News Windows 7 editions revealed

Better yet, they could ditch the whole concept and go back to Windows XP era licensing - “Home” and “Professional.”

+1

 

So it's exactly the same as Vista then? No real suprise seeing as windows 7 is an uber service pack for vista (Say it like you see it)

Vista Ultimate already has limited availability. Why? Because at retail it's so damn expensive not many retailers stock it, and if they do they won't stock as many copies as they do premium. And how many rigs do you see out there that come with ultimate as a standard option?

For me Vista ultimate is worthwhile for it's drive imaging backup tools, Pro has that too of course but you lose media center.

 

There are less editions to select that what you think.
Actually there are only 2 version! Crazy? nope.. please let me explain why.

Windows 7 Starter editions existed in Vista and in XP!
Proof: http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/newsroom/winxp/...
It is for emerging markets

Windows 7 Home Basic is also for emerging market... (like the above one) so we won't even see it.

Enterprise edition is for group licensing.. so we won't see it.

Now we have 3 editions:
- Home Premium
- Professional
- Ultimate

The problem with Vista layout is that the Buisnes edition was more expensive than Home Premium, for an extange of feature. Based on the article, the Professional edition will NOT replace features but add them. So the layout it:

- Win7 Home Premium (XP Home edition + Media Center + tablet PC in one + more)
- Win7 Professional (XP Pro + Media Center + tablet PC in one + more)

What is is to be mad about?

 

BTW, what is with people saying that XP had only 2 editions.... it has way more:
- XP Home
- XP Media Center (2003/2005)
- XP Prefessional
- XP Tablet PC
- XP Starter edition
- XP for Embedded Systems
- XP Embedded (getting confusing here)
- XP Pro 64-bit (I put that in because you can do the upgrade form 32 to 64 like Vista and Win7)

Sounds fun, which one will you pick?

 

LOL, yes suddenly people seem to have forgotten about that.

Well I feel Win 7 should come in just 3 different versions:

Home
Professional
Enterprise - same thing as business with a volume license agreement but a nicer name.

 

There should be two pared down editions:
Home
Business
with optional modules such as drive encryption, windows media player, paint etc That can be paid for and downloaded if they are wanted. The days of bloatware need to end.

 

I have been a loyal fan of Microsoft for a long time. I have tried the Windows 7 beta and it's fantastic.

But, this further confirms my growing dislike for their sneaky end-user hating business tactics. Why can't they just have 1 version, 1 price? It's not like it costs them any extra to include the features! In fact, when you install Vista, you can upgrade to a higher version on the same disc!

 

Oh joy! A new windows for me...
>.>

I doubt I will bother with Win 7 unless it has some sort of new improved graphics enhancement (IE DirectX XX blah blah). If it would be like WinXP and Vista, on the DX side, that would be just insane...

 

Where's the Windows 7 *iss everyone off edition?

 

Direct X11 should comes to Vista, with SP2 I beleive

 

This really isn't the big deal everyone's making it out to be, although it's funny watching 1/2 the blogging world go ballistic over it and the other 1/2 working out what's really going on.

Basically, most peoples' first instinct is to ask "why can't they just take the OSX approach and make a single version for everyone?!". Sounds logical on paper, but Microsoft have close to 90% of the world market and Apple have 3%- fact is, Windows doesn't have a specific market whereas Macs are higher-end consumer systems. Therefore, the only way Microsoft can ensure you can still get your $300 laptops is to make a cheaper version of its product and thus cutting out features to justify the price drop. If they try and supply the same version for every PC, they'll have to charge a standard price instead of giving the option of below-average or slightly-above-average options. Make sense?

As many have pointed out, we've only really got 2 options when it comes to buying a PC, and unlike Vista they follow a much more ordinary hierarchy- thus the professional version isn't a MCE-less suit-and-tie only SKU and caters for the slightly more advanced users. Those of us who really care about the enterprise features (and know what they actually do) will go out of our way to get Ultimate anyway, and removing it from the OEMs' grasp is a wise idea.

 

Are there any reasons why I should move to Vista or 7? Or do they still all do the same thing as XP, but with a new price tag.

 

to quote MS - because no one seems to care about actually .. you know.. refereing them

from http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/features/2009/feb09/02-03Win7SKU-QA.mspx


Seriously, why do people care if there are more than 2 versions. It just makes OEM PCs cheaper for those that don't want anything more than a box to surf the net and read email.

 

Also

Yes, there are many many reasons.

They do the same as XP (As XP did the same of 2k..) but they do more. The "more" is both behind the scenes (Better security, better drivers, better caching, better disk IO scheduling, better power managment) and infront of you (better UI, better work flow, better thought out options)

Win7 is built on Vista - same basic kernel used just with more tweaks and patches. XP to Vista is an entirly new kernel just as XP was from NT4.

 

With 7 you can now uninstall those software - so your wish has been granted.

 

Ok, so what's the big deal?

This is how the system has always been since win2000.


What I find a bit ironic, yet sad, is that first people complain that MSOS come with lots of crap that nobody needs. They also don't want to pay for stuff they don't need.

MS responds with making different versions for different user groups, and what happens? People whine about this too!

I have seen all the versions of vista in active use, and I think they fit their specific markets very well. The Win7 scheme is about the same, but with different names. IMO it would have been better to keep the same names Vista used.







I'm not sure why I bother to write this, though. The ones that already hate MS for some reason will continue to do this. The ones that understand what's going on will already know what I'm talking about.


edit: Oh, and the Win7 system is slightly better as you don't have to choose between two versions that have different functionality. Better verions just add stuff, and doesn't remove anything.

 

I too, simply don't understand why anyone cares. It completely makes sense IMO, perhaps less choices wouldn't hurt, but what's wrong with choice?

Limited availability of ultimate seems odd, but I'll be using it anyway so I don't care, or maybe I'll use Enterprise just to be different - gogo TechNet!

 

Although I agree it's an odd move to offer 6 flavours, I can't imagine it would make anyone consider OSX instead.

 

WIndows XP, Windows Vista, Windows 7, all have about the same amount of variations, this isnt new, are people just that forgetful??? shesh...

 

UK

for the most part its only home prem and ultimate that users will buy (Disk/oem pack not reatail you have to be stuped to pay £100-150 for an box with geen or black on it), users who buy PCs form shop will buy what ever comes with the pc but home basic Will come with pcs that are low spec still that you buy from shops
pro will only be needed for small to med companies with an Domain server

when you get an computer from OEM (acer) some of them are useing vista basic (4gb ram 2ghz c2d ATI HDMI) on computers that should be coming with home prem

most 1gb ram or less systems seem to get home basic most the time with some giveing home prem from time to time,
systems with 2gb ram and an None 945 intel video cards norm would have home prem,
ultimate you never see unless the system is more then £1000 norm (i have Never seen an ultimate system in the last 2 years of fixing pcs apart from my own pc)