Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Discloses Windows 7 Pricing
It's the tripnaut! writes "Information Week has posted prices for Windows 7. From the article: 'The full version of Windows 7 Home Premium is priced at $199, with an upgrade from Vista or XP costing $119. The full version of Windows 7 Professional is $299, with upgrades going for $199. Windows 7 Ultimate is priced at $319, with the upgrade version at $219.' In a nod to the global economic downturn, it is interesting to note that prices are 10% lower than Vista."
It's too much!
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
I ended up getting Vista Ultimate.
Never saw ANY of the benefits/Ultimate Content that was promised.
The upgrade from Vista Ultimate to Win 7 Ultimate should be free.
That will teach me for buying a boxed, non-OEM version of Windows I guess.
How does MS think this pricing is competitive in the least? Snow Leopard is going to be sold for $30 for upgrades while 7 costs $120?!!?! Really, MS needs to learn that those who actually buy their products in-box (not from OEMs) are going to be people who are their valuable customers who are going to have a lot of influence.
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
Yeesh... apple is releasing snow leopard for $29 and microsoft is still pricing stuff like this? When will they learn that a lower price will likely increase the number of people willing to pay for it instead of pirating it.
I'm glad that with Windows 7 Microsoft mostly reverted back to the kind of editions they marketed Windows XP with. It's now much more clear which one to buy when it is distinguised by Home and Professional, then Ultimate for the power user.
It seems to me that everyone I know has a pirated copy of windows: the few people people that have legal copies have them because they were bundled with the computer they bought. When was the last time someone actually went out specifically to bought a copy?
And I do not mean the store 7-11.
Here:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/ptech/06/25/cnet.windows7.pricing.upgrade/index.html
From the article: "From Friday through July 11, consumers in the U.S. will be able to buy an upgrade copy of Windows 7 Home premium for $49 or Windows 7 Professional for $99."
No ultimate and an upgrade not full though. But the upgrade from XP is a full wipe install anyway.
And I do agree with others who said that upgrade from vista ultimate should be free to win 7 ultimate.
I doubt we are going to see any big move towards Windows 7 until people see that is is worth the price tag. I mean with all the issues people saw with Windows Vista, no one is going to want to upgrade their working Windows XP for a Windows 7 that could be just as bad as Vista. If we see that Windows 7 is stable and worth the money we might begin to see a larger transition to it 6 months from now.
Just because you are wrong and I called you out on it doesn't mean I am a Troll.
Can I use the windows 7 license to legally run windows XP? ;)
Why should Microsoft care if the Win7 prices are "competitive" or not? They've got a captive audience consisting mainly of new PC buyers and existing corporate seats. I suspect they simply did an analysis to determine the amount that maximizes license revenue from those two fish in a barrel and didn't even consider the cost of other alternatives.
Best,
I agree with you, but to be fair, Apple knows that 99.5% of every boxed copy of OSX thats sold is going to be installed on a Mac which they already made money on. And up until now, every boxed version of OSX (which apple considers to be an upgrade) has been $129.
Kiteboarding Gear Mention slashdot and get 10% off!
I can't believe those cocksuckers at Microsoft didn't plan their release dates around an unforseen event happening to one fucking person. They're definitely at fault here. You know, as opposed to the guy that stole the laptop.
Whale
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8118749.stm
Wait, a copy of DOS 6.0 would have solved the Northrup Grumman problem in the other story?
"All exiting drives must be reformatted with Dos 6.0, which will Promote Data Volatility past the expected recovery half life."
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
In a nod to the global economic downturn, it is interesting to note that upgrade prices are still more expensive than a non-upgrade OEM copy with far more reinstallation hassles.
System Utilities should never cost more than $40.
Games should never cost more than $50.
Productivity apps can cost whatever, based on the size of their target market.
[flame suit on]
I know much of slashdot would vehemently disagree, but for the majority of users, Windows comes 'for free' with their PC. They buy a computer from Dell or whomever and it comes with Windows, then when the buy a new PC 4 or 5 years later, it comes with Windows again. Virtually no one I know 'buys' the OS - They'll simply get a the newest / latest when they buy a new computer.
[/flame]
How many of you zealots have actually used the W7 release candidate? From the look of the comments, not many. It's a fantastic OS already, and I'm betting it will be very successful, increasing Microsoft's market share.
Oh, but this is slashdot. Anything Microsoft = bloat, crashes, unsecure. Get out of the 90's.
What exactly do I get for my hard-earned $199 or $119?
-A glorified file manager?
-Shiny new icons?
-a DRM crippled media player, that can only play "approved" formats
-Buggy drivers
-A "free" web browser, full of security holes
-Wordpad, Solitaire, Reversi?
-"Promised" compatibility with old software
-A crippled email application
-A crippled media recorder/editor
So lets see, I basically get a glorified file manager, and at worst case, need to repurchase new versions of most of the critical applications, unless I do so, my system is mostly useless, unless I'm satisfied with web broswing and typing in wordpad.
Sorry, not worth it. I'd rather pay/donate to slackware/ubuntu and get a DVD that contains USEFUL software.
is how much will it be as an "OEM" version from the likes of Newegg when I purchase it with a HD? Because anyone paying Brick and Mortor retail pricing is just paying an ignorance-tax.
If you can't be good, be good at it!
If you buy a new computer, it'll come with Windows 7. You'll wind up paying for it whether you want it or not.
According to that pricelist, you're buying Windows 7 and getting a free computer that comes with it.
After the two years I had to spend on Windows Vista, I figure a free copy of Windows 7 Ultimate is a justifiable compensation for all of the frustration and emotional trauma I have endured.
I have been using Windows 7 for the last month or so (since it went from beta to RC) and, I have to say that I have liked MOST of the experience so far.
Stability is at least on par with XP (have not had to restart since I finished driver installs). Annoying messages have been minimal - they only appear when I am doing something that should require administrator credentials, such as installing a new application or driver.
Performance... I have no concrete figures but this also seems on par with XP.
The only down-side has been the installation time (hours, even on my beast) and the size of the OS(how DO you fit 20GB of data on a 3GB DVD anyways????).
So, the reason I want Windows 7 is so I can use all of my system's memory without a ramdisk/virtual memory hack and 64-bit support. There is really no other reason to upgrade because everything else seems on par with XP.
perhaps I could direct your attention to a fine catalog of vendors prepared to sell a PC in the natural state - start naked and free from all operating systems. For those who prefer not to pay for an unwanted proprietary operating system there are Naked Computers. If anyone sees a vendor out there with a naked system for sale please let me know. It has to be an up front option (full frontal if you prefer) not an under the counter, if you ask specially kind of deal. We are also mostly interested in complete computers, not a pile of bits, and we want a minimum order quantity of a single unit.
I have really no issues with Vista to be honest, and Windows 7 seems like it'd be alright. But seriously, if you're going to have an opinion and criticize other users for what they've said, at least post under your handle and have some balls so it doesn't look like cheap attempts at astroturfing.
I have purchased only one copy of Windows(tm) in the last years; XP Professional(tm), and I paid almost $300 for it (all in, after taxes). Yes, I know I was taken for a fool, more on this later.
Now, I know that OEMs can't possibly be paying anything CLOSE to that, because I can buy a computer now WITH Windows and pay just a bit more than that.
So, I was led to believe that as a single consumer, I was being ripped off, and the only way to get a reasonable price for Windows was with a new computer. Simple, right?
Wrong. My wife works as a middle-school teach in the TDSB (Toronto District School Board). They have, what, 40,000 (more?) employees. My wife just got an offer - buy Windows Vista(tm) (Business?) for $21, and Office(tm) for $21. As far as I can tell (from the literature), there don't seem to any resale restrictions. And no "OEM" restrictions. The literature also mentions that the retail price for Office is north of $600.
How much DO Windows and Office cost? Since only idiots would buy retail Windows or Office (yes, I used to be in that category), the only reason to have ANY "suggested retail price" is to attempt to establish some sort of valuation.
"It's expensive, it MUST be good",
but no-one actually pays that price
"but I got a GREAT deal on the software!".
And now the suggested retail pricing pops up here, just to help spread the meme.
Of course, it is possible that the purchase was subsidized by the TDSB, in which case I will be very upset. The TDSB just ok'd the use of OpenOffice, and thus should have no need to spend the money.
Just another "Cubible(sic) Joe" 2 17 3061
Where's the part of the summary telling people that they can upgrade for $49.99 by pre-ordering?
"Finally, as a way of saying thank you to our loyal Windows customers, we are excited to introduce a special time limited offer! We will offer people in select markets the opportunity to pre-order Windows 7 at a more than 50% discount. In the US, this will mean you can pre-order Windows 7 Home Premium for USD $49.99 or Windows 7 Professional for USD $99.99. You can take advantage of this special offer online via select retail partners such as Best Buy or Amazon, or the online Microsoft Store (in participating markets).
This program begins tomorrow in the U.S., Canada and Japan. The offer ends July 11th in the U.S. and Canada and on July 5th for Japan or while supplies last. Customers in the UK, France and Germany, can pre-order their copy of Windows 7 starting July 15th and will run until August 14th (or supplies last) to ensure folks donâ(TM)t miss out on this. Act fast if you want to be the first in line to get Windows 7 at this screaming deal! Note: The special low pre-order price will vary per country."
Granted, it's a small window for a bloated Windows, but you have to applaud Microsoft for this. If you hate Vista and are convinced you want an upgrade, it's only $49.99 if you do in in the next few weeks.
Wise men say, "Forgiveness is divine, but never pay full price for late pizza."
honestly, I haven't seen any features yet that I really consider an upgrade over XP, so perhaps someone could enlighten me about why I would even consider buying an upgrade?
Windows are stored as vector graphics in video memory under Vista and 7. Previously, they were stored as bitmaps that needed to be redrawn every frame. This enables things like viewing a thumbnail of a window from the taskbar (including video) and windows still drawing their last good state when the process locks (unlike XP and before, where the window will be plain white). It's similar to the OS X system.
There are security upgrades as well, but this reason is good enough for me.
Write your representatives! Repeal the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
64-bit execution that works. XP-x64 has poor application compatibility compared with Vista-x64 and Win7-x64.
Convert FLACs to a portable format with FlacSquisher
Apple charges $29 for their OS upgrade, but the Mac user who's getting that cheap upgrade paid 50% more up front for the computer that he bought from Apple. Microsoft, despite selling a few keyboards and mice, is not a hardware company, and doesn't make its money by maintaining exclusive manufacturing control of the hardware that Windows runs on.
I heard the Pirate Edition was free. Just sayin.
This sort of attitude is one of the main reasons why anti-piracy lobbyists get so much love from legislators.
If you pirate Windows, why the hell would you care about "alternatives" ? And vice-versa: if you're a linux fan, you don't need to pirate Windows.
One thing is certain: bragging about your hypocritical stance on /. is not going to make Microsoft lower their prices.
-Billco, Fnarg.com
honestly, I haven't seen any features yet that I really consider an upgrade over XP, so perhaps someone could enlighten me about why I would even consider buying an upgrade?
Windows are stored as vector graphics in video memory under Vista and 7. Previously, they were stored as bitmaps that needed to be redrawn every frame. This enables things like viewing a thumbnail of a window from the taskbar (including video) and windows still drawing their last good state when the process locks (unlike XP and before, where the window will be plain white). It's similar to the OS X system.
There are security upgrades as well, but this reason is good enough for me.
How is explaining my favorite feature of a new operating system to someone who asked about the features a troll? In fact, how can pointing out good qualities be a troll at all?
Write your representatives! Repeal the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics!
I had hoped that they would do like Apple this time and offer a family pack license. I can get Leopard with five licenses for a little over $130, less than half the cost of a second standalone copy. With four PCs in my household (my game PC, wife's, and two the kids use), even the cheapest upgrade option is nearly $500 if I upgraded all of them.
From WineHQ
Myth 1:
Windows applications that do not make system calls will run just as fast as on Windows (no more no less).
I will agree on the having to test, but also on Windows, to an extent, you have to test to make sure that the device that says it works on Windows actually does properly.
Microsoft, Apple, Google, Amazon what's the difference? All steal money from devs and control with walled gardens.
Prices are set to maximise profit, not to reflect production costs. Your question makes no sense unless you think Microsoft is a charity, not a business.
On http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows7/products/compare-editions there's a feature which only comes with the Ultimate edition: "Work in the language of your choice and switch between any of 35 languages." It's interesting that Microsoft, with all its billions, only supports 35 languages -- at a serious premium. Compare this to volunteer-based projects such as KDE, which has (admittedly varying) levels of support for over 60 languages. For free.
I didn't think the house band in Hell would play this badly.
Which is why someone needs to start one of those anti-trust lawsuits Microsoft loves so much. How can any marketplace be competitive when an expensive product is sold cheaper than a free product. Really, the only way to stop Windows marketshare is to ensure that when you buy a Dell, you have to pay the retail price (ok, or a discounted price - but you have to pay extra) for the OS too.
If Dell had to be more transparent in its pricing, you might have the situation where you bought the hardware for X, the software for Y and a Dell-engineer installation (ie the disk duplication step) fee of Z. For Windows Y might be $100 and the installation $10, and Linux Y might be $0 but Z $200, but you'd see those prices and could decide to buy just the hardware and install your own OS. With the current situation, you just see that Windows is the cheapest option, which would be impossible in any other non-monopoly-based industry.
64-bit execution that works. XP-x64 has poor application compatibility compared with Vista-x64 and Win7-x64.
I call FUD. XP x64 is just 2003 x64, its the same kernel. 2003 x64 is rock solid, and so is XP x64.
Maybe you had a few things that didn't work, but it doesn't mean everyone did. It simply went by the wayside right away because Vista came out shortly after.
But in terms of speed and stability, nothing beats XP x64, in my opinion. I'd really challenge anyone to come up with a significant list of applications that work on Vista x64 that don't work on XP x64.
Now you've done it, he's picking up his chair...
Free Martian Whores!
In fact, how can pointing out good qualities [of Windows] be a troll at all?
You must be new here.
I wouldn't say application compatibility is a problem with XP x64 -- at least not in my experience. Drivers, on the other hand, are a fairly big problem. My sound card and wireless card both have working Vista x64 drivers, but no XP x64 drivers. And this is despite the fact that both cards were released before Vista was even out!
XP x64 is a bit like linux in that respect - if you deliberately build a system to support XP x64 / linux, it works quite nicely. If you don't, be prepared for hardware support headaches.
- Photoshop (don't dig yourself in further by suggesting Gimp)
That's fine if you are a high-end graphics designer, but if you were you'd be running it on a Mac, not Windows. Apple has always had the creative image market. If you're just mucking around with your home photos, any number of graphics apps will suffice, that $900 copy of Photoshop is overkill for anyone except professionals.
- Any decent audio editing software
That's just bullshit. There is a LOT of good audio editing software out there for Linux, much of it used by professionals.
- Pretty much any software one might need when purchasing a consumer electronics device
Your info is sadly out of date. It's been my experience that with few exceptions, Linux just recognises the devices and they work. One exception is my Logitech keyboard, which works - except for the extra controls, like the volume, play, screoll wheel, etc. But that's Logitech's failing, not Linux's.
- iTunes
Useless for those of us boycotting the RIAA labels. I prefer to buy CDs and rip them myself.
- Media Center
More bullshit; MS's "media center" is far less useful than any number of non-MS offerings (even among offerings that run on Windows)
- Decent accounting software
You're probably correct on this one, I wouldn't know, as I'm a nerd, not an accountant. Didn't accountants ruin the economy? If so, can we blame Microsoft for out economic meltdown? ;)
- Chrome
Are you kidding me??? Chrome is just another web browser!
Free Martian Whores!
You know, I don't really understand why the Linux guys point to OO.o as a substitute to MS Office when there is Oxygen Office Pro out there also free, which IMHO is a MUCH better substitute for MS Office since it already has the templates and clip art and all the bells and whistles that folks are used to with MS Office.
That said until I can get assurances from the Linux community that a good 90%+ of the items sold in Staples, Best Buy, and Walmart work in Linux I won't be carrying it in my shop. The support costs for home users and Linux is a nightmare and I was looking at 600% return rates compared to Windows. Before you say "Ur doin it wrong" or some other snarky BS I'll point out that MSI was looking at similar numbers, and I bet if you asked them they would tell you consumers buying stuff in the big three retailers and then finding out it will never work was the cause of a great number of returns.
So while Linux is great if you are running a server (its intended task) and wonderful if you are willing to research every single purchase for the life of the machine, that just cut out 95%+ of the market, including all my customers. Sorry, no sale.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Windows are stored as vector graphics in video memory under Vista and 7. Previously, they were stored as bitmaps that needed to be redrawn every frame.
That's totally wrong.
Window visuals in XP and before (and, in fact, in Vista and 7 if you disable DWM) were not stored at all. Whenever part of the window got erased, the application received a WM_PAINT message, and had to handle that and redraw that part. This is why, when a Windows application hangs, you could mess up its window by e.g. dragging other windows on top of it.
In Vista & 7, windows are handled by a composition engine. That thing can deal with vector graphics (if you use WPF, it hooks up with DWM to provide that), but for normal GDI windows applications, they just render the window to a bitmap, and then that bitmap is stored.
his enables things like viewing a thumbnail of a window from the taskbar (including video) and windows still drawing their last good state when the process locks (unlike XP and before, where the window will be plain white).
It's fairly obvious that neither of these are any better or worse whether window contents are stored in bitmap or vector format. The real question is whether they are stored at all.
If I was in your shoes I wouldn't be pushing Linux either, but whenever I see the MSI FUD I feel I have to comment.
I am not one bit surprised that MSI got much higher returns on the Linux version of the netbook as they sourced hardware that wasn't 100% Linux compatible and then shoehorned a SuSE install where several of the devices that were compatible weren't configured correctly. In short, they actually tried to sell a completely broken Linux install, and then had the audacity to blame the returns on Linux.
I'm sure their goal was to meet a certain price point and they simply assumed that people would install their own copy of Windows. If that was the case they should have shipped the box with FreeDOS and left Linux out of it.
Dell, who has done a much better job bundling Linux on its netbooks, has a very different story to tell about returns.