Slashdot Mirror
Hidden Fees Discovered For "Free" Windows 7 Upgrade
An anonymous reader writes 'Thousands of recent computer purchasers who are expecting to receive free upgrades to Windows 7 when it is released on October 22 may be surprised to learn that some big computer makers are quietly tacking on hefty processing fees as high as $17 to mail out those disks to some buyers.' How about they process $0 to click a link and download a file?
Similar to paying $9.99 for going from Leopard to Snow Leopard (if you bought a Mac with Leopard recently).
It's annoying but it's not hefty.
And in this (Win7) case the price seems to be a manufacturer thing and not a MS thing. Ranging from $0 to $17.
Because of course the infrastructure to serve 3gb of data to each customer doesn't cost anything?
Not that I'm defending the practice of charging for a free upgrade, free upgrades should be free, postage free too, but suggesting doing it digitally means there would be no cost is ignorant. In the UK with the extortionate costs of bandwidth I think posting a CD first class via Royal Mail might in fact be cheaper.
A lot of people would just want to stick the Windows 7 DVD they receieve through the post in the drive too. Downloading an ISO and knowing how to burn an ISO rather than copying the file across like they do usually when writing CDs (if they've ever even written one before) would be too much for some users.
I think that exposes the truth of copyrights to consumers a bit too clearly for corporate comfort.
Windows has traditionally been about receiving the product. You go to the store, give them that ungodly sum that they charge, and then come home with your shiny box and DVD. Now, online distribution is coming up, and Microsoft likely will go that way, but allowing them access to the whole thing before buying a key puts the issue into the spotlight too much. They've already downloaded the system for free, and now they'd be paying several hundred dollars for a code to unlock it. At that point even the simplest minded consumer will put together that all they really paid for was that key and the other stuff costs really nothing (which has always been the case, but it's not been so obvious).
If Microsoft only allows a download after paying the fee then there's still some level of abstraction. IE, the consumer feels like they're buying at least a big file.
Just my take on the issue anyways.
"People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
"Shipping and Handling" is a scam in whatever form it takes. This is especially true when those charges are excessive.
Yes - charging shipping to pass along a variable, customer dependent charge is outrageous!
Get back under your bridge.
Yes, you're right, the manufacturing cost of a "Key" is miniscule. Guess what, it's just like the cost of building a car. You don't think it costs 20,000 dollars in materials and labor to build a car, do you? Aren't you completely indignant that you had to pay that much? The nerve of car companies covering design and R&D costs and they expect to cover the costs of marketing their product in the sales price!? Well, that's outrageous!
Every product has hidden costs embedded into the price. In Microsofts case, it's dev time and marketing, and yes, a profit too. If you don't think the dev time yielded a high enough quality product, or a product you're interested in, by all means, go buy a Mac or download *nix. But, just because it costs next to nothing to create "keys" doesn't mean there weren't some very real expenses in delivering this product that need to be recouped.