It's official:

[Rob Oplawar]

Windows Vista shot Microsoft in the chest; to avoid the slow painful death it would seem it's using Windows 7 as the bullet to the head.

http://www.engadget.com/2009/02/03/windows-7-skus-announced-yes-your-worst-nightmare-has-come-to/2

It's truly idiotic. One part in particular sticks out in my mind as pure retardation:


Windows 7 Starter

Available worldwide to OEMs on new PCs
Missing Aero UI tweaks
Limited to 3 simultaneous applications



Limited to 3 simultaneous applications

Limited to 3 simultaneous applications

:FACEPALM:

I kinda like XP, and I was kinda hoping that Windows would make a comeback, as competition is always good. But hey, on the bright side, the massive failure that is to be Windows 7 will make more room for Linux. :)

[Donut]

what the fuck. there isnt even a setting to disable that or change the number?

[Hotrod]

Well that's fucking retarded, who in the hell would want to use Starter?

[thehoodedsmack]

What-what-WHAT?!?! :gonk:

Who makes these decisions?

[Rob Oplawar]

My guess is it's the "trial version." After all, Microsoft would never be so stupid as to release good software for free. We've already seen, free open-source is not at all financially viable.
Ahem.

fake e:

Microsoft would never be so stupid as to release good software for free.ftfm

[MetKiller Joe]

You mean I can't run 3 things at once on this thing?


http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/401/whathu0.jpg

[flibitijibibo]

lolwut

Why don't they just say it. Windows 7: Trial would be a good start, but "Windows 7: Come the fuck on, spend the extra $50 to get an operating system with a decent lifespan" could do it too. Though, "3 simultaneous applications at once" is shorter anyway. Yeah, Windows 7: Trial is fine.

[jcap]

It was the same with Windows Vista.

Real mess that was, huh? Totally confusing choosing between Home Premium and Ultimate when buying a computer, right?

It's not even for sale in the US or other developed technology markets.

And if you think people will switch to Linux over getting the next version of Windows with their new computer, then you're an idiot. Even if Linux was an option, a basic user would never know where to start. Windows doesn't need a "comeback." They've never fallen behind. Vista-haters are just fucking full of themselves and are the same idiotic crowd that complained about UAC being in Vista, and is now complaining that Windows 7 is less secure without a strict UAC.

[legionaire45]

They are only selling Windows XP/Vista/7 Starter in places where piracy is so common that you can buy illegal copies of Vista Ultimate for $20 off the street. They've had this set up for years now.

Home Basic and Enterprise are redundant. Prices for all versions should be $100 cheaper across the board. Features of Ultimate should be integrated into Pro.

In fact, better solution; sell Ultimate for $100. None of this "oh, you don't need that feature" bullshit. Make it one version for a reasonable price. No one is going to want to pay $200 for the cheapest, most cut down version of Windows given the shitty economy.

[Rook]

Yeah I would say most manufactured computers would ship with Basic. The people manufacturing these computers wouldn't be stupid enough to release it with Starter.

[DarkHalo003]

HOW THE HELL WOULD THAT BE IMPROVED FROM XP? Really, it's stupid. If anything, wipe Vista from the record books, then focus on making an OS better than XP.

[jcap]

Every PC sold today with Windows Vista offers Home Premium as default. There's usually an option to upgrade to Business or Ultimate. Only in extremely basic PCs hardware-wise do they offer Home Basic as an option, simply because the hardware isn't capable of taking full advantage of all the Home Premium and above features. This is common with netbooks now.

I do think they should have slimmed down on the versions, though. In my opinion, there should be two on the market in the US: Windows 7 and Windows 7 Business.

Windows 7 would be on sale for $120 upgrade, $220 full. It would be the "complete" version, containing everything that was planned for this version of Windows. It would contain everything a regular home user would need, as well as everything a business would need. It would feature everything enabled by default, including the Aero glass interface.

Windows 7 Business would actually be less expensive. Prices would be about $99 for an upgrade, and about $150 for full. It would be a hybrid between what we see as the "Home Basic" version and the "Business" version. It would offer everything a business would need, and barely anything more. It wouldn't have the fancy Aero interface, and you would be able to choose between the basic Aero theme and the Windows classic theme. RDP Host and all domain features would exist. Nothing extra such as Media Center or any of the "bloat" would be included. It would just be Windows with the fundamental applications. Both home users and businesses would be able to purchase it.

[Warsaw]

Hmmm...I suspect Windows 7 Professional will be the highest most people go. I guess Microsoft didn't like having the typical package be so close to the best that it was almost pointless to upgrade to Ultimate, so they made more. Now there is no point to Ultimate unless you really need those features of Enterprise, so Pro is the best bang for the buck.

Whatever. I'm still going to buy Windows 7 when it is released, probably Pro. I see no reason not to, especially since Newegg has OEM versions for half the price of retail.

[DrunkenSamus]

Fuck that. I'm sticking with XP until applications or anything for that matter are unable to run under it.

[Limited]

Wow, and I was hoping Windows 7 would be a breath of fresh air from Vista.

Sticking with XP.

[Cortexian]

I refuse to buy any copy of Windows that has a limited amount of features, no Remote Desktop in XP Home was bullshit. I'll be buying the top-tier version of Windows from now on, always, regardless of price-practicality ratio.

Also, I agree that Microsoft is stupid, how they missed the fact that all these version of Windows are pointless and stupid I don't understand. You only need TWO versions, one for home users, and one for business users. Except the difference should be extremely small, and all of the applications and programs available to both versions should be purchasable as add-ons later on.

[InnerGoat]

Wow, and I was hoping Windows 7 would be a breath of fresh air from Vista.

Sticking with XP.

Uhhh, it is. You should give the beta a try :confused2:

[=sw=warlord]

I think i will stick with my Vista home premium.
Fuck this.

[Dr Nick]

Oh well, I guess I'll be getting Ultimate or whatever it is. $300 doesn't seem bad at all.

[StankBacon]

who the fuck would use starter anyway?

[InnerGoat]

Nobody does. I'm sure the countries it is sold in don't like it much either.

[NuggetWarmer]

Fucking Microshit. I bought they're crappy operating system that failed, where's my discount for Windows 7? >:|

[Cortexian]

Fucking Microshit. I bought they're crappy operating system that failed, where's my discount for Windows 7? >:|
Haha, no.

[InnerGoat]

Fucking Microshit. I bought they're crappy operating system that failed, where's my discount for Windows 7? >:|

Who is Microshit? :confused2:

Also, why should there be discounts for Windows 7?

[Rook]

I am CEO of Microsoft. The edition/prices are now:

//Home edition: $99.95
//Business edition: $199.

:awesome:

[Limited]

Jesus christ CN, are you a MS fanboy? Whenever I say anything negative amount MS you instantly -rep me with a bunch of shit.

[Bodzilla]

Well that's fucking retarded, who in the hell would want to use Starter?
All about different versions plus more and more more for the same thing.

lock out something that was free and charge them to get it back, why do you think there was something like fucking 7-8 Vista install packages.

[Timo]

Probably because you said this,


Wow, and I was hoping Windows 7 would be a breath of fresh air from Vista.

Sticking with XP.

When you found out a version that you can't buy isn't that great.

[Syuusuke]

It's only starter edition too.


who the fuck would use starter anyway?

[DarkHalo003]

Jesus christ CN, are you a MS fanboy? Whenever I say anything negative amount MS you instantly -rep me with a bunch of shit.
I agree. WTF CN? I almost had three green rep in a row. :gonk:

[Xetsuei]

Lol, Microsoft.

Sticking with XP.

[DarkHalo003]

If Microsoft says their next Xbox 360 model will be smaller and have touch screen compatibilities or motion sensors..........:smithicide:

I almost had 3 in a row again Anton. :gonk:

[Bodzilla]

who the fuck would use starter anyway?

your asking the wrong question.

Why would they make a starter edition is the question you should be asking, and we all know the answer to that.

Typical microsuck bullshit.
boycott for the moment.

[Bodzilla]

Probably because you said this,



When you found out a version that you can't buy isn't that great.

wait... i think i missed something here.

you cant buy starter?
what is it like a demo or someshit?

still bullshti either way but.... meh.

[Needles]

If windows 7 shows any good improvements in performance, video game fps, and cpu and ram usage, I'll buy the premium.

My dad wants to get me a new pc. Nothing fancy, just an inspiron 530s that's ok and can play old games like halo 1 decent and browse internet fast. I might end up getting windows 7 if I do get that pc.

[Needles]

wait... i think i missed something here.

you cant buy starter?
what is it like a demo or someshit?

I googled it and one website said it's supposed to be a cheap OS you can get in some notebooks. O my, it's stupposed to come with some notebooks/netbooks :fail:

http://www.liliputing.com/2009/02/microsoft-to-offer-crippled-version-of-windows-7-for-netbooks.html

[Warsaw]

Guys just buy the friggin' OS off of Newegg, as a [cheaper] OEM. Who cares if you don't get complete Microsoft support if you do that, they are rarely much help anyways. There really isn't much to complain about. Sure, stunts like this are crap, but there are ways around it. :cool:

Or you could just go Linux...:D.

[Cojafoji]

this is gonna be messy, i haven't eaten today, and i'm jittery from wayyy to much caffiene.

I can't believe that this topic is still going. I decided not to post anything in the first place because I'm sure I would've been banned. Everyone chill. This is the heads up. I will star the only things that you will see in the large scale US/EUROPE consumer market.

Stater: Response to eeepc bs, I'm sure. Will probably be for netbooks.
Basic: Not in the US! SO STFU.
*Premium: Cheap, affordable, nice.
*Pro: Standard for power users.
Enterprise: Large scale licensing with added interoperability for domain and group use.
*Ultimate: A marketing gimmick. For fanboys like xet who have to much cash. (Sorry xet, you're rich, and I needed someone like you to rip on).

Three! Three usuable SKU's for the masses. That is PERFECTLY reasonable, and gives a wide range for people who need different things out of the computer.

[Phopojijo]

Almost right... except according to Paul Thurrott -- Ultimate is just Enterprise sold on a per-user basis.

And each version up contain each of the prior goodies + some.

I will update when the latest Windows Weekly comes out non-live broadcast.

[Donut]

I agree. WTF CN? I almost had three green rep in a row. :gonk:
dont feed the troll.... ?
E: wow forgot what i originally meant to post:

Every PC sold today with Windows Vista offers Home Premium as default. There's usually an option to upgrade to Business or Ultimate. Only in extremely basic PCs hardware-wise do they offer Home Basic as an option, simply because the hardware isn't capable of taking full advantage of all the Home Premium and above features. This is common with netbooks now.
so when my dad bought his acer that came with windows vista basic, he basically bought an overpriced piece of shit?
the thing sucks.

[itszutak]

Jesus christ-- stop complaining. It's a free OS, and 3 apps at one time is not that big of a problem, especially if you look at it as a trial, and not as a full OS.

If someone wants to try W7, but isn't willing to risk hundreds if they don't like it, this is the perfect choice.

I doubt it was ever intended for anything but bringing the price down on netbooks and letting those new to windows OSs or anxious after the Vista debauchle try out their newest brand.

If MS wanted people to pay for this trial, then I'd see reason to be upset.

[Donut]

wait so, are we talking about 3 simultaneous apps as in, like... 3 separate programs? or 3 windows of the same thing, like 3 ms paint windows?

[itszutak]

wait so, are we talking about 3 simultaneous apps as in, like... 3 separate programs? or 3 windows of the same thing, like 3 ms paint windows?
3 windows of different apps, AFAIK

It all really depends on how they define application.

[Rob Oplawar]

The point is that it's a completely artificial, arbitrary limitation. You can call it a "demo version" if you like, and that may be what it is, but the idea of a trial operating system is completely ridiculous. And the idea of delivering 7 different versions of the same software with certain portions of it selectively disabled goes beyond absurd.

What drives me crazy about Windows 7 is that they don't seem to have learned their lesson from Vista. They may be toning down the security alert crap, but they're doing it wrong, they're not addressing the real issue. The user interface tweaks are superficial. They keep making the same mistakes, digging their operating system deeper and deeper into its grave.

Microsoft is probably hurting as much as the rest of us in the recession, but it's not gonna go away, and they'll bounce back, and when that happens, what they need to do is reconstruct Windows on a fundamental level. It'll be a shitton of wok and it'll cost a shitton of money, and their system will probably remain mainstream for years to come even if they don't do it, but they have to face it eventually. The core design of Windows is getting really outdated, imho.

[itszutak]

The point is that it's a completely artificial, arbitrary limitation.

While I do agree that it is a strange way to limit an OS, in some ways it works.
Limiting the number of windows encourages a user to buy the full version, while still not detracting too much from the experience. It is rare for me to have more than two windows open at once, and from my experience it is similar with most casual PC users, the types who will most likely use the stripped-down OS to see if they like it.


You can call it a "demo version" if you like, and that may be what it is, but the idea of a trial operating system is completely ridiculous.
Not necessarily. The biggest bonus is allowing new users to decide whether or not they like Windows 7 on their home PC, rather than basing their decision on how the demo worked at circuit city best buy Fry's or a similar outlet. People who refuse to use Vista can try 7 to see if it's what they expect or if they prefer XP.
At the very least, it's better than MS's old system of time-based trials.


And the idea of delivering 7 different versions of the same software with certain portions of it selectively disabled goes beyond absurd.
This I agree with. It's stupid to release more than three variants (trial excluded), but MS probably based their versions off of different trial markets.

[Bodzilla]

i generally have steam, xfire, winamp, trillian, ventrillo, firefox (multiple windows normally about 3-4) and a game in the backround such as wow or l4d.

this is a joke anyway you dress it up itszutak.

[klange]

I say let them do it. It's about time Wine was a better Windows than an actual OS from Microsoft within the past 5 years.

[itszutak]

i generally have steam, xfire, winamp, trillian, ventrillo, firefox (multiple windows normally about 3-4) and a game in the backround such as wow or l4d.

this is a joke anyway you dress it up itszutak.
It's a joke if you take it as a primary OS-- I doubt that the intention was ever that it be used as a replacement, but rather as something a computer user would try on the side, just to see if it is better or worse than their expectations.

Naturally, if you want an unresricted OS, you'll have to pay. But for free, it's the only Windows choice.

(And yes, I know all about linux and in fact use it a bit. Wine is great for certain programs, but it's a sad fact that most software is designed for use on windows OSs only, and fail to work properly given the limitations of wine.)

Also: It's free, and MS isn't forcing it down our throats. This is called a business strategy: Knowing that many are still wary of microsoft's new OSs after Vista's problems, a free trial is great for proving (or disproving) the stability of their new OS without the risk of lost money (On the part of the consumer) involved.

If someone finds out they like the trial, I'm sure MS has made it so they can simply unlock the other features by buying the OS.

[Bodzilla]

how can i possibly prove it's stable if i can only run 3 programs on it at the same time.

your not exactly putting it through it's paces or under load are ya.
Just because it's a buisness strategy doesnt mean we have to like it or accept it.

[343guiltymc]

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/windows-7-starter-versions-pricing,6982.html
........

[Syuusuke]

At least quote the title



Windows 7 Starter Rumored at $200... Really?

[Snowy]

Everybody here realizes that
A). Starter edition is only going to be sold in developing countries, you will NEVER see it here in the US, Canada or UK.
B). The "three application limit" has been around since XP.,
Right?

Oh and that $200 price point was bogus. The original source retracted the story as it came from an unconfirmed source.

[jcap]

This thread is fucking stupid.

http://www.modacity.net/forums/showpost.php?p=359041&postcount=8