backtop

Print 111 comment(s) - last by matt0401.. on Jul 2 at 10:59 AM

Which price will consumers prove more sensitive to -- the OS price (advantage Apple) or the hardware price (advantage Microsoft)? (The hardware price is generally the larger difference.)
Analyst lavishes both praise and criticism on Microsoft

Microsoft announced its Windows 7 pricing yesterday, and today began accepting preorders for the new OS.  The preorder program in the U.S. offers a cheaper OS than Vista or XP, with the Home Premium upgrade only costing $49.99.  Yet some analysts are looking at the glass half empty and have gone on the record to publicly reprove Microsoft.

Stephen Baker, Vice President of Industry Analysis for The NPD Group wrote a blog post on Thursday analyzing the release of Windows 7 information.  He began with some words of praise for Microsoft, exalting, "A+ for timing pricing, and for ensuring that this will be the smoothest transition within the industry of any Windows OS upgrade yet."

Then he shifted gears, though, and turned to criticism.  He chidingly remarked that to praise Windows 7 for being more affordable than Windows Vista would be "damning with faint praise".  The key problem, he argues, is that after the two week pre-order program (or when supplies run out), the base price of the OS jumps to $119.99 for a Home Premium upgrade in the U.S.

He remarks, "No discussion about Microsoft ever leaves everyone happy.  In this case I am mightily disappointed in a couple of aspects of Microsoft's upgrade plans for non-PC buyers. First, is the pricing on the Windows 7 home Premium upgrade. Besides the fact that $119 is a price point that fits nowhere in these economic times, it is still way too much for the software."

Mr. Baker also was less than a fan of the fact that Microsoft did not announce whether it would be offering multiple licenses per purchase, or presumably a signle license.  He states, "In a world (at least in the U.S.) where most opens are moving into a multiple PC environment, it would enhance the consumer home experience if they could upgrade all their home PCs at a single low price with a single boxed purchase.  Although I don't think it is exactly equivalent, Apple's Snow Leopard pricing model ($29 for a one user license and $49 for a five user license) is much more appropriate to driving adoption and raising customer satisfaction levels. This is a direction I would have much preferred to see Microsoft head into."

In the end, whether you agree or disagree with Mr. Baker, even the strongest Microsoft proponents must concede that Windows 7 is obviously pricier than Apple's Snow Leopard -- which weighs in at $29.99 compared to Windows 7's $119.99 October base price (or $49.99 preorder).  If Apple allowed an open market on hardware, this might indeed be damning to Microsoft, but as the situation stands Apple's hardware (particularly its desktops) generally remains much pricier.

While Apple has its allures -- its lower OS price point, slim form factors, light weight laptops, multiboot, and long battery life -- will that be enough to steal away Microsoft customers and convince them to buy Apple's pricey products?  Or will Microsoft's lower hardware prices and strong base user appeal with its Direct X gaming libraries, free antivirus software, strong file system, virtualization, and more convince users to overlook the OS sticker and go PC?

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
more misinformed opinions
By invidious on 6/26/2009 9:23:52 AM , Rating: 2
Apple's snow is a service pack's worth of content, not a new OS. You are just buying the same thing you already have with a few small tweaks. win7 is a completely new OS, and MS releases service packs for free. I can assure you if they charge $30 for win7 sp1 the public would cry bloody murder.

This is not to say that I think win7 pricing is reasonable, just that comparing it to snow's pricing is moronic.




RE: more misinformed opinions
By headbox on 6/26/09, Rating: 0
RE: more misinformed opinions
By invidious on 6/26/2009 9:46:39 AM , Rating: 3
thanks for posting a response that has nothing to do with my comment. I would rather be a fanboy than a worthless troll.


RE: more misinformed opinions
By Mitch101 on 6/26/2009 12:53:51 PM , Rating: 2
Cant we all just get along? :(

Like ATI forced NVIDIA with lower prices on video cards I am instead going to welcome our Apple competitors for allowing us to get Windows 7 on the cheap.


RE: more misinformed opinions
By wrekd on 6/26/2009 1:18:55 PM , Rating: 5
Well, a real competitor would allow you to install on any system, not just the ones with apple emblems.


By Zaphod Beeblebrox on 6/26/2009 1:34:01 PM , Rating: 2
Tru dat!


RE: more misinformed opinions
By superflex on 6/26/2009 5:23:01 PM , Rating: 1
Word!


RE: more misinformed opinions
By Tamale on 6/29/2009 9:12:47 AM , Rating: 2
give this man a 6


RE: more misinformed opinions
By HaB1971 on 6/26/2009 9:59:22 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
Windows fanbois are the ultimate human/sheep hybrids


Wow, just wow, the sheer logic in your closing rant makes me think you believe that irony is an app you can download from iTunes.

Nobody wins in a MS vs. Apple argument as it is an exercise in pointlessness.

I will say Win 7 is too pricey for me to just go out on a whim and replace my currently functioning OS. Besides until SP1 and its issues are resolved (going on history) i'll wait until then.


RE: more misinformed opinions
By phattyboombatty on 6/26/2009 11:40:53 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
Besides until SP1 and its issues are resolved (going on history) i'll wait until then.

I have used both Windows 7 beta and Windows 7 RC almost exclusively for the past six months and I can tell you that I've had zero issues with the OS. By far, this is the most polished and stable OS I have ever encountered at this stage in its life cycle.


RE: more misinformed opinions
By wempa on 6/26/2009 12:39:43 PM , Rating: 1
I haven't used it yet, but I can see why this would be. I think of Windows 7 more as an upgrade on Vista since the adoption of that was pretty bad. I'll most likely get it from MSDN and upgrade once it's officially released.


RE: more misinformed opinions
By HaB1971 on 6/26/2009 12:53:19 PM , Rating: 2
I'm sure it is perfectly fine for you and alot of users who have been testing and using it for some time.

But with the thousands of software and hardware permutations out there i'd like to give the program time to mature before adopting.

For example I am hoping that Punkbuster issues with Win 7 RC1 are resolved at launch of the full product. Though the fault for that is at EvenBalance's feet and not Microsoft's


RE: more misinformed opinions
By rippleyaliens on 6/26/2009 11:39:33 PM , Rating: 1
Here is the killer.. Win7 Will work.. Pretty much nuff said.. Apple well, if i have to buy a new computer just to run the latests apple software, i would go broke fast.. Win 7 works on lowly p3's up to latest greatest.. Vista ROCKED, except 1 thing, It took 3rd party vendors forever to catch up with drivers... And my friends, Drivers for your stuff, makes/breaks systems.. With $300 systems comming with dual core, >200gb hard drives, 2gb ram, there is no reason to do this thing called grow...
Yes Vista is a resource hog, (if ya running a p4), but P4 was 4 years ago, now ya can get a quad core system for under 500, with 4gb ram,, what else is needed???? Win7 multi tasks MUCH smoother than vista, and destroys XP.. Im loving it.. AND ALSO!!!!!

Even if the OS was $300 NEW.. if it lasts just 3 years, that is 100 per year, and that is for ultimate version.. 100 a year, less than 10 per month, IE People pay more to play WOW than what it would cost for this..

BUT!!! now with new MS office comming , ugggg, now i hate paying >400 for a office package every 3 years.. that is the one getting old..


RE: more misinformed opinions
By RubberJohnny on 6/28/2009 9:53:53 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I am hoping that Punkbuster issues with Win 7 RC1 are resolved at launch of the full product

Its not really that hard to manually download pbsetup.exe choose your game and hit update. It fixed all my punkbuster problems with win7, not exactly a deal breaker even if it remains in RTM.


By Jabroney701020 on 6/27/2009 1:39:33 PM , Rating: 2
The only thing I've seen so far is a lack of drivers for older wireless D-link products and, I chuckle as I type this, Apple Safari has crashed 5 or so times over the past 4 months. Everything else seems to be rock solid so far. The blending of so much ease-of-use with so much functionality is very refreshing and I can't say enough about the stability. Even though I installed Win7 on a partition I don't even bother with WinXP anymore.


RE: more misinformed opinions
By Boze on 6/26/2009 5:43:22 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Wow, just wow, the sheer logic in your closing rant makes me think you believe that irony is an app you can download from iTunes.

Nobody wins in a MS vs. Apple argument as it is an exercise in pointlessness.
I will say Win 7 is too pricey for me to just go out on a whim and replace my currently functioning OS. Besides until SP1 and its issues are resolved (going on history) i'll wait until then.


Actually the Microsoft people win:

Larger amount of available programs
Larger amount of available hardware
Lower cost of entry

That's just starting at readily available, widely-known things.

Five to eight years ago, I would have argued that a Mac is probably the ideal computer for a graphics professional, some students, and most lazy people who can't be bothered to ever read manuals. Nowadays though, Windows 7 is faster, lighter, more secure, and more stable than even Windows Vista SP2. Its arguably easier to use than Windows XP and Vista. It supports nearly all XP programs through a compatibility mode.

I can't think of one good single factual reason to own a Mac over a Windows-based machine.


RE: more misinformed opinions
By aj28 on 6/26/09, Rating: -1
RE: more misinformed opinions
By Boze on 6/26/2009 11:35:51 PM , Rating: 2
I can't think of one single thing you can do on Mac OS X on a Mac machine that you can't do the equivalent of on a Windows-based machine with equal or greater quality.

I'm not bitter, nor stubborn, nor jealous. If you say, "The Mac makes me feel good as a person, because its exclusive and expensive." then I can't argue with you, that's not a statement of fact, that's your opinion. If you say, "Adobe Photoshop CS4 is faster on a $2500 Mac than a $2500 Windows machine." that is a statement of fact, and you'd be wrong, because you can build a much more powerful Windows machine for $2500 than you can buy a Mac for $2500.

And why you think I'm stupid is beyond me, I haven't said anything that isn't true. I'm not interesting in arguing opinions or feelings, I'm interested in arguing facts. And the fact is, everything you can do on Mac OS X you can do on Windows XP, Vista, or 7, usually cheaper and better, but always for the same price.

I also find it interesting you want to try to insult me because I hurt your feelbads about your feel good computer. I don't want or need a computer to make me feel good about myself, or make me feel better than other people. Its a machine. A hunk of metal and plastic. Its job it to enhance my productivity and entertain me. Its not a 300 foot megayacht. Its not a Ferrari F430. Its not Megan Fox on my arm. Its a damn computer.


RE: more misinformed opinions
By Alexstarfire on 6/27/2009 5:12:25 PM , Rating: 2
You shouldn't feed the trolls man. People like this guy and pirks don't know what facts are, save for the one about battery life. They come in with insults, opinions, and wild accusations to "argue" with. Only thing I'd get a Mac for is if I absolutely needed the longest battery life in a laptop for whatever reason. I don't ATM, and likely never will, so owning a Mac for me isn't really an option.

I mean, heaven forbid Microsoft "retaliate" after the decade or so of Mac ads that take nothing but pot shots at Microsoft. Hell, Microsoft's ads are probably cheaper than Mac ads as well since they don't have to pay the likes of Justin Long. I think he's a hilarious actor BTW, not that it matters for the ads of course.


RE: more misinformed opinions
By Boze on 6/27/2009 9:26:07 PM , Rating: 2
Well Alex, the great thing about DailyTech is that this is one of the few places where the trolls have to take responsibility for their comments by being voted down.

On an aside, the issue of battery life has always confused me because, comparatively speaking, if you really need a lot of battery life, why not just purchase a second or third battery for your machine? I have an ASUS A8Js I bought a long time ago when I was being deployed to the Middle East so I could play the games my brother would send me. It would get about 2 hours of battery life running at max performance with an intensive game. Instead of being frustrated by the battery life, I picked up two OEM batteries for $55 each. It really wasn't a pain to swap them in and out every 2 hours, and the batteries are actually small enough that I could fit about 4 of them side by side in my laptop bag if needs be.

I admit, its a nice thing to have a single battery that lasts for 8 hours, but I question that usage... if you were watching a DVD or BluRay movie, or playing Call of Duty 4 (is that out for Mac? I don't keep up with Mac games), would it still have an 8 hour battery life?

People get quite uppity about their laptop's battery life, but I have discovered that the 7 or 8 hours is while running the machine conservatively. Show me a computer that gets 8 hours battery life while playing a new, computationally intensive game at max settings, or will allow me to watch a BluRay movie with the screen at max brightness, and I'll be impressed. Maybe my expectations are a little unrealistic though.


RE: more misinformed opinions
By PitViper007 on 6/30/2009 12:58:16 PM , Rating: 2
While I agree with you that you could just buy more batteries, and really, it's not a bad idea, many people just don't want to lug them around. That's why people buy the lightweight laptops, so they can carry them easier. Well, one reason anyway. So being able to squeeze a little more run time out of the one battery you have becomes much more important.


RE: more misinformed opinions
By Ristogod on 6/26/2009 10:07:49 AM , Rating: 5
This goes for all companies, not just Microsoft.

Microsoft wrote the developed the software. It's their product. They have the right to charge whatever they want. What prices they set will play a role in how well it sells. It's basic free market economics.

If you don't like their pricing, or are against Microsoft (because that's the trendy popular thing to do), then don't purchase it. If enough people think like you, Microsoft will be forced to drop the price. But I'd be willing to bet that people are going to buy it, thereby justifying the value Microsoft has placed on its product with its chosen price.

You can spout your anti-Microsoft messages and continue troll forums if you feel necessary. But at least develop an intelligent argument to back your opinion. This idea that Microsoft is the evil entity is ludicrous. Apple is no different, and from a consumer standpoint, often times more restrictive.


RE: more misinformed opinions
By wifiwolf on 6/26/2009 11:55:36 AM , Rating: 3
furthermore, windows has a 1 time purchase. Apple has makes OS price lower because consumers need to pay first for the whole machine and updates. That is far more expensive. Just like you said, those are the laws of market ruling those prices. Apple is not comparable, those are sheep laws - like " I've got bigger "gun" than you have".


RE: more misinformed opinions
By ipay on 6/26/2009 9:40:42 AM , Rating: 3
A complete change to a 64bit kernel and OS is not a 'service pack', but everyone else already know this. kthxbye


RE: more misinformed opinions
By JasonMick (blog) on 6/26/2009 9:50:38 AM , Rating: 4
You are somewhat correct -- in 19 years (through the end of this year) Microsoft will have released 7 OS's (including Win 7). If you include Windows 2000, Windows 98 SE, and Windows 3.1 as separate releases that number jumps to 10.

Windows 3: 1990
Windows 95: 1995
Windows 98: 1998
Windows ME: 2000
Windows XP: 2001
Windows Vista: 2006
Windows 7: 2009

Apple meanwhile will have churned out 16 OS's:
Mac OS 7.0: 1991
Mac OS 7.1: 1992
Mac OS 7.5: 1995
Mac OS 8.0: 1997
Mac OS 8.1: 1998
Mac OS 8.5: 1998
Mac OS 9.0: 1999
Mac OS 9.2: 2001
Mac OS 10.0: 1999
Mac OS 10.1: 2001
Mac OS 10.2: 2002
Max OS 10.3: 2003
Mac OS 10.4: 2005
Mac OS 10.5: 2007
Mac OS 10.6: 2009

Focusing on the XP-Vista-Win7 time frame. Apple will have seen 6 releases, while including service packs, Microsoft will have seen 8:
Windows XP
Windows XP SP1
Windows XP SP2
Windows XP SP3
Windows Vista
Windows Vista SP1
Windows Vista SP2
Windows 7

In the end Apple, for better or worse, is marketing Snow Leopard as an OS, not a service pack. And it does feature some major changes (though arguably less than Win7). However, based on the release comparison (6:8), it appears that it is slightly more than a MS service pack, but certainly less than a full MS release (6:3).


RE: more misinformed opinions
By nordicpc on 6/26/2009 9:59:38 AM , Rating: 3
You missed all of the NT's in that 19 year cycle :p

Seriously though, I see this as the following analogy:

Windows 2000 : Windows XP :: Windows Vista : Windows 7

XP was little more than a facelift of 2000, the core stayed the same while the overlying features were updated, and new ones were added. Windows 7 is similar, with the new taskbar and UI improvements, Libraries, support for TRIM in SSDs, and much more, Windows 7 is no service pack, and is worth what MS is charging.

I personally think that either Snow Leopard is undervalued as an attempt to get more people to throw out their PPC Macs, or we're in for a big let down when it launches.


RE: more misinformed opinions
By Korvon on 6/26/2009 11:43:05 AM , Rating: 3
I think he was going for the Retail releases. All the NT platforms up until XP was meant for the Business sector, and not designed for home use.


RE: more misinformed opinions
By 9nails on 6/26/2009 11:55:41 AM , Rating: 2
I concur. Since we're not making distinctions to Apple Server products vs. Microsoft Server products, the information presented above is correct.


RE: more misinformed opinions
By Hyperion1400 on 6/30/2009 2:29:15 AM , Rating: 2
Apple has server products?


RE: more misinformed opinions
By PitViper007 on 6/30/2009 1:05:31 PM , Rating: 2
Thanks. That made my day. <GRINS>


RE: more misinformed opinions
By Chernobyl68 on 6/26/2009 11:44:28 AM , Rating: 3
Also Windows 3.1.1 and Windows XP Media Center Edition.


RE: more misinformed opinions
By iFX on 6/26/2009 11:54:56 AM , Rating: 3
Of course he did, because he has no idea what's hes talking about.


RE: more misinformed opinions
By androticus on 6/29/2009 6:53:19 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
XP was little more than a facelift of 2000, the core stayed the same while the overlying features were updated, and new ones were added.


Just totally not true -- XP added all kinds of code and modality to enable tons of 95-line software to run on the NT base; and the OS itself got a fair number of major upgrades, such as brand new Registry code, the new (and welcome!) system snapshots, the Terminal Services integration that enabled native Remote Desktop and user switching, etc.


RE: more misinformed opinions
By jrch2k8 on 6/26/09, Rating: -1
RE: more misinformed opinions
By frobizzle on 6/26/2009 10:59:49 AM , Rating: 2
Looks Pirks has a new handle!


RE: more misinformed opinions
By Alexstarfire on 6/26/2009 2:36:55 PM , Rating: 1
Even so, it's mostly true. Win 7 doesn't add many new features but is set to fix a lot of the problems that Vista has/had. Anyone who's read even a little bit about Win 7 should know this.


RE: more misinformed opinions
By Pirks on 6/26/09, Rating: 0
RE: more misinformed opinions
By Tsuwamono on 6/26/09, Rating: 0
RE: more misinformed opinions
By Pirks on 6/26/09, Rating: -1
RE: more misinformed opinions
By Tsuwamono on 6/26/2009 9:02:36 PM , Rating: 1
Well you beat me to it. I don't think I'll ever pay for an MS release. That is unless there is serious competition in the OS market from Linux distro and the MS release is actually better for the same or lower price.

Until then Ill keep my free linux distros and use XP for my gaming needs.


RE: more misinformed opinions
By eddieroolz on 6/26/2009 4:06:14 PM , Rating: 2
Hey jrch plz do tlk in propr speek nd grammr plz. Otheerwaise uu make urself luk liek an ass.


RE: more misinformed opinions
By iFX on 6/26/2009 11:49:02 AM , Rating: 1
What did you expect from Jason Mick?


RE: more misinformed opinions
By Alexstarfire on 6/26/2009 2:39:51 PM , Rating: 1
Something EXACTLY like this. Some sensationalist POS article. Hey, lets forget the fact that Win 7 is going to be priced just like Vista is NOW. It's the same price or cheaper to get Win 7 rather than Vista. We can't all do our research though. Guess Mick forgot to read the pricing article that was released yesterday on DailyTech.


RE: more misinformed opinions
By GotDiesel on 6/26/2009 12:12:31 PM , Rating: 3
buy it ? ...just wait for the cracked version on torrents..


RE: more misinformed opinions
By matt0401 on 7/2/2009 10:59:10 AM , Rating: 2
I torrent 99% of my Movies, TV episodes, Software, PC Games, etc, but I would gladly pay for something as critical as an OS if Microsoft lowered the price low enough. I know MANY people who torrent as much as myself who would as well if they price were lowered substantially. Imagine for example if they lowered the price to $20. I could easily see 10x more people buying instead of torrenting, which would result in more gross sales $ than the price they have now.


RE: more misinformed opinions
By phatboye on 6/26/09, Rating: 0
RE: more misinformed opinions
By eddieroolz on 6/26/2009 4:07:47 PM , Rating: 2
In Nazi Germany, you'd be silenced immediately.

/sarcasm.

Anyways, the general consensus is against your statement. Just search Windows 7 for more info.


RE: more misinformed opinions
By Boze on 6/26/2009 5:58:37 PM , Rating: 1
I sort of agree with you, based on the actual way software version numbers should work.

I really consider Windows 7 to be NT 6.1, and Vista was NT 6.0. Apple feels the say way about Snow Leopard, calling it Mac OS 10.6. Its an incremental update, not a major overhaul, and again, this fits. Moving up to NT 7 (Windows 8 I guess...) and Mac OS XI or 11 - whatever each company chooses to call it - should indicate some sort of dramatic change, such as a new user interface, lots of bug fixes, and/or lots of added functionality.

While I do love Windows 7 to death, I really do, its not really "dramatic" enough to justify a new version number. Do I think its worth $99 for an upgrade? Absolutely I do. Windows 7 is everything Vista should have been and more, but I've also been using Vista for three years now, and I don't think asking for a few dollars is unjustified by Microsoft.

I do think Apple is putting their incremental update out at $29 to further adoption of their products. Its quite a brilliant marketing ploy really. They can claim that owning a Mac is cheaper over time because the OS upgrades are so inexpensive, and I imagine that's exactly the angle they'll take.


RE: more misinformed opinions
By Hyperion1400 on 6/30/2009 2:42:39 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Moving up to NT 7 (Windows 8 I guess...) and Mac OS XI or 11 - whatever each company chooses to call it - should indicate some sort of dramatic change, such as a new user interface, lots of bug fixes, and/or lots of added functionality.


Check, check, annnnnd check...

They have updated the look, feel, and usability of the Aero interface; they have fixed a shit ton of bugs and idiosyncrasies all the way down to the kernal level, and added NATIVE virtualization support(That's a pretty big feature to just tack on if you ask me)!

So..., yeah, W7 is a new OS.


RE: more misinformed opinions
By 91TTZ on 6/26/2009 1:26:40 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Apple's snow is a service pack's worth of content, not a new OS. You are just buying the same thing you already have with a few small tweaks. win7 is a completely new OS, and MS releases service packs for free


Windows 7 is not a completely new OS. It is based on the Vista kernel.

http://windowsteamblog.com/blogs/windowsvista/arch...

Releasing a rebranded OS like Windows 7 was a great way for them to shed the negative image of Vista.

From the Windows development team:

"Contrary to some speculation, Microsoft is not creating a new kernel for Windows 7. Rather, we are refining the kernel architecture and componentization model introduced in Windows Vista."

You can see the family tree here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Windows_Family_T...


RE: more misinformed opinions
By Flunk on 6/28/2009 3:10:04 PM , Rating: 2
Windows 95, 98, 98SE and Me are all based on the same kernel too (as all all versions of Mac OS X, with minor changes). You don't need to massively change the kernel to make a different OS.


RE: more misinformed opinions
By tmouse on 6/29/2009 7:39:29 AM , Rating: 2
His point would be they were also not new operating systems. Do you REALLY feel 98, 98se and Me were? This really was a way for Microsoft to recover from the poor release of Vista. They ran a lot of consumer brand tests and Vista was dead; it was irreversibly tied to a sense of a failed Os, right or wrong. They made some changes and rebranded. Why do you think windows 7 beta went so smoothly? The VAST majority of drivers required no changes.


RE: more misinformed opinions
By superPC on 6/26/2009 3:57:26 PM , Rating: 2
It's a lot more complicated to make a PC OS because PC has all the different and sometimes weird configuration (let's not forget about the guy running win 7 in PII and 128 MB of memory). PC gets attacked all the time (virus, worm, hack). so i think win 7 price really is justified.


RE: more misinformed opinions
By Uncle on 6/26/2009 8:14:31 PM , Rating: 2
I don't know about that. MS sure sold a lot of Vistas and any body screaming bloody murder was ignored. Now their going to pay 50 to 100 for vista sp3.


RE: more misinformed opinions
By crystal clear on 6/27/2009 12:47:11 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
win7 is a completely new OS


Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer had said a few months earlier that "Windows 7 is Vista ...just much better...."

He never ever said "Win7 is a completely new O.S".

So win7 is Vista rebranded just much better, like "Microsoft® Security Essentials" (just much better) is of "windows live one care" .

All Microsoft does is to take their existing product/s refine it/speed it up/add in some new features etc, give it a new name & packaging plus back it up with a huge marketing campaign.

Based on Ballmer's statements its Vista rebranded.


RE: more misinformed opinions
By Targon on 6/27/2009 10:17:42 PM , Rating: 2
How does Apple increase the adoption rate when those with Apple computers are pretty much locked in? You don't buy an Apple to run Windows on it, so, the only thing it does is give Apple ammo to drop support for older versions of their OS since new versions are cheap.


RE: more misinformed opinions
By jeromekwok on 6/28/2009 10:25:14 PM , Rating: 2
Tell me about it. Name three new features in Windows 7 which are not in Windows Vista, and those are no small tweaks you can spend $100 for it.

DirectX 11 looks like a small tweak to me. I can play all games with DirectX 9 and no obvious difference now.


Ballmer
By JasonMick (blog) on 6/26/2009 9:28:38 AM , Rating: 5
If any have not seen the video of Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer advertising Windows 1.0 in wild-eyed fashion (which the FP image comes from) check it out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGvHNNOLnCk#

It makes my morning every time I watch it. That man should have his own TV show or something.




RE: Ballmer
By ZoZo on 6/26/09, Rating: -1
RE: Ballmer
By ZoZo on 6/26/2009 9:36:30 AM , Rating: 2
Was meant as a reply to the first comment


RE: Ballmer
By gyranthir on 6/26/2009 9:59:07 AM , Rating: 4
No, Snow Leopard is a service pack that they are charging money for...


RE: Ballmer
By aj28 on 6/26/2009 6:51:12 PM , Rating: 2
Vista SP2 and XP SP3 were both pretty miniscule compared to 10.6, so while you may not think Snow Leopard is a full blown OS upgrade, it is certainly more substantial than a service pack. Hell, the only SP that's even close to being comparable in scale would be XP SP2, but it's not like every pack Microsoft has ever released was that dramatic... So few of them have been.

And after all, back to the point actually mentioned in the article: Snow Leopard is significantly cheaper than Windows 7. While it's not nearly as large of an upgrade as W7 (because yes, it is essentially an overgrown service pack) it's not like they're charging the traditional full OS price for it, so I really don't see what all the ruckus is about =/


RE: Ballmer
By oab on 6/27/2009 12:04:44 PM , Rating: 2
Remember, MS Service Packs are typically only bundles of all previously released security updates plus the semi-private hotfixes that have all undergone regression testing. Usually, no significant new features are added.

XP SP2 was an exception (it was more like Win98 SE but they gave it away for free).

Apple OS releases 10.3, 10.4, 10.5, 10.6 include significant new features, plus updates to the core itself. Apple "service packs" are more like 10.3.11 to 10.3.12, though they are typically slightly more limited in scope than a servicepack.


RE: Ballmer
By AlexWade on 6/26/2009 10:54:32 AM , Rating: 3
I will give some teeth to your argument. In the Windows 7 RC, if open the command prompt, it gives you a version number 6.1.7100. I am using Windows 7 Build 7100 right now. Windows Vista with the latest service pack has a version number of 6.0.6001.

However, there are many areas in which 7 is different than Vista. According to a TechNet article I read, the 7 UAC now reads the digital signature of certain files that require system access. If said files are digitally signed as being from Windows (a Microsoft signature is not a Windows signature) and in certain pre-defined folders and has the autoElevate tag set in the digital signature, UAC will not prompt.
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/2009.0...

The task bar is different in 7 than Vista. It is twice as tall and everything is more compact. Instead of showing the Window's title, it just shows the program's icon. If the program has multiple windows, they are all group together under one icon. Once you get used to it, it is very nice.

Another feature that a service pack could not address is that 7 uses less processes than Vista. That is the first thing I noticed. The entire kernel is tuned up. 7 is much more responsive than Vista in everything.

So clearly Windows 7 is not a service pack for Windows Vista. In my opinion, Windows 7 is Microsoft's best work, ever.


RE: Ballmer
By ZoZo on 6/26/2009 12:44:30 PM , Rating: 2
I didn't say it was a service pack. It's more like Windows 98 was to Windows 95. A few enhancements here and there, some of which are very welcome. Just what was needed to turn Vista into the best OS from Microsoft (IMHO).

However if Microsoft had released Windows 7 instead of Windows Vista, it would have been a bad launch and that OS would still have had bad reputation. Vista kind of laid out the ground work: drivers, service packs, applications.


RE: Ballmer
By Sulphademus on 6/26/2009 9:39:07 AM , Rating: 2
He's got the dough to start his own TV station (or more) if he wanted to.

Great ad (though I prefer the "microsoft dance"). Lotus 123 + Miami Vice = profit?


RE: Ballmer
By Screwballl on 6/26/2009 9:44:37 AM , Rating: 4
RE: Ballmer
By Integral9 on 6/29/2009 4:07:01 PM , Rating: 2
Did you see the size of that clock! LOL.


By Johnmcl7 on 6/26/2009 9:42:58 AM , Rating: 2
The 'allures' section is nonsense - there is plenty of choice if you want a Windows PC that is slim, lightweight and excellent batterylife which can surpass any of these aspects within the current and very limited selection of Apple hardware.




By JasonMick (blog) on 6/26/2009 9:59:22 AM , Rating: 4
I agree with you somewhat, but the big disappointment when it comes to slim, lightweight Windows laptops is that virtually all have underwhelming Intel graphics, where as Apple's have dedicated NVIDIA Gpus.

Granted I would never buy an Apple out of principal -- I despise their dictatorial behavior. I also think that they are overpriced. However, they can get away with that somewhat because of lack of competition in the lightweight/ultraportable sector.

Take the Voodoo Envy -- its a beautiful, well built, full-featured laptop -- except for its dirt poor graphics. I certainly hope some majors (Dell? HP? Anyone?) step up to plate and offer a lightweight Win7 PC with some decent graphics offerings.

(Disclaimer: I am a PC gamer and game on my laptop placing me in two minorities -- thus my demand for nice graphics may be unreasonable. Sorry.)


By Johnmcl7 on 6/26/2009 2:28:32 PM , Rating: 3
On the other hand though, the Macbook Air while offering an Nvidia graphics solution is laughably bad at even basic functionality - I wouldn't choose to lose just about every port and feature going just to get better graphics. I use an ultralight TX when travelling as I want something extremely small, light, well featured and capable of lasting a long time on battery. The TX excels here as it's smaller and ligher than the Macbook air yet manages to pack in an optical drive, standard range of ports and thanks to its removeable battery can pack in over 12 hours on its extended battery. To introduce gaming capability is going to compromise its ability as an ultralight.

When I want gaming I just for the slightly bigger and heavier 13in machines which offer dedicated Nvidia graphics. I am also a PC gamer and a laptop enthusiast but I can't say I have any interest in a Macbook air rival with better graphics as I find the machines fairly useless in general. They seem designed to grab headlines rather than be proper machines, hence Sony's 4.5in machines weighing in at under 500g have a better range of connections.


By Donovan on 6/26/2009 3:38:41 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
where as Apple's have dedicated NVIDIA Gpus

Now all they need are some games to go with them.


By crystal clear on 6/27/2009 6:06:30 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I certainly hope some majors (Dell? HP? Anyone?) step up to plate and offer a lightweight Win7 PC with some decent graphics offerings.


Here is what you are looking for-

The Lenovo® IdeaPad® S12 delivers the next level in computing with improved usability and performance featuring NVIDIA® ION™ graphics processors. Whether it’s for looking at photos, playing music, emailing or cruising online, smaller and more portable PCs are in demand. Until now, small size often meant sacrificing performance.
Lenovo designed the IdeaPad S12 as a super thin, portable and affordable device offering a familiar , computing experience similar to full-function laptops – they chose NVIDIA ION graphics to deliver this capability.

With Lenovo IdeaPad S12 and NVIDIA ION, watch 1080p high definition video with smooth and quick playback, or hookup an external monitor via an HDMI connection and watch on the big screen.

http://www.nvidia.com/object/IO_73301.html


By Oscarine on 6/30/2009 6:05:23 PM , Rating: 2
There are quite a few Windows based laptops that are slim and light that feature something better than integrated graphics, in fact HP (not the Envy...) in its Elitebook lines, Lenovo etc all offer up discrete graphics in 13.3" or less units weighing under 4.5lbs.

Not to say I'm anti-apple, I'm typing this up on a Macbook Pro as we speak, but the competition is out there.


Windows 7 is not expensive
By Qi on 6/26/2009 11:53:21 AM , Rating: 5
Can someone explain to me why people spend $2000+ on a computer system without even complaining, but at the same, it's almost a crime if a software maker asks $200+ for an operating system that actually allows you to do something with your $2000 machine? And yes, Linux is free, but it's incomparable with Windows on many levels.




RE: Windows 7 is not expensive
By DarkElfa on 6/26/2009 12:29:51 PM , Rating: 2
Anyone intelligent will just buy the OEM version at half the cost anyways.


By phattyboombatty on 6/26/2009 3:35:42 PM , Rating: 3
I doubt the OEM version will be as cheap as the pre-order option.


RE: Windows 7 is not expensive
By Regs on 6/26/2009 1:58:51 PM , Rating: 2
Can anyone remember the predicted piracy rate of windows 2000 for home use?


Windows 7 ( here comes more ME b******t )
By sith77 on 6/26/09, Rating: 0
RE: Windows 7 ( here comes more ME b******t )
By cboath on 6/26/2009 2:29:01 PM , Rating: 2
Let's see, BEFORE release - MS came out and said:

1. You'll need better hardware. Don't expect to run it on older stuff.

2. Fair amount of old hardware was not going to be supported.

3. Some apps, especially older ones might not work.

They warned people ahead of time. Yet they still like to whine like little children that they had problem with those things.

As for the UAC (the security question thing you mentioned)can be turned off in about 5 seconds and then rebooting. Yeah, it was dumb. It's still in 7, too. However, there's a sliding scale of 5 positions i think on which you set it instead of on/off. For those who don't know what they're doing, it's actually not a bad idea. For those who do know what they're doing, turn it off and go on with your life. It's not worth complaining about.


By Alexstarfire on 6/26/2009 2:53:04 PM , Rating: 2
And what you wrote between #3 and your last paragraph explains everything. :)


By phattyboombatty on 6/26/2009 3:19:01 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
which for all intesive purposes

The proper expression is "for all intents and purposes."


RE: Windows 7 ( here comes more ME b******t )
By eddieroolz on 6/26/2009 4:16:16 PM , Rating: 2
My friend, I appreciate an OS that pushes the limits of affordable computing and accelerates development.

If we were still using XP, guess what? An affordable, OEM graphic card would not happen, ever. 4GB of RAM? Nope, not gonna need it. 64-bit computing? Nope, it wouldn't ever become necessary. Faster CPU at lower price? Not gonna happen, because XP runs perfectly on a Celeron II 333MHz.

Seriously, its about time people like you stopped spewing hate against Vista.


By mindless1 on 6/27/2009 1:30:06 AM , Rating: 2
You don't actually "appreciate an OS that pushes the limits of affordable computing", because you don't understand what you are talking about. You are talking about the equivalent of appreciating someone throwing 5 bricks into a backpack you carry, when you have no need for bricks and the extra load won't make a computer stronger from more exercise, it just reduces the ability to do as much while those bricks are there so actually what you are is crippled, but not yet understanding it because you didn't know how to get the things done you needed to on XP and it's predecessors.

That makes Vista, and probably Win7 a valid upgrade path for such users, it would be fair to say you appreciate not having to think because you are watching the computer do what it wants to right out of the box, but that doesn't enable the user, that puts the user on a train that goes on a linear path, quite the opposite of the old slogan "Where do you want to go today?". Today it's "Here's where you're going, here's what you're paying, and don't bother trying to take a different train because we've taken steps to ensure none of them can be competitive in an open market."

If it hadn't been for the infancy of the PC, what has happened in the last 15 years would never have been allowed, as it wasn't in any other markets, but do note worldwide governments aren't quite through with their objections yet either.


By HaB1971 on 6/26/2009 4:32:33 PM , Rating: 2
After all the useless drivel and rant that spewed forth from your keyboard, I saw this at the end and shed a tear for the people you supposedly support.
quote:
where i am an IT sys-admin


I'll go the low route and say you missed the SH in front of IT sys-admin


"There is no such thing as a good excuse."
By crystal clear on 6/26/09, Rating: 0
RE: "There is no such thing as a good excuse."
By jojo29 on 6/26/2009 10:24:06 AM , Rating: 2
You are comparing two very different things there buddy.

You cannot take Vista Rev 2 with you anywhere and everywhere

You cannot put Vista Rev 2 in your pocket

You cannot make a phone call with your Vista Rev 2

I mean, one is a damn pricey ( pricey only if 1) you can't upgrade with AT&T, or are with another carrier) phone, but a phone that does it all: Movies/phone calls/pictures/music/etc... from where ever you are at. The other is stuck on your PC...at home...

Don't worry, im not some apple fanboi...just your comment lacks common sense, you can't compare a OS, something you only really use at home, to a cell phone, something you use everyday probably, i mean i use my cell phone a helluva lot more than my computer, which is running on Vista 64 TYVM :)

Also $120 bucks for the upgrade? I don't think that is bad at all, wasn't Vista like double that?

Actually, here is where i get a bit confused, so bear with me.

I bought my Vista 64 with SP1, for $100...that is "OEM" version.

I remember though when i was shopping, there were some versions of Vista 64 for like $300-$400...I don't understand why they would pay that..explain the difference to me please


By crystal clear on 6/26/2009 10:42:00 AM , Rating: 2
The point I am focusing on is "blaming these economic times".

Thats no excuse !

If people have the money to buy those pricey apples then others like them have the money for a window.


By Alexstarfire on 6/26/2009 2:47:33 PM , Rating: 2
I guess you totally disregard all laptops. laptops are mobile and do far more than a crappy iPhone could ever dream of.


By eddieroolz on 6/26/2009 4:11:44 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You cannot take Vista Rev 2 with you anywhere and everywhere


Laptop/Ultraportable/Netbook.

quote:
You cannot put Vista Rev 2 in your pocket


UMPC.

quote:
You cannot make a phone call with your Vista Rev 2


Windows Mobile 7.

quote:
I mean, one is a damn pricey ( pricey only if 1) you can't upgrade with AT&T, or are with another carrier) phone, but a phone that does it all: Movies/phone calls/pictures/music/etc... from where ever you are at. The other is stuck on your PC...at home...


Other phones do a lot too. Either way, iPhone tries to do everything and fails miserably at it. Call quality? Miserable. Audio quality? Subpar. Camera? Literally a piece of turd, especially compared to my SH906i.

If you want more explanations, then just reply back.


Excellent competition
By fishbits on 6/26/2009 10:23:32 AM , Rating: 4
"In the end, whether you agree or disagree with Mr. Baker, even the strongest Microsoft proponents must concede that Windows 7 is obviously pricier than Apple's Snow Leopard --"

Crud, I didn't know this! Think I'm going to buy a copy of Snow Leopard and install it on my PC!

Wait, I have to buy a special PC in order to use a $30 Snow Leopard? One with PC hardware, but a mandatory $500 logo? Yeah, $500 + $30 to run an OS on a PC is really competitive with Windows 7 pricing.

Windows 7's pricing is very competitive, especially for so highly desired a release. I have no idea why drag Apple into this. This is a standard and tired forum comment trolling approach, elevated as an article.




RE: Excellent competition
By Xonoahbin on 6/26/2009 8:43:35 PM , Rating: 2
I absolutely agree there, bits. See, in the world of pay-per-view journalism, sensational stories like these, no matter how true or false they may be, generate views and therefore money for the writer. (I'm assuming that Dailytech uses this approach, correct me if I'm wrong.)

Regardless of the above statements, I think there should be a rating system for the articles like there is for the replies in articles. I would be rating this article down. Dailytech needs better quality than this.


oh brother
By coolkev99 on 6/26/2009 10:18:56 AM , Rating: 5
Yeah, and half you people probably pay $80+ per month for your iphone and/or cable. Some even more. THats $960 per year, and you complain that Microsoft's a money grubbin greedy for charging $119 for an operating system that should last you 3+ years easy. ::face palm::




911!
By clovell on 6/26/2009 12:29:13 PM , Rating: 2
Somebody call us a WAAAAAAHMBULANCE quick - this guy is coding!




RE: 911!
By foolsgambit11 on 6/26/2009 4:12:13 PM , Rating: 3
Uh, no, if he was coding, he'd know the value of programming work!


Free antivirus software?
By fleas2016 on 6/26/2009 12:46:28 PM , Rating: 2
Won't this get them fined again?




RE: Free antivirus software?
By omnicronx on 6/26/2009 2:00:51 PM , Rating: 2
Which is why it does not come with the OS, nor will it be advertised within the OS via windows update. They can make any piece of software they want, they just can't use their OS dominance to push a product. In this case it would be the users choice to go to Microsoft.com and download the security essentials package.


For me, Win 7 is cheaper
By cyriene on 6/26/2009 1:10:16 PM , Rating: 3
It will be cheaper for me to upgrade my XP machine to Win 7 than for my gf to upgrade her Tiger OS laptop to Snow Leopard.

Finally, I get the last laugh!!




Mr. Baker
By omnicronx on 6/26/2009 2:13:02 PM , Rating: 3
Any reviewer that compares the pricing between Windows 7 and Snow Leopard is either on the take, or has no business being a reviewer in the first place. Don't be fooled, Snow Leopard has some nice additions, but it is nothing more than a bunch of enterprise changes that should have been implemented years ago. Lets face it, to the end user Open CL, 64 bit support and updated exchange support is not exactly ground breaking for the average end user (i.e most of Apples userbase). A new version of Quicktime, a few Finder tweaks and a new theme is all that users will see. Its worth exactly what they are selling it for, and nothing more.

Furthermore I firmly believe that if it was not for the iPhone, all of these features would have been implemented in 10.5 in the first place.




By SongEmu on 6/26/2009 10:38:19 AM , Rating: 2
You can't really call Snow Leopard a service pack, because it's more than just fixes. It improves the user interface, and adds *features* in addition to patching holes.

At the same time, no, it's not nearly as big a transformation as Vista->7. And given that, I think $29 vs. $50 is pretty fair. If only Microsoft would *keep* that price point for more than 2 weeks...




By honestIT on 6/26/2009 10:56:39 AM , Rating: 2
Even an upgrade

However with the bad will they built up with Vista, it may well be into SP2 before consumers trust MS again like they did in the second half of XP's lifespan




UK...
By PlasmaBomb on 6/26/2009 11:15:41 AM , Rating: 2
I can has pre-order?




Not an even comparison - price wise
By cboath on 6/26/2009 2:24:29 PM , Rating: 2
Snow Leopard to Win7 isn't remotely an even comparison.

First, you have the aforementioned fact that one is basically a service pack and the other is a full OS.

More importantly though, the article loses it's point when claiming if Apple allowed open hardware it'd gain much more traction. Well, therein lies the big obstacle.

When a Mac is sold, Apple makes money on the OS AND the harware. That's one big reason it's a closed system. The other is it's easier to control issues when you dictate 100% of the hardware spec and can block people from making hardware for your stuff.

But the fact remains that, if Apple went open hardware, it's a given that the price of their OS would increase.

IF you want to take shots at MS for having 200 and 300 dollar full OS prices. That's fine. $300 for Pro or Ult is too much frankly. Especially when 95 debuted at $49 i believe.

In an open hardware environment, though, both makers OS's would be fairly close in price I think. It's really easy to lower the OS price when you get a large chunk of the hardware sold to run it.




By epobirs on 6/26/2009 7:03:59 PM , Rating: 2
This NPD guy hasn't any perspective.

Back when Windows 3.11 shipped, a combined package of it and the latest DOS release (needed as the base OS layer) went for $100 at retail. That $100 from 1992 is over $150 in todays value when adjusted for inflation. Thus the cost of Windows on a mainstream consumer system (if bought separately rather the far cheaper price the OEM gets for preloaded systems) has stayed fairly constant and even gone done a fair bit in constant dollars.

What you get for that purchase has increased immensely, behind the ever improving capability of the hardware. That hardware has gotten fantastically less costly as well. Look at what a high-end system cost when Win3.11 shipped and compare that to the much lesser sum needed to get a good system today. You need to get into options like multiple top-end video boards or multiple CPU sockets to spend any serious money nowadays.

I'm reminded of this Louis C.K. rant:
http://www.kk.org/thetechnium/archives/2009/02/so_...

I can go into the local Wal-mart at 3:00 AM and for a few hundred bucks buy a computer more powerful than any machine in existence when I got my first system.

I try to remind myself of that when I feel frustrated that a dual-socket Nehalem system is so costly.




Pre-order pricing is good
By corduroygt on 6/26/2009 8:24:13 PM , Rating: 2
$50 for Home Premium, and $100 for Professional, which home users don't need (no, you don't need to log on to a domain for home computing) is a great deal in a world where console games cost $60 a pop. Hell I use OSX but it's stupid to deny Windows 7 has a lot of technology, and a lot of work put into it, and for the price, it's a steal.




By crystal clear on 6/27/2009 11:41:34 AM , Rating: 2
Yes this is for those complaining about the high prices-

Microsoft to cut prices on Windows 7 system

SEATTLE (Reuters) - Microsoft Corp (MSFT.O) will sell the standard home-user version of its new Windows 7 operating system for 8 percent less than the comparable version of its Vista system, as the global downturn hits spending on technology.

The world's largest software company, whose recent ads champion low-priced PCs against more expensive Apple Inc (AAPL.O) computers, said the new system will be available at even lower prices for a short time, as it looks to tempt buyers ahead of the holiday shopping season.

Prices for the full retail versions of the software -- for customers who want to install the system from scratch rather than upgrade their existing Windows system -- are also being reduced or held.

To further tempt buyers, Microsoft said it was making a free upgrade option available to computer makers, meaning that customers who buy a PC or laptop with all but the most basic Vista versions from Friday should be able to get a free upgrade to the equivalent Windows 7 version.

How that offer is made available to customers is up to the individual PC makers. Both Microsoft and the manufacturers are hoping such an offer will avoid a sudden drop-off in already falling PC sales by persuading customers not to hold off on purchases until Windows 7 is launched.

Because the upgrade option means Microsoft is essentially selling two operating systems for the price of one, the company is deferring half the revenue from Vista sales over the next several months.

As a result, it said it would defer about $200 million to $300 million revenue from its fiscal fourth quarter, ending June 30, to later quarters, recognizing it either when a customer takes advantage of the upgrade, or at the end of the program on January 31, 2010. The move has no effect on cash flow.

In contrast to the Vista operating system, which was released in different language versions over several months, Microsoft said Windows 7 would be available in 14 languages on October 22 and a further 21 on October 31.

http://www.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idUS...




By Targon on 6/27/2009 10:20:25 PM , Rating: 2
If you go out and just buy Snow Leopard, it will cost a LOT more money. The upgrade price is where Apple is keeping the price down.

So, $200 or so for Windows 7 Home Premium. How much does it cost for a non-upgrade version of Snow Leopard?




Value is in the Eye of the Beholder
By tech329 on 6/28/2009 3:49:06 AM , Rating: 2
I disagree that Windows 7 is overpriced.

When I consider the overall product I can't imagine how you can make that argument.

The common way Windows 7 will be distributed is through the purchase of a new PC. On a low end machine Windows might represent as much as 20% of the cost but as soon as you move up on the hardware scale this drops dramatically. The evolution of hardware is very rapid but it bears examination how that evolution influences the OS.

Where this gets really tricky is when you take into account the ever expanding hardware universe. This is mostly related to increasingly improved hardware designs, manufacturing efficiencies, CPU and GPU technology evolution. These things contribute to less cost with improved performance.

However, on the OS side of the equation, the hardware gains have an opposite effect. Expanding the universe of hardware adds cost to the OS. In the PC world, the idea of having a structure which manages the relationship between hardware and the OS and assures all the pieces work is a nonstop ever evolving process. Comparatively speaking the hardware universe that Apple has to support is a tiny subset of what Microsoft has to contend with. Apple has one motherboard designer and a smaller set of CPU and GPU variables to accommodate.

On the software side Apple and Microsoft have adopted two differnet approaches to servicing the OS and these approaches aren't easily compared without examining in detail the methods devised to meet the goal. These methods are influnced by the independence of Microsoft from hardware vendors as opposed to the Apple model which incoporates the hardware into the model. Thus we have Microsoft providing OS support mostly free of charge across the OS lifecycle whereas the Apple hardware integrated model provides a means to spread these costs in a completely different way.

The two models establish an apparent OS cost across the lifecycle. But unless you examine how these two are different and how the difference dictates the assignment of cost you could be easily mislead into making some incorrect assumptions about that cost.

I happen to think that this argument of OS cost is invalid as typically presented. The argument fails because it too often doesn't expand upon the essential details necessary to the evaluation. Where this goes wrong is it offers a supposedly authoritative, but fundamentally flawed, expression of the idea to the computing public.




Article about a blog...fail
By Kahnivorous on 6/28/2009 6:30:48 AM , Rating: 2
Nothing new here. 200 other regular-joe bloggers beat him to the punch. Must have run out of useful news at DT to post. That or they got a kick back for the referral. Starting to question some of the content use.




W7 pricing
By wallijonn on 6/29/2009 11:27:15 AM , Rating: 2
$120 for W7H doesn't sound too bad. I am more interested in the Professional Edition, which, if it comes in at about $150, will surely buy. If however it has a price point of $300 then I will pass. Let's just hope that there's not 5 different flavours like Vista. If someone wants to pay $400 for a Media Centre W7 Edition - that's up to them to decide whether or not it is worth it. It wouldn't be for me.

Now, if it is an UPGRADE for $120 then that may be over priced. Why bother? People will wait until their machines will need replacing and rely on the OEMs to package the OS with their new purchases.




What about XP users?
By Belard on 6/29/2009 10:41:01 PM , Rating: 2
Unless I miss something...

Where is the WindowsXP > Windows7 deal?

If Microsoft isn't offering any upgrade deals for WindowsXP users, then MS is only going to hurt themselves in Win7 sales and market share.

And how about a real Family pack... 3 License version of Win7 Home for $150~200.




"Game reviewers fought each other to write the most glowing coverage possible for the powerhouse Sony, MS systems. Reviewers flipped coins to see who would review the Nintendo Wii. The losers got stuck with the job." -- Andy Marken











botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki