| 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 |
 |
Official Microsoft Windows Vista Pricing | |
|
||
| Time: 00:14 EST/05:14 GMT | News Source: ActiveWin.com | Posted By: Robert Stein | ||
| ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 327 Last | Next |
The time now is
5:58:41 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 992 (80.47.8.8) at 9/6/2006 7:17:27 AM |
| Does anyone know what the UK pricing will be? And when it will be released to consumers? |
| #2 By 6859 (206.156.242.36) at 9/6/2006 8:47:21 AM |
|
Two things:
(1) I still assert there are too many versions of Vista. There should be only one; and, (2) Those prices suck, specifically for Ultimate. I don't know anyone who likes a $400 pricetag. |
| #3 By 61 (71.251.77.56) at 9/6/2006 10:46:52 AM |
| Cthulhu, so what you are saying is choice is bad? |
| #4 By 32132 (142.32.208.233) at 9/6/2006 1:27:29 PM |
|
"I don't know anyone who likes a $400 pricetag"
I can't think of anyone who can't find an old copy of Windows to do an upgrade install with. Besides, most people pay about 50$ for Home if you buy a new PC. I suspect Ultimate will cost 200$ or less with a new PC. |
| #5 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 9/6/2006 2:35:49 PM |
|
#4: Parkkker the marketing whiz. If you're complaining about Vista being $400, just spend $1000 on a new computer to get a discount on Vista. Brilliant.
|
| #6 By 32132 (142.32.208.233) at 9/6/2006 3:09:48 PM |
|
#5 Or, if you can read (unlike coffee girl) find an old copy of XP and buy the Upgade Edition for 259$.
And new computers with dual-core CPU's and 512MB running MCE 2005 are around 650$ and up. Most Vista users will get Vista by buying a new PC. Thats reality. Those with a brain (unlike you) will buy an Upgade Version. |
| #7 By 6859 (206.156.242.36) at 9/6/2006 4:21:38 PM |
|
"#3 By CPUGuy (1627 Posts) at 9/6/2006 10:46:52 AM
Cthulhu, so what you are saying is choice is bad?" No, choice is generally a good thing; however, MS needs to make a more secure product while at the same time giving them intense focus in the OS arena. By having only one form of "Vista" available this gives MS the focus, unifies their OS footprint, and allows them to attempt to make a more secure OS in general. Add to this that XP Home is more or less an abomination, you get my opinion: one OS from MS (excluding server variants.) Force the home user and the business user to use the exact same version. Simplicity rocks. |
| #8 By 3746 (71.19.43.237) at 9/6/2006 7:56:52 PM |
|
#7
Why would you want a business OS with Media Centre? Or why do most home users need access to domain or business level features? I think it makes sense to have two levels of OS -one for business users and other for home users. Simplicty in SKU numbers does not mean simplicity for those having to admin a business level OS with a bunch of stuff you don't need. In effect MS is doing what most admins would have to do if there was only one SKU - remove all the unneeded parts. Choice is good - choice that saves you money is better. |
| #9 By 2960 (68.101.39.180) at 9/6/2006 11:25:00 PM |
|
What can you upgrade FROM ?
=TL |
| #10 By 2960 (68.101.39.180) at 9/6/2006 11:26:41 PM |
|
Is there a comparison grid somewere?
TL |
| #11 By 61 (71.251.77.56) at 9/7/2006 12:34:14 AM |
|
Cthulhu, the beauty is, all editions are on the same CD it's just a matter of loading up the SKU you have the CD key for.
Also, it takes no less or more work to create these extra editions, either way they are working on the same feature set. And on top of that, security has NOTHING to do with this, so SHUT UP. So tired of crap like this. "They are spending so much time on the UI, why don't they focus on security?" This kind of crap is SOOO stupid. Do you really think that the developers working on these types of things are also working on security? Do you think that simply throwing more and more people onto security is going to somehow make it better? SHUT UP. I usually don't get this low when posting stuff, but seriously, I'm tired of MORONIC commets such as yours. What is so bad about not having to pay for MCE or Tablet software when you didn't need or want it? Why is Home an abomination? There are one or two features it lacks, which a home user would never need anyway. There is a reason why it is called Home. |
| #12 By 61 (71.251.77.56) at 9/7/2006 12:36:39 AM |
| Tech, yea, there is, it was posted a week or two ago, I would Google it and post a link, but eh.... |
| #13 By 3746 (216.16.225.210) at 9/7/2006 8:39:05 AM |
|
#10
There is a comparison grid in this forum - this one also lists the N versions for Europe and the Starter edition for developing countries. http://forums.microsoft.com/TechNet/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=587581&SiteID=17 |
| #14 By 6859 (206.156.242.36) at 9/7/2006 9:07:55 AM |
|
I LOVE it when mindless people resort to insults. CPUGuy, therefore, I feel the right to resort to the same.
You say that it takes no less or more work to create extra editions (of Vista.) What are you, mentally handicapped? Do you think the OS code just writes itself? Someone wrote it. Had MS worked on only ONE cose-base there'd be less cost involved for production--which translates directly to a lower cost to the end-user--and less time would be needed to write the code in the first place. If you write a piece of all-encompassing code, and then have to take parts out to accomodate some silly request, you are taking time out to do so--it just doesn't magically happen. Apparently, you reside in a world of fantasy beasts where unicorns talk and software writes itself. MS has repeatedly said, and you can go look it up, that they've focused a lot on making Vista a more secure OS than any previously made--as proof go check out many of the people's posts who moaned about UAC and the perceived headaches involved. Then you go off and post stuff I never said (in quotes, no less) about "They are spending so much time on the UI, why don't they focus on security?" Find where I said that. If not YOU are the one that needs to STFU, since you clearly fail at remedial understanding of words. Do you think that simply throwing more and more people onto security is going to somehow make it better? Yes, the OSS developers use a very similar tactic, and to date it works just peachy. More eyes + more developers = more better software. You apparently are under the opinion that Vista is being written by a core group of about 12 people. Sadly, you are mistaken. There are whole teams devoted to writing the components of Vista--that's how MS works. What is so bad about not having to pay for MCE or Tablet software when you didn't need or want it? They (MS) already took the time to write the code for the pieces you are losing in the whole versioning mess--as a result, you HAVE paid for something you're not even getting. The only people who "win" in this case are those who fork out the big bucks for Ultimate, and MS themselves. All others are losing out on functionality and wasting money. And to finish up: why is Home an abomination? Clearly you haven't had to work with it, and trouble shoot the systems with it, for very long or you'd know exactly why anyone with a lick of sense has stayed away for XP Home for quite some time. For a slightly higher output of dollars the end user could have obtained XP Pro and saved themselves all the headaches and frustrations that Home gives. I'm not about to waste more time than I already have refuting your garbage, you can go look up all this yourself--but I doubt you'll even see this post. Trolls are like that. Oh, and resort to insults again and I will happily request the admins ban your account. Keep that in mind. |
| #15 By 61 (71.251.77.56) at 9/7/2006 9:57:39 AM |
|
Obviously you are the one which has absolutely no clue.
How exactly does paying less for fewer features translate to losing out? And of course, you say I need remedial reading, but you are the one who failed to read my post. I didn't say you made that quote, I said you make similar quotes, and even in the post I was responding to you made a very similar quote. The types of programers that work on Vista editions are not the type of programmers working on security, period. No, OSS does not just throw more and more programmers to make better security (It is still yet to be proven whether many OSS apps are actually secure, really, but that that's not the point here). I know there are thousands of people writing Vista, hell, I beta test it. I know how much work is going into it, I know how much frustration is going into. The simple fact is, you don't just throw more and more programmers and money into a security problem to fix it, especially not the guys working on SKU code. Again I will say, you are paying less for fewer features that you didn't want/need to begin with, you win. You aren't paying "for something you're not even getting". The ONLY people who have trouble with Home are people who are not in an enviroment that is conducive to using the Home edition. Home is perfect for people who are... AT HOME, with no domain to login to. |
| #16 By 3746 (216.16.225.210) at 9/7/2006 10:18:19 AM |
|
#14
I don't know what your problem is about multiple versions. It has been said before that when you purchase a version of Vista you are getting the DVD with the full version on it. Your key tells the system what version you are loading. Technically, they are doing what you say just providing people with a choice to pay less money for the OS if they need less features. This is good for the consumer as we pay less for an OS and not get components that we don't need. Why would Home give people headaches? The core OS is the same. Certain business level features have been disabled - so what? I have plenty of clients and friends that use Home and are perfectly happy with it. I have worked with it, used it and and loaded it for clients. Working with it is the same as with Pro except certain features have been disabled. You have said it twice but never really explained why XP home is an "abomination". Why would all those people want to pay 70 bucks more (oem version) for something they don't really need? Seems like a waste of money to get features that they would never use, The only downside of Home is that you have to reinstall to get Pro if you did make the mistake of purchasing it. Vista will not have this problem as you will be able to do an upgrade to the other versions if you needed those features. I don't get your logic that someone who buys ultiumate wins. If someone pays 399 US for ultimate and they use all of the features then they are getting a great deal. If they pay 399 US and don't use media centre or access a domain they then paid 200 dollars more then they needed to. It is the same with XP media centre. I see plenty of people who have it on there system and have no clue what it is and have never used it. Seems like they wasted money and could have went with XP home for 30 bucks less. If they did have one SKU what do you think the fair price would be for the retail version of the OS? This post was edited by kaikara on Thursday, September 07, 2006 at 10:34. |
| #17 By 6859 (206.156.242.36) at 9/7/2006 12:28:54 PM |
|
#15,
You're not "paying less for fewer features", you are, in fact, paying more for features you may need--and later have to get a new SKU for. The fact that Vista has it all on one DVD is the proof right there. You (and by that I mean the end user) can end up having to pay multiple times for what equates to the exact same product because something is only available in a upper-level edition of the product. You really think that MS is being kind to the end user in this scenario? No, they know full well that some stuff people will want to pay for--even if they use it only once. They're charging for it, it's the retail way of doing business. And it's how they've done things previously--and not just with the OS market. Ask around about Biztalk and the HIPAA accellerator fiasco. You made a Straw Man argument, nowhere did I equate UI to security, that's all you. Saying I've made similar statements is a lie--I have not. #16: If they did have one SKU for Vista I think an appropriate retail cost would be $299. Since Vista has the image-based install/update process, there's no real "upgrade" pricing to be used. |
| #18 By 61 (71.251.77.56) at 9/7/2006 1:00:05 PM |
|
Cthulhu,
So you are basically bitching about the price in general? $299 is the price for XP Pro Full version, which doesn't have MCE, and doesn't have Tablet software. So you think that people should get MCE+Tablet+Full OS for the same exact price? Are you insane? Without the different SKUs (Just one SKU), Vista would be $399, period. Just because you want it for $299 does not change the fact that it would be $399. Why would somone want to pay $399 for MCE, Tablet, domain support, etc.. when all they have is one computer in the house for basic stuff? Why pay $399 for the equivelant for $199 worth of features (price of Home Basic). Also, if you happen to need something in Home Premium, or any other version, you simply by the new SKU CD-Key. So if have Home Basic($199) and you need something in Home Premium ($239) you are only going to pay the difference in the price ($41), not the full price of the new SKU. I didn't say you made a statement about UI and security. However I did say you made a statement about "Why are they spending all this time on X project when they could be focusing on security?". |
| #19 By 3746 (216.16.225.210) at 9/7/2006 3:15:18 PM |
|
#15
I am not really following your logic here so I have to agree with CPUguy - why would you want to pay 299 if you could pay 100 dollars less? With Vista it is a no brainer because it will be very simple to pay the difference get a new key and upgrade to a higher end version if you do need the funtionality. They wouldn't pay multiple times and it gives you more flexibility in how much you want to spend and what funtionality you are going to use. Just because you want ultimate, and want it for 299, doesn't mean that the vast majority of users are going to be happy with a home version of vista for signifigantly less. I have seen many types of software licensing and I think the options and costs of MS vista pricing is very fair and gives the consumer solid choices and flexibility. This post was edited by kaikara on Thursday, September 07, 2006 at 15:16. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 327 Last | Next |
The time now is
5:58:42 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
