home & Pro, for consumers. The rest are specialty editions for the man and people who must have ultimate...
Ninnle Linux is so configurable that only one version of it is needed. There are built-in installations for desktop, server, gamer, office, amateur radio and development, with the ability to combine any and all of these within one setup. I don't think M$ can hold a candle to Ninnle!
"But the reality is more complex, with different packages offering different subsets of the total range of Windows 7 features."
Isn't this just a way to admit that around 90% of the people don't care about most of these so called "features"?
Bloat by any other name has the same stench!
Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.
"...the Seinfeld/Gates advertisements, and the "I'm a PC" ad campaign did a lot to overturn Vista's bad PR..."
Ha ha ha ha.
C-x C-s C-x k
Server, office (pro), and home. One could argue that home and pro should be one version. So then Two versions are needed. What about 32 bit and 64 bit then 4 versions? Or are we going straight to 128 bit and skipping the 32 bit vs 64 bit issue?
Only if AMD/Intel/IBM/ made 128 bit CPUs. And microsoft came out with a 128 bit version of windows that would run all 64 bit and 32 bit applications it might actually sell. But there is so much money to be made from selling separate NNN bit versions. I do not see them ever doing that.
Idiots.
I don't understand the greed if MS sometimes.
They should release one version "Ultimate" for $99 thats it.
If a user wants to scale down to a business, at install tell it and it will reduce the add-ons. If you need a light "CE" version tell it at install and have it strip all the garbage.
At that price point and feature level anyone that would have downloaded or hacked it for free may very well buy it instead. The days of trying to squeeze people for every last penny are over. Evolve to the market you big dumb asses.
For my PC, I like operating systems with 'X' in them...XP...Xubuntu...OSX.... Don't ask me which version I want. Don't ask me if I want 32- or 64-bit.... Just install the fucking operating system! If I need a feature then I will look for it. If not, then I won't and if, by chance, I don't need a particular feature you did not short your stockholders by installing it on my PC.
It is because MS never used "metadata" stuff in NTFS which exists for years. Apple's "FAT binary" is a good solution since User doesn't see "G4.exe, G5.exe, i386.exe" in their own respective directories.
Also thanks to HFS+ and .app architecture, Apple can easily separate data and code without any ugly look. For apps, there is one data directory (icons, languages, movies) and it will be used regardless of the CPU. Lets say, IE does have its icons, menus in .exe file itself, not in "IE resources". That is how MS had a nice Internet Explorer.app on MacOS/OS X which you can drag to Trash.
Want to see how it looks on NTFS which somehow, insanely trying to look like MS DOS? If you have Apple Quicktime or Safari installed, just look at their directories in "Program Files". Man it is really ugly and confusing.
If MS was really in revolution, they would have started to use NTFS features such as "streams" but of course, that feature is reserved to DOSkit authors now :)
Haha, I was waiting for someone to point that out.
All the Ubuntus are pretty much the same, it's just the default desktop enviroment that is different, maybe a few different packages.
It's not like there is an Ubuntu Home that lacks NFS and SSH support, so if you need those, you need Ubuntu Home Premium.
But that one is missing media player capabilities, so you need to get Ubuntu Home Ultimate Premium Super which requires 4 cores and 12GB of Ram.
I do agree, though, if you are new to Linux trying to figure out which distro to use is confusing enough to say "F it", I'll stick with Windows.
The variety in Linux is it's power, but also it's weakness in attracting new users.
Shameless plug alert: Game server control panel
I'm really not a MS fanboy.
But seriously, I'll bet a good number of posters bemoaning the 6 versions of Windows were saying how great it is to have a hundred Linux distros in response to http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/02/03/1555216
I'm just sayin.
How bout this:
Ballmer Rejects One-Size-Fits-All Win7
Who cares how many versions of the new windows I won't be buying?
Until my clients have a reason to migrate from XP Pro on the desktop, that's what I'll be using.
Mac gets by with two versions; I've never heard anyone complain.
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Edubuntu, and Xubuntu are all exactly the same aside from the desktop environment. Going for one over the other will not limit what you can do.
By going with Kubuntu over Xubuntu you aren't missing out on features, or sticking yourself with a needlessly crippled (Starter) operating system. The only difference is the interface.
If you think 7 versions is bad, Linux has "hundreds" and apparently Torvalds likes it that way.
To quote Linus:
"I think multiple distributions aren't just a good thing, I think it's something absolutely required. We have hundreds of distros, and a lot of them are really for niche markets."
You can take that same statement and apply to Windows. So let's not be the pot calling the kettle black.
No, read it again. They don't say that they are only offering 2 editions. They say that "customers will be best served by two primary editions." But then they mention the other 4. They know how heavily criticized the 6 editions were with Vista. But just like Vista, MS wants you to buy the expensive editions and will put them in front of you while asking you to ignore what's behind the screen. Some people will opt for the cheaper ones. It's basically a re-labeling of product but not really changing the strategy.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
They should have low cost 5 system packs for Home Premium for people that have a few pc's in there home and Professional for small business / home business that are to small for Enterprise.
While the .app structure is one way of making a fat binary, it's actually not that common.. All of the *NIX applications and Apple are fat binary in a single file (See Below). I've only ever seen 1 or 2 programs which had separate PPC binary files. I imagine that it is only quite different when there is quite a bit of assembly code or AltiVec accelerated code. There's no reason that Microsoft couldn't do a fat binary of iexplore.exe that had 64 and 32 bit code. Apple made it ungodly easy on developers that used XCode to develop for 4 platforms instantly. How hard could it be for Microsoft to do the same?
lipo -info /System/Library/CoreServices/Finder.app/Contents/MacOS/Finder /System/Library/CoreServices/Finder.app/Contents/MacOS/Finder are: i386 ppc7400
Architectures in the fat file:
lipo -info iMovie
Architectures in the fat file: iMovie are: ppc i386
lipo -info /bin/* /bin/[ are: i386 ppc7400 /bin/bash are: i386 ppc7400 /bin/cat are: i386 ppc7400 /bin/chmod are: i386 ppc7400 /bin/cp are: i386 ppc7400
Architectures in the fat file:
Architectures in the fat file:
Architectures in the fat file:
Architectures in the fat file:
Architectures in the fat file:
etc...
lipo -detailed_info /bin/bash /bin/bash
Fat header in:
fat_magic 0xcafebabe
nfat_arch 2
architecture i386
cputype CPU_TYPE_I386
cpusubtype CPU_SUBTYPE_I386_ALL
offset 4096
size 576016
align 2^12 (4096)
architecture ppc7400
cputype CPU_TYPE_POWERPC
cpusubtype CPU_SUBTYPE_POWERPC_7400
offset 581632
size 663296
align 2^12 (4096)
I'm not particularly well versed in the ins and outs of every niche of the OS market, but just the other day Slashdot had an article about how it was a bad idea for Linux to consolidate all their builds into one OS. The reasoning for this was because of all the different groups who use them. Whereas when Microsoft does this sort of thing it's inherently bad because it's just a blatant cash grab, and not an attempt to broaden their market.
I have nothing compelling to say
I think Apple can do this because Unix is far more modular than Windows. Some where in the installer it probably queries the OS X version and hardware and then decides which binaries to load. Windows with it's library and dll complexity probably just loads them all.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Good to see that they are going back to the two OS lineup (at least in western world). No more vista basic BS.
I know this is Slashdot and par for the course, but really people quit bashing a perfectly acceptable practice.
I don't know about you, but personally I enjoy having choices.
It makes sense, not all users have the same requirements so why try to shoehorn them all into the same box.
Not only that, but people always seem to fault Windows as bloatware, but one of the reasons behind this is that they try to be everything to everyone half the time.
Now I also have my own skepticism as of course the devil is in the details, and both articles are a bit light on those.
Realistically from the sounds of it, some of the "choices" won't be choices at all. One will be MS's attempt to avoid piracy in China and other "emerging" markets (those unwilling or unable to pay 120$ USD). Another will only really be available to corporate clients. As for the rest, Ultimate will be the horribly overpriced fanboy edition that less than 1% will buy, but include the kitchen sink. Another will be a "slim" version for netbooks, which I find intriguing. Depending on features, and cost, this might be pretty attractive. What is left are the two versions that will likely comprise 90% of the market, in Home Premium for home users and Professional for businesses.
Anyway as mentioned its the details which count, which we do not have so making a big deal about it at this point is a bit premature.
Heck all you folks bitching about SIX different versions of Windows should remember that an OS like Linux has like hundreds, some in some pretty niche groups.
What I would like them to do is take a page from Linux. Sell me the lean slim version, and let me pick and choose what I want. Heck we download enough patches already at this point why not? Their fear of course is probably that most/many users won't understand. Of course they could just automate it...
Anyway wait and get the specifics before bashing.
It's only a matter of time until Microtransactions reach the OS level.
"Your new OS is completely free!"
_insert DVD_
"Please approve $1.00 charge to watch this DVD"
_insert new video card_
"To enable use of new video card, please approve $5.00 charge"
_take shotgun and shoot computer_
What I am saying is, it could be really possible for them as Vista+ only supports NTFS to install and NTFS has "streams" support which can be used as metadata.
The problem is, you are dealing with a company who still insists using 8.3 MSDOS names even on Windows Vista and 7. Expecting them to use something like metadata which is absolutely possible is asking for impossible. I joked about it but let me be clear, if a miracle happens and MS starts to use their own metadata zone... All current rootkit detectors will go nuts! It is because only rootkit developers found a way to use that stale feature.
If you have used OS/2 you know know how advanced "metadata" features are. You can even configure a browser behaviour on a basic, saved web link file. The filesystem is in fact can be called NTFS 1.0 (it is HPFS). They have a way more complex thing in hand and they use it like MS DOS. So there is no "Internet Explorer.exe" and it is still called "iexplore.exe".
1) Copy slackware;
2) viral marketing: "I'm releasing XXX soon, which is LinuX based";
3) profit.
--- I am known for the ones who want to find me on the net. Is that a privacy risk or a privilege? One might wonder..
Hooray for sensationalist idiot posters :P
The article clearly states that there will be TWO editions: Windows 7 Home Premium, and Windows 7 Professional. This mirrors XP's Home and Pro editions.
The "other four" editions are for specifically targeted markets, like the Starter edition for low-end 3rd world machines, and the Home Basic edition probably destined for netbooks and the like. For most users, there will only be Home and Pro to consider, and the differences are fairly clear-cut, just like they were for XP. You won't see six different W7 boxes at Staples, you will see two.
Keep in mind, XP also had a handful of spinoff editions for foreign markets and low-end machines. Most people have never even heard of them, because your mother doesn't need to know about Windows XP KN Edition or Windows XP FlexGo-Brasil :P
Now, even with 2 main SKUs, this is still just a small subset of the features Vista was supposed to have in the first place, and that's nothing to be proud of, but those who choose to bitch and moan about having "too many versions of Windows" will be required to sit down and shut up, because there is nothing wrong with Home and Pro. In fact, that kind of split is better than just having one mega-distro for both environment, from a usability perspective.
-Billco, Fnarg.com
I'm going to register pindows.com and hincows.com ... ;)
maybe I should include windows.com too because too many people make spelling mistakes
--- I am known for the ones who want to find me on the net. Is that a privacy risk or a privilege? One might wonder..
and totally ignore business, having one SKU that they put on all computers. Let's be honest, no one posting to /. is going to _purchase_ Windows 7.
Well, you're a tool. That's probably why you were modded down. The modding instructions specifically state that "You must mod people down who are having a gender-identity crisis."
In the wise words of Eric Cartman: "You're a fucking faggot, dude."
Aren't there 3 versions of XP? (*2 if OEMs are included)
Home, PRO and Corporate Edition?
--- I am known for the ones who want to find me on the net. Is that a privacy risk or a privilege? One might wonder..
OS X Server edition is really for servers, optimised for them in every aspect down to how memory is managed. On Windows case, Home version has features which not just admins but a bit technical users may use from time to time. That is why people are driven to pirate Pro version while they have perfectly working and legal Windows Home.
If OS X was like Windows, OS X "home edition" would lack "Time Machine" backup functionality and would ask for Ultimate edition. I also heard they made a good invention of using a cheap usb key,whatever to accelerate systems boot but it is only existing in Ultimate version. Imagine you find a way to fix the number 1 issue of Windows, slow boot and you only give it to "Ultimate" edition users who already has very high end hardware which already fixes it.
I took a call yesterday from a woman using Win2K and Firefox 3.0. Needless to say she was having some issues.
Virginia is for lovers. EVE is for griefers.
Windows will come in six versions. How many versions of Linux exist?
Although I have no problem with the versions, I think it does MS no good to announce all six versions like this. Of the versions, one is only available in a handful of countries, one of them is only available on a volume licence, one of them is a token version only available to system manufacturers, and one of them is going to be in over-priced limited supply to gormless tech-nerds. That leaves only the two versions anyone actually gives a crap about.
They should've announced those, then quietly unveiled the remainder to their target markets. Windows XP came in umpteen versions (Home, Pro, Tablet, ULCPC, Media Center, Starter), but MS managed the marketing such that Joe Average thinks his netbook, tablet, and regular PC all use the same OS.
No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
Well, I guess it makes sense you guys would ignore some more facts in your endless rant against Windows. It's funny that the post says "the reality is more complex," when in fact the reality is LESS complex. See, there are six versions (Starter, Home Basic, Home Premium, Professional, Enterprise, Ultimate). Starter is NOT meant for netbooks. Starter is exactly the same as Vista Starter: meant for super super poor countries. Home Basic is an extension of that, but it is meant as a low-cost version in countries with lots of piracy.
Let's go to the top of the list. Enterprise is just for businesses purchasing bulk licenses. Ultimate is the same as Vista Ultimate, except you're only ever going to be dealing with Ultimate if you are a techie and know where to find it - it won't be sold through normal distribution channels.
The only two left are Home Premium and Professional. These are the only two actual consumers will deal with. They are exactly the same as XP Home and XP Pro; in fact, the only reason it's called Home Premium is because test users thought Home was a downgrade from Home Premium, so the kept the name. So there you have it: there are TWO versions of 7, and four versions for niche markets that will never be sold in stores. It's a lot like XP, where Home and Pro were considered the only two editions, but there were lots of others (Starter, MCE, Tablet PC, Embedded). But in the case, people were smart enough to understand that consumers only had to choose between two.
It's interesting that Gizmodo and Endgadget (and any places that quoted their stories) made all this very clear, but Slashdot had to go find the one site that had their facts wrong.
If anything, Microsoft's made it a bit simpler this time round (although I would have preferred them to offer one distribution and have done with it) in making every edition a superset of the next one down. The choice of Linux distros is baffling to new users—and I'm in favour of multiple distributions.
Those using pirated Tinysoft signatures(TM) are a real threat to society and should all be thrown in jail.
Huh? My parents' machine is a PIII 800 Mhz running W2K and they've got Firefox 3.0 with AdBlocker and a few other plugins. Never had a serious problem. (Just the minor Windows issues that can be solved by a reboot.)
What were her issues?
www.lucernesys.comHorizon: Calendar-based personal finance
Back when XP came out, the benefit over Win2K was negligible. And still is really.
But back when WinXP *Home* came out, its benefit over WinME where incredible. For the average user, going for WinXP Home was an incredible improvement over what the user had to endure before.
Certainly for business user, switch from Win2k Workstation to WinXP Pro didn't make any sense. But there was a very strong incentive for a certain significant subset of the market (home users) to move to WinXP Home.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
So you're saying I'm going to continue to use XP and Ubuntu? OK!
I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Edubuntu, and Xubuntu are all exactly the same aside from the desktop environment.
So what you're saying is they're exactly the same except for the part that makes up the entire desktop experience? To the layperson, this makes them entirely different. The set of applications, the way the desktop behaves, the task bar. If you think that the different versions of Ubuntu are more transparent to the end-user than the different version of Windows, you need to share that shit you're smoking.
Similes are like metaphors
What version of Ubuntu limits you to 1 gig of ram or only three apps?
The different Ubuntu versions are different configurations you can EASILY switch between if you want it to. I have NO objection to MS including an option to automatically configure your OS for various settings. Let it offer me a choice wether this is a single shared PC at home, or a PC at on a small network or a locked down machine in an office.
So your argument fails because you just don't have a clue about Ubuntu.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Microsoft just doesn't get it. How about ONE version of your OS--maybe TWO if you want to sell an expensive, over-engineered version to gullible government agencies and big businesses. Maybe (big maybe) three, if you want to do a bare-bones/student edition.
Look, Microsoft, you have a precedent of needless complexity that is hurting your image. Take a trick from the Apple playbook and try simplifying for once.
They still haven't learned.
Why sell stupid crippled versions of Windows 7 at all. It just sours the customer experience.
After paying significant amounts of money for an OS like Windows, I would expect that it would come with at least the feature set I can get from a free operating system like NetBSD, FreeBSD, or Linux.
I think the story here is more that Slashdot is actually discussing this. I have to hand it to Microsoft PR department - they're keeping "the next greatest version of Windows" in the news, just like they've always done. This is just another way to keep Windows in the news. Got to keep the monopoly going!
Does Apple really include a 32-bit Intel version on their installer DVD? I thought all Intel Apple's have always been 64 bit since the very beginning.
... and in the DRM, bind them.
Yeah, as a Linux user, it's nice not to have things so complicated. I only have to choose between Fedora, CentOS, Red Hat, Suse, Debian, Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu, Mandrake, Slackware, Gentoo, and-
That's actually not confusing because you pick one and install what packages you want.
Unlike Vista, the Linux versions are all functionally equivalent. If you buy a "lower" Vista (sorry, Win7) version you lose some ability you cannot restore without paying more money.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
It is not clear to me if the "installed" Windows is legal or not.
If it is not, then how do you get past the various "Genuine advantage" part ?
If it is legal, how much do the shop pay for it to be able to "bundle" with the hardware ? 2$ each copy ?
Given the two above, the article seems to me some astroturfing on the inevitability of Windows
There's Windows 7, Windows 7 Lite, and new Windows 7 Dry.
UTF-8: There and Back Again
I can install (say) ubuntu, and move to a different 'version' of the same just by installing or removing packages later. There's your difference. Oh, and I didn't have to deal with licensing headaches that way either. Install and go. Tweak packages if necessary. If in a corporate environment, roll up an install script and life is easy.
Microsoft licensing? not so easy, is it?
Say what you like, but at least Apple keeps it simple for the consumer. Everybody gets the same version, and they can customize which features get installed. You get to choose if you want to install BSD or Developer tools, language packages, etc. I know there's also Mac OS X server, but the difference in price tag still helps to make it an easy choice for consumers.
She was trying to use our companies web based application. She was randomly getting booted from the site and generating page errors. Nothing an ordinary person would experience.
Virginia is for lovers. EVE is for griefers.
But will it run Vista? ...wait...
First Core Duos were not, including the first MacBook Pros.
Because it sounds like from the blurb that Ultimate doesn't get ALL the bits that Professional has.
And why "Home Premium"? If there's no other version of "Home", the only possible premium is that it costs more.
Hmmm, maybe that's the idea. "Windows 7 is NOT more expensive than Vista or XP because the Home PREMIUM XP was the same price and inflation....".
Rail operators do the same "We haven't increased the fares!" When they didn't, they just limited how many cheap ones you can get.
Why are 6 different versions needed? Honestly, this is why I went over to Mac. One version that has all features available.
For Windows, I'd have no opposition to 2 versions, "home" and "professional", but anything beyond that is just nuts. It won't matter which versions they promote anyway. What matters is what version is available on the PC I want to go purchase at Best Buy or Walmart. I think that's part of what caught Microsoft with their shorts down this time. They promoted all the fancy features and pretty GUI of Vista, but you only got those features if you have a big enough computer and the right version of Vista.
For most people they will either want Home Premium or Pro. That's it.
One of those version's won't even be sold in most parts of the world and the starter will just be used on netbooks or something.
You people make such a big fuss over nothing. In reality there are really ONLY 3 versions most people will want. Premium, Pro and Enterprise/Ultimate (the only difference is th
What ticks me off is not that they are charging more for these extra features - that's fine! I am all for being able to buy a cheaper version of something that doesn't have features I don't need.
But why the hell are they separate versions of the OS instead of applications I can buy?
Why do I have to buy media center edition to install the media center app - why can't I buy JUST media center for $25?
Why isn't touchscreen support a $5 option that OEM's can opt to get?
Why don't they sell Bitlocker as an addon for small business for $50?
These are great *applications*, and I don't have a problem with them offering a bundled version that includes a lot of them together - but why are they tying them to an operating system version? Someone explain to me how that isn't retarded.
Aside from the complexity of all these different versions of Windows, what about the problems with supporting your software on them?
First you have to determine if it's 64-bit or 32-bit -- after you get past that you need to determine which edition is running specifically.
If it's Home Basic then only 5 SMB connections are allowed but if it's Home Premium then it's 10 connections. Maybe that's not your problem, if your app is CPU intensive then the user won't have a second CPU without Business edition.
Of course, if you're doing any multilingual work you will need to be on Enterprise or Ultimate.
Do you need your application to use a web server for anything? What about sending a fax or scanning something? Better figure out which version of Windows you need and detect on install before you run into trouble.
Rather than have such a complex lineup, with such stringent upgrade paths, MS would do better to have an app store level functionality where you could simply install the additional programs you need.
Are you running low on SMB access? Spend $10 and get another 10 connections! Do you need to scan something, spend $25 and get the Windows scanner support.
Eric Sarjeant
eric[@]sarjeant.com
Try buying a Home Premium OS and installing Ultimate.
See if MS like you.
Oh, and how many are from Canonical? Or should we include Solaris, zOS, ...?
My biggest complaint about MS's Vista versioning (and possibly Windows 7 - we shall see) is partly due to me being an IT geek:
I've got a win 2003 server and active directory at home. Have had a domain set up like that since NT 4.0 Server several years ago. I did it originally to give myself hands-on experience setting up / managing a domain where a mistake would not cost me a job. However, over the years, I've kind of gotten really used to having my network at home make good use of AD, so I've kept going.
Now, on Win 2K and Win XP, this wasn't a big deal - buy pro, it's a superset of home with AD hooks - runs everything else just fine. However, along comes Vista and I get a distinct impression that if I went with Vista Business, I might have trouble with some of my gaming stuff. My only option there was to buy Ultimate so I could essentially have the Multimedia / game features of Home but be able to join a domain. (even on WinXp Media center laptop, I was able to hack the registry to get it to join my domain)
With the number of PCs I have, this gets expensive (which is why I'm only on Vista with two of my um... embarrassingly lots).
So, I have this uneasy foreboding that I'm going to either end up having to dish out quite a bit more for the Ultimate edition with all sorts of crap I don't want/need, or I'm going to just stick with what I have until I'm forced to migrate.
We shall see, but I'm leaning toward the latter.
The Digital Sorceress
Here's what I would do with Windows:
1). Windows Basic: It has an OEM price of $1.00. This will help stem the threat of a desktop Linux. If computer prices continue to drop, the Windows License becomes a significant share of the price, the pressure to switch to a Linux desktop becomes more and more powerful. I use Fedora at work and see no reason why it can't be a consumer desktop. Ubuntu is even shinier. Microsoft certainly knows this by now. By selling Windows Basic for $1.00, they are simply trying to keep Windows as the default desktop OS. Its all they can do to stem the bleeding.
2). Windows Home Premium: It includes all the bells and whistles and is a $75 Internet installed upgrade for all Window Basic systems. This way, there are no Windows Home Premium CDs being spread around from person to person. 99% of the people who want to upgrade will pay their $75. To encourage users to upgrade, Microsoft can include some free Internet services and other goodies.
3). Windows Business: Commercial users will be prohibited from using Windows Basic or Windows Home Premium. Therefore, they will pay the $175 for Windows Business. Their whole infrastructure is Windows based, and their IT departments know nothing but Windows. They can't switch to Linux.
4). Windows Server: Why not? Even Apple makes a separate Mac OS X Server vs. Mac OS X. Charge $500. What are businesses suppose to do? Switch to Linux for servers? Like a typical MSCE knows anything about that. Besides, you can't run Exchange on Linux.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
which one is the EU Lawsuit Edition?
Then your website was at fault. Use standards next time.
"Not to mention all the idiots who use words like boxen."
Anonymous Coward on Monday August 04, @06:49PM
And by that, you mean anyone who actually buys it, right?
This is true, but what Microsoft is doing is attempting to artificially segment the market into more price points than it can reasonably bear. I hope their analysts have a good reason for this, particularly when most consumer purchases are down. If Vista is any indication what might happen, the average consumer will purchase whatever happens to be on their system for the cheapest price (usually some variation of "Home"), businesses will most likely purchase Business, and gamers or enthusiasts will most likely purchase Ultimate.
I really don't see what was so awful about having as many as three segments: Home, Professional, and Server. I think this is why there are quite a few people upset with Microsoft offering six different flavors. It has nothing to do with a reasonable segmentation of the market; instead, it looks to be a decision solely based on greed.
In this argument, Linux enters as an apples-to-oranges debate, because most distros can be obtained for free. Unlike Windows.
He who has no
And how exactly did you determine that her issues were caused by win2k?
Ignorance in tech support. Big surprise.
As a potential lottery winner, I totally support tax cuts for the wealthy
So to rephrase your analogy as I see the situation, it would be if Nissan built all Maximas with leather seats and Bose stereos, but then at the dealership they stripped off the leather and replaced it with canvas (or whatever), and put in a crappy stereo using the excuse that only audiophiles really need nice stereos.
Imagine that Bose sells stereos that can have features (e.g. bass reverberation chambers and vehicle-speed-sensitive EQ) turned on or off, and Bose charges Nissan less for each car that ships with the premium features disabled. This would make Nissan's position correspond more closely to Microsoft's position: Microsoft has to pay MPEG LA, DVD FLLC, DVD CCA, Macrovision, DCP, etc. only for Windows licenses that have Home Premium features turned on.
Well lets see, there are really only 3 versions of Windows instead of 6. Why?
Only Home Premium, Professional, and Ultimate will be much advertised at retail.
I only see Starter being preinstalled at OEM in netbooks, because really it is a POS.
Home Basic is only offered in emerging markets, so most of use won't even see it. Besides those emerging markets will probably pirate their copy of Windows 7 Ultimate anyways.
The general user won't care about Windows 7 Enterprise anyways, because you can't get it at retail, since it is only reserved for enterprises via Volume Licensing (and of course BitTorrent piracy). And most complaints due to version confusion I believe came from the general user, and not Enterprises (Enterprises were more vocal on compatibility issues with their old software)
So yeah, to reiterate there are really only 3 versions of Windows that we general consumers should really care about. For those who liked Windows XP, go with Home Premium, XP Professional, there's now Windows 7 Professional, and for those gamers who have too much money on their hands, there's Ultimate as well.
And of course, there is already different versions that appear in Windows XP anyways, Home, Media Center, and Professional. Except 99% of the people that goes into retail stores are only aware of Professional (given my previous experience at Geek Squad). So maybe I should say, really, there is only one version of Windows 7 that we should care about, and that is the Professional version.
Starter and Home Basic are limited to developing markets. America/England/whatever non-third-world country you live in will not have to deal with them.
Enterprise is a volume-licensed product. Won't be on store shelves.
So you're left with Home Premium, Professional, and Ultimate, one more edition than XP. Not that big of a deal.
But, then again, the only confusion with Vista was between Home Basic and Premium. Home Basic should never have existed, frankly, so it's good MS is (mostly) getting rid of it for 7.
The old "Home/Professional" distinction doesn't work any more as a ranking system. The home user is likely to want lots of bells and whistles like media players and video stuff that the "professional" IT department may not want enabled on their users' desktop machines. The CEO of an "Enterprise" might want a top-end laptop with video conferencing, but most of the "enterprise" employees won't be getting that.
An "Ultimate" edition isn't really an ultimate edition, because there are (hopefully) going to be service packs and updates.
A "starter" edition suggests that the user is going to upgrade that copy of Windows at some point, but the "starter edition" is targeted at entry-level machines that might not be able to grade. And so on.
It's just totally screwed up.
Now, here's a radical idea. If you need to produce different editions for different markets, how about starting by defining those markets, creating different editions market-by-market (like they did with "Windows Server"), and naming each edition after the sector that it's aimed at (like they did with "Windows Server")?
So if you're producing a cut-down Win7 for netbooks, call it "Windows 7.0 for Netbooks".
If you're producing a different cut-down version for basic desktop machines for people working in office environments, call it "Windows 7.0 for Office Desktops".
Don't call the "everything" version "Ultimate" or "Ultimate Premium", call it something more accurate and less shouty, like "Windows 7.0 Complete Edition".
Rather than starting with the OS specifications, then generating lots of different arbitrary cut-down versions, giving them abstract names, and only then starting to think about who's going to want to buy each version, start with the customer. Think about what your customers actually want, and use the naming system to tell them how to get it.
Do you sell to schools and universities using a different pricing plan? Then don't sell them a generic "Home" or "Professional" edition, release "Windows 7.0 for Schools", decide the pricing, and then finalise the specs and the branding differences (different default desktop layout, wallpapers, default shortcuts, colour schemes) later. With customer-centric editions, if you make a mistake in the specs, and decide that "Windows 7.0 for Schools" really needed some feature that you'd left out, you can add it as a freebie update ... because the "edition" is no longer defined by the specifications, it's defined by the business model, pricing plan, and targeted customer base. If two versions aimed at different markets end up having almost the same specs, and just different cosmetics and included apps, it doesn't matter.
I mean, hell, if MS want to do a "Windows 7.0 for Callcentres", which is basically "Windows 7.0 for Business" with the video facilities stripped out, then that's fine, isn't it?
IFAICS, the only problem with this approach is that it'd need Microsoft to have people who actually understand the needs of the different customer-bases that they're trying to sell to. Instead of their marketing guys relying on being able to come up with whizzy names that impress the MS board, they'd actually have to do some old-fashioned legwork and get to understand something about their actual market.
They'd have to have some idea what their customers actually wanted.
Eric Baird
You're missing the point.
XP Home could not join a domain. This is a big deal. This severely limits the OS.
The thrust of the argument against 6 different packages is that valuable features are left out of some versions of the OS. The argument is not that having 6 different versions of the same OS is especially confusing.
See, "Windows Vista" was a typo. It was supposed to read "Windows 7 (beta)."
You know that it depends entirely on what the programs are. If you're running three programs that consume a decent amount of CPU and 500MB of RAM apiece, then it might be the limit of what your little netbook can handle.
On my eee701 (currently /w Ubuntu), it runs decently fast with firefox, an IM client, a mail client, a few terminals, and a programming IDE open. The main failing there is the lack of real-estate to have too much on the screen at a given time, but they were never meant for that anyhow.
Why aren't you running some sort of AV on your Linux box? Surely you don't think you're totally immune? Granted, the update utilities on most distros make Windows look like a crying shame, but on to the next topic.
PDF readers. WTF? Mine opens in moments rather than seconds or minutes. I assume you're using Adobe Reader 8 or better, so you're using a 300MB installation to do what many others are doing in 3MB. Time for a change. I would recommend the one I'm using, but let's adopt the new "standard" and I'll point you to pdfreaders.org.
As for the loading 100MB driver packages for devices with 50k modules, eh, that sounds like a dev manufacturer complaint, not Windows or Microsoft.
As a matter of fact, besides the update+reboot thing (which can be disabled), most of your complaints are with third parties. Take it up with the right people.
As for the bit about apps stealing focus, yeah, I hate that too. Good thing the Gnome and KDE teams thought about adding some functionality for that in the base packages rather than the way Microsoft handles it. I forever despise the system stopping me while I'm typing an email to pop up a box that I needed to see and my space bar gets tapped before I realize that I've gotten an alert, and now the alert is gone again. ARGGGGGGG. I feel your pain.
2^3 * 31 * 647
I use OSX, Ubuntu an WinXP pro.
I have paid the Apple tax (bought their hardware) and can upgrade to the latest and greatest OS from them for $129 (or 5licenses for $229).
There is one version for homes or businesses and one server version which is not in the shops (a user who needs it knows what to ask for).
For this price I get all the graphic goodies of OS X (which are technically similar to all the Win7 thingies, although less flashy and more geared towards usability) with all the networking (actually a bit easier in most cases).
So, by paying the Apple tax I get a simpler life and can upgrade the OS for $129 and always use the Ultimate version.
Of course the Apple tax also included a host of other applications all of which were excellent and full featured applications (iLife suite)
When I want to save money I get myself some spare parts and select an appropriate Linux distro (usually just something simple, Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Fedora, something like that). There I pay a time tax (select the distro and make sure the H/W I use works with linux.
I can get quite nice graphic goodies, on par with anything else out there, but the general ease of use is lower (with some cool exceptions, the simplified package manager/add remove programs dialog on Ubuntu is a nice example of how computers should work) than MacOSX, in most ways on par with WinXP (Windows 7 seems to have improved usability in several important aspects, dragging windows out of that hole).
Ok, so I pay the apple tax, or pay the time tax on Linux. So far so good, a fair swap.
What incentive do I as a longtime MS user to get their latest and greatest? When I bought my first mac it was because the price difference between a Mac and a Win laptop that could actually run Vista properly (with all the apps that I needed) was very small. The Vista machine would have had more RAM, a similar CPU, a better GPU and a bigger HDD. Still it could not run the audio apps that I needed (available on Mac and PC) as well as the Mac.
And $300 for a usable version of the OS? WTF?
And don't even try tp say that it's as low as $200 because that version is a piece of crippleware. The $260 version is the minimum that is even remotely usable, but who knows that except the type of nerd who is likely to spend his/her time on slashdot?
Most regular users want a computer (they don't care about what an OS is) that can open their documents(pictures, sound files, movies etc), save their documents, share their documents and not lose their documents or make the user feel stupid. What MS is giving them is none of the above because first you need to figure out what version to select. The regular user has no interest in knowing the difference between the version WITH remote desktop or without it. Until they need help. Then they see their friend use some cool features like that and get annoyed that their computer can't do that just because they didn't understand the long list of tecnical items that the salesman spewed out.
MS really NEEDS to get this one right and not annoy their possible users any more. And it seems that technically they are doing cool stuff now (at least interface wise). I just hope that their marketing department doesn't screw it up completely, although that seems too late.
My hope was for having 3 equally good options, Win7, OSX, and the many flavours of Linux.
Alas, it seems that MS marketing is their worst enemy.
Good to see that their technical department seems back in the game though.
IIRC the OSX DVD is dual layer, whereas the Vista one is single layer.
Supported Operating Systems: Any currently available Microsoft IBM compatible OS release that is still supported by Microsoft, including all 2000, 2003, XP and Vista versions. Please note that Windows NT is no longer supported. At this time [Company] supports [Service] on MAC OS X 10.3.9 or higher.
Browser & Version: [Service] functions on Internet Explorer(TM) 6.0 or higher, Firefox(TM) 2.0 or higher and Safari(TM) 1.3.2 or higher; with all security patches and updates applied. A display resolution of 1024 x 768, using the entire browser display area, is recommended. At this time, [Service] will not function properly on other browsers such as AOL(TM), Netscape(TM), Opera(TM), etc.
I had her switch to IE 6 and it worked fine.
Virginia is for lovers. EVE is for griefers.
XP Home could not join a domain. This is a big deal. This severely limits the OS.
For who? People trying to use XP Home in a corporate environment?
Your beef is clearly with Microsoft trying to maximize their profits. They are a business -- That is what they do. There is nothing ethically wrong with it, unless you're a whack job who hangs on RMS's every word.
The reality is, using your own example, that 99.9% of people using Windows XP Home Edition are completely oblivious to the fact that they can't connect to a domain. It is largely a non-issue, except on technology websites like slashdot who desperately grab at anything they can to try and prove that their platform of choice is somehow superior, all while being grossly hypocritical and contradicting in the process.
Similes are like metaphors
I only have to choose between Fedora, CentOS, Red Hat, Suse, Debian, Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu, Mandrake, Slackware, Gentoo, and-
In reality you choose between Red Hat and Suse for corporate installations and between Ubuntu and Mandriva for private installations. The rest on your list are fine-tuning for or natural consequences of that choice; except Slackware which has a natural affinity to Unix fans, and Gentoo which chooses you, not the other way around. ;-)
Similarly, Xandros and Linspire have distinct enough profiles of their own. They don't make the choice more complex for the casual user considering going Linux. When you include them as options, you know your reasons for doing so. (Right?)
canonical have realsed 4 versions of ubuntu NOT 7 and switching between them is free not $200
IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
I am perfectly productive on a 3 years old AMD processor, 512MB ram and a 120 MB hard disk....why should I spend money on a new (...) operating system, more ram, more processor, a new version of office, all to do the same things as before, just not any faster?
Because your computer more than likely has moving parts (PSU fan, CPU fan, case fan, hard disk), and those die. At some point, replacements become hard to find, and you need to buy a new motherboard, which won't be certified for anything before Windows Vista or Ubuntu Hardy.
you listed 3 versions, troll or just cant count?
IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
If that's the case, does that mean that they drop XP support when Win7 comes out?
And does "No longer supporting" include key validation services?
Eric Baird
6 Editions, but effectively only three choices since Home Basic and Enterprise won't be available to the typical consumer and Starter will only come pre-loaded on devices where the other MS options won't work.
So, your choices will be Home (Premium), Professional or Ultimate.
Where can I get my Windows 7 No Bullshit, No DRM Happy Gamer's Edition?
Part of me hopes that MS do the decent thing and keep supporting XP ... but another part of me wonders what would happen if they continued their run of self-destructing business decisions, so we could all watch the current MS car crash continue. It'd be kinda interesting to see MS abandoning XP, and the third-party support community stepping in to fill the void, and maybe doing a decent job of it.
Eric Baird
I'm happy. As long as Ballmer remains CEO of Microsoft, Mac OS X and Linux will continue to thrive. That guy doesn't seem to get anything right. Ballmer is great for all of Microsoft's competitors.
Beauty is in the beholder of the eye.
Home and Business would have an option at install to run either in desktop or laptop mode the only difference being that laptop mode deactivates compositing and other effects and activates battery saving technologies.
64-bit Intel
32-bit Intel
64-bit PPC
32-bit PPC
Looks like 4 to me.
Actually, I thought that Apple missed out on the market for school computers for tots. I figured that they could have teamed up with Disney and produced a range of brightly-coloured desktop Imacs with big Mickey Mouse ears, a Disney-themed desktop, and large cartooney-style application window frames.
The sort of thing that you could put in the corner of a creche, or that rich parents could buy for the nursery. Customers could choose between Mickey Mac and Minnie Mac, and there'd be brightly-coloured plastic snap-on cosmetic customisation options.
Eric Baird
I had her switch to IE 6 and it worked fine.
as he said... use standards next time. Firefox with 30% market share (give or take). IE6? You should be ashamed of yourself.
Why are there going to be different 32/64 bit disks? How is it that Apple can make a installer DVD with 4 different platforms (Intel/PPC, 32-bit/64-bit) but the 800 lb gorilla still has a different "64-Bit Edition"? Are fat binaries that hard to work with?
The fact that having 32 and 64 bit binaries on the same machine, for 99.9% of people, is nothing more than a waste of disk space, probably plays a significant part.
How does that remove the fault from your site being the problem, not Windows 2000 + Firefox 3.0 ?
"Not to mention all the idiots who use words like boxen."
Anonymous Coward on Monday August 04, @06:49PM
RJ Reynolds announced they'll begin offering only one brand of cigarette, saying that "having read slashdot we feel that today people don't want choices, they want nicotine; hence we've fired our marketing department and it's branding consultants."
Say hello to my little sig.
In Apple's case, it probably helps that the kernel and drivers are all 32 bit. So you can basically cut that down to 2 versions (PPC and Intel).
means 7 versions. The 6 mentioned, plus one more, un-released yet.
TOP DSLR Cameras Reviews of the top DSLRs
Doesn't the fact that Vista'a drivers work on Win 7 really show us that this is nothing more than Microsoft selling us Service Pack 2?
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
Yeah, but the statement "Back when n came out, its benefits over WinME were incredible" is true for all n.
No, I don't agree. If we take :
"Back when smashing repeatedly on the gonads with a club came out, its benefits over WinME were incredible"
This statement is blatantly false : clubs predate WinME by a couple of millenia, even if the rest of the sentence is true.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Retail Windows DVD includes both 32 and 64 version. Ditto for the OEM DVD's (though you only get a license for one or the other)
No, seriously, that's the actual word I heard in reportage summarizing what "critics" of this action think.
If you can make only $500,000/yr and have 3 kids, the two youngest are going to have to share a portion of Beluga caviar.
It's like living in a convent!
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
It's funny how the recent article where Linus said having multiple type of linux systems is a good thing and people agreed with him but of course if big bad Micro$oft does it, now it's a bad idea.
If I get stuck with a shitty "Basic" or So-Called "Premium" version of Windows 7, I'd just download the "Ultimate" version on BitTorrent!
That was, ya know, an example. One of many. If there weren't many such examples, then there really wouldn't be a need for these different versions, would there?
You compared the multitude of Linux OS's to how Microsoft divides its features between its versions of the same OS. One is a natural result of the OSS development process, and the other is, as you stated, the result of a company trying to make as much money as possible.
Your beef is clearly with Microsoft trying to maximize their profits. They are a business -- That is what they do.
No shit. That's what everyone here has been saying. Microsoft is divvying up features between different versions its OS to make money. Some question whether it will work, but everyone here agrees with that.
Folks were responding because you made a comparison between one company's versions of an OS and the many Linux-based OS's which, as others have pointed out, are different OS's. That was a stupid comparison to make and you got called on it.
And I have no beef with Microsoft.
Although I just read your user page, and I've been had. So troll. So very troll.