Print 118 comment(s) - last by juve.. on May 20 at 12:09 AM

One analyst suggests that Microsoft should fork over free copies of Windows 7

Windows Vista has been the tech industry's whipping boy ever since it was first released to the public in January 2007. From poor driver support at launch to incompatibilities with some software applications, Vista was destined for a troubled life. Apple also cashed in with a number of "I'm a Mac, I'm a PC" ads which poured more salt into the Vista wounds.

Now as we edge closer to the release of Windows 7, at least one analyst is suggesting that a specific group of Vista users get a little something in return for added expense. Michael Cherry, an analyst for Directions on Microsoft, suggests that Windows Vista Ultimate users should be given free upgrades to Windows 7 according to Reuters.

Surprisingly, it's not driver issues, poor media sharing performance, slow file transfers, or software application incompatibilities that Cherry suggests as the reason for the free software; it's the fact that Microsoft made a poor effort in delivering on its promises of Vista Ultimate Extras. Although Microsoft did deliver a few "extras" including a Hold 'em Poker Game, some new sound schemes, and BitLocker enhancements, most people felt that they were lead astray by Microsoft with the promise of exclusive content.

"I'd like to see a free upgrade [to Windows 7] for Vista Ultimate users," said Cherry, an analyst with Directions on Microsoft. "It would buy them a lot of good will, and I don't think it would cost them much."

Although Microsoft is not likely to take such advice seriously, at least one thing is certain -- Microsoft will not be providing "Extras" for Windows 7.

"Our new approach to planning and building Windows doesn't have the capacity to continue to deliver features outside the regular release cycle," Microsoft announced earlier this year. "While our core development team is focused on building the next release, our sustained engineering team is focused on updates to existing features. As a result we don't plan to create Ultimate Extras."

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

That's insane...
By jonmcc33 on 5/12/2009 3:39:56 PM , Rating: 5
Said analyst is crazy and needs to see a mental therapist.

RE: That's insane...
By das mod on 5/12/09, Rating: -1
RE: That's insane...
By Brandon Hill on 5/12/2009 3:50:31 PM , Rating: 5
Spend all day at home just browsing the web looking for ways to make money, and/or get FREE stuff

Hence the image above ;)

RE: That's insane...
By Master Kenobi on 5/12/2009 3:50:05 PM , Rating: 5
Anyone with a computer and some free time can be an analyst on the internet these days.

RE: That's insane...
By mmntech on 5/12/2009 4:44:21 PM , Rating: 5
...and thus Daily Tech was born. lol

He does have a point though. Ultimate may as well be worth two copies given price they charge for the retail boxed version at WorstBuy. :p

RE: That's insane...
By Lord 666 on 5/12/2009 5:39:46 PM , Rating: 3
I'm going to charge this analyst for stealing my idea. Actually posted it several times on DT; Ultimate users should get a free upgrade to Windows 7.

Looking for the previous posts when I get home.

RE: That's insane...
By jonmcc33 on 5/12/09, Rating: -1
RE: That's insane...
By Doormat on 5/12/09, Rating: 0
RE: That's insane...
By SunAngel on 5/12/2009 5:43:25 PM , Rating: 2
be careful. just like rambus, dailytech could go on a rampage and start suing its' posters for slander and misinformation.

RE: That's insane...
By Master Kenobi on 5/13/2009 6:09:05 AM , Rating: 5
I find that highly unlikely since DT doesn't police opinions at all. Several of the trolls have been here for years. :P

RE: That's insane...
By aj28 on 5/12/09, Rating: -1
RE: That's insane...
By segerstein on 5/12/09, Rating: -1
RE: That's insane...
By PrezWeezy on 5/12/2009 6:17:28 PM , Rating: 4
I agree, let's all go back to DOS where we didn't have to learn anyting to use it. Progress is just dumb

RE: That's insane...
By Alexstarfire on 5/12/09, Rating: -1
RE: That's insane...
By ClownPuncher on 5/13/2009 11:15:13 AM , Rating: 5
Windows 7 is just a different UI than DOS, but same features? Wow, I guess I need a good head injury to understand your logic.

RE: That's insane...
By lecanard on 5/14/2009 3:48:33 AM , Rating: 2
Yes it is. You can be much more productive with modern UIs. Not that I'm one to talk about productivity since I am wasting time posting in an online thread...

Anyway, if making computers run better and more easily doesn't impress you, what kind of progress do you expect? An OS that not only manages processes and devices but also cures cancer and writes new Sherlock Holmes stories? I admit that would be cool, but that is not really the in scope of windows.

RE: That's insane...
By StevoLincolnite on 5/13/2009 12:06:29 AM , Rating: 4
Most people would be lost in DOS these days!

"What!? I have to type a command for my program to run!?"

RE: That's insane...
By aharris on 5/13/2009 3:09:49 AM , Rating: 2
Eh, upwards of 12 million people wouldn't be able to play WoW in DOS, so that idea is out the window.

RE: That's insane...
By atlmann10 on 5/13/2009 7:43:54 PM , Rating: 2
Your probably right and for say 90% of those users all the would have to type is C:\windows\programfiles\worldofwarcraft.exe

Thats actually pretty sad

RE: That's insane...
By Inkjammer on 5/13/2009 3:24:26 PM , Rating: 4
Internet trolls would reign as gods in a DOS world.

"No, no, you're doing it wrong! To format your letter in Word you have to enable the formatting tool by going back into DOS and typing 'C:\FORMAT C: /Q' to enable formatting on all your documents on the hard drive!"

RE: That's insane...
By Kenenniah on 5/12/2009 9:36:15 PM , Rating: 5
Why didn't they make Vista more compatible with existing XP software and drivers?

For years and years Microsoft has posted rules and guidlines for developers to follow for security and stability. Things like storing user information in the user profile instead of the program files directory and using user registry instead of system registry. For years and years many lazy developers ignored rules for good programming. With Vista MS started finally enforcing some of these rules. Not all, but quite a bit of the incompatibility issues are simply a result of poor, lazy, and incompetent programming.

RE: That's insane...
By Master Kenobi on 5/13/2009 6:06:39 AM , Rating: 5
Indeed. I point to Blizzard, who's Starcraft of all things works flawlessly on Windows Vista and Widnows 7 64-bit. Half-Life, and other games also work with no issue. The problem is definately bending or breaking the rules.

RE: That's insane...
By aj28 on 5/13/2009 2:41:04 AM , Rating: 3
I don't agree with your 2nd and especially 3rd point. Why change what works spend time redoing (ISVs) and relearning (users) things at the whim of MSFT?

Since when was total software backwards compatibility a requirement when a first-party developer releases new hardware or software? It never has been. Look at Xbox 360, PS3, and Wii. None of those have complete backwards compatibility with last-gen titles. While they all do in certain iterations, none of them are perfect all the time, which is what people seem to be expecting from Windows Vista.

Point being, Microsoft is responsible for supporting their OS and their direct software ecosystem, not everybody else's. A clean install of Vista SP1 with Microsoft-bundled software is no less stable than a comparable install of XP SP3.

As for my point on users, while it may seem a bit harsh, it's the reality of the situation. Why change what works? Because they wanted to make it more intuitive, and they half-way succeeded. Can you blame them for a lack of perfection? I don't think so. No one ergonomic design can fit everyone, just as no UI design can fit everyone. I firmly believe, however, that if you placed a user in front of two PCs, one XP and one Vista, and gave them a list of tasks to perform, from data input to system maintenance, they would complete them faster on the Vista machine. It's just plain easier to figure out from the onset. The design makes sense. Windows 7 is a great improvement on that, but just because it has more in common with Vista than XP, that does not make it some sort of Vista service pack that users should be entitled to for free.

RE: That's insane...
By Samus on 5/13/2009 6:18:34 PM , Rating: 2
He makes it out as if Vista Ultimate cost everybody who has it $300 bucks. Did anyone really pay more than $200 for it? I paid $180 from newegg for the OEM, and all I had to do was get a Microsoft Mouse for $10 bucks to make it legit.

RE: That's insane...
By inighthawki on 5/12/2009 3:55:31 PM , Rating: 2
Well to be fair, the "extras" for vista ultimate were lacking at best, though dishing out a free upgrade to windows 7 might be overdoing it. A lot of people did pay extra for the ultimate edition which at the time could easily cost $200 more than home premium and really didn't get much out of it.

RE: That's insane...
By Murloc on 5/12/09, Rating: 0
RE: That's insane...
By tdawg on 5/12/2009 7:11:58 PM , Rating: 5
If you wanted any combination of features from Home Premium and Business, you had to buy Ultimate. It was f'd up, really, to separate the two. What about those that work from home?

RE: That's insane...
By Aloonatic on 5/13/2009 5:28:18 AM , Rating: 4
If you want it to do two things then what? You want to have to buy home and business separately? Isn't ultimate perfect for you and has value? Or do you think that people should be forced to buy things that they don't want/need just to suit you and your little minority?

People who didn't need everything in ultimate but bought it anyway, probably thinking it was Windows to the Max with go faster stripes were fools to themselves, but those who found the extra benefits of an OS that did both home and business functions in one box should be happy really.

Businesses don't want the home stuff, most home users don't want he business stuff and a few people like you want everything, so shouldn't you pay extra for that? I don't really see what your problem is. Why should I, as a home user pay for your businesses convenience?

Home is fine for me, but if I was profiting from my OS by working from home I would expect to have to pay a little more for extra functionality etc, and then write it off as a business expense or get my work to pay for it any way, but you seem to think that everyone should chip in for your business?

RE: That's insane...
By Helbore on 5/13/2009 2:15:24 PM , Rating: 2
What about people - like me - who wanted access to features like Media Center, but also had a full Windows domain set up, as well? For me, I had to get Ultimate, because Business doesn't include Media Center and Home Premium doesn't work on domains.

Bought my copy as an OEM, though, so it didn't cost the Earth like the retail copy does! Still its s ridiculous amount of money just to have the "domain" radio button available in networking.

RE: That's insane...
By Etern205 on 5/12/2009 4:57:38 PM , Rating: 2
Some people got Vista Ultimate (retail version x86 and x64) if you gave up your privacy for 3 months and in the end you get Vista Ultimate retail version (x86 and x64 with 2 COAs) aa a gift. :)

RE: That's insane...
By JBird7986 on 5/12/2009 6:20:27 PM , Rating: 2
That's how I got trade I ever made. As soon as they confirmed the copy was on its way, I deleted the feedback program. I'm happy to let MS spy on me, I've got nothing to hide...but I want something in return.

RE: That's insane...
By bodar on 5/12/2009 11:33:35 PM , Rating: 2
You only THINK you got rid of it... Muuhuuhahahaha!

*StrongBad voice* ROOTKITTED!

RE: That's insane...
By JBird7986 on 5/13/2009 9:03:46 AM , Rating: 2
Not really...I deleted my old copy of Vista HP x86 when I re-formatted to x64 Ultimate, so there's no way that it's still on my system.

RE: That's insane...
By Bateluer on 5/12/2009 4:08:56 PM , Rating: 3
It would be a powerful incentive to buy the Ultimate edition of a MS OS if you know when you bought it that it would also come with a free upgrade to the next MS OS. Not sure how they'd work multiple upgrades, Vista Ultimate to Win 7 Ultmate, then purchase a full or discounted new license for Windows 8 Ultimate?

Just a thought, it could be worth a look by MS marketing.

RE: That's insane...
By AnnihilatorX on 5/12/2009 4:11:55 PM , Rating: 1
I'd say free upgrade to 7 ultimate from the home premium/professional, or a good discount for the upgrade cost from vista ultimate to seven ultimate.

RE: That's insane...
By AnnihilatorX on 5/13/2009 6:30:52 AM , Rating: 2
Why the rate down? Giving Vista ultimate users some upgrade discount (obviously better than giving away free) to me is logical and fair.

RE: That's insane...
By Madhawk on 5/12/2009 4:30:22 PM , Rating: 2
Said analyst is crazy and needs to see a mental therapist.

jonmcc33 (microsoft employee?);
No, Microsoft is insane for creating what is essentially Vista SP2 and re-branding it Windows 7 and expecting people to pay for it.
If Microsoft decides to release another slew of Basic, Home, Home Premium, Business, Ultimate, Kitchen Sink, Nuclear Powered versions then they will not only prove themselves even more insane but out of touch with what their customers want. Insanity, corporate stupidity...A very thin line here.

RE: That's insane...
By RjBass on 5/12/2009 4:55:28 PM , Rating: 4
Hmmmm, doesn't Aplle do the exact same thing with OSX? I mean maybe they don't a brazilion different versions of the same thing, but they do in fact charge an arm and a leg for every "new" version of OSX.

RE: That's insane...
By GaryJohnson on 5/12/2009 5:10:17 PM , Rating: 2
What MS AND Apple would both like to do is make the OS a "service" that you pay for monthly.

RE: That's insane...
By StevoLincolnite on 5/13/2009 12:12:46 AM , Rating: 2
I for one wont go that way, I'll just stick to the last non-monthly payment version of Windows and be done with, Also funny now that I think about it is that I have never actually directly paid for any Operating System in my entire life!
I started using PC's during the DOS/Win 3.1x era, and every OS I have gotten is from buying a new PC, or someone giving me there copy because they hated it, or a business throws a machine out with the OS Keys and Discs.

RE: That's insane...
By Doormat on 5/12/2009 11:58:46 PM , Rating: 2
$129 is an arm and a leg? What planet are you from?

Since you brought up Apple, I'll pull out this gem - if you have multiple PCs or Macs in your home:

3 licenses of Vista Ultimate OEM: $577 ( (3 pack "system builder" copy, individual upgrades are $199 ea)
5 licenses of OSX 10.5: $138 (

RE: That's insane...
By Master Kenobi on 5/13/2009 6:16:56 AM , Rating: 3
That's quite alright since OSX can only be loaded on Mac hardware in the first place. They make it up by raising the price on the hardware. Not to mention their OS releases are little more than service packs.

RE: That's insane...
By Doormat on 5/13/2009 11:21:44 AM , Rating: 2
Not to mention their OS releases are little more than service packs.

Obvious troll is obvious. Apple hasn't needed to change their basic UI design pattern over the past 5 years because it works well. And if you want to debate that point, I'll have to break it to you that the W7 task bar redesign makes it a lot more like OSX's dock in that its a place to switch and launch apps - the primary function of the bar.

RE: That's insane...
By Sazar on 5/13/2009 11:43:13 AM , Rating: 2
W7's implementation is more like the Arthur and RISC OS setups in its visual appearance, although there are some similarities to the OSX dock.

Not sure why the first thing people thing of is OSX when there are so many other UI implementations :)

Honestly, the W7 dock is a lot more intuitive and easier to follow than the OSX dock in how the application icons appear when launched and the order they are present in.

Either way, it works and it works well and that is why the icon bar/dock interface has been a big part of operating system interfaces since the mid/late 80's.

RE: That's insane...
By TheRagnarok on 5/13/2009 3:46:31 PM , Rating: 2
I guess you've never heard of the Hackintosh scene? IDeneb is a variant that I've used. It actually only took me one try to install, and get Mac OS X on my AMD PC. -.-

RE: That's insane...
By Master Kenobi on 5/13/2009 6:18:38 AM , Rating: 3
Windows 7 would have been Vista SP2 and it would have been free. However the bashing Vista has taken has destroyed its public image and it is simply easier to market a new OS and drop Vista than attempt to repair the brand. You can thank the media, Apple, and OEM's for that.

RE: That's insane...
By gyranthir on 5/12/2009 4:39:48 PM , Rating: 4
I don't believe he is crazy. I think he's miffed that he paid a premium for a product that promised extras, but the extras never really materialized... I think that loss of value is a huge promise that wasn't kept, and people have the right to be miffed about it.

I have a copy of vista ultimate, that I use, but it's no different than the copy of vista home premium, because there were very few "ultimate" addons... I think the premium you pay for Vista Ultimate should yield something...

RE: That's insane...
By Bateluer on 5/12/2009 4:56:19 PM , Rating: 5
You did get something for paying for the Ultimate version. You get all the features of Home Premium and Business. In HP, there's no RD. In Business, there's no Windows Media Center. Only way to get both is through Ultimate. Same with a number of other features.

RE: That's insane...
By MonkeyPaw on 5/12/2009 10:43:03 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, when it came time to choose which version of Vista, I actually chose Ultimate with the hopes that there would be more extras. Those couple games really didn't leave me too satisfied with what MS made it sound like I'd be getting. However, my copy of Ultimate was only $45, so I'm not out for blood. If I paid retail price for Ultimate, I would not be as indifferent.

Maybe MS should just offer a deeper discount on the Win7 upgrade to Ultimate buyers? I suppose you'd have to order online, but that would be fair, IMO.

RE: That's insane...
By Starcub on 5/13/2009 2:40:15 PM , Rating: 2
You could buy the missing features for cheaper in third party software. It really only made sense to buy Ultimate if you could find a significant discount for it, which wasn't too hard if you kept an eye out for it.

I tend to agree that not many people will want to upgrade from Vista Ultimate, especially if they don't offer an Ultimate version of Windows 7. MS would need to offer a discount program for these people to make the switch.

RE: That's insane...
By inperfectdarkness on 5/12/2009 5:48:44 PM , Rating: 2
is he related to wes cherry? is this an attempt to get back at microsoft's shiens from ages past?

regardless...i don't think microsoft owes anyone freebies. if anything, this should motivate more companies to expand linux based OS availability & compatibility. this is a capitalist country. if the 800lbs gorilla isn't doing his job, soon someone else will come along and replace him.

RE: That's insane...
By SiliconAddict on 5/12/2009 6:40:21 PM , Rating: 2
Why? Apple release 10.0 to a major sucking sound. They gave 10.1 away for free. There is no reason why MS who charged a massive premium for Ultimate shouldn't be giving them a free upgrade. Sorry but until last fall even some of the higher end laptops still struggled on Vista.

RE: That's insane...
By jonmcc33 on 5/12/2009 8:32:50 PM , Rating: 2
Apple gave away a Service Pack for free? Oh good! That's what Microsoft does too!

RE: That's insane...
By aj28 on 5/13/2009 2:54:53 AM , Rating: 2
10.0 to 10.1 was an entirely different increment than 10.1 to 10.2 or higher versions of the OS X platform. More than anything else, Apple just hadn't figured out their marketing yet, and that's why it was free. It was a bugfix release, and not much more, making it very much equivalent to XP SP2 in its impact. Beyond that, OS 9 to OS X was an absolutely huge jump when put beside the XP to Vista transition. In fact, in order to run a good portion of OS 9 apps, you had to completely boot a built-in version of OS 9 within the original OS X. On a side note, the whole "XP Mode" thing in Windows 7 is a lot less of a new idea than it seems...

I would also like to point out that Vista can be run without issue on very, very minimal hardware. The main problem is that it comes out of the box poorly configured. Turning off something as simple as animating windows as they are opened, closed, and moved about the screen can have a huge impact on a user's perception of responsiveness. You'll see this effect particularly on Intel and low-end nVidia chipsets, as well as units with single-core processors. With that said, Microsoft should seriously consider putting a bit more emphasis on the Performance Options window, or at least legitimately measure a machine's performance during setup, rather than just determining whether or not Aero should be turned on.

RE: That's insane...
By teohhanhui on 5/12/2009 11:24:43 PM , Rating: 2
I think a special discount for a full retail copy is justified.

RE: That's insane...
By Griswold on 5/13/2009 3:48:01 AM , Rating: 2
No why? The one and only beef I had and still have with vista is the "ultimate extras" lie. Two years later, there is still not much coming from Microsoft in that respect. We got a couple crappy games, a moving desktop background and two sound schemes I believe. And you bet there wont be coming anything at all from now on.

A free upgrade might be a bit too much, but how about a 50% discount?

RE: That's insane...
By rburnham on 5/13/2009 9:27:01 AM , Rating: 2
Or people could do some research and find out which version of Vista is actually good for them so they don't buy Ultimate unless they need the few extra features it has. It's so funny how that works it's almost... crazy!

By cscpianoman on 5/12/2009 3:48:22 PM , Rating: 2
What is wrong with Vista? If you bought it you accepted the product and license. Microsoft doesn't owe anyone anything for "free." If anything Microsoft went out of their way to accommodate all those wishing to stick with XP, you could have easily avoided Vista, if you wished. Analyst, apparently, couldn't figure out how to turn UAC off.

RE: Free!?
By jajig on 5/12/2009 3:52:12 PM , Rating: 2
Vista Ultimate was meant to get lots of extras on an ongoing basis. Microsoft didn't deliver on their promise.

RE: Free!?
By Souka on 5/12/2009 4:05:03 PM , Rating: 5
No doubt...

Without more themes and Aero interfaces, my Vista experience has been ruined! Ruinner!!!

RE: Free!?
By mikefarinha on 5/12/2009 4:33:31 PM , Rating: 2
Vista Ultimate's Extras were a small part of what was included with Vista Ultimate. The main selling point of Vista Ultimate wasn't the extra's it was the fact that you could have all the home and business features. Vista Ultimate Extra's was simply to be like sprinkles on a cake. Yes they were underwhelming but they are hardly anything to get angry about.

If you want to get angry about something it should be the way they excluded features from Vista Business that were in Vista Home Premium (such as Windows Media Center).

I'm glad that Windows 7 has it's editions setup they way they are. 90% of Windows geeks will only ever want Windows 7 Professional.

RE: Free!?
By omnicronx on 5/12/2009 4:56:39 PM , Rating: 2
Ultimate was pretty much useless, you were paying for MCE and bitlocker.. other than that it was pretty much identical to the business version. There should have been just a Professional version, that included bitlocker but had MCE as an optional download.

RE: Free!?
By Sazar on 5/12/2009 5:10:13 PM , Rating: 2
MCE came with Home Premium so basically it was BitLocker plus the extra's and perhaps a couple more items.

Nothing to write home about.

I just got it to see the lovely ULTIMATE signage when logging on :)

RE: Free!?
By omnicronx on 5/12/2009 5:19:50 PM , Rating: 2
RDP support was the sole reason I went Ultimate. Could have just used cracks but I decided against it.

RE: Free!?
By QuantumPion on 5/12/2009 5:26:37 PM , Rating: 2
The main selling point of Vista Ultimate for me was the legal ability to run Vista within a virtual machine, which only the Ultimate Edition's license allowed. This was an important feature for some businesses.

RE: Free!?
By HinderedHindsight on 5/12/2009 4:15:33 PM , Rating: 1
What is wrong with Vista? If you bought it you accepted the product and license. Microsoft doesn't owe anyone anything for "free."

This statement completely ignores the fact that Vista, to a large extent was shoved down everyone's throat. This collective of "everyone" I refer to includes more than just consumers, it includes developers and hardware manufacturers.

Some system manufacturers do not offer alternate OS's to Vista on much of their product line, and if they do, there is often a premium paid to downgrade.

What's wrong with Vista starts with the fact that Microsoft's monopoly hold on the PC market allowed them to release software that was not completely ready for prime time, and certainly not ready for a corporate environment (argue as much as you want with this point, but a good number of companies have rejected Vista, don't try and tell me you're more intelligent than hundreds, if not, thousands of IT departments, you can't prove it). The really stupid thing is, Microsoft has been pushing to limit your choices even among their own product line by trying to completely stop XP sales. Fortunately popular backlash has prevent this completely.

This is next to their massive marketing failure with developers and hardware makers. Microsoft failed to get them on board to get their products compatible with Vista. It is Microsoft's job to ensure Vista is compatible and works reliably with a wide range of hardware, and therefore, it becomes their responsibility to get developers and hardware manufacturers on board.

And this is *besides* the technical issues with Vista that had absolutely nothing to do with drivers. If you doubt this, look at all the updates that weren't security related.

BTW, in case you feel the need to label me a Microsoft flamer, I have implemented a number of Microsoft products over the last decade, and currently manage an environment that includes Active Directory, Exchange server 2007 (migrated from Exchange 2003), Team Foundation Server, Sharepoint all based on a mixture of 32 and 64 bit versions of Windows Server 2003 and 2008. In other words, I think Microsoft makes a lot of great products. I just honestly don't think Vista can be included with them. And yes, I have actually used it.

RE: Free!?
By mikefarinha on 5/12/2009 4:26:28 PM , Rating: 2
This statement completely ignores the fact that Vista, to a large extent was shoved down everyone's throat.

How can this be?

All I've heard is how no one is upgrading to Vista!

The current marketshare shows that Vista is at around 23%... Apparently this isn't even as good as Windows XP's less-than-stellar adoption rate.

The majority of people complaining about Vista are not Vista users.

RE: Free!?
By mikefarinha on 5/12/2009 4:28:11 PM , Rating: 3
And this is *besides* the technical issues with Vista that had absolutely nothing to do with drivers. If you doubt this, look at all the updates that weren't security related.


If you would like to try a little experiment try this.

Install a clean Vista RTM, turn of auto update, and install all the latest drivers. Please post here what problems you have.

RE: Free!?
By HinderedHindsight on 5/12/2009 4:56:35 PM , Rating: 2
I don't need to, Microsoft does us the favor of documenting the stuff for me. So please, don't take my word for it, take Microsoft's own word for it:

In my own environment, I've encountered several of these issues, including:

-Changes to a printer's device configuration are not applied until the computer restarts or the Print Spooler service restarts in Windows Vista
-You cannot use a remote access server to apply DHCP options to a Windows Vista-based computer
-Error message when you try to install a hotfix on a Windows Vista-based computer in a domain: "Installer encountered an error: 0x8007177f. This machine is disabled for file encryption"
-The default gateway setting is lost when you wake a Windows Vista-based computer from sleep

Feel free to read on :).

RE: Free!?
By QuantumPion on 5/12/2009 5:29:07 PM , Rating: 2
I think an even more serious issue was the inability to install or run Vista x64 on an Nvidia motherboard chipset with 4 GB of memory or more until SP1...

RE: Free!?
By HinderedHindsight on 5/12/2009 7:05:15 PM , Rating: 2
Interesting, I hadn't ran across that one, but then again the only Vista systems in our environment are the ones that go into laptops belonging to executives who specifically request it- not too many nVidia chipsets there. I only mentioned the ones I directly experienced (through my end users).

I do like how even after I proved the point of technical issues (and my point regarding Microsoft's developer/hardware manufacturer relations has so far not been addressed) my original post in this thread got rated down to a -1.

I guess people just can't tolerate a reasonable, experienced opinion regarding Vista. And as I mentioned before, all the other products I've implemented are great, and definitely production environment material.

RE: Free!?
By SavagePotato on 5/12/2009 4:46:33 PM , Rating: 4
Every time I see some forum nerd say that Microsoft is shoving software down their throat I feel like shoving my foot up their ass.

There is no nazi death squad that went around forcing you to buy Vista at gunpoint, the version that comes preloaded on your new computer does not cost you any more than XP

It is not, I repeat not your god given right for corporation to do anything whatsoever for you. If you do not like the product, do not buy the product, it is that simple. Mac OSX and Linux are waiting for you as your alternatives.

RE: Free!?
By ICBM on 5/12/2009 5:09:40 PM , Rating: 3
Hasn't Microsoft always forced a new OS upon everyone? Going from 95/98/ME to 2000/XP was definitely worth the jump, however was 2000 to XP worth the jump? I would say no it was not. 2000 had all the functionality and stability with a smaller memory footprint. I feel XP to Vista was much the same type of push. Not needed, just a little extra eye candy.

I would agree Vista had a rocky start, however that was resolved long ago, and I have found it to be everybit as stable as 2000/XP. As to the reason IT departments don't want to switch, well I would say that is because IT departments are usually slow to adopt changes. I worked at a major university 's IT department as a student worker, and if something didn't have to be changed, we wouldn't change it. This was back when service pack 2 was coming out for XP, and the university flat refused to use it for quite a while.

Why would anyone want to go around and upgrade 1000s of computers to Vista? First off it's different in regards to drivers, security, etc. Second it doesn't bring any actual benefits. I think what IT departments have done to Vista's reputation is unfair. Their opinions are largely based on Vista at launch, and even though most problems have been fixed, they keep saying the same things. Their friends will come up and ask their opinions on things, and they trash Vista.

Now Windows 7, so much hope, praise, hype...
I have been using the RC, and its nice and stable, I haven't had any problems to speak of with it on my Athlon XP test machine. However, after using it for a few days, I was like, how is this different from Vista? Hmm, the task bar is a little different, they moved the control panel items around....again. Other than that, its THE SAME THING! At least with Vista we got a little bit of eye candy. Ok, we get a tiny bit of additional eye candy when Windows is starting up. It seems to me that Windows 7 is just a rebadged Windows Vista, strictly to drop the bad reputation.

Now I like Vista, and I like Windows 7. I don't have any problems with Microsoft doing this, since it is how they have always done it. I DO have a problem with people still complaining about Vista, and with people saying how fantastic Windows 7 is.

RE: Free!?
By JBird7986 on 5/12/2009 6:25:50 PM , Rating: 2
I would disagree with you only because I think that there was a valuable addition in terms of the fact that Vista has truly brought x64 computing to the mainstream. Oh, sure, XP64 existed, but it never had the traction or driver support that Vista64 got. The remainder of Vista doesn't have much over XP (though that's not to say I don't like Vista (I'm actually very happy with it)), but that one feature makes a huge difference to me. I don't even own a computer with an x86 OS anymore. All of my machines are x64.

RE: Free!?
By ICBM on 5/12/2009 11:25:28 PM , Rating: 2
Good point about XP64. This was one product which was definitely not forced upon us. However, I find it just as capable as Vista64.

What I wish is that Microsoft had only released Vista 64. I wish they would do that with Windows 7. I think every processor sold today is x64, be it Intel, AMD, or even Via! 32bit needs to be removed completely.

RE: Free!?
By Master Kenobi on 5/13/2009 6:37:00 AM , Rating: 2
All but the 2 most power hungry Atom processors are 32-bit only. Windows 7 as a 64-bit only flavor would kill the netbook market.

Great Idea!
By lewislink on 5/12/2009 3:49:25 PM , Rating: 2
I think it's an excellent idea. I believe MS should do this. They could still make most of their money off of the people who don't have Vista Ultimate.

I'm all for it!

RE: Great Idea!
By mikefarinha on 5/12/2009 4:01:20 PM , Rating: 5
I think Apple should sell a $600 laptop. This will buy goodwill for Apple.

I think Adobe should sell Photoshop for $99. This will buy goodwill for Adobe.

I think the government should give me free health care. This will buy me goodwill towards the Democratic party.

I think I shouldn't have to work to support my self nor my family, the government should provide all this. This will buy me goodwill towards supporting King Obama.

RE: Great Idea!
By mcnabney on 5/12/09, Rating: 0
RE: Great Idea!
By SavagePotato on 5/12/2009 5:09:43 PM , Rating: 5
Having to buy used hardware to get a notebook for 600 dollars because new hardware is 3x more than it is worth, and the manufacturer denies the possibility of any competition in hardware through aggressive legal action...

That doesn't sound like screwing your customers at all, does it? How about charging them for product updates? I guess that's kosher too.

RE: Great Idea!
By omnicronx on 5/12/2009 5:28:18 PM , Rating: 2
Only a monopoly can safely screw their customers and expect to keep them...
You are assuming a large percentage of these Ultimate users knew they were suppose to get exclusive content in the first place. Personally I had no idea, i was buying it for particular features, not what they promised to deliver. Do you really think a lot of people bought Ultimate because of these extras?

RE: Great Idea!
By lewislink on 5/12/2009 5:55:24 PM , Rating: 2
All I can say is I'm for the idea simply because people who don't have Vista Ultimate wouldn't get 7 free and are against it only for that reason.

MS Rah-Rah Clube
By Chama Teddy on 5/12/09, Rating: 0
RE: MS Rah-Rah Clube
By Sazar on 5/12/2009 5:16:09 PM , Rating: 2
I would have to disagree with you here good sir.

Drivers are not the sole domain of Microsoft and therefore Microsoft cannot be held liable for the inability of a 3'rd party vendor (let's say, Nvidia) for shoddy drivers that cause bsod after bsod, even to this day (and bsod's also occur on Windows 7 due to the drivers).

If Microsoft's programs are not working correctly than yes, you are completely correct, however they do work, most of the time.

With regards to Linux, maybe when there is a free, linux based operating system that doesn't require a lot of work to even set the right resolution on your system right off the bat, we may have a conversation. Until then, the market-share Linux has developed over the years will continue to hover around the same percentage. OSX is growing much faster than Linux and Windows is still a statistically dominant 91% or so.

RE: MS Rah-Rah Clube
By SavagePotato on 5/12/2009 5:36:51 PM , Rating: 2
The linux driver model is as follows.

Pray someone has made a driver for your device.

Beg forums of linux geeks to make a driver for you.

Give up load Windows.

RE: MS Rah-Rah Clube
By SteelyKen on 5/12/2009 8:28:23 PM , Rating: 2
Loaded Ubuntu 9.04 (700Mb CD) on my second system and everything worked immediately.
Loaded Windows 7 RC (2.35Gb DVD) on same system and had no drivers for LAN, Audio or Video.
I won't say Ubuntu is superior to Windows 7, but its out-of-the box installation experience sure is refreshing.

RE: MS Rah-Rah Clube
By aj28 on 5/13/2009 3:02:44 AM , Rating: 2
To be fair, you're not getting the manufacturer-intended features out of your product though. The video drivers that are bundled? Poor performance with limited configuration options. The audio drivers that are bundled? Poor performance, not to mention impossible to configure. The LAN drivers? A bit more respectable, but not for higher-end managed NIC solutions like some Intel chips. Basically, good for browsing the internet, but not networking.

So yes, Linux is real-real good at being universally compatible, but by being universally compatible you give up a lot of the features that differentiate a $200 X-Fi card from a $10 Realtek chip, so let's not make unfair comparisons here.

RE: MS Rah-Rah Clube
By SavagePotato on 5/12/2009 5:28:52 PM , Rating: 2
The drugs you are taking are awesome.

Downgrade to XP
By Bainne on 5/12/2009 4:45:33 PM , Rating: 2
You are all forgetting the NUMBER 1 addition that made Vista Ultimate worth purchasing over the others...

..You could request a free downgrade to Windows XP :P

So when you finally realized you made a mistake - all hope was not lost :)

That said, I personally have used Vista from day one, and NEVER had an issue with it. People that complain about incompatibility and issue have obviously never used Vista extensively. It is far LESS buggy than XP, has a host of new features that make computing much easier and the driver issues were a result of negligent manufacturers, not Microsoft. Is it really not obvious that manufacturer's of the products were obviously far to lazy and stupid to develop new drivers for an new OS. Completely idiotic.

RE: Downgrade to XP
By SavagePotato on 5/12/2009 5:03:16 PM , Rating: 2
Incorrect, downgrade was available with Vista business which cost far less than ultimate.

RE: Downgrade to XP
By omnicronx on 5/12/2009 5:34:52 PM , Rating: 2
20 dollars less ;) (retail)

RE: Downgrade to XP
By SavagePotato on 5/12/2009 5:47:00 PM , Rating: 1
Not in Canada at launch.

I payed far more for vista ultimate retail than buisness cost at the time.

By Belard on 5/12/2009 4:47:20 PM , Rating: 3
With XP, it was simple - HOME or PROfessional editions, at least at the start.

Vista had horrible naming and of course features on business were missing that could be found on home Premo (Premium).

MS is going in the right direction with Win7 with their feature set (Win 7 Pro has everything that Win7 Home-Premo has) and a little more effort by Microsoft can make the work and effort from everyone else a lot simpler.

TWEAK the names a bit more PLEASE!

We don't really need "Home Basic" and "Home Premium" - its confusing and tech support as well as developers has to specifiy the requirements or what the user has.

It's VERY VERY simple Microsoft:

Current name = New Recommended Name (if required)

Starter = Starter (Limit market version)
Home Basic = Basic (Less eye candy and bloat for NetPCs)
Home Premium = Home
Business = Professional AKA PRO (MS already did that)
Ultimate = Ultimate

We don't NEED two versions of "home". The box art is simple and we won't get "Which version of home do you have"?

If MS doesn't do this, I suggest that users / market does it for them.

Basic remains OEM only.
HOME, PRO & Ult. are OEM & Retail only
(Retail includes "upgrade" built in - make our lives easier and store shelves less crowded). Also MS, you're manufacturing goes down without making "upgrade" packs that you have to track (as well as your resellers) or a customer picks up the wrong box.

Home should be $100 at the most, retail version.
Pro at $200 at the most (I'd prefer $150)... not as expensive as $250 retail, a bit more than $150 OEM.

By mikefarinha on 5/12/2009 6:06:40 PM , Rating: 2
Just an FYI.

Home Basic has now been relegated to 3rd world countries. You will not be able to purchase Windows 7 Home in a developed country.

Windows 7 Starter will not be sold at retail, it will only be available pre-installed on a few low end PCs.

Windows 7 Home Premium will be available in the retail channel.

Windows 7 Professional will be available in the retail channel and for businesses.

Windows 7 Ultimate will be a specialty item that will be outside of the mainstream. Perhaps you'll find it at NewEgg but probably not at BestBuy or Fry's.

Windows 7 Enterprise will only be for businesses with license agreements.

So for 95% of consumers they will only ever see two versions of Windows 7. Home Premium and Professional.

For people with a little bit of knowledge and determination they'll be able to find Windows 7 Starter and Ultimate.

By Belard on 5/13/2009 9:08:31 AM , Rating: 2
I am aware of the various versions.

But Win7 Basic may end up on a netbook.

It doesn't make sense for starter to change spots with Baic. Starter was for 3rd world countries and allowed a limited number of apps to run at the same time and on low res. Many netbooks are more powerful than that.

Be that as it may.

There is still no reason to have "home basic" and "Home Premium", especially if the customers are not going to SEE two versions. Why bother adding "Premium" if there is no "regular" to compare it with. Its about as stupid as going into fast food joint and their drinks sizes are MED / Large / Ultimate - Where the frack is the small?

I'm one of the suckers...
By Fox5 on 5/12/2009 4:07:37 PM , Rating: 2
I bought Vista Ultimate back in the day. The ultimate extras turned out to be worthless (even more so than the free power packs microsoft used to give for XP) and any attempts microsoft made at adding value to vista ultimate were half-assed. The ultimate extras don't work properly (bugs galore), are plain worthless, or have superior free alternatives available.
If Remote Desktop Connection were made part of Home Premium (how else am I supposed to manage my media center remotely? well, vnc but I didn't know about that at the time and it's inferior), I'd never have bought Ultimate. Luckily I bought the upgrade version so it wasn't that much of a premium price.
Still though, I'll never buy another Microsoft product again. Ubuntu has made leaps and bounds and is sufficient for most of my use at this point, and as long as they don't abandon Vista as a gaming OS, it can last me quite some time I'd think.

RE: I'm one of the suckers...
By ZachDontScare on 5/12/2009 5:24:44 PM , Rating: 2
You completely contradict yourself. You say the extras in Ultimate werent worth it, but apparently having access to Remote Desktop is a feature you thought was worth more to you than the increase in price. And I'd agree - RDP is a much better experience than VNC. When you factor in the time Remote Desktop can save you over the life of a PC, the actual additional cost of 'ultimate' is pretty low.

I'd certainly prefer it if Remote Desktop was included in lower end versions. But then, its also functionality thats of interest to a limited set of people, and has to be supported by MS. It makes sense to put that sort of thing in a higher end package.

RE: I'm one of the suckers...
By Blackened144 on 5/13/2009 10:56:16 AM , Rating: 2
Youre confusing the features found in Vista Ultimate with the "Ultimate Extras" feature in Vista Ultimate. When Ultimate was announced Microsoft claimed they would be making scores of "Ultimate Extra" applications that would only be available to users of Vista Ultimate. There are people who bought Vista Ultimate expecting to get all of these "cutting-edge" games, apps, and features. Of course though in the end the only "Extras" that were released are Dreamscene, BitLocker, Texas Hold'Em, and Tinker.

Another Analyst says..
By GreenEnvt on 5/12/2009 3:59:03 PM , Rating: 5
.. That Microsoft should donate $1 Million to each of it's customers, just for fun.

Put that as a new headline please. I've decided I am now an "analyst" and my opinion should be displayed as front page news on technology sites.

I'll come up with some new opinions every so often.

The Ultimate Extra
By epobirs on 5/12/2009 3:59:31 PM , Rating: 2
Here is a way to go about it that would save face and make customers happy. Treat a Windows 7 upgrade as an Ultimate Extra for existing Vista Ultimate purchasers.

The difference is purely semantic but would make for great PR.

BTW, has anyone gotten DreamScene running on Win7?

RE: The Ultimate Extra
By anonymo on 5/13/2009 10:29:57 AM , Rating: 2
Considering I see Windows 7 as just a big patch/fix for Vista I fully hope MS does the right thing and offers a free update to 7 via MS update/extras for Ultimate owners.

I personally bought my new laptop last year with Vista Ultimate under the impression that MS would actually support the OS as their flagship. Yet instead they just kill it and expect me to shell out another $200 for what is arguably just an update that should be offered to Vista owners anyways? It's a complete slap in the face.

Either way I intend on getting Windows 7 for "free"

This makes me wish...
By FranksAndBeans on 5/12/2009 4:44:45 PM , Rating: 2
This makes me wish that there was a "not worth reading" tag for articles.

RE: This makes me wish...
By Makaveli on 5/12/2009 7:32:09 PM , Rating: 2
It makes me wish the XP users that are holding out would get with the times and STFU.

Windows 7 is based on Vista and that is the direction we are going. If you don't like it get out of the fast lane, and stick to the passing lane with all the grannies.

One thing I hate more than liars is whiners!

Half the clueless public has jumped on the Vista hate bandwagon, you can go into any local WorseBuy and ask any customer. They will tell you they hate vista but don't know why its very amusing.

I've been using windows since 3.11 and this is how its been and always will be.

Reminds me of a friend I had that went through a horrible breakup with his ex, five years later he is still crying about it.Time to move on with your life!

By Chiisuchianu on 5/12/2009 4:49:31 PM , Rating: 2
Would be nice. Or at least a discount.

RE: lp
By jpeterson on 5/12/2009 5:15:19 PM , Rating: 2
Why not just pirate Windows 7 (if you haven't already)? It would be infinitely easier to justify than Microsoft ever rationalizing giving anything away for free. And it would work fine too.

windows 7
By vcolon on 5/12/2009 11:50:52 PM , Rating: 2
just my 2 cents.
Not free windows 7, but a smaller upgrade cost to vista ultimate users.

RE: windows 7
By Russell on 5/13/2009 3:56:29 AM , Rating: 2
Or perhaps to Vista users, period. Not the OEM users who were forced into it, but those of us who actually BOUGHT the boxed retail software despite all the negative reviews and reputation.

Good one
By redacted on 5/13/2009 2:04:05 AM , Rating: 2
M$ showing good will? That will be the day. They don't call it the evil, money grubbing company for nothing.

RE: Good one
By juve on 5/20/2009 12:09:02 AM , Rating: 2
M$ on the right direction for a successful Windows 7 & relatively satisfied users.

By mikefarinha on 5/12/2009 3:55:20 PM , Rating: 2
The more I read from ' industry analysts ' the more they seem like ' industry pundits .' They all have some sort of glaringly obvious bias.

Just the other day my boss sent out an email with a link to a computerworld article in which some analyst was claiming WinXP mode in Windows 7 was going to be a major headache... it would be like supporting two OSes per each computer.

This analyst obviously had never used Windows XP mode or read about it's implementation. But now my boss thinks that WindowsXP mode is some sort of heinous piece of technology.

By grandpope on 5/12/2009 4:30:39 PM , Rating: 2
Analysts are basically a PITA... always spouting some nonsense idea that the media picks up as breaking news.

Different Upgrade Levels
By Justin Time on 5/12/2009 9:29:44 PM , Rating: 2
Upgrades are not where MS are going to make the bulk of their sales anyway, open licensing and new sales are where it's at, so they can afford to use any decision to take a hit on upgrade pricing, as a form of PR.

A more "face saving" approach would be to implement version upgrade pricing instead of a flat-fee upgrade.

Upgrade from XP or earlier == Full Upgrade Price
Upgrade from VISTA == 60% Upgrade Price (or whatever).

Not only would that act as a form of PR for Vista users, but it's in-line with how most applications upgrades are priced.

By AlmostExAMD on 5/13/2009 8:09:09 AM , Rating: 2
I am an Ultimate Vista user and do feel cheated, Texas hold 'em I mean come on Microsoft a few pissy games and you call that Ultimate, I won't be falling for Windows 7 hype, The idea is great but unlikely.
I would accept Win 7 Ultimate at half price though.
Take my Vista down to store and hand over in return for full retail boxed Win 7 Ultimate 64 at half price!
Ultimate users need to get something back whatever that may be,Otherwise I'll just stick with current OS regardless of how good Win 7 is.

SO Not Gonna Happen...
By cubdukat on 5/13/2009 10:39:35 AM , Rating: 2
'Nuff Said...

Free chicken and windows7
By TheMissingLink on 5/13/2009 11:34:14 AM , Rating: 2
Microsoft should give windows 7 free to any sucker who spent $$$ on vista regardless of version.Vista is a piece of junk.As for windows7,the beta version worked better than RC.Only microsot can release OS's that get worse as the testing moves forward

Matthew Lesko LOL!!
By flurazepam on 5/13/2009 12:17:42 PM , Rating: 2
For those who can recall ol' Lesko!!

Cheapest upgrade from MS
By Integral9 on 5/14/2009 10:17:41 AM , Rating: 2
Was the upgrade from DOS 6.2 to DOS 6.22. It cost me $5 at Egghead. The only appreciable difference to me was the addition of commas to file and volume sizes. Kinda pissed me off when I realized I had paid $5 for commas. I laughed when the sales rep said it would be the cheapest upgrade from MS ever... So far, he was right.

Windows 7 is SP2 of Vista
By sleepeeg3 on 5/19/2009 12:37:33 AM , Rating: 2
Either give everyone with Vista a free upgrade to "Windows 7" aka Windows 6.1 or extend support past 2012. Win7 is just MS sucking people into a rebranded Vista. All the features they originally promised have been dropped. Trimmed OS? Nope. MS confessed - same core.

So what's left? Well they removed the classic start menu and turned the quick launch into one confusing taskbar. Oh and they allow XP to run virtually, in anticipation of problems. SSD performance is also slightly improved.

Dvorak has it right:,2817,2346877,

"Nowadays you can buy a CPU cheaper than the CPU fan." -- Unnamed AMD executive
Related Articles

Most Popular ArticlesAre you ready for this ? HyperDrive Aircraft
September 24, 2016, 9:29 AM
Leaked – Samsung S8 is a Dream and a Dream 2
September 25, 2016, 8:00 AM
Inspiron Laptops & 2-in-1 PCs
September 25, 2016, 9:00 AM
Snapchat’s New Sunglasses are a Spectacle – No Pun Intended
September 24, 2016, 9:02 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki