Windows 7 To Come In Multiple Versions 821
Crazy Taco writes "Tom's Hardware reports on newly discovered screenshots that reveal Microsoft is planning to release their newest version of Windows in multiple confusing versions ... again. The information comes from the latest version of the Windows 7 beta, build 7025 (the public beta is build 7000), and shows a screen during installation that asks the user which version of the OS he or she would like to install. Who's up for guessing what the difference is between Windows 7 'Starter' and Windows 7 'Home Basic?'"
Not a surprise really... (Score:5, Interesting)
I always wondered why they didn't just call it Windows 7 or whatever code name and then distribute it with application packs, which would include application packs such as:
server app pack
home/media app pack
basics/offic app pack
The way they do it, joe public can't really be sure what version they have. Hell, there are a lot of end users that don't know if they are currently running XP or Vista (but you can tell by complaints about performance LOL).
I think that Ubuntu, Fedora and others could use with that sort of packaging also. By simply distributing the basic distro and setting up repositories for each application pack. That would make it easy to get a media server based on abc linux set up and maintained.
Bill Gates 2002 testimony (Score:5, Interesting)
In court, Gates also argued that multiple versions of Windows would essentially stifle competition by confusing consumers and putting developers "into a situation like the computer industry was before the PC came along." He said consumers would face a jarring experience due to multiple Windows versions customized by PC makers and uncertainty about the interface or whether applications would run on them. [cnet.com]
So what changed, Bill?
Re:Not a surprise really... (Score:4, Interesting)
Hardly. Microsoft makes probably 1% of its revenue from boxed copies. Most people will have no clue what version of a half dozen options their Dell came with.
Re:another crippleware outrage (Score:3, Interesting)
There was an old saw about IBM mainframes I remember hearing. Don't know if it's true...
Essentially, somebody with an IBM mainframe had decided to upgrade to the next higher level and gave IBM a big hunk of money to do so. One day, the FE arrived to do the upgrade. He went over to the mainframe, pulled out a circuit board, and cut a resistor.
*POOF* 50% faster.
Why not one version? (Score:3, Interesting)
Can someone explain to me why MS doesn't win by releasing one "loaded" version at some low price ($49 or something)?
The low price would work against people who might be inclined to pirate it to get some more "loaded" version, one version without artificial limitations would make it easier to support both at the end-user organizational level as well as at Microsoft level, as well as promoting a unified, less bullshit-enhanced image for Windows 7 as compared to Vista, which was an incomprehensible Medusa of marketing and phony choices.
I work for a SMB VAR and the XP home/pro split actually loses business for Microsoft when customers with a half dozen or so XP home PCs decide whether they want something like SBS and we tell them it will have limitations with XP home clients. They don't want to buy new XP licenses for the same hardware already running XP Home on low-cost boxes bought retail, but they have to if they want domain mebership and some of the gee-whiz features that come with it. They often opt out of the SBS option because they have Home and can't join machines to the domain. Seldom does anybody spring for more than 1-2 XP Pro licenses to clean up the XP Home installs.
Thus, MS loses SBS sales and almost never gets XP Pro upgrades from XP Home, either. Stupid. If there was only one version, I can think of at least 5 customers off the top of my head that would have spent money on servers & OS licenses.
I can live with the "Server" and "Desktop" OS differences, which are probably just as artificial as Home/Pro desktop if you think about it. Those seem legitimate or at least based around rational reasons and purposes. But it would be nice to rid ourselves of the Pro, Deluxe, Media Center, etc. subdivisions within each category.
Re:Oh stop complaining (Score:4, Interesting)
Thats all you had to say.
Re:another crippleware outrage (Score:5, Interesting)
I wouldn't mind the stripped down version if features could be added piecemeal. For instance, I prefer a stripped down, lean running Home Edition of XP on the one Windows box I run. But, I'd also like for it to sync my SAMBA-served home directory automatically. There's a sync tool that MS distributes separately, but it doesn't work the same, it's basically a file copier. Unfortunately I can't get the sync tools built in to Windows without upgrading to a version that has a lot of features I don't need.
THIS is why I don't like the Windows sales model.
Microsoft is at least *gathering* customer input (Score:5, Interesting)
Yesterday they sent one out that asked very pointed questions about XP, Vista, 7, 98/ME/2009, Linux, and Mac OS. Things like "On a scale of 1 to 9, rate how likely you are to develop solutions on one of these platforms".
They included questions about likely we would be to upgrade systems to Vista if 7 were released soon (Yup, I answered "Extremely Unlikely"). There were also focused questions on the versions available and if it was more/less confusing. I specifically wrote a comment on how the multiple versions serve as an obstacle.
I wonder when this starts to eat into real profit. I mean, if they have to un-bundle IE for European distribution, they just multiplied their versions by at least 2. Checking MSDN, there are a huge number of flavors for XP when you also add in the 32/64 bit, Embedded, Media, Tablet, Volume License, and other types beyond Home and Pro. At least 50. Yup, 50! And that's XP!
Re:Survey says.... (Score:4, Interesting)
I've seen no evidence that Microsoft plans on making Starter a netbook version- that would be a bizzare branding change.
Right now, Vista is a complete flop for netbooks and the general consensus is that Microsoft must make inroads with Windows7.
Since only the most powerful (ie expensive) netbooks will have the graphics horsepower to handle Aero, it makes perfect sense to push the feature-set that is 'Starter' for that market segment.
overrun with textbook MBAs (Score:5, Interesting)
The textbook says, if a company is in a monopoly position, the best way to maximize revenues is for them to differentiate their output so as to take away as much consumer surplus possible under the demand curve.
So, of course, they differentiate their product.
What they've failed to understand is this factoid completely relies on the consumer's ability to differentiate between the products! If 100,000 Joe Schmoes don't know the difference between Home Basic and Home Premium, then guess what, revenue from the two will just be the average prices between the two as Joe Schmoes around the world toss coins to decide which to buy. Some will buy the "better" (more expensive) one because they can't tell but want to "be safe", while others will get the cheaper one because they can't tell and want to save some money. MS will have been better off just selling an all-encompassing "Home" version at a price set at the averages of the Starter and two Home versions and not incur the overhead costs of differentiating the two versions in the first place.
Bottom line:
The people who can differentiate between Start, Home Basic and Home Premium won't bother with either, and the people who can't won't care which one they get.
I mean, three different versions for non-geeks?? Of all products to differentiate, they choose the one aimed at the customer demographic who are least equipped to make an informed decision between all options.
Geez, God help you Microsoft.
Re:another crippleware outrage (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Survey says.... (Score:4, Interesting)
That never made sense to me. Why would anyone put up with a hopelessly-crippled-to-the-point-of-being-nearly-useless version of Windows when they could buy a bootleg of a Pro/Ultimate edition on a street corner for almost nothing or even torrent it for free?
I'm a little surprised this was modded up so high.. the answer is presumably because they consider piracy to be wrong, but don't want shell out money for the full version.
I know that most slashdotters don't consider piracy to be immoral, but has it really gotten to the point where you can't even fathom why or that people would?
*Awaits karma burn...*
Re:Survey says.... (Score:3, Interesting)
They never marketed it as "Pro", they marketed it as "Professional". Are you a professional? You'll want windows XP Professional then. Makes sense to me.
Now Vista Business, on the other hand, I have no idea where the hell that came from. Professional is the best name you could give that product for what it's aimed at.
Re:The difference (Score:5, Interesting)
Because Mac's implementation of LDAP, and integrating it with NFS/Samba is awesome.
I mean, have you ever actually tried building a network with LDAP/kerberos authenticated file sharing from scratch using BSD? Good luck to ya.
That, and their (albeit proprietary) wiki is WYSIWYG, and doesn't require the knowledge of markup language. It is great for introducing non-tech types to wikis.
It could be worse. (Score:1, Interesting)
Image a Student, Gamer, Travel, and Green version.
A Student version can be split into three. A k-6 version, 7-12 version, and college edition. The k-6 could be limited to the basic things that a elementaty school student would need. And the college version would be the same as a 7-12 version, except with more of the Office products.
A Gamer version could be stripped down to the bare essentials. No browser, no Office products, no anything. It would be locked down, so game programs can be ran, and connected to the Internet, but no browser would be on it. That way it's efficient, with no clutter.
A Travel Version, with the ability to run the OS in such a way that if your laptop gets stolen, all sensitive data will be deleted or something like that.
And the Green version, which, in an effort to be environmental, doesn't boot up.
As you can tell, my attempt is more at the humour side, rather than the serious side. But, all in all, the more versions there are, perhaps the more Microsoft could sell. Then again, given how well Flight Simulator has been doing, and that there gaming systems never once had a problem, and that they never had to face antitrust issues, I'm sure Microsoft is doing well enough to just give out an all-around custom version you can do what you want with. *cough*
Re:Survey says.... (Score:5, Interesting)
Because it's Microsoft, it's okay to pirate their software.
Oddly, there are a lot of people that seem to feel this way toward Microsoft. I know several people that I feel are rather honest law abiding type citizens that do. They are totally against any kind of software piracy, except for Microsoft products. They will gladly give out copies of any Microsoft products that they own or accept pirated copies. It's actually a little odd now that I think about it.
Re:how is this news? (Score:1, Interesting)
The way I see it, you can flame Microsoft all you want, but how many Linux distros are there?
I know it's slightly off-topic and borderline trolling, but the whole "year of the linux desktop" is hampered by "linux" being a balloon term these days.
Re:Good luck with that (Score:5, Interesting)
> It was limited to 800 x 600 resolution, classic mode only - no theming, only three applications running, and a network restricted to an internet connection, not home networking.
Ouch! Why would anyone bother with it?...You really have to wonder what idiots at Microsoft think this stuff up? Presumably some idiot proposed crippling it to absurdity as "a way to combat piracy" and the co-idiots in the room nodded enthusiastically: "Hey! That'll work."
That's because it was never actually intended to reduce piracy or to be actually used in said developing countries. It was simply meant to placate politicians' voter-bases while giving the politicians a convenient reason to put more pressure on poor developing nations to adhere to US and international IP laws and cough up more cash. (Thereby also helping to keep them "poor" and "developing".)
By offering this crippled nearly-useless piece of crap they could then say to the politicians;
"Hey look! See!? We even went to the trouble to create a low-cost OS *just* for them, and they still pirate our "IP"! Sanction 'em and maybe threaten to stop humanitarian food shipments too, as they're clearly lawless IP pirates with no respect for the rule of law because they refuse to stop their "theft" and switch to paying for the privilege of using this crippled, all-but-useless (P)OS! They're practically terrorists!"
So then they can co-opt the might of the US government to help them enforce their marketing strategies and price structures around the world.
Cheers!
Strat
It isnt the only crippleware they make... (Score:5, Interesting)
Go out an grab a copy windows server 2k3, enterprise edition. Sounds like it is just like the ship, right? Tons of phasers, holodecks, and fun toys. It will have everything you need.
Set it up as an application server, and see how many connections they allow. You have to buy a friggen extra license if you want to say set it up to allow more than a couple of people to log on. AND...you have to install a special service somewhere on the network to manage it.
Just think of that: it actually takes writing extra code once you set up the service protocols to limit the number of connections, and make sure that you aren't exceeding the number of connections you have paid for. They paid programmers to limit the number of connections that the OS would allow, to make more money off licenses. If I set up a Linux server, I could open connections (for free) until my RAM exploded.
Even when you try to play the game their way, and buy the biggest, most expensive OS on the shelf, they will still try to fuck you over with an incomplete product.
Go read my old posts. I am generally easy going in regards to MS overall, and I will not advise anyone to buy their operating systems. They are utter garbage.
Re:Developing markets (Score:4, Interesting)
I've travelled around Asia quite a bit.
I've never seen pirated software being sold in Japan or Taiwan. Or Singapore come to think of it, but I only spent a day or so there.
There was one street stand in Korea that sold probably pirated DVDs. Pretty much everything in China was pirated. Thailand had a big mall with shops that sold pirated software, but each time I went there it seemed like it was becoming less socially acceptable. By the last time they couldn't keep the burned CDs on site, they had to send someone out to get them, so they were presumably worried about the police raiding them.
My guess is that in a country that has no indigenous software houses, it's in everyone's interest to ignore piracy of imported software. However as domestic software houses start up they lobby for enforcement of IP law.
Now Starter Editions and price cuts by imported software houses can help this process.
Actually the implication that people in Singapore don't understand IP is pretty offensive. In Taiwan people are very aware of pirated goods. Buying them is seen as a very cheap thing to do. Possibly this is because it is so common in China.
It could be worse, you know (Score:3, Interesting)
The confusion is quite ridiculous. I mean really, when the fscking salespeople need to look up tables to determine which windows versions include which features, you can tell someone somewhere in marketing has screwed the pooch badly.
Don't ever try to discuss Labview licenses with National Instruments... Even their sales reps can't figure out what kind of licenses we need in many cases. This debacle recurs every year in different ways (we're a significant customer for them, since we sell a lot of stuff with embedded Labview).
Not even worth the price of pirating.. (Score:2, Interesting)
Actually... (Score:5, Interesting)
With all the time spent dealing with the licensing, a company could probably save money if Microsoft had a 'dumptruck licensing plan' where you simply drove them a dump truck full of money every 6 months and you could use whatever software in whatever situation.
This does actually exist, although not quite in the terms you describe, as the enterprise licensing agreement.
The investment bank I recently worked for paid MS a fixed amount per "seat" per year, which gave them carte blanche to deploy as much end-user and server software (Office, Server OS, MS-SQL, Exchange, Sharepoint, Virtual Server, HyperVisor and so forth) as they wanted.
Developers are handled in a similar fashion - you pay x per developer, and that gives you MSDN access, all the dev tools, documentation, and support.
In passing, this is why VMWare ended up making their server editions no-cost - any company on the enterprise deal gets as much virtualisation as they want for effectively free... the VMWare reps would turn up and ask what it would take for us to use their product in our server consolidation projects, and the answer was always "be the same price..."
Re:Survey says.... (Score:5, Interesting)
Having multiple versions with artificial limitations is the single things that is currently pushing me most towards Linux everywhere (I already develop for it and use it at work, but the next home upgrade will be it).
The only time I've ranted more at a commercial company bizarre marketing technique was when we ordered extra memory for our (very expensive) HP oscilloscopes. We immediately received a 'memory upgrade license number'. I didn't understand why there was no hardware chip, so I called them up: "Oh, the memory is already inside the oscilloscope, you just need to change your license number in order to activate it!". I was so taken aback I had no breath left to hurl insults at them. If it had been my personal hardware I would have sent the whole thing back for a refund.