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?'"
Survey says.... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Survey says.... (Score:5, Funny)
Windows Starter edition comes without the Pipes screensaver?
But that's the best feature!
The reality... (Score:5, Insightful)
Second of all, all of those builds have been available since the early days of Windows 7. This isn't something they recently added in to 7025, it's been there the entire time as a carry-over from Vista.
Just because these versions are randomly available in a pre-release version of an OS doesn't mean they'll still be there by the time it's actually released.
Re:The reality... (Score:5, Funny)
Exactly. The only place I've heard about the "Disasterous Confusion" of vista's multiple versions is on Slashdot.
Who's up for guessing what the difference is between Windows 7 'Starter' and Windows 7 'Home Basic?
There is another method... it's far more effective than guessing. You could... look at the feature list.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windows-vista/compare-editions/default.aspx [microsoft.com]
OMG The confusion!!!
Let me break it down for ya'all
Do you need remote desktop?
Ultimate or Business.
Do you need Faxes?
Ultimate or Business.
Do you need Media Center?
Home Premium or Ultimate.
Do you want to burn DVDs and HD-DVDs out of the box?
Home Premium or Ultimate.
Do you live in a third world country and have flies on your face?
Home Basic
Was that REALLY so difficult?
Re:The reality... (Score:5, Insightful)
On the other hand, you can install SAMBA shares or host multiple VNC sessions even on a "Workstation" linux if you bother to install the required (free) software, and it won't do stupid crap like limiting your SAMBA share to 5 connections.
Re:The reality... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah - but there IS a difference....
The "home" versions of Linux most times are focused on speed rather than stability. Not to say the "home" versions are not stable, but the first priority is things like multimedia etc. Also the focus lays on the latest and newest applications.
The "Server" versions are optimized to be rock stable and fast in things you could expect from a server. Multimedia has no high priority here. Also software is not the latest bleeding edge but proved and stable.
So - there is a reason you have two very different types. At the other hand the Microsoft versions are all the same. The only difference is the amount of services (software) added, and the amount of cash you have to deliver...
Re:The reality... (Score:5, Informative)
Yeah - but there IS a difference....
The "home" versions of Linux most times are focused on speed rather than stability. Not to say the "home" versions are not stable, but the first priority is things like multimedia etc. Also the focus lays on the latest and newest applications.
The "Server" versions are optimized to be rock stable and fast in things you could expect from a server. Multimedia has no high priority here. Also software is not the latest bleeding edge but proved and stable.
So - there is a reason you have two very different types. At the other hand the Microsoft versions are all the same. The only difference is the amount of services (software) added, and the amount of cash you have to deliver...
Actually the server versions of Windows are tuned differently too
http://blogs.msdn.com/larryosterman/archive/2009/01/08/why-do-people-think-that-a-server-sku-works-well-as-a-general-purpose-operating-system.aspx [msdn.com]
One of the senior developers at Microsoft recently complained that the audio quality on his machine (running Windows Server 2008) was poor.
To me, it's not surprising. Server SKUs are tuned for high performance in server scenarios, they're not configured for desktop scenarios. That's the entire POINT of having a server SKU - one of the major differences between server SKUs and client SKUs is that the client SKUs are tuned to balance the OS in favor of foreground responsiveness and the server SKUs are tuned in favor of background responsiveness (after all, its a server, there's usually nobody sitting at the console, so there's no point in optimizing for the console).
In this particular case, the documentation for the MMCSS service describes a large part of the root cause for the problem: The MMCSS service (which is the service that provides glitch resilient services for Windows multimedia applications) is essentially disabled on server SKUs. It's just one of probably hundreds of other settings that are tweaked in favor of server responsiveness on server SKUs.
Re:Oh come on.... strawman (Score:5, Insightful)
The various flavours of desktop Windows are PURELY a marketing concept and have no basis in customer needs.
Uh, market segmentation is pretty basic economics and common practice. See, for example, any car manufacturer charging $500 for a GPS unit or stereo when equivalent (if not better) models be bought off the shelf for 1/4 the price (but won't be quite as "integrated").
Heck, even Red Hat does it. They have at least 3 different licensing tiers. Any company that can do this, will do it, because they'd be stupid not to.
The idea that consumers would specially pick out Microsoft for criticism, when basically everyone does it, is laughable.
Re:Oh come on.... strawman (Score:5, Insightful)
The difference is that a Workstation Linux is preconfigured for a workstation but is otherwise the same as the server edition and both can be turned into the other one ... it is just a convenience and many simply ask which do you want to install and actually install the same system but with configuration changes and a different list of installed components (there is nothing stopping you turning a workstation into a server of vice-versa)
The RedHat systems are actually different levels of support as well as different pre-configured systems - what you are actually paying for is the support not the system (i.e. you actually get a real benefit by paying more)
Windows flavours are purely marketing and are there so some flavours can be sold more cheaply than others, they cost the same to design, build market and sell but the more complete systems can be sold for more
Re:Oh come on.... strawman (Score:4, Informative)
The RedHat systems are actually different levels of support as well as different pre-configured systems - what you are actually paying for is the support not the system (i.e. you actually get a real benefit by paying more)
Right. So you pay more and get more... just like the different versions of Windows.
Windows flavours are purely marketing and are there so some flavours can be sold more cheaply than others, they cost the same to design, build market and sell but the more complete systems can be sold for more
Given that the different versions of Windows come with different features, it's quite arguable from a conceptual point of view that they cost more (or less) to "design", depending on how you want to measure.
It's ultimately moot, however. The important point is that there's nothing unusual, special, or different whatsoever about a manufacturer targeting different price points with products that just variations on a theme. Anyone who's ever gone car shopping, will not be surprised that there are different versions of Windows with different features at different price points.
Re:Oh come on.... strawman (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Oh come on.... strawman (Score:5, Insightful)
I am not saying this doesn't happen in other business, but it is a bad practice nonetheless.
Why ?
Person X wants feature A and is prepared to pay price P.
Person Y wants feature A and B and is prepared to pay price 1.5P.
Person Z wants feature A, B and C and is prepared to pay price 2P.
Company Q can take a single product, and with minor changes, deliver A, B and C. The company maximises their revenue and minimises their costs. The customer gets the features they want, at the price point they were prepared to pay and a perception they aren't paying for features they don't need (which cost more). Everybody is happy (or as happy as they're going to get).
It's a textbook example of capitalism and the free market, which is why it's so common.
Re:Oh come on.... strawman (Score:4, Insightful)
Why? Because the product being sold already has features A, B and C. In fact, as someone pointed out, there is a cost of disabling the feature, so the version with only feature A should be more expensive. So in fact you are telling your costumers - or the ones who can think anyway - they're idiots.
Secondly, it is not as easy as saying person X wants feature A and is prepared to pay price P. Things are much more complicated than that: people have usually a general set of expectations of what they want in a product - specially one as complicated as an OS -and the value they should pay for it. There is a marketing effort to convince people their expectations will be met by a product only with feature A, or perhaps the most complete with features B and C, and it is worth of paying whatever price they ask for it.
To cap it all, free market and MS don't go very well in the same post. MS have a lot of control over what they put down their costumers throat, since they have a monopoly. The real problem with free market is that it is a fictional, theoretical construct. The real market is usually nowhere like that, and people should know the difference.
Re:The reality... (Score:5, Funny)
It's not missing, it's on a secret mission to the neutral zone.
Re:Survey says.... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Survey says.... (Score:5, Funny)
For you Google chrome users...
Point your browser to: about:internets
Re:Survey says.... (Score:5, Funny)
"Starter Edition" just lets you install Windows 7, and when it reboots, it pops up a dialog where you must either shutdown, or type in your credit card information to pay for an upgrade to "Home Basic" edition.
Re:Survey says.... (Score:5, Insightful)
You know, I'd mod you funny ... but there's the nagging thought in the back of my mind that you're serious.
Re:Survey says.... (Score:5, Funny)
"Starter Edition" just lets you install Windows 7, and when it reboots, it pops up a dialog where you must either shutdown, or type in your credit card information to pay for an upgrade to "Home Basic" edition.
You know, I'd mod you funny ... but there's the nagging thought in the back of my mind that you're serious.
I'd be more concerned that the nagging thought of seriousness would be in Microsofts' mind!
Cheers!
Strat
Re:Survey says.... (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Maybe MS is preying on the fact that most consumers will be too stupid to know they're buying more than they need, or too elitist to buy just what they will use instead of getting "Ultimate". Either way, they make more money.
I have nothing against them making money, but hawking feature incomplete operating systems at rock bottom price just to artificially create the appearance of choice drives me nuts.
Re:Survey says.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Survey says.... (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
After being in the Linux arena for several years, I ran into a client that needed a Windows solution. CDW was their preferred vendor. I called them for a quote....and spent the better part of my work day on the phone with the account rep, and some odd sort of Microsoft licensing rep trying to figure out the correct licensing for a handfull of workstations, and two servers.
Strange combinations of eOpen licenses for workstations, and server CALs, but then special CALs for having more than 1 server on an SBS network, and then a license for SQL, and then Office under some other 'open' license, plus a few standalone apps from the office suite for computers that only needed Word or PowerPoint, etc...
What a huge fucking nightmare. 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.
My linux licenses are so much easier.
Server: $0
Workstation: $0
Database (MySQL or Postgresql): $0
Jabber collaboration server: $0
Development workstation (with any combination of vi, vim, emacs, openkomodo, kate, eclipse, etc...): $5
(Actually, my linux sales rep says 'Just kidding stupid, it's $0')
Re:Survey says.... (Score:5, Insightful)
My linux licenses are so much easier.
Server: $0
Workstation: $0
Database (MySQL or Postgresql): $0
Jabber collaboration server: $0
Development workstation (with any combination of vi, vim, emacs, openkomodo, kate, eclipse, etc...): $5
(Actually, my linux sales rep says 'Just kidding stupid, it's $0')
A fully functional server: Priceless.
Re:Survey says.... (Score:5, Insightful)
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:4, Informative)
Huh? UAC is not in XP Pro, and it is in Vista Home.
When was the last time you used Windows?
Re:Survey says.... (Score:5, Insightful)
The XP Starter edition was a crippled version of XP intended to reduce piracy in countries where people couldn't afford full-priced versions.
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.
The press at the time called it "cut-rate," "cheap," "crippled," and "futile. Users in emerging nations ignored it and continued pirating XP.
Expect the Windows 7 Starter Edition to have similar restrictions.
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: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
Re:Survey says.... (Score:5, Funny)
Windows Starter edition comes without the Pipes screensaver?
I believe it still comes with the "Tubes" screensaver though.
To start the "Tubes" screensaver, open the program with an icon that looks like a blue 'e'. Click around to different places for a little while to enable all the features.
The "Tubes" screensaver takes the appearance of the Windows desktop, getting covered with overlays that flash and blink, show pictures of naked women playing with animals, and games where you get to hit monkeys.
"Tubes" has been included with Windows since Windows 95.
Re:Survey says.... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Survey says.... (Score:5, Informative)
Where?
XP and Vista Starter edition were cut-price, limited versions for developing markets, to combat piracy. I've seen no evidence that Microsoft plans on making Starter a netbook version- that would be a bizzare branding change.
Re:Survey says.... (Score:5, Funny)
I've seen no evidence that Microsoft plans on making Starter a netbook version- that would be a bizzare branding change.
And that is in what way a change of policy?
Re:Survey says.... (Score:4, Insightful)
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?
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...*
Developing markets (Score:4, Insightful)
the answer is presumably because they consider piracy to be wrong, but don't want shell out money for the full version.
Presumably, but if that's the case it's not terribly smart.
In most developing markets you'll find the consumers to be less savvy about high tech IP issues like copyright violation than other developed markets. Far less.
Hell, less than five years ago here you had a significant percentage of the online population in the states copying music left and right with no clue that it was even illegal, much less wonder about the morality of it. You still see that defense come up from time to time, too.
And MS expects some preteen in Singapore to know better? Good luck with that.
Re:Developing markets (Score:4, Insightful)
More than MS should expect it from the Western 'cultures'. Have you seen the state of our education systems lately?
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.
Misplaced anger IMHO (Score:5, Insightful)
There still is a high percentage of people in the States copying music left and right - who don't give a c**p about copyright. Nor should they. "Piracy" isn't immoral...copyright is.
There is nothing inherently wrong with copyright. It's actually a great idea. Protect the creator of a good with an exclusive right so they can make their money off of it.
What's immoral is what has been done to that original great idea.
Now it's large record companies that hold the copyrights on the works its represented artists have created. They get a percentage which is determined by a cartel. And copyright has been extended by such insane lengths as to create a revenue stream for those companies that will typically last longer than the artist will live.
And they pay the artist pennies on the dollar. IMHO, that's why people pirate music. They know that 99% of that $15 they just plunked down on a CD will wind up in some corporate jackoff's wallet. The artist you actually like will probably get a thin nickel from your cash. So why bother?
What we need is copyright reform. If the artist got a fair percentage of the sale, and these useless bags of skin that sit between me and them were somehow cut out of the picture, I'd start buying music again.
Disclaimer: I don't buy music, but I don't copy it either. I simply do with what I already own until such time as the marketplace will allow me to buy directly from the artists I like without giving a penny to organizations like the RIAA. Soon as they die, I become a customer again.
Re:Misplaced anger IMHO (Score:5, Insightful)
...What we need is copyright reform....
A simple and straightforward reform would be to allow only real living flesh and blood persons to have copyrights and patents. No faceless corporation has ever written a song or come up with a new idea. It is only creative people within these corporations that do this and they should be rewarded, not the corporation. The title to and disposition of the so-called intellectual property could never be bought or sold or transferred in any way and would die with its creator. At that time the work or patent enters the public domain for all of society. The concept of the work for hire should be abolished. A creative person could make any agreement with any corporation they wanted to, as long as no title to a work gets transferred. All such agreements must have maximum time limit included. No corporation or other fictitious business entity should ever become the OWNERS of products of a mind.
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.
Re:Survey says.... (Score:4, Informative)
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:Survey says.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Presumably it's because it's been proven in multiple courts of law that Microsoft has no problem with illegal acts that extend its market share. Sauce for the goose, my friend.
Re:Survey says.... (Score:5, Informative)
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?
Because most people installing Windows are OEMs, not end users.
Re:Survey says.... (Score:5, Informative)
I have some experience with this from developing countries. Sometimes it's nice to have licensed software, such as when you're an international organisation, a government body, a joint venture, or when your country sometimes does care about licensing issues. So people buy the cheap version to prove that they have licensed software. Then they buy a copy of the full version for $2 on the street corner.
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.
Re:Survey says.... (Score:5, Informative)
Wrong. The 945 chipset in my work Macbook can handle Aero just fine, and most Atom-based netbooks have a 945 as well.
The limitation would be the processor, and that's not going to affect Aero so much as it will the entire system.
Re:Survey says.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Survey says.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Then why don't they call it "Windows Netbooks"? If "Windows Starter" is supposed to be the netbook edition, then they've managed to give it a name that actively misleads you as to what it's intended for.
Re:Survey says.... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Survey says.... (Score:4, Funny)
Sorry, but you're wrong, the word you're thinking of is "coaster".
Or am I just a media generation behind? It's been a while since I've actually seen those in the mail/mag-subscrips...
how is this news? (Score:5, Informative)
That would imply a product selection similar to Vista...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I really have no problems with multiple versions, however...I do think Microsoft needs to cut down on the number of versions they had. The need for 'starter' is for netbooks or 3rd world countries, sure. Other than that, there should be just "Home" and "Business".
The difference (Score:4, Insightful)
If I remember right, starter is a stripped down version they just sell in developing countries at a big discount in at attempt to combat some piracy by giving users a low priced option. Home would just be home again like in XP. Business would be enterprise. It is the ones after that where it gets pointless and confusing. They would do better to stick with home and pro. Then an ultimate after that if they just MUST toss in extras.
So... (Score:4, Insightful)
Priced low enough that you couldn't be arsed to ask for a refund
Re:The difference (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
My one remaining Windows box runs Win2K. I see no reason to upgrade. It runs the 2 windows-only apps I care about and a couple of games.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:The difference (Score:4, Informative)
The very thought of Mac OS being a server makes me ill. X is based on BSD, why not just use BSD?
Because they have some nice tools for server management (gui (Workgroup Manager) and commandline (e.g. dscl)) that don't exist in vanilla BSD?
I'm just running it for a lab with less than 10 computers and less than 30 users, but for someone like me who is only a part-time administrator with other duties to my job, the Mac OS X Server tools are great.
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.
another crippleware outrage (Score:5, Insightful)
I've got big issues with artifically crippled software, where all versions come on the same install media.
It's like buying a car with 12 cylinders and having a switch hidden under the hood somewhere that controls the number of cylinders used. You buy the budget model, still have to cart around the weight of all 12 cylinders, but only get to use 4 of them.
Re:another crippleware outrage (Score:5, Insightful)
Your analogy doesn't work. By stripping out features, an operating system can actually run faster. My only experience is with XP, but the Home addition stripped out features most people wouldn't need, and ran faster out the box. At an extreme, a highly-regarded (but of questionable legality) version of Windows called tinyXP speeds up Windows considerably by stripping out tons of features and services 90% of people will never use.
I prefer an operating system to come lean and fast, and to allow me the option to add features I want.
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.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
It's more likely that they don't ship on the same install media (at least in this case), since they're likely compiled with different options. For instance, desktops want low latency premptive multitasking, while servers and (sometimes) workstations want high throughput, which could be done with a different config at compile time (it is on Linux, though the Windows kernel is a bit further towards the microkernel side of things).
It also used to be that a lot of closed source software for servers limited how
Re:another crippleware outrage (Score:5, Insightful)
But I find the Vista versions really objectionable. It's a dishonest scheme to milk PC buyers. The buyer wants to know what version is right for him, and the salesman says "you want a great looking interface for that great computer you just bought, right? Well, you'll need the Premium Edition. How about backups, you don't want to lose your files? OK, you'll need the Business Edition. Wait, you want backups and be able to create DVDs right? Great, I'll ring you up for the Ultimate Edition."
Re: (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.
Re:another crippleware outrage (Score:4, Funny)
It's like buying a car with 12 cylinders and having a switch hidden under the hood somewhere that controls the number of cylinders used. You buy the budget model, still have to cart around the weight of all 12 cylinders, but only get to use 4 of them.
Ssssh! They have the Internet in Detroit now...
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.
Re:Not a surprise really... (Score:5, Informative)
Actually you can kind of do that with Fedora. Instead of downloading the full ISO, just download the 5-meg ISO image which contains just the anaconda installer. Then select a fedora mirror as your install server, and choose the package groups that you need as they are presented to you.
Only thing is they don't make it obvious where to grab the small ISO image. You have to browse through the the repository a bit. For example: "/pub/fedora/linux/releases/10/Fedora/i386/os/images/boot.iso"
Re:Not a surprise really... (Score:5, Insightful)
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:
Because:
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.
Probably something like this ... (Score:3, Funny)
Who's up for guessing what the difference is between Windows 7 'Starter' and Windows 7 'Home Basic?
"Starter" won't do much more than, well, start, and "Home Basic" will let you get your email.
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:Bill Gates 2002 testimony (Score:5, Funny)
Also: 32 and 64 bit (Score:5, Insightful)
Why Win7 is not purely 64 bit is beyond me - any recent machine can run the 64 bit version, any older machine should be running XP anyway.
Re:Also: 32 and 64 bit (Score:4, Insightful)
Intel's Atom processor is 32-bit only.
Re:Also: 32 and 64 bit (Score:4, Informative)
That's kind of, sort of, not really true. The Diamondville core supports x86-64, but Intel is playing an odd game where they're disabling it on some processors for no specific reason. The Atom 200 and 300 series leave it enabled, meanwhile the N27x series disable it for no obvious reason. Meanwhile the Silverthorne core used in the Atom Z5xx series is more ambiguous; none of the products its used in support x86-64, but there's a lot of disagreement over whether it's actually a different core. The reigning belief is that Diamondville is just Silverthorne built to use the GTL bus, which means Silverthorne supports x86-64 all along.
So why would Intel artificially disable x86-64 support? There's the million dollar question.
I probably should also add that the Intel Core (1) is 32bit only. Replaced since 2006 by the Core 2, MS may not want Core (1) boxes limited to Vista, hence they still need a 32bit version
Re:Also: 32 and 64 bit (Score:4, Funny)
Despite its pink exterior, I've taken the liberty of playing around with it a bit.
Dang it, I just know there's a "Nerd meets vagina for the first time joke" somewhere in there...
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Why Win7 is not purely 64 bit is beyond me - any recent machine can run the 64 bit version, any older machine should be running XP anyway.
There are probably some people who buy recent machines for performance or some specific features, but who still need to run peripherals for which only 32-bit drivers are available. My Mustek scanner, for instance. First they said they would never write Vista drivers. After lots of moaning from customers they finally did, but only 32-bit. Vista x64 requires 64-bit signed drivers for all hardware.
It's not that complicated (Score:3, Informative)
If you really want to know the different, pop into add/remove windows components on Windows 7 beta. You'll see a motley connection of odds and ends relating to business and home use. Most of them aren't installed and are somewhat irrelevant to you.
Basic is baseline (like XP home)
Home Premium includes media center (like XP media center edition)
Business is basically XP Professional
Ultimate is XP professional + media center
They didn't actually add any new editions except for Ultimate. I am sure the home users will really be lamenting their lack of NFS client/server capabilities.
Most of the guification will remain and all the desktop essentials are now under the Live Essentials umbrella, so the versioning should be irrelevant to everyone except people on slashdot who make it into a massive philosophical crisis.
Oh my god! They've made spins of their operating system with a feature relevant to the market and usage scenario!
Oh my god! Media center costs extra!
Oh my god! enterprise-level networking features aren't included on my mom's compaq!
This is a COMMERCIAL operating system. This is similar to the complaint that Ubuntu and Kubuntu are separate distributions because they have different software sets except they cost a different amount of money because commercial systems COST MONEY.
Let's break this down further:
Basic is for low-end bargain PC's
Home Premium is for middle-high end PC's
Business is for Business PC's
Ultimate is for enthusiasts (like beta testers and people with pony tails and translucent panels on the side of their tower-- it exists because some people will pay for it)
By offering different levels of product at a different price point, they've made their product more accessible to people who would rather pay less and just have an operating system. If you use mostly F/OSS on your windows system, you should get Basic. It's not that complicated!
Re:It's not that complicated (Score:4, Insightful)
Basic is baseline (like XP home)
Home Premium includes media center (like XP media center edition)
Business is basically XP Professional
Ultimate is XP professional + media center
So maybe they just need a name change.
Home
Home + Media Center
Business
Business + Media Center
Maybe make it easier:
Home*
Business*
* "And if you call in the next five minutes, we'll throw in Media Center for only $29.95!"
Windows 7 Compatible (Score:5, Funny)
All I care about is that my new machine is Windows 7 Compatible!
</snark>
Not to be an Apple shill... (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
New Boss Same as Old Boss (Score:5, Insightful)
Astro Turfin' (Score:4, Insightful)
(Sung to Surfing USA)
Everybody is turfing',
Cross the USA,
Everybody is turfing',
Turfing' USA.
What a non-story. Windows 7 should be the next service pack for Vista, but then they wouldn't get to charge for it.
More Crippleware from Microsoft? (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm actually pleased enough with Ubuntu and Gnome that I think I have installed my last Windows image at home, except for my work box, and that license is paid for.
MS has simply become too expensive for too little in return, and the options out there in Open Source, and even on the Mac side with it's more up front cost for hardware offer more bang for the buck with less stress and lost time spent fixing the OS.
Thanks but no thanks...
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!
Two Versions (Score:5, Funny)
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.
Monopolistic ploy: monopolize folks' time (Score:5, Insightful)
Typical Microsoft. Anyone remember Windows 3.0 real mode, protected mode, and virtual mode? At least there was some excuse for that. But it had the beneficial effect (for Microsoft) of soaking up most of organizations' development efforts just trying to target, optimize, and SQA products for three different kinds of Windows, leaving precious little bandwidth for work on, oh, UNIX or OS/2 or Mac OS.
I once worked for a Fortune 500 company where people literally used the word "port" to describe what needed to be done to keep a piece of software working under Windows, as in "We're porting the code from Windows 3.1 to Windows for Workgroups."
IBM did the same thing when they were dominant. Multiple versions of everything and small changes mostly for changes' sake. Big organizations couldn't afford to ignore IBM, and were kept very busy tracking all that stuff.
People build careers on the personal knowledge of the various changes IBM kept making, and people build careers now on their personal knowledge of the changes and variations in Microsoft products.
Lousy engineering. Great way to exploit a monopolistic position in the marketplace.
As opposed to Linux... (Score:5, Insightful)
Which only has one version and a single standardized desktop environment. Clearly multiple versions of the same OS are bad.
Clearly it's collectible. (Score:4, Funny)
Re:not the main problem (Score:5, Informative)
Except your car comes with all the features, it's just that they disable the ones you didn't pay for, and call the cops on you if you get them working by yourself.
(The Vista/7 DVD has the same content for all versions, your product key controls which version is installed. Thus if you choose to skip key entry at install time, it has to ask you which version you want to install.)
If Linux was sold like Vista/7 (Score:4, Funny)
The Mark: Um, yeah.
Salesman: Good, I can also sell you this full version of Ubuntu, all the Gnome goodness one could ask for.
The Mark: What about Amarok? Does it come with
Salesman: OOOoooh, you want Kubuntu then? Not a problem, we can sell you that too.
The Mark: But, I like the partition editor in Gn....
Salesman: Buntu Pen-Ultimate...gotcha, just a little more cash for a Gnome/KDE love fest.
The Mark: That sounds great
Salesman: Oh, you want the goodies, like an SSH server, and extra packages?
The Mark: Yeah, I um..
Salesman: Not an issue my good man, we even have financing!
The Mark: Does that include things like databases and Apache?
Salesman: Oh, no. That is just a bit more, sorry. Tell you what though, you have pluck, I like that. I'll cut you a deal.
The Mark: Really!?
Salesman: Sure, Lets see....2000 add 98 carry the 7 and ME oh my! Lets go talk to our finance department, do you prefer a 5 or 7 year loan? Things are rather tight these days I hope you have colateral like a house?
===
Epilogue
===
Friend: So the price was
The Mark: Yeah, go figure.
Friend: For 7 years?
The Mark: Releases, but they come out twice a year, so 3 and a half.
Friend: Harsh, I am just going to spend my $300 plus software costs on 7.
The Mark: You do that man.
Sera
Re:Whatever (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You do know that Windows already has a POSIX subsystem, right?
Nobody really used it.
Re:Oh stop complaining (Score:4, Interesting)
Thats all you had to say.
Re:Windows 7 non-starter (Score:5, Funny)
I, for one, won't be buying it.
If you want to cut out the middle man but still support your favorite artists, you can always download it from TPB and then donate $15 directly to Microsoft. Or go to one of their concerts and buy a t-shirt.