backtop

Software No Upgrade to Windows Vista Ultimate
Marcus Yam (Blog) - October 30, 2006 9:42 AM
Print E-mail del.icio.us 103 comment(s) - last by NullSubroutine.. on Nov 8 at 9:10 AM
Plus Acer says that Vista is a clever disguise for a Windows price hike

Those who were paying attention when Microsoft formally announced its Windows Vista Upgrade program might have noticed that the new OS' top variant, Vista Ultimate, is unavailable for upgrade. No matter which version of Windows XP a consumer purchases with a new PC this holiday season, there will be no discounted upgrade path to Vista Ultimate.

This is how the program works: upgrades from Windows XP Media Center Edition 2005 to Windows Vista Home Premium, and upgrades from Windows XP Professional, Windows XP Tablet PC Edition and Windows XP Professional x64 Edition to Windows Vista Business and Windows Vista Business 64, will be offered for a nominal fee. Upgrades from Windows XP Home Edition to Windows Vista Home Basic and to Windows Vista Home Premium will be offered at a 50 percent discount from the boxed product upgrade price, plus the cost of shipping and handling.

"There is currently no upgrade path under the Tech Guarantee programs from Windows XP to Ultimate, since Vista Ultimate is an entirely new high end product with significant functionality and value-added compared to existing high end Windows XP product," stated Microsoft in an email to iTWire.

Consumers who wish to run the top level of Windows Vista may find themselves holding off on a purchase until the new operating system launches early 2007.

In other potentially unsettling Windows Vista news, top OEM Acer claims that the most basic version of Vista (Home Basic) is so poorly featured that consumers will simply reject it, according to PC Pro.

"The new [Vista] experience you hear of, if you get Basic, you won't feel it at all," said Jim Wong, senior corporate vice president at Acer. "There's no [Aero] graphics, no Media Center, no remote control."

Wong says that part of the problem is that many of the new features that Microsoft have advertised about its upcoming OS are not found in Vista Home Basic, but rather Vista Home Premium, which he calls "the real Vista."

Wong also expressed displeasure at Microsoft raising the price of its manufacturer's license by 10 percent price from XP Home to Vista Home Basic. This directly affects PC manufacturer's bottom lines, as Wong comments, "We have to pay more but users are not going to pay more." The change in licensing pricing raises the cost to build a PC by one to two percent, which represents a significant portion of an OEM's margin.

All versions of Windows Vista are slated for January 2007 appearance. Windows Vista was set to be released to manufacturers in late October, but now faces a two week delay due to a last minute bug hunt.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
not worth it
By Pwnt Soup on 10/30/2006 11:54:29 AM , Rating: 2
i have tried vista rc2, and frankly i dont care much for it at all. not wanting too simply bash ms, i'll simply say this about it, it looks very pretty, and seems too be very well done over all, but i am not pleased with it over all. it seems to be made for dummies who dont like choices or doing things for themselves. i may not be the target for this os, but i feel almost insulted by it when i try too do anything with it. granted i felt the same about xp when it was new. i simply do not care for it and wont be upgrading anytime soon. ms has a fine product for most people i guess, but not for me.




RE: not worth it
By dgingeri on 10/30/2006 12:07:08 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
i'll simply say this about it, it looks very pretty, and seems too be very well done over all, but i am not pleased with it over all. it seems to be made for dummies who dont like choices or doing things for themselves. i may not be the target for this os, but i feel almost insulted by it when i try too do anything with it.


That is the part about catering to 'average users'. they don't make money catering to technical users. we are far too small of a market. Why do you think Linux isn't dominating things right now, even though it can be had for free? It's the 'average user' that runs this industry.


RE: not worth it
By encryptkeeper on 10/30/2006 2:48:59 PM , Rating: 2
they don't make money catering to technical users
Well this is the problem with companies like Microsoft and Sony. They have gotten so full of their own hot air and believe their products are so revolutionary that they think the general public is chock full of tekkie people who will instantly see how technically impressive their products are. The reality is our society is mainly filled with people who don't know a clue about what they're buying, just that something big and expensive and flashy is the best. Then there are companies like Apple and Nintendo, who want to make products that can do almost everything that the high tech guys can do, look as good but be MUCH more simple to use. That's the market Microsoft needed to design Vista for. But again, they think everyone out there has a P4 computer with a gig and a half of memory. Time to wake up Microsoft!


RE: not worth it
By Pirks on 10/30/2006 3:47:28 PM , Rating: 1
I believe the market will ultimately decide where MS is going to move. if amount of people preferring tightly integrated one-provider-for-everything solutions like Apple Mac grows significantly enough - then MS will just enter PC hardware business and OEMs will have to bite the dust... unfortunately. poor Dell... but, honestly, it's very hard for me to believe the market will shift THIS drastically, that's another revolution, no less. it's hard for me to foresee Dell dying because MS follows Apple trail and offers a series of slick and easy to use MS PCs for sale.

it's an interesting question where this drive for easiness-to-use will bring us. Apple is growing fast and opening new stores like crazy - the question now is not when or if Apple starts hurting big boys like Dell, Sony and others, the question is what MS and its partners can fight back with and what role OEMs will play here - will they just gradually morph into hardware suppliers for MS PC? and what about corporate market? so far Apple was absent there but will they crack it after beating MS on the US home PC market?

probably the most likely scenario is where MS turns into two headed company - one sells tightly integrated MS PC for average joe consumer, and the other sells volume chinese PCs together with OEMs to corporations. by exploiting strengths of branding for joe blow and strengths of low price/high performance for corporations MS can possibly beat Apple into submission... I hope they will :)


RE: not worth it
By dgingeri on 10/30/2006 6:43:08 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I believe the market will ultimately decide where MS is going to move.


That is what worries me the most about the PC industry. Right now, the whole industry is run, very unstably, by the decisions of average users and non-technical corporate managers based partly on advice from technical people. At least right now, we have some small say in what goes on, but in the near future I fear those average users will quit asking their cousins, sons, friends, and friend's friends for advice and just buy what the guy at Best Buy tells them to buy or the corporate manager buys what the vendor that took him golfing tells him to buy.

At that point, the PC industry will go the way of the auto industry and we'll all be running computers that suck up the electricity that currently powers a whole house AC unit with slower performance than a P3-700 and will cost more than I make in a year and manufacturered by MS.

Don't get me wrong, I like MS right now. they make the easiest to use, easiest to troubleshoot, and most stable OS and Office software I've seen. They continue to make good software despite the competition creating such crap that they can't compete anymore. They have even created software to cover small markets that previously we only had crap to deal with.

What worries me is that MS management will start catering more and more to the masses and forget what a good product really is. Vista is the start of that decline. It's slower, less stable, and more locked down than anything they have created, making it harder for support personel to do their jobs while piling more work on their desks. The big thing that average users will like about it is the pretty semi-transparent windows and the pretty effects they do.


RE: not worth it
By Pirks on 10/30/2006 8:18:21 PM , Rating: 2
yeah, market economy and capitalism are two sad things, too bad nothing else works out. communists tried to dump market forces and implement new "scientific" way of life where everything is planned by so called "smart" techies who are supposed to know much more than your dumb average consumer. well, you can take a plane to Russia and see what was the result of it - you're welcome to observe it anytime, man! :P

also try North Korea and Cuba while in the process ;)

I'm glad MS follows market. btw didn't you notice that our favorite clown mr. jobs was trying to impose his "smart" vision on the customers for a loong time? didn't you notice how Apple jumped high after he finally bent over, dumped much of his PPC lunacy and other garbage and jumped into the windows boat by making WinXP compatible WinMacs? see how following market can bring you happiness and money?

I'm actually not sure it's bad. in fact, I think it's good. why? because us techies will always have Linux and other alternatives, and I can customize my XP to bones, hence I won't bother myself with what MS does to dumb Vista down - there will always be a way for me to bend it to my will, just a matter of time and er.. little help from hacking community, you know ;)


RE: not worth it
By hergieburbur on 10/30/2006 9:22:58 PM , Rating: 4
While you are knocking Communism in your almighty knowledge of the world, you might want to note that China is communist AND is the world second largest economy, and is poised to pass the US within 10-15 years.

Also, I have been to Russia, and I would bet its not as bad as you think. (Their system failed just as much because of the fact that nearly 60% of their GDP went to the military as it did because of the inherent flaws of the system).

That being said, I am not so sure that the consumer tech industry is all that market driven for the giants of the industry. Especially when it comes to Processors and OSes. The computer-ignorant masses will buy what ever MS,Intel, et al. tell them is the best product for them. How else do you explain Windows ME? (Which I think Vista home is the new version of.) Or the Fact that Intel is pushin quad-core on home PCs as the next wave when most software can't even take advantage of dual-core yet?


RE: not worth it
By hergieburbur on 10/30/2006 9:28:42 PM , Rating: 3
Before People explode, I am not a communist, nor do I believe communism works in any type of free society, I was just pointing out that our way of life is not the only way of life.


RE: not worth it
By Pirks on 10/30/06, Rating: -1
RE: not worth it
By Pirks on 10/30/06, Rating: 0
RE: not worth it
By hergieburbur on 10/30/2006 11:54:49 PM , Rating: 3
Actually, China IS a communist country, since communism is a social ideology and form of Government, not an economic model. It is just different from the traditional Marxist/Leninist style of communism. And I KNOW Russia is not communist anymore, thats my point, I was there about 10 years ago, when they were still deep in transition, and I understand where they were when it was communist, communisms affects on their country, and the reasons communism failed (apparently better than you do).

Again, communism is NOT an economic model, though it does often include economics, so your statements are not even relevant here in the first place.

And Speaking of CLEVER OMISSIONS, you conveniently skipped the fact that I said it is not entirely market driven for the GIANTS OF THE INDUSTRY, which at this point in time doesn't really include any of the companies you mentioned. Of course the industry as a whole is market driven, that is basic economics, but there are cases where mega-companies can drive the market (do some research on Wal-Mart if you ever get curious, or read below).

As for Intel dropping Netburst, it took YEARS for the market to catch on to the fact that Netburst was inferior to AMD's offering and start buying AMD, and Intel was more than happy to stick with it an insist it was the way to go the whole time. And guess what, they made BILLIONS from peoples' ignorance and acceptance of what they were told while the "market" was driving them.

You can say the same thing about MS. They have forced the market to accept the same OS for 5+ years, and their new offering (Vista) is basically a GUI refresh with some other basic updates, and they basically dropped some of the features that were in higher demand, yet people will eat it up despite the fact that they are being fed what looks to be an inferior product. Again, MS has made BILLIONS by dictating to the market what they would buy rather than allowing the market to drive their offerings.

Next time you start talking about BS, why don't you think and do some research before you post, and maybe think about more than the past year or so (see Netburst vs AMD) when citing economic indicators, since the economy takes a longer view than that.

But thanks for reminding me that I can't expect people to think for themselves and I have to spell things out in more detail before they understand.


RE: not worth it
By Pirks on 10/31/2006 2:02:02 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
communism is NOT an economic model, though it does often include economics, so your statements are not even relevant here in the first place
I'm afraid you lost the perspective here - communism IS THE ECONOMIC system based on the absence of private property and total planning of everything by the state bureaucrats who are supposed to distribute wealth in a "fair" way (wink wink nudge nudge ;)

The political part of it is less relevant. In other words you seem to be bent on the power of the state, on the monopoly of one ruling party, and you have lost the perspective WHY this monopoly exists, what is the reason? You see no difference between any dictatorship and communism, it's all the same to you. Whether it's Augusto Pinochet or Joseph Stalin, or Saddam Hussein - you call them all communists, don't you? Because they all have monopoly on power, right? See, this is the place where you fall flat - communism is THE ECONOMY, and the political system in a communist country IS SECONDARY. It's just your standard dictatorship, but where you fail to see the cornerstone ECONOMIC difference between communism and dictatorship - I see it very clear.
quote:
it is not entirely market driven for the GIANTS OF THE INDUSTRY, which at this point in time doesn't really include any of the companies you mentioned
Great! You just said Microsoft, Intel and IBM are NOT the GIANTS OF THE INDUSTRY! Niicee! Please enlighten us, what company is THE TRUE GREATEST BIGGEST GIANT OF INDUSTRY then??? :))))
quote:
As for Intel dropping Netburst, it took YEARS for the market to catch on to the fact that Netburst was inferior to AMD's offering
Nice, I love the fact that you already admitted that market actually forced Intel to stop dumpung their crap on us. Well, sure, you like to hide behind the veil of words like "YEARS" but still you just admitted it was the MARKET who shut Intel crap down - I like it! Keep on like that, you move to truth one little step at the time, keep the pace, don't slow down :)
quote:
You can say the same thing about MS. They have forced the market to accept the same OS for 5+ years

Yeah, right, they did, I agree. And somehow they decided to release Vista right now. And this has nothing to do with market or competition from Apple, right? It's just our buddy Ballmer up there deciding suddenly that he just HAS TO force the market to accept Vista right on January 2007 for precisely $400 a pop... you know, he just got that weird dream where some crazy prophet told him to do it - he heard the God's voice - and that's why he decided to do Vista release precisely this way... of course IT IS NOT BECAUSE OF THE MARKET! It was just a dream in his bald head ;))

Riiight... so is our buddy Steve Jobs - he suddenly decided that he can, you know, just for the fun of it jump from PPC to Intel. Heck, why not? MARKET does not drive Mr. Jobs, right? It's Jobs who drives market - Jobs The Driver! So he suddenly decides to jump to Intel and the market swallows it. And then, let's suppose, he decides to jump to, say... err.. Alpha AXP! Heck, he's the driver! The market will follow and just everyone will buy Alpha AXP Macs from him, right?

And then he decides that, you know, Macs are too cheap and should cost no less that $5000 a pop - sure, he's the driver. HE WILL DRIVE THE MARKET AND EVERYBODY WILL START BUYING ALPHA AXP MACS FOR $5000 A POP.

Gee, I love your logic, most funny thing of the week! Keep it coming man!
quote:
why don't you think and do some research before you post
There's a neat thing about your posts I like very much. The thing is: I don't have to do anything but to illustrate YOUR OWN IDEAS with some colorful pictures. I just, you know, color your thoughts, illustrate them with some interesting examples and let everyone have fun. No need to do anything else - your posts plus my illustrated examples in addition to them speak for themselves :)))


RE: not worth it
By hergieburbur on 10/31/2006 5:05:48 AM , Rating: 3
Don't presume to tell me what I think. Distorting my logic and taking it to extremes that I never mentioned just makes you look silly. I said from the start that this industry is not entirely market driven, and that remains true. The rest is senseless hyperbole that you added in an attempt to look intelligent.

I did say Microsoft and Intel are the Giants of this Industry, and I have provided proof that for a period of time, both have driven their respective markets, rather than vice versa.

I would argue that the release of Vista has VERY little to do with the recent changes in Macs business practices, especially since Mac is not a major threat to MS a this time, and further that Microsoft's release plan is designed as much to set the various markets as it is a response to any market forces. Their pricing model is NOT in line with the current market, else they would not be charging their OEMs so much more, nor would they charge $400 for an OS.

As for your comments on Communism, China is a communist government without a communist economy, thus putting the lie to your statements. Further true Communism is NOT the same as a dictatorship, though you mistakenly seem to think so. You probably equate communism and socialism as the same and think this country is a democracy as well.


RE: not worth it
By Pirks on 10/31/2006 11:58:55 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
I said from the start that this industry is not entirely market driven, and that remains true
Care to give al least one example of a truly giant Western industrial company that is not market driven? Let's see if you have any proof for your words :)
quote:
I did say Microsoft and Intel are the Giants of this Industry, and I have provided proof that for a period of time, both have driven their respective markets
Interesting. So you think that if company manages to dump its stupidity on the market and get punished for doing that (like Intel got punished by market for dumping Netburst on it) then that company DRIVES MARKET? Alright, IF YOU MISS that PUNISHMENT part - I let you get away with the statement that "company drives market". BUT ONLY IF you miss it - that's THE point :)))
quote:
I would argue that the release of Vista has VERY little to do with the recent changes in Macs business practices

You don't believe MS was reacting to OS X, and I believe that without competition from OS X Microsoft would delay Vista for a couple of years more, very easily. Why? Because I saw how Microsoft was hastily RESPONDING TO _MARKET_ when they saw IE losing the grip and MARKET demanding new version of IE by boycotting IE6 and going to Firefox in droves. If MS dropped IE development for several years not DOING ANYTHING to it because there was no competition - you think they WOULD NOT do the same with Vista? Because Vista is somehow magically different from IE or any other of their software products? You can tell me fairy tales about how MS was carefully planning IE7 and Vista release just at that time, HOW CAREFULLY MS was planning to DROP WINFS from THE VERY beginning, how all that LONGHORN RESET story (ever heard about it? I doubt that ;) was carefully planned from the very beginning... and so on and so forth. Yeah, sure, keep on producing fairy tales like these. I just happen to see some "coincidence" on the market whenever MS is moving fast. You know, that "coincidence" when MS was running fast to develop IE and grab the market from Netscape... NOT MARKET forces you say - suuree yeaaahh riight... not them. And introduction of .NET has nothing, absolutely nothing to do with Sun and its Java... ok, keep your funny stories coming :))
quote:
Their pricing model is NOT in line with the current market, else they would not be charging their OEMs so much more, nor would they charge $400 for an OS
What's wrong with their prices? They set them depending on MARKET demand, this is totally normal. Why do you think they ignore market and get the prices off some crazy dream of Ballmer? Why do you think they follow some voice of God when they write their prices? Care to add any hard proof to another fairy tale of yours? ;)
quote:
Further true Communism is NOT the same as a dictatorship
Is there any serious politics-wise difference between Joseph Stalin and Adolf Hitler, for example? Enlighten me, I always thought they both were dictators. Now you're telling me Stalin was not a dictator :))) Very funny - so who he was then?? ;) A president? A general secretary? A king? Come on, elaborate on that please, this becomes ever more interesting and entertaining!


RE: not worth it
By hergieburbur on 10/31/2006 1:32:34 PM , Rating: 2
If you think that over the long term that Intel was PUNISHED by making BILLIONS out of an inferior design over a period of at least three years while they didn't have to invest in a new design, I'd love to see what you consider a reward. Yes, in the end they lost market share and responded to the market to improve their sales, but they over the long term, they were able to steer the market to meet their designs, and I guarantee the money they made far outweighs this so-called punishment of yours.

AGAIN, I never said those companies don't respond to market forces, of course they do. You keep attempting to twist what I say into something I didn't say in order to prove your point. You obviously are not going to see what I am trying to say, so I will leave you to argue with yourself, I am sure you will.

As for your other comments:

quote:
Is there any serious politics-wise difference between Joseph Stalin and Adolf Hitler, for example? Enlighten me, I always thought they both were dictators. Now you're telling me Stalin was not a dictator :))) Very funny - so who he was then?? ;) A president? A general secretary? A king? Come on, elaborate on that please, this becomes ever more interesting and entertaining!


1) Hitler was a Fascist which is as far right (conservative ) as you can get while Stalin was technically a Communist, which is a far left (liberal) as you can be, and while the whole spectrum is circular, they are at the same time polar opposites with Fascism stating everything is for the good of the state, and Communism stating everything is done for the good of the people.
2) Hitler and Stalin were both power hungry mad-men that corrupted their respective political systems to meet their own whims. Stalin was a dictator and a communist, those the followed him were not. Neither is Nguyen Minh TRIET (the current head of Vietnam, another communist country), nor most of the premiers of China. A dictator is somone who is responsible only to himself, and all of those I mentioned were responsible to their respective cabinets to be elected every few years. So if you want to attempt to use the exception to prove the rule, which is a completely invalid logical argument, then be my guest.
3) If you want a real comparison, why don't you compare Mussolini and Gorbachov or Wen Jiabao?

In fact, that's your homework for tonight, go find the difference in their political ideologies. Until you can prove that you can come up with something intelligent rather than just twisting what I say, I will no longer be bothering to respond.


RE: not worth it
By Pirks on 10/31/2006 3:36:10 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Intel was PUNISHED by making BILLIONS out of an inferior design over a period of at least three years while they didn't have to invest in a new design, I'd love to see what you consider a reward
A reward is when you win BOTH the market share and billions. A punishment is a market reaction that causes a company to jump out of it and start running around looking for quick fix - which was Intel running to their Israel labs screaming for help after AMD kicked them bad using THE MARKET. Which was Microsoft running screaming with stripping Vista of WinFS to make a quick patchy fix out of infinitely delaying Longhorn, or again Microsoft rushing to do anything possible to stop Firefox, hence instantly restarting IE development. Which was IBM dumping their PC business because THE MARKET did not want it. Which is a gazillion of dead companies or products because THE MARKET did not want them.

In other words - what are your billions good for if your competitors will tear you apart by taking your market share? Look at SGI - they'd be absolutely happy to listen to your tales about "driving" the market, in fact, this is precisely what they did! They were enjoying their own delusions of "driving" the market... until market FORCED them to file for bankrupcy protection recently! How about that? Do you like this story of SGI "driving" market? What would you say about BILLIONS that SGI made, huh? Where are those BILLIONS, buddy? :))) Hehehe

Yes, you can fool people for some time - Intel did it successfully, MS did it successfully, but where's that drive of yours that "drives the market"? Where's this Intel new design NOT COPIED from _market_endorsed_ AMD design that's driving the market, eh? Where's Vista GUI not copied from again _market_endorsed_ OS X GUI that drives the market? See, there's no such thing. This imaginary "drive of the market" you talking about does not exist.

All our discussion boils down to one important point - NOONE can fool people indefinitely. There's no company in the world that can sell inferior products indefinitely. Sooner or later that company will be FORCED to CHANGE its behavior, FORCED BY THE _MARKET_.

If you agree with that then we have nothing more to discuss here, right? :)

quote:
Stalin was a dictator and a communist
You're very close now! Keep moving - truth is just one step away. Here's how to make that step: try answering a couple of related questions:

why Stalin was not just your plain vanilla dictator, why he was a _COMMUNIST_? was this related to the ECONOMY of Soviet Union? was there any similarity between economies of Soviet Union and North Korea and Cuba? if there was - does it tell us anything?

The right answers to these question will tell you why communism is the _economical_ system. Happy thinking ;)


RE: not worth it
By hergieburbur on 10/31/2006 3:58:37 PM , Rating: 2
I have said from the start that no one can drive the market indefinitely, but that some larger companies can drive it for a time. You are now saying the same thing, so apparently we agree on that.

As for your political/economical arguments, you are still missing it. Please tell me which type of government China and Vietnam have, and what type of economies?


RE: not worth it
By Pirks on 10/31/2006 4:49:44 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I have said from the start that no one can drive the market indefinitely, but that some larger companies can drive it for a time. You are now saying the same thing, so apparently we agree on that.
Yeah, almost the same. The only little difference between us is that what you call "driving the market" I call "fooling the market".
quote:
which type of government China and Vietnam have, and what type of economies?
The government there is a collective dictatorship Soviet Politburo-style, with several people on top holding tight grip on power. Economy in both countries is mostly a free market one, with remnants of state owned enterprises slowly rotting apart and gradually being dismantled or sold to private companies. All traces of communism are gone from both a long time ago.


RE: not worth it
By hergieburbur on 10/31/2006 12:02:54 AM , Rating: 3
PS, The economic model commonly associated with communism does not work on a large scale, we all know that's been proven. However there is more to it than that:

North Korea suffers from a lack or resources/fertile and a bloated military budget.

Both NK and Cuba suffer from trade embargoes placed upon them by other countries.

Cuba for example, has two main exports: Sugar and Tobacco, with an enormous trading partner 90 miles away that will not trade with them on an equal footing, which cripples their economy.


RE: not worth it
By Pirks on 10/31/06, Rating: 0
RE: not worth it
By NullSubroutine on 11/8/2006 9:10:48 AM , Rating: 1
for every 1 failed "communist state" you could easily see 5 failed capitalist states.


RE: not worth it
By Christopher1 on 11/1/06, Rating: 0
RE: not worth it
By thejez on 10/30/06, Rating: 0
RE: not worth it
By Pirks on 10/30/2006 1:40:11 PM , Rating: 2
woah, I've seen a lot of weirdo freaks on this forum but saying that Unix is a dumb dumb os... man, you just made a world record here - congrats! ;))


RE: not worth it
By Pwnt Soup on 10/30/2006 2:35:12 PM , Rating: 2
i dident want too simply bash MS in my post, and i'm sure mainstream users will flock too vista as they allways flock too the next new thing...but i honestly dont see vista as any kind of improvement, and it seems that MS is gonna make some big money with vista, even if Bill does some good with his cash, i for one dont aprove of the pricing of vista, but honestly theres simply nothing too be done about it. MS will do as they want with little concern for end users like us, who can see through the smoke and mirrors.


RE: not worth it
By Pirks on 10/30/2006 3:25:05 PM , Rating: 2
you don't see any kind of improvement in Vista for the same reason most people didn't see any kind of improvement in NT 4. why would an average joe see any improvement if an OS looks, feels and even smells about the same as the previous version? you think anyone cares about what "kernel" or "some-other-hard-to-spell-or-even-imagine-thingie" is inside the OS and drives everything you actually see?

you think if you change your internal combustion engine to hydrogen powered engine in the same body/color/etc, i.e. inside the same SHAPED car - you see any difference? I bet not! why? because you're not a techie, so this is normal. most people don't see much difference between Vista and XP since indeed they look the same in many aspects.

but not let yourself to be misguided by blind men like Beenthere - there IS a second revolution happening in MS desktop OSes, and it's pretty much comparable to NT revolution in late 90s when old DOS based OS was thrown out and replaced with a new kernel based OS which actually looked as a clone of a previous OS!

same stuff in Vista today - there was a _major_ overhaul of the GUI presentation system, and everything there is now is up to date, it's not your 1980s with message based drawing anymore - it's multilayer texture compositing on the fly baby, plus declarative GUI with XAML and many other major groundbreaking features (prioritized IO anyone? just don't ask blindfolded Beenthere what it is :P).

well, that new GUI system IS basically Vista itself, all the other things came on top or in addition to it. you can call UAP or Windows Mail or even Windows Desktop Search a minor addition - hard to argue here, no matter how many of those are in Vista - but this second revolution in GUI department is actually what makes Vista a Second Revolution in MS desktop OS department, no less.

there's also a consistency thing, where MS doesn't want its new OS to look totally different from the previous version. they COULD afford it in Office 2007 with ribbons (I'm sure you heard about very serious GUI concepts changes in Office 2007), but they chose to tread much more carefully with Windows. this is WHY you see Vista so similar to XP - because MS INTENTIONALLY decided to do so.

it's normal for Vista to look like a minor upgrade for many users, but give it time - with the new GUI subsystem we should see new user interface in a lot of apps that was impossible with XP. and THEN it'll be the time to laugh at Beenthere, but now it's a little too early ;)


RE: not worth it
By hergieburbur on 10/30/2006 9:31:48 PM , Rating: 1
SO basically what you said boils down to its a GUI refresh, which you can achieve on Windows XP with a whole mess of cheaper and currently available products which won't use 2GB of memory?

It seems to me that all the useful features Vista was supposed to have (such as the new file system) have been taken out, and we are left with a product that can almost already be had by using third party software and Windows XP, for less than the upgrade cost.


RE: not worth it
By Pirks on 10/30/06, Rating: 0
RE: not worth it
By msva124 on 10/30/2006 7:48:56 PM , Rating: 2
That's what I was afraid of. This could be Microsoft's first bomb (not including Bob). I really like Windows XP because it is stable yet gives you the freedom to do whatever you want. Hell, you can patch the kernel if you feel like it. Users like freedom, even if they have to deal with spyware and viruses. They do not like being treated like children. I have not yet tried Windows Vista so I shouldn't talk. But based on everything I've read, the blogs, the new features, .NET, the new interface for Office, and just the general direction MS has taken in the past few years, I'm really afraid for them.

There are various types on computer geeks, many of whom favor Microsoft products. They are the ones that family and friends go to when they have a question about tech stuff. If they don't like Windows Vista, it will sell poorly.


RE: not worth it
By lobadobadingdong on 10/30/2006 9:31:47 PM , Rating: 2
Someone forgot about WindowsME...


RE: not worth it
By cubby1223 on 11/3/2006 8:39:59 PM , Rating: 2
There's no way Vista is going to be a bomb. Even Windows ME sold a whole lot of copies. Dell, HP, Gateway, etc. are all going to convert 99% to Vista. And we already know, it's not even close trying to match their prices on building a system from parts - people are going to continue buying store brand systems, not custom systems from local vendors (like any really exist anymore).

The one thing that just pissed me off with Vista more than anything else, well two things: (1) they do not want people running at 1024x768 anymore, that's clearly obvious by the ginormous icons in the default installation - and (2) Vista makes me feel like I'm just a little kid needing to ask & be granted permission to do *anything* with the computer, and I just don't think I'm up to relearning how to remove all of the new "features" and "pop-up" warnings...


RE: not worth it
By moisiss on 11/1/2006 5:20:27 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
it looks very pretty, and seems too be very well done over all, but i am not pleased with it over all. it seems to be made for dummies who dont like choices or doing things for themselves.


... sounds like OSX.


Does this actually suprise anyone?
By DigitalFreak on 10/30/06, Rating: 0
RE: Does this actually suprise anyone?
By idboracle on 10/30/06, Rating: 0
RE: Does this actually suprise anyone?
By Griswold on 10/30/06, Rating: 0
By MrDiSante on 10/30/2006 5:26:42 PM , Rating: 3
Is no one even both trying to account for inflation? Assuming an average inflation rate of 2% per year one gets 10.4% infation in 5 years. Hmm... anyone see a similar number?


RE: Does this actually suprise anyone?
By Bonrock on 10/30/2006 11:20:25 AM , Rating: 5
"It's just another tax, except it goes into Bills wallet rather that doing any good for the community."

Yeah, because we all know Bill Gates is the stingiest man alive and hasn't made a single noteworthy contribution to charity.


By rushfan2006 on 10/30/2006 11:35:55 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
It's just another tax, except it goes into Bills wallet rather that doing any good for the community. M$ and bill should be ashamed of themselves for foisting on us this thing that really adds zero productivity for the ordinary user.


Just points:

-I fully agree that some of the Vista pricing is extremely expensive, as such I won't ever by retail and in fact (like I did with XP) I'll wait for much cheaper OEM version of the product that will most benefit my needs. You any one else can obviously do the same.

-I'm all for calling out unfairness on industry leaders/popular business leaders....its easy to place blame on other people for all our woes, particularly when said folks are rolling in the money while we try to make the mortgage, put food on the table and still have some money for some kind of social life (eating out, movies, clubs, etc.). However your statement about how money goes into Bills wallet rather than "help the community".....last time I checked this is a free-enterprise economy, and also last time I checked Bill Gates has donated BILLIONS to charity and actually, according to magazines like BusinessWeek, he is devoting more and more time to his foundation and less to Microsoft. So go ask the tens of thousands of families that benefit from his charities before you rant about how the man doesn't help the community.



RE: Does this actually suprise anyone?
By therealnickdanger on 10/30/2006 10:22:28 AM , Rating: 2
Vista = new product. 10% OEM price increase for said new product.

I guess I don't see what the problem is? So Acer/Dell/etc. have to pay a little bit more to sell PCs with Vista installed. Should Microsoft not be allowed to set prices as they wish? Vista is by no means a mandatory product - neither is using a computer for that matter - sounds like whining. I dispise whiners.

Like someone else said, they can switch to Linux if they can't compete.


RE: Does this actually suprise anyone?
By h0kiez on 10/30/2006 10:39:16 AM , Rating: 4
Agreed. I think the prices are pretty fair (especially...buy a new comp with XP Media Center, then get Vista Home Premium for free), but even if they weren't fair, so what? If it's worth it to you, then buy it. If not, then don't. 1/2 of the whiners will still buy it...the other half will steal it under the guise of "it's too expensive"...when of course they would've done anyway regardless of price.


RE: Does this actually suprise anyone?
By rushfan2006 on 10/30/2006 11:42:04 AM , Rating: 3
Good point...definitely I predict Vista to be the most pirated OS in history....

And as you stated people, like they ALWAYS do, will give a lame excuse like "well that's what MS gets for making the OS so expensive...."...the ONLY reason folks do that is because of the nature of the product -- its intangible...just ones and zeros......imagine applying the same logic to a big ticket material image like a car......then a cop catches you and goes "yeah well I stole (pirated) the car (software) because it was too expensive...".

;)

Have to admit I don't know what is more enjoyable the lame excuses people give or the very fact that they REALLY believe that most of us are fools enough to buy into them as if they really are just stealing for some noble or honorable cause or point to make.....

No you are stealing to get something for nothing....that's your whole reason folks at least stop lying about it my god.



RE: Does this actually suprise anyone?
By Hydrofirex on 10/30/2006 1:17:13 PM , Rating: 4
Most pirated version of an OS EVER? Good luck! They've slowly cracked down to the point that you really can't now. Unless you plan on never connecting to the internet, installing any updates (which are basically a must for any Microsoft product), or even installing any of the extra companion software they plan on offering (ie. Windows Defender).

Licenses man, why do you think they've cracked down on their EULA agreement, and added the whole Windows Validation program. Windows 98 was probably the most pirated version as there was basically nothing to stop you. Vista on the other hand, is going to be a severely crippled OS without Microsoft support/Updates (Think how bad XP would be if you couldn't get service packs). There are still way's around in XP, but they are filled with hassles and require above average user skill, not to mention you'd have to discover these loop holes, and even then it still has some serious drawbacks to just paying for it... unless you find the one version of windows which still freely installs.

I love how everyone who goes out and pays full price for something thinks their better than everyone else. If you think piracy is lame, then attack it with logic and intelligence, not ego and that lame superior tone.

This OS is outrageously priced, and whether I agree it's moral or not, I applaud anyone clever enough to bypass paying jacked up prices and nab their own free copy. It's not going to be easy for the reasons I've illustrated, and it's going to take a savvy user, but hey, if they can do it, are happy with the OS, and they can sleep fine with it, then whatever, that's between them and their conscience.

HfX


By poohbear on 10/30/2006 1:36:42 PM , Rating: 4
riiiiight. i think most of us can differentiate between copy right infringement and stealing. grow up please and spare us your lectures.


By ZeeStorm on 10/30/2006 1:45:03 PM , Rating: 1
Anybody that knows how to pirate Vista, knows it isn't worth trouble. Performance hit for some goodies? You might as well get DesktopX, and with that you get much more customization and the compatibility of WindowsXP applications and games. I don't see the piracy going very far on a crappy product.


RE: Does this actually suprise anyone?
By Lonyo on 10/30/2006 12:31:46 PM , Rating: 3
The price increase is only really in-line with inflation. 10% increase in price when money is worth 10% less doesn't seem like it's an evil thing to do.


RE: Does this actually suprise anyone?
By Saist on 10/30/2006 4:04:05 PM , Rating: 2
moved to Mepis long time ago. See no reason to go back to Windows.


Acer???
By kibets on 10/30/2006 10:11:23 AM , Rating: 2
Why is Acer the only one complaining?

So what if MS wants to increase their prices! Charge more fro your hardware to offset money and quit complaining. If you don't want Vista Acer start selling your PCs with Linux.




RE: Acer???
By encryptkeeper on 10/30/2006 11:01:48 AM , Rating: 2
kibets, do some research before you rant about things you don't know about. Acer operates on volume, and there's very few manufacturers that can beat their new systems quality and price. When you operate on volume, one or two percent can kill ANY profit you would have made. That's why you can go to Techdata or D&H or Newegg and see 4,000 of the same Acer notebook model and the next week they'll be GONE.


RE: Acer???
By KristopherKubicki (blog) on 10/30/2006 1:54:03 PM , Rating: 2
Almost all Acers are manufactured by ECS. Some people are not comfortable with that.


RE: Acer???
By crystal clear on 10/31/2006 7:42:41 AM , Rating: 2
Source-http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/lo...

Microsoft's top exec talks about Vista
STEVE BALLMER TALKS ABOUT THE INNOVATIONS IN MAJOR WINDOWS UPGRADE
By Dean Takahashi
Mercury News

If you analyse this interview with Balmer , as I said-

Lets get it right
By crystal clear on 10/30/06, Rating: 3
By crystal clear on 10/30/2006 10:56:11 AM , Rating: 3

Every OEM offers their package & its up to the buyers
to choose the best deal available.
If ACER does not satisfy your requirements move on to the next OEM.

*In my earlier post I preferred to Quote the Balmer interview
because there no better source than that.
*The intention being to get some crystal clear thinking on the subject for the posters on this site.
*The Author of this article should have given the MS-Vista link (upgrade) for reference purposes ,then go into the interpretation of the upgrade programme.
*His interpretation is Not well researched,nor correct.
* He fails to quote that there are 2 versions of Vista & the version he is discussing is the commercial version(for OEM only)-the terms & conditions differ from the retail or consumer version.
*He does not double check/validate the contents of his article.
*The links he quotes are NOT to be relied upon.
* I really wonder HOW IN THE WORLD HE MISSES OUT the interview
with Balmer-THE MOST RELIABLE SOURCE to quote & base your article upon.
*One poster correctly said- "This story is misleading"

Summary-
*RESEARCH YOUR STORY thoroughly
*USE ONLY RELIABLE SOURCES to base your story contents upon.
*Double check IF YOUR INTERPRETATIONS ARE CORRECT.
NOTE_
THIS IS CONTRUCTIVE CRITCIZISM WITH POSITIVE ATTITUDE


RE: Acer???
By Mudvillager on 10/30/06, Rating: 0
RE: Acer???
By Korvon on 10/30/2006 11:39:28 AM , Rating: 2
You haven't seen Acer lately have you. They make some of the best laptops and the best customer support that can be had. Do some research.


RE: Acer???
By thirdtenor on 10/30/2006 12:24:52 PM , Rating: 1
Is the TM8204WMLI new enough for you?

Well I had one and is was not cheap by any definition, but it sure was a plastic piece of crap.

Back to the topic, if Acer really cared, start selling barbones, linux (in the US) and stop selling XP home and dont offer Vista basic. Then launch a PR campaign to educate the world on the evils of vista basic (or maybe they have already...) To bad they will get murdered by the BTO's and (then) cheaper offerings in the brick and mortars.


RE: Acer???
By encryptkeeper on 10/30/2006 2:38:21 PM , Rating: 2
The bottom line is that you'll get a lot of new computers hitting the market with Vista from all of the name brand providers. Don't expect to see an XP machine EVER again after next January from Dell or HP. Years will go by and we'll probably all cling to our XP machines until someone pulls the OS from our fingers. Really the only way to deny Vista it's glory is if it's SO bad that Microsoft won't force everyone to switch to it, like with Windows ME. I'm sure they would have loved everyone to switch to ME from 98, but we all know how that went.


RE: Acer???
By othercents on 10/30/2006 6:32:54 PM , Rating: 2
Acer needed some free PR. Therefore complaining about something they can't control seams like a good way to do it.

No matter if the price is too high or whatever people are going to pay unless they can find something better to use. This is the same thing with Microsoft Office. Everyone knows that Office Pro for $500 is overpriced especially since you can get OpenOffice for free. However OpenOffice has less than 10% of the market.

Bottom Line: People will pay and PC Manufacturers will find other ways to make money. This is the price of innovation.

Other


RE: Acer???
By mindless1 on 11/1/2006 2:54:36 PM , Rating: 2
Aren't they #4 right now? No more need for PR than anybody else.

Yes, complain about what you can't control because in a free market there are supposed to be CHOICES.

Office Pro is not what most people are running, businesses can absorb the volume license cost easier and others will tend to get it with their PC bundle or not be continually upgrading to each new version. Why haven't people moved to Open Office? Because they already owned a MS Office license, because they were not choosing $500 vs free, and because many don't even realize Open Office exists.

Bottom line: People don't and won't pay. It'll be dramatically cheaper bundled with their PC, or through volume licenses, but a rare exception when someone forks out $500 for a single MS Office license.

Innovation at $500 a pop is laughable in MS Office, the vast majority was done by Office 97-2000, most features added after that people would gladly give up for substantial savings. People just don't need these supposed features and no amount of advertising is confusing them in that what they want to do they can, save for the basic learning curve which doesn't change with later Office versions.


This story is misleading
By bunny rabid on 10/30/2006 1:02:40 PM , Rating: 5
The headline of this story, "No Upgrade to Windows Vista Ultimate," is misleadling and inaccurate.

What the Microsoft spokesperson was saying was that there was no FREE upgrade to Ultimate using the coupon-based "Express Upgrade" program.

Vista Ultimate is priced as follows:

$399 FPP (Full Package Product)
$259 Upgrade

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista/getready/edi...

If there was no UPGRADE to Vista Ultimate, why did Microsoft create an upgrade SKU and pricing?

A more accurate headline would be, "No FREE Upgrade to Vista Ultimate in Express Coupon Program," but then I doubt you'd get as many people reading the story, because who expects everything for FREE? Other than Linux users, that is. ;-)

The article continues to mislead by saying things like, quote, "there will be no discounted upgrade path to Vista Ultimate." Again, not true: the upgrade SRP is $259 instead of $399. That's a $140 discount.

It is possible to make the argument that there should be a free (coupon-based) upgrade to Vista Ultimate, but it's not an especially compelling argument. For example, if you buy XP Media Center Edition today, you can upgrade to Vista Home Premium, which includes Media Center functionality. But Vista Ultimate can also join a domain like Vista Business. XP Media Center Edition did not support joining a domain like Vista Ultimate. Therefore it seems much more logical to expect to upgrade from XP MCE to Vista Home Premium than it does to expect an upgrade to Ultimate.

Inexplicably, there's also criticism of the pricing for Vista Home Basic -- we are told it's "so poorly featured that consumers will reject it." So which is it? Is Microsoft's software too cheap or too expensive? It doesn't seem like Microsoft can win here. I thought $99 for a whole new operating system wasn't such a bad deal, but apparently the author thinks if there's no Aero Glass and no TV recording it's hardly worth touching the keyboard. And here I was thinking that a range of choices was a good thing.




RE: This story is misleading
By BigLan on 10/30/2006 2:52:17 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, the DT headline is waaaay misleading.

In addition to the retail upgrades (from XP) Vista users will also be able to buy an upgrade to ultimate from a lesser version from within vista itself. Connect to the MS website, enter your creditcard details and ultimate becomes unlocked. (I can't remember what this feature's called though.)


RE: This story is misleading
By Webgod on 10/31/2006 11:28:21 PM , Rating: 2
"Windows Anytime Upgrade"


RE: This story is misleading
By hergieburbur on 10/30/2006 9:39:48 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, you can join XP MCE to a domain. Its a relatively simple process thats takes 5 minutes of searching on the internet to find.


RE: This story is misleading
By bunny rabid on 10/30/2006 10:32:24 PM , Rating: 2
It's possible to hack the SYSTEM hive to make MCE join a domain, but that's a hack that's not supported by Microsoft (I said not supported on purpose). It is not supported by Microsoft nor by the OEMs who sell MCE PCs. See

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/88721...

I think the hack also disables Extenders while logged in because you lose Fast User Switching.


RE: This story is misleading
By Dactyl on 10/31/2006 2:14:56 AM , Rating: 2
None of the existing versions of XP has any of the features of Vista Ultimate that make it "Ultimate"

Moving from XP MCE to Vista Home Premium is a trade up. Why whould MSFT give people MORE than the smallest trade up--for FREE?

If you want Ultimate, you'll have to pay for it (or pirate it). MSFT is not going to hand it to you. Get over it.


Business Edition?
By jonmcc33 on 10/30/2006 8:34:31 PM , Rating: 2
I use XP Pro because XP Home lacks the NTFS features that I prefer for security. So my only option to upgrade is Vista Business Edition? No freakin' thanks!




RE: Business Edition?
By Pirks on 10/30/2006 9:06:47 PM , Rating: 2
XP MCE is the same as Pro with Media Center on top. You should've used MCE instead of Pro - it's your fault man :P


RE: Business Edition?
By hergieburbur on 10/30/2006 9:34:07 PM , Rating: 2
Not quite, you have to do a couple hacks to join a domain or use the backup utility, etc...


RE: Business Edition?
By Pirks on 10/30/2006 10:14:21 PM , Rating: 2
From the point of view of the original poster (see his "the NTFS features that I prefer for security" sentence) these two are the same. He doesn't seem to care about domain. And if you exclude domain stuff they ARE the same.


Inflation...
By Bonrock on 10/30/2006 11:27:16 AM , Rating: 5
Look, I wish Windows was cheaper as much as the next guy does. But Windows Vista is coming more than 5 years after Windows XP. A 10% increase in the price of Windows over 5 years isn't much; in fact, one could attribute it to inflation. The price of a cheeseburger at my local grill has gone up by more than 10% over the past 5 years, so why should Microsoft keep its prices constant?

Like I said, I do wish Windows was cheaper in the first place... I'm just saying that this isn't necessarily the devious price hike people are making it out to be.




RE: Inflation...
By johnsonx on 10/30/2006 8:02:34 PM , Rating: 2
But it isn't simply a 10% increase for equivalent products. The 10% increase is for a comparatively crippled product. XP Home is not obviously crippled compared to XP Pro - it's only features that *MOST* home users would never use anyway that are missing (indeed some of my small-business customers who run non-Microsoft networks opt for XP Home since it works just the same as Pro for them but costs 50% less). Now Microsoft is saying 10% more for a product that IS crippled and comparitively undesirable. To get the version of Vista that actually is equivalent to XP Home you have to go with Home Premium for EVEN MORE money. Yes, Home Premium many of the MCE features too, but most people aren't interested in those.

So the end point is that Vista is a BIG stealth price increase for Windows, far bigger in actually effect than just 10%.

If Home Basic had Aero, I think there'd be little to argue about. But then Home Premium sales would be far lower.


Retail Upgrade?
By Sunday Ironfoot on 10/30/2006 10:41:45 AM , Rating: 2
What about an off the shelf retail upgrade to Vista Ultimate? Will they be selling this, or will our only alternative be to buy the full $400 package, or try and obtain the OEM version somehow?




RE: Retail Upgrade?
By Griswold on 10/30/2006 10:55:27 AM , Rating: 1
From all I've read up on the topic so far, yes there will be an retail upgrade from XP to Vista ultimate at a lower price than the $399 full blown ultimate box.


RE: Retail Upgrade?
By masteraleph on 10/30/2006 1:42:16 PM , Rating: 2
The list price on it is $259.

Keep in mind that the list price on XP Pro upgrade is $199, so it's not that huge of a jump. And IIRC, the Vista Business upgrade is $199, so hypothetically, you're paying $59 for the extra MCE features that show up in Ultimate.


RE: Retail Upgrade?
By PrinceGaz on 10/30/2006 5:48:47 PM , Rating: 1
Well if they expect me to pay anything more than $100 for Vista "Ultimate" over XP Pro, then they can think again. I'm not going to accept anything less than the best when I migrate from Windows XP to Vista (probably when Vista SP1 has been released).

The more of a hassle MS make Vista upgrades, the more likely I'll use something else as my main OS. There's no doubt I'll have to use Vista to play games, but whether that is generally available is another matter.


I can't believe the complaints here
By dgingeri on 10/30/2006 12:02:46 PM , Rating: 1
Of course they have to raise prices a little. Of course they have to produce a product that is above and beyond the current high end and charge more for it.

LEt's look at a little thing called 'the real world'. we can't all get constant raises every year and expect all our prices to go down. If you want more you have to pay more. the developers want to make more too, so they can keep up with inflation and be able to provide a living for their families. 10% is not all that much for a product in development over the last 7 years. They do need to actually make up the money spent on that in order to stay profitable and stay around as a company. There is alost the little matter of paying for the guys that update Windows XP, they need to eat too. You don't want to put the programmers out of work, do you? Then again, don't answer that part.

The extra features in Vista Ultimate are going to cost more as well. It's a bit of a surprise to see that there isn't going to be an upgrade discount, but not a huge one. I'm a little disappointed in this part.

Oh, and those complaining about "the security that should have always been there". think about one thing, it's the average people that buy these things. those of us who know better are a very, very small market. Of course, Microsoft didn't want to inconvenience the average users by introducing security that those average people would complain about. They had complained enough about the security of Windows NT and Windows 2000. They wouldn't use those OS's because of the security. It actually caused a slow down. I'm quite frankly surprised that they put as much security into Vista as they did. Most average people will complain about the difficulties of installing their kids' programs that were written by loser programmers who only knew how to program for Windows 95. I have yet to see a 'Barbie' or 'Bratz' program that my neices tell their parents to buy actually work without Admin rights. Get the other programmers to do things right, and not change system files for their own use, causing crashes and security problems, and then we won't have problems with stability and security.

On the other hand, I am probably just going to stick with WinXP for a while longer until there is actually a reason for me to migrate. I bought every MS OS on release day, including WinXP up until now, but I likely won't be buying Vista for a while. I simply don't see anything special about this version. The security isn't something I'm worried about because I have securied my own system properly. The 'pretty' aspects don't interest me at all. The fact that the system slows down DirectX 9 programs bothers me. DirectX 10 doesn't currently have any supported hardware or programs. Perhaps after a year or so I may see a use in it. Windows XP is working fine for me right now, so I'll stick with it. Microsoft has simply appeased the average user with this release, and they will make money off of it, but not from me just yet.




RE: I can't believe the complaints here
By aguilpa1 on 10/30/2006 12:34:12 PM , Rating: 1
blah, blah....., I probably speak for the 1 percent or less, but if and when I decide to get Vista, it will be free to me, so no complaints here...., nuff said.


By blwest on 10/30/2006 1:04:57 PM , Rating: 2
software is like secks, it's better when it's free!


Is Micrsoft too bloated?
By othercents on 10/30/2006 6:46:30 PM , Rating: 2
What does it really take to program a new operating system? Yes I know I haven't done it and I'm sure it is hard, but really... Microsoft basically owns the OS market and gets a chunk of money for almost every computer sold today along with all their server software. Do you really think that 10% is going to make a difference between Microsoft loosing money or making money? If it is how bloated has Microsoft gotten? Maybe they need to streamline their business some. This might help them meet deadlines along with increasing their bottomline.

Do you believe that MS could make money even if the Vista Ultimate was only $50? I believe that at $50 more people will buy a real version and spend less time trying to pirate a copy. Therefore more people overall would have purchased the product allowing for either the same amount of money into Microsoft's pockets or possibly more. Not only this, but some people might even like to have a $50 per year fee for their operating system instead of the single chunk up front. That way they can get upgrades to the latest OS anytime it comes out.

I really think Microsoft needs to rethink their business plan and work on a model that will ease the cost of new versions of software that come out. A subscription model might even help Microsoft plan for new operating systems.

Other




RE: Is Micrsoft too bloated?
By Pirks on 10/30/2006 9:03:12 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
some people might even like to have a $50 per year fee for their operating system instead of the single chunk up front. That way they can get upgrades to the latest OS anytime it comes out.
This is what Apple does with OS X updates. I'd love to see MS following Apple here. How about $100 for Vista Ultimate upfront and then $100 for every major service pack, say every year? Sounds excellent, doesn't it?


Why 6 versions of Vista?
By Randalllind on 10/31/2006 9:07:29 AM , Rating: 2
Microsoft made a big deal about Lindows vs Windows confusing people saying we may buy Lindows instead of Windows.

What about 6 different versions of Windows? Also are all 6 going to be for sell at your local store? I think Steve Ballmar complain about making millions different version of windows because of EU complaints he actually fall in love with it.

6 versions now so next time they will make 12 version. They still screw you cause one has all the features but they won't tell you which one. So Joe End User goes out buying an OS and then gets home to find out it doesn't do crap like MS said because he brought the wrong version.

When XP came out there main goal was to put everything in to 1 maybe 2 different versions now they are making this so hard you don't know what to buy.




RE: Why 6 versions of Vista?
By Suomynona on 10/31/2006 3:04:02 PM , Rating: 2
There are four versions available at retail: Home Basic, Home Premium, Business, and Ultimate. Business probably won't even be available at most non-business retailers. Starter Edition isn't available in the US and Enterprise is only available for corporations.

Note also that all versions (except starter and enterprise) are offered on the same media. Users can switch from one to another by paying the price difference.


vistaz
By Russell on 10/30/2006 10:14:31 AM , Rating: 3
Do read the article people, this is regarding those systems sold between now and January that include coupons for Vista. There will be a retail upgrade copy of ultimate in the stores, but you cannot use those upgrade coupons to get a free and/or cheap Vista ultimate.




Lets get it right
By crystal clear on 10/30/2006 10:56:11 AM , Rating: 3
Interview -

What do you think of the ultimate solution of having so many different versions of Vista? I suppose Microsoft is trying to be careful not to raise the low end of the PC market too high in terms of costs?

We want to be able to target the needs -- We're talking about a market where 200 million computers ship a year. Not all of the 200 million people have the same needs. Some people want cheap. Some people don't care. Some people want a lot of features. Some are going to use it for work. Others will not. Our packaging will really support our hardware vendors in supporting the customers. At the end of the day the offering in large measure is not our software but our software with somebody else's hardware. Exactly what the mix might look like at Best Buy. It could be different at Staples. What it looks like at Dell might look different at HP. What we have done is help our OEMs (original equipment manufacturers) serve their own customers


Source-http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/lo...

Microsoft's top exec talks about Vista
STEVE BALLMER TALKS ABOUT THE INNOVATIONS IN MAJOR WINDOWS UPGRADE
By Dean Takahashi
Mercury News


The above portion of the interview could give an indication
what to expect from OEMs.
There are 2 versions-commercial version like the above & the consumer version to be released in Jan07.




No shit, Sherlock Acer
By Griswold on 10/30/2006 10:56:56 AM , Rating: 1
The home basic version probably wont even surface in many regions for the simple reason that it is aimed at developing markets.




RE: No shit, Sherlock Acer
By crystal clear on 10/30/2006 11:16:58 AM , Rating: 1
Quote-

At the end of the day the offering in large measure is not our software but our software with somebody else's hardware. Exactly what the mix might look like at Best Buy. It could be different at Staples. What it looks like at Dell might look different at HP. What we have done is help our OEMs (original equipment manufacturers) serve their own customers "

Unquote-
In short all depends what each OEM has to offer.
MS does not serve your interests rather the OEMs.


RE: No shit, Sherlock Acer
By Griswold on 10/30/2006 2:49:12 PM , Rating: 1
Doesnt really change the fact that not many OEMs will put home basic on a system sold in the US or Europe for example. So why exactly is he complaining about home basic?


... another misleading title.
By 8steve8 on 10/30/2006 2:30:26 PM , Rating: 2
yet another misleading title from dt.

it implies that u cant upgrade from xp to vista ult.

this is not adnormal here at DT to the point where i find myself not clicking on what could be interesting articles cause i distrust the title's honesty, or more correctly: accuracy.




lots of choice
By spindoc on 10/30/2006 2:56:18 PM , Rating: 2
I'm kinda looking forward to the basic version of vista. I've used Beta II for a few months and the only use I've found for the Aero Glass toolbar is to watch my CPU hit 100% when I move windows around the desktop.

As long as I can install DX10 and media player classic (6.4 I think) I'll be fine. Games and porn; nothing else matters. Well, maybe IE but Microsoft can keep everything else.




I dont think this is actualy correct
By jkresh on 10/30/2006 3:04:28 PM , Rating: 2
Even if there is no standard policy in terms of sending upgrades for vista ultimate there is a way to do it. Unless I am mistaken every vista dvd includes all copies of the OS (home basic through ultimate, though probably not enterprise), and Microsoft is allowing upgrading from that disk (so if you buy home basic and want to go to home premium you just go online buy an upgrade code (not sure what the price is) then put your dvd back in and upgrade. So if they send out discs with codes for Vista premium and you want ultimate all you have to pay for is the upgrade license from premium to ultimate (which should just be the difference in retail cost between premium and Ultimate but I don't think it has been released yet).




better free
By AnotherGuy on 10/30/2006 7:46:30 PM , Rating: 2
Well the higher the prices the better will feel like when u get it pirated I guess :)

Keep it going MS...




$150?
By NoSoftwarePatents on 10/31/2006 1:03:38 AM , Rating: 2
So can I get an OEM copy for $150 or a little less, just like XP Pro right now...?





MS Downfall
By mindless1 on 11/1/2006 3:03:40 PM , Rating: 2
Ironically it seems MS' undoing will not be a direct competitor but rather that they have overgrown their company size relative to market potential, overextended their obligations in past OS support, and raised prices when each successive version of windows will have less, truely value-added (rather than superfluous) features for most users.

As MS continues to dumb-down windows, they forget that their target market isn't new users, it's those seasoned in Windows' use even if not gurus. Emerging 3rd world markets are not going to be impressed by the escalating costs and other alternatives come ever closer to meeting the criteria of being usable by the Average Joe.

This doesn't mean MS shouldn't price it however they want, IF it were an open competitive market. Rather, it means when something grows out of control it runs out of resources (market and consumer spending caps). Everything that has a beginning has an end.




Microsoft SHOULD be ashamed
By thefrayedends on 10/30/06, Rating: 0
1st post!
By PrinceGaz on 10/30/06, Rating: -1
RE: 1st post!
By DigitalFreak on 10/30/06, Rating: -1
RE: 1st post!
By spindoc on 10/30/2006 3:02:14 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, he was first, based on the time of post.


RE: 1st post!
By johnsonx on 10/30/2006 8:09:23 PM , Rating: 3
Now he wasn't, missed by 40 seconds or so. However both of the first two posters should be banned and summarily executed for posting worthless crap.


RE: 1st post!
By johnsonx on 10/30/2006 8:10:05 PM , Rating: 2
and it appears the typo nazis will have to execute me as well!


What difference does it make?
By Beenthere on 10/30/06, Rating: -1
RE: What difference does it make?
By OrSin on 10/30/2006 11:32:25 AM , Rating: 2
That what the public beta is for. Also with MS record? What it thier record? The most used OS in history 100 times over. Yeah that sound like a crappy record. Stop hating on MS just becasue it was the in thing to do. I was not fan of vista either until I tested RC2. Vista is nice product and fits alot of the market. As far as games go, I got 2-4% decent in the games I play (mostly RPG and RTS) and thats with using only 1GB of ram. Also I but the basic on my GF computer and we are both loving it. She get a much more secure OS and I don't have to come thought and delte weathbug and other spam from he computer, now since she uses gadgets and spyware for stuff.

Bill gate has done more the world lower class then anyone one else ever. Call MS greeady if you but if Exxon took our money and did what bill does I'm all for it.


RE: What difference does it make?
By michal1980 on 10/30/06, Rating: -1
RE: What difference does it make?
By johnsonx on 10/30/2006 8:04:00 PM , Rating: 2
lol, there he is again. Always a laugh. Say hi to your brother Cornfedone and your dad Cramitpal for me.


"A politician stumbles over himself... Then they pick it out. They edit it. He runs the clip, and then he makes a funny face, and the whole audience has a Pavlovian response." -- Joe Scarborough on John Stewart over Jim Cramer

DailyTech Poll
Which web browser do you use on your primary personal machine? 






44 Comments









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