Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Windows Operating Systems Software The Almighty Buck

Microsoft Cuts Vista Price In 70 Countries 257

Posted by kdawson
from the defibrillation-paddles dept.
dforristall alerts us to an odd move by Microsoft: cutting the price of retail boxes of Vista in many markets. Analysts didn't see this one coming, and they are scratching their heads a bit over it; one called it "very unheard of." The price cuts vary by country — they're largest in the developing world where piracy levels are high — and they don't apply to OEM copies of Vista, which account for 90% of sales. "Gartner analyst Michael Silver said the move... is puzzling... [He] noted that the market for such upgrades is fairly limited. Those who bought XP in the fourth quarter of 2006 got a coupon for a free Vista upgrade, while most of those who have bought systems since then have gotten Vista. Machines purchased prior to 2006 probably aren't all that attractive as candidates for a Vista upgrade... 'The whole notion of upgrading PCs has sort of fallen by the wayside.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft Cuts Vista Price In 70 Countries

Comments Filter:
  • by tritonman (998572) on Friday February 29, 2008 @10:19AM (#22600084)
    THey need to drop the price of XP so I can buy it to replace my copy of Vista.
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      Actually, there's no need to purchase a copy of XP to replace your Vista...you can usually talk the OEM into a free downgrade to XP...that's what my company does, as we're completely uninterested in inflicting this wretched excuse for an OS on our systems, users, and network.
    • From msft's point of view, would it make more sense to have an XP firesale?

      That would still lock people into msft, but it look better from a PR point of view. And msft apparently considers PR very valuable.

      If there were an XP firesale, msft could say "Yeah, nobody wants junky old worn-out XP anymore. Everybody wants a shiny new Vista."

      Also, XP would be more attractive to those with lower-end hardware.

      Selling more Vista will just piss more people off
  • vista sp1. that is the only reason retail prices would drop. on a side note, maybe now they will get some more sales
    • by ShieldW0lf (601553) on Friday February 29, 2008 @10:47AM (#22600442) Journal
      They got paid by large private and government interests to put Trusted Computing on everyones machines so they can engage in widespread information control. They would LIKE more money from the consumer, but they MUST achieve widespread deployment for this to be realized. If it's realized, they will have a power the likes of which has never been seen before on earth, and money will be the least of their concerns. If it's not, they will become a niche product. It's pretty obvious where their motives lie, and their actions are entirely sensible if you understand their motives.
      • by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 29, 2008 @10:52AM (#22600532)

        If it's realized, they will have a power the likes of which has never been seen before on earth, and money will be the least of their concerns.

        Pinky: What are we going to do tonight, Brain?
        Brain: The same thing we do every night, Pinky. TRY TO TAKE OVER THE WORLD!!
      • by marcello_dl (667940) on Friday February 29, 2008 @11:17AM (#22600826) Homepage Journal
        If I were representing big interests i wouldnt' bet much on MS. Nor on software. Hardware backdoors are better. Try and detect those in a multi layered nanometer scaled impossibly complex circuit.

        Of course, naming a chipmaker INTEL doesn't help reassuring tinfoil hats :D
      • by h4rm0ny (722443) on Friday February 29, 2008 @11:31AM (#22601056) Journal

        I don't know why someone marked the parent as troll, but it's unfair as this is a reasonable explanation as it both fits the observed fact and there are groups with means and motive to do this. We also have previous instances of this sort of behaviour from these groups and of private companies complicity in such activity (including Microsoft). As to the other poster who discounted this because a hardware solution would make much more sense, that's hardly a solid counter-argument because a hardware solution would firstly be more difficult to implement, crossing multiple areas of hardware requirements and manufacturers in all probability (including manufacturers in countries such as Germany and China), we don't know what companies behind the scenes are amenable to aiding US spying efforts and a hardware solution seems likely to be less flexible.

        This is not to say that this is the reasoning behind Microsoft's desperate attempt to get people to take up Vista. A private awareness that if they don't lock people into their O/S using the drm mechanisms in Vista, that they're in serious trouble. Could also be the reason. Or it could be multiple reasons. But certainly the parent shouldn't be modded a troll because it's a strong possibility. Installing subversive software on people's machines is one of the first things that I thought of when I read this article.
    • if the product works.

      Did they fix that? I thought not. Nothing to see here.

    • (offtopic, checking "no karma bonus" box)

      No fair, you added two more people to your "foes" list making me not the only guy on it any more.

      Now my feelings are hurt!

  • by tjstork (137384) <(todd.bandrowsky) (at) (gmail.com)> on Friday February 29, 2008 @10:24AM (#22600148) Homepage Journal
    I have a dual Opteron with a fairly decent graphics controller that would be an ideal candidate for Vista x64 Ultimate. But, for about $400 cheaper, (or $200 if you get the system builder edition), I downloaded Ubuntu and it works great.

    Taken together, Microsoft's actions of the last few weeks : decreasing the price of Vista, giving away Visual Studio to Students, publishing specifications, all point towards an effort to attract developers to their platform. Even the channel partnerships that I railed about earlier are structured to attract developers. Clearly, Microsoft knows something that we don't know, and, I think it is that Linux development is starting to reach a critical mass for them to be really concerned about it. I wonder how much trouble Microsoft realizes it is in.

    There is a demographic factor going on as well. A lot of we formerly reliable Windows zealots are now in our 30s and 40s, and suddenly money that would be spent on graphics cards and Windows upgrades is now getting plowed into our over-priced houses and our children. It's like, I would have stayed up in line to get Vista Ultimate the day it came out, but instead, I bought diapers, soy milk and a thomas the tank engine train set for my son. Having jonesed for some sort of an upgrade to my PC, I went with Ubuntu instead, and its pretty satisfying.

    Linux has hit that point where, it may not be the best in terms of a consumer operating system, but its often good enough, and installing it just works.
    • by Jason Levine (196982) on Friday February 29, 2008 @10:30AM (#22600228)
      Linux has hit that point where, it may not be the best in terms of a consumer operating system, but its often good enough, and installing it just works.

      That statement there might be the scariest thing for Microsoft. Microsoft pretty much based their entire business around "good enough." If Linux is "good enough" also and has the added benefit of being free, then that will take sales away from Microsoft. That combines with Microsoft's main competition (their own older versions which are "good enough" for most people) to make for a really bad situation for Microsoft to be in.
      • by aslvrstn (1047588) on Friday February 29, 2008 @10:49AM (#22600480)
        But what percent of people EVER install an operating system? Microsoft has the advantage of being "good enough" to not have people reinstall another operating system over top of them. That's all they need. Linux, however, needs to be "better enough" to force people to reinstall, or have someone reinstall, their OS.
        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by domatic (1128127)
          Not necessarily. Linux is supplied with things like EEE PCs and we'll be seeing it on more and more phones and portable devices. It isn't going to storm big desktop PCs and full size laptops anytime soon but nonetheless devices capable of running general Linux apps are falling into more and more consumer hands. Furthermore, so-called "Linux Desktop" apps are becoming ever more polished and finding their way onto Windows installs. A multitude commonly using such apps would be very frightening for Microso
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by sm62704 (957197)
          Linux, however, needs to be "better enough" to force people to reinstall

          It already is "better enough"; at least, the distro I'm using is. Unlike MS It's secure. Unlike MS it's stable. Unlike MS I can have the thing boot in exactly the state I left it in, with all the programs I was running when I shut it off running when I start it back up. Those are just a few things and there are a whole lot more advantages to Linux over Windows.

          What Linux needs is for non-Linux users to be shown the advantages.
        • by Yvanhoe (564877)
          Apparently the 10% of users who buy Vista non-OEM licenses.

          Note also that in the corporate world, many people don't install their OS, they get it installed by the IT guy. A pointy-haired boss may want to try Linux, he'll just call an IT guy and ask him for it.
      • by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 29, 2008 @11:04AM (#22600676)
        As a person who has been in the industry about as long as Microsoft, I can honestly confirm that their entire business model was originally based on "very cheap and good enough". Later on, they relied on the fact that "everybody uses it". This made sense, as the original PCs were nothing special from a performance point of view. In the beginning, the IBM name was enough to create a de-facto standard.

        From the very beginning, there were better alternatives to MS-DOS. Problem was, they were expensive and not viable on low-end hardware. Microsoft's attempts to move upscale have been a mixed bag. Apple did a better job [eventually] on the desktop, and Linux took over the low end of the spectrum (along with a huge threat on the server side and the possibility to go upscale on the desktop as well).

        This brings us to where we are today -- a scary time to be Microsoft. As far as pricing is concerned, how low do they need to go if Linux is free? Is low pricing of any use against OS X? I doubt it.

        It may be impossible for MS to maintain compatibility with the installed base AND go upscale at the same time. Either way, they are vulnerable to attack from competitors on all sides. From the customer point of view: If you have money to spend, OS X is great. If not, Linux is cheaper. Who needs Vista at any price?
      • Linux is good enough for a long time, it's actually better, the problem is that's not "compatible enough", remember the outcry about Vista breaking compatibility with a really small number of programs, if people can't use Vista over XP do you think they will be able to use Linux?
    • I don't think so (Score:5, Interesting)

      by geekoid (135745) <dadinportland AT yahoo DOT com> on Friday February 29, 2008 @10:51AM (#22600510) Homepage Journal
      "I think it is that Linux development is starting to reach a critical mass"

      Maybe, but I haven't seen a large trend towards that through the industry.

      What I think is happening is that MS as a place to work has been stagnent in the last few years, and MS needs good developers.

      There is no opportunity to get rich anymore, there reputation stinks, they have been cutting back on developer perks, but still expect 60+hours a week.

      Ballmer is right in that it's about the developers, but MS isn't handling it's transition from skyrocketed company to, a strong but steady market force very well. This is typical. Developers seem more like a commodity that can be swapped around by Accounts. Which is fine,if accountants are tempered with good upper management that backs the developers concerns.

      The top management may be deluded and think MS got the great developers it did in the early 90's because it's a great place to work. Instead of a great place to get rich.

      I have said this for years, MS will go to an existing OS and brand their GUI on it, or die. You can not turn out a good solid OS in 10 years of development, you also need 10 years of in the market maturity.

      I was astounded when Apple did it. Man, that blew me away. It's a good move that will keep you from reinventing the wheel.

      • You have to be sleeping to have missed free software's 2007 surge and proof of concept. Dell, IBM and Asus all did well with it on "consumer" desktops. If the Asus EEE PC meets sales goals, there will be more EEEs out there than Macs. So far, the EEE has exceeded sales goals handily. You only need a few home runs like that to have GNU/Linux break into double didgit market share, which would also eclipse Vista. Microsoft has launched this firesale to prevent that but it's too little too late. Every ven

    • by TrekCycling (468080) on Friday February 29, 2008 @10:52AM (#22600526) Homepage
      I think there is something else going on with that demographic you mentioned earlier that's also germane. If that power user demographic played games they're not gaming as often on a PC. Their kid is playing a DS (tons of those have been sold), they're playing a 360 or a Wii. That demographic (I say that because my friends and I are in it) are largely buying cheap computers and running Ubuntu and then using the money we might have spent on Vista and a new graphics card on a new video game system.

      In fact, you could make a pretty solid argument that Microsoft's success with the XBox has severely undercut the PC market. Take out a large chunk of gamers who are no longer upgrading their PCs to play the latest game and you're left with a few enthusiasts and everyone else is running a computer that's "just good enough". Vista is completely unnecessary. Oh, and they did a good job with XP, honestly. Good enough that most people seemingly see no reason to switch. Even if it's given to them.
      • As a game dev, I totally concur. The gaming market has shifted to consoles, and to causal gaming. In the 90's upgrading your system was fun. In the 00's there are less and less games I want to play, and the money is being spent elsewhere -- family, or other recreations / hobbies.

        For gamers, the one BIG advantage consoles have is that "stuff just works." I don't have to worry about getting a new video card (or drivers), or any other upgrades (cpu/ram.) I think one of the biggest frustrations is playing P
    • by plague3106 (71849)
      Enough of the $400 figure. Its a bit more than half [pricegrabber.com] that amount. That's after a few seconds of searching; I was able to find a Full version for $165. OEM versions can be had for even less.

      So you didn't save as much, and good luck if you ever want to use wireless with that Ubuntu computer. Price isn't the only thing you should consider when buying an OS. Not saying you mad a bad choice or anything, but you used at least one bad point of information to make that decision, and for me I'd rather pay than s
      • by rolfc (842110)
        I am running Wireless on my thinkpad with ubuntu. I dont waste a lot of time with making software run.
      • by tjstork (137384) <(todd.bandrowsky) (at) (gmail.com)> on Friday February 29, 2008 @11:16AM (#22600810) Homepage Journal
        So you didn't save as much, and good luck if you ever want to use wireless with that Ubuntu computer.

        I am wireless with the Ubuntu computer. I didn't have to do anything. When I installed Ubuntu, I got the little wireless icon on my upper right hand corner, hit connect... to my wireless network, and it completely worked, just like the little wireless icon on my Windows XP does.

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by MrNemesis (587188)
          Sssssh! If you tell people that you can use wireless on Linux without having to watch uber-733t text scroll across the screen, no-one here is going to want to use it. I'm sure most people here, like myself, reconfigure X so it only displays stuff in monochrome green and black after being piped through aalib.

          The caveat is, of course, that you need a wireless controller with Linux friendly drivers - thankfully, Intel "got it" a long time ago and I've not found a wireless chipset of theirs which wasn't ungeeki
      • ... good luck if you ever want to use wireless with that Ubuntu computer...

        Are you kidding me? Since at least Ubuntu 6.06 LTS, I have not had a problem with wireless, and this is not based on an experience with just one computer. Two desktops and a laptop with internal 802.11a/b/g have all worked fine. In fact, I am using the wireless on my laptop with Kubuntu 7.04 to post this comment.

        While there may be a some wireless adapters which might still need NDIS Wrapper, the vast majority now have adequate
    • by plague3106 (71849)
      I only got to your first paragrah before I repled.

      Taken together, Microsoft's actions of the last few weeks : decreasing the price of Vista, giving away Visual Studio to Students, publishing specifications, all point towards an effort to attract developers to their platform. Even the channel partnerships that I railed about earlier are structured to attract developers. Clearly, Microsoft knows something that we don't know, and, I think it is that Linux development is starting to reach a critical mass for th
      • by tjstork (137384)
        Well, if you're that hard up that a few hunderd dollars will screw you, it sounds like you have problems managing your money

        Maybe I do. But I fail to see in the list of fiscal priorities, why an operating system of all things is something that I should pay that much money for. I mean, if Linux costs me a $1 to download, and Vista is $400 list, then, is Vista 400 times better than Linux? No, its not. It doesn't use 400 times less memory. It doesn't make my computer run 400 times faster. It doesn't make
        • by plague3106 (71849)
          Maybe I do. But I fail to see in the list of fiscal priorities, why an operating system of all things is something that I should pay that much money for.

          I never said you should. Just don't lie about the cost to make your point.

          I mean, if Linux costs me a $1 to download, and Vista is $400 list, then, is Vista 400 times better than Linux? It doesn't use 400 times less memory. It doesn't make my computer run 400 times faster. It doesn't make my computer have 400 times the features.

          Again, you're lying about
    • ...Windows zealots

      Oh, man, you had me going right up until then.
    • Clearly, Microsoft knows something that we don't know, and, I think it is that Linux development is starting to reach a critical mass for them to be really concerned about it. I wonder how much trouble Microsoft realizes it is in.

      I agree that Linux is attractive for developers who want to build their own integrated solution from the ground up and have control at each level, plus many existing libraries that they can modify for their specific uses. Companies are starting to realize that they can't put all
    • There is a demographic factor going on as well. A lot of we formerly reliable Windows zealots are now in our 30s and 40s, and suddenly money that would be spent on graphics cards and Windows upgrades is now getting plowed into our over-priced houses and our children. It's like, I would have stayed up in line to get Vista Ultimate the day it came out, but instead, I bought diapers, soy milk and a thomas the tank engine train set for my son. Having jonesed for some sort of an upgrade to my PC, I went with Ubuntu instead, and its pretty satisfying.

      I didn't realize, but this is true for me as well. I don't have the time or patience to deal with MSWindows installations for relatives anymore. Ubuntu may not be ready for my family (or maybe it is), but Mac OSX certainly is.
      As a plus, a fresh Ubuntu installation for me is a lot less painless than the last time I installed WinXP.

  • Oh yeah (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Pojut (1027544)
    My computer used to be considered near the top of the pile...2.2 GHz Athlon64 overclocked to 2.7, 2 gigs of Corsair XMS DDR-400, a bios-modded x800, Dell 2005FPW (1680X1050)...even though for games coming out now, it's largely unusable (mainly due to the video card), it runs things like Battlefield 2 and World of Warcraft flawlessly. Seeing as most of my gaming has been done on consoles the past few years, I haven't had a need to upgrade my computer. Spore is actually what is going to cause me to take th
    • by Simulant (528590)
      Those are more less the same specs I have. If you get a ~$200 video card (9600GT) and a 1280x1024 monitor, you'll still be able to play all the latest games at med-high quality. Works for me. Even Crysis plays well and looks good. A 9600GT is slight better than my card, the 384MB 8800 GTS.
    • Re:Oh yeah (Score:5, Insightful)

      by cordsie (565171) on Friday February 29, 2008 @10:51AM (#22600504)
      This is absolutely correct, and it's almost as if the entire OS/hardware industry is grinding to a halt for these reasons.
      Though the possibilities of what you can do on a computer are theoretically limitless, but in practice there's now a small set of functionality (web access, email, office type stuff, or media manipulation apps) for which 99% of people need computers for. Most of what we have is good enough. Over the past twenty years a lot of the advancement has been due to improvements in graphics, which led to directly obvious improvments in usability, and vice versa, but this has plateaued at what we have now. Nobody has come up with any convicing 3D GUI designs that have been demonstrated to be any better or more efficient than where we already are.
      Even on the gaming front, consoles appear to be slowly but surely taking that role away from the PC. The endless cycle of nvidia-ATI upgrades is getting old, and I've got better things to spend my money on.
      Advancement these days appears to be mostly in server side apps and web-distributed content, and it's as if we've gone full circle back to the days of the dumb terminal. If you're an average user, and your machine keeps working, why do you need to upgrade?
      You don't, end of story.
  • by TCFOO (876339) on Friday February 29, 2008 @10:27AM (#22600188)
    I'm still waiting for Microsoft to pay people to upgrade to Vista. Ever check the resource consumption on the display models, half the resources are being used just to display the desktop.
    • by MrNemesis (587188)
      XP: Where do you want to go today?
      Vista: Where we're going, we're not going to need to go anywhere today. Ooh, shiny!

      ;)
  • by sheldon (2322) on Friday February 29, 2008 @10:29AM (#22600208)

    In an interview, newly minted Windows consumer marketing vice president Brad Brooks said that Microsoft had been testing lower prices over the past few months and was surprised to find that the amount of revenue lost was more than made up for by an increase in the number of PC buyers willing to shell out for an upgrade.


    Didn't they learn this lesson with the Student/Teacher version of Office?

    Duh
    • It's funny that the vice president of consumer marketing was surprised by something taught in economics 101. Lower the price and the number of sales go up. Shocking!

      They were actually surprised to learn they were charging too much. Unbelievable.
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by Detritus (11846)
        If you take Economics 101, you might find out that it isn't always true. Sometimes sales drop when prices are reduced. The Wikipedia article on supply and demand has references to cases where the normal rules don't work.
    • by orlanz (882574) on Friday February 29, 2008 @10:56AM (#22600576)
      They are surprised because, as a monopoly, they didn't think fair market economics would show up on their line graphs.
  • How about cutting the prices of the OEM licenses so that it moves more computers pre-installed with Vista too? Oh wait. That's not going to happen as that's how you make money. So IMHO, this means that you won't miss the cash that you lose due to these price cuts.

    Nothing to see here. Move along.
    • by geekoid (135745)
      Except it's not too expensive for OEMs. If the off the shelf price was the same as the OEM price, they would ahve moved a lot moer units. Many pople look at it, but there computer is still good enough. everything else you do to upgrade a computer is coming down in price. why isn't the OS?

      really, your going to put 150+ into your current computer, is the OS really the best place to put it? Add to that the possibility that it might fubar your current set up?

      To entice people, MS needs to sell 1 disk for 50 buck
  • A slightly smaller number multiplied by zero still equals zero.
  • Not enough (Score:5, Insightful)

    by stoolpigeon (454276) * <bittercode@gmail> on Friday February 29, 2008 @10:35AM (#22600302) Homepage Journal
    When Vista Ultimate upgrade [amazon.com] costs almost $200 and Kubuntu 7.10 full [amazon.com] costs $12 (if you don't feel like just downloading it) - it seems reasonable that some prices are going to have to come down somehwere.
    • by sm62704 (957197)
      MS vs Linux is like RIAA vs indies: it's damned hard to compete with "free". Considering the SCO debacle, it looks like MS and the RIAA are going the same lawyerly route.

      Who do you want to sue today? How about your own customers!
  • I think Microsoft is doing it out of good faith since so many consumers paid money to participate in Microsoft product development. After a lot of work and headache by customers helping Microsoft debug their Vista OS which resulted in SP1. Which is really the first instance of Vista that could come close to a production release.

    I still thank Microsoft should be paying people to help debug there software. In some ways they are smart getting people to pay to work for them.

    True other third parties contribu

  • I totally called it, again.

    So What do I need to do to be an analyst? Get a degree in statistics? take some logic course? DO I need a masters?

    I'm sure only qualified people would be an analyst~
    • by mgblst (80109)
      So what exactly did you call?

      That Microsoft would drop price?
      That Microsoft would drop the price on non-oem Vista?
      That Microsoft would drop the price of non-oem Vista by $70?
      That Microsoft would drop the price of non-oem Vista by $70 in Febuary?
      That Microsoft would drop the price of non-oem Vista by $70 on Febuary 28th?
  • by truthsearch (249536) on Friday February 29, 2008 @10:41AM (#22600382) Homepage Journal

    Gartner analyst Michael Silver said the move... is puzzling... [He] noted that the market for such upgrades is fairly limited. Those who bought XP in the fourth quarter of 2006 got a coupon for a free Vista upgrade, while most of those who have bought systems since then have gotten Vista. Machines purchased prior to 2006 probably aren't all that attractive as candidates for a Vista upgrade...


    And that's why it makes sense. Dropping the price will not affect Microsoft's revenue. Yet they'll sell a few extra copies. They're hoping to sell it to people who are otherwise upgrading with unlicensed copies. Plus they probably think it'll help their public image.

    Of course they could have just made a better product in the first place and not dropped the price, but we'll leave that discussion to other threads.
  • hardware upgrades (Score:4, Informative)

    by esocid (946821) on Friday February 29, 2008 @10:42AM (#22600390) Journal

    Machines purchased prior to 2006 probably aren't all that attractive as candidates for a Vista upgrade. "I guess at the end of the day anything that makes Vista a little bit more accessible is probably a good thing," he said, but added that a cut in the price computer makers pay would have a far bigger impact, given new PC licenses account for 80 percent of Vista sales. "The whole notion of upgrading PCs has sort of fallen by the wayside."
    While that may apply to Joe Blows who aren't tech savvy, I wouldn't say that it applies to all customers. Those who actually build (assemble) their own computers know the importance of hardware upgrades. I recently acquired my brother's old setup (AMD X2 4200+) with a 7900GTOC, which is a pretty good upgrade from my old CPU/mobo/GPU as well as 3 more gigs of memory, but rather than try out the 64 bit version of Vista (which I was tempted to do) it just didn't seem worth it to me with all the lack of hardware drivers, and software compatibility issues so I just did a fresh install of XP Pro (with fedora 8 on the 1st partition) rather than deal with the headache of trying to fix any issues that would arise.
    What I think makes the brunt of those new sales is that people who have the money to shell out for what the salesman at best buy tells them to get, will also shell out for the newest thing, which in this case is vista in terms of OSs. I will personally feel fine using XP until Vista's issues are either resolved or it's put in the ground.
  • Comparison to Apple (Score:4, Interesting)

    by je ne sais quoi (987177) on Friday February 29, 2008 @10:43AM (#22600396)
    Lately I've been seeing a lot of criticism point at Apple when they do the same thing Microsoft does. Let's turn it around, eh? When Apple cut the cost of the iPhone, quite a few people were screaming bloody murder about Steve Jobs and his evilness. So where is the outrage over the Vista price cut? Where is Bill Gates promising to send a rebate to all the people who "overpaid" for their copy of Vista? I'm not trolling here, I suspect the reason is that MS waited just long enough for the sensationalism to fade before they dropped the Vista price whereas Apple didn't wait long enough. Since I haven't bought either of these products, I'm going to have to rely on others who have...
    • From my point of view, it's because I don't care about the iPhone. It's an overpriced gadget that does stuff that I don't really need. My phone does what I need it to do. Whereas I actually use the winblows OSs, and considered using vista. I also think you're comparing apples and oranges here. If Apple had done the same with Leopard I think people would have grabbed on to it, just the same as with Vista, but Leopard has been pretty stable (except for one upgrade about a month ago my roommate had problems wi
    • by geekoid (135745)
      People ahve higher expectation of Apple then they do of MS.

      Let's not forget MS and Apple are in different business.

      an Apple / Dell comparison would be better.
    • by DAldredge (2353)
      How long has Vista been out? How long had the iphone been out when the price was cut?
  • by urcreepyneighbor (1171755) on Friday February 29, 2008 @10:43AM (#22600404)

    'The whole notion of upgrading PCs has sort of fallen by the wayside.'
    Instead of upgrading most of the old(er) boxes I acquire, I simply repurpose them. Could be something as simple as dedicating a 486 box to playing abandonware.

    Did I mention I'm a hoarder? ;)
    • I still have my old AMD K5 166 mhz, my AMD K7 750 mhz, and my "more modern, laugh* AMD 1.4 ghz computer.

      Each has a purpose and a place in my computer eco system. Each one was my main computer rig for a period of time, and each was tweaked until very stable. The oldest even saw use with my younger brother for a good time after I was on to my next computer.

      Sometimes it is nice to pull out the old Dungeon Keeper or even Betrayal at Krondor and Doom I & II and remember the good times from the past. Gamep
  • "version used to move from XP or another copy of Vista. "

    They are competing with themselves, and need to slash prices. Market force at work.

    "surprised to find that the amount of revenue lost was more than made up for by an increase in the number of PC buyers willing to shell out for an upgrade."

    you're kidding me, right? that's not un common. You can sell a newspaper for a dime and sell 100 of them, cut it to a nickel and you will sell 300 of them.(adjust number for inflation)
    I mean, this is a known market f
    • by ubrgeek (679399)
      You can sell a newspaper for a dime and sell 100 of them, cut it to a nickel and you will sell 300 of them.(adjust number for inflation)

      True, as newspapers don't make money on subscriptions. If you give them out, however, you must sell at least 50% of your circulation numbers (or maybe 51%, I don't remember. Been a long time since I worked for one) you have to change what your tell advertisers what your official circulation is and thus affect ad revenue.

      All of that said, I'm not sure why the price cut
  • Not odd at all (Score:5, Interesting)

    by gilesjuk (604902) <giles DOT jones AT zen DOT co DOT uk> on Friday February 29, 2008 @11:18AM (#22600852)
    Vista costs twice as much in the UK as it does in the US.
    • by caluml (551744)
      That's 'cos we're twice as gullible. (Wow, all those apostrophes, even correctly placed, look weird)
  • Because Vista sucks, and nobody wants to pay for it. I don't see what's surprising to the analysts about that.

    The only difference between this and Toshiba's price cuts on HD-DVD players shortly before they finally conceded defeat, is that Microsoft won't have to admit defeat for a long time, if ever, due to the lack of a real "format war" on the desktop.
  • by kiddailey (165202) on Friday February 29, 2008 @02:05PM (#22603318) Homepage
    Instead of axing all those other features that were supposedly going to be in the Vista, they SHOULD have axed Activation and Windows Genuine "Advantage." Then I might have considered upgrading.

    Until that happens, I'll continue using software that doesn't require me to "prove my innocence," and no amount of pricing cutting will make me think differently.

Dennis Ritchie is twice as bright as Steve Jobs, and only half wrong. -- Jim Gettys

Working...