page 1 of 2
Comments: 29 | Views: 1896

Well this is still in the "rumour" stage, but it's coming from a Dell marketing executive:

"“If there’s one thing that may influence adoption, make things slower or cause customers to pause, it’s that generally the ASPs (average selling price) of the operating systems are higher than they were for Vista and XP,” Darrel Ward, director of product management for Dell’s business client product group, said in a phone interview, referring to the various versions of the Windows 7 operating system that are expected to appear."

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13924_3-10242555-64.html

http://blogs.zdnet.com/gadgetreviews/?p=4414

I really hope this turns out to be baseless, but at this point doesn't sound like it - this isn't coming from the Inquirer. I feel this would be one of the dumbest moves MS has made to date for several reasons:

1) Legitmately or not, Win7 is viewed as "Vista done right".  The last thing you want to do is charge *more* for the OS that's supposedly fixing the problems of the first.

2) The economy.  'nuff said.

3) MS is one of the most profitable corporations alive.  In their recent "down" quarter, they "only" made a profit of 4.4 billion - and responded with thousands of layoffs.  This in one of the worst economic climates in decades and with their main OS being savaged by the critics.

4) Netbooks.  Suddenly the Starter Edition makes a whole lot more sense.

What say you?  I really hope the ire over this builds up and makes MS change its mind here.  This is without a doubt the wrong product and wrong time to charge a price increase.

How would you know Win7 is newer and better if it is not more expensive than Vista?

ManipUni
ManipUni
Proving QQ for 5 years!

Vista was more expensive than XP. XP was more expensive than 2000. So this isn't exactly a shock...

W3bbo
W3bbo
The Master of Baiters

Due to inflation, yes, XP came out 7 and a half years before Vista.

Anyway, notice how both articles refer exclusively to a Dell spokesman and no other sources. My cynicism is tingling: Dell's just trying to negociate a lower price from Microsoft so they can improve their profit margins during this recession. They're also probably comparing the cost of Win7 Home Premium (the entry-level Win7 in countries-with-money) with Vista Home Basic (which used to be available here).

ManipUni
ManipUni
Proving QQ for 5 years!

It wasn't just inflation. Ultimate was significantly more expensive than XP Pro or MCE. XP Pro was significantly more expensive than 2000 Pro (which cost the same as XP Home).

If Dell are just using them as a negotiation tool then is that a bad thing? A lower price 7 with netbooks (<$300) becoming popular is good for everyone.

edit: Except Microsoft Tongue Out

Yes, and Vista Ultimate was derided as a ridiculous cash-grab (to the point where some Ultimate users feel they should get Windows7 for free due to the "Ultimate Extras" boondogle), heck the number of tiers in general was roundly criticized. 

Windows 7 should be more than fixing Vista's code-related downfalls - the marketing of Vista was exceptionally poor, and price/tiers falls under this.  The latter has improved somewhat with mostly Home and Professional being offered to consumers only and the higher tiers being a superset (finally!) of the lower versions.  MS has to rebuild their image in this aspect whether you think they need to or not, charging more for their OS which is supposed to "fix" Vista - especially in this economy where MS is one of the few companies making cash hand over fist - would be monumentally idiotic.

I hope this is just posturing from Dell though.

ZippyV
ZippyV
Fired Up

Not for me: I payed 250 € for Windows XP Pro OEM and 185 € for Vista Ultimate OEM.

5. Microsoft currently has an ad campaign targeting the expense of Apple products, which are seemingly successful. However, OSX is cheaper than Vista, and raising the price on Windows 7 is going to be a marketing fiasco.

Larsenal
Larsenal
ready to give an answer

Excellent point.  That will blow up in their face.

http://adage.com/digital/article?article_id=136731

I find it ironic that the ads are about laptops, which Microsoft doesn't sell, while the OS is a completely different matter (of course, the hardware is subsidizing the software to some extent on the Apple end).  Raising the price on Win7 could really turn off a LOT of the customers that were swayed by these ads.  At the worst, the prices should remain comparable.  Better yet, offer family packs similar to OSX and/or make the price more comparable.

If I were Apple, I'd sit tight on prices and just wait for MS to undo their own hard work.

 

Nah, Obama will sign an Executive Order mandating the fixing of the price of Win7 at x dollars for those that make less than 75k per year anyway.

elmer
elmer
I'm on my very last life.

Ultimate was significantly more expensive than XP Pro or MCE. XP Pro was significantly more expensive than 2000 Pro (which cost the same as XP Home).

Vista-Ultimate is not the same product level as XP-Pro.

Vista-Business is the product equivalent of XP-Pro, and that's where any price comparisons should be made.

Ultimate is a sucker product, aimed at the “Apple” type of market - where paying more implicitly gets you a “superior” product, which makes you a superior person. The actual details of the differences between Business and Ultimate NEVER justified the price hike.

 

CannotResolveSymbol
CannotResolveSymbol
{insert caption here}

Except that Ultimate was the only way to get feature parity with XP MCE--  essentially, the feature set from Vista Business (remote desktop, the new backup utilities, etc.), plus the consumer-oriented features from Home Premium (Media Center, Movie Maker, DVD Maker, etc.). 

staceyw
staceyw
Before C# there was darkness...

If they have to the raise the price, they should at least give current vista owners an upgrade for free as an apology (deserved or not).

Bass
Bass
www.s​preadfirefox.c​om/5years/

Does Microsoft actually make anything massive from retail sales anyway? Most people will get Windows 7 preinstalled and they won't ever know how much Windows 7 costs.

GoddersUK
GoddersUK
I CAN has cheezburger and you CAN'T has stop me!

That's what I was thinking.

Why does the price matter - most people will never buy a copy of Windows in their lives, it'll always come preinstalled for them.

..except... when youve lined up for a copy of windows...

 

thats when you know it's 99$

..sure that was years ago... but oems today ..pay what ... 30 to 60?

why did Windows go to $499 - and go behind a case -"call salesrep!!??"   ( oh ya ... ballmer)

 

windows 7 - 7 billion boxes at 99 bucks.. with everything ... one version.

 

ballmer - retire - PLEASE

 

 

edit= no piracy - or 90% less + no negative bsa bull press garbage to diminish whats left of your corp/karma
(do no evil!)

Even if that IS another rambling Jamie post with lots of = signs I will agree with you. Smiley

One product for a reasonable price and everyone gets exactly the same version. Keep it simple!

I don't understand why the dell manager would care about this. Dell buys Vista for 1 euro.

Bass
Bass
www.s​preadfirefox.c​om/5years/

No they don't. OEMs get Windows for cheaper then you can get it for, but they still pay enough that Windows is Microsoft's major cash cow. Microsoft made something like $18 billion from Windows last year, trust me, that's not by giving it away for free or almost free to their biggest customers. The exact price major OEMs pay is of course, an extremely well protected secret.

Bas
Bas
It finds lightbulbs.

And, I'd guess, subject to other agreements with individual customers. It's interesting how this is an almost exact opposite to a platform like the 360: because people have no choice but to buy the software from you, you can give the platform away almost for free. You have to, in fact, if you want to get a broad userbase. Because Windows is so open, it's the other way around.

Dovella
Dovella
Go Microsoft !!!!!!!

NeowinFeedWindows 7 pricing to be revealed next month?: Microsoft's pricing details schedule reveals that they plan to.. http://tinyurl.com/oev3vt

PhreePhlyer
PhreePhlyer
Chemicals for a Better Life!

Why does everyone make this comparison?  Apple is a hardware company that throws an OS in on the deal.  Apple makes money on hardware.  MS makes money on the OS.  There is a huge difference.  MS has to support the OS on an almost infinite hardware landscape.  Those support costs need to be paid for.

PhreePhly

page 1 of 2
Comments: 29 | Views: 1896
Microsoft Communities