Microsoft.com Canada has released pricing for Windows Vista. Windows Vista Ultimate is listed at $499 Canadian which translates into $450.36 in USD. Home Premium is listed at $299 or $269.86 USD, Vista Ultimate Upgrade is priced at $299 or $269.86 USD, while Home Premium Upgrade is $199 or $179.60 USD. At the same time, the first 100000 respondents can download Vista Build 5536. Microsoft is not giving out new keys, so you need your Beta 2 key. Update: Amazon.com now too sells Vista.
My gosh. That is truly pathetic. I’m am no fan of Microsoft, or Apple, really…anything because they all have problems…but… Apple normally charges ~$120 for their OS. That is awesome.
Yes, but to keep up with Apple you need to shell out that amount about once every 18 months, whereas with Windows, well we know the story. People often tend to forget that.
4 x 120 = 480 (10.1 was a free upgrade).
That is not to say this is cheap software. Heck, when an OS costs just as much as the hardware… It just feels wrong.
What a weird kind of “logic”.
1. You don’t have to shell out the amount every 18 months. You can happily go on using your older version of OSX if you want to.
2. Using MS’ inability to deliver Vista on time as an excuse for Vista’s price… It just feels wrong.
that is, until you get new software being released as OS X 10.foo and up only.
not to mention apple cutting you off on security updates, bug fixes, etc.
Sure, this happens, but not after 18 months.
You left out that every successive release of OS X is getting spaced farther than the last. They’re fueling a massive buildup of OS technology in a short amount of time, and they need renewable consumers to do that. It’s not like Microsoft’s infinite budget and refusal to engineer anything truly new. They’re in the fastest stages of growth, but slowing down all the time.
Also, almost all the software I see says it will run on the current and previous minor version of OS X. You only need to upgrade every time if you just gotta have Apple’s new bells and whistles. If all you need is free software from the Internet, you can skip every other release. And if you’re using professional stuff, it’s not going to require Apple’s toolkits to do its job, so anything should work, but newer will be generally faster and more reliable.
Any company will want to give you a reason to upgrade, but in Microsoft’s case, the reasons seem to be a lot more fundamental, like security and basic function (does it boot? Will it still boot tomorrow?), rather than superficial, like a really neat search tool. Look at all the comments on that article from a while ago about security holes in 98 that weren’t going to be fixed. People still using that were pretty much called the scum of the Earth, complete morons deserving of whatever horrendous virus they get. You don’t see that so much with other systems. You could easily get away with using Solaris 8, Mac OS 7, Linux 2.2, or any version of BeOS without anyone wishing righteous doom on your computer.
And who is forcing you to upgrade to Vista?
Goes both ways, and therefore irrelevant.
Thom, please…
I did not claim you had to upgrade to Vista.
You on the other hand acted as if you had to upgrade OSX every 18 months in order to compare the price of Vista favorably to it.
And thanks btw. for ignoring my other point.
“And who is forcing you to upgrade to Vista?”
While this is of course true that no one is forcing, it is a much more significant upgrade (at least I really hope so, otherwise Vista is pointless – sorta like XP if you already have 2000). With OS X if I wanted I could easily skip every other release and at least stay somewhat up to date – try that with Windows.
>And who is forcing you to upgrade to Vista?
>Goes both ways, and therefore irrelevant.
Microsoft is “forcing” other (not Vista) Windows user to upgrade by:
– bring out software that only runs on Vista
– adding Vista only codes to the run certain multimedia files
– All other tricks they can find to “force” an upgrade.
All this off course in a way nobody can really complain…..it is still your choice..
And who is forcing you to upgrade to Vista?
MS that’s who, maybe not ddirectly but indirectly. Most ignorant consumers will shell it out because that what MS says they should do. Either thorough tech support or even at the local Staples, Best buy etc.
Since when did “Forcing” take on the definition of “Coaxing” or “Pursuading”?
Most ignorant consumers will shell it out because that what MS says they should do.
And how is this different from other platforms or software vendors? Also, most customers will not pay retail as they will get Windows as part of their new computer purchase or via license agreements.
1. You don’t have to shell out the amount every 18 months. You can happily go on using your older version of OSX if you want to.
Until the stop issuing updates for security problems, stops providing updated software for your operating system, and software vendors start putting ‘minimum OS X 10.4.x’ and you’re sitll running 10.3.9.
The humorous thing, Microsoft is now EXTENDING their support for Windows XP; what does this mean? I think they’ve realised that they can’t provide perfect backwards compatibility, so they’ll need to extend the time as to allow a smooth transition as applications become “Vista Capable’.
2. Using MS’ inability to deliver Vista on time as an excuse for Vista’s price… It just feels wrong.
And how many will actually upgrade? most will get it when they upgrade their computer; another section will wait till their companies select licencing package gets it, which enables all employees of the company to run a copy of it on their home computer, along with Microsoft Office – the New Zealand ministry of defence has such an arrangement.
you can buy old versions of OS X for $49 and less if you need to upgrade.
MS is extending support for XP so they don’t get a Class Action from GE and ATT and all the Universities and state run authorities.
It would be IMPOSSIBLE for any large corporation or organization to pay for the hardware upgrades for every MS update.
As for OS X not running old software, I’m running OS X 10.3.9 and I can still use TypeStyler 2 which was originally written for System 7.
Edited 2006-08-30 04:35
MS is extending support for XP so they don’t get a Class Action from GE and ATT and all the Universities and state run authorities.
It would be IMPOSSIBLE for any large corporation or organization to pay for the hardware upgrades for every MS update.
That’s rediculous. Corporations move when they want to. Many are still using Windows 2000. Besides that, they’ve had 10 years of support provided by MS for a few years now, not to mention their licensing agreements include downgrade rights.
I’m still seeing boat-loads of new OS X software or updates to existing software, being released with 10.2 (PowerPC)/10.4 (x86) as the minimum version. It’s quite easy to build things against older SDKs from within XCode, so lots of developers do it when they’re not using newer APIs.
– chrish
Yes, but to keep up with Apple you need to shell out that amount about once every 18 months, whereas with Windows, well we know the story. People often tend to forget that.
At least you have an option to upgrade every year or so, unlike with Windows. Nobody forces you to upgrade, but if you have the money and feel like so, you can.
Quote:
—
What a weird kind of “logic”.
1. You don’t have to shell out the amount every 18 months. You can happily go on using your older version of OSX if you want to.
2. Using MS’ inability to deliver Vista on time as an excuse for Vista’s price… It just feels wrong.
—
PERFECT response the that one. Yes, I would love to upgrade my version of Windows every 2 years. Instead, we are stuck without innovations for 5+ years.
Edited 2006-08-29 21:14
Umm, no, you don’t have to keep up with Apple’s hardware every 18 months.
I’m running the latest OS X on my 7 year old Blue and White G3 thank you very much!! It has an upgraded G4 processor in it but I did that 5 years ago! 🙂
Your concerns are misinformed….
This is horse hocky! Microsoft generally tries to release a new version of their software every year or two; just like Apple.
This time, however, Microsoft got a bit carried away with their project plan. As a result, they’ve had to cut here and there until Vista really isn’t all that interesting anymore, but they’ll finally be able to release it.
Microsoft themselves have admitted this and declared that they will never let this much time pass between updates again.
Since Microsoft has committed to release much more often in the future, your logic is a one time fluke.
Edited 2006-08-29 21:56
I guess the major action will be around the Home Premium edition as otherwise you won’t get DX10, apparently? Get the upgrade edition and allow for sale discounts, OEM prices, etc., and you are not looking at too gross a hit (less than $180 USD, anyway). That’s way less than a scary $450 for the Ultimate full monty.
That said, I guess many folks with XP might sit this one out for a few months after launch and see what happens both to Vista and to prices? Folks buying new PCs will be getting Vista whether they want it or not, and the DX10 stuff probably has gamers over a barrell as it is not backwards-compatible with XP, I believe.
But hey, with a staff of 60,000 or something, I guess the Beast has to be fed … and fed … and fed … please give generously!
I guess the major action will be around the Home Premium edition as otherwise you won’t get DX10, apparently?
DirectX 10 is available on all versions of Vista. You’re thinking about the Aero Glass UX.
It’s interesting how most news sites tend to ignore Home Basic, the successor to XP Home.
As with XP Home, it lacks the ability to join a domain, but that should not prevent it from being popular amongst home/soho users.
Perhaps they assume that the sort of person who is doing a standalone upgrade wouldn’t be attracted to the low end?
Or maybe the reasoning has to do with the way Microsoft has a habit of dropping support early for their customer based OSes while continuing to support the enterprise versions of the same product? That’s an additional detail that needs to be factored into the total price pf a product, and an added value if you choose to stay with Microsoft.
–bornagainpenguin (who plans to leave Microsoft-Land for Linux or Mac OSX in his next upgrade cycle)
MS supports their OSes far longer than does Apple.
Apple’s no longer supporting OSX 10.2 (no security updates or bug fixes), and that was their top OS just 3 years ago. 10.3 support will be dropped almost immediately after 10.5 comes out.
And Apple’s new software releases generally require the latest OS (sometimes the latest two OSes) – iLife 07 and iWork 07 will NOT run on 10.3, I guarantee you. I question whether it’ll even run on 10.4.
Well, it seems unlikely that 10.5 will be released before iLife ’07, and therefore, I imagine it will run on 10.3. It will definitely run on 10.4.
How often is priceing of computing products a direct currency conversion from country to country….
NEVER.
EVER.
I’ve followed Vista fairly closely. I’ve ‘obtained’ pretty much every build, including the latest one mentioned here.
Personally, for me it’s as exciting as ME. I don’t know why. I _want_ to, perhaps almost /need/ to like it, however it just doesn’t feel exciting or new to me.
Maybe when I’ve seen some 3rd party tools that leverage Avalon…
Whilst I expect to use + support MS for work, I just can’t seem me using them at home in the longer term.
Quite happy with the 360 for games tho’ so they’ll keep me for that.
The Vista interface and way of doing things just seems ‘confused’ to me. I can’t believe this is all we get.
Shame.
ill just grab a copy of ultimate off one of the piratebay torrents that will begin to show up a month before official release
ill just grab a copy of ultimate off one of the piratebay torrents that will begin to show up a month before official release
Glad this came up…
Price of Ubuntu+universe packages: $0
Price of Vista+Office+Photoshop+… via bittorrent: $0
See? Closed source software can be as “free” as open source. And 99.99% of users don’t care about the source.
The real enemy is piracy. Fight that, and people will be searching for “freebies” elsewhere. GPL, BSD, perhaps.
As for me? Using pirated software? Please. You might as well call me a p0rn sufer. Nobody does this, right?
ill just grab a copy of ultimate off one of the piratebay torrents that will begin to show up a month before official release
You sir are part of the problem.
Edited 2006-08-30 03:23
Actually …
239 for Vista Home Premium.
159 for Vista Home Premium Upgrade
143 for Vista Home Premium Upgrade additional license.
159$ for an upgrade is not that much more than the price for OS X Leopard … and anyone can find a previous version of a Windows OS.
http://www.amazon.com/s/103-8171045-6471811?ie=UTF8&keywords=Window…
Of course most people will get Vista with a new PC … and it will cost them 50$ or so.
Edited 2006-08-29 19:16
For Windows every PC needs its own paid up copy, and since I usually want the full unfettered install CD/DVD, that would be quite a pretty penny (plus any special video card upgrades).
If I had any no of Macs, does Apple require me to buy N copies or can I use 1 copy without them caring?
As for upgrading, is the upgrade ticket price same for whatever Windows you are coming from?, W2K in my case.
If I had any no of Macs, does Apple require me to buy N copies or can I use 1 copy without them caring?
Apple has “family packs” for OSX and several of their own software applications (iLife, iWork). A family pack costs less than twice the price of the regular edition and can be installed on up to 5 computers in the same household.
I find this “family pack” a nice idea… I assume most households with children have several computers at home and the “family pack” concept makes it more affordable to stay legal. In general, I think that Apple has reasonable prices for their software.
You are supposed to purchase a license for each Mac as well. The upgrade for single user is $120 or you can get a five-pack for $199, which is a lot friendlier than Microsoft’s pricing. Also, MacOS X doesn’t do any of that activation stuff.
Activation is the main reason I stopped using Windows. I reinstall my OS on about an annual basis when I upgrade the hardware. The last thing in the world I want to do everytime is call Microsoft to explain why I’m installing Windows again.
I know that is a little thing, but I absolutely hate it and the mentality behind it.
If I buy something, it is mine to do with as I please. If the company selling it to me doesn’t agree, they can keep their product.
Activation is the main reason I stopped using Windows. I reinstall my OS on about an annual basis when I upgrade the hardware. The last thing in the world I want to do everytime is call Microsoft to explain why I’m installing Windows again.
If this annual install cycle is true, there shouldn’t be a need to call MS unless you can’t get connected to the Internet. Activation resets after a period of 120 days. So, assuming retail media, you can change your whole system 120 days after the last activation and not have to call MS.
“If this annual install cycle is true, there shouldn’t be a need to call MS unless you can’t get connected to the Internet. Activation resets after a period of 120 days. So, assuming retail media, you can change your whole system 120 days after the last activation and not have to call MS.”
The activation does not reset ever. I do the same myself, and each year I have to call Microsoft to get it unlocked. Once installed the key is tied to the hardware. If you do a major change of hardware it will not activate and you have to make the call. If it were to reset then that would pretty much defeat the whole reason for the activation scheme in the first place.
There is nothing on the Microsoft website about activation resetting after 120 days (that I could find, however it is widely reported that the hardware hash does reset after 120 days), however, there is no reason you should have to call Microsoft to have your machine unlocked unless your hardware has changed dramatically. If you have an OEM copy of Windows, the activation is far more lax than the retail version, as it is only checked against the BIOS, so as long as your BIOS remains the same, you can change everything except the motherboard and it will activate as normal over the net, without any need for calling MS. The retail version uses an ID generated as a hash number of all of your major hardware, and is less flexible than the OEM copy in that regard. Although, you will have to ring up MS if you want to change your motherboard, as the OEM version is tied to the motherboard via it’s BIOS.
The activation does not reset ever. I do the same myself, and each year I have to call Microsoft to get it unlocked. Once installed the key is tied to the hardware. If you do a major change of hardware it will not activate and you have to make the call. If it were to reset then that would pretty much defeat the whole reason for the activation scheme in the first place.
“Microsoft has also recognized that certain users may wish to change components frequently. As a result, Microsoft recently implemented time-based reactivation. Every 120 days, the current configuration of a user’s PC will ‘reset to zero,’ so to speak. Starting from that 120th day, users may swap out hardware components as described above. After another 120 days passes, the PC ‘sets to zero’ again, and users once again may swap out hardware components. This time-based reactivation is designed to provide users with greater flexibility to change their systems.”
http://reviews-zdnet.com.com/4520-6033_16-4206544.html
Okay, then when did that go into effect? It sure wasn’t in effect 2 months ago when I had to call them.
You either have the retail version, and you have exceeded the number of allowable hardware changes within 120 days, or you have the OEM version and have changed the BIOS or motherboard (the OEM version only requires that the BIOS not change – if you flash your BIOS it might mean you have to reactivate by calling MS, though that would be unusual). Otherwise there is no reason why you would need to call MS to reactivate. If you have reinstalled without changing your hardware (ie, you haven’t upgraded your RAM, Graphics Card, HDD, Network interface etc), then your problem is inexplicable. I’ve reinstalled my OEM copy of XP home dozens of time, changed most of the hardware except the motherboard, and never had to do anything more than type in the product code and activate it over the net, takes a few minutes at most.
Correct on all counts, as it is each time I re-install. I have a retail version that I use. I change my hardware, as is my perogative. For my OEM copy that came with my Dell computer, that never has to be activated at all and I can install that one over and over on that machine. A true OEM copy does not require activation. The only issue is with the retail copy for my test machine. That machine gets changed constantly, and it does not matter how much time between changes, I need to call MS. I could wait 2 years, and I would still have to call then as the key is tied to the old hardware. The 120 days is not in effect, or if it is, then the system is broken.
Okay, then when did that go into effect? It sure wasn’t in effect 2 months ago when I had to call them
Check the date on the article — 2001.
“Check the date on the article — 2001.”
I saw that…but that does not mean it is in effect. See my other posts, as no matter what the time I have to call MS as it is tied to the original hardware.
I saw that…but that does not mean it is in effect. See my other posts, as no matter what the time I have to call MS as it is tied to the original hardware.
Not sure what’s the cause then, I’ve upgraded several systems over the life of XP and only called in once (my net connection was down).
One thing I thought about is if you image your harddrive and re-install that image after making the hardware changes, this may cause you to have to call MS to activate as the hashed hardware ID that may be part of the image doesn’t match the new hardware. This may also occur if you run a repair installation to make it work w/ the new hardware (haven’t tried this in a while).
Edited 2006-08-30 08:20
I didn’t have to call on my last install, it was kind of refreshing.
Tell that to them. I have had to call on several occasions.
In addition to what rft said, it is not only that there is no activation, but there are no serials (unless you have OS X Server). Based upon honor system and EULA.
That being said, I have 3 Macs and own Tiger licenses and 2 Panther licenses (2 had Panther when I purchased, I updated one, and the other I bought after Tiger was out)
Thanks all for clearing that up!
If you’re buying a video card then buy an OEM version of Windows with it. It’s a full version of Windows, not an upgrade. It’s tied to the machine you install it on but so is any other “legally” installed copy of windows.
http://www.mwave.com/mwave/ViewProducts.hmx?PID=SOFTWARE-MICROSOFT&…
I have Novell Linux Desktop 10 on all of my machines, and it was free……
LOL!!!!!!! Nobody cares!!!!!!!
At that price, it better come with a bottle of finely aged bourbon. Even at 300 CAD, the upgrade is quite expensive. Like it wasn’t enough, we will need to add sales taxes… While it’s more affordable than specialisated software, an operating system is mostly used for running other software.
Then again, I’m pretty sure there are people out there that will be ready to shell that amount for getting the please of getting a luxury edition.
Anyway, that’s no big deal. Ultimate isn’t necessary, prices will go down, alternatives are getting better… Life will go on.
Did anyone else get a download and try it out?
I’m out of dvd media but as soon as I pick some up I’m going to give this new build a whirl.
Morglum
These are my thoughts (faults?)
* The installer is simple. However, it’s the most intensive install I’ve ever seen. I feel as my hard disk has had its lifespan massively reduced already :/
* It’s annoying. Within under your first minute of using the OS, you will be shouted at, reminded, prodded and notified about everything you don’t care about. It’s like having a five year old surgecially attached to you.
* IE7 changes appearence when you maximize it, going solid black, WTF!?
* I’m on a Macbook Pro. Windows XP flies on this machine. Vista does not. I’m used to installing OS(X) upgrades and my machine getting faster than before, not the opposite.
* Everything that was easy to get to before is one or two steps further away than it was before (Control Panel for example)
* The last time I saw something as pointless and annoying as the gadgets sidebar was the Channel Bar that was on by default in Win98FE. A slideshow constantly on the side of my screen beggars belief. Only a programmer could have decided that was a good thing.
* You can no longer shutdown / restart by pressing Win, U, U or Win, U, R.
* Getting to My Computer has become a whole world more harder to do.
* LUA is still no good. It does nothing but provide me with one extra button to press in just about every Wizard. It doesn’t even ask me to type in my password. It serves absolutely no purpose other than to train me to never read annoying popups and just keep pressing Yes/Okay until what I want done, gets done.
I’m glad I moved to OS X. I held off trying Vista until it was ready, and even now I don’t think it’s anything that was promised. Vista = XP + DRM + teh shiney
* IE7 changes appearence when you maximize it, going solid black, WTF!?
This is a feature. When you maximise a window, it means you want to focus on THAT window, hence transperancy/blurrecy (…) is pointless.
It’s a hack, to quickly fix a problem with a UI system that was never properly designed with usability from the start.
* The last time I saw something as pointless and annoying as the gadgets sidebar was the Channel Bar that was on by default in Win98FE. A slideshow constantly on the side of my screen beggars belief. Only a programmer could have decided that was a good thing.
This is optional and can be turned off. You can also select other gadgets beyond the default set.
* Getting to My Computer has become a whole world more harder to do.
There are several ways of accomplishing this including:
Start | Computer
Enable the desktop icon
Use Search (i.e., type the path to the drive/directory, typing Computer may also work)
* LUA is still no good. It does nothing but provide me with one extra button to press in just about every Wizard. It doesn’t even ask me to type in my password. It serves absolutely no purpose other than to train me to never read annoying popups and just keep pressing Yes/Okay until what I want done, gets done.
It accomplishes the same thing as entering a password (elevates the context in which the application runs), and does prompt for a password by default for standard users. You can configure UAC to prompt Administrators for passwords via policy. If you don’t pay attention to the text of the obvious elevation prompt, you likely won’t when prompted for a password either.
Even on a fresh install of OS X when I’m customizing and configuring everything (beyond that of a normal user), I come across the elevation prompt, two, maybe three times in the first hour.
I’ve seen it fifteen times in the first hour of Vista already.
You’re used to OSX getting faster with each version because it was so slow to begin with. 10.0 was a dog. 10.1, 10.2, and 10.3 increased the speed with each version. But 10.4 is slower than 10.3 in my experience.
Tiger still boots faster than Vista. Even on a clean install. Leopard is reported as being quicker still.
Why do people not understand that these are prices for the full software and not upgraded software?
If you have a previous version of Windows you can slice that Ulimate version of Windows by half.
So you pay only $2xx for an upgrade to the Windows Vista Ultimate which contains the 32-bit and 64-bit version of Windows together and some stuff that the mac does not even have. That is a good deal and you won’t have to pay yearly.
Just out of curiosity, what stuff?
That price is just pathetic. There’s no way I am going to pay for that upgrade on top of the hardware upgrades.
I’ll stick to XP or migrate to Linux.
In the product details section,
“Discontinued by manufacturer: Yes”
I think most IT Pros would never ever recommend an Upgrade disc to anyone, especially Windows.
It generally carries forward too many little quirks and errors.
I’m starting to see why the development takes so long, its for when Vista does get released, XP has gained a large chunk towards EOL, so they can start to say that you haven’t got long.
With those prices, people will just not upgrade, definitely not schools, business’s will be reluctant, government certainly won’t.
In Australia at least, why would someone go to buy a computer at $699 or so, and then find they have to buy an OS at $499 or so, it’s ridiculous.
I think Vista did have a a slight potential, despite the requirements, but now they’ve really cut their own throat.
I think most IT Pros would never ever recommend an Upgrade disc to anyone, especially Windows.
It generally carries forward too many little quirks and errors.
Most IT Pros should know that just because it’s upgrade media doesn’t mean you can’t use it to perform a clean install. You just need the media from the previous version of Windows you’re upgrading for verification.
” think most IT Pros would never ever recommend an Upgrade disc to anyone, especially Windows.”
It has the full version. To do a clean install all you have to do is prove you own an earlier version by inserting the earlier version of windows when asked. Then do a clean install.
No problems.
F*** Windows, f*** OS X. Use Linux, BSD!
P.S: Excuse me for any censorship used.
Leave it to MS to drive the costs of software ever higher over time.
I mean this seems pretty in line with what most people were saying….Home Basic is pretty much like XP Home and Home Premium or Vista Business is more like XP Pro depending on the user…Ultimate is obviously going to cost a fortune since a) its goign to have everythign that all the Vista’s have b)its geared towards the ultra power users like gamers. I think it will even let you use it on as many PC’s as you want with in reason…
I hate to say it, because I would gladly give MS the money for the upgrade.
But given the number of features stripped out of Vista, I won’t pay this price.
I’ll probably stay on XP. 90% sure.
And if I do upgrade to Vista, it’ll probably ne for security purposes because there really is nothing else there for me. Windows Calendar? Outlook Express? Transparency? (Which, BTW, is a big mistake because it will make Vista look like a kitchen from the 70’s within 6 months)
And my upgrade will be a free download. Sorry, I normally pay for stuff. But if the only value is security which should of been in the last generation product to begin with, P2P suits me fine and I’ll sleep at night.
So
I keep hearing people say that lots of features were stripped out of Vista. Can somebody list these features? WinFS is one, but what are the others?
It’s pretty amusing to read so many “I won’t pay this price” posts. Of course you’re not. First, nobody pays retail prices (which these prices most assuredly are). Street prices are easily half of retail. Second, according to MS financial reports, less than 1% of its OS sales (upgrades, fresh installs) are bought at retail. The remaining 99% are installed by OEMs (ie. Dell, Gateway, IBM, etc) on shiny new PCs. Since most OEMs aren’t exactly installing Linux and OSX on new desktop PCs, users will get Windows Vista by default; ergo, they will pay whatever price the OEM charges. See how this works? Whether you like it or not, Vista can’t fail.
“It’s pretty amusing to read so many “I won’t pay this price” posts. Of course you’re not. First, nobody pays retail prices (which these prices most assuredly are). Street prices are easily half of retail. Second, according to MS financial reports, less than 1% of its OS sales (upgrades, fresh installs) are bought at retail. The remaining 99% are installed by OEMs (ie. Dell, Gateway, IBM, etc) on shiny new PCs. Since most OEMs aren’t exactly installing Linux and OSX on new desktop PCs, users will get Windows Vista by default; ergo, they will pay whatever price the OEM charges. See how this works? Whether you like it or not, Vista can’t fail.”
——————————————————-
Quite right (well, technically Apple is essentially an OEM installing OS X on its hardware, but since it is the only one doing so, you can ignore them as a separate case. There are a few vendors installing Linspire, but in such low numbers that it really makes no difference to the market share of MS OEM sales).
You can just buy the OEM version with some qualifying hardware, for example a hard drive, and save a packet. As long as you don’t plan on changing your motherboard, the OEM version is far more flexible in most cases. There is very little reason to buy the retail version when, chances are, you will need to upgrade one or more pieces of hardware, if not your whole PC, to make the most of Vista anyway. Your best bet is to buy or build a new system and buy the OEM version of Vista, as there is no compelling reason to put Vista on an old machine with XP. XP will be good for several years yet, and you can replicate much of Vista’s new functionality with third party apps (e.g Windowblinds) until such time as you need or can afford a new PC with Vista pre-installed.
I am THRILLED with the 5536, because after install it AUTOMATICALLY checked for updates and indeed installed a (working!) driver for my ancient but perfectly-2D-crisp-and-excellent video card.
With the previous one only a minimal VGA resolution was available – useless. So I had the suspicion that they were maybe just ditching all us folks with ancient cards, what a relief.
Maybe retry YOUR ancient card….
Microsoft Windows Vista is designed to dramatically improve the computing experience of every kind of PC user—from people at home who use their PCs for simple web browsing, to business people who must organize and act on large volumes of data, to scientists who routinely perform complex mathematical analysis. To make sure that everyone has an offering tailored to meet their specific needs, Microsoft will deliver five different editions of Windows Vista. Each edition is focused on the needs of a specific type of person.
The five different editions of Windows Vista are designed to fit the way you intend to use your PC:
Windows Vista Business
Regardless of the size of your organization, Windows Vista Business will help you lower your PC management costs, improve your security, enhance your productivity, and help you stay better connected.
Windows Vista Enterprise
Windows Vista Enterprise is designed to meet the needs of large global organizations with highly complex IT infrastructures. Windows Vista Enterprise can help you lower your IT costs while providing additional layers of protection for your sensitive data.
Windows Vista Home Premium
Whether you choose to use your PC to write e-mail and surf the Internet, for home entertainment, or to track your household expenses, Windows Vista Home Premium delivers a more complete and satisfying computing experience.
Windows Vista Home Basic
Windows Vista Home Basic is designed to deliver improved reliability, security, and usability to home PC users who just want to do the basics with their PCs.
Windows Vista Ultimate
If you want all of the best business features, all of the best mobility features, and all of the best home entertainment features that Windows Vista has to offer, Windows Vista Ultimate is the solution for you. With Windows Vista Ultimate you don’t have to compromise.
The above is from Microsoft’s web site and at first glance it seems like they are tailoring the OS so people and businesses only spend what they “need” to spend. The reality is having multiple editions is just a way to blatantly nickel-and-dime Joe six-pack and gouge buisnesses at the same time.
I have been looking for a comparison chart to see what specific “differences” there are between the editions but that information probably won’t be available until after Vista has been RTMed.
Let’s see, three new Vista licenses (my box, my wife’s machine, and the LAN server; all currently running XP Pro), or upgrade her to a MacMini (she’s using my old BeOS machine, a dual P2 350MHz)…
Since I can’t really tell which Vista I “need”, I’d probably end up paying too much for one of the ultra pro gold versions, which would put this “upgrade” above the cost of new hardware.
No, thanks. Then upgrade to a dual-core x86 Mac will be significantly better than running a bloated XP + new skin.
– chrish
If you read enough the box usually tells the real difference, but you need to read through the idiotic marketing hype and understand some of the marketing terms.
It’s irritating, but not too hard if you’re educated, to figure out which version has the features you desire. More than likely it will be the ultimate one though…