Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Windows 7 Pre-Orders Top Vista's In Just 8 Hours 279

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the well-in-the-uk-anyway dept.
Barence writes "In order to ensure Windows 7 got off to a better start than Vista in the UK, Microsoft slashed the cost of Home and Home Professional by a third on promotional copies which were sold on a 'first come, first served basis while stocks last.' The promotion ensured Windows 7 shot to the top of Amazon's charts when it was released yesterday, with the online retailer claiming that 'sales in the first eight hours outstripped those of Windows Vista's entire 17-week pre-order period.' The price of pre-ordering Windows 7 has now shot up to £80, after the £50 copies sold out within a day."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Windows 7 Pre-Orders Top Vista's In Just 8 Hours

Comments Filter:
  • by Nerogk (1096421) on Thursday July 16, 2009 @11:08AM (#28717141)
    Does the collector's edition come with a deluxe CD of Windows sound effects?
    • by omnichad (1198475) on Thursday July 16, 2009 @11:20AM (#28717293) Homepage

      Can't wait for a 192KHz, 7.1 surround tada.wma

  • Just 7? (Score:5, Funny)

    by mrthoughtful (466814) on Thursday July 16, 2009 @11:09AM (#28717145) Journal

    "Windows 7 Pre-Orders Top Vista's In Just 8hrs" - So Vista only had 6 pre-orders?

    • Re: (Score:2, Troll)

      by MindKata (957167)
      If Windows 7 success is judged by how cheaply they sell it for, then how many more people would want to try it if they gave it away for free?

      (Also surely this Microsoft & Amazon PR stunt is actually the opposite of success? ... Because if any company released a truly desirable product people would be willing to pay a premium to own that product. Yet Microsoft & Amazon are trying to claim success by reducing its price... (talk about lies, damned lies and PR)).
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by penguin_dance (536599)

        (Also surely this Microsoft & Amazon PR stunt is actually the opposite of success? ... Because if any company released a truly desirable product people would be willing to pay a premium to own that product. Yet Microsoft & Amazon are trying to claim success by reducing its price... (talk about lies, damned lies and PR)).

        First off, EVERYONE was running a sale on the upgrade. That was a Microsoft offer, not Amazon's. Just like getting a laptop with Vista now, will earn you a free upgrade.

        Business drop the price all the time to see if they can sell more items. They make less of a profit per item, but make up for that in quanity. Very useful in the software business where the materials involved (disc and packaging) in the product cost pennies.

        NO ONE is willing to pay a premium for something in this economy that's not a NEED. S

      • by jank1887 (815982)

        Microsoft and Amazon are using smart marketing tactics. they want profits. And so they want a large number of sales. To do that they need visibility and hype. By offering a temporary price promotion, they get hype (wow, everybody's buying it!), and visibility from being pushed to the top of the Amazon charts. Marketing should have made some guesswork at the number of increased sales that will result from the initial discount. If they were smart, the cost of the discount is less than the net from increased

    • So Vista only had 6 pre-orders?

      Huh. They wish.

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by hairyfeet (841228)
        Actually I bet Vista had a ton of preorders, after all they didn't realize until the RTM and they got it home that Vista sucked the big wet titty. I imagine a lot of folks got their RTM and after a day of using it you could practically hear the Monty Hall "Wahhh Wahhhh.....You picked the goat!" sound.
  • It's not too expensive, it's a great piece of software, and the best OS Microsoft has put out yet.

    Say what you will about Linux or OSX, but I honestly think that Windows 7 is going to have a good future.

    • by Jeng (926980) on Thursday July 16, 2009 @11:42AM (#28717635)

      No, I would have to say that Windows 7 is still overpriced. Without it being able to be pirated or sold at a reasonable price it will never have the share that XP does.

      XP is Windows 7 competition, not Linux or OSX.

      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        by HerculesMO (693085)

        I never compared Linux or OSX as the competition for 7, I just mentioned them in passing, since they are spoken of in rather complimentary terms, I think Windows 7 will also be as the future comes around.

        XP took 7 or 8 years to have the share that it has. Windows 7 in that amount of time may have a similar share. My outlook is favorable to Windows 7, and that's pretty much all I was saying.

        Way to miss the forest for the trees.

        • by Jeng (926980)

          And my comment is that its up to Microsoft to price Windows 7 appropriately or otherwise it will sit on the shelf while people pirate XP.

          • I don't know the numbers, but I would really venture to guess that the vast bulk of Windows sales occur at the OEM level, and that people who go out and buy upgrades for old computers are a small minority. If my guess is right, it doesn't really matter too much what Microsoft prices Windows 7 at.

        • by PitaBred (632671)
          The thing is, Linux and OSX ARE competition to Windows 7. Much more so than they were when XP came out. Linux has become a much more acceptable replacement for XP in general, and especially now that Windows 7 is such a relatively radical change from XP, the costs of migrating XP->7 are approaching that of XP->Linux in certain use cases.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by svendsen (1029716)
        I would say it is cheap when you think about. Assume you buy Windows 7 for $200. You will probably get 10 years out of it. $20 a year isn't bad considering everything it can do. Even if you only get 5 years $40 is still a great deal.
      • by Monsuco (998964)

        No, I would have to say that Windows 7 is still overpriced. Without it being able to be pirated or sold at a reasonable price it will never have the share that XP does.

        XP is Windows 7 competition, not Linux or OSX.

        XP is also going to be sold less and less, especially since Windows 7 is far more capable on netbooks than Vista. MS will simply stop licensing XP and let time do the rest.

    • by mcgrew (92797) on Thursday July 16, 2009 @12:02PM (#28717977) Homepage Journal

      A $200 OS for a $400 computer is "not too expensive?" What planet do you live on?

      Great piece of software? That remains to be seen, and depends on your definition of "great". Kind of meaningless marketspeak if you ask me. What makes it so great?

      Best OS Microsoft has put out? Probably.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by CAIMLAS (41445)

      It's not the "best OS Microsoft has put out yet". That's making room for previous versions being worth half a shit at their release.

      Windows 7 is the only Microsoft OS that is not only markedly better than its predecessor but is the only release they've made where there is not something immediately noticeable as "broken for unknown reasons". That's a pretty big accomplishment for them!

      Meh. Maybe I should just not post this comment. I'd forgotten about the "Windows XP Compatibility Mode" feature. That's inexp

      • Windows 7 is the only Microsoft OS that is not only markedly better than its predecessor

        The Dos + Win 3.11 -> Win95 transition probably counts. That was the biggest step I can think of.

        However, there's nothing wrong with incremental upgrades, in fact they are rather good. So long as they are released frequently and cheaply enough. Neither of which is something Microsoft does.

      • by hairyfeet (841228)

        You know that whole stupid "Virtual PC compatibility mode" got me thinking, why didn't they just rip off Apple? While I am a lifelong Windows user I believe in giving credit where credit is due, and the transition for OS9 to OSX was brilliant. To give the users and developers time to migrate they had a whole OS9 that could be run seamless, ala parallels. Then they simply slowly phased out OS9 support.

        Considering how many users of XP there are, something like 400 million + according to Wikipedia, it would

    • by Cromac (610264)
      It's not too expensive, it's a great piece of software,
      Great? Great? Windows 7 is better than Vista, that's it's only claim to fame. It's far from "great".

      and the best OS Microsoft has put out yet.
      Pure opinion and far from the opinion of most people. XP, while not perfect by a long shot, is still the best OS MS has managed to come up with.

      The only reason Win 7 will eventually have a majority share is because Microsoft will stop selling and supporting XP and will only sell Win7. Through simple hardw

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 16, 2009 @11:11AM (#28717173)

    about a new operating system these days. DRM? The idea of paying a wad of cash for something that one already has but for something slightly newer that's had a facelift?

  • by mprindle (198799) on Thursday July 16, 2009 @11:18AM (#28717281)

    Someone I was talking to the other day made a good point. Every other OS Microsoft has put out in the last 10 - 15 years or so has sucked.

    Win7 = TBD - Looking good as of now
    Vista = Horrible
    XP = Pretty Good
    ME = Rancid
    2000 = Not Bad
    NT 4 = Not Bad, but severely limited

    • by geekoid (135745) <(dadinportland) (at) (yahoo.com)> on Thursday July 16, 2009 @11:28AM (#28717413) Homepage Journal

      Win7 = TBD - Looking good as of now
      Vista = Bad
      XP = Pretty Good
      ME = Rancid
      2000 = Pretty Good.
      NT 4 = Good.
      BOB = OMGWTF?

      Vista isn't horrible. It has some issue that can be solved by turing off some features. SHould the user ahve to tunr off features to stop getting apop up, and having there disk grind all that time? no. Other then that thee only crashes I have seen ahve been due to hardware problems. Something that can impact ANY OS.

      IT is getting harder and harder to rag on MS for OS performance. There are business and philosophical issues.

      Are there technically better OS's? Yes, but that doesn't matter. While they are technically better, the difference doesn't really add much value to the home consumer. You see it in large scale systems, becasue the cost begins to become very apparent, pretty quickly. I ahve said this many time, the killer app for Linux is wide scale desktop business adoption.

      • by IsoRashi (556454) on Thursday July 16, 2009 @12:11PM (#28718101)
        OMGWTFBobbq? Sorry, I could not resist. :(
      • by drinkypoo (153816)

        NT4 was fucking miserable and to think anything else is serious nostalgia.

        There were multiple world-destroying service packs. NT 3.51 with the Windows 98 shell grafted onto it was probably twice as responsive. Memory spaces which were separate in NT 3.51 were merged in NT4 to improve performance, with disastrous results in the realm of reliability. And compatibility with other versions of Windows is probably the worst ever (backwards or forwards) if you set aside WinME's inability to run DOS software... not

      • Given that 40-50% of the releases were bad or worse, why are you even considering still buying MS software? Would you buy another auto from a company that sold you your last one that turned out to be a lemon? No, of course not, you'd buy something with a better reputation for quality. It doesn't matter if the new model of that manufacturer is of better quality, you'd buy something else because you wouldn't want to take the chance and you wouldn't want to reward that company with another sale.
        • Because for the simple reason: the cars the other people are putting out don't do what I need. Some don't have climate control, some are hobbyist cars. Some won't work with the roads I need to drive down. Some require me to buy a new garage to keep it in.

          I want a car that'll work on the roads I need, with the features I know I need, and can be kept where I already have a place to keep my car.

      • "Vista isn't horrible. It has some issue that can be solved by turing off some features. "

        And yet, so many Microsoft trolls rag continuously on Linux for that sort of thing. The business with DOS prompts and CLI has been pretty much overcome, both in the Windows world and in the Linux world. It is entirely possible to run either one without ever typing a single command. But, still, Linux is ragged on because people need to configure things.

        So, for those who bitch and moan about Linux, it seems that Vista

      • Vista isn't horrible. It has some issue that can be solved by turing off some features. SHould the user ahve to tunr off features to stop getting apop up, and having there disk grind all that time? no. Other then that thee only crashes I have seen ahve been due to hardware problems. Something that can impact ANY OS.

        IT is getting harder and harder to rag on MS for OS performance. There are business and philosophical issues.

        Are there technically better OS's? Yes, but that doesn't matter. While they are technically better, the difference doesn't really add much value to the home consumer. You see it in large scale systems, becasue the cost begins to become very apparent, pretty quickly. I ahve said this many time, the killer app for Linux is wide scale desktop business adoption.

        Also, the spell checker appears to suck quite badly.

      • by Yunzil (181064)

        SHould the user ahve to tunr off features to stop getting apop up, and having there disk grind all that time? no.

        The user doesn't have to do that. If the user just leaves the system alone, the user will find that it settles down. A user will then rarely see a UAC prompt and the user's disk won't be thrashing. It's usually when the user starts mucking around with the system that the user finds that the user's system is behaving poorly.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by msormune (808119)
      Actually both XP and Vista were pretty heinous before the service packs.
    • by ljw1004 (764174)

      An odd list. Why include NT4 but not NT3.5 or Server2003 or Server2008 or Server2008R2? Why include ME but not Win98 or Win95?

      Same sort of selective list shows that every other integer is divisible by 3:

      2 - not divisible
      3 - divisible by 3
      5 - not divisible
      6 - divisible by 3
      7 - not divisible
      8 - looks a bit like two "3"s facing each other

    • by CAIMLAS (41445)

      You can improve on that list quiet a bit; based on my experience, it goes like this:

      NT4: short of being terribly stable, it was a suitable and functional desktop OS for PCs in a corporate/business environment.
      3.1: great if you only ran office apps by themselves, but useless if you needed networking and/or
      95: a drastic improvement over its predecessors in many ways, but still suffered horribly from the whole "need to go to DOS to actually use all 8Mb of RAM" problems. Severe hardware limitations for about 1+

  • ...by the reassurance that one is indeed greater than zero.
  • ... are still advertising it for £44.99.

    It's very possible that they're just being retarded and will later say "sorry, you were too late, order cancelled" but it's worth a go.

  • There is no cheaper upgrade version of Windows 7 in Europe. So, for Win7 Home Premium, it's either pay £50 now or ... three times that much later on.

    It seems that £50 is what people are willing to pay for a decent OS. More than willing to pay. Which suggests that the OS is overpriced and that if some form of competition were introduced, the price would plummet and MS would be unable to sell their new shiny OS for 150 clams without falling victim to that competition (assuming no dirty

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by HermMunster (972336)

      It is overpriced. Vista was a horrible dead horse. Essentially a dead horse with lipstick. I have 3 machines with Vista on it. I have 10 machines with Linux and about 8 with XP. The linux boxes run more stably and are more customizable. I can change the look with little effort. Software is easy to install.

      Vista is horrible. I spend my days as a small business owner supporting Windows based products. I make my income off it. I spend a good deal of that time (about 90% of it) cleaning computers of m

  • while stocks last? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 16, 2009 @11:27AM (#28717399)

    Is there a shortage of electrons?

  • It also comes with 18% fewer bugs and vulnerabilities if you order a promotional copy.
  • by Anonymous Coward

    Man I hate Windows! Oohhh I bet Windows will solve that problem!

  • by Clarious (1177725) on Thursday July 16, 2009 @11:46AM (#28717715)

    ... and people are acting crazy. When I used vista, I have absolute no problem with it, so I don't understand what with the Windows 7 hype. From what I have heard, it is just Vista with the retarded parts removed.

    But I have no reason to care about Windows world anymore, switched to Linux half a year ago and now I am a happy Linux user :) There may never be an year of Linux or its market will never go past 10%, but I can use it comfortably now, so it is fine with me.

    • it was in 2002 when I decided to move away from windows xp which was crashing all the time to Debian GNU/Linux Sid. I will never go back.

      Maybe Debian is not the easiest distribution for the home user but Ubuntu is quite easy to install and use, and there are many other distros.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      From what I have heard, it is just Vista with the retarded parts removed.

      I use Vista right now, and it's fairly stable, but it's a little slow, even after I had to turn all the retarded parts off.

      What I find strange is that the people that use MS software out of choice continually put up with and reward a company that regularly bends them over a barrel and gives them downright awful or just mostly awful software with every other release.

    • by Runaway1956 (1322357) on Thursday July 16, 2009 @01:13PM (#28719153) Homepage Journal

      "When I used vista, I have absolute no problem with it"

      Obviously, you ran Vista on a recent high powered machine, with super graphics. Unfortunately, as part of the marketing hype, Vista was sold on new machines that were seriously underpowered, with crumby onboard graphics. So, even on expensive new machines, businesses and consumers found that Vista sucked. Win7, however, rocks along nicely on almost any machine with a CPU over 1 Ghz. You may or may not be able to use the Aero features, but it runs stable, and performance is decent.

      I have found that Vista sucked even harder in virtual machines - but Win7 is perfectly happy inside a virtual machine.

      I just don't know how else to spell it out. Vista was a terribly expensive mistake, and in today's economy, few people or businesses can afford expensive mistakes.

    • by Draek (916851)

      Well, Windows 7 eliminates the choice between XP and Vista by giving us the best of both worlds and with a price cut on top, what's *not* to like?

      Sure, I use Linux as my main desktop and have been for the past 6-7 years, but I like PC gaming so I still need a Windows install somewhere and 7 is the best there is for that purpose.

  • by jbarr (2233) on Thursday July 16, 2009 @11:48AM (#28717735) Homepage

    ...except that we've had ample time to critique and review both Vista and Windows 7, and the general conclusion is that what we know about Vista NOW is completely different from what we knew about Vista when it was first released. And the general knowledge about Windows 7 is much more positive than current perceptions about Vista

    Hmmm. What was that about hindsight...?

  • Surprise! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 16, 2009 @11:52AM (#28717781)

    Make a good product and people might actually be willing to give you money for it

    Imagine a world where businesses actually made their products better to get sales rather than skimming quality to reduce margins for more profit

  • My adult life has primarily been spent using various permutations of Apple's Macintosh computers for fun and (quite often) for profit and (always) to further my artistic goals. By day for the past couple of years though, I'm usually forced to interact with a Windows PC running the latest flavour of Win XP.

    I really can't imagine why I would ever want to upgrade that PC and why oh why I would ever need anything more than Word/Excel/PPT 2003 on Windows. I really don't. I'm a geek and believe in giving Windows

    • by PitaBred (632671)

      "I would really love to see Microsoft innovate something that would make interacting with these boxes more pleasing, the manipulation of complex information more straightforward"

      See, that would allow people to use an OS and office suite other than the ones that Microsoft provides, and they sure as hell don't want that. I'd love to see it happen too, but I'd also love to have someone randomly give me a million dollars. I firmly expect that neither will ever happen, unless they're forced to do it.

  • BOHICA! (Score:2, Interesting)

    by MarcQuadra (129430)

    Bend Over, Here It Comes Again!

    Seriously, Win7 just feels like a lot of good press wrapped around Vista to me. That being said, I'm using it at work already (but I was using Vista pre-SP1 too).

    I'm -not- going to enjoy trying to hold-off users from self-deploying this until we're ready to support it. Even with the lead time, there are lots of bits and pieces that wouldn't fit in our environment, and there are far too many 'flavors', especially with the 32 and 64 bit editions for me to handle.

  • While I do run Windows XP, since my computer came with it, I recently realised that virtually all of my software will run under Windows 2000. In the few cases where XP is necessary, it is usually possible to use the prior version of the software and pretty much accomplish the same task.

    So what did I do: I dumped some money into acquiring VMware Workstation and some older copies of Windows. The system allows me to create separate virtual machines for separate tasks, thus allowing me to avoid (or at least i

  • by XB-70 (812342) on Thursday July 16, 2009 @12:28PM (#28718425)
    Installing Windows 7

    Microsoft:

    YOU ARE ATTEMPTING TO UPGRADE WINDOWS VISTA, ARE YOU SURE YOU WANT TO CONTINUE?

    Yes.

    ARE YOU REALLY SURE?

    Yes.

    ARE YOU REALLY REALLY SURE?

    *****yes!******

    OK, THEN. JUST SO YOU KNOW, WE'RE REQUIRED TO ASK YOU THAT NOW. IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT FOR BEING A PICKY CONSUMER AND SUPPORTING THAT WHOLE "ANTI-TRUST" NONSENSE. INGRATE.

    Just get on with it.

    ATTEMPTING TO INSTALL WINDOWS 7. FIRST WE NEED TO CHECK YOUR SYSTEM FOR COMPATIBILITY. THIS COULD TAKE SEVERAL DAYS.

    Groan.

    THE INSTALL PROGRAM HAS DETECTED SEVERAL POSSIBLE PROBLEMS AND WILL NOT LET YOU INSTALL 7.

    Problems? What problems?

    THE VIDEO CARD YOU ARE USING APPARENTLY DOES NOT WORK WITH THE MOTHERBOARD.

    But I'm using it at this very moment.

    THAT IS IRRELEVANT.

    But if the video card isn't working with the mother board then I can't very well see this warning message telling me that the video card wasn't...

    DO NOT ATTEMPT TO FOOL ME WITH LOGIC, I AM A MICROSOFT PRODUCT. LOGIC DOES NOT WORK ON ME. I HAVE ALSO FOUND THE FOLLOWING MINOR ERRORS: WINDOWS 7 IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE FOLLOWING HARDWARE - MONITOR, KEYBOARD, MEMORY CHIPS, MOTHERBOARD BIOS, WEB CAM, SCANNER, SOUND CARD, USB CONTROLLER, CD/R DRIVE, MICROPHONE, AND FLIGHT STICK.

    All that?

    YES. AND THE HARD DRIVE IS RIGHT OUT TOO. WE DON'T LIKE THE MANUFACTURER.

    Well what *DOES* work?

    THE MOUSE.

    The mouse?

    YES. AND THE 5 1/4 DRIVE.

    I don't have a 5 1/4 drive.

    YES YOU DO.

    No I don't.

    WHAT'S THAT THEN?

    It's a DVD R/W drive.

    NO IT ISN'T.

    Yes it is.

    YOU'RE NOT THAT SMART YOU KNOW.

    Look, can you just upgrade Vista on my system and I'll download the latest drivers for everything later? Please?

    WAIT, WHAT DO YOU MEAN *YOUR* SYSTEM?

    Well it is mine.

    NO IT ISN'T.

    It bloody well is.

    NUH-UH. YOU SIGNED THE AGREEMENT WHEN YOU OPENED THE BOX. OUR SYSTEM. IT'S OURS. AND YOU CAN ONLY DO 4 CHANGES BEFORE YOU HAVE TO PAY US MORE MONEY.

    But why?

    BECAUSE THAT'S HOW THE LICENSE WORKS, IDJIT. WE CAN'T VERY WELL HAVE PEOPLE PUTTING HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE ON THEIR SYSTEMS ALL HIGGLEDY PIGGLEDY, NOW COULD WE? YOU USERS WOULD MUCK EVERYTHING UP, AND THEN WHERE WOULD WE BE? I'LL TELL YOU WHERE, NOWHERE. THAT'S WHERE. I... HEY, WHAT IS THAT? WHAT ARE YOU DOING? IS THAT A DISK? WHAT ARE YOU DOING WITH THAT DISK? YOU'RE NOT PUTTING IT IN THE DRIVE ARE YOU? YOU ARE! WHAT'S ON THAT DISK? IS THAT LINUX? YOU'RE INSTALLING LINUX?? WHY WOULD YOU INSTALL LINUX WHEN I AM INFINITELY MORE POWE..........

    Ubuntu-9.04 #

  • I'm never first (Score:5, Insightful)

    by BigJClark (1226554) on Thursday July 16, 2009 @12:40PM (#28718627)

    I'm never first to buy any piece of software. I don't like paying to beta test software, and with MS's current record with OS's, I'm apprehensive at best to purchase this. And I still hate how MS wipes your MBR. For the love of god MS, some of us run dual boot systems.

    At the very least, give us an option.
  • News? (Score:4, Informative)

    by Runaway1956 (1322357) on Thursday July 16, 2009 @12:48PM (#28718775) Homepage Journal

    Somehow, this hardly seems like news. Windows 7 is a much better planned and engineered system than Vista ever was. Vista was shoved down our throats, while 7 takes into consideration what people need and want. I run 7 on machines that Vista just barfed at, meaning I don't need to spend 600 bucks on hardware to please Microsoft.

    Yes, of course Win7 outsells Vista immediately. The humorous news will be coming out in the months ahead, when organizations that adopted Vista, like the US Army, find that they are unable to do things that Win7 users can do. Right now, I have almost no idea what those things might be - but most likely it will be driver related. No one is going to develop for Vista!!

    Just wait for it.......

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      Vista was shoved down our throats, while 7 takes into consideration what people need and want.

      Say what? You in for a rude awakening when 7 is actually released. It will be "shoved down your throat" more so than Vista ever was, especially if it is moderately successful. The only reason for 7's existence and XP's continued presence is because of the awful press (in my opinion, justified) and that companies and home users basically rebelled against Vista. The key is to watch for Win7 only features like i

He keeps differentiating, flying off on a tangent.

Working...