Login:
Password:
Lost Password?
Print this article  |  E-mail this article  |  Comment on this article

High-End Vista Comes at a High Price

By Ed Oswald, BetaNews

August 28, 2006, 4:11 PM

A glitch on the Microsoft Canada Web site has apparently let slip Microsoft's planned prices for Windows Vista, indicating the Redmond company intends to charge as much as $299 CDN for its top-of-the-line upgrade to Ultimate Edition, and $499 CDN if users wish to purchase the full version.

Canadian prices are typically higher than their American equivalents. Thus, it can be expected that Windows Vista pricing in the United States would be lower. However, it does show that Microsoft stands to make considerably more money if it can convince computer users that upgrading to higher-end versions is worthwhile.

Besides the Ultimate Edition, the site listed Windows Vista Business, the equivalent of Windows XP Professional, at $249 CDN for the upgrade and $379 CDN for the full version.

Windows Vista Home Premium, equivalent in functionality to Windows XP Media Center Edition, was priced at $199 and $299 CDN for upgrade and full version, respectively; and Windows VIsta Home Basic was listed at $129 CDN for the upgrade and $259 CDN for the full version.

To compare with current pricing, upgrade and full versions of Windows XP Home SP2 currently sell for $129 and $259 CDN respectively; and $259 and $429 for XP Professional SP2. If the price list is correct, it appears that for business users, upgrading to Vista could be cheaper, while in some cases the same cost or more expensive for consumers depending on their needs.

The pricing list has since disappeared from the Microsoft Canada site, and the company is not commenting on the matter. However, the accidental release did not stop several Microsoft watchers from opining on the company's planned price structure.

"Guess Microsoft execs weren't kidding when they talked about their plans to push Premium Vista SKUs (with premium price tags attached)," noted Microsoft pundit Mary Jo Foley wrote for Microsoft Watch on Monday.

Ed Bott, on the other hand, applauded Microsoft's moves to price Vista more strategically. "[If the prices are true], then it's mostly good news for Windows customers," he wrote on Microsoft Report. "There's no price increase for Home Basic ... Vista Business buyers will get a break with a small discount relative to XP Professional."

Windows Vista is expected to be released to manufacturing in November with consumer availability starting in January 2007, according to company statements.

Add a Comment (93 Comments)

BetaNews reserves the right to remove any comment at any time for any reason. Please keep your responses appropriate and on topic. Foul language and personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Name (required):

E-mail (required):

Enter Your Comment:

By cardog

edited Aug 29, 2006 - 3:16 PM

Yes if true kinda spendy but whair win 2000 and xp use the same programs Vista will not alow you to use office xp and 2003! Alsow others will not work ether! when you can bulid a computer cheaper then the software you required to run it, is it realy worth it?

I have tried vista my self, and it is a varry cool and usefull os. Thowe it requires a gig of ram 2-3 gig proseser and a high end graphics card you neeed a beast of a computer to run it!!!! Thanks to amd and intell we have the prosessing power to run it, but how menny people are willing to upgrade and can thay afford it? I will be excited to see how well it go's and if thay can fix the bugs this millenium. lol

Score: 0

By morriscox

posted Aug 30, 2006 - 1:24 PM

I'm running Office 2003 and 2007 on Vista right now.

Score: 0

By terminalx

edited Aug 30, 2006 - 1:24 AM

Good god man! Is that even English? First off your facts are wrong, my pc is 4 yrs old and runs vista fine. My graphics card cost 50 bucks but, I do have a 1.5 gig of ram. (which is quite cheap nowadays) My processor is 1.83 Ghz AMD..the program is still in beta as well so of course some programs are not going to work but there is a compatibility mode which would fix much of that...

Score: 0

By ZenWarrior

posted Aug 29, 2006 - 12:17 PM

PC Tool, if your notions about price and piracy were correct, Apple's iPod and iTunes would be complete failures. However, and although piracy still occurs, the industry has been more than surprised that a good price will indeed lead to more people buying and fewer people stealing.

So yes, I agree with some others. Microsoft is only encouraging piracy with its pricing. And before you reply, how about showing me the overall price elasticity coefficient for software products. (Prepare to be surprised, but any person with a brain shouldn't be.)

Score: 0

By terminalx

posted Aug 30, 2006 - 1:30 AM

Well in the eyes of the music industry Itunes is not a incredible success... there is still losses and piracy still remains high...it comes down to "I want it, I deserve it, Why should I have to pay for it?" The same with software, just because you want it does not make it ok to steal it no matter what the price...you dont see people walking into a car dealership picking up the keys and leaving because they "want it"

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Aug 29, 2006 - 2:27 PM

You're operating under a delusion.

1.) MS determines it's prices as they see fit. Saying it encourages piracy is BS. It's a cop-out. A person's moral obligation to *not* take that which they have no right to should not be be an 'IF' equation.

2.) If Piracy has dropped (and that's a *very* big if), it is only because it is getting harder to do. If you want to attempt to prove me wrong, go for it. I'd be interested to see where you're getting your data. iTunes is successful because the iPod. Nothing else.

3.) No, I won't show you "price elasticity" because it isn't relevant. MS can charge whatever the hell they please and have every right to be pissed as hell if someone chooses to take it without paying for it. It's THEIR Product. The *only* people who have a right to it are Microsoft and the folks they have given a legal license to.

Everyone is more than free to b**** about the price. They can either not pay it and go without (which would likely effect a price drop), or they can pay for it. This is how the market works. Piracy does not affect change, at least not in the way you seem to hope it will.

Piracy will only force them to lock their products down tighter and, if necessary, pass any costs for that on to legitimate users.

...anyone with a brain should know that.

Score: 0

By ZenWarrior

posted Aug 29, 2006 - 4:03 PM

Dude or Dudette, you are truly clueless. 'Tis no wonder you have so much to say about so many things. How about not refusing to use facts next time? (Yea, I know. They always get in the way.)

Score: 0

By morriscox

posted Aug 30, 2006 - 1:30 PM

Actually, it seems that PC_Tool (who is a he) has so far demonstrated more of a clue than you have. I've seen $5 apps pirated. I've even seen people try to pirate free software. Seriously. Look on some of the groups on Usenet and you'll see requests to crack some software that turns out to be freeware or public domain or open source.

Score: 0

By crashoverride

posted Aug 29, 2006 - 8:06 PM

Ok so you're saying it's ok to steal something because it's too expensive. If that's true I'll just go to my local Walmart ans steal one of those nice plasma TVs.

Score: 0

By dagi

edited Aug 30, 2006 - 3:20 AM

The price of one license should be at least US$999. Companies can afford it anyway and it would a be real price that is more equivalent to standard of US salaries. Here in Slovakia, *average* salary is US $380 and one license for Windows XP OEM costs US $140 USD. Go figure.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Aug 29, 2006 - 6:02 PM

Whatever.

AS stated, your facts wouldn't help you here. They're irrelevant. Seriously. If you can give me one good reason why price should have *anything* to do with moral justification for theft, please, do so.

There's no such thing. There *is* no moral justification. Claiming it's too expensive and that's why there are so many pirates is one of the dumbest excuses I've ever heard.

Ooh...It's sooo expensive. They must *want* me to steal it. If they didn't, they'd lower prices.

Idiots...

Score: 0

By crashoverride

posted Aug 30, 2006 - 2:43 PM

"Ooh...It's sooo expensive. They must *want* me to steal it. If they didn't, they'd lower prices.

Idiots..."

Amen brother. If they were any sharper they'd cut themselves.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Aug 30, 2006 - 3:39 PM

lmao...

I haven't heard that one in a while. I'll have to remember to use that one today.

What are you charging for a license to use that quote? ;)

Score: 0

By crashoverride

posted Aug 30, 2006 - 9:27 PM

lmao

I just couldn't resist.

Score: 0

By terminalx

posted Aug 30, 2006 - 1:20 AM

my ? is I have never bought an upgrade only a full version...if my pc crashes and I need to reinstall the os does the upgrade allow a full install or do you have to install the previous version?(sorry if this is a dumb ? just I never have bought a upgrade before)

Score: 0

By bsf

posted Aug 30, 2006 - 8:29 AM

stick the vista upgrade CD in it, and before the installation starts, it'll ask you to either stick in a win2k or xp CD or something (maybe it accepts older ones as well) if the installation does not find an OS on the harddrive. if the installation varifies your 2k or XP CD, then it goes on doing a clean install. Nothing complicated at all. Although I kind of always buy Windows, and Dreamweaver the full edition because I really appreciate those two, and it seems appropriate to give my two pense (or 299 dollars lol)

Score: 0

By Ramhound

edited Aug 29, 2006 - 12:11 PM

Ultimate Edition, isn't going to be used as a desktop OS. Its like using Windows 2003 for your desktop OS. If you have a ultra expensive computer, and use it for alot more things then your typical desktop use ( even multi-use desktop wont need it).

The only feature that people might miss is the intergrated Virtual PC software in the Ultimate Edition at this stage microsoft might even cut that, they been getting rid of alot of the "cool" ultra experience computer user features.

This is not an exact comparison, but found it on a wiki for Vista.

Windows Vista Business
Comparable to Windows XP Professional, and aimed at the business market. Does not include the Media Center features of Home Premium, but does include the IIS web server, fax support, offline files, dual physical processor support, Remote Desktop, ad-hoc P2P collaboration capabilities, and support for 128 GB of memory. Product activation is not present in this edition.

Windows Vista Ultimate
This edition combines all the features of Home Premium and Enterprise editions, and additionally comes with podcast creation support, a game performance tweaker (WinSAT), DVD ripping capabilities, and special online services for downloadable media, as well as additional customer service options. The Ultimate edition is aimed to be the most impressive edition of Vista, aimed at high-end PC users, gamers, multimedia professionals, and PC enthusiasts.

So the Vista's version of Professional really will be what most advanced users need. Incase anyone didn't notice, the Business won't require activation.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Vista

I feel that $200 to upgrade my PC to Vista which allows most people to do the following:

Support the next generation of HD's with flash memory
Support more then 8GB of memory without having to use x64
Additional features that the other "Home" versions don't have.

The only features I might miss is the following:

1) BitLocker Drive Encryption is a data protection feature integrated into Microsoft's upcoming Windows Vista operating system that provides encryption for the entire OS volume. Microsoft has indicated that BitLocker will only be included in the Enterprise and Ultimate editions of Vista.[1]

2)Additional features include a single-session version of Virtual PC

* Its not a big deal, I can get this for free via AA MSDN access.

The biggest buzz kill, and I think is a mistake is only having this feature in the most expensive version:

a game performance tweaker (WinSAT), DVD ripping capabilities

However, clearly there is a market for a Vista program to maybe more then WinSAT as a commerical product so I am not worried about it.

The good news is the following:
The three retail editions (Home Basic, Home Premium, and Ultimate) of Windows Vista will ship on the same DVD. The features of the Home Premium and Ultimate editions may be "unlocked" at any time by purchasing a one-time upgrade license through a Control Panel tool called Windows Anytime Upgrade. The Business edition will also be upgradable to Ultimate. Such licenses will be sold by Microsoft's partners and OEMs, but not directly by Microsoft.

This means, the "features" themselfs are not enabled. This might mean Microsoft can introduce a way to enable a given feature perhaps. There is of course the fact, the support code for these features will allow commerical programs to take advantage ( you import a dll into a program you have access to the same stuff as microsoft does ).

Overall $200 to upgrade to Vista is a fair deal, does it suck I can't buy a cheaper version. I suppose but at the sametime, I have a desktop can take advantage of alot of the additional features in the Vista Professional ( Bus ).

Score: 0

By Orbitration

posted Aug 29, 2006 - 11:40 AM

What a lot of people aren't going to realize until it's too late is that if they're thinking of the upgrade path, they probably won't be figuring on spending more $$ on ram and video card, and quite possibly cpu.

I installed this pig on an AMD x3400, 512 megs ram, and 9600 ati, just to see what it would be like. I'm pretty sure most people aren't going to like it if they're used to actually doing some uninterrupted work without waiting for things to happen, and then having to click OK on the OK to OK the process a couple times.

I'd give it a couple years for maturity and user friendliness improvements, personally.

On the other hand, it was pretty aswesome of Microsoft to just let you try it out fully with no strings beforehand with the new beta.
I'm sticking with XP for awhile.
Until someone ports Photoshop to Linux fully, anyway. ;)

Score: 0

By RingMaster

posted Aug 29, 2006 - 10:29 AM

VISTA ULTIMATE $379

XP Home $99
XP Pro $199

Not so bad.

Score: 0

By RingMaster

posted Aug 29, 2006 - 10:20 AM

Drop $130 from all prices listed in this article. It is canadian prices.

Score: 0

By SorenMD

posted Aug 29, 2006 - 10:13 AM

Have fun suckers...

Score: 0

By templar™

posted Aug 29, 2006 - 6:18 AM

I like Mark Gillespie's idea below (but can't seem to post this comment as a reply to his post).

Downloadable Vista a la Linux distro is good. Most of us don't look at the manual and other stuff in the box anyway.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Aug 29, 2006 - 9:50 AM

With the success of their Beta downloads, it wouldn't surprise me to see this. I just wouldn't expect the price to drop as dramatically as MG would like it to. ;)

Score: 0

By Mark Gillespie

posted Aug 29, 2006 - 4:28 AM

If MS really want to cut out piracy, they need to price their products right.

A lot of people that download dodgy XP, would be more than happy to buy a licence key for Vista from Microsoft, and download an ISO from Microsoft to burn themselves.

MS would have minimal distribtion costs, no middlemen to pay or store comissions.

I'm sure if they did a $80 Vista online "buy and burn" scheme, it would be very popular, and many people wouldn't bother with dodgy copies.

Score: 0

By dbarjim

edited Aug 29, 2006 - 1:02 PM

I know my brother, sister, Mom and girlfriend would not want a "buy and burn scheme." I think this would work for less than 10% of the people out there. Most people just use the computer for getting email or games and DON'T want to be bother with the Operating System.

How did you come up with pricing the product would cut out piracy?? Will this new price recoup MS spending on R&D ??

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Aug 29, 2006 - 9:49 AM

FFS....

Yeah. Another brilliant use of logic here.

Let's see... If they pirate our software, we'll just lower prices. Yeah...that'll work.

The problem isn't pricing. It's the pirates sense of entitlement. They couldn't, for the most part, care less what it costs.

Score: 0

By tipsyboy

edited Aug 29, 2006 - 3:59 AM

Nothing has changed since the 80s. Nothing new under the sun. What do you need new OSs for, anyway. Keep your machines as long as they run. Once you really need new hardware, get a machine with a bundled new OS.

And, hey - don't get addicted to engineered machinery, don't be a fool. A computer won't help you once you're going to die.

Score: 0

By cannie

posted Aug 29, 2006 - 3:42 AM

Old computers die hard.

Score: 0

By extremely well

posted Aug 29, 2006 - 12:30 AM

I'm willing to pay $100 for Vista Ultimate and $100 for Office 2007 Standard. Since I'm the one who decides how much to pay (otherwise I pirate it) it's really irrelevant what MS charges. Hopefully MS will take serious anti-piracy measures so I'll HAVE to pay (this will give boost to the competition which is always healthy). Still I'll find semi-legal methods such as buying a used copy, buying upgrade rights off someone, student discount etc.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Aug 29, 2006 - 9:47 AM

OMG...

You're a complete idiot. A few gems from your post that prove this beyond all doubt:

Since I'm the one who decides how much to pay

it's really irrelevant what MS charges

Hopefully MS will take serious anti-piracy measures so I'll HAVE to pay

It's amazing how you need incentive such as "serious anti-piracy measures" to be responsible.

Score: 0

By mshulman

edited Aug 28, 2006 - 11:18 PM

Maybe I'm missing something.

Windows Home = $129 upgrade, $259 full
Windows Vista Home = $129 upgrade, $259 full

Windows XP Pro SP2 = $259 upgrade, $429 full
Windows Vista Business = $249 upgrade, $379 full

I fail to see the price difference, other than saving a little on a business upgrade or a bit more on a full business copy.

You can't compare Premium since Media Center isn't sold at retail!

Edit - Ok, I guess you can argue users with Media Center PC's get a bit screwed, but I think its unlikely your average media center user will upgrade.

Score: 0

By RingMaster

edited Aug 29, 2006 - 10:10 AM

Windows XP Home SP2 = $99 full
Windows XP Pro SP2 = $199 full

These is the retail prices of XP.

Vista Ultimate will be $399 full.

(eh. dont be a baby. an OS wont have to be updated for another 5-6 years.)

They are only this high because of the bootleg copies in circulation.

Score: 0

By bourgeoisdude

edited Aug 29, 2006 - 12:09 PM

"Windows XP Home SP2 = $99 full
Windows XP Pro SP2 = $199 full

These is the retail prices of XP."

Retail price is retail price is retail price--now, you can find copies of XP full versions perhaps for those prices, but genuine FULLY MICROSOFT supported products retail for $199 and $299. That's straight from Microsoft (http://www.microsoft.com...-469c-802e-55ca8ec542d5). Those other cheaper ones more than likely have limited support or are perhaps OEM copies that come with specific name-brand PC's. (Now, I am assuming we're talking USD here? Perhaps retail price is significantly different with Canadian $...)

"Vista Ultimate will be $399 full."

For the third time...WHO GIVES A **** ABOUT ULTIMATE EDITION's PRICE??? It is not a version us mere mortals would ever need to use, and IT IS NOT a replacement for XP Pro. Geez...

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

edited Aug 29, 2006 - 9:42 AM

MCE sells OEM for about $159 right now.

http://www.mwave.com/mwa...c.hmx?scriteria=AA30340

$199 for the Vista upgrade isn't really that bad a deal. I certainly wouldn't call it getting screwed. ;)

Score: 0

By ladylust

edited Aug 29, 2006 - 12:12 AM

What are you missing? nothing.... People will complain about anything when the "drive by media" makes it sound like they are being ripped off. You are 100% right... nothing has changed, but the lemmings will scream when asked.

Score: 0

By bourgeoisdude

edited Aug 29, 2006 - 12:33 PM

Right on ladylust.

Everyone here must see the Ultimate Edition's price and somehow they believe they actually want that version.

*Sigh* nobody complained about Windows 2000 Datacenter costing over $1,100 USD and an additional $50 per seat...

Just because Vista Ultimate Edition is the biggest version doesn't mean you must have it--who here HAD to have NT 4.0 Enterprise Server or Windows 2000 Datacenter Server? Heck, does anyone in here who is complaining about the price need Office 2003 Enterprise for over $500 USD? OH, you didn't know there was an enterprise version of Office 2003? Well there's your problem--Windows Vista Ultimate Edition is only for very specific organizations, individuals, etc.--not for you or I.

Score: 0

By morriscox

posted Aug 29, 2006 - 12:31 PM

I do know about Office 2003 Professional Enterprise Edition. I get it for $20 a copy as I work for a non-profit. :D

Score: 0

By ladylust

posted Aug 28, 2006 - 11:14 PM

Good, enough of these 299.99 computers.. there starting to give them away like toasters... pump those prices up a bit.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Aug 29, 2006 - 9:39 AM

Heh...You have a point.

Score: 0

By Ramhound

posted Aug 28, 2006 - 10:16 PM

Guys $300 for Vista is not alot of money. You do understand that, you paid almost $200 for Windows XP right?

Windows XP was $300 I am sure. Like others have said, the Ultimate edition is not for the normal desktop. Why they decided on Vista Business as a version to upgrade from Windows XP Professional although it sort of makes since

Business = Proffesion

Score: 0

By RCS

posted Aug 29, 2006 - 8:36 AM

Proffesion = Professional

Score: 0

By ladylust

posted Aug 28, 2006 - 10:12 PM

Don't like it, don't buy it.. its simple.

Score: 0

By crashoverride

posted Aug 29, 2006 - 1:44 AM

Good idea.

Score: 0

By deedadee

posted Aug 28, 2006 - 10:43 PM

Okay, XP works fine. Thanks.

Score: 0

By templar™

posted Aug 28, 2006 - 9:46 PM

At prices like that, piracy will thrive...

Score: 0

By RingMaster

posted Aug 29, 2006 - 10:11 AM

Its because of piracy that prices are this high.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Aug 29, 2006 - 9:34 AM

Not because of the price. Because people are to stupid and completely lacking in personal responsibility to actually do without if they don't want to pay for it.

Price has little to do with piracy. People who feel entitled generally don't give 2 sh1ts about how much it costs others.

Score: 0

By smarterthanyou

posted Aug 29, 2006 - 1:50 AM

Windows XP SP2 and later are virtually impossible to pirate thanks to much improved product activation.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Aug 29, 2006 - 9:36 AM

Wrong.

It's still quite easy. Even to activate.

There's an OEM version of XP pro floating around for Dells. It will install (and activate) on *any* Dell system.

As for the rest? Don't install WGA, get your updates from Windiz update, and use the activation hack. Couldn't actually *be* much easier.

This isn't anything new. Anyone who *wants* to pirate a copy already knows this.

Score: 0

By Tenoq

posted Aug 28, 2006 - 9:18 PM

Hmm... that's a tough choice - a new PC or full-version Vista. I would guess at the AUD price of around $699-$799. Yep, that's the price of a new PC, even a cheap one including XP. :P

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Aug 29, 2006 - 9:32 AM

...or upgrade your current PC and pay $50 for the hard drive and $130 for the OS.

OEM pricing will be *much* cheaper than the prices listed above.

Score: 0

By bsf

edited Aug 28, 2006 - 8:56 PM

Wow, that's a lot cheaper than what I expected. I guess when it comes out, I'll get a copy of Vista Business, and for the rest of my computers, wait awhile for the SP1 or something. Guys, if you can't pay $300 for an OS, I seriously wonder how do you pay for the rest of the software. I mean, seriously, quit using computer if you are that poor lol. Photoshop or whatever... I think even Acrobat cost more than that. (Depending on the version maybe)

Score: 0

By bourgeoisdude

edited Aug 28, 2006 - 8:23 PM

Seriously, guys, try reading this article all the way through. Vista Ultimate Edition is more or less strictly for academic purposes as it combines the consumer, small business, workstation, and enterprise client software into one beast. That's so you can play games, make movies, AutoCAD, and connect to multiple print servers simultaneously...and who does all of this?

Vista Business is the price you guys should be examining. Quit calling Microsoft idiots and start reading articles rather than skimming (or misunderstanding, if somehow you actually read the article and still offered your opinions.)

Vista Home Basic is for the "average consumer", geniuses--ULTIMATE EDITION is not. The Home Basic version will be cheaper than XP Home was when it was initially released, this is the best news for consumers. Again, quoting the article for those linxu lovers who can't read (or see that I purposely misspelled linux):

"[If the prices are true], then it's mostly good news for Windows customers," he wrote on Microsoft Report. "There's no price increase for Home Basic ... Vista Business buyers will get a break with a small discount relative to XP Professional."

(Note: I am directing the comment towards those saying "the average consumer", "linux will beat microsoft hahaha", and simalar stupid off-topic and completely innaccurate statements).

Score: 0

By Trillinon

posted Aug 29, 2006 - 2:23 AM

Windows pricing has been rediculous for a long time, and the versioning is even worse.

It started with XP, with Home and Pro. The difference between the two is minimal from an end user standpoint, except when you need it, and certainly isn't worth the $100 difference. When it comes to Vista, there is no doubt in my mind that I'd want the Ultimate Edition, because it include everything, and being technically savy I know that any other version has simply been stripped of features, and is now functionally retarded.

Secondly, my operating system should not cost more than any other component in my computer, period. As a mid range gamer, and a bit of a hardware enthusiest, I readily spend $200 or more on a piece of hardware. I recognize the importance of my operating system in the mix, and am willing to pay that $200 for a 12 cent disk with infinately duplicatable data on it. There are development costs involved.

But I cannot peacfully accept the idea of being asked to spend more than that on a retarded version of the software I want. Especially when I know that said software will be sold millions of times, readily paying for its own development.

So, if I had my way, there would only be one version of Vista, and it would be $200. There would be no "upgrade edition" to make reformatting difficult. Just one, simple box.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Aug 29, 2006 - 9:30 AM

There would be no "upgrade edition" to make reformatting difficult

I actually made it through without laughing too hard up until this point...

What does an upgrade edition have to do with formatting? Format the drive, put the disc in, start the install and have your XP CD handy when it asks for it.

*shakes head*

While you may *want* the UE, I'd really *love* to hear just one reason why you would *need* it. Even the most hardcore gamer is not going to benefit from UE. VHP will do just fine.

Score: 0

By smarterthanyou

posted Aug 29, 2006 - 1:55 AM

The "average user" does a lot more than browsing the web and checking their e-mail on their computer. Most people who have a computer also do things like watching streaming video, light gaming, watching DVD's, and DVD burning. Windows Vista Home Premium will probably be the most commonly used version of Vista.

Score: 0

By bourgeoisdude

posted Aug 29, 2006 - 12:40 PM

"Most people who have a computer also do things like watching streaming video, light gaming, watching DVD's, and DVD burning."

Vista Home Basic can do these things--now, perhaps it may need some codecs, DVD burning software, etc., but since most PCs will come with software, DVD drives have a DVD player software CD if purchased from a store, as well as burners coming with Nero/Sonic/NTI software.

As far as Vista Home Premium being the most popular? Can't disagree with you on that, but I'm not sure of that either.

Score: 0

By TurningWorm

posted Aug 28, 2006 - 8:16 PM

I have XP Pro on my main machine, but still use Win2000 quite happily on my other two. I sat out XP for five years, I think I can take a pass on Vista as well. I really don't know what people are thinking. Between this and the $700 PS3, I wonder how much disposable income they think the average consumer is going to have in the next few years?

Score: 0

By imafurby

posted Aug 28, 2006 - 8:25 PM

Yep, I agree. I think Win 2K is still the all-round best version for absence of useless junk, ease of set-up and general user - friendliness.

Score: 0

By bourgeoisdude

posted Aug 28, 2006 - 9:06 PM

"Yep, I agree. I think Win 2K is still the all-round best version for absence of useless junk, ease of set-up and general user - friendliness."

I will admit--Windows 2000 is one of the most solid operating systems Microsoft has ever made. They spent 4 years on it is one of the big reasons. That being said, perhaps Vista has had enough work on it to be stable out-of-box like win2k for a change. I'll still probably wait till SP1 before using it as my *primary* OS, however.

I also agree that if XP Pro works for you, don't waste money on Vista yet. Vista is not required for anything yet by any means, and Windows XP will be fully supported for at least another year (and critical hotfixes/security/etc. for another two years at least--that's worst-case scenario).

Boils down to "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." If you want DirectX 10, you'll need Vista. Other Vista-only features, buy the thing. If DirectX 9.0c works for ya, stick with Windows XP.

Score: 0

By morriscox

posted Aug 29, 2006 - 11:16 AM

I can't (and won't) help it. "If it ain't broke, it doesn't have enough features."

Score: 0

By cranbers

posted Aug 28, 2006 - 7:49 PM

That is very expensive, but being a monopoly why would they sell it for any cheaper? I mean imaigne what kind of costs the corporate users are looking at. Think any of them will be upgrading? I think not, I have a feeling linux will be getting a huge market share push in the next few years.

As for the average consumer, it will be forced upon them by oem's and hype. I am sure it will be an improvement. But all the latest features are available to windows xp users. The only thing that isn't would be the 3d interface and the lovely annoying security popup which you can get with zone alarm firewall. Ok directx 10 might be something 5 years down the road but every game will be back words compatible. I can't imagine game vendors alienating a very large percentage of users by using directx 10.

Everything else is just childs play. Linux will gain some ground soon hopefully or mac os10 will be relased for all pc's at least we should all hope.

Score: 0

By Joe Dirt

posted Aug 28, 2006 - 7:22 PM

And they wonder why Piracy goes on.

Yet another reason I will not be buying Vista. I'll stick to Windows XP Pro and Slackware Linux.

Idiots.

Score: 0

By Ramhound

posted Aug 28, 2006 - 7:01 PM

Windows XP Professional, meanwhile, can be upgraded only to the Business and Ultimate editions of Windows Vista. This is due to features built into XP Pro not being added to the Home Basic and Home Premium SKUs of Vista.

This is from another article. It went on to say ANY version can be used if your using Windows XP Home ( sort of sucks that they didn't make a version equal to Windows XP Professional considering those uses paid $100 more ).

Just search for "Vista" if you want to read the article yourself.

Score: 0

By RCS

posted Aug 29, 2006 - 8:38 AM

Vista Business is the equivalent of XP Pro

Score: 0

By jellyfish

edited Aug 28, 2006 - 6:58 PM

with this price, i can't afford to upgrade all my pc's at home. looks like i'll have to look for alternate OS or wait for a copy on p2p :p

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Aug 29, 2006 - 9:24 AM

with this price, i can't afford to upgrade all my pc's at home.

Then don't.

Since when is Vista a requirement? It's not mandated by anyone.

Score: 0

By zridling

posted Aug 28, 2006 - 6:41 PM

Raise your hands if you're planning on sitting out Vista altogether and waiting for its successor, which is bound to come by late 2009!

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Aug 29, 2006 - 9:22 AM

Vienna won't be out till 2012, at least.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_%22Vienna%22

Score: 0

By zridling

posted Aug 30, 2006 - 12:31 AM

Microsoft won't wait another six years to upgrade their OS. They've already said they plan Vista's successor by Jan.'09. Their stock price took an extended hit by sticking with XP this long and they've vowed never to let that happen again, going back to a maximum of 3-year OS upgrades. Still, I'll wait until I get a 64-bit system so I don't have to buy two licenses. XP-SP2 serves me well and will continue to run everything for many years.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

edited Aug 30, 2006 - 8:57 AM

They've already said they plan Vista's successor by Jan.'09.

You're one of the biggest MS detractors on this site and you're going to tell me *you* believe them when they say this?

Give me a break, *I* don't even believe it.

Waiting for the 64-bit is probably a good idea. Why waste the money?

Score: 0

By giwo

posted Aug 28, 2006 - 6:34 PM

Heavy-handed and intrusive "Genuine Advantage" software, a track record of anti-consumer policies, and now a $500.00 price tag.

Albeit that number is a little blown out of proportion, I'm sure most consumers won't see that kind of price, but regardless, $100.00 is an expensive piece of home software - any home software - in my mind.

And an ever-growing non-Windows userbase, along with excellent new reasons to switch.

I really don't see moving to Vista from XP, but with my next computer purchase, I wonder if I'll use Microsoft at all...

Score: 0

By kashin

posted Aug 28, 2006 - 6:30 PM

..and they wonder why piracy is so rampant. I'm Canadian, and I sure as hell can't afford $300 just to upgrade my operating system. That's assuming it's even possible to upgrade from the Home (OEM?) Edition of Windows XP which came with my PC.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Aug 29, 2006 - 9:21 AM

and I sure as hell can't afford $300 just to upgrade my operating system.

Then don't.

*gasp*

You are under no obligation to upgrade. Your next PC will come with it installed anyway. Using the price of the OS as an excuse to pirate is just that an excuse...and a lame one at that.

Score: 0

By rla0001

posted Aug 28, 2006 - 5:42 PM

Doesn't it seem odd that everytime Microsoft gets fined for screwing comsumers...the comsumers get screwed back *laughs.

The only way to beat this scenario is to become a lawyer and get your cut up front! sheesh!

Score: 0

By Johnbald01

posted Aug 28, 2006 - 5:24 PM

It may be a free market based upon Capitalism etc and blah blah, but the price of Microsoft products in relationship to their security problems, crashing, and no product warranty makes one just a bit tight at the jaws. When is it that the consumer boycotts lousy products and or files class action suit so that warranty of software products is part of the requirements of their OS. If It does not work right they must fix it at no cost to the consumer.Than they can charge a high price and I would feel I am getting my values worth.

Score: 0

By dhjdhj

posted Aug 28, 2006 - 5:13 PM

The "Post Reply" links have extra slashes in them which is causing a "not found" URL. I had to reedit the URL manually to fix it.

BetaNews people - please fix

(Running Firefox)

Score: 0

By Noremacam

posted Aug 28, 2006 - 5:28 PM

I find it funny that the gaming system will cost less than the operating system.

Score: 0

By bourgeoisdude

posted Aug 28, 2006 - 5:02 PM

Vista Ultimate Edition is NOT THE "REPLACEMENT" for XP PRO, people. Ultimate Edition is Vista basic, Vista Business, AND Vista Premium. Read the article; let me quote it:

"Besides the Ultimate Edition, the site listed Windows Vista Business, the equivalent of Windows XP Professional, at $249 CDN for the upgrade and $379 CDN for the full version."

Vista UE is an elite package and IMO is completely unnecessary for 99.99% of the world.

Score: 0

By The Man

edited Aug 28, 2006 - 5:21 PM

let's ballpark a nice low sales total here.
figure they can sell at least 1 million copies in the first year.
$250 for the average copy.
this had better perform like a $250,000,000 OS!
yah right eh?
prolly cost them twice that to buy all the patents for it.
damn, i love to hate MS!
:-p

-edit- odd...posted itself as reply to the wrong person.
was supposed to be under "yleclerc"

Score: 0

By dhjdhj

posted Aug 28, 2006 - 5:12 PM

As far as I can tell, Vista itself seems unnecessary for 99.99% of the world.

Having been a Windows user (and developer) since the DOS days, I can't tell you how much of a pleasure it has been after switching to Mac OS X

Score: 0

By nick_greiner

posted Aug 28, 2006 - 4:58 PM

I already read that users of MediaCenter Edition 2005XPmay only buy upgrade for Vista Ultimate or Vista Home Premium and users of Win XP Pro can upgrade to Vista Ultimate or Vista Business editon. Therefore, is it no surprize new computers over last year have only been running XP Media Center Edition, so upgraders will be forced to only beable to install Vista Ultimate Edition because than, according to Microsoft, "users will notwant to downgrade services."

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Aug 29, 2006 - 9:18 AM

Vista Home Premium will be the most likely upgrade path.

..at least, for all those who don't have money coming out of their ears.

Vista ultimate (as stated, even by MS) is only targeted at the high-end enthusiasts. *Not* the average home user.

Score: 0

By citizen420

posted Aug 28, 2006 - 4:47 PM

For most home users the pricetag will still just be the cost of the bandwidth or blank media.

Anyone with any sense would rather invest the $499CDN in hardware.

The only prob will be the bluddy OEM's packaging the s***.

Score: 0

By The Man

posted Aug 28, 2006 - 5:09 PM

that's BLOODY OEM'S,
once again, BLOODY OEM'S packaging the $hit!
:-)

Score: 0

By sjc001

posted Aug 28, 2006 - 6:24 PM

A full copy of XP Home SP2 OEM costs around $159 CAN.

Score: 0

By citizen420

posted Aug 29, 2006 - 1:49 AM

Another reason i hate em!!!! who in their right mind uses home edition, my modified version of server 2003 is soooo mutch better as a workstation OS:)))

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Aug 29, 2006 - 9:16 AM

server 2003 is soooo mutch better as a workstation OS:)))

Yeah...the average user would get *so* much more use on their desktop out of a *server* OS.

Score: 0

By xyzcb1

posted Aug 28, 2006 - 4:30 PM

"To compare with current pricing, upgrade and full versions of Windows XP Home SP2 currently sell for $129 and $259 CDN respectively; and $259 and $429 for XP Professional SP2."

If XP Pro full sell for $429 CDN, then $499 CDN for Vista sound right.

Score: 0

By yleclerc

posted Aug 28, 2006 - 4:26 PM

How many Vistas would MS expect to sell? It seems that they are "shooting" themselves. The higher the price, the less they will sell.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Aug 29, 2006 - 9:14 AM

Higher price?

Duh?

New product. Much higher? Not really.

Home costs $129. What most folks will use (Vista Premium) will cost $199. That's a whopping $70. We're not talking a huge increase here, and it will very likely be available for much less when purchased with hardware.

Of course, this is all totally irrelevant as 90% of folks who upgrade will not even *know* the cost of the OS since it will come with the computer they are upgrading to...

Score: 0

By The MAZZTer

edited Aug 28, 2006 - 5:24 PM

Except that most users don't think they have much of a choice... although with Mactels now that perception may be changing.

Hopefully Linux will become more user-friendly too. It should be only a matter of time before Microsoft finally sees some competition and is forced to rethink its prices.

For the moment most users won't see prices... hardware vendors will continue to bundle the least expensive version of the latest Windows ("Look, you get Windows Vista! [smallfont]Very Very Basic Edition[/smallfont]") and obscure the price in with the hardware.

Side Note:
CDN$299 ~= US$270
CDN$499 ~= US$450

I just got $1000 for a job, so I COULD afford Vista Ultimate, but I think I'll spend LESS for a Nintendo Wii instead.

Score: 0

By PC Rat

edited Aug 28, 2006 - 4:39 PM

...

"It seems that
they are 'shooting'
themselves"

...

Microsoft has shot itself so many times
in the foot, it don't have feet anymore !

...

The Computer Rodent

...

Score: 0

Nov 21 - 6:51 PM ET Coalition urges better laws for e-mail and cell phone privacy

Nov 21 - 6:42 PM ET How is Internet advertising faring in this bad economy?

Nov 21 - 6:15 PM ET From out of the Amazon Cloud, an AWS winner emerges

Nov 21 - 5:20 PM ET Mufin music finder enters public beta, adds widgets

Nov 21 - 5:01 PM ET Google launches its SearchWiki semantics plug-in

Nov 21 - 4:57 PM ET Asus previews a slimmer, less costly Eee PC

Nov 21 - 4:32 PM ET New Adobe Media Player ushers in AIR 1.5

Nov 21 - 2:11 PM ET AT&T to add Pantech's low-cost C630 phone to 3G lineup

Nov 21 - 1:11 PM ET iPhone gets firmware 2.2 update

Nov 21 - 11:51 AM ET The Dell surprise: Higher earnings on lower revenue