backtop

Software Windows 7 Won't Save Falling PC Sales
Brandon Hill (Blog) - June 29, 2009 3:28 PM
Print E-mail del.icio.us 44 comment(s) - last by Parhel.. on Jun 30 at 6:06 PM
Windows 7 may be great, but it can't work miracles

Windows 7 is expected to be a big sensation for the PC industry when it is released in the latter half of October. Beta and Release Candidate versions of the operating system have been praised for stability, performance, and compatibility with existing hardware/software applications.

Microsoft has also enjoyed brisk pre-sales of Windows 7 according to Information Week. The strong initial sales of Windows 7 can be placed squarely on Microsoft's decision to make Windows 7 Home Premium Upgrade and Windows 7 Professional available to pre-order customers for $50 and $100 respectively.

The special pricing for Windows 7 is expected to continue until July 11.

Despite the surge in pre-sales and the overabundance of praised showered on Windows 7, Gartner Research says that worldwide shipments of PCs will continue on its downward spiral for at least the next two quarters. According to Gartner, an estimated 274 million PCs will ship worldwide during 2009 which would be a 6 percent drop from the 292 million PCs shipped in 2008.

"Although the buzz surrounding Windows 7 has generally been quite positive, we don't expect the market to significantly deviate from its normal seasonal trends in reaction to its release," said Gartner research director George Shiffler. "Unless Microsoft mounts a major marketing campaign in support of Windows 7, we think consumers will simply adopt the new operating system (OS) as they would normally buy new PCs and/or replace old ones."

Netbooks, which have been a sales blockbuster for a number of computer manufacturers including Acer, ASUS, and HP have also begun to see an erosion in sales. "Mini-notebook units posted their first quarter-over-quarter decline in the first quarter of 2009," Shiffler continued. "While this was in part the result of the general contraction in PC shipments to the EMEA region, it also reflects increasing competition between mini-notebooks and low-end mainstream mobile PCs as the former evolve toward larger screen sizes, and the latter continue to drop in price."

For those that don’t jump on the Windows 7 pre-order bandwagon, upgrades of Windows 7 Home Premium, Professional, and Ultimate will be available for $119, $199, and $219 respectively. Those who are required to purchase full versions of the aforementioned versions will pay $199, $299, and $319 respectively.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
In other news...
By HaZaRd2K6 on 6/29/2009 3:44:49 PM , Rating: 5
The new Prius won't save Toyota's declining sales.

The Chevy Volt won't stop GM's inevitable decline.

We're in a recession. People aren't investing large amounts of money into something when an older product works just fine. And I don't mean to look like I'm knocking electric cars; they're just the first two products that came to mind.




RE: In other news...
By Ratinator on 6/29/09, Rating: -1
RE: In other news...
By marvdmartian on 6/29/2009 4:29:16 PM , Rating: 4
Hmmmm.....sounds like good PROFIT on the Prius to me.....

....but will it make up for the lower overall sales that Toyota has experienced during the recession?? I think that's the point that the OP was trying to state.

Good point, OP. No reason to purchase a new computer, PC or otherwise, if the old one is working fine. Especially if the economy has taken away some of the "fun money" that people normally use to make that type of purchase.


RE: In other news...
By HakonPCA on 6/29/2009 4:50:24 PM , Rating: 1
yea, it'd be more like

Windows 7 will be hugely profitable
274 million PCs * 90% = 246.6 million copies of W7
profit per (total made up guess stat) $15-$150 (basic/netbooks to full W7 ultimate)
$3.7Billion to $36.7 billion in (made up numbers) profit (not revenue)

The 274 million pcs is new sales and does not include upgrades.

The comparison is still good because MSFT stock is based on future earnings not current performance.

So yes, good job on selling priuses (priusiis??), is it making up for the huge dip in Highlander sales (etc), nope.

w7 will sell hundreds of millions of copies in 1 year alone, but the overall drop in pc sales will cause msft to have lower future earnings compared to what some financial analysts predicted. Thats what captain obvious was saying about the recession headlines.


RE: In other news...
By kontorotsui on 6/29/2009 5:36:04 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Windows 7 will be hugely profitable 274 million PCs * 90% = 246.6 million copies of W7


You assume too much.


RE: In other news...
By HakonPCA on 6/29/2009 6:55:58 PM , Rating: 4
lol my bad

http://marketshare.hitslink.com/

its only 87.75%

....

everyone's a critic


RE: In other news...
By MatthiasF on 6/30/2009 12:39:00 PM , Rating: 2
What was the penetration rate for Windows Vista? From what I've noticed, not many people upgraded and most of the share was new computers.

So, the 100% upgrade rate you mentioned is what probably got people sneering. Vista had only 15% of the market, while Windows XP has 69%.

http://www.w3counter.com/globalstats.php

I'm willing to bet that the first year of Windows 7, only 10% of the Windows XP installations will upgrade and maybe 30% of the Vista.

That would make it about 30 million upgrades, which shouldn't be taken lightly.


RE: In other news...
By The0ne on 6/29/2009 6:53:21 PM , Rating: 3
It probably won't but then again it's better than not having any orders at all :) Production for Prius 10' have surpassed expectations that Toyota can at least now use some of the other groups from other vehicle lines to help out :) Again, beats now having any small to no orders and having to lay off many many workers.


RE: In other news...
By thartist on 6/29/2009 5:40:26 PM , Rating: 2
there is always someone who steers away from the point.


RE: In other news...
By SiliconAddict on 6/29/2009 9:54:39 PM , Rating: 2
I work for Toyota. And no not a dealership. No it won't. Toyota has been hit by a decline for the first time in its history and the Prius, while may very well help, won't stop the hemorrhaging of sales. The simple fact is gas is now cheap again and few people are going to drop that kind of money in this market. Period/


RE: In other news...
By MonkeyPaw on 6/29/2009 6:57:21 PM , Rating: 3
If nothing else, Windows 7 runs great on netbooks and nettops. Sure, Vista also works on these devices, but from my own experience, 7 runs better than Vista, and 7 works just as well as XP (speed and battery life). This should open the door for more netbooks shipping with Windows 7, even if it's just the starter version. From there, MS has the opportunity to sell upgrade licenses. Then, finally, they can phase XP out of the market.


RE: In other news...
By mindless1 on 6/30/2009 7:48:10 AM , Rating: 1
Except that despite your assumption, some of us still want XP, not win7 or vista, on netbooks.

The fact is Win7 does not run as fast as XP. It has more processes, larger memory footprint, more drive access. It is a bit mind boggling that anyone can keep a straight face and claim much more than that it is Vista with some of Vista's flaws finally removed.


Microsoft doesn't sell Computers
By lightfoot on 6/29/2009 4:50:17 PM , Rating: 4
Microsoft isn't in the business of selling PC's. They sell software (including Operating Systems.)

If everyone bought an Apple and installed Windows 7 through Bootcamp, Microsoft would still win.

This is like saying "Eggo's new fat free waffles aren't likely to slow declining toaster sales." Eggo doesn't care because they don't sell toasters, so why should Microsoft care about PC sales?




RE: Microsoft doesn't sell Computers
By austinag on 6/29/2009 5:18:23 PM , Rating: 2
Because in general, the average PC buyer keeps whatever operating system is loaded on it when they get it home from Walmart and unbox it. Which, 99% of the time is MS. However, this article does focus on misleading Stats. It should speak to OS market share, not PC's.
Lastly -sorry to be a pain, but if no one owned Toasters then no one would buy frozen toaster ready waffles.
(I can't beleave I'm being this picky today, I'm truly channeling my inner DT comment critic) :)


By lightfoot on 6/29/2009 5:57:34 PM , Rating: 4
My point was only this: Microsoft only needs to convince the market to buy the new OS (because it is better than XP/Vista) they don't need to convince them to buy a new toaster (everyone already has one.)

People were outraged when Vista was released and it wouldn't run on existing hardware (thus forcing computer upgrades.) Microsoft seems to be actively avoiding a similar outcome.


By Oregonian2 on 6/29/2009 10:04:39 PM , Rating: 2
Could be. But I certainly haven't kept the same OS on my machines (I've updated them over the years at least until that point where they all have XP, thus far). Other's I've known have updated their Microsoft OS's as well. All new sales for Microsoft (even if it's at a lower upgrade price).

P.S. - True, nobody would buy those frozen waffles without having a toaster, but that doesn't mean the toaster makers necessarily need to sell even one toaster next year. Everybody may already have one, and the few that have ones that break might pick one up at their local Goodwill store. No new ones sold at all. At some point there's market saturation and sales are only replacement sales -- much lower than the original market expansion sales. I've read that this is the horror that companies like Microsoft have in their dreams and why they're trying to get into other things (and/or go to providing the same products as web delivered products that they can charge for ad infinitum).


By MatthiasF on 6/30/2009 12:42:04 PM , Rating: 2
I'm hard core. I microwave my Eggos.

That's right, irradiated food FTW.


RE: Microsoft doesn't sell Computers
By cubby1223 on 6/29/2009 5:44:11 PM , Rating: 1
You fail at analogies.

The vast majority of sales of the Windows Operating System is directly tied to new PC sales.

How many people do you know went out and bought an actual retail copy of Vista for their computers? Pretty much no one.


By monomer on 6/29/2009 6:09:49 PM , Rating: 2
Well,it may not be the full retail version, but the upgrade is already selling like hotcakes:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/software/

Win 7 Home Premium and Professional took the #1 and #2 spots respectively for software sales at Amazon.


RE: Microsoft doesn't sell Computers
By lightfoot on 6/29/2009 6:10:47 PM , Rating: 2
You mean not counting people who downgraded to XP with their last computer purchase?

Or do you want to count only the people who expressed outrage that they COULDN'T upgrade because their "new" computer didn't have the required specs for Vista?

Never before has the market been so saturated with personal computers. Assuming that the business model has not changed over the last decade is naive at best.

Yes, new computers will still be sold with the latest and greatest OS. However now that the market has reached saturation, computer purchases are based on life-cycles of hardware. A new OS is unlikely to drive hardware sales. The marginal sales (ie the sales that they would not otherwise get) are from people who upgrade.

Even if Microsoft introduces support for new hardware (multi-touch touchscreens for example) it will not drive hardware sales unless the hardware vendors support that technology. Software bloat is what has forced hardware sales in the past - I for one am thankful if that trend does NOT continue.


By mindless1 on 6/30/2009 7:55:59 AM , Rating: 1
That's the beautiful part about getting off the upgrade bandwagon.

No need to constantly upgrade hardware. No need to constantly upgrade software (let's face it, enthusiasts do not usually pay $2000 a year to replace their software every time a new version comes around).

The business model certainly has changed. Now grandmothers that do little more than email and surf have 4GB of memory (LOL) and a quad core CPU, HD decoding when she doesn't even know what that is or that she can watch a Blu-ray movie (what's blu-ray she'd ask?).

The enthusiasts at Anandtech and Dailytech seem to continually forget that the world managed to function a decade ago with an order of magnitude less computing power than they have today, and what the fastest growing trend is... Twitter-like social forums which wouldn't even need a Celeron 500MHz system if it weren't for those darn flash advertisements that infected the web.


But not for the reasons you might think...
By Emryse on 6/29/2009 5:19:11 PM , Rating: 2
Windows 7 is nothing more than the product of learning from Vista - which is as it should be, but does not merit to be sold for the same cost as a full-blown, stand-alone OS in my opinion.

I already paid multiple hundreds to switch over to Vista Ultimate just last fall and suffer through the pain that Vista brought both in terms of performance and compatibility (and I blame both MS and developers, but particularly MS for not getting developers onboard with Vista early enough in the game)... explain to me why I should downgrade to Professional (because they haven't given a hint of a discount for Ultimate), or even pay $100 for the equivalent tier of Vista Ultimate to move to Windows 7?

Those who have Vista Ultimate keys should be entitled to a dramatically reduced cost version of Vista Ultimate, preferably at a price point between $50 ad $100. And that should be for the *retail* version, including both 32 and 64 bit versions, as was the case with Vista Ultimate retail.

Windows gets most of its word-of-mouth from the enthusiast community - that's who the people that have no clue consult when they're debating whether or not to buy upgrades for their PCs. Windows is not setting themselves up for good reviews by treating their high-end segment this way.

Also, can anyone confirm for me that BitLocker and 35 language pack are absolutely the ONLY differences between 7 Professional and 7 Ultimate? If so, I can understand why only a $20 diff between Pro and Ultimate retail versions... but even then - as a Vista Ultimate key owner, I should get my copy of 7 Pro for $50, not $100.




RE: But not for the reasons you might think...
By drebo on 6/29/2009 5:51:18 PM , Rating: 1
Why? Windows 7 is a new version. It's not an upgrade. It's not a service pack. It's not a subversion upgrade. It's an entirely new version. Whether they based it on an older code-base or not doesn't matter.

Intel wouldn't give you a discount on a Core i7 just because you own a Core 2 Duo, and Toyota isn't going to give you a discount on a 2010 Prius just because you own a 2009 Prius. Why would you expect Microsoft to do so?


By mindless1 on 6/30/2009 8:17:41 AM , Rating: 3
Calling it a new version is arbitrary at best. It's not a service pack only because they, meaning MS, gave it a new name instead of Vista SP(n).

The argument many have about this is they paid a pretty penny for an upscale version of Vista and didn't get the add-ons they were led to believe they'd get for the money. Further they expect the problems with Vista, like unworthy bloat, gotten rid of. They are entitled to what was advertised and fairly directly implied having already bought their OS license.

Intel would indeed give you a replacement working CPU if the one you had did not live up to the specs claimed before purchase.

Toyota would indeed fix a problem with the Prius if it accidentally shipped with a load of bricks in the trunk and that prevented the claimed mileage.

We expect MS to act as though their monopoly is not cheating customers out of what they choose in what is supposed to be an open market, in following through on delivering a finished product that doesn't have nagging bugs like not even being able to copy a lot of files without the wierd days-long stalling Vista did when first released.

We expect to open the box and have a working product, or to have it replaced with whatever version is necessary for it to work... not some day, immediately. Putting people through the Vista nonsense should get them a new OS. One that works like Vista was supposed to!


By OblivionMage on 6/29/2009 6:51:48 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
suffer through the pain that Vista brought both in terms of performance and compatibility


LOLWUT


RE: But not for the reasons you might think...
By eddieroolz on 6/29/2009 11:45:39 PM , Rating: 2
Uh, you do realize, its not the company's job to piggyback you all the way through right?

You can attempt to say that Windows 7 sucks all you want, and demand a free upgrade to Windows 8, and then continue on to Windows 9. But will MS listen? Like any other company no.

Adobe certainly does not provide free or even heavily discounted upgrades from CS3 to CS4, nor does Norton practically give away retail copies of their antivirus just because you have the 2008 version. Nor does even Apple give away free copies of their OS (*cough* service pack *cough*) when the newer version comes out.

Moral of story. You bought into it, you are solely responsible. Don't expect companies to give you "apologies" or "exclusive upgrade rights to get the most expensive stuff for waaay cheaper" of any sort.


RE: But not for the reasons you might think...
By mindless1 on 6/30/2009 8:27:43 AM , Rating: 2
That is totally backwards. Like it or not, the fact remains that a very very large % of users are not happy with Vista, enough that they chose XP even after Vista was out for over a year.

Can you say the same about XP? No, not even an order of magnitude fewer people, except for the corporate sector who always roll out OS slower than OEMs, made this choice to stick with 9x after XP had been out awhile.

Further backwards is your misconception about "solely responsible". Let me explain it very simply since it is very simple:

The customer's responsibility is to PAY FOR THE LICENSE. That's it, all, the end.

The seller's responsiblity is to deliver the OS that was pitched as the product being paid for.

Don't ever expect a customer to roll over if they don't get what they've already paid for, not the name of a product but a product that does what it was marketed as doing.

For example, if I tell you I'll sell you a mouse name Fred that can dance, you pay me, then I hand you a mouse named Fred. Is it enough that you got a mouse that is the name I dropped, or did you pay for a dancing mouse? Is it ok if it's only a mouse named Fred?

NO! You should get your money back or a mouse named Fred that can dance. Geeze, is this really so hard to understand that it's irrelevant whether you think it's an upgrade, only that the customer get 100% of what they were led to believe they were getting for their money WHEN they paid, not later?

Now let's look at the opposite side of the coin. Either MS fixes all the problems with Vista at significant extra development cost, or they give the customer the patched OS that they conveniently renamed as Win7 and that they already developed.

The latter option is a win/win for everyone. Why is it I get the feeling all your disagreement is rooted in greed, that you are going to pay for Win7 and it upsets you that someone else shouldn't have to.


By Parhel on 6/30/2009 6:06:42 PM , Rating: 2
A very very large percentage of users aren't happy with Vista? I think you're buying into Apple's ad campaigns rather than looking at facts here.

The majority of computer users have little to no idea whether Vista is any good or not, and will tend to believe whatever they are told about it. I've been using Vista since the month it came out, and aside from one issue with an old version of Visual Studio, my system hasn't crashed once. Not one time.

The most common complaint I've heard about Vista isn't UAC, driver issues, or even hardware incompatibility. It's that little button in Office 2007 where "Save As" and "Print" are hiding. Nevermind that that's actually Office and not Windows. Nevermind that Office 2003 will happily run on Vista, as will Office 2007 on XP. It's what came on their new computer. It's changed, it's confused them, and they aren't happy about it.

I understand your point that XP is good enough and Vista brings little to the table in terms of new functionality, and I agree. But purchasing an OS doesn't entitle you to a lifetime of support. At some point, Microsoft has every right to say that - after 5 years of updates to IE, Media Player, DirectX, .NET, etc. - enough is enough. If you want to keep playing, cough up the dough and buy a new version.

But I entirely disagree that anything fundamental about Vista was broken. In that respect, it was about in the middle of the spectrum of Windows releases. Not Win98 stable, but also not the unmitigated disaster that was WinME.


And businesses will skip Windows 7 as well
By honestIT on 6/29/2009 9:48:32 PM , Rating: 1
After running the RC1 in our Test center it boots slower and requires way more horsepower then XP

MS does not scale their OS very well. Both Apple and Linux really do better at running newer kernels on older hardware




By StevoLincolnite on 6/29/2009 10:11:31 PM , Rating: 3
On my Windows Test Machine which is Dual Pentium 3 Tualatin @ 1.4ghz, 768mb of memory, it runs fine, Vista would have brought the machine down.

Install time... Was amazingly quick, I expected it to take twice as long, but I think it was only about half an hour.

Boot times/shut downs are also faster than Vista and XP for me as well, only takes a couple of seconds, XP used to sit on the Loading screen for awhile, almost paused, doing nothing on that rig.

Some tasks are a little slower than XP, but realistically you have to give a little to receive allot more, If I wanted an Operating system which gave me the best performance with the smallest footprint, I would go back to Windows 95/98.


By mindless1 on 6/30/2009 8:07:09 AM , Rating: 2
1) Nobody cares about install time. Anyone who knows how to practice safe computing will do that once every upgrade and not again till the next one.

2) Nobody cares about shutdown times, are you kidding? Boot times are also largely irrelevant since the advent of hibernate.

3) Snappy GUI is what it's all about, the OS is supposed to be a transparent means to run apps, not something you have to sit there and wait on.

4) If you wanted an operating system with best performance you would not choose 9x because of it's lack of support for over 512MB memory (or 1GB with system file hacks) and no multi-core CPU support.

Someday Win7, even Vista will seem fine once hardware is a lot faster than it is today. There are slow users who don't notice the difference, then there are highly productive people who have a rhythm and work at high speed when using the optimal OS for the current day hardware which is XP.

For all those who pretend Vista or Win7 is useful, they do a whole lot more talking than being productive, suggesting that after all these years XP was available they never even got the hang of using a PC or else they'd find zero benefit to changing OS.

In short, you aren't receiving a lot, you're paying for nothing in particular but the vague feeling you are staying modern which is fine except that isn't what all the nonsense was about which was anything of importance that can actually be done.

Hint- world kept spinning just fine once we got rid of the 9x bluescreens. Subsequent OS benefit were almost exclusively support of newer hardware, DirectX and versions of IE.

That isn't to say Win7 is not a worthwhile OS to run, as each day passes there comes more advantage to running the newer os like more driver support and less driver support for prior windows versions. The same could be said about application support though Vista paved the way for that.

The bottom line is no matter what it seems like you have received, you're still doing the sames things as those running xp so it's all smoke 'n mirrors.


RE: And businesses will skip Windows 7 as well
By eddieroolz on 6/29/2009 11:46:32 PM , Rating: 2
Are you running it on a Intel 486?


By honestIT on 6/30/2009 12:45:17 AM , Rating: 1
Yep 486 :)

Windows 7 on my C2D 2.5 GHZ 4GB laptop boots and closes slower then both my Macs and my work laptop running XP (its running SEP too)


By mindless1 on 6/30/2009 8:10:39 AM , Rating: 2
The faster the system the faster XP runs, so the question was pointless. Hard to say where the great myth came along that if only someone has a higher spec semi-modern system then suddenly it erases the difference because it doesn't.

Vista and Win7 erase some of the gains of modern hardware. It is quite obvious running both, or all three actually, on the same system. I mean apples:apples, clean new installs of each, not contrasting a several years old XP install with lots of old apps cluttering it up.


By zavias on 6/29/2009 10:49:03 PM , Rating: 2
I have a little bit of an issue here. I received my Dell Latitude D820 pre-loaded with Vista Ultimate and I want to upgrade it to Windows 7, but I don’t want to pay hundreds of dollars to get the Ultimate Upgrade. Is it possible to go from Windows Vista Ultimate to Windows 7 Home Premium?




By theapparition on 6/30/2009 6:35:57 AM , Rating: 2
Yes, you may purchase the upgrade to update any version of XP or Vista with any version of Windows 7, even Vista Ultimate -> Windows 7 Home Premium.

However, when you upgrade with a lower featured version (eg Vista Ultimate to 7 Home), it will do it as a clean install. It will not upgrade in place.


Computers aren't edible
By Murloc on 6/30/2009 5:07:33 AM , Rating: 2
the most useless analysis ever made.
If ppl hasn't got the money to buy a PC, they won't do it even if there's a new OS.




RE: Computers aren't edible
By mindless1 on 6/30/2009 8:32:03 AM , Rating: 2
The whole OS debate totally misses the point. People buy a new PC when their old one seems slow at what they want to do, or it breaks.

They do not think to themselves OMG A NEW OS I MUST RUSH OUT AND REPLACE MY CURRENT PC (which works fine still).

Even if they have the money, this is no longer the era where only enthusiasts buy PCs. Everyone has one, and to most it's an applicance like a washing machine or DVD player, they might eventually buy a Blu-ray player but the average person is not eager to switch till they perceive what they have doesn't suit their needs which is a tough thing to persuade about because they are regularly using their system just fine - hence the internet grew.


Is it just me or...
By icanhascpu on 6/29/09, Rating: 0
RE: Is it just me or...
By honestIT on 6/30/2009 12:49:39 AM , Rating: 1
Yes it is

and when you mention Mac or Linux the replies are always..

"MY VISTA RUNS FINE ON MY QUAD CORE WITH 16GB RAM AND QUAD SLI"

Or they compare an unreleased beta Software to the second coming of Jesus and tell everyone who doesn't buy into their zealot ways they are idiots.

I like Windows 7 too and if they actually release the ADmin tools this time around and don't tell me to RDP to a XP box to administer Windows 2003/2008 i just may use it

For work of course....


RE: Is it just me or...
By callmeroy on 6/30/2009 2:37:46 PM , Rating: 2
Your post carries no weight. As someone who's been reading this site for years --- i can say this is pretty par for the course with how DT is so why you are trying to spur up some conspiracy thing is beyond me --- unless you are a new visitor to the site.

They go with what people are talking about -- or at least what they think folks would be talking about as it relates to tech in some way...why do you think they posted plenty of stories about Apple products recently as well --- because folks flock around the Iphone - so they post a couple stories on the Iphone, so then why are you surprised that a few stories come out regarding the company that has produced the most widely used commercial OS the world has yet known, as they provide details relating to their latest OS?


Upgrade Windows now at Apple.com
By honestIT on 6/29/2009 9:40:59 PM , Rating: 1
It's been available for years

Sad when Windows lovers are placing their hope and dreams on a beta OS......




By callmeroy on 6/30/2009 1:41:35 PM , Rating: 2
Leave to an Apple fan to be exceedingly over dramatic...

"Placing their hopes and dreams on a beta OS..."

Funny I just think of my computer as a tool and the OS enables my use of that tool to do what I need it to do....my hopes and dreams? I save my hopes and dreams for far more important things in my life than a computer or a piece of software....get a grip dude....its just a product.

Also Windows 7 RC is highly polished for an RC if you ask me, I've been using it and playing around with it for a couple weeks now, I'm far more impressed than I was at this stage with Vista (which I never bought)....I just pre-ordered my W7 upgrade...


These type of articles are ridiculous
By GTVic on 6/29/2009 5:03:25 PM , Rating: 2
Windows 7 is priced too high, it won't save PCs, blah, blah blah, etc.

What is the point here, to write sensational headlines that grab attention and deliver meaningless information?

Another moron recently decided to announce that the Windows 7 free upgrade program doesn't apply to corporations. This was truly idiotic. Corporations don't buy computers and then register with Microsoft for free updates. They plan their purchases and roll outs far in advance and generally put their own OS image on the computer.




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











botimage
Copyright 2009 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki