Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

MS Confirms Six Different Versions of Windows 7

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the totally-learned-that-lesson dept.

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."

51 of 758 comments (clear)

  1. Priorities by JoeytheSquid · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I guess when you're Microsoft accounting is more important than marketing.

  2. Why? by whisper_jeff · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Why? by HockeyPuck · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So then what do you base your price for the product?

      Do you base it on the "entry level user" that uses it for web/email/photos and toss in the Enterprise features for free?

      Or do you base it on the Enterprise features, but then customers will complain "Why am I paying for enterprise features which I'll never use?"

      To solve your manufacturing/distribution point above you could always package the full version, but only allow certain features to be enabled via licensing. However, managing license keys brings its' own set of issues.

    2. Re:Why? by mdm-adph · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Aye, it's confusing. I'm guessing it's because, in reality, all versions of Windows aren't worth any more than a decent copy of MacOS (around $100), probably less, and having all these fancy "Enterprise" and "Ultimate" versions of things enable them to sell something for $300 which normally should sell for $100.

      That make any sense? The packaging, production, and stuff included with "Ultimate" doesn't really cost any more for Microsoft to produce than the cheapest version (is BitLocker really worth that much?), so if they sell it for $300, they're making a nice bit of change.

      --
      It is by my will alone my thoughts acquire motion; it is by the juice of the coffee bean that the thoughts acquire speed
    3. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's called confusion marketing.

      The same tactics are used for those complicated mobile phone deals where there are ten packages, each of which differs slightly.

      The idea is that the consumer can't be bothered to analyze each option to see which is the best for them.

      Therefore they go for the one more expensive than the cheapest option, as taking the average seems like a good way to cut through the confusion.

      This ends up with them spending more then they intended to, just in case, and still preserves the feeling of not getting ripped off, as they did not choose the most expensive one.

    4. Re:Why? by je+ne+sais+quoi · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think they must just like to pretend that their revenue stream isn't tied to one product. If they have "six different versions" of one of your flagship products, maybe they can fool themselves into thinking they're more diversified. Alternately, maybe it's because they don't want to burden joe six-pack and jane grandmother with any "power-user" features confuse and befuddle them. Or maybe this is done at some marketing droid's insistence to make him- or herself feel like they're making a contribution to the company, I don't know.

      --
      Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the war room!
    5. Re:Why? by furby076 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually - it is the "charge less money". They charge less for the reduced versions. So if ultimate is $300 and they only sell ultimate everyone pays $300. But if grandma only needs Basic features then why have her pay $300? Why not have her pay $200 and get only what she needs. Also, the lesser versions - since they have fewer features - will be less of a hardware hog meaning the computer hardware will be cheaper since they don't need to get the best.

      See it's not hard to think of the positive. We don't have to be negative nancies.

      --

      I do not support "The Man". I also do not support your irrational stupidity
    6. Re:Why? by swilde23 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If a user can't be bothered to check what comes in the version of a product they are buying (whether it is a cell phone plan or an operating system), then they deserve whatever they get.

      I don't understand why it is so outrageous that Windows offers different packages at different prices... "Choices???? Won't someone think of the children".

      If they decided to just package it up into 1 version (or 2 for the hell of it), people would be screaming about the option to opt out of things they feel they don't need.

      --
      There are 10 types of people in the world. Those that understand this sig, and those that beat up people who do.
    7. Re:Why? by Silentknyght · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sometimes I worry that the people on Slashdot aren't really smarter than your average bears, otherwise I wouldn't keep reading the same, rehashed, "why are they making X versions, that's so dumb" comments over and over.

      It's simple economics. And I've seen only very few people stand up and point this out. It makes sense with economic theory. I'm not making any comments on whether or not it's confusing, or on whether or not it's ethical, but just that there is a perfectly logical reason for it: money.

      I suppose the best description of their economic practice is Price Discrimination. It's not a new theory, and it happens all over the place (see airline ticket sales). In short, think of your standard supply/demand curve. If you sell one product, at $50, you lose out on the people who would have paid $75 for the product, and you also lose out on the people who will only pay $25 for it. By charging different amounts, they're capturing demand at all (or many more) points on the supply/demand curve, maximizing their efficiency.

    8. Re:Why? by quickOnTheUptake · · Score: 2, Insightful

      the reason to do this is to differentiate customers effectively, so they can make every sale, but still charge a premium from the people with money. If they sold W7 in only the full featured version with the full-feature price, a lot of netbooks would not even consider it, since it would double (or more) the price of the netbook. On the other hand, if they sold it at a low price (so it is an option for cheap machines) they would be passing up the opportunity to milk the people with money to drop (businesses, gamers, and people with more money than they know what to do with).
      So they break the product out over a wide price range and take some features out of the cheap ones (and apparently add some artificial limits) to differentiate the products. Then they can sell to the people on a budget and still give a big incentive to people with money to pay top dollar.
      The difference in revenue that this pricing model introduces is much higher than any relatively insignificant added cost in distributing multiple versions.

      --
      Mod points: Guaranteed to remove your sense of humor.
      Side effects may include gullibility and temporary retardation
    9. Re:Why? by JCSoRocks · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The trouble here is that you're acting like all of those enterprise features represent some huge chunk of the OS - and Microsoft is too. That's what makes the pricing ridiculous. The bulk (let's say 99%) of the code is identical across all versions. People are basically paying double the price just to get remote desktop and the ability to join a domain. That's complete insanity.

      It'd be like Ford selling an "ultimate" F-150 that includes an extra cup holder and costs twice as much.

      --
      You are using English. Please learn the difference between loose and lose; they're, there, and their; your and you're.
    10. Re:Why? by jedidiah · · Score: 2, Insightful

      - Netbook hardware (basic windows runtime)
      - Home (all the multimedia bells and whistles)
      - Business user (enterprise functionality)
      - Ultimate (multimedia toys + enterprise + some extras)

      Certainly, 1, 2, and 3 are quite distinct markets with very little cross-over. So that's why; it's a "more is less...unless you've got cash to burn" philosophy.

      ...except that a netbook really isn't that meagre. Such a machine
      is more than capable of supporting all of the multimedia bells and
      whistles. Even the first Asus netbooks were capable of being MCE
      extenders. That was one of the first things that Linux users did
      with them (tried running MythTV on them).

      Even before the netbooks were released I had my own netbook class
      ancient laptop running MythTV as a frotend. I have a nother machine
      of roughly that same class (AppleTV) serving as a dedicated frontend.

      The only real rough spot is modern codecs in HD.

      Infact, MythTV users are salivating at the prospect of
      an ION based netbook to be used as a media extender.

      Boxing your users in has always been stupid.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    11. Re:Why? by HockeyPuck · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The trouble here is that you're acting like all of those enterprise features represent some huge chunk of the OS - and Microsoft is too.

      I'm not assuming that it's a huge chunk of the OS, however these licenseable features could be considered to add significant value to the product. If the only features that are optional are remote desktop and domain support, then why raise the price the average consumer will have to pay? As they say, "My grandmother doesn't need those two features, so why make her pay for them?"

    12. Re:Why? by bleh-of-the-huns · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I stand corrected.. mods can mod my parent down.

      --
      I came, I conquered, I coredumped
    13. Re:Why? by UnknowingFool · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The difference here is that in the airline example, the same product is sold at different prices to maximize profit. MS is selling different products at different prices. To extend the analogy, a person is willing to pay $75 but wants non-alcoholic drinks, snacks, and use a pillow. The $25 person doesn't care for any of it. So do you differentiate your services on the plane that so that the $25 person sitting next to the $75 can't get drinks, snacks, and pillow even if they ask?

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  3. 6 versions - yea not hard to understand by furby076 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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
  4. Re:3 applications?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Correction, leaving you with 1 slot for explorer.exe

  5. Re:Starter Edition by Microlith · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I believe it's inherited from the super-crippled version of XP that was released into "emerging markets" that could only load up 3 applications at a time.

    I was under the impression that Home Basic was intended for netbooks, and Starter for "emerging markets." Although I wouldn't put it past Microsoft to artificially limit what a netbook can do out of the box, to give the impression of a lack of power to drive people to buy a more powerful laptop with more expensive copies of Windows on it.

  6. Re:Sounds like another win for Apple by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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?

  7. Re:Starter Edition by Neeperando · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's like saying "Well his Nissan Maxima has leather seats and Bose stereo, mine doesn't - that's an artificial decision"...response "So is the price tag".

    I get your point, but my point is that they're taking out functionality that was already there and then charging less for it. 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.

    I don't mind paying extra to add extra features, but it seems silly to put in a artificial road block to make it seem like I'm getting more with the Home Premium Edition.

    --
    Being a computer scientist means you tell people how computers should work, not that you know how they actually work.
  8. Re:They are selling six versions..... by zappepcs · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think that a lot of people will wait till XP support dies before wanting to switch.

    I was just thinking about the Ubuntu family of versions Desktop, server, AMD64 desktop, AMD64 server, Kubuntu and how many more? Yes, I know some are based on Ubuntu like Ubuntu is based on Debian. I wonder how much confusion there is over Linux distros for end users, and can they see any difference between the Linux distros and the Win7 and Vista family trees.

    I look forward to Ubuntu desktop, home premium media center edition. NOT! But wait, there's more!

    All this bitching about MS and then see that page of Ubuntu versions, hmmm... they must have a large supply of chairs 'handy' in Redmond.

    --
    Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
  9. Microsoft Is Ridiculous by CyberSlammer · · Score: 1, Insightful

    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.

  10. Enter the Balaclava light regiment...... by gadget+junkie · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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)
  11. Re:Obviously.... by vadim_t · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's very simple when you think of it.

    An OS which runs fast, doesn't require an unreasonable amount of resources, and doesn't get in your way is good.
    An OS which is slow, requires new expensive hardware, and constantly annoys you is bad.

    Back when XP came out, the benefit over Win2K was negligible. And still is really.

    So why is now XP getting declared as good when before it was bloated? Several reasons:

    1. You can't buy Win2K anymore. It doesn't matter if it's the best thing since sliced bread when you can't get it.
    2. Hardware advanced to the point that the extra resource usage over Win2K isn't really noticeable anymore.
    3. Win2K installations have largely disappeared, so it's hard to make a comparison with it anymore.

    As far as I'm concerned, Win2K does precisely what I want it to do: it provides a base system to install stuff on. It doesn't do anything terribly fancy, but I don't want it to. It also doesn't have activation. But it's not a realistic option anymore with everybody dropping support for it.

    So when a normal user asks me which Windows version to go to, I will tell them to go with XP, which is light and fast and more compatible than Vista. The average person isn't interested in hearing me rant about how I despise the Fisher Price interface and how Win2K was so much better, because they can't get it anyway, and if they did they could run into a compatibility problem sooner or later.

    They're asking about what should they get *now*, out of what is currently on the market, not what would I consider the ideal option if I could chain the MS programmers to their desks and force them to maintain Win2K for eternity. So that's the question I answer. When having a choice between XP and Vista, which is the light one? XP.

    I bet that in 2015 I'll be talking about Win7 was nice and small, and didn't need those insane requirements of 50GB disk space and 16GB RAM.

  12. Re:Obviously.... by rad_chad · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But it's not so cut and dry with that. For some time PPC WAS great...then Intel became the better choice for them. Apple moved on with the times. Microsoft just doesn't get what people want, and that is definitely not 6 different versions of Windows.

  13. Re:Obviously.... by ncy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    well, it reminds me of the argument of Torvalds arguing that we need multiple Linux distros. the only difference is that MS is trying to make profit from it.

  14. Re:Obviously.... by linhares · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Do they know how to read? As much as I am glad to see their new MS-repeatfuckup, I wish we had fewer distros of linux. And, irony of ironies, probably the same people going HAHAHAHA here are to be found in the recent post where prophet Linus declared that billions of distros were greatest thing around on the monkeysphere.

  15. Re:Why the hate? by downix · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Because Windows is an OS, Linux isn't.  Linux is a kernel, around which hundreds of OS's, commonly called "Distributions" have been built.  If you apply that logic to the Windows Kernel, you are dealing with a lot more OS's as well, from Windows NT 3.1 to Windows Server 2008 and even OS/2 Warp 3.0 for Networks.

    Now, you are closer with the Ubuntu/Kubuntu/Edubuntu, the main difference is that there are no features being "turned off" or "turned on" with any of them, just repackaging of which front-end apps you desire upon initial install.  The differences between them is more clear from a consumer standpoint as they actually changed the names.  They see Ubuntu and Kubuntu, they know they are different.  They see Windows Vista... they don't know if it's Home Basic or Home Premium or what.  If they went Pindows vs Hindows, instant recognition that something is different.

    --
    Karma Whoring for Fun and Profit.
  16. Re:Obviously.... by brackishboy · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I reckon the relative bloat of XP has been supplanted by the increasing power of computers in the last eight years.

    Microsoft's minimum recommended specs say it'll run on anything down to a 233mhz machine with 64mb of RAM, but I imagine the end user would be long dead by the time it got round to doing anything useful.

    Going on those facts, Vista should be fairly useable by 2015 :)

  17. Re:Obviously.... by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The man who owns the voting machine, owns the election.

    --
    SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
  18. Re:Obviously.... by Ilgaz · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Apple doesn't have problem with people still preferring to use Tiger, a lot of people do BTW and that is why iTools/iWork 08 (until 09) can be installed to Tiger adding their own frameworks and it keeps getting Quicktime/Security updates.

    Apple doesn't start a "Mojave experiment" just to prove people that they are hallucinating. In fact, they do everything to keep low Mhz CPU people away from Leopard.

    Besides trying to justify their move (a big move) to Intel for portable future, they never said anything bad against G5. G5 was and even still is a great CPU but it can't fit to portable and Apple thinks the future is portable (which already proved right). Of course, a 2008 Xeon will beat G5, I am not saying otherwise.

  19. Re:Obviously.... by Teun · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Uh no, the difference is in the different Linux versions, all made by different groups of people.

    The 7 Windows versions are all from the same foundry and mold, depending on how much you are prepared to pay they just have different disabilities.

    --
    "The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
  20. Re:Obviously.... by Jurily · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Though I remember when XP came out people screamed (for over a year) "bloatware" "Suckware"....and now it is being touted as an great OS.

    It's still bloated, and it still sucks, even though they fixed a lot of things during the years. (And the average computer it's installed on has at least twice the horsepower).

    But now we're comparing it to Vista.

  21. Re:Starter Edition by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I get your point, but my point is that they're taking out functionality that was already there and then charging less for it.

    This is how everything is sold, though: for what the market will bear. If you can sell an interim product for $y, and do it by reducing the features of your higher product without reducing its sales then you're crazy not to kick it out. Last I looked Buick had two bodies, a SUV borrowed from another GM line and a sedan body which had a (small) variety of engines and a large variety of features which could be swapped around and which were then sold under different model names. And most automakers have higher and lower-positioned marques in which they offer the same chassis and engines but tweaked with different characteristics, costing the same or nearly the same to produce, but with wildly different sticker prices. (Everyone likes a car analogy, eh?)

    I don't mind paying extra to add extra features, but it seems silly to put in a artificial road block to make it seem like I'm getting more with the Home Premium Edition.

    No, that's business. What's silly is falling for it if you don't have to.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  22. Re:Original Sources by cjb658 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why do they make things so complicated? Are they trying to trick consumers to either over buy or under buy then have to shell out more money to right their original mistake?

    It seems kinda sleazy to me.

    I'll stick with OSX and Linux.

    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-

    Hmm, I'm having trouble remembering. But it will come back to me in a second!

  23. Re:Obviously.... by geordie_loz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    My only annoyance is I will need to buy it twice (64 bit desktop, 32 bit laptop)

    Actually, you'll have to buy it twice because, desktop + laptop equals 2 computers, otherwise you're pirating windows, and I'm sure no-one on slashdot would do that.

  24. Re:Why the hate? by V!NCENT · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Seriously. Different markets, different computers, different users... why should they ALL have the _same_ OS?

    Yeah why not? Why not have all the features when you can keep the same performance and get feature cripple?

    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."

    All versions of Windows 7 are the same except for a few programs. Windows 7 is not made for different markets. All these 'versions' of Windows 7 compare to 7 flavours of Ubuntu, namely:
    -Ubuntu Basic : Compiz disabled
    -Ubuntu Home : Encryption wizard disabled
    -Ubuntu Home Premium : Some disabled network features
    -Ubuntu Professional : Ubuntu with EXT4 file defragmentation tool
    -Ubuntu Business : Ubuntu without nice wallpapers and User Restrictions
    Different markets my ass!

    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?

    Good question.

    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.

    Get Windows 7, run a tool to strip even more features, run a tool that allows you to make an iso out of your install, burn to disk. C'mon man...

    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.

    Who cares what John Doe knows? It's his fault for not asking advice on what to buy, so let him/her face the consequences.

    I don't see much of a problem, except that there's not _enough_ customization.

    Download a third party tool.

    --
    Here be signatures
  25. Re:Original Sources by peragrin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    OS X has two versions. Server and regular. Even most Linux distro's are broken into two groups server and workstation.

    32 bit, 64 bit shouldn't matter to the end user. The OS should handle that by itself. Of course msft isn't that good.

    --
    i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
  26. Re:Why the hate? by at_slashdot · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Most of those hundred distros cost $0 and you won't get a "reduced functionality distro" and a "less reduced functionality distro" and an "enhanced functionality distro", so you are free to choose and use whatever works best for you.

    However in Microsoft case, you have to pay more to get the full monty.

    Nobody would care if Windows would come in 100 versions, all free and all having the full functionality, the problem is not in the number, it's in reducing the functionality and asking for money to get the "full version". It's basically a crappy shareware type of distibution that asks money even for the basic product and asks for more mone for "enhaced version"

    Oh, and remember that Windows now competes with Macs too, and Mac OS doesn't come in 7 versions.

    --
    "It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." -- Prof. Dumbledore
  27. Re:Obviously.... by vux984 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Uh no, the difference is in the different Linux versions, all made by different groups of people.

    Ubuntu Desktop Edition
    Ubuntu MID Edition
    Ubuntu Server Edition
    Ubuntu Netbook Remix
    Kubuntu
    Xubuntu
    Edbuntu

    7 official versions of Ubuntu alone. You were saying..?

  28. Re:Obviously.... by Random+BedHead+Ed · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Absolutely true. In 2001, screaming about the bloatedness of Windows XP was entirely rational because it offered virtually nothing over 2000, aside from a superfluous, crippled Home edition and the Luna themes. Over time, however, that has changed, and XP has benefited from a couple changes. The first change was the increase in the power of hardware that you mentioned, but IMHO the second was the introduction of Service Pack 2, a security update that seriously improved XP as an OS. It's easy to forget how insecure XP (and particularly IE6) was in its initial release, but SP2 showed the business world that Microsoft was finally willing to be serious.

    Many have said that the same may happen to Vista. Were it not for the release of Windows 7 I'd agree, since it looks like Windows 7 is meant to supplant Vista, thus rendering it permanenly maligned. But that future attitude shift doesn't change the fact that some of the changes in Vista were ill-conceived, despite its many improvements. The increase in bloatedness was not necessary, nor was the "market segmentation" foolishness of Vista's (and now 7's) cornucopia of editions. Microsoft has done right by improving performance in Windows 7, but these many versions sully the image of an otherwise improved OS amongst educated consumers who understand that it's a marketing gimmick and not a feature.

  29. Re:Obviously.... by Dragonslicer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Back when XP came out, the benefit over Win2K was negligible.

    To be fair, though, XP wasn't really meant to be an upgrade from Win2k as much as an upgrade from Win9x. Most home users probably didn't even know that Win2k existed.

  30. WinME by DrYak · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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 ]
  31. All free, no upgrade no limts by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  32. Re:Why the hate? by itsdapead · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It goes something like this:

    1 version (see OS X): PASS

    2-3 versions (Home/Business/Pro): PASS

    Pick'n'Mix (Many permutations, tailored by OEMs or power users - bit like Linux): PASS

    [3 < N < Many] versions aimed at artificial price points rather than user needs: FAIL

    (And remember, those 6 versions don't include server editions)

    --
    In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
  33. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  34. Re:Original Sources by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yes it does. If you don't like your version of Vista, you can still switch to Ubuntu (or SUSE or Mandriva, or Gentoo) for free.

    --
    Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
  35. Re: Still one user by citylivin · · Score: 2, Insightful

    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
  36. Re:Why am I not surprised? by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 4, Insightful

    When I bought my T61 Thinkpad, I was forced to buy a worthless MS license. I opted to buy the cheapest MS license, Vista Basic.

    I then proceeded to fdisk and install Ubuntu. So yeah, I was forced to bundle a Windows license, for which I care nothing about.

    --
  37. Not trying to troll, but... by drachenstern · · Score: 2, Insightful

    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
  38. Re:3 versions needed only by syousef · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Not that I would even try. Who wouldn't install 64bit at this point in time anyways? What's the benefit to not installing 64bit?

    Anyone who

    - Has an app that is partly or fully written in 16 bit and still wants to run it.
    - Has hardware for which there is no 64 bit driver and still wishes to be able to use it.
    - Has less than about 3GB of RAM on the machine. 64 bit addressing also means that for 64 bit code and data, twice as much memory is used.

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer