Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 16th Sep 2009 18:01 UTC
Windows Microsoft has been very protective over its OEM pricing, and while various figures float around the web, the company has never really confirmed or denied any of them. At the Jefferies Annual Technology Conference, however, Charles Songhurst, general manager of Corporate Strategy, revealed some of the pricing details for OEMs.
Permalink for comment 384570
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Hmmm...
by coreyography on Thu 17th Sep 2009 05:53 UTC
coreyography
Member since:
2009-03-06

95% of Windows sales are bundles with new PCs. And Microsoft charges $50 for a $1000 PC bundle.

So why am I asked to pay $200 for the same Windows for my $1000 homebuilt PC?

This -- not Linux being better (which, in some ways, it is, others not), not me railing against The Man (Ballmer) -- is why I'm still running Linux and XP. And will be unless I can get Win7 Pro or better for <$100. I don't like being overcharged.

Some of the other comments here are kind of interesting as well, if only for the reason they don't reflect my experience:

Arch Linux, not Ubuntu (which I tolerated for all of a week), and not Windows XP, has the best out-of-the-box recognition of all kinds of hardware that I've experienced. When I have some random computer accessory I can't get recognized, I plug it into an Arch box and it usually tells me whose guts are inside it and happily loads a module for it. I can then go to the guts maker's web site and get the Windows driver. Windows wasn't easier, but it did give me several nice dialog boxes to click through (the "Found New Hardware" ritual) before it told me I was screwed.

OpenBSD is the easiest-installing OS I've used (you _do_ have to know a little something about disk layouts, though).

For all the talk of Windows "familiarity", I still see longtime users struggle with it. Someone really needs to completely rethink computer UIs if they really are to become anywhere near as easy to use as, say, microwave ovens. Maybe Macs are close to this ideal; I haven't used one so I don't know. Further, when it works, it works well, but when it breaks, it's often harder than any Unix-ish OS to fix. This I do blame Microsoft for.

An intelligent, but not particularly computer-interested, friend did not want to pay for, nor try and load, MS Office, even though she used it some at work. When she needed a real spreadsheet for her business, though, I suggested OpenOffice, with all the caveats (menus not quite the same, performance sometimes requires patience, etc.). She downloaded it, installed it herself, and likes it. I don't think she would have any real difficulty or dissatisfaction using a Linux (or FreeBSD) desktop. But for $50, she probably would not risk it ;)

Edited 2009-09-17 05:54 UTC

Reply Score: 2