Coffeehouse Thread

29 posts

Win7 more expensive than Vista? Is MS really this stupid?

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • Lizard​Rumsfeld

    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.

  • magicalclick

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

    Leaving WM on 5/2018 if no apps, no dedicated billboards where I drive, no Store name.
    Last modified
  • ManipUni

    magicalclick said:

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

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

  • W3bbo

    ManipUni said:
    magicalclick said:
    *snip*

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

    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

    W3bbo said:
    ManipUni said:
    *snip*

    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).

    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

  • NitzW

    ManipUni said:
    W3bbo said:
    *snip*

    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

    ManipUni said:
    magicalclick said:
    *snip*

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

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

  • wkempf

    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

    wkempf said:

    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.

    Excellent point.  That will blow up in their face.

  • wkempf

    Larsenal said:
    wkempf said:
    *snip*

    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.

  • Ray7

    wkempf said:
    Larsenal said:
    *snip*

    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.

     

  • phreaks

    Ray7 said:
    wkempf said:
    *snip*

    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

    ManipUni said:
    W3bbo said:
    *snip*

    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

    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.

     

  • Cannot​Resolve​Symbol

    elmer said:
    ManipUni said:
    *snip*

    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.

     

    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

    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

    staceyw said:

    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).

    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

    Bass said:
    staceyw said:
    *snip*

    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.

    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.

  • jamie

    GoddersUK said:
    Bass said:
    *snip*

    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!)

Comments closed

Comments have been closed since this content was published more than 30 days ago, but if you'd like to continue the conversation, please create a new thread in our Forums, or Contact Us and let us know.