Blogs Will Windows 7 really cost more than Vista?

Hey pimonserry,

don't know if it's your cup of tea, but your licence key is for one version of Windows Vista [version] (i.e. home premium). x86 or x64 is merely the install media you get. You are within your rights to ask Microsoft for an alternate install media (costing a mere £15 or something, rip off for a CD!), or just borrow one from a friend. If you have access to MSDN or something or know someone that does you can just download the .iso.

I think really Microsoft should allow anyone to download the .iso from their website, (so you can try before you buy) and if you like it you should be able to buy a CD key from within the operating system. They are not that progressive yet though . Of course if you already had a CD key you could just plug that in.

 

Done that already. I've been running W7 for several months now.

 

I'll agree with that. So far on my Dell Mini 9 (Intel Atom N270, 1GB RAM,8GB SSD), I've run Ubuntu Netbook Remix (8&9), WinXP, Win7 & Vista. I've stuck to WinXP for the size of installation and familiarity, but Win7 works like a dream; really quick & responsive (SSD issues aside) and it feels very intuitive on a netbook.

Vista on my netbook doesn't even warrant a mention - I had to jump through so many hoops that I felt like a circus performer.

 

There's always buying OEM products.

 

Agreed. I just wish they would make the whole upgrade experience a lot more cost effective and streamlined for the customer. I made the mistake of buying the digital download version of a 64 bit Vista install, thinking that i could upgrade easily from my 32 bit install. Unfortunately i didn't realise that the installer has to be run from a 64 bit o/s (eg XP or Vista) and won't run from a 32 bit install. Of course i'd already parted with my hard-earned cash at this stage and the only option then is to pay extra for an install CD. Why it isn't possible to design an installer to run on 32 bit versions of XP/Vista is beyond me and has left me a bit disillusioned with MS.

Compare that experience with the Linux distros i've tried out over the last few years, where you just pick 32 bit or 64 bit and download the .iso from the website.

 

I don't see why you couldn't have burned what you downloaded to a DVD. Surely that would have worked? Booting from before Windows loads is whatever environment you wanted (x86 or x64) I thought? Otherwise how would any install disc work if it already required a 64 bit install? Installs would have to be written on in the first place when the HDD was manufactured!

All you will have forked out for, I suspect, was a disc based version of what you downloaded.

 

I am guessing the direct install is just an executable you run inside the operating system. But all the same, I can't see any justifiable reason for Microsoft to restrict access to the install media. Windows will notify you plenty if you haven't put in a CD key, and it's probably one of the only discs most people with a PC have, so it's not like you can't get it from somewhere else.

Just like linux, except after install it prompts you that you need to activate. You go to activate, it comes up with a menu:
"Enter CD Key"
"Purchase Single User Licence"
"Purchase Home (3x user) Licence"

Or something like that. Then they could just spam out their CDs in the post to all and sundry, people pop the CD in and it asks if they want to upgrade, they say yes, then they play on the new OS and buy it or revert back.

I don't see the major pitfall with this strategy, the average Joe doesn't know anything about cracking activation methods and the people that do know will already know how easy it is to get an .iso from other sources. So the only people they are inconveniencing by not having a back-catalogue of all install media for consumers is their legitimate customers.

Linux: 1
Windows: 0

 

I'm by no means an expert on the subject, but I would suggest that it's because of the pre-installation environment required to install it (have been doing some experimenting with customised/strealined/etc installs). Full retail discs may include the environment required to start the installation binaries, where special upgrade editions can simply omit this or be configured to work only under specific environments (i.e., an already installed operating system). It may be possible to customise an upgrade edition to boot from a pre-installation environment such as Bart PE, but this would require some serious hacking/modification, and is out of the reach of the average consumer.

This isn't actually a new tactic; I can remember upgrade versions of WinXP and even WinME & Win2K that would not boot from CD - you had to start the install from an already installed version of windows. Despite the fact that, effectively, a whole new OS distribution was installed and, accordingly, included on the discs - WinXP & Win2K architectures are completely incompatible with anything that went before, so the old OS could not actually be "upgraded" as such (unlike going from Win95 to Win98, where some parts of the old OS could be re-used).

FWIW, I agree with Dreaming; allow people free access to the OS install media and charge simply for the licence - after all, when I purchase Windows, I'm not actually "buying" the software, I'm paying for the right to use it. Piracy is already rife with all Windows versions, so they've got nothing to fear there. Also, make it easier to install from USB - Linux *definitely* wins in this regard! I can get a Live USB Linux distro set up with a single click - the software automatically writes the install image to the USB drive and is usable straight away. Windows installs via USB are rather more complex...

And who the hell would design a 64-bit upgrade version to only work from a 64-bit OS? The only 64-bit Windows consumer OS available before Vista was XP-x64 - that was a nightmare as there was no support for it at all... Chances are, you're going to be going from 32-bit to 64-bit...

 

Who cares as it won't be interesting before SP1 anyway

 

not neccesarily true, remember this isnt a complete rebuild like vista (or like vista was supposed to be) this is more of a buff up of vista, so the basic OS is the same and as a result is very stable. i should imagine SP1 will be just security updates and maybe some DX stuff.

 

Yeah I'm a few days late here, but I wanted to chime in about the 64 bit upgrade version. The way Microsoft markets it, I think the intention is to go from [version] to [better version] as in [Premium] to [Ultimate]. That's what the upgrade install is for.

When you jump instruction sets (x86 to x86_64) you're looking for trouble. I wouldn't recommend it, and instead you should probably clean install, even if you had a 32 bit binary to run.