Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Microsoft Discloses Windows 7 Pricing

CmdrTaco posted more than 5 years ago | from the snow-leopard-is-cheaper dept.

Windows 821

It's the tripnaut! writes "Information Week has posted prices for Windows 7. From the article: 'The full version of Windows 7 Home Premium is priced at $199, with an upgrade from Vista or XP costing $119. The full version of Windows 7 Professional is $299, with upgrades going for $199. Windows 7 Ultimate is priced at $319, with the upgrade version at $219.' In a nod to the global economic downturn, it is interesting to note that prices are 10% lower than Vista."

cancel ×

821 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

The answer is... (5, Funny)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467043)

It's too much!

Re:The answer is... (2, Insightful)

Xiph (723935) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467195)

well, it's just a minor upgrade to windows vista, so...?
It's a good upgrade to vista, they've taken care of many of the big grievances.

Windows 7 is not that big a change, so it hasn't cost that much to develop, so it's cheaper.

Re:The answer is... (5, Insightful)

OrangeTide (124937) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467403)

Should be a free update to Vista. Given the problems of Vista and the high amount of customer dissatisfaction with the product.

Re:The answer is... (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28467543)

At the very least it should be a $39 upgrade to Vista. If there's more in Windows 7 compared to Vista than there is in Snow Leopard compared to Leopard, I'll eat my shorts.

Re:The answer is... (1)

socrplayr813 (1372733) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467503)

well, it's just a minor upgrade to windows vista, so...?
It's a good upgrade to vista, they've taken care of many of the big grievances.

Windows 7 is not that big a change, so it hasn't cost that much to develop, so it's cheaper.

Or more likely, they want it to be a little bit easier for people to get 7. The beating they took with Vista means they have to be a little nicer for this one to avoid losing people.

XP = Vista for upgrade pricing (1, Insightful)

phayes (202222) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467059)

Seems like MS has realized that upgrading to Vista was useless as otherwise the upgrade from Vista should have been cheaper...

Re:XP = Vista for upgrade pricing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28467119)

while vista is not all bad, I do wish I had stayed with XP and saved the money. I know its not realistic but I would chose Vista to 7 to be cheaper then XP to 7.

Ultimate Rip-Off (5, Interesting)

Chaoscrypt (1476283) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467069)

I ended up getting Vista Ultimate.

Never saw ANY of the benefits/Ultimate Content that was promised.

The upgrade from Vista Ultimate to Win 7 Ultimate should be free.

That will teach me for buying a boxed, non-OEM version of Windows I guess.

Re:Ultimate Rip-Off (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28467141)

It is free if you buy it from (i think) the end of the month onwards.

Re:Ultimate Rip-Off (5, Funny)

Jason1729 (561790) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467213)

I bought MS-DOS 6.0. It wiped out my hard drive. Then MS charged an extra $20 for the "upgrade" to 6.2 which doesn't wipe out hard drives (as often). Compared to that, Vista Ultimate was a bargain.

Re:Wiped (3, Funny)

TaoPhoenix (980487) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467307)

Wait, a copy of DOS 6.0 would have solved the Northrup Grumman problem in the other story?

"All exiting drives must be reformatted with Dos 6.0, which will Promote Data Volatility past the expected recovery half life."

Re:Ultimate Rip-Off (1)

gweilo8888 (921799) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467407)

Ditto. Resisted upgrading from XP to Vista for a long time, finally gave up a year ago after somebody I trusted insisted it was stable and better than XP. I've regretted my decision ever since.

Given that Win 7 is essentially just a Vista service pack by another name, I will not be paying several hundred bucks to upgrade. I'll stick with XP until it is unsupported, and then I'll switch away from Microsoft altogether.

$30-40 I might just have considered paying, after trying Win7 myself to confirm that the problems were solved. What *should* have happened, though, was a free upgrade to the equivalent version for anybody who returned a retail copy of Vista, and a $30-40 paid upgrade to Win7 or a free downgrade to WinXP for anybody who bought a PC with Vista included.

Re:Ultimate Rip-Off (5, Informative)

vux984 (928602) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467453)

I ended up getting Vista Ultimate.

Me too.

Never saw ANY of the benefits/Ultimate Content that was promised.

I however knew what I was getting:

1) Disk encryption -- in ultimate only (and enterprise which is only by VLA)
2) licensed dvd codecs -- in home prem and ultimate but not in business
3) ability to connect to a domain, IIS, etc -- business and ultimate but not home
etc

But if you only bought Vista ultimate based on the handful of exclusive ultimate freebies that came at launch, and the half hearted promise that theird be some more cool stuff... that was idiotic. You should have just bought home premium or business as applicable, and then done an in place key upgrade if / when they ever released a bonus feature that made the ultimate upgrade price worth it to you.

For me, ultimate was the right choice right out of the gate. The features I wanted to play with were in the box, and I could only get everything i wanted in ultimate.

That will teach me for buying a boxed, non-OEM version of Windows I guess.

Meh, I did that so I'd have I'd have a legit key, 32 and 64 bit disks, and no grey area about whether I could move it from machine to machine, run it in a VM, etc, etc. Of course I bought the 'upgrade' so it cost the same as the oem version, and I knew about the double install trick for doing clean installs. (And I have multiple licenses for XP to legitimize the Vista upgrade.)

But the lesson that you should be learning is to buy products for what they have today, not to buy them on some vague promise of what they might one day have. That lesson will serve you will in general. For example, if you buy a game console when there are enough games for it out already that you can justify the cost even if no other game ever comes out, then you'll never be disappointed with it.

Re:Ultimate Rip-Off (1)

Ephemeriis (315124) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467483)

Never saw ANY of the benefits/Ultimate Content that was promised.

The "Ultimate" content is available, you have to download it through Windows Update. But I really don't feel it is worth price difference. All you get are a few animated wallpapers and some half-assed security/encryption/backup features.

How.... (2, Informative)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467095)

How does MS think this pricing is competitive in the least? Snow Leopard is going to be sold for $30 for upgrades while 7 costs $120?!!?! Really, MS needs to learn that those who actually buy their products in-box (not from OEMs) are going to be people who are their valuable customers who are going to have a lot of influence.

Competitive pricing? Doesn't matter... (5, Insightful)

Ritz_Just_Ritz (883997) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467179)

Why should Microsoft care if the Win7 prices are "competitive" or not? They've got a captive audience consisting mainly of new PC buyers and existing corporate seats. I suspect they simply did an analysis to determine the amount that maximizes license revenue from those two fish in a barrel and didn't even consider the cost of other alternatives.

Best,

Re:Competitive pricing? Doesn't matter... (1)

sgt scrub (869860) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467489)

Add to that users that are too non-technical or frightened to try something different but hate the issues they constantly have with Vista. If there is a better reason to upgrade to Windows7 than "your machine is running Vista", I haven't heard it yet. IMHO. Spending that much to get rid of problems, not learn anything new, and not have to buy new versions of your existing software is the price point Microsoft is shooting for.

Re:Competitive pricing? Doesn't matter... (1)

Ephemeriis (315124) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467529)

They've got a captive audience consisting mainly of new PC buyers and existing corporate seats.

Exactly.

If you buy a new computer, it'll come with Windows 7. You'll wind up paying for it whether you want it or not.

And if you're a corporate client with one of their maintenance/upgrade/support plans you're already paying a yearly fee to use their software - so they're getting your money regardless of whether you upgrade(?) to Windows 7 or not.

That's the problem with Windows these days, there really is no competition. Microsoft's got a steady stream of cash and they don't really have to be better than anyone else.

Re:How.... (1, Interesting)

bertoelcon (1557907) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467247)

But MS is competitively priced, if you already are running it. If your system is setup as Windows then the cost to learn and use Mac may not be worth the savings on the upgrade.

Re:How.... (1)

moderatorrater (1095745) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467263)

OSX is there to make their hardware more appealing. From the price of their computers, I'm pretty sure the hardware's where they make their money. At prices like that, I wouldn't be surprised if it's a loss leader to get people to stay on their platform.

Re:How.... (1)

drsmithy (35869) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467271)

Snow Leopard is going to be sold for $30 [...]

...If you already have 10.5.

Re:How.... (3, Insightful)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467373)

....And the $120 price is if you already have Windows, considering that Snow Leopard is x86 only and most machines with x86 CPUs shipped with Leopard (a few shipped with Tiger though) its really the most average situation for a Mac owner to only pay $30.

Re:How.... (1)

Ephemeriis (315124) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467397)

Snow Leopard is going to be sold for $30 [...]

...If you already have 10.5.

I do believe that is what upgrade means.

Re:How.... (1)

OrangeTide (124937) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467433)

The update of Windows 7 is cheaper than the full version, unless you only have Windows 2K, Windows 98, or Windows ME.
It's not unusual for an update to be limited to recent versions. Once you skip a couple of updates you have to pay full price again.

Re:How.... (5, Interesting)

elevtro (1012599) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467291)

Agreed.

MS should give the crippled version away free. The one that runs only 3 apps. Then there would be no getting your money back when you purchase a computer. It would also compete with the price of Linux and BSD. Then drop your tiered pricing by a lot. Home basic at $30, Home premium $50, Professional $150 and Ultimate at $175.
I bet a lot more people would "purchase" their OS if they structured it like that. I also think it would help in the level of illegal copies.

How did MS win in the web browser market? They made it free and included it in their OS.
Why not give away the lowest level of your OS for free to retain your market share?
That makes better sense to me at least.

Regards, Ben

Re:How.... (1)

Marcos Eliziario (969923) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467379)

Oh. And do you think that the EU would not go chasing after them if they did it?

Re:How.... (2, Insightful)

thepotoo (829391) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467497)

If you're asking seriously, no, the EU would not go after MS for reduced pricing. They only care if companies are abusing their monopoly position in operating systems to break into other markets (like media players or web browsers). Maintaining control of their existing monopoly in OSs is fine.

(Personally, I wish these prices were twice as high, and that the OS included some sort of truly unbreakable DRM (yeah, right). Linux could use a boost in its market share.

Re:How.... (4, Insightful)

mejogid (1575619) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467321)

Snow Leopards adds no significant (home-)user visible changes - most of the changes are architectural and under the hood, aimed at developers. You won't get developers using features that most users don't have, so you can't sell a platform based on developer potential alone.

Apple has recognised this and priced Snow Leopard to tempt developers, so that they can use the same base in future OSes (Open CL, 64-bit, full Cocoa etc). On the other hand, Vista is that new base and MS doesn't really care if you develop for Vista or 7, although you could argue they should've priced Vista more competitively.

Oh, and you seem to be neglecting the fact that Snow Leopard is only that cheap for Leopard users - Tiger users need to shell out $169 for iWork, iLife and Snow Leopard. And let's not forget that Apple uses software to sell hardware - users will upgrade to Snow Leopard then realise they need a 64-bit processor (so no first-gen Intels) and a recent graphics processor (last couple of years) to take advantage of the most of the improvements. PowerPC users will also need to buy a whole new PC to use the new OS.

MS' pricing may not be as low as we may have hoped, but let's not paint Apple as the angel it clearly isn't.

Re:How.... (0, Flamebait)

cliffski (65094) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467361)

Indeed. No wonder those dumb schmucks at microsoft lose so much money.

Hang on...

Re:How.... (4, Insightful)

Ephemeriis (315124) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467419)

How does MS think this pricing is competitive in the least? Snow Leopard is going to be sold for $30 for upgrades while 7 costs $120?!!?!

Keep in mind that OS X is, to a certain degree, subsidized by the fact that it will only run on official Apple hardware. Apple doesn't need to charge as much for the OS, because you've given them additional money for the hardware it runs on.

I'm not claiming this is the only reason their OS is cheaper. Nor even that it is a major reason why their OS is cheaper. But it is something to keep in mind.

Re:How.... (1)

AdamHaun (43173) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467427)

Snow Leopard is an upgrade for an OS version released a year and a half ago. WinXP was released eight years ago. Going from XP to Win7 is like going from OSX 10.0 to Snow Leopard.

Re:How.... (1)

Slur (61510) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467555)

Going from XP to Win7 is like going from OSX 10.1 to Tiger.

There, fixed that for you.

Re:How.... (1)

alen (225700) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467451)

SL will be $30, but you have to spend a fortune for an Apple branded computer. feature wise they are competative with Dell and HP's if you compare similar specs, but most people don't care about adding on all those options. and most people won't care about upgrading their OS on their PC unless they buy a new PC.

i know if i buy a new laptop it will probably be a $600 Dell. don't care if it's not made as well as a macbook pro. at that price i can buy a new one every year for the price of one Apple laptop

Re:How.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28467475)

$30 for a service pack. Apple users = fools.

Overpriced. (3, Insightful)

barnyjr (1259608) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467097)

Yeesh... apple is releasing snow leopard for $29 and microsoft is still pricing stuff like this? When will they learn that a lower price will likely increase the number of people willing to pay for it instead of pirating it.

Re:Overpriced. (5, Insightful)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467143)

Not to mention that most of the people who purchase Windows boxed either A) build their own PCs, B) are a business C) are a computer enthusiast or D) are a MS developer. Charging this much for people who are high up on the technology chain is just insane, especially because these people know of alternatives and they see Apple with a cheap but better OS and Linux with a free OS. Plus, what is the point of ultimate? As far as I can tell its nothing but a rip-off, there were none of the promised features, and you would think that MS would give them a free upgrade to 7 but I guess not.

Re:Overpriced. (5, Insightful)

roemcke (612429) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467233)

They don't expect people to buy stuff at those prices. The prices are high so that they can pressure OEMs into making shady deals.

Re:Overpriced. (1)

utexas delirium (908530) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467253)

Until you can install OS X on non-Apple hardware, I doubt Apple is going to make inroads selling their OS. And who buys retail Windows? People who build their own computers know enough to buy OEM, and the average consumer upgrades when they buy a new computer.

Re:Overpriced. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28467519)

People who build their own computers know enough to buy OEM

And people who really know computers do not buy: they get Free software.

Re:Overpriced. (5, Insightful)

Jason1729 (561790) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467269)

Most of the people who will pay $29 for snow leopard paid apple for their hardware. How many vista users bought their hardware from microsoft?

Re:Overpriced. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28467423)

Snow leopard requires leopard to be installed, which may have come with the machine or have been a $130 cost to "upgrade" tiger. In reality, snow leopard is an SP for leopard, service packs are free from MS.

Re:Overpriced. (4, Funny)

Hogwash McFly (678207) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467439)

I have an IntelliMouse, you insensitive clod!

Re:Overpriced. (1)

sean_nestor (781844) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467285)

You're forgetting that Apple makes most of its profits off it's hardware, not their operating system. Microsoft doesn't have that comfort.

Re:Overpriced. (1)

barnyjr (1259608) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467339)

Not disagreeing with you at all. However, it's a basic marketing strategy to lower prices to sell more units thereby increasing overall profits. My point is not that they shouldn't be making money off of it... it's that they would sell more units if they lowered the price.

Re:Overpriced. (1)

sean_nestor (781844) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467399)

Not disagreeing with you at all. However, it's a basic marketing strategy to lower prices to sell more units thereby increasing overall profits. My point is not that they shouldn't be making money off of it... it's that they would sell more units if they lowered the price.

...and its basic economics that when you have a practical monopoly on a given market, you can price gouge to your hearts content. Oh, sure, you'll eventually be tried in court for it, but court cases take years to complete, and will likely just result in a fiscal slap on the wrist.

Microsoft charges exorbitant fees for their OS. More at 11.

Re:Overpriced. (1)

vintagepc (1388833) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467485)

Microsoft charges exorbitant fees for their OS. More at 11.

That's supposed to be news?

Re:Overpriced. (1)

Endo13 (1000782) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467335)

Of course, to use snow leopard you have to have a mac, but let's not let the facts get in the way.

I do agree though that the prices are still too high. I'd say starting at $50 for home version and tacking on an extra $50 for each higher version would be about right.

Re:Overpriced. (1)

MoOsEb0y (2177) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467349)

Yeah, and if I could buy snow leopard for my PC, I might actually consider it.

Re:Overpriced. (3, Insightful)

iamacat (583406) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467365)

Cue in to Apple ads where people are sent to Best Buy to find an operating system for fifty bucks.

Re:Overpriced. (1)

robbiethefett (1047640) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467415)

if 1 in 500 PCs has a boxed copy of an OS and the other 499 have pre-installed versions, why would the OS maker care in the slightest about "competitive pricing?"

what competition? apple? *nix? laughable. There is no competition and the consumer has no choice. if it was $5 or $500 there would be an 80% market share. I'm running a pirated copy of XP right now because my legit version that i payed for (in a box, btw) was installed on this same machine more than the allowed 3 times in the past 7 or so years. I refuse to call an 800 number and have some jerkoff ask me to explain myself in order to use the product i purchased years ago. The funny part is, once I (fairly painlessly) removed all the backdoors and keyloggers, etc from this installation of xp, it runs WAY better than the boxed version. Pirated versions often come with all the most annoying bloated shit stripped out, as well as changing up some settings to a more sane configuration.

So i guess there is a choice for the consumer after all.. either buy MS or pirate MS. I suggest pirating it, it usually works better.

Re:Overpriced. (1)

p1r4t3 (1139441) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467459)

How else will they continue to fun their legal battles and OS development. LOL Plus they need to make up for vista and other projects that don't turn a profit.

Editions (4, Insightful)

sleekware (1109351) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467109)

I'm glad that with Windows 7 Microsoft mostly reverted back to the kind of editions they marketed Windows XP with. It's now much more clear which one to buy when it is distinguised by Home and Professional, then Ultimate for the power user.

Going right after Mac OS X (1, Informative)

guruevi (827432) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467121)

Apparently they have noticed their pricing was too ridiculous compared to other systems. Vista was the pinnacle of it, a crappy system that was sold for what... $499 retail?

Mac OS X starts off at $129 as well for new releases (and goes down from there) and $199 for a 5 license pack and I believe that Apple has been eating Microsoft for lunch on the home desktop market and is making inroads on the business as well.

Re:Going right after Mac OS X (3, Insightful)

Fahrvergnuugen (700293) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467209)

I agree with you, but to be fair, Apple knows that 99.5% of every boxed copy of OSX thats sold is going to be installed on a Mac which they already made money on. And up until now, every boxed version of OSX (which apple considers to be an upgrade) has been $129.

MacOSX starts as free (1)

davidwr (791652) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467225)

Well, free with purchase of overpriced computer.

If Apple hardware was sold at prices for comparable non-Apple hardware, they would have to raise their software prices or eat the loss.

Of course, there are some operating systems that are free, companies make their money on services.

Too late for a friend of mine (-1, Flamebait)

Seakip18 (1106315) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467131)

They just bought a laptop(old one was stolen) and couldn't wait for Win7 to come out.

Good to know Microsoft is kicking them for paying the MS tax.

Re:Too late for a friend of mine (4, Funny)

qoncept (599709) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467261)

I can't believe those cocksuckers at Microsoft didn't plan their release dates around an unforseen event happening to one fucking person. They're definitely at fault here. You know, as opposed to the guy that stole the laptop.

Re:Too late for a friend of mine (1)

Seakip18 (1106315) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467363)

Or perhaps ANNOUCE THE FREAKIN' FREE UPGRADE DATE [windowsteamblog.com] more than a day before it starts. That'd help.

It'd have helped alot actually.

Does anyone actually buy windows? (5, Insightful)

ActionJesus (803475) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467139)

It seems to me that everyone I know has a pirated copy of windows: the few people people that have legal copies have them because they were bundled with the computer they bought. When was the last time someone actually went out specifically to bought a copy?

Re:Does anyone actually buy windows? (5, Insightful)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467205)

Lets see, businesses do, gamers very often do (hey, if they have the money to buy a $1,000 Core i7 extreme CPU, 6 gigs of DDR3 RAM, a top of the line graphics card, etc, $300 for an OS is a drop in that computer's budget), as do people who are still stuck in the '80s upgrade mentality or people who have Macs and want to run Windows under Boot Camp.

Re:Does anyone actually buy windows? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28467275)

I must be behind the times. $1,000 doesn't seem like a lot to build a high-end gaming machine. I usually spend closer to $2,000.

Re:Does anyone actually buy windows? (1)

OrangeTide (124937) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467465)

Gaming machines are not "high-end". They are just over priced.

If I could get a system that met my needs for under $5k I would be thrilled.

Re:Does anyone actually buy windows? (2, Insightful)

xxuserxx (1341131) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467553)

So a graphics card pushing more polygons per second than anything else on the market is not high end?

Re:Does anyone actually buy windows? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28467507)

$2000? Sorry, thats pathetic. I spend at least $5000 on my high end gaming machines. Considering thats only a week's salary for me, its not all that much, though.

Re:Does anyone actually buy windows? (1)

pwfffff (1517213) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467309)

I priced my i7 system at ~$700. Must be a miiighty small bucket you got if one drop fills it a third of the way.

Re:Does anyone actually buy windows? (2, Interesting)

cliffski (65094) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467389)

I have a legit copy.
I store my business details and do internet banking from my PC. Why would I be dense enough to trust a copy downloaded from thepiratebay?

Theres no need to write trojans that bypass windows security and firewalls when there are people happy to actually get hold of a malware-infested O/S from day one.

Re:Does anyone actually buy windows? (5, Funny)

sakdoctor (1087155) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467393)

I downloaded XP, off edonkey2000, over a 56k modem.
Though I didn't buy it, I feel I earned it.

That was before I went to university, and found they had free student licences anyway.

Value proposition (1)

MrKaos (858439) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467147)

200 Buck's, might be worth waiting till the next version of Windows comes out since they are releasing it early and often nowadays.

OT, but... (1)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467561)

You need to meet Bob [angryflower.com] .

Can be cheaper if you order before 7-11 (4, Informative)

BlackSnake112 (912158) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467149)

And I do not mean the store 7-11.

Here:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/ptech/06/25/cnet.windows7.pricing.upgrade/index.html [cnn.com]

From the article: "From Friday through July 11, consumers in the U.S. will be able to buy an upgrade copy of Windows 7 Home premium for $49 or Windows 7 Professional for $99."

No ultimate and an upgrade not full though. But the upgrade from XP is a full wipe install anyway.

And I do agree with others who said that upgrade from vista ultimate should be free to win 7 ultimate.

Re:Can be cheaper if you order before 7-11 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28467505)

I've developed a flying car, as well as personal jet packs and all natural herbal pills that increase penis size by 3000%. I'm going to be selling them for $5000 a piece, but if you give me $50 now, I'll ship yours out first as soon as they are ready.

Re:Can be cheaper if you order before 7-11 (1)

The Moof (859402) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467525)

So they're offering you a discount if you purchase before any reviews of the OS are released. Maybe they did learn from Vista...

Also, I was looking at the Edition Comparisons [microsoft.com] (curious what was left out of 'Ultimate' since it's not in the discounted upgrade offer). Does that say you can't choose your language unless you buy Ultimate, or am I just reading that chart incorrectly?

10% lower than Vista? (1)

pushing-robot (1037830) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467151)

They've dropped Home Basic and moved Home Premium into its price slot.
Other than that, every version of Windows 7 costs as much as Vista does now.

You Mean (1, Insightful)

Ian Alexander (997430) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467159)

Microsoft expects people to pay for Windows?

Time will tell. (2, Interesting)

gubers33 (1302099) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467161)

I doubt we are going to see any big move towards Windows 7 until people see that is is worth the price tag. I mean with all the issues people saw with Windows Vista, no one is going to want to upgrade their working Windows XP for a Windows 7 that could be just as bad as Vista. If we see that Windows 7 is stable and worth the money we might begin to see a larger transition to it 6 months from now.

Re:Time will tell. (3, Interesting)

dtml-try MyNick (453562) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467313)

I skipped Vista entirely. Tried it a few days and went back to XP until recently.

When Win 7RC came out I decided to give it a shot and quite frankly, I'm hooked.....
It's a damn fine OS for a average to power user. If you're still running XP this is a upgrade to consider. If you're running Vista.. hmm, might aswell wait until pricing dropped a bit.

But.. this is the first time I'm actually considering to buy Windows.
It runs smooth, behaves as one would expect from a OS.. In the end Win7 might end up as their best OS till now.

Preordering it is cheaper starting tomorrow (2, Informative)

utexas delirium (908530) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467163)

I think starting June 26, you can preorder the upgrades for a lot cheaper. $50 for a Home upgrade and $100 for a Pro upgrade.

More importantly... (2, Interesting)

Jason1729 (561790) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467173)

Can I use the windows 7 license to legally run windows XP? ;)

Re:More importantly... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28467235)

Actually, I believe you can with some of the editions.

Microsoft has added some kind of VM-XP feature like what Mac OSX had for Mac OS9 apps.

That said, I don't keep a close watch on this stuff. I like my Ubuntu from ubuntu.com much better. :)

Re:More importantly... (1)

VitrosChemistryAnaly (616952) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467325)

Since Windows 7 comes with "XP mode" for compatibility, I'd say that yes you can.

I'll stick with Ubuntu and run a virtual XP for all the "windows only" things I need to do thank-you-very-much.

Seriously, Vista and Windows 7 pricing are such a joke.

10% cheaper but... (0)

Lord Jester (88423) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467203)

still 100% overpriced.

Sure, Mac OSX is less, but you are paying for that with the outrageously over-priced hardware.

Re:10% cheaper but... (1)

stillpixel (1575443) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467413)

still 100% overpriced.

Sure, Mac OSX is less, but you are paying for that with the outrageously over-priced hardware.

I paid $1299 for my 24" iMac (2007) and I think it is worth every penny. It is a rock solid machine with an awesome OS on top of that. I do web development on it, surf the web ( /.), edit movies in Final Cut Express, watch TV on it (eyeTV), watch movies on it (DVD, HULU, iTunes) with the remote and I've never had one issue with it since I bought it two years ago.

When I'm ready to move up to a newer one, I'll be handing mine down to my wife. She'll be handing down her 20" iMac (2005) to our son and he can hand down his old CRT iMac (2001) to his little sister. Just like how my wife handed down her iBook (2001) to her parents so they could use it when they travel.

Overpriced? No I don't think so.

Wow, $319US! (0, Troll)

kawabago (551139) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467221)

$319 United States dollars for the opportunity to have my computer assimilated by a botnet? I think I'll stick with Ubuntu for free. I've also just realized that Windows Vista is much more difficult to administer than Linux has become so if you want simple and easy to manage, it's now Linux not Windows.

Re:Wow, $319US! (0, Troll)

Colourspace (563895) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467327)

If you think by using windows in any form will get you 'assimilated by a botnet' by default, then are you sure you can administer any OS that well? Once again, users of any minority OS will see less attacks, simply because they don't have the market share. Simple as that really.

You mean people.. (0, Redundant)

stillpixel (1575443) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467239)

actually PAY to have Windows on the PCs?

Wow! Microsoft you really dont have a clue do ya? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28467251)

Goin for the $200 price point after that last pile of shit you tried to sell us? And in this economy. You must be crazy..

$200 for some software that by itself wont do a god dammed thing for you. still gotta buy all the stuff to run on it.

And these are the prices for people who already have some sort of OS working on their system. Not the bundled with their brand new dell price.. The price you expect people to pay to upgrade their already working computer to the latest greatest? $200... really?

Home premium should start at $100. And the ultimate wizbang got everydammthingincluded should be a MAX of $200s

s
Look. after all these years its pretty obvious you guys at microsoft dont have a clue at all about what to do and how to make things work. I suggest you HIRE SOMEONE WITH A CLUE. Any geek off the street could do a better job these days. And hey. theres alot of them laid off right now. SO get out there. get you a clue!

Re:Wow! Microsoft you really dont have a clue do y (1)

cliffski (65094) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467409)

So any geek off the street is smarter than Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer.

I bet those two guys laugh like maniacs about comments like that, whilst sitting on gold plated thrones and guzzling Krug.

Not in Europe (4, Informative)

benwiggy (1262536) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467301)

You're missing the bigger picture. MS is selling a version without IE in Europe, at increased prices, and you have to erase and install.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8118749.stm [bbc.co.uk]

Upgrade paths (1)

haystor (102186) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467329)

Anyone know if it is possible to move from Vista Home Premium to Windows 7 Pro with an upgrade, or does that require another full license?

Need a price for ... (0)

PPH (736903) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467333)

...upgrading from Vista Home Edition, but then I discovered that it lacked features I needed, so I switched to Vista Professional. But then that didn't support my hardware and ran slow as a pig. So I switched to XP, which ran fine, but Microsoft might discontinue support for that any day. So I'll give them just one more chance and try Windows 7. Or just say, "F*ck it all" and go to Ubuntu.

What's the price going to be for that?

Really? (2, Informative)

dr00g911 (531736) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467351)

In a nod to the global economic downturn, it is interesting to note that upgrade prices are still more expensive than a non-upgrade OEM copy with far more reinstallation hassles.

Convenient... (0, Troll)

ternarybit (1363339) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467359)

I still think it's a bit convenient that M$ takes 6+ years to develop something as awful as Vista, then spends less than 3 developing something remarkably usable, innovative and stable (at least compared to its predecessor.) I just thank Canonical, FOSS coders everywhere, and the good man upstairs for (K/U)buntu!

IMO... (2, Interesting)

stalky14 (574130) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467371)

An OS should never cost more than $80.

System Utilities should never cost more than $40.

Games should never cost more than $50.

Productivity apps can cost whatever, based on the size of their target market.

Anonymous Coward (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28467385)

For businesses , its about reliability, not price. If they ship it with default admin user again, it has no way of being secure and reliable, with the UAC bug and all.
On the other hand, home user doesn't care about owning a legal copy, and will use pirated if presented the opportunity. Home users that buy original mostly do so UNKNOWINGLY, when buying laptop or brand machine. Or when the price is expressed as total - and the price is still right. That being said, those machines tend to be awful - for example where I live, a relatively big company sells their desktop machines with horrible hardware, Asus motherboards with tons of bios bugs, cheapest possible PSU, memory and disk. Price is OK, but without Windows user would get MUCH better machine for the same amount of money. So the choice is - bad bad machine with legal Windows, or decent machine with pirated Windows. (disclaimer: IMHO Asus is not too bad as mobos go, but really those specific motherboards are some of the worst Asus mobos that I've ever seen - and I've seen a LOT).

for most people Windows is free... (5, Insightful)

CohibaVancouver (864662) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467387)

[flame suit on]

I know much of slashdot would vehemently disagree, but for the majority of users, Windows comes 'for free' with their PC. They buy a computer from Dell or whomever and it comes with Windows, then when the buy a new PC 4 or 5 years later, it comes with Windows again. Virtually no one I know 'buys' the OS - They'll simply get a the newest / latest when they buy a new computer.

[/flame]

Re:for most people Windows is free... (1)

hamburgler007 (1420537) | more than 5 years ago | (#28467495)

Unless Dell has some special arrangement with MS with regard to this, a new machine with windows installed as the OS has the price of the license bundled into the machine. You can refuse to agree to the MS EULA on the new machine and be compensated for it.

Fear of Windows 7 (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28467449)

How many of you zealots have actually used the W7 release candidate? From the look of the comments, not many. It's a fantastic OS already, and I'm betting it will be very successful, increasing Microsoft's market share.

Oh, but this is slashdot. Anything Microsoft = bloat, crashes, unsecure. Get out of the 90's.

What exactly do I get? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28467559)

What exactly do I get for my hard-earned $199 or $119?

-A glorified file manager?
-Shiny new icons?
-a DRM crippled media player, that can only play "approved" formats
-Buggy drivers
-A "free" web browser, full of security holes
-Wordpad, Solitaire, Reversi?
-"Promised" compatibility with old software
-A crippled email application
-A crippled media recorder/editor

So lets see, I basically get a glorified file manager, and at worst case, need to repurchase new versions of most of the critical applications, unless I do so, my system is mostly useless, unless I'm satisfied with web broswing and typing in wordpad.

Sorry, not worth it. I'd rather pay/donate to slackware/ubuntu and get a DVD that contains USEFUL software.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>