backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 125 comment(s) - last by johnsonx.. on Mar 6 at 2:35 PM
Microsoft cuts Vista prices just a year after its consumer launch

Windows Vista has received a sour reputation in the year it has been on the market. Some users of complained about driver incompatibility and performance issues -- among other things -- compared to the venerable Windows XP operating system the came before it. Microsoft addressed a number of these issues with Service Pack 1, but many consumers and businesses are still sticking with Windows XP.

Microsoft is looking to give customers more incentive to upgrade to Windows Vista by cutting the price on some versions of the operating system. Although upgrade versions account for less than 10% of Vista licenses, two upgrade editions will see price cuts.

The range-topping Windows Vista Ultimate (full) will fall from $399 to $319. Windows Vista Ultimate (upgrade) drops to $219 from $259. Finally, Windows Vista Home Premium (upgrade) had its price cut from $159 to $129.

"We anticipate these changed will provide greater opportunities ... to sell more stand-alone copies of Windows," said Microsoft corporate VP Brad Brooks.

Microsoft says that it sold over 100 million Vista licenses since its consumer launch in late January 2007. Hopefully for Microsoft, this latest price cut will help improve Vista adoption.

However, there may be one obstacle in the way that will still stop consumers from making the switch: Windows XP SP3.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
No thanks.
By 67STANG on 2/29/2008 10:40:49 AM , Rating: 2
I'll wait till Vista is <$200 and on SP2.... I'm quite content with my XP SP3 installation right now. Can't beat the speed.




RE: No thanks.
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 2/29/2008 10:43:04 AM , Rating: 5
Well if your hardware exceeds XP's ability to handle it, then Vista x64 is your only option. (XP 64 was a disaster)


RE: No thanks.
By jadeskye on 2/29/08, Rating: 0
RE: No thanks.
By MMilitia on 2/29/2008 11:09:40 AM , Rating: 4
OMG he must be some kind of undercover Microsoft marketer amiright?

I mean no one else could possibly find anything good to say about a fairly decent functional OS, could they?


RE: No thanks.
By aharris on 2/29/08, Rating: -1
RE: No thanks.
By Aikouka on 2/29/2008 11:44:20 AM , Rating: 5
Even when Vista first came out, the only issues I had with it were not caused by Microsoft but by nVidia. Their driver support was horrid in the beginning and is still quite buggy.

Are you sure comparing the changes in OSX: Leopard to Vista is even fair? That'd be like Comparing the differences between Windows XP and Windows XP SP2 to the differences between OS9 and OSX. Essentially, whether or not you wish to agree, Vista has substantial underlying code changes compared to XP and comparing that to an OS upgrade that provides new apps and some patches is just not right.


RE: No thanks.
By aharris on 2/29/08, Rating: -1
RE: No thanks.
By BladeVenom on 2/29/2008 4:17:51 PM , Rating: 5
Apple is not doing a better job when their operating system won't work with 97% of computers. When Apple can make an operating system that can run on my hardware then I'll buy it.


RE: No thanks.
By theapparition on 2/29/2008 6:39:18 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Apple does a better job on their software, period. You DO NOT have to sit back and accept what Microsoft Inc decides to give you.

So your content to sit back and take what Apple gives you?

WTF are you smoking?

First off, Apple controls all hardware and drivers, so they have a level of control that Microsoft will never have. Some see that as an advantage. But the flip side is you are forced into the hardware that Apple provides support for. Want one of those new Graphics cards.......sorry, not supported. Plus, you have to pay a premium for Apple hardware. Plus, there's plenty of software that doesn't run on OSX.

Lastly, we have the Apple mindset. Apple users are used to buying new hardware when new OS's come out. They are used to being forced to running older software 1/3 the speed since it's now running in emulation mode, if it even runs at all. Yet no matter how many times they are shafted, they'll still look down on PC's.


RE: No thanks.
By sphyder on 2/29/2008 11:48:31 AM , Rating: 5
It is not a fair comparison between an Apple OS and a Microsoft OS. On the Apple side, they know exactly what hardware is being used because they control it. On the Microsoft side, they have to deal with hundreds of thousands of 3rd party parts and drivers. It is also an issue of installer/market base. When you look at the big picture you can see that there is no comparison at all. It's like comparing a rubix(spelling?) cube to a tic-tac-toe puzzle.


RE: No thanks.
By retrospooty on 2/29/2008 12:06:40 PM , Rating: 3
"You obviously haven't tried Leopard. Apple got 90% of theirs right the first time."

I hate to break this to you, but Apples latest totally new OS was OSX, several years ago, and it was a nightmare, especially for early adopters. Since then, the incremental releases 10.1,10.2,10.3,10.4,and now Leopard 10.5 are not really all new OS's like the OS9 to OSX or XP to Vista was.

Just because Apple add a few features and charges money to go from 10.4 to 10.5 doesnt make it a whole new OS. Lets see OS11


RE: No thanks.
By jla0 on 2/29/08, Rating: 0
RE: No thanks.
By retrospooty on 2/29/2008 2:23:11 PM , Rating: 3
apparently I am the one that needs to explain this AGAIN... using your chart, edited for accuracy

Windows NT 3.0 > Windows NT 4.0 > Windows 2000 > Windows XP > Windows Vista

MacOS X 6 > MacOS X 7 > MacOS X 8 > MacOS X 9 > MacOS X 10.xx

OSX's point releases (10.4 to 10.5) is more equivalent of a service pack, as in WinXP SP1 to SP2

Get it?


RE: No thanks.
By aharris on 2/29/08, Rating: -1
RE: No thanks.
By retrospooty on 2/29/2008 3:06:34 PM , Rating: 3
Agreed, Apples point releases are adding a good deal more than your average MS service pack, but to say that XP to Vista should have been as easy as 10.4 to 10.5 is rediculous. Vista add a ton of new functionality and security levels, granted MS did a piss poor job at it.


RE: No thanks.
By hiscross on 3/1/2008 9:00:35 AM , Rating: 1
I've been a Vista user since 2006. It runs on Mac hardware. I can say that I like it over XP because of the added functionality it provides. With XP I feel like I'm still in the mid-90's (I use XP at work). Vista provides me some of MaxOS X 10.3 features that I have come to rely on. I'm not sure why Vista is getting a bad rap, but I can say it maybe Microsoft failure to push the industry in standardize PC hardware. Apple controls it's hardware because it makes it's hardware. It uses standard Open Source standards (I'm a developer so I know what's inside). Microsoft can easily work with the hardware people to accomplish the same thing, but have choose to make a buck over leadership. So be it. What I find assuming more than anything is how Microsoft users refuse to demand better out of Microsoft. I can tell you from experience Mac and Linux users demand better and let their respective OS suppliers know it. That said, I will sign-off on this note, nobody is forcing you to buy any product, that is your choice (good or bad). I ask people to stop the hate post that degrades a group of people on their buy choices.


RE: No thanks.
By aharris on 2/29/08, Rating: 0
RE: No thanks.
By retrospooty on 2/29/2008 2:41:21 PM , Rating: 3
I am not saying MS doesnt have its bad points, or that Apple doesn't have its good points... the fact is, both have both, and you should buy what suits you, and what you are comfortable/familiar with.

However, OS9 to OSX was a major upgrade, and did have major problems, you cant deny that... In fact the whole Mac community was up in arms about compatibility issues and many other bugs. 10.3 to 10.4 is an incremental update, as is the move to 10.5, even if new features are added. The point releases are more in line with a service pack on the MS side. XP to Vista is a new OS... Yes, it may be based on the same core, but it is a new OS none the less.