$50 to Get XP On a New Dell 616
CWmike writes "Dell will charge customers up to $50 for factory-installed Windows XP on some PCs after Wednesday, according to the company's Web site. Buyers of the low-priced Vostro line of desktops and notebooks will pay $20 to $50 more for Windows XP Professional installed as a 'downgrade' from Windows Vista Business or Vista Ultimate than they would for Vista only."
It's like divorce (Score:5, Funny)
Re:It's like divorce (Score:5, Insightful)
Forget about Apple Mr. Gates, you're doing a good job of self-destructing.
Re:It's like divorce (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It's like divorce (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:It's like divorce (Score:4, Interesting)
How about a better deal? (Score:5, Insightful)
Dell sells you the box without any software or OS installed, and takes $50 off the price?
Re:It's like divorce (Score:5, Insightful)
That said, many people would use XP because it's XP and for no other reason. It has all the buttons in the right places and works exactly the same as it's "supposed to" work. Let others figure out the funny stuff for you, then you migrate when you need to. I migrated from 2000 SP4 to XP SP2, now I run XP in a virtualbox under Linux but maybe someday I'll upgrade to a Vista version too. Not today though, not tomorrow either.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Thank-you. I just laughed maltesers all over my monitor.
Re:It's like divorce (Score:5, Funny)
1. Write software that works 90% of the time and crashes randomly 10% of the time (who cares the 10% is during critical computing)
2. Wait, release patches.
3. Release new version of OS so crappy the public will be happy to use the 90% ware and pay to downgrade
4. Profit
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
DirectX is a fantastic API that allows developers to effectively bypass some pretty piss-poor Win32 APIs. Games are written for DirectX, not for Windows. The fact is that DirectX runs in other environments, like Xbox and Xbox360. If all you're doing is gaming, then you shouldn't be surprised if yo
Re:It's like divorce (Score:5, Insightful)
1) Environments would not be the correct term.
2) XBox and XBox360 both run Windows- XBox is Win2K, XBox360 is XP x64.
This whole thread is based on the premise that Windows crashes, and reliability studies continue to show that since Win2k and XP, crashes are as rare on Windows as they are on any other OS. Vista so far is reporting to be even more stable than any OS, which is a bit surprising.
Windows stability issues is an old tale that needs to finally stop. People stopped bitching about Apple OS 9 when it was replaced with OS X, yet people still make fun of Windows based on the Win9x era.
Windows users don't see crashes, this is not the Win9x kernel era, the 'Windows crashes all the time' myth crap needs to stop once and for all...
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
At least it's sort of running, but it's better than nothing!
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Gamers run their games for somewhere between 12 and 18 hours at a time. That's a SINGLE application most of that time.
If desktop PC Windows users only ran a single application all day long, they would probably ALSO have rock-solid results. Unfortunately, that's not the case. Instead, they usually run a dozen different apps no including the multitude of other programs that run in the background from start-up to make things ea
Re:It's like divorce (Score:5, Funny)
http://www.geocities.com/rcwoolley/ [geocities.com]
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
This is because of the requirement of having a fscking graphics card to run an OS.
Historically, its been the other way around
5+ Years (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:5+ Years (Score:5, Insightful)
Now, you could say "you can't leap a chasm two inches at a time," but where is the great leap forward with Vista?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The ship took a massive course change during the product cycle for Vista - which changed what the priorities were for the final release. This should not be overlooked.
Don't get me wrong, the Vista that did ship was a huge piece of junk - but SP1 has fixed many of the significant problems peop
Re:It's like divorce (Score:5, Insightful)
Indeed, but for my $50 I would rather have a properly supported version of Windows 2000. It's all been downhill since there.
Re:It's like divorce (Score:5, Insightful)
"Activation." (I.e., having to beg somebody for permission to use your own property.)
Re:It's like divorce (Score:5, Interesting)
I think you're confused; My copy is my property, and the claims that it isn't because it's Imaginary are just that: imaginary themselves!
Re:It's like divorce (Score:4, Insightful)
Right. And my point was the contrapositive: since it is really my property, then I shouldn't have to beg someone else's permission to use! That's why XP is intolerable compared to 2000.
Re:It's like divorce (Score:5, Interesting)
And it's a fallacy that XP runs significantly more packages than 2000 does. It's just that Micro$oft rewrote their installers to check and exit if they were run under 2000. I have successfully installed and used several "XP Only" packages under 2000 by using a hacked set of installer DLLs.
Re:It's like divorce (Score:4, Insightful)
So you judge an OS by the quality of its GUI? By that measure, I'd say Win 2000 wins (the two OSs pretty well come out even on every other measure). XP definitely had a far more irritating GUI than Win 2000. I don't remember what "theming" is, but I remember having to:
Only time I ever found a reason to prefer XP over 2000 was when I was messing with wireless, and learned that it was a pain to support anything better than WEP encryption on 2000 (something MS could have easily done in a patch). Only reason I've been paying for XP these days is that it will be supported with fixes for all those security holes longer than 2000.
Hello! You get both operating systems. (Score:5, Informative)
I know it's a lot more fun to misinterpret the summary, then comment on your misinterpretation. But if you actually RTFA, it's not so sensational.
Re:Hello! You get both operating systems. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Hello! You get both operating systems. (Score:5, Insightful)
For probably 90% of the people paying extra to get XP, that's functionally identical to getting only XP.
Re:Hello! You get both operating systems. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Hello! You get both operating systems. (Score:4, Funny)
Yes, but you can't really market that as a benefit to Dell's customers. "Buy XP! Help MS cook the books for only $50!"
Re:Hello! You get both operating systems. (Score:5, Insightful)
Two for the Price of Two (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Hello! You get both operating systems. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Hello! You get both operating systems. (Score:4, Funny)
I know it's a lot more fun to make fun of the summary, than to commit Microsoft executives to an insane asylum. But if you actually use Windows, it's not so pathetic.
Re:Hello! You get both operating systems. (Score:5, Informative)
These people are paying an extra $50 off of the most expensive versions of Vista so that they can run Windows XP. People that are willing to pay a premium to run XP are not excited about the fact that they get Vista as well.
Seriously, if these thought that Vista was worth running, they'd save their $50 and run Vista. There is essentially no way to spin this that is good for Microsoft or Vista. Heck, downgrading to Windows XP on most computers of the Vostro line (which ship with Vista Home Basic by default) adds $150 to the price tag.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You really are a clueless idiot.
I'm crushed. Here's what I said.
These people are paying an extra $50 off of the most expensive versions of Vista so that they can run Windows XP
What I meant to say was that these people are paying an extra $50 "on top of" the most expensive version of Vista. It's possible that this mistake is why you got so worked up. The basic idea is that it doesn't make sense to pay an extra $50 to have Windows XP installed if what you really want to do is run Windows Vista. Especially considering the fact that Dell probably doesn't include Windows Vista installation media with these computers.
Here's your response:
WRONG! When you buy Vista Business or Ultimate (note: Business costs the same as XP Pro), you are entitled to downgrade the system yourself. Dell are offering their "downgrade services" for $50. This is not M$ ripping you off, it's Dell offering you to downgrade for an extra fee. Dell offer to re-configure your computer's Boot Sequence for $5, they offer to remove unwanted applications for a few bucks, and there are probably more customisation things which i cant remember. Dell is probably being forced down the Vista road, but while the downgrade loophole exists, they are cashing in. You can downgrade yourself & save $50.
This
Re:Hello! You get both operating systems. (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:It's like divorce (Score:5, Funny)
She's gaining weight and trying to control you.
Re:It's like divorce (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:It's like divorce (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:It's like divorce (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:It's like divorce (Score:5, Informative)
That's because Bungie was originally a Mac-only game developer. Then MS bought 'em for Halo, and nixed all their Mac development.
It's Twitter, Slashdot Duped Again! (Score:5, Informative)
This story is a cut and paste job from Twitter's journal [slashdot.org], made within two hours of the twitter post. CWMike must be another Twitter sock puppet and this story is just more hysterical FUD about Vista [slashdot.org].
Re:It's Twitter, Slashdot Duped Again! (Score:4, Insightful)
And no, I'm not a twitter sock puppet, and I generally think he's kind of over the top, but this article looks like a pretty straightforward summary of the article it links to. This particular piece is not in any way "hysterical FUD." Do you add anyone who responds to twitter's posts or reads his journal to his list of sock puppets?
Re:It's like divorce (Score:5, Funny)
Re:It's like divorce (Score:5, Funny)
Re:It's like divorce (Score:5, Funny)
I guess Apple will have to avoid using cougar as a code name for OS X. Don't want MS suing you for creating confusion in the marketplace.
$50 for assurance of less headache ? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Then how much would you pay for Ubuntu, which causes even fewer headaches than Windows XP as long as GNU/Linux supports your hardware?
Re:$50 for assurance of less headache ? (Score:5, Insightful)
Then how much would you pay for Ubuntu, which causes even fewer headaches than Windows XP as long as GNU/Linux supports your hardware?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
You are a sucker. I've purchased two copies of Vista. One retail and one with a new laptop. In the license agreement that came with both of them, there is a clause that allows you to use Windows XP instead of Vista. No need to pay extra.
Re:$50 for assurance of less headache ? (Score:4, Interesting)
Is this for real? Any copy of vista you pay for you can take an OEM CD of XP and install it and you're legal?
What code do you enter when it asks? The one for the vista install? Does it activate? Who has done this?
Most people will have a copy of XP around, probably OEM. I have a CD for pro and home, so this may just make the vista thing a non-issue. You're still buying a copy of AN operating system, there's just an extra step of the format/reinstall to fix it.
Re:$50 for assurance of less headache ? (Score:5, Informative)
Depends on what you do with that computer (Score:2)
On the other hand, while I _am_ writing this on a SuSE 10.0 machine, I wouldn't really want Linux on my gaming rig. I know, Wine, bla, bla, bla. Tried that route some time ago, wasn't worth the effort. Does it even work with most games' copy-protection these days, or do you still need a crack just to run your legitimately purchased game in Wine?
So, well, different tools for different folks.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
A respectable number (Score:3, Informative)
Didn't you hear? There are now 42 games for Linux.
And once you include all the free-and-Free games in Ubuntu's repository, you have more games than were released for the Atari 7800 (60 titles) [wikipedia.org] and Virtual Boy (22) [wikipedia.org] put together. And no, not all of them are just Tetris clones [pineight.com] either.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
If you focus on how much fun you can have, instead of whether you're pushing the most polygons through your video card, then linux is a nice option for gaming. No matter what genre of game you like most, there's something for you on linux.
Would I want to play them? (Score:3, Interesting)
Look, I'm not trying to dis Linux or anything. It's great for work or casual browsing any email.
But for games, umm, how do I say this tactfully?
1. the "you have more games than were released for the Atari 7800 (60 titles) and Virtual Boy (22) put together" doesn't say much. Both
Re:$50 for assurance of less headache ? (Score:5, Insightful)
Then how much would you pay for Ubuntu, which causes even fewer headaches than Windows XP as long as GNU/Linux supports your hardware?
(there are many more ways, but yeah - it's worth paying-back that way, if not in other ways as well).
It's an upgrade, (Score:5, Funny)
Downgrade? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Downgrade? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Downgrade? (Score:5, Interesting)
its all relative, isn't it?
compare win2k that had NO activation and you could copy the system disk from one box to another and it would work fine (if the hardware/kernel were compatible).
I am forced to use an acronis (or similar) tool to dupe my system disk. that hurdle should NOT exist but XP sure does like to stop you doing things you need to, at the system level.
not to mention activation, which kept a lot of people OFF xp and made win2k the last 'great' os from MS.
the only useful xp is a corp edition (non activation), sp2, pre-WGA. all others are bolloxed-up. (fwiw, at least SP3 on xp didn't turn on WGA on the corp version I tested it with. so a corp SP2 with SP3 update still seems 'mostly safe' to use).
Re:Downgrade? (Score:5, Interesting)
It's a "downgrade" only because Microsoft wants to preserve the illusion that Vista is better, and the pricing is set to discourage people from buying it.
But, yes... a significant share of the consumer market, and practically *all* of the informed market, consider XP a vastly improved upgrade [dotnet.org.za] over Vista.
I've been using Microsoft OSes since MS-DOS 3.2 (circa 1988), and I've never been nearly as frustrated, disappointed, and often outraged by an OS as I am with Vista. I've been using it for two months, and it's horrid in many, many aspects.
I have been making a list of irritations that are novel to Vista. Every time I run across some new irritant, I pop open this text file and add a line to it. I am also making a list of Vista features that I have turned off because they are buggy, poorly implemented, resource hogs, unsecure, frustrating to use, etc., etc. They are both very long lists, and they continue to grow.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Please post it in your as-yet nonexistant slashdot journal!
Wasting money (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
So the question is, from what I understand, if you turn off all the extras, Vista is not that bad. I don't suppose I can get an unbiased assessment on slashdot, though. Is it really that buggy? More than XP?
Re:Wasting money (Score:5, Informative)
Also the journal playback doesn't work with the UAC turned on. It was a security issue but it is also how some programs did simple macros and allowed you to create applications that pushed text into other windows apps.
Also the USB system seems to have some bugs in it.
Also the sound system can be really odd at times. Some computers produce really crappy sound if you record at less than 16 bit 22 khz stereo. That shouldn't be an issue for just recording voice.
It does use more disk space and memory than XP.
It is also different and often it seems like it is different not to be better but to just be different.
So as you have put it if you turn off all the extras then it isn't that bad.
But if you turn off all the extras is it any better than XP?
That is what makes Vista so bad. It really is a lot to some pain for little to no gain.
XP works as well as Vista, uses less resources, and everybody knows most of it's quirks and problems. I feel that Vista is a case of not worth it. And what I find shocking is that most of the normal users out there feel the same way.
Re:Wasting money (Score:5, Informative)
There are a handful of people here on Slashdot who actually like Vista and admit it. I'm one of them.
I haven't turned off any of the extras. Regarding the eye candy, they did an awesome job. It's a slick looking user interface. Regarding performance, it runs beautifully on my Acer laptop (1.6 GHz dual core, 2 GB RAM, GeForce Go7300).
The biggest annoyance for me is the automatic horizontal scrolling in the folder pane of Windows Explorer. I absolutely hate it and want to turn it off, but there is no option.
I've only encountered two actual bugs, and they were both extremely minor. One of them I only encountered once, and can't actually remember what it is right now. The other is just a small bug that occurs when you create a new folder and then try to rename it too quickly.
Overall, I'm happy with it.
Re:Wasting money (Score:5, Insightful)
"go back"? I'm still waiting for a compelling reason to upgrade from 2K to XP. Seriously.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So, the advice from Microsoft is to allow Vista to just automatically escalate your privileges?
Sigh.
I actually like UAC, and I'd recommend that most users just leave it on and suck up the increasingly infrequent nags. Perhaps it's a motorcycling thing; you give a final look over your shoulder before every maneuver, even though 99% of the time there's nothing there. It's the 1% that's going to kill you.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
by then, if the world is STILL on MS platforms, well, we have worse things to worry about than xp running out of support..
there's no compelling reason at all to embrace vista. none. xp won't stop working all of a sudden (well, not any more than usual) and its supported via patches for quite a while to go.
after that, its linux, freebsd, mac. MS is losing share every month. I know NO ONE in the corp world who wants vista and even home users are
Stop blowing stuff out of proportion (Score:2)
Or... (Score:4, Insightful)
other side of the coin (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
What about refunds? (Score:3, Interesting)
Better idea: (Score:5, Insightful)
As in: "...can you just send me the laptop with nothing at all installed on the hard disk? I intend to install (Ubuntu/Fedora/OpenSuSE) on it. No, I really don't want anything in the way of tech support outside of parts and labor."
Screw that noise (Score:2)
Almost makes sense (Score:2)
Microsoft Monopoly (Score:5, Insightful)
Also, if there were competition, Microsoft would not have the economic ability to decide to drop a product that people wanted and force them into something they didn't. If I was a share holder and there was actual competition in the market place, I'd have the board and CEO fired for failing their fiduciary responsibilities.
But since they have a monopoly, there is no economic feedback.
Staying with Windows 2000 (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm still running Windows 2000 on the last Windows machine. It's so drama-free. No pushed updates, no annoying popups from Microsoft, no crashes in years.
You run Windows 2000. XP is tied to the mothership in Redmond. With Vista, Microsoft runs you.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If one has a Linux-liked wifi card, switch to Ubuntu. Its worth the trouble.
I want to see how they plan on downgrading... (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously, people at NVIDIA must be REALLY LAZY to not include one line of code into an
Re: (Score:2)
Just one more drama in the Saga that is MS reality telvision. Hand me the remote please....
Labor ain't free (Score:4, Insightful)
-Rick
Re:Labor ain't free (Score:4, Insightful)
There is far more to this than manufacturing costs.
tooling/labor/licensing costs... what??? (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, that was sarcasm.
Re:tooling/labor/licensing costs... what??? (Score:4, Insightful)
If you have exactly the right amount of resources to distribute Vista as per your current plan, where are you going to get the resources to distribute XP? Sure, maybe it's 1 extra man-hour a day to get the installs done, or to swap bins and output trays for pre-loaded XP hard drives. But that's 1 hour of labor that you have to pay for only because you are offering XP. 1 hour could be $20 payment for a union factory worker with seniority. Figure another $10 in taxes, SS, UE, etc on top of that, $4 to the health care plan, and another $1 to the retirement plan. You've just paid an extra $35 for 1 hour of labor.
Now you also need to update your sales catalog to reflect the new availability and pricing.
Update you web site to include the configuration option.
Update your marketing material to let consumers know they have the choice.
Update your support documentation so that your Tier 1 script readers know to ask "Do you have Windows XP or Vista?"
Duplicate your warehouse and distribution organization to handle identical models of PCs and laptops with both OS's.
Continuously review production and sales data to determine if you need to increase, decrease, or suspend production of XP PC/Laptops.
etc...
And, if what another commenter has mentioned is true, about Dell no longer having distribution rights to XP to allow them to use pre-loaded HD's, you are looking at having to pay the labor to have each and every laptop loaded manually.
So yeah, it costs a bit extra for them to offer it. Could part of the $50 be due to MS trying to push them away from the selling it? Likely. Could some of the $50 be due to Dell trying to dissuade people from buying it? Also likely. But to claim that running extra product varieties on an existing production line will not increase production costs is just short sighted.
-Rick
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Sometimes (Score:4, Informative)