| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Microsoft won't cut Windows price to beat Linux | |
|
||
| Time: 14:43 EST/19:43 GMT | News Source: Forbes.com | Posted By: Byron Hinson | ||
|
Microsoft Corp. won't cut the price on its Windows operating system to compete with a $199 personal computer that runs rival operating software, the No. 1 software company's CEO said Wednesday. Walmart.com, the online shopping site of the nation's largest retailer Wal-Mart Inc., has been selling a $199 personal computer -- monitor and modem not included -- that runs the Lindows operating system. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 161 Last | Next |
The time now is
5:20:11 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 2960 (156.80.64.132) at 10/9/2002 3:26:38 PM |
|
Monopolies rarely drop prices due to competition. They rarely need to...
TL |
| #2 By 2332 (12.105.69.158) at 10/9/2002 3:33:43 PM |
|
Sigh... perhaps Microsoft's not going to drop their price for Windows because Linux isn't really competing with Windows.
Walmart sells machines with Lindows... Lindows is horrible... and very few people will ever buy a machine that runs it. Those that will buy it probably aren't in the market for a Windows-powered machine anyway. ($400 for a horrible Lindows machine vs $800 for a decent Windows machine... if that $400 makes a difference, they're not gonna by the Windows machine even if it sold for $700, or $600 for that matter... in which case, MS would be giving away Windows.) When Lindows or Linux starts attracting more than 2% of the market, then perhaps Microsoft will feel the need to drop their prices. |
| #3 By 1989 (32.102.75.41) at 10/9/2002 3:51:28 PM |
| Maybe Microsoft is hoping that the buyer will go out and buy Windows after they realize that Lindows is not what it says... |
| #4 By 3653 (63.162.177.140) at 10/9/2002 4:02:00 PM |
| If you add another $20 in features, yet you don't increase the price but $5... the consumer wins. |
| #5 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 10/9/2002 4:45:28 PM |
| Not really, mooresa. What's $20 in value nowadays considering what the OS already provides? If the next major release and each succeeding release came out with a $5 increase, would everyone be happy? Don't think so. |
| #6 By 3653 (63.162.177.140) at 10/9/2002 6:13:09 PM |
|
sodajerk - "What's $20 in value nowadays considering what the OS already provides?"
I dont get what you are trying to say. Do you not think that MSFT can replace what would normally cost the user $20 in shareware fees? Sure they can. |
| #7 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 10/9/2002 7:34:37 PM |
|
Sure they can, Mooresa... I've been waiting for years for good screen capture from Microsoft. Does that mean I'd pay $5 more for the OS? Hell no... I'd say about freakin' time! I'd still rather give the shareware company $20. I know that sort of purchasing decision blows your mind, but I really want an OS at a sustainable price, not an escalating one. And the shareware can probably provide better features. And if I am seeking extra functionality (which doesn't mean everyone else is), I may want to experience the cost when the cost arises, not when purchasing an OS. See, even if there is a $20 value in the feature set, I don't perceive it as even a $5 value to the OS...
After all, do you really think you are paying for past functionality when buying an OS and say I'm only paying for $5 worth of new features (if that were so, I'd gladly pay $5 for new OS releases), or do you say these new features alone (and not the previous OS release) are worth the full cost? This post was edited by sodajerk on Wednesday, October 09, 2002 at 19:47. |
| #8 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 10/9/2002 8:24:32 PM |
| He's as illogical as ever. |
| #9 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 10/9/2002 8:58:58 PM |
| theCoach, so are you saying that you would pay for OS releases that incrementally got more expensive? I see nothing irrational about expecting an OS to progress without trying to weasel in some incremental profit by bumping the price per feature. |
| #10 By 20 (24.243.41.64) at 10/9/2002 9:46:56 PM |
|
"Ford won't cut prices to beat bicycles"
GREEDY CORPORATE DEVILS! |
| #11 By 3653 (166.90.116.208) at 10/9/2002 11:11:57 PM |
|
WOW! I just read sodajerk's comments (#6 and #11) THREE times each. No kidding, 3 times. And they make absolutely no sense at all. Jerk, are you drinking today?
Jerk, surely you can admit that over time, MSFT has added features to their OS... causing many of us to no longer need some of the apps we once required. For example, the web browser, a cheap paint program, Eudora, a defrag program, etc. Well, by building those features into the OS, Microsoft has saved me quite a bit of money that I would have been spending elsewhere. For arguments sake, lets just say that at any given major upgrade, this new OS functionality has saved me $30. Well, the OS upgrade also gives me increased functionality (.wma, .wmv for example) and stability (2K and XP are rocks). Well, MSFT raises the price of the new OS maybe $20-$30... so in effect its no higher for me. Its just that MSFT gets all the money now, instead of all the other companies. Jerk, please wait to respond until you sober up a bit. ps... I left a new poll for you on the other thread we were arguing on. |
| #12 By 3339 (67.116.255.26) at 10/10/2002 1:12:44 AM |
|
mooresa, is this story not about the threat facing Microsoft: that as they drive down costs in the hardware market, it decreases the overall value proposition of their software because the percentage of the cost increases? Yes.
Okay. I don't believe Microsoft has to or should respond, but I also think this is a real threat, a real concern, a real perception issue that they will be facing from now on... more and more... on a number of different fronts. You then suggested that Microsoft could (approximately) continue to raise the cost of the OS by 5$ with each release for the equivalent of 1/6 the cost of the OS worth of shareware/software. By shareware, I presume you mean add-on, more-flexibility-type functionality, not core systems, but I originally posed the question: "what would constitute that 1/6 in functionality?" If you believe that, I would think that you've got to be a nut. But that's my opinion. I believe they've got bigger issues to face. You believe they should continue to try to squeeze more money out of the consumer. Whatever. This post was edited by sodajerk on Thursday, October 10, 2002 at 01:27. |
| #13 By 3653 (63.162.177.140) at 10/10/2002 10:07:46 AM |
|
When Microsoft raises the price $5, jerk says they are "squeezing the consumer". Nice obvious bias!
I feel like I'm arguing with one of the fictional writers at The Register. Pointless to argue with such a close-minded person. Its like arguing military strategy with a bum on the street. Pointless! btw... jerk, good luck with those "chicks", as you call them. LOL. |
| #14 By 3653 (63.162.177.140) at 10/10/2002 12:19:32 PM |
| RichardJC, you forget that the majority of pcs are purchased by businesses, not home users. And I assure you that MIS staff don't simply migrate to XP because its "available". And for business purchases, I assure you there are plenty of choices other than XP. Yet, business CHOOSE XP because it is WORTH the purchase price. |
| #15 By 2459 (24.233.39.98) at 10/10/2002 9:10:09 PM |
|
Sodajerk -- If you want good screen capture, you need look no further than the Print Screen (and Alt-Print Screen) key on your keyboard. This has been in Windows at least since Windows 3.0. Print Screen takes a screenshot of everything showing. Alt-Print Screen takes a screenshot of the currently active window. Both commands copy the screenshot to the clipboard. Just open Paint or practically any other app that uses the clipboard and paste the screenshot into the app.
If you mean motion screen capture, you can use Windows Media encoder or another freeware app from MS called Microsoft Camcorder. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 161 Last | Next |
The time now is
5:20:11 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
