Windows 7 pricing

JDMurray

From: Microsoft sets Windows 7 pricing, upgrade programs - CNN.com

When boxed copies of Windows 7 go on sale on October 22, Microsoft plans to charge $119 for Home Premium, $199 for Professional, and $219 for Ultimate. These prices are to upgrade from an existing license of Windows XP or Vista.

The non-upgrade price of Windows 7 will be $199 for Home Premium, $299 for Professional, and $319 for Ultimate.

From Friday, June 25 through July 11, consumers in the U.S. will be able to buy an upgrade copy of Windows 7 Home premium for $49, or Windows 7 Professional for $99. The upgrade will be available at Amazon, Best Buy, Microsoft's own store, Office Depot, OfficeMax, Costco, Staples, Wal-Mart and several other retailers.

Forsaken_GA

In contrast, Apple will be charging 30 bucks to upgrade to Snow Leopard.

I think Microsoft is on absolute crack with those pricing points.

djhss68

Absolutely ridiculous. I won't be upgrading. I already have Vista. Really, what is the difference between the 2.

tiersten

Forsaken_GA wrote: »

In contrast, Apple will be charging 30 bucks to upgrade to Snow Leopard.

I think Microsoft is on absolute crack with those pricing points.

You didn't just buy a Microsoft branded PC and Windows doesn't have DRM to stop you running it on a non Microsoft branded PC. Apple make their money from selling hardware.

tiersten

djhss68 wrote: »

Absolutely ridiculous. I won't be upgrading. I already have Vista. Really, what is the difference between the 2.

Quite a bit actually. Windows 7 is what Vista should have been.

Anyway, if you want Windows 7 then buy the technet sub...

dynamik

OEM por favor? There's a qualifying 4MB SIMM I've been holding off on getting until the release...

Forsaken_GA wrote: »

In contrast, Apple will be charging 30 bucks to upgrade to Snow Leopard.

I think Microsoft is on absolute crack with those pricing points.

I guess it depends on what you get. I've seen Mac guys call Snow Leopard a service pack and say it should be free...

Jordus

Forsaken_GA wrote: »

In contrast, Apple will be charging 30 bucks to upgrade to Snow Leopard.

I think Microsoft is on absolute crack with those pricing points.

There is no "contrast" because Apple is a hardware company, through and through.

They mark up the same hardware we all buy anyway and pretend its superior.

Besides, comparing the true features and abilities of Windows vs. OSX leaves Apple in the dust every time.

Lets also not forget that 99% of consumers buy windows bundled with a computer, which means they pay 30-60$ for the entire full license.

excalibur1814

djhss68 wrote: »

Absolutely ridiculous. I won't be upgrading. I already have Vista. Really, what is the difference between the 2.

You might as well have stuck with Windows XP, or Windows 2000, or WIn98. Things move forward and like it or not, we'll all probably be on Win7 eventually. I recall the time where I refused to move from Win200 to XP as there wasn't any point at all apart from the flashy green bar at the bottom. Opps, how wrong could I have been?

From an admin point of view, I look forward to the additional gpo changes with regards to allowed applications

Lee H

They've got a sweet thing goin on according to BBC UK, if you buy a PC now you can get a free upgrade to Windows 7, upgrade only available in US so a full install disk is required for Europe

Quote "Anyone buying a new PC between now and then - running Windows Vista Home Premium, Business or Ultimate - will get the chance to upgrade the operating system on it, at no cost, to Windows 7."

BBC NEWS | Technology | Windows 7 pricing gets unveiled

tiersten

Lee H wrote: »

They've got a sweet thing goin on according to BBC UK, if you buy a PC now you can get a free upgrade to Windows 7, upgrade only available in US so a full install disk is required for Europe

Quote "Anyone buying a new PC between now and then - running Windows Vista Home Premium, Business or Ultimate - will get the chance to upgrade the operating system on it, at no cost, to Windows 7."

They always do that. If you bought an XP PC just before Vista came out, you'd be entitled to a copy of Vista for free. I got a free copy of full install Vista for my VAIO because of this.

It isn't "free" because you've just bought the XP OEM license but they're allowing you to to upgrade.

Forsaken_GA

tiersten wrote: »

You didn't just buy a Microsoft branded PC and Windows doesn't have DRM to stop you running it on a non Microsoft branded PC. Apple make their money from selling hardware.

You should check out what folks are doing with the Dell Mini's and MSI Winds then There's no DRM. They just use EFI, which screws with some stuff, but can be gotten around, and the OS is very chipset dependant.

Believe it or not, Apple is in the software business as well, and they make some of the best in the industry for what it is. (Aperture, Final Cut as primary examples).

The entire reason I switched to the Mac line is because of Mac OSX, not because of their hardware, so the software counts for more than you think. Everyone thinks that the OS is a commodity that comes with the computer, and that's true to a point... until the next version comes out. Then your choices are either buy a new computer or buy the upgrade, so pricing points start to matter.

Apple knows their market. Most folks who buy Macs use them for a bit, so the reasonable pricing is something that's nice to see.

msteinhilber

Forsaken_GA wrote: »

In contrast, Apple will be charging 30 bucks to upgrade to Snow Leopard.

I think Microsoft is on absolute crack with those pricing points.

And apple makes up for it by charging for updates for devices like the Ipod Touch (I had a Zune for a number of years prior, never had to pay for an upgrade for it).

tiersten

Forsaken_GA wrote: »

There's no DRM. They just use EFI, which screws with some stuff, but can be gotten around, and the OS is very chipset dependant.

Whilst there isn't any specific DRM technologies like the TPM chip in the original developer units, Apple do try to stop people from running it on non Apple hardware.

Forsaken_GA wrote: »

Believe it or not, Apple is in the software business as well, and they make some of the best in the industry for what it is. (Aperture, Final Cut as primary examples).

Yes but their main profit is in the hardware they sell. Microsoft also make mice and keyboards. Does this make them a hardware company?

Forsaken_GA wrote: »

Apple knows their market. Most folks who buy Macs use them for a bit, so the reasonable pricing is something that's nice to see.

Apple have already made a significant profit from you on the hardware. They don't need to charge anything major for OSX since they've already got their cut.

Forsaken_GA

tiersten wrote: »

Whilst there isn't any specific DRM technologies like the TPM chip in the original developer units, Apple do try to stop people from running it on non Apple hardware.

Well they try to stop other people making a profit off it, but I actually think they're smart in their approach. By only officially supporting their own hardware, they only have to code for and maintain compatibility with a small group of hardware. Tends to result in a better product. It's essentially the same approach as a console maker.

Yes but their main profit is in the hardware they sell. Microsoft also make mice and keyboards. Does this make them a hardware company?

Oh there's no denying that they enjoy their biggest profit margins from their hardware sales, they're alot like Cisco in that regard. The problem is you keep trying to put them in the same vein as a company like Dell, when that's not quite the entire story. They are a hardware company. They're also a software company. Their software is a major selling point for their hardware. You don't think that folks who fork out the cash for Apple hardware do it just to install Windows, do you?

Apple have already made a significant profit from you on the hardware. They don't need to charge anything major for OSX since they've already got their cut.

Given how long I'm likely to use it, it's worth it. I tend to upgrade on a 5 year cycle. Most of the folks I know change laptops every couple of years, if not every year, and it's become more prolific as pc-based computers keep slipping lower and lower in price. I'd be willing to bet that, over the course of the lifetime that I use my Mac, most people will pay more for laptops than I paid for the Mac.

tiersten

Forsaken_GA wrote: »

Oh there's no denying that they enjoy their biggest profit margins from their hardware sales, they're alot like Cisco in that regard. The problem is you keep trying to put them in the same vein as a company like Dell, when that's not quite the entire story. They are a hardware company. They're also a software company. Their software is a major selling point for their hardware.

When did I say they were like Dell? I just said that expecting Microsoft to be able to charge $30 for Windows 7 is unrealistic when you consider that Apple have already made a significant profit from you already on the hardware.

Forsaken_GA wrote: »

You don't think that folks who fork out the cash for Apple hardware do it just to install Windows, do you?

Actually, I do know a few people that spend most of their time in Windows using Boot Camp. They just prefer the aesthetics of Apple hardware and are willing to pay the for it.

Forsaken_GA wrote: »

Given how long I'm likely to use it, it's worth it. I tend to upgrade on a 5 year cycle. Most of the folks I know change laptops every couple of years, if not every year, and it's become more prolific as pc-based computers keep slipping lower and lower in price. I'd be willing to bet that, over the course of the lifetime that I use my Mac, most people will pay more for laptops than I paid for the Mac.

How does people changing their laptops often have any bearing on you preferring a Mac? There are people who buy the latest greatest Macbook Pro every time there is a new model.

Snow Leopard has dropped support for PowerPC CPUs. The G5 was still being sold in 2006 which is less than 5 years ago.

Forsaken_GA

tiersten wrote: »

When did I say they were like Dell? I just said that expecting Microsoft to be able to charge $30 for Windows 7 is unrealistic when you consider that Apple have already made a significant profit from you already on the hardware.

Really? Because given the size of the Microsoft userbase, I think it's quite realistic. If every windows user paid them $30-50 bucks to upgrade to Windows 7 (and I think they'd find folks alot more willing to do so at that price point) they'd make a ton of money.

Instead, I'm willing to bet that most consumers will wait until they buy a new computer that has it pre-installed to upgrade to Windows 7. I have no idea what corporate America is going to do in terms of Windows 7 adoption.

Actually, I do know a few people that spend most of their time in Windows using Boot Camp. They just prefer the aesthetics of Apple hardware and are willing to pay the for it.

Well sure, I know a few guys who do the same, and a few other guys who wipe MacOS entirely and install Ubuntu instead. I didn't say that there were no people at all that who just bought Mac for the hardware and pretend it's like buying a BMW. But I'd be willing to put good money on a bet that the majority of people who buy Mac hardware are running OSX as the primary OS on that hardware.

How does people changing their laptops often have any bearing on you preferring a Mac? There are people who buy the latest greatest Macbook Pro every time there is a new model.

It doesn't, don't put words in my mouth. You were making a point about Apple making a big profit on their hardware. And sure, they do up front, but I'd be willing to bet that for some of their product lines, Dell makes just as much, if not more, as Apple in a given time period, despite the fact that their hardware is 'cheaper', just from folks upgrading on a more regular basis. Of course there are going to be folks who upgrade to the newest Mac every time one is released. And there will be Dell users who will treat their laptops as cherished family heirlooms and be using them for far too long. I'm assuming that we're all intelligent enough to understand that there's no such thing as an absolute when it comes to sales and marketing, and that we all understand the difference between the exception and the rule.

Snow Leopard has dropped support for PowerPC CPUs. The G5 was still being sold in 2006 which is less than 5 years ago.

I honestly don't have a problem with them dropping support for legacy hardware. Being tied to the past is one of the things Microsoft has suffered from.

msteinhilber

This thread should just remain what it was originally about - Windows 7 pricing, and not another silly Apple is great MS is terrible threads, there are enough of those on the Internet. Besides, everybody knows you cannot win or reach any sort of common ground between Mac fan's and Windows fan's anyways.

JDMurray

Amazing how this thread immediately turned into an Apple/Microsoft flamewar.


It's apples and oranges, people. The pricing on W7 and Snow Leopard will not cause anyone to crossover from OS X to W7 or visa versa. If you don't already own Apple OS X hardware (like me) then Snow Leopard is a very expensive upgrade for you. If you don't own Vista-capable PC hardware then W7 is a significant--albeit smaller--expense too.

The advice is simple:

• If you are happy with Leopard then stay with Apple and upgrade to Snow Leopard.
• If you are getting a new PC then get Windows 7.
• If you are happy with Vista then stay with it.
• If you don't want to give up your 3+ year old PC hardware then stay with XP.
• Tired of both Apple and Microsoft taking your money? Try Linux!!

Forsaken_GA

Well my original point remains - Microsoft is on crack with these price points.

I could almost buy a netbook with Windows already installed on it for the prices they want!

Forsaken_GA

JDMurray wrote: »

Amazing how this thread immediately turned into an Apple/Microsoft flamewar.

Well I could have gone the Linux route and pointed out that Ubuntu and upgrades are free, but Apple vs. Microsoft tends to be more fun

tiersten

Forsaken_GA wrote: »

Really? Because given the size of the Microsoft userbase, I think it's quite realistic. If every windows user paid them $30-50 bucks to upgrade to Windows 7 (and I think they'd find folks alot more willing to do so at that price point) they'd make a ton of money.

Maybe but you can't justify it by saying that because Apple can sell the upgrade for $30, so should Microsoft. If Apple didn't have the profit from the hardware, the price of an OSX upgrade would be significantly more.

Forsaken_GA wrote: »

Instead, I'm willing to bet that most consumers will wait until they buy a new computer that has it pre-installed to upgrade to Windows 7.

As previously mentioned, most users won't upgrade. They won't see the point or have the ability. Their "upgrade" will be buying a new PC at some point with OEM Windows 7 which ends up to be around $30-$60 for the license.

Forsaken_GA wrote: »

It doesn't, don't put words in my mouth.

You said that you upgrade on 5 year cycle. You then said that people change their PC laptops every couple of years. Are they buying a new PC because they want the latest OS or because its just generally slow and they want a faster one? Maybe they just want something new?

You're claiming that I'm comparing Dell to Apple. When have I mentioned Dell or any other major PC manufacturer? You're the one that is comparing Dell to Apple in a Microsoft vs Apple comparison. Apple is a hardware + software company. Dell is a hardware company. Microsoft is a software company.

Forsaken_GA wrote: »

You were making a point about Apple making a big profit on their hardware. And sure, they do up front, but I'd be willing to bet that for some of their product lines, Dell makes just as much, if not more, as Apple in a given time period, despite the fact that their hardware is 'cheaper', just from folks upgrading on a more regular basis.

Dell isn't Microsoft. Dell gets the profit from the hardware. Microsoft get the OEM license fee when somebody buys a Dell with Windows installed.

Apple get the profit from the hardware and the profit from the Snow Leopard upgrades.

Profit(Mac Hardware) + Profit(Snow Leopard for $30) > Profit(Windows 7 for $30)

Forsaken_GA wrote: »

I honestly don't have a problem with them dropping support for legacy hardware. Being tied to the past is one of the things Microsoft has suffered from.

People scream murder every single time Microsoft tries to drop legacy support. The new Windows 7 Virtual XP mode will help with removing legacy baggage.

tiersten

msteinhilber wrote: »

This thread should just remain what it was originally about - Windows 7 pricing

At the end of the day, who actually goes out and buys a retail boxed copy of Windows anyway? Whether it is an upgrade or full install version.

Its a moot point for most people on techexams as well. If want Windows 7 then there are cheaper legal methods of getting it. If you pay for the technet sub, you'd get Windows 7 and a bunch of other software for a pretty good price.

msteinhilber wrote: »

Apple is great MS is terrible threads, there are enough of those on the Internet. Besides, everybody knows you cannot win or reach any sort of common ground between Mac fan's and Windows fan's anyways.

I've actually got both and I think both are fine *shrug*

msteinhilber

Forsaken_GA wrote: »

Well my original point remains - Microsoft is on crack with these price points.

Your opinion is noted. Here's how things work in the real world though. Businesses make money. Microsoft has found that the price points they select work well for them and generate nice profits. Taking everything else away that people might like or dislike about Microsoft's products, services, business practices, etc - what you are left with is a company that is capable of selling products in significant volume at the price points they select. Apple has surely done market research and found what they are able to charge for their software given what they already charge for the hardware - it's always a calculated decision. Do you really think Apple charges what they do for their OS because they don't want to make more? Not at all, they likely feel they have priced their product in the sweet spot for them - if they thought they could make more on it I am sure they would.

JDMurray

The pre-order for the Windows 7 Pro and Home Premium upgrades with the discount pricing have now appeared at amazon.com and will ship on October 22, 2009. This offer is good until July 11, 2009 (July 5 in Japan).

More on Windows 7 pricing

I'm hoping that I can downgrade my Windows 7 Ultimate RC to the Windows 7 Pro upgrade without performing a complete re-installation, or having Windows Vista or XP be installed on the hard drive.

Windows: Windows 7 Upgrade Option Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

tiersten

JDMurray wrote: »

I'm hoping that I can downgrade my Windows 7 Ultimate RC to the Windows 7 Pro upgrade without performing a complete re-installation, or having Windows Vista or XP be installed on the hard drive.

Microsoft didn't officially support the beta -> RC upgrade because they don't feel it is worth spending time & money on testing it. The RC -> retail upgrade will probably be similar. I'll just have to reinstall my laptop which is currently running the RC

I'll probably end up with Pro as well. The only feature from Enterprise/Ultimate that I'd quite like is the VHD booting part. The other extras I don't need or don't want.

JDMurray

The RC was build 7100 and the RTM is said to be build 9260. That's quite a leap. I know several people that have Windows 7 RC on production systems and will be rather upset if a complete reinstallation is necessary. MS could probably provide a downgrade installation path from the RC if they wanted to. Either way, I'm gonna buy two copies of W7 Pro.

tiersten

JDMurray wrote: »

The RC was build 7100 and the RTM is said to be build 9260. That's quite a leap.

Microsoft do fiddle the build numbers so it might not be a quite as big difference.

JDMurray wrote: »

I know several people that have Windows 7 RC on production systems and will be rather upset if a complete reinstallation is necessary.

Well... Sounds harsh but it is a RC and still in testing. Use it on production systems at your own risk and all that!

JDMurray wrote: »

MS could probably provide a downgrade installation path from the RC if they wanted to.

Probably. Not sure they will though. At least not officially. You can probably do a similar hack to the configuration files to allow an upgrade from 7100 -> 9260.

JDMurray wrote: »

Either way, I'm gonna buy two copies of W7 Pro.

Ditto

tiersten

JDMurray wrote: »

I know several people that have Windows 7 RC on production systems and will be rather upset if a complete reinstallation is necessary. MS could probably provide a downgrade installation path from the RC if they wanted to.

You can sorta upgrade from RC to retail.. The contents of the Windows directory won't be transferred over.