Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 6th Jan 2009 21:34 UTC
Windows Tech ARP has a collection of dates regarding Microsoft's update program. The upgrade program concerns upgrade paths from Windows Vista to Windows 7, and basically entails that when you buy a Windows Vista machine after July 1 2009, you will get a free upgrade to Windows 7 once it's released. The data also confirm a number of versions for Windows 7.
Order by: Score:
Upgrade
by lefty78312 on Tue 6th Jan 2009 21:59 UTC
lefty78312
Member since:
2005-10-18

Yeah, like the Vista upgrade for XP customers in early 2007. What a disaster!

Reply Score: 5

Versions
by Moredhas on Tue 6th Jan 2009 22:21 UTC
Moredhas
Member since:
2008-04-10

I was about to make some exasperated comment to the effect of "why do they persist with this stupid version system?", when I remembered something I saw in Mad Magazine years ago. If I remember rightly, it was a Tales from the Duck Side comic.

A manager says to a guy in the office "do something that condom machine. It's costing money, and nobody's using it". Later, the manager sees two more there, and says "What the hell do you think you're doing? Now we have three useless machines!". The employee says "wait a minute", and in the next panel, the machines are labelled Small, Medium and Large, and everyone is queued up at the large condom machine.

Whether or not there was actually a difference wasn't mentioned in the comic, but the point was, everyone wanted to make sure everyone else saw them buying a large condom; I think we have the same thing here with the Windows versions.

Reply Score: 6

RE: Versions
by _txf_ on Tue 6th Jan 2009 23:02 UTC in reply to "Versions"
_txf_ Member since:
2008-03-17

unfortunately most people care more about their penises than windows.

Plus I'd sooner be caught dead than found with windows 7 ultimate. It would label me a [insert adverb of choice here] sucker.

Edited 2009-01-06 23:10 UTC

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Versions
by StephenBeDoper on Wed 7th Jan 2009 20:43 UTC in reply to "RE: Versions"
StephenBeDoper Member since:
2005-07-06

unfortunately most people care more about their penises than windows.


...unfortunately? I'm really hoping that's an ironic statement.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Versions
by _txf_ on Wed 7th Jan 2009 21:00 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Versions"
_txf_ Member since:
2008-03-17

yeah...lol...in the context of the existence of the human race it isn't unfortunate, but in the context of the condom machine story it is.

People aren't going to say associate windows versions with social standing.

Besides real men don't use Ultimate Micro Soft size.

Edited 2009-01-07 21:02 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Versions
by StephenBeDoper on Wed 7th Jan 2009 22:22 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Versions"
StephenBeDoper Member since:
2005-07-06

yeah...lol...in the context of the existence of the human race it isn't unfortunate, but in the context of the condom machine story it is.


Call me crazy, but I can't think of *any* context where I'd put Windows (or any OS) ahead of "'ol one-eye" ;)

Reply Score: 4

RE[5]: Versions
by _txf_ on Thu 8th Jan 2009 01:06 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Versions"
_txf_ Member since:
2008-03-17

made a complete hash of it, but basically I was just saying that the anecdote about condom machines does not apply to versions of windows.

i.e. nobody (except fools) are going to feel inadequate when seen buying less than largest (Ultimate).

sigh..I must have left my brain back in 2008

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Versions
by StephenBeDoper on Thu 8th Jan 2009 01:29 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Versions"
StephenBeDoper Member since:
2005-07-06

made a complete hash of it, but basically I was just saying that the anecdote about condom machines does not apply to versions of windows.

i.e. nobody (except fools) are going to feel inadequate when seen buying less than largest (Ultimate).

sigh..I must have left my brain back in 2008


Ah yes, I see what you mean (and agree).

Sadly, there's no shortage of fools out there - or at least people with just enough knowledge to be dangerous. E.g., the folks who will very matter-of-factly tell you that you can't use an ATI video card with a nForce motherboard (or that Intel and AMD processors require different video cards).

I'm assuming that's the demographic that see "Ultimate" in a product name and then go into "Ooooh, new shiny thing" mode.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Versions
by RGCook on Wed 7th Jan 2009 01:54 UTC in reply to "Versions"
RGCook Member since:
2005-07-12

Yeah but if they only sold a "one size fits all", then nobody would feel left out or, ahem, less than ultimate.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Versions
by gehersh on Wed 7th Jan 2009 04:42 UTC in reply to "Versions"
gehersh Member since:
2006-01-03

and so the manager says: Jenkins, you're genius! I love that one.

So I guess I'm gonna wait till Windows 8. No, seriously, I'm runing XP. I have a particular set of applications I'm using on a regular basis. Vista does not offer anything substantially new. Tollbar? WTF? Do I have to move to completely new environment because of different (and not necessarily better) toolbar? And Windows 7 is essentially a patched Vista (with yet another version of toolbar, so praise the Lord!). So me stays with XP for another few years.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Versions
by Moredhas on Wed 7th Jan 2009 21:11 UTC in reply to "RE: Versions"
Moredhas Member since:
2008-04-10

Sounds to me like it would be easier for you, in the long run, to start moving to Linux. Eventually, things just aren't going to work at all with XP, and as it is you're using a pretty old OS now, so that day may be closer than you think. For most Windows programs, there are decent Linux alternatives, or even programs that cater to a different main goal but still have the functionality you want. WINE is pretty good these days - admittedly, not perfect though, and Crossover is just as good with a little more polish in the form of software installers, and managing WINE "bottles". The bottles are separate WINE environments - WINE Prefixes, I think they're actually called - which can each have their own configuration, and even be modeled off completely different versions of Windows.

I switched to Linux before Vista came out. I was worried about Microsoft basically forcing it on all Windows users, and they probably would have by restricting MS Office and Windows Live Messenger and the like, if Vista had sold better. I have used the Windows 7 beta, and although I think it's pretty nifty at the moment, I'm going to wait until Marketing get their grubby paws on it. The Longhorn betas were pretty nifty too, and look what happened. The "Libraries" feature seems interesting, but I'm already doing something similar with symlinks.

Anyway, Windows 7 might not be terrible, so if I were you I'd view it in it's own light; not in the shadow of Vista, even though they're very closely related. This, from someone who attacks Microsoft at every chance (though not undeservedly or with mindless trolling like "winblowz sux"). Linux is a very real alternative for most people though, even (or perhaps especially) complete novices to computing in general. Ignore what everyone on OS news says, since you're going to find fanboys on both sides of the debate, some of them with some very good points. My best advice would be to try and go two weeks or even a month using Linux (Mint is a great place to start, for an easy to use distro - none of the normal newbie headaches) 'cold turkey', and then form your own opinions. I tried for a couple of years to dual boot, but every time Grub came up I'd just select Windows. It's a bit like trying to give up smoking without throwing away your smokes, though you might be more disciplined than me, so dual boot if you want ;) .

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Versions
by weildish on Wed 7th Jan 2009 23:22 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Versions"
weildish Member since:
2008-12-06

I've been dual-booting with Vista and Ubuntu for a while, and then just recently tripled with Fedora, but I'm thinking I like Ubuntu better. So far, I mainly use Vista for most everything. Call me deranged, but I like how it runs-- it runs fast (on my machine, anyway) and it tackles everything I throw at it. I use Ubuntu more as an educational experience rather than because I have to, but I also like how it runs, not to mention the bouncy windows feature that I hadn't come across until then! ;) Anyway, what I'm getting at is that, for me at least, it hasn't been like trying to give up cigarettes. Vista and the programs designed for it just do everything I want a system to do better than any other systems I've been trying out. If I come across a system I like better in my reviewing, I'll begin to use mainly that.

I'm looking forward to Windows 7-- most people, even some of the alleged MS-haters, are saying it'll be a good improvement on Vista, though aside from the petty UAC (which I turned off), a slower startup and login than I'd prefer, and the fact that Vista is quite resource-hungry (which hasn't been a problem for me-- I went all out on a spiffy build), I haven't had any complaints.

I still need to get my hands on the beta, though. I haven't taken the time to look for a valid torrent, and it'd be nice to legally download it instead of sneaking.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Versions
by dwarfyperson on Thu 8th Jan 2009 23:56 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Versions"
dwarfyperson Member since:
2009-01-08

Really, windows 7 isn't all that similar to vista. they are supposedly going to jump a whole kernel version, which makes it (at least in theory) about as different from vista as vista was from XP, or 2000 was from NT4. I do agree that Win7 will fix many issues that were present on vista, on the other hand, vista has never presented an issue to me other then when I upgraded from premium to ultimate (and that was fixable). In my opinion, MS gets kind of a bad rap.

Before people tell me to try linux, I spent six months trying to get linux working on a four year old computer before realizing that linux has some weird issue with my chipset. I finally got it working, and uninstalled it a month later because it was buggy and wouldn't run games.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Versions
by StephenBeDoper on Wed 7th Jan 2009 20:28 UTC in reply to "Versions"
StephenBeDoper Member since:
2005-07-06

That's an interesting observation... I remember noticing a similar phenomenon back when Win95 was current. There was a fairly large contingent who used NT 4 instead - mainly because (so far as I can tell) it was perceived as the OS that "real men" used, at least among Windows users. (There certainly were valid reasons to use it over Win9x, I'm talking about the people who saw bragging rights as the main advantage of NT.)

Maybe Microsoft should label the upper-tier version of Windows 7 as the "Affectations of Superiority Edition."

Edited 2009-01-07 20:46 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Versions
by Moredhas on Wed 7th Jan 2009 20:51 UTC in reply to "RE: Versions"
Moredhas Member since:
2008-04-10

I'd buy a "Delusions of Grandeur" edition. I do tend to hum the Imperial March a lot...

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Versions
by StephenBeDoper on Wed 7th Jan 2009 21:05 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Versions"
StephenBeDoper Member since:
2005-07-06

I do tend to hum the Imperial March a lot...


Maybe John Williams would let them use the Imperial March as the startup sound ;)

Reply Score: 3

I didn't see a home basic version of 7
by Bounty on Tue 6th Jan 2009 22:29 UTC
Bounty
Member since:
2006-09-18

I didn't see a home basic version of 7. Even if it's just getting rid of one version, that would be a step in the right direction.

Drop 32 bit. Go back to having a Home version and a Pro version, or no versions.

-Bounty

Reply Score: 2

About the different editions
by NxStY on Tue 6th Jan 2009 23:04 UTC
NxStY
Member since:
2005-11-12

Lets not forget that Microsoft insists on having different editions for 32 or 64 bit and upgrade or full install. So there will be even more than 5 editions of windows 7.

Reply Score: 5

v Smorgasbord
by Bink on Tue 6th Jan 2009 23:59 UTC
RE: Smorgasbord
by poundsmack on Wed 7th Jan 2009 00:35 UTC in reply to "Smorgasbord"
poundsmack Member since:
2005-07-13

ah the sky is falling to many edditions!?!?!?!

grow up. it doesnt effect anyone really, its just marketing hype.

1. your standard user doesnt know what OS or eddition they run half the time. I run a computer repair business and when i ask people if they are using XP Home or Pro, they don't know. but the reality of it is, they don't know because it doesn't matter. to them its all the same.

2. only business users or "geeks" need to even note what edition they have. so the other 12% of people (geeks and IT employees) need to actualy know whats in there OS "version." IT admins (like myself) need to be able to have it join AD and have the security policy editor, after that the server does the rest. Geeks want ____________ (add whatever you want based on need). that blank can be extra medai functions, better gaming suport, cool (useless) eye candy, the list just goes on.

3. 95% of people stick with whatever was preinstalled on their machine, and they are fine with it.

conclusion: most people don't know or care that there are different flavors of windows. those who do know usualy dont care for a good reason, example being the people who say that everyone needs to release the source to everything, regaurdless of if it actually effects them.
and last, and certainly not least, those who know and actualy need a different version to do something specific make up about 1% of consumers (i am obviously not including businesses who only use the business version).

so there you have it, stop whining already. if it bugs you that much get a Mac or put a piece of tape over your monitor where it displays what version you have...

(i don't spell well, nor proof read)

Reply Score: 8

RE: Smorgasbord
by flanque on Wed 7th Jan 2009 01:36 UTC in reply to "Smorgasbord"
flanque Member since:
2005-12-15

F*uck you Microsoft! Take another page out of Apple’s play book and stop with the moronic version smorgasbord!


As opossed to the smorgasbord of linux distribution variations? If ever there's confusion about what variation to install, it's in the Linux operating system bubble.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Smorgasbord
by sbergman27 on Wed 7th Jan 2009 01:45 UTC in reply to "RE: Smorgasbord"
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

If ever there's confusion about what variation to install, it's in the Linux operating system bubble.

You often jump too quickly to conclusions, flanque. The OP seems more partial to OpenBSD. And last I looked, there was one OpenBSD. He has a point, and is standing on firm ground. And your post was tangential to that topic.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Smorgasbord
by flanque on Wed 7th Jan 2009 02:56 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Smorgasbord"
flanque Member since:
2005-12-15

You often jump too quickly to conclusions, flanque. The OP seems more partial to OpenBSD. And last I looked, there was one OpenBSD. He has a point, and is standing on firm ground. And your post was tangential to that topic.

I often jump too quickly to conclusions? Really? Perhaps it's just an alternative point of view that doesn't align with yours. It's possible, but hey, I best not just too quickly to that conclusion.

I wasn't talking about specifically Apple's demonstration of how to do it.

I also wasn't suggesting that Bink thinks it's OK for Linux distributions yet somehow not OK for Windows varients.

I was talking about the general comment of Microsoft making the apparent availability of a smorgasbord of varients and constrasting that to the smorgasbord of Linux distribution varients.

The top 10 page on distrowatch even says (italic and bold mine):
The bewildering choice and the ever increasing number of Linux distributions can be confusing for those who are new to Linux.


That's all "on-topic". Your injection of personal references to me is more tangential, if anything.

Edited 2009-01-07 02:57 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Smorgasbord
by MaxKlokan on Thu 8th Jan 2009 09:29 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Smorgasbord"
MaxKlokan Member since:
2007-12-04

That's all "on-topic".

In a story about Windows' upgrade paths and in reply to a comment that did not even mention Linux ? Doesn't sound really "on-topic" to me ;-)

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Smorgasbord
by UltraZelda64 on Wed 7th Jan 2009 03:37 UTC in reply to "RE: Smorgasbord"
UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

As opossed to the smorgasbord of linux distribution variations? If ever there's confusion about what variation to install, it's in the Linux operating system bubble.

At least with Linux, there are some noteworthy (read: major) differences between distros. They tend to cater to their own specific purposes of existence quite well, and then there are the general-purpose distros that don't hold anything back. Almost all of them being free, of course.

Windows is meant to be a general-purpose OS, so you'd expect it to have just about every OS-related feature that you need... yet, you always get the feeling, "man, I got screwed--I have to pay more to get another feature that I was able to use perfectly fine on another computer that had Windows [version] installed."

Either that, or you plop 400 bucks down on Ultimate (for whatever reason), and feel screwed for spending so much money just to be able to run your computer (and still being limited by things like the number of other computers allowed to connect to it at a time). You're basically screwed either way, the way I look at it.

Too bad Microsoft won't get realistic on their SKUs and pricing... yet, they'll practically pay certain governments in developing countries to use (and get locked into) their operating systems.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Smorgasbord
by google_ninja on Wed 7th Jan 2009 13:27 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Smorgasbord"
google_ninja Member since:
2006-02-05

75% of distros are debian or fedora with a different theme and/or different packages.

That is not "noteworthy difference", it is just noise. And we are not talking about 7 here, it is at least 100 that have no real reason for existence.

Edited 2009-01-07 13:28 UTC

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Smorgasbord
by dagw on Wed 7th Jan 2009 15:06 UTC in reply to "RE: Smorgasbord"
dagw Member since:
2005-07-06

As opossed to the smorgasbord of linux distribution variations?

What does that have to do with anything? Just because there is someone worse doesn't make you good. Being second from last should never be anyones goal in any situation. The OP is spot on. Microsoft really should cut down on the number of versions they offer, no matter what Linux or anybody else may or may not do.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Smorgasbord
by RRepster on Wed 7th Jan 2009 17:06 UTC in reply to "RE: Smorgasbord"
RRepster Member since:
2008-06-18

Linux users are more tech savvy and thus know the distro differences; therefore there is no confusion which you claim.

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: Smorgasbord
by flanque on Wed 7th Jan 2009 20:29 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Smorgasbord"
flanque Member since:
2005-12-15

Uh, hold on a minute, I thought Linux is ready for the average user...?

It'd be almost, if not definately, impossible for the average user to know exactly what the differences are between each distribution, let alone know if they really make a difference to them.

The differences between some distributions is about as clear as mud.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Smorgasbord
by Piranha on Wed 7th Jan 2009 21:33 UTC in reply to "RE: Smorgasbord"
Piranha Member since:
2008-06-24

Where does Linux fit in here at all? You really can't speak about "Linux" being catered to average users anyways, as this is simply incorrect. What user would know how to take source code, compile themselves a kernel, and build a userland? What we're focusing on is a distribution, and last I checked there was ONE Ubuntu, ONE Debian, ONE FreeBSD (by the way, OSX is based on BSD NOT Linux..), but you get my drift.

With a distribution like Ubuntu, at least people now have a sense of what they're running (maybe not what's truly lying underneath) and say "I'm running Ubuntu". They aren't saying "I'm running Linux version 2.6.19 cause 2.6.20 is too bleeding edge for me, and not sable enough". Even now, people are saying they're running "Windows" regardless if they're running Home or Ultimate.

And yes, the "Ultimate", "Home", "Business" really needs to be retired. With OSX, they have "OSX Leopard" or "OSX Leopard SERVER". When a customer sees "server" they are at least [usually] smart enough to know not to get that. Plus, the cost alone would likely deter them away.

Edited 2009-01-07 21:35 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Smorgasbord
by flanque on Wed 7th Jan 2009 22:11 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Smorgasbord"
flanque Member since:
2005-12-15

Where does Linux fit in here at all? You really can't speak about "Linux" being catered to average users anyways, as this is simply incorrect. What user would know how to take source code, compile themselves a kernel, and build a userland? What we're focusing on is a distribution, and last I checked there was ONE Ubuntu, ONE Debian, ONE FreeBSD (by the way, OSX is based on BSD NOT Linux..), but you get my drift.

With a distribution like Ubuntu, at least people now have a sense of what they're running (maybe not what's truly lying underneath) and say "I'm running Ubuntu". They aren't saying "I'm running Linux version 2.6.19 cause 2.6.20 is too bleeding edge for me, and not sable enough". Even now, people are saying they're running "Windows" regardless if they're running Home or Ultimate.


I think you'll find a lot of people claiming that Linux is definately catered to average users, so much so that it is superior to Windows. Let's also keep in mind that when the majority of people say the word Linux they generalise this to mean a distribution of some sort and are not talking about the kernel itself.

Yes I agree that I don't think average users will understand the differences between kernel levels.

However, even at the basic distribubiton level and even keeping just the main ones in mind listed on DistroWatch, take a look at some of the pros and cons and ask yourself how on earth is someone who is isn't technical or is new to Linux (including the politics and philosphy behind it) even going start to identify which one suits their needs?

There's comments about lacking incompatibility, proprietry packages, patent deals and intellectual property, developer mailing lists and blogs can be uncultured at times, lack of "mindshare" among publishing houses, lacks release planning, conservative in terms of base package selection, and so on.

Yeah, I have cherry picked some of the cons from various distributions, but the point still remains that in even with just the top 10 distributions there's too many variables between the distributions for average users to dedicate effort to figuring out what it all means.

It's my view that the approach Linux has taken from a marketing and adoption perspective has been completely wrong. It's been too technically, politically and philosophically based and abscent minded to the fact that most people are more objective based when they use a computer.

It's my view that people want to know things like:

Can I browse the Internet and view websites fully?

Can I access my email?

Is it safe to use?

Can I do internet banking safely?

Can I do things like shopping online, booking holidays or tickets with my airline, etc?

Can I connect things like my printer, scanner, memory cards, camera?

Can I watch videos and movies?

Can I edit and manage photos and videos?

Can I still use my favorite software?


Maybe some don't agree with me, and that's fine, but this is my opinion either way.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Smorgasbord
by weildish on Wed 7th Jan 2009 23:38 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Smorgasbord"
weildish Member since:
2008-12-06

I completely agree. The "average" user doesn't care (or usually even know) what his or her system is. If it runs what they want and how they want it, then they're happy-- that's how I see it. Usually their system of choice, even though they don't know what the name is or even that it's called a system, is Windows, just because it's installed on almost every prebuilt computer at every retail store. If Dell started shipping desktops with (place Linux distro of preference here), I bet you a majority of the poor folks who are tricked into buying Dell computers would hardly know the difference. "Oh, they changed the Start menu to be at the top of the screen, now. And what's this? OpenOffice? My, it's just like Word/Works! And there's that familiar Firefox. Come here, buddy. Let's check some email at Yahoo."

No, I never did like a Dell compy. Though they'd probably be able to run a Linux system better than Windows since Linux is generally (always?) less resource-intensive.

Reply Score: 2

Upgrades for all Vista users?
by mckill on Wed 7th Jan 2009 00:51 UTC
mckill
Member since:
2007-06-12

I didn't totally understand the article, but it seems to mostly be uprades to OEMs or ppl buying systems in the future with Vista already installed. Will there be a program for those that bought Vista?

Reply Score: 2

v Just so I have this straight...
by zaine_ridling on Wed 7th Jan 2009 05:48 UTC
UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

If you can survive the trauma. ;)

Reply Score: 4

They're fake
by robojerk on Wed 7th Jan 2009 17:04 UTC
robojerk
Member since:
2006-01-10

The whole version thing feels so phony to me. I wanted to RDP into my PC the other day only to realize Vista Home Premium doesn't allow me to do that. All the necessary programs are on the OS, I can even open a resource editor and modify a couple of system files to allow me to RDP, or spend at least a hundred dollars to do it the legitimate way.
If there were real differences to each OS instead of handicapping the non ultimate editions I could be on board with their 5-7 different versions, but instead it all feels like a big scheme to get me to shell out more cash.

Reply Score: 4

RE: They're fake
by MaxKlokan on Thu 8th Jan 2009 09:43 UTC in reply to "They're fake"
MaxKlokan Member since:
2007-12-04

I don't like too may versions either, however when you are buying Windows is not like buying one Kg or two of apples. You are buying the license to use the software, therefore it makes sense that only the parts you pay for are activated.
You could argue, though, that non activated features are somewhat wasting your disk space, but frankly I don't find that it's a big deal.

Reply Score: 1