After a long wait, Microsoft has finally unveiled the pricing information for the next Windows release, Windows 7, which will arrive at the shops on October 22. Interestingly enough, Europe will get full retail copies for upgrade pricing because of the whole Windows 7 E thing not being tested when it comes to upgrades.
Since I’ve found out I really enjoy making tables and charts, I figured I present the pricing information in a nice and clear table. It shows the prices of Vista during launch, Vista prices after the price cut, and Windows 7’s estimated retail prices. These are US prices, as the blog post announcing the prices did not have European prices ready.
Us Europeans are in for a serious treat, thanks to the Internet Explorer 8 thing. As we all know by now, Windows 7 will ship without Internet Explorer 8 in Europe, but apparently, this was a bit of a last-minute decision; Microsoft has not been able to test the upgrade procedure from Windows Vista to the new IE-less Windows 7. To ensure a simultaneous worldwide launch, Microsoft therefore decided to not ship any Windows 7 upgrade copies in Europe, instead offering the full retail versions at upgrade pricing.
Microsoft also confirmed the information leaked recently in the Best Buy memo, which stated that for a limited time, you can pre-order Windows 7 upgrade copies with discounts of over 50%, in select markets. The following table summarises the pricing and dates for this program (note that that European customers will get the full retail versions under this program, as explained above).
The Windows 7 Upgrade Option Program will also kick off tomorrow, June 26, and will run until the launch date of Windows 7. Under this program, anyone who buys a computer with an OEM copy of Windows Vista will receive a free Windows 7 upgrade once it’s released.
These prices are all quite hefty, obviously, but it’s important to note that they are actually of little relevance. Less than 5% of Windows licenses are sold at retail, meaning most people will get a new copy when they purchase a new PC. You can also order OEM copies yourself, and these are considerably cheaper than normal retail versions. For instance, while the full retail copy of Windows Vista Home Premium comes in at 199 EUR here in The Netherlands, the equivalent OEM copy goes for 99 EUR.
Microsoft actually addressed the price comparison between Windows 7 and Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard as well. “Even their chief software architect called (Snow Leopard) an upgrade of Leopard,” Corporate Vice President Brad Brooks said, “The way I look at it, it’s a service pack and we don’t charge for service packs.”
Direct words, but you can bet your sweet bum that Apple is going to take advantage of this, fair or no.
I guess that means no retail Win7 for me… it’s a shame, but it’s too much for an OS (I won’t even talk about home premium version because it lacks so many aspects about configuration that make it non-existent to me)… This “limited time, special retailers thing really bothers me too… especially for the amount of “discount”… is normally buying the retail version of Windows some kind of fine?
I’m sure that lots of people will tell that Win7 is just as a service pack as Snow Leopard is to Leopard… So, kind of pointless defensive comment by MS.
So, I’m officially disappointed.
Yeah, I had hoped for lower prices as well. I mean, we’re talking less than 5% of copies sold anyway. Microsoft could’ve earned some serious cheap goodwill here.
Microsoft are and never will be bothered about earning some “goodwill”. Windows users will have to pay through the nose just like with Vista, only this time the OS is actually better then the last one.
I’m sure the final release version of 7 Will have dozens of things wrong with it that weren’t in the RC. The RC was probably released before marketing got their filthy paws on it. I’m a Linux fan, but based on the RC, I’d actually consider using Windows 7 if I had to. I’m going to sit back and wait for the negative press to pile up after the full release. I’ll be particularly interested in negative press from people who liked the RC and Beta releases, and how quickly it gets buried in showers of praise for the next footfall on the treadmill.
There a very few Windows users who pay through the nose. A very small fraction (<5%) buy Windows, or Office for that matter. It is sold mostly by either Volume licensing for Businesses and Schools, or as a preloaded OEM copy with a new PC. Hardly anyone buys these expensive copies. They’re more like the commercials on TV where the some guy is selling a goofy kitchen product: – “These normally go for $500, but we’re selling them today for only $29.95”. The $500 is a fictitious price. So is the price for Windows and Office.
I recently had a funny experience with Microsoft.
You know, I am a Linux guy through and through, so you can probably imagine that Microsoft’s image is no nice one to me (to stay polite). IF I have to deal with this company, I want to stay away from pirated software as far as possible.
But I am in the process of starting my own business, and as it goes I need the ability to read and write MS Office documents without the risk of sending a misformated document to a potential or actual customer or mine.
So I went into the nearest store and bought a WinXP CD. The only ones they now sell are the OEM versions, which became legal after Microsoft lost a court case in 2003.
Unfortunately in the EULA there is one paragraph which forbids you to use this OEM software on any hardware not bought TOGETHER with the software. As I am a Linux guy and am trying to stay legal, I returned the WinXP CD to the shop and told them about my findings.
The clerc was very astounded, and told me that somehow this was not a valid paragraph. I told him, that I want to get this on paper, and from Microsoft.
He gave me back my ^a`not99.90 and wished me good luck.
Then I phone Microsoft and got some sales lady who told my that this version would actually install fine and can also be activated fine. I told her, that this is not the point, that I wanted to get a written statement that this paragraph was not valid.
She escalated me to her boss. Same thing there. We agreed to continue this discussion by email, so he could send it to some central instance without loosing too much information.
I sent the email, and got back – YES – the same answer again. It should be technicalle no problem to activate blah blah … .
I returned it and emphasised again, that I was not interested in technical installability, but in legal information.
At last I got the mail with the information:
My translation:
In other words: This CD may be sold, but not be installed.
I told this story to a friend of mine, who happened to have a WinXP SP2 OEM CD from 2002. Naturally he wanted to look at the paragraph I was citing, and see there: IT DID NOT EXIST!
So I went to ebay, and bought a CD from 2002 for ^a`not48.60 and installed it. Now I am perfectly legal licensee of Microsoft for less than ^a`not50.-
What troubles me, is that neither the guy in the shop nor Microsoft support had the slightest Idea that they told people the wrong things all the time since the rewording of the EULA. So lot’s of people and companies actually are not properly licensed while thinking they are.
Remember Ernie Ball, the company which was raided by Microsoft, and you could start having some uneasy nights.
The thing is that the EULA is not that relevant, at least not in Switzerland and in Germany. At least in those countries and I suppose in the EU as well the EULA is only a legal contract if you sign them when you buy the software.
Read here (in german):
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endbenutzer-Lizenzvertrag
Well, I searched around and it seems this is an area which is not entirely clear.
It seems that for private users most EULAs in fact could be invalid, but for me as a corporate customer the protection laws (Konsumentenschutzgesetz) are not available.
I would say it is a murky legal swamp I do not want to get dragged into, that is one of the reasons why I prefer free software. In this case I am more or less forced to buy Microsoft software because otherwise I could not communicate with some customers in a satisfactory way.
You know, as a one-man show even getting sued could break my business. And Microsoft is rather known for thuggish behaviour, especially against outspoken pro open source guys.
If you want to send documents to clients and ensure that they’re exactly what you created, you have to send PDFs with fonts embedded.
There is no other way, even if you’re using the same version of Windows and Office, unless you stick to the basic fonts that are installed with Windows.
Also, don’t expect HTML sent to clients to look anything like what you see on your screen. Outlook, for example, has an extremely half-assed HTML (not even up to HTML 3.2) renderer with only partial CSS support. We’ve wasted many, many man-hours at my office trying to work around Outlook’s stupidity.
– chrish
And never mind what can happen if different versions of Office are being used on each end, or even Office for Windows versus for Mac of the same generation. I don’t much like PDF, but I have to agree with you. However, PDF doesn’t lend itself well to editing unless you know the other side has Adobe Acrobat or another PDF editor (which may or may not format them properly), so it’s often impractical for professional documents which often need to be edited by multiple people at different locations. Personally, I wish everyone would switch to ODF… not going to happen, but a guy can dream.
The nice thing about Office in this situation is that you can track changes easily. Open Office (and pretty much every .docx compatible app I’ve seen) doesn’t seem to implement this feature at all.
– chrish
Many retailers help you end-run this restriction by selling you a piece of hardware to install with the OS as a “bundle.” I’ve seen Windoze bundled with DVD burners, NIC/Wireless cards, HDD’s, Cases, you-name-it. As long as the retailer designates it as a “bundle” and you install both the OS and the hardware in your system, there shouldn’t be an issue.
The best piece of hardware I’ve seen Windows bundled with is a screw.
Join the club; I recently sold my EeePC 1000HA as I found no use for it any more – but I was tempted at one stage to keep it because of a rumour that Windows 7 would receive a decent discount. I’m happy I did sell it off given the pathetic pricing.
I mean, come on, NZ$184.468 + GST for what amounts to little more than a service pack; features that are going to end up in Windows Vista (Direct2D/DirectWrite) or in the case of accelerated GDI+, find that the performance issues will still lag due to a lack of WDDM 1.1 drivers from some vendors.
I look at Windows 7, and there is very little that exists in it that won’t appear in Windows Vista as separate downloads by Microsoft; if Microsoft charged less it might have been tempting but even so, Windows 7 has all the same design flaws (UI and structural) that all previous Windows have had and no attempt to correct these.
“The way I look at it, it’s a service pack and we don’t charge for service packs.”
Hehe, Win7 is also regarded as a Vista Service Pack by some people
Who have no *** clue what they are talking about and never actually used it.
That may be true, but the view can nonetheless also be held by those who have considerable experience with Win7. It is a view which can be held by software engineers and non-software engineers alike.
In truth, Win7 and Snow Leopard appear similarly pitched, as refinement rather than redefinement. Whether to characterize both as “service packs” or neither as service packs is a matter of opinion on the line between a service pack and a release. As others have pointed out though, it seems difficult to construe them differently to one another – both are of a similar scale relative to their predecessors.
I wonder if the gushing and reverential tone of the article is caused by its writer being fully prostrated before the great Win Dao while he composed it. There’s really no need to thank manufacturers for telling consumers how much a product costs. I expect I’ll be getting Windows 7 as it sounds so much of an improvement on Vista which is getting a bit clunky here.
The European pricing for the “no IE” edition does worry me slightly, though. We surely haven’t heard the last of this spat and I wonder if an unwelcome trick or two lies in wait, just to show the EU that messing with the great Win Dao is really bad karma, etc.
Wait, what? You mean me, or the author of the blog post linked to?
He works for Microsoft, you see, so, well, yeah.
Don’t worry, Tom, you weren’t in my mind at the time. Besides, isn’t Mac roshi more in your line …
If you seriously think that Windows 7 is just a service pack on top of Vista – you need to learn a little bit about software engineering. I love when people who have no understanding about how software is developed try and discuss it. You just sound like idiots.
That being said – these prices are disappointingly high. Fortunately, I have a MSDN subscription :-).
Edited 2009-06-25 14:30 UTC
I’m a software developer.
But if you’re one of those “understanding people”, you could at least explain to us the differences between Leopard/Snow Leopard and Vista/Win7, of course from a software engineering standpoint.
I’d think of testing.
Apple’s hardware testing department probably consists of three men and the company dogcow, whereas Microsoft’s hardware testing department is large enough to shame Ramesses II’s workforce.
+1 for the Clarus reference.
Getting nostalgic here…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dogcow
Moof!
Edit: Epic fail! Can’t vote after making a comment… damn!
Edited 2009-06-25 15:09 UTC
haha, indeed, I was sad I couldn’t +1 him either
I’d be delighted to give a brief overview.
Here’s a Leopard/Snow Leopard example: Grand Central. It’s a very complex *new* component of Snow Leopard meant to assist developers in writing efficient multithreaded code. Pretty big investment in time and engineering resources on Apple’s part. I don’t consider an investment like that a “service pack”. Do you? If so, what in the world would make you think that?
How about a Windows 7 example: the new task bar. At first glance, it might not seem that big – it’s just a different UI after all, right? Nope: that’s a pretty damn big investment as well, which as Microsoft points out, required years of UI design work and user telemetry analysis before they sat down and built it – which itself is no easy feat. Probably required a total rewrite from the ground up, and that doesn’t include the new APIs for jump lists, task bar buttons, window previews, etc. Again – I don’t consider that kind of investment a “service pack”. Do you? If so, why, and what in the world makes you think that? And that’s just a small component of Windows 7 – a lot more has changed under the hood.
But go ahead – keep telling yourself that it’s a service pack – you won’t look like an idiot to other software engineers. Oh wait, yes, you will.
Okay then here’s my overview:
1) Whether Snow Leopard is merely a service pack was questioned by a Microsoft employee, not by me. And it was him who compared it to Win7 and pointed out a *difference*.
2) Whether an OS is regarded as a service pack or a true new OS by customers has nothing to do with “how it’s developed”. They see the end product and judge on that basis.
3) The reason why some people say Win7 is a service pack is because everyone is upset with Vista and now thinks of Win7 as a big fix with an additionally revamped taskbar.
4) I did not say that Win7 is a service pack, for me, anywhere.
2) Whether an OS is regarded as a service pack or a true new OS by customers has nothing to do with “how it’s developed”. They see the end product and judge on that basis.
That’s why I said I love when people who have no understanding of software engineering try to discuss it. They sound like idiots to software engineers. That’s my entire point.
omg, ringham is a software engineer, every one bows before him!!!
Yeah but Windows is still an OS for the masses, not for software engineers.
Do people sound like idiots when they judge a car because of how it looks, without knowing how the motor works or how it got engineered?
Also, it’s not an excuse. If people feel like Win7 is just a service pack, then it won’t help if they look like idiots to you, they still won’t bother paying 199$ for it, no matter they’ve seen “the making of Win7” or not.
Those promo prices should have been the retail prices!. This will only mean that pirated versions will be creeping all over the web. Not everyone can afford those high prices in this economy. I agree that now is the time for people to start looking into Linux as a cost effective and equal alternative.
Just to play devils advocate:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v420/kaiwai/devils_advocate.jpg
Sorry, I couldn’t help it
but Microsoft does have something similar called Concrt which comes with Visual Studio 2010 which is current in beta, but it isn’t part of the operating system itself nor will any of those libraries appear in Windows 7 – so Apple have the lead.
With that being said, the icing on the cake with Mac OS X when compared to Microsoft’s Concrt, in Snow Leopard, the operating system itself are utilising those new technologies right throughout the operating system where as with Windows 7 it isn’t (because it isn’t included as part of the Windows 7 distribution). It is still using the old and decrepit version of Microsoft’s compilers and libraries.
So whilst Microsoft has something similar to grand central, Microsoft isn’t utilising it in any of their products – it’ll be years before we do see it being utilised in their products. Apple is optimising their products for the new API’s whilst Microsoft is still using broken and deprecated API’s in Windows that should have died long ago.
Edited 2009-06-26 12:24 UTC
In any engineering discipline there are no bonus points for using the ‘new and shiny’ techniques and materials unless it helps you build something that meets more needs without compromising reliability.
And how does that relate to what I said?
Apple are using Grand Central Dispatch (GCD) extensively through their operating system which not only produces fabulous results for their customers but also proves to third parties that the technology is ready for prime time.
Mate, I’ve looked at every MSDN Channel 9 video on Windows 7 changes and documents too – I don’t know where you come off by way of swinging from chandeliers claiming that all those who don’t see it as a major change are obviously idiots. People like me aren’t idiots, many of us have informed ourselves about the apparent improvements but at the same time we firmly have out feet fastened to the earth.
Microsoft is charging for something that is little more than a set of refinements, something that Apple has the decency in their own operating system to charge US$30 for.
Then you haven’t been paying attention very well.
Compare this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Features_new_to_Windows_7
To this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X_v10.6
Calling Windows 7 a minor upgrade is silly and ignorant.
Yes, that is all very nice – but you ignore what I said in my post simply to beat your chest about nothing. I looked through the whole wikipedia article and there isn’t a single thing there to justify a NZ$184 + GST price tag – not a single thing. You may like to swing from the rafters and screaming about non-existent features but having actually used Windows 7 leaked versions – there is very little to write home about.
It has the same horrible user interface, the same flawed structural design that fails to properly set end users by default as limited user. The bundled applications are a mishmash of different UI’s based on how the programmer of the day felt rather than any sort of coherency.
When they do develop great replacements for old API’s such as GDI+ being replaced by Direct2D and DirectWrite, not a single application in Windows is utilising the new API’s! you’re still stuck with the same cruddy problem prone GDI+ because Microsoft can’t be bothered pulling finger and moving their common controls and so forth to the new API’s.
Then there is Internet Explorer, it’s a f*cking abortion; come on, as others have pointed out, Microsoft can’t even be bothered support standards that were established over 11 years ago! Jesus H Christ! come on mate, a multibillion dollar company and they can’t seem to accomplish something that Opera, Firefox and Apple have achieved.
Windows 7 quite frankly is a joke, a very bad joke – and there is very little that I’ve seen in Windows 7 that would ever want to make me leave my Mac or even consider recommending Windows 7 to a Windows Vista user. Windows 7 is yet again another half baked operating system from Microsoft whose management are stuck in a reality distortion field that insulates them from the reality of just how much their product sucks (I can’t think of a better word than that at the moment).
Edit 1: Also, look at many of the ‘features’ you’re praising; many of them have been either seperate downloads or incredibly minor enhancements; sorry, I’m not going to write home about the fact that Windows 7 now has a new font called Gabriola, nor am I going to cream my pants with delight because “NDIS 6.20” has been included. As I said, minor updates – nothing note worthy to justify a NZ$184 + GST price tag.
Edit 2: Just had a look at the pricing; nice to see once again New Zealand and Australian customers are given the royal screw job. I can see why the Vietnamese are trying to create their own operating system when overseas customers in the ASEAN region (New Zealand and Australia are joining shortly) are treated like second class citizens.
Edited 2009-06-26 11:58 UTC
$200 for a retail Operating System!? I don^aEURTMt understand this. What have Microsoft got to lose that they won^aEURTMt reduce pricing to something more reasonable. They will sell more copies of Windows 7 at retail then Apple sell copies of OS X. The price need to be fairer. I certainly wouldn^aEURTMt pay any more than ^Alb100 for an OS and customers certainly wouldn^aEURTMt pay nearer ^Alb200 when you can buy a new computer (and will get 7 with it) for a little more than that price here.
I will be taking advantage of the ^Alb50 pre-order offer since I^aEURTMll be getting a retail disc and Windows 7 does feel like the true successor to Windows XP.
OSX is a “loss liter” for apple. They don’t make their money off of it, they use it to sell marked up hardware. If apple didn’t get the money they do off of their hardware sales, OSX would have to be a lot more expensive then it is (although then their hardware could be cheaper).
The phrase you’re looking for is “loss leader”. And also, no it’s not. A loss leader is something a middleman (shop) sells at a loss, i.e. white bread in supermarkets which tends to be sold at less than wholesale to encourage further buying.
It doesn’t apply in this case at all. How do you know they’re not making money off individual copies of OS X? They’re not middlemen, they develop it, there’s no wholesale price.
EDIT: Spelling
Edited 2009-06-25 16:01 UTC
I’m not sure “loss leader” logic can be applied to something infinitely reproducible after design. Each DVD it’s on must cost them a couple of cents, and the cardboard box, not much more. Probably the most expensive thing in an OS X retail box, in terms of manufacturing, is the manual (do they have manuals in the box, or are they all digital now?)
For example, Microsoft claim to be selling Windows XP at a loss now. They aren’t, it’s infinitely reproducible. The only calculable loss comes when XP cannibalises potential Vista market share (like on netbooks, not that you can squeeze Vista onto one and still use it), but even then, the price of XP itself is entirely profit. I’m sure they paid their XP development costs off long ago, and since OEMs just stamp a disk image onto every machine, shipping is taken out of the equation for MS.
Software has an insane amount of R&D cost. Microsoft says they have about 80 devs working on windows. At an average of probably about 90k/yr, that is 14.4 million dollars (assuming a 2 year release cycle) just for developer salaries. And developers are just the tip of the iceburg. It mounts up pretty quick; testers, manufacturing/shipping, marketing, support (retraining at least), technical writing, artwork, usability testing, 3rd party licensing, legal, etc, etc, etc.
130$ is next to nothing, considering the amount of work going in to an operating system. If you look at the size of the potential market, if Apple isn’t losing money on osx, they are about breaking even. The only reason they are even making OSX is to sell their hardware. It may not be exactly the same thing as selling cheap bread to get people in the door, it is close enough that the analogy stands.
I wouldn’t say you’re too far off with the ‘cheap bread’ analogy given that it was Steve Jobs who said that Mac OS X is the heart of a Mac; without Mac OS X, Apple computers would be just yet another x86 PC out there with some minor tweaks here and there.
With that being said, if Windows 7 is all they can produce after throwing millions or possibly billions at the project – then I’d hate to see what a failed project looks like.
Edited 2009-06-26 11:29 UTC
Vista.
I was talking about a two year release cycle, 7 years of active development must have cost a fortune. I doubt vista broke even, even considering the much higher price, and the much larger market.
It wouldn’t be accurate to say that it was in active development for 7 years considering SP2, Windows XP SP2 to Windows 2003 SP1 transition as the basis of Windows Vista.
Microsoft wastes an awful lot of money when you look at some of the go-no-where R&D projects that never actually develop into real world products to bring in the cash. Instead of Microsoft investing money into pie in the sky, go-no-where projects, they stick to the fundamentals, namely, getting Windows sorted out by ripping out 20-30 years worth of cruft that quite frankly are a giant size liability.
I doubt that OSX is a “loss leader” for Apple. Stand-alone copies of OSX is currently the #14 best-selling software title at Amazon. Apple makes millions in profit from those sales. They probably paid for the R&D within the first week of sales…
see my answer here http://www.osnews.com/thread?370259 software costs way more money then most people realize.
So how are we to get a browser without the ability to browse and thus download one?
What if Windows 7 became the only OS. Would we have to revert to messy methods of ye olden times like magazine/newspaper freebie discs, copying from friends or ordering by phone. Shock horror… buying!
Is it more likely that Microsoft and the EU were struck with forethought and are providing considered solution……….
We of the OSAlert readings may annoyingly yet easily get around this but what about Joe Average.
Of course this isn’t relevant to people buying PC’s from Dell and such.
Windows has an FTP client inside of it. Just use the “Run command”, type in FTP, and use it to get firefox…..which is what you would’ve done anyways.
Holy cow! If I want to continue with Ultimate, I’d better start saving now. 8(
Mac OS X is starting to look downright cheap. And I could be running it full time on my computer. (I just wouldn’t be able to play all of my games).
Maybe time to switch back to XP just for my games, and try EFI-X again to run Mac OS X as my primary, and XP as a secondary OS.
With each future release of the Windows operating system, it becomes more apparent that Microsoft has lost focus or truly does not understand their customers needs. I am amazed at the high price of the upgrades, especially for previous owners of Windows Vista Ultimate
I purchased Windows Vista Ultimate 64-bit for the last desktop machine that I built and in hindsight wish I would have stuck with Windows XP. One of my biggest complaints is that Vista Ultimate really didn’t offer the user any additional functionality than Home Premium. The majority of users are not going to use BitLocker and the DreamScene wallpapers. Also, trying to get a stable machine with 64-bit Vista and device drivers was extremely frustrating, can you say BSOD.
Now I read that Microsoft want’s another $200 to upgrade from Windows Vista Ultimate to Windows 7 Ultimate. I’m sorry – but this customer will not be purchasing the upgrade.
My latest laptop purchase was a MacBook Pro with OS X and I am extremely happy. The best way I can put it is to say that the machine simply works. I don’t have to fight with it. My next desktop purchase will be a Mac Pro.
I just want to thank Microsoft for opening my eyes to Apple Macs and OS X.
So, to save 100$ on your operating system, you spent an extra 300$ on a computer?
An extra $300 knowing that all computer is fully supported out of the box without the need to resorting to downloading dodgy third party drivers – I’d say the $300 one pays is a small price to pay to save ones sanity. You may like to play, “find the driver” but most of us who own Mac’s want to either do more important things, like spend time with the family or knuckle down and get some work done.
I’m not saying macs aren’t worth the money, I am saying that spending an extra 300 to avoid spending an extra 100 seems kind of bizarre to me.
Maybe he is actually looking at the long term costs rather than just the instant costs.
If you bought a computer at the beginning of the year, you’ll need to shell out NZ$207 (including GST) for a copy of Windows 7 when it is released, and probably the same for Windows 8.
Compare that to a Mac bought at the beginning of the year, NZ$52 (incl GST) and assuming Mac OS X 10.7 is the same price as 10.5, $NZ199 (incl. GST), you’re better off:
Snow Leopard: $NZ52
10.7: NZ$199
Windows 7: NZ$207
Windows 8: NZ$207
You’re already saved NZ$163 and the result has been for an extra NZ$137 over 4 years you have obtained a superior user experience. I think the extra NZ$137 you paid over a PC is a small price to pay. Ask yourself, is Windows really cheap enough to justify saving NZ$137 and as a result having a horrid user experience? Having used a Windows computer, paying NZ$137 is a small price to pay for a superior experience.
Edited 2009-06-26 12:44 UTC
Interesting comments. My decision to purchase a MacBook Pro wasn’t based solely on the price of Microsoft OS upgrades, it was a result of a number of factors.
The desktop PC that I built was intended to be my office PC for running a business. When I first installed Vista 64 (Pre SP1) and the device drivers, I would get consistent BSOD when coming out of sleep mode, etc. I spent numerous hours trying to research the issues and updating device drivers. When Vista SP1 was first released, I upgraded to SP1, but still had issues. I finally wiped the hard drive and reinstalled Vista from scratch with SP1. Since this was my office PC I needed a machine that was rock solid and I could trust. Luckily, Vista with SP1 has been pretty stable.
When I decided to purchase a laptop, I looked at the amount of time I spent researching Vista issues and getting a stable box and decided that I did not want the same issues with a laptop. I looked for laptops with Windows XP Pro, but you really can’t find them anymore.
I decided to purchase a MacBook Pro and the laptop has been rock solid with no issues.
I realize others have had good experiences with Vista, but that has not been my experience. The simple fact that Vista has such a bad reputation has forced Microsoft to rush a new windows release to market to replace the Vista brand. Others may decided to continue with Windows 7, but I have decided not to.
My additional 2 cents …
For me, I bought a MacBook as a replacement for my iMac G5, then for some strange reason I tried a Lenovo laptop with Windows Vista, then I quickly cut my losses and came back the MacBook I use now. For me, at the end of the day, I’m a dyed in the wool Mac user; it is what I an comfortable using. Unless Windows was rebuilt from the ground up with a GUI that would be like an Amiga clone of some sort – I simply wouldn’t be happy.
What I am excited about with Snow Leopard, having given 10A380 a try, is the improvement in snappiness; a pure Cocoa finder has alot more responsiveness, especially under a heavy load; a lot of the applications are alot more responsive and snappy. Some people are disappointed that there isn’t a ‘revolution’ but given that Leopard is hardly something that needs to be given a massive overhaul, I think it is a testament to the strong foundation Mac OS X is based upon.
THe extra cost this will incure on buisness and gov departments will be HUGE.
This is how MS get back at the EU for making them pay up for media player and ie
Extra cost?
I have worked on/for Gov projects in the uk (council level). In particular around the time of the XP upgrade cycle.
We basically wanted all systems to be the same (supporting 98 installations 2k and xp was just unrealistic moving forward)
Over time the 2k boxes were upgraded to XP and the 98 machines replaced. To upgrade these 1000 odd boxes at full price (not upgrade price) would have increased the cost and meant more people would have remained on 2k as the budgets involved would not have covered the extra price
Yes, but WHAT extra cost? As the article states, the full retail versions in Europe will be sold at upgrade prices.
If the person you are replying to does work for a local government then he should be coming under the Microsoft Select licensing scheme. I know in New Zealand the government pays a fee to Microsoft each year and in return they get the latest Windows, Office and other software.
If the local city councils in the UK haven’t got such an arrangement then it speaks volumes for the share incompetence of local government in the UK more than anything else.
Edited 2009-06-26 12:47 UTC
Well, there you have it. The greed that is Microsoft has come full circle. No cut in price, no good upgrades. oh and Microsoft Apples 29.99 upgrade is good for all time, not a limited time. Microsoft has completely and utterly neutered Windows 7 with this. I dont expect too many upgrades at this pricing. Its a shame, I have the RC and its good but the economy in the shape its in Microsoft could have propelled itself above Apple and even Linux and it wont. Windows 7 is DOA and now I hope people stop with all the hubbub about it.
Unfortunately, Windows [7 or any other version] will never be DOA as long as virtually every PC comes with it and people and OEMs continue to demand it and load it on the vast majority of new machines. Look at netbooks for an example of this happening in a new style of PC where some Linux distro was originally the dominant installed operating system; now it’s nothing but Windows XP since Microsoft backpedaled on their original plan to terminate the OS. Can’t let their competitors eat their lunch on any potential markets, can they?
Hopefully ARM netbooks catch on. Sure, Windows itself can likely be ported to it, but will the hundreds of thousands of third-party applications that people use? Probably not. Linux and the BSDs have the edge there. Not only can the operating systems and additional applications quickly and easily be ported over, there are already ARM ports of Debian and Ubuntu. I think I read that an ARM port of OpenSolaris is in the works too. Now hopefully the architecture itself picks up soon.
1. After I saw Apple will be charging $29 for Leo to S. Leo, I realized that Apple was trying to give Microsoft a hard time on the OS pricing. If Microsoft followed the same approach, they will lose their profit. If Microsoft don’t, end user will be bitching on it.
2. We all know Apple is making money on Hardware, and Microsoft is making money on software. That’s why Apple can charge less on OS upgrading but Microsoft don’t want to;
3. To me, both S. Leo and Win 7 are not significant change from its predecessor. The only difference to me is that S. Leo was based on the successful Leo, Win7 was based on an unsuccessful Vista.
4. I don’t like Microsoft call it as Windows 7 but actually it should be 6.1 as shown. It’s totally misleading.
Edited 2009-06-25 17:35 UTC
Working markets help the customer.
If Apple finds a business model how to sell an OS for $30, and Microsoft finds none, that is Microsoft’s problem.
In effect I think MS could sell for $3 and still be profitable on Windows, but as people will buy their stuff for this inflated price instead of going either the Apple or the Linux way they have no reason to lower the price.
Nothing stopping Microsoft from selling an Office/Windows bundle for home, student and small businesses – then use the volume to make up for the loss of margins. Microsoft won’t do that because they’re stuck in an RDF where they believe that people will be happy to bend over and take a damn good rodgering.
I have a feeling though, given just how horrible Windows Vista is; people will shell over the cash just to get something that isn’t a royal pain in the rear.
Unsuccessful – correct, but there are some improvements; but all the boasting so far from the rabid fanboys and Thom is the fact that it has lots of changes. If the base of your new operating system is so horribly shit – of course you’ll need a lot of changes! you’re fixing up a broken system!
Its funny when I hear rabid fanboys who go on about Windows 7 being a major upgrade whilst ignoring the fact that when rumours flew around about Windows 7, various managers tried to play it down saying that it’ll be called 6.1 because it isn’t a major upgrade, that it is only an evolution rather than a revolution, its only taking the rough edges off Windows Vista but don’t expect anything drastic.
1 – 1 1/2 years later we have another set of managers swinging from the rafters promoting Windows 7 as a major revolution – where as a year to a year and a half ago they were virtually tripping over each other to try and curb speculation of big changes in Windows 7.
Is there not going to be a Home Basic version? The last few OS purchases were XP Basic for $85 – hard to justify paying more than twice that much for a new OS, especially if on a budget build.
I’d rather put my $300 into a new netbook than upgrade to Windows 7.
Sorry Microsoft.
Which would be just fine from their perspective. Guess which os will come preloaded on almost all new netbooks within another month or so?
In seeing the OEM prices since those are what most people are going to pay.
Generally the ‘for system builders’ editions are somewhere between half off and and a third off – Remember Vista Ultimate has a MSRP of $320 but the system builders OEM is $175 on NewEgg. Vista Home Basic has a MSRP of $200 but is $90 at most online retailers (newegg, tiger direct) for the ‘system builders’ OEM copy (same price you can STILL buy XP Home for BTW – oh yeah, the channel of new copies of that has SO dried up).
When it comes to Operating systems, retail box is for suckers who don’t know any better – which is why they usually rot on shelves until there’s a ‘scare demand’ like there was with the announcement of the end of XP, or end up filling dumpsters out back of Best Buy like ME did. (anybody else remember the dumpster diving stories involving ME?)
Edited 2009-06-26 02:46 UTC
You can’t tell me people are actually surprised by this? MSFT has a history of over-pricing their OS and Office product. That’s how they make their money.
Say no to their monopoly people and turn to Linux distros once and for all.
I’m sure end users are going to be oh-so-happy when they find none of their old software they like is available on Linux or find that their hardware is either unsupported or only partially supported.
Linux will grab marketshare on the desktop/laptop the moment when the Linux world acknowledge why they don’t have a larger marketshare – so far all I have heard from Linux zealots on this site, mailing lists and forums is, “its everyone elses fault except our own”.
MS currently offers half off promotion for pre-orders for the next two weeks. So basically this makes the prices in acceptable range (home: $50 – professional: $100).
So, if we include the newer PCs will have free (or $10) upgrade option, this makes the price OK, for now.
But this is my personal opinion.
Which is not available world wide.
Which again, isn’t available world wide.
Maybe someone should send Microsoft a globe to make them realise that the world doesn’t revolve around the US.
I heard that it would be available in US, Canada, UK, Japan, Germany, and one other country (which I don’t remember).
You’re right it’s not global, but at least it’s better than nothing.
So I should feel comforted that whilst I’m getting ripped off there are customers who aren’t? Atleast Apple has the good decency to make the pricing of their products global on day one instead of what Microsoft is doing – namely, ripping off customers.
But this isn’t the first time they’ve done it; Microsoft haven’t proven time and time again that they are a myopic navel glazing organisation who cannot get their mind around the fact that they are a global company – not just a US, UK, Germany, Japan etc based company.
The more they treat international customers like second class citizens, the more tempted they will be to look at alternatives.
Uh, the original iPhone took forever to ship worldwide…
Way to go talking about a NICHE product when compared t a product which HUNDREDS of MILLIONS of users have on their computer.
Well Microsoft, i would’ve given you my money. But at those rates, i’ll just end up getting a cheap ebay-OEM license the original buyer doesn’t use…
I did the same with XP and it saved me half the price.
All I can say after seeing those prices is good thing the CS department at my Uni has a deal with Microsoft. CS students get free copies of a bunch of MS software, including operating systems. I got my Vista copy for free that way and I’ll get a free copy of Win7 that way. Also I can tell you right now that unless MS significantly drops their prices Win7 will be the last version of Windows I use, since I will probably graduate before Win8 comes out.
I don’t understand what all the fuss is about. If you really want it and don’t want to spend lots of money, preorder the upgrade now for $50 (home premium) or $100 (professional).
$50 doesn’t seem much different than $29 for snow leopard to me.
The half-off deal is only valid for Upgrade versions. If you’re building a new computer, you probably can not use those. Not sure if there’s a way to bypass the Upgrade restrictions.
If it’s possible to install the Upgrade packages on new-build computers, I’d pre-order a couple copies in anticipation of upcoming builds.
From what I have heard, with Windows 7 it doesn’t look for an older version of Windows but it still doesn’t make it kosher if one were particular about abiding by the licence – which is especially relevant to those who are running businesses and might find they get a visit from their friendly BSA.
They need to make it cheaper if they want people to upgrade from XP. It should be free to Vista owners.
http://jamesmsingleton.com
In true world, you do wrong and you don’t sell anymore, or, at least, you give a change to the oportunity of costumer looking for other supplier. Quality speaking the batch is rejected and you pay back transport as supplier.
In software world, you do wrong and sell twice (?)
Windows 7 is too expensive. I don’t think I’m going to buy it, but, in fact, I’ve never bought any OS that it didn’t comes with the computer. So, I will wait for a new computer and last year I got my new laptop, so .. see you later (or may be not, depending on the way you try to push me to your side)
-kisses-