Although it is still working to finish the code for Windows Vista, Microsoft has reached a decision on which versions of the operating system to offer. Microsoft has settled on six versions, including an Ultimate edition that will combine the best of the company’s corporate and consumer features. The company is aiming to have all of the versions ready for launch in the second half of next year.
Microsoft Boxes up Vista
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
And they talk about Linux being fragmented? MS had a really solid business strategy with * Server, * Pro, and * Home. More versions of windows == more frustration for end users and corporate decision makers.
The new “security” features of vista like not running as the administrator by default, seperating the graphics subsystem out of the kernel and more into userland, better firewall, and new internet explorer should prove interesting. Even though I’m a longtime Linux/gnome zealot, I’m looking forward to play with Vista final.
Actually, they already have a corporate edition and a media center edition as well. 9x had just the one edition of course.
I don’t see the point of splitting up Home/Pro/Media except to make money. Surely it cost’s more work to cripple Pro enough to make it the Home edition. Media Center is a trivial application that ought to be left to third party developers.
The concept of selling several versions of a product is called price discrimination, and is an old way to enable the selling part to get as much money as possible out of a customer.
The point is that if a customer has a high willingness to pay or just a lot of money you want to charge him a high price. On the other hand, a customer with a thinner wallet may not want to buy a standard windows version because he deems it to expensive. The solution is to offer a crippled version that the poor guy can afford but the rich guy doesen’t want.
So, yes this is probably more about profit than anything else, although there be some merit to offering different default settings and such in the different versions targeted at different classes of customers.
And they talk about Linux being fragmented?
There’s a big difference: I can generally run an app on any SKU of the same Windows family release (Home, Pro, etc). Whereas, the same is NOT true of differing Linux distros. Why not? Well, among other things, the different Linux distros install things at different places in the filesystem, use different GUIs (KDE, Gnome, etc), etc.
The article states
“The company is aiming to have all of the versions ready for launch in the second half of this year.”
Not
“The company is aiming to have all of the versions ready for launch in the second half of next year.”
as written in the summary
Perhaps the editors are experimenting with new predictive-branching code …
Hope that the final version is a lot better then the latest beta version! I have been playing with it over the last 2 days and I am not impressed at all. It’s slow, it’s extra buggy (I know it’s a beta but good lord)
I have a 64 MB video card and if you let Windows choose the best performance settings for you then things don’t refresh on screen etc. Wooooo.
I actually like how IE7 looks though. But I will still stick with Firefox (And by default most of the security settings are not turned on by default)
After the install you are still made admin by default and you still have a choice on if you want to make a password or not. Also there are prompts every place when you click on things that only admins should access, but if you are an admin then it doesn’t require a password to complete the task.
I like the default view of the file manager also that they changed the documents and settings folders to users. I also like the fact that the buttons on windows are now square instead of round. That feel is nice.
They have their work cut out for them. I don’t think it will be tight till SP2 (If Windows XP is a good marker)
They STILL need to learn security though! If this is how the final version will be then we are in trouble AGAIN! (Unless you want to pay extra for the Windows Defender suite)
@Windows Rocks
They STILL need to learn security though!
If it’s built upon the Windows Server 2003 codebase then it’s going to be the most secure OS on the planet. Plus it’s gonna continue to outperform all *NIX OSes.
While I do agree that Windows server 2003 is a great server OS, with many security improvements, I don´t believe that Vista will be the most secure OS just because its based on Server 2003 code.
Firstly, its generally harder to a secure a general purpose system, such as a desktop. There are way more legacy applications for the desktop, and the users are not all that skilled. So you have compromise more between usability and security.
Secondly, I think that there are other OS´es that are designed with even more security in mind than Server 2003 and Vista. OpenBSD and Solaris are some examples of this.
Edited 2006-02-27 10:34
Only going to out perform other operating systems because Ms is a marketing and sales company that happens to make software!
But hello, you didn’t read what I wrote I see, because I said nothing about the codebase being bad or wrong or having holes, I said that their security practices of allowing users to be admins by default at install time and to allow tasks harmfull to the machine still work without requireing anymore then a click etc are not secure practices. If Vista comes out like it is now it won’t be anymore secure then XP. (And this beta is the feature complete version according to MS, which means not much more is gonna be added. Mostly all that is left is debuging)
To me it looks like Windows XP SP3. Like they just added some features to Windows XP. LOL! Hope it’s better at release time.
what are the 6 versions? Home Premium, Vista Ultimate and…
I wonder if they dropped the Vista Home Server edition they were talking about not long ago.
“what are the 6 versions? Home Premium, Vista Ultimate and… ”
Actually, no.
They are: Home crippled, Lock-in (subscription), No indemnity (subscription), Virus Haven, DRM Ultra and Double-plus EULA.
Edited 2006-02-27 10:44
Interesting if in a Linux thread someone made a statement like that they would be modded down to hell whereas this parent thread actually got modded up!
If they said that in a Linux thread, they should be modded down, because, it would be off-topic.
Those things he mentioned do not apply to the Linux world.
The EU and Korean versions with their respective parts just a click away instead of immediate install.
Of course as a Mac user we have running bets going to see when the first mass malware is circulated for Vista. Which if it’s buisness as usual from Microsoft, will see further growth of Mac OS X.
If not, I expect Apple stock to take a nosedive and Apple buy Disney.
>Of course as a Mac user we have running bets going to see when the first mass malware is circulated for Vista.
Im sure it’s back compatible with all malware back to Win95…
With Windows XP, Goffe said, people “really have to compromise.”
“Either I get all the great media experience or I get all of the mobility features,” he said. “What if I want a great home experience and a great business experience?”
So is he saying switch to Linux or Mac OS X? Seriously…I mean come on. I thought this guy was for MS.
Oh well.
(PS
)
Well, MS are gonna have their hands so full supporting all of these versions of vista they’ll drop XP faster than you can say: “Vista, vista, vista, vista, vista, vista”.
Babe, there is a EOL as part of your software licence; I’ve yet to see Microsoft bring it forward, most cases, they push BACK the EOL to give people more time to migrate; it isn’t in the best interests to piss off their big customers – hence the inclusion of Virtual PC Express to allow older applications to still run.
As for the different versions; there will be one DVD shipped; and the key you put into the installer will dictate which version that will get installed; when you wish to ‘super size’ your copy of Windows, it’ll be a matter of ringing up Microsoft and paying for a new key that’ll give you access to the features of the next version up from the one you are running.
This isn’t about making money off people, its about offering customers more options; for the low end, allowing end users to strip of things they don’t need – will joe user *REALLY* need to have EFS (Encrypted File System)? honestly? so why the heck charge him for a feature he doesn’t need or use; thats the situation with Windows XP today.
At the other end of the spectrum, there are those like me who want MORE features; and Windows Ultimate Edition will offer me that; its a win for those who want less, and a win for those who want more – choice, isn’t it a marvelous thing!
This isn’t about making money off people, its about offering customers more options; for the low end, allowing end users to strip of things they don’t need – will joe user *REALLY* need to have EFS (Encrypted File System)? honestly? so why the heck charge him for a feature he doesn’t need or use; thats the situation with Windows XP today.
Segmenting your product portfolio in lowend and highend products is a classic way of maximizing profits. Cover the lowend of the market with a stripped version, and reap high margins in the high-end space.
When Vista goes gold, the cost of development is sunk cost – already had. So it would not cost them more to ship EFS to Joe Average, thus no need to charge him more. Except of course that it would totally undermine their high-end market. Fear of cannibalization is the reason why most lowend versions of software are so crippled that they are barely usable (think WinXP Starter edition here).
Choice is not bad for customers – and neither in this case. But segmenting the market is *ALL* about maximizing profits.
Its called capitalism.
Edited 2006-02-27 16:02
Choice is not bad for customers – and neither in this case. But segmenting the market is *ALL* about maximizing profits.
Oh, so its now evil to segment? even though Linux vendors have been doing it for years with their standard, professional and deluxe versions of their distributions – oh yes, thats right, good old double standards; when its Linux, its all ok, but when its Windows, wheel out the conspiracy theories.
As for clawing back development costs; those who use the feature and pay the extra are the ones who will pay for the cost of development; the idea will allow a cheaper version of Windows for those wish to have one, and a more feature rich one for those who have the extra cash; I see nothing wrong, again, choice is a great thing, lets start treating the consumer like an adult rather than belittleing them as a government does to its citizens on a regular basis.
Oh, so its now evil to segment?
No, but it’s stupid to segment so much. Six versions? SIX??? How come everyone else manages to get by with 2 or 3?
the idea will allow a cheaper version of Windows for those wish to have one
Yeah, I’m sure it’s going to be a lot cheaper. That’s totally how MS operates.
No, but it’s stupid to segment so much. Six versions? SIX??? How come everyone else manages to get by with 2 or 3?
Its a big bloody improvement over what we have today! Tablet version, a Media Centre version, Professional, Home, the emerging market version etc. etc.
Yeah, I’m sure it’s going to be a lot cheaper. That’s totally how MS operates.
Thats right, they do; they work on the basis of economies of scale, hence the reason the have such great profit margins; they have a large customer base which spread their costs very thinly accross; no differently to OpenOffice.org and how the costs are distributed over the various distributions that bundle and contribute to it.
Microsoft see Linux as a possible threat in niche areas in developing and fixed requirement markets; they’re hopeing to head this off with a cheaper version, and I for one say, good; its good to see some pressure being bought on Microsoft – and thanks to that market pressure, they’re finally correcting the security issues in Windows.
Forcing multi-user compatibility and limited user mode as standard for Windows thus requiring software companies to finally stop compromising and update their software to be compatible; the seperation between users, services and drivers; drivers and services will load in session one; keeping the two (user and services/drivers) seperate, thus increasing system integrity.
I don’t know what you have such a rabbid anti-Microsoft agenda, because quite frankly, its the equivilant of a evangelical Christian, who no matter what you say to them, what evidence you provide, they have no willingness to entertain the notion of different ideas.
I simply don´t understand how you get from my “Choice is not bad” to your idea that I think that “segmenting is evil”. There must be a misunderstanding somewhere.
Of course MS and Linux vendors should be able to segment the market. My point was merely that segmenting is a question of trying to maximize profits, and not some benevolent actions from a vendor.
Software vendors like MS has very few marginal costs associated to selling an extra copy of their OS. As such, they should maximize profits by increasing turnover, rather than reducing marginal costs. Segmenting the market is a great way to achieve this, as long as you can avoid cannibalization (and as long as noone provides a good-enough substitution in the low end of the market).
So no conspiracy theories and no Linux double standards – just basic economic theory.
Of course MS and Linux vendors should be able to segment the market. My point was merely that segmenting is a question of trying to maximize profits, and not some benevolent actions from a vendor.
Of course, that is the case; they’re not a chariety, they want to maximise profits; so to do that, they want as many people through the door and purchasing their software – convince users who would have otherwise stuck with Windows XP, that the cost of upgrading to Vista is pitance, and the benefits are there.
To cut costs, you cut features; you cut those features which the end user will not likely user or require for day to day running of their computer.
Microsoft is not only going to be competing with a re-invigorated Apple, they’re also competing against themself in that customers will want a decent justification as to why they should sink their dollars into purchasing a copy of Windows Vista when Windows XP does most of the stuff they want.
Its the same situation with Office; people are still holding onto 2000/xp and asking ‘is there a compelling reason to upgrade’, its up to Microsoft to say, ‘yes there is’ and outline what compelling features they are going to include with their product.
Red Hat, SUSE, and others don’t support versions of their OSes indefinitely, either. You can hardly blame them. Software evolves, or dies.
Indeed we will see vendor problems evolve from this. What version will we sell and at what braket?
Why arnt windows doing what the rest of the operating system world are doing?
Look at the default centos RHEL etc install. Chose your path Desktop; Developer; Media; Buisness? It couldnt be that hard to implement from the folks at microsoft. Also then people can chose the windows from a new install that suites them not vendors offerings ramed down their gobs.
Can anyone remember the ME vendor ram?
OEM problems? Please; read information about Vista before you act like a child and read some documentation – knowing Dell, they’ll probably offer Home on the low end machines, with a gimicky ‘free upgrade to premium’ and for their high end Dimension 84xx line, they’ll do the same ‘free upgrade to Ultimate!’
That’s just absurd. I think most people have a hard enough time remembering which Windows is newer, 2000 or XP. This is obviously just another step toward Microsoft’s holy grail of “make the user pay for each additional feature” they’ve been talking up lately.
Just you watch, Windows Update will be a subscription service one day. I guarantee it.
is it still the plan that they will use one iso for all of these, and have the key control what version is installed/available?
Vista Home Basic will run on much older and slower computers and will probably cost the least to compete with Linux.
Vista Home Premium which will ship with most PC’s for the home that are not hardcore like your parents or people who don’t want to pay too much for the OS but don’t want the basic Version. Includes media player and games.
Vista Business for Business computers without a focus on gaming but pure Business.
Vista Business Enterprise for serious bussiness uses of enterprise. You won’t see this version too much.
Vista Ultimate version is what you will see mainly along with the consumer versions.
Vista Starter edition for small emerging markets (again you won’t really see this version that much).
You have all of these versions on ONE DVD. You buy the key and bang you can upgrade to one of these versions.
Windows is a lot more than MAC OS and remember its the same code, the difference is that you are getting additional programs added or subtracted from the version you purchased. For example, why does a business computer need to play games?
I think the real cool thing is that you are not being charged for 64 bit computing as extra, it just comes with almost every version. That is good news. So if I get a 32-bit processor and I upgrade to a 64 bit processor I can decide to be in 32-bit mode or upgrade to 64-bit mode. Nice!
Here is the quote:
“All the flavors of Vista will be able to run in either 32-bit or 64-bit mode, with the exception of Starter, which will be 32-bit only.”
Also I found this part of the article more than interesting…
“It will include two features designed to help with compatibility issues. This means a new subsystem that can run Unix Applications and Virtual PC express and a limited version of Microsoft’s emulation software that will allow Vista enterprise users to run an older version of Windows as a virtual machine.”
I think the real cool thing is that you are not being charged for 64 bit computing as extra, it just comes with almost every version. That is good news. So if I get a 32-bit processor and I upgrade to a 64 bit processor I can decide to be in 32-bit mode or upgrade to 64-bit mode.
You sure about that? It seems you need a new license (at least for XP) when you replace your motherboard, see e.g. http://bink.nu/Article6247.bink
>You sure about that? It seems you need a new license >(at least for XP) when you replace your motherboard, >see e.g. http://bink.nu/Article6247.bink
This is if you use an OEM copy of Windows and ONLY if you replace the motherboard not due to any problems.
If the motherboard is defective than this is out the window. Also if you buy a boxed copy and not an OEM copy this also does not apply.
This is no different than it’s always been.
You mean people actually buy boxed copies of Windows
I thought they buy OEM copies or borrow their mates.
Not true:
“I think the real cool thing is that you are not being charged for 64 bit computing as extra, it just comes with almost every version. That is good news. So if I get a 32-bit processor and I upgrade to a 64 bit processor I can decide to be in 32-bit mode or upgrade to 64-bit mode. Nice!
”
Remember now (Which will apply to all PC’s when Vista comes out) changing processer will require a new license and you will have to pay a fee for that. In Windows XP it only applies to OEM motherboards but in Vista I have read it will apply to all machines, change processer/motherboard and it’s looked at as a new machine requiring a new license for Windows.
Only for OEM copies, if you buy the full retail copy you won’t need to.
“Only for OEM copies, if you buy the full retail copy you won’t need to.”
That is only the stated policy for Windows XP. Not for Windows Vista.
(I stated that in my post)
“It will include two features designed to help with compatibility issues. This means a new subsystem that can run Unix Applications and Virtual PC express and a limited version of Microsoft’s emulation software that will allow Vista enterprise users to run an older version of Windows as a virtual machine.”
In other words, they’re bundling Unix Services and Virtual PC (both aqcuired technologies). Ground breaking for sure….
I’m sorry, I don’t quite understand.
>>Vista Home Premium which will ship with most PC’s for the home that are not hardcore like your parents or people who don’t want to pay too much for the OS but don’t want the basic Version. Includes media player and games. <<
Not hardcore? What is the difference between “hardcore” Vista, and “not hardcore” Vista?
>>Vista Business for Business computers without a focus on gaming but pure Business. <<
Does that just mean that they leave the games off?
>>Vista Business Enterprise for serious bussiness uses of enterprise. You won’t see this version too much. <<
For example, what will this do, that other version won’t?
>>Vista Ultimate version is what you will see mainly along with the consumer versions.<<
Why? What’s the difference?
>>
You have all of these versions on ONE DVD. You buy the key and bang you can upgrade to one of these versions.
<<
Oh goody!! I get to pay msft two or three times over for my OS. I can hardly wait.
>>
Windows is a lot more than MAC OS and remember its the same code, the difference is that you are getting additional programs added or subtracted from the version you purchased. For example, why does a business computer need to play games?
<<
Are you sure that the only difference is the additional programs? For example, XP-Home won’t connect to a domain. Will more basic versions of Vista be similarly crippled?
Windows is a lot more than MAC OS
Explain what you mean by that. How is Windows “a lot more than Mac OS”? More what? If you mean “more money”, I agree with you.
more companies use it
more people use it
more games support it
more accessories support it
more software is developed for it
more hardwares are designed for it
more people OEMs ship it
etc etc….
I really hate Microsoft’s tendency to split up their product line like that. To think I was happy when 9X went away because Windows is now one product line. Yea right, I should have known. I get the feeling that the different editions only exist to rationalize today’s Windows prices. How much do you want to bet Vista Ultimate breaches the 300 dollar/euro line?
I dunno. I have to give them credit for providing more choice and flexibility in their pricing/features.
Well, I don’t think it’s such a bad idea. It’s about choice and not everyone cares about buying the Ultimate Edition.
Yes, I will buy the Ultimate Edition but not everyone needs to buy it nor should everyone buy it.
My mother-in-law just needs access to email and the web and she doesn’t play games or whatever.
It all uses the same code, it’s just different strokes for different folks.
Not every car is going to be for everyone and not every feature is going to be used by everyone in an OS.
I am sure there are people that are going to pay for the cheap versions of windows vista because they just need something small and cheap that works and without all the extras and if they happen to change their mind they have the DVD and can upgrade at any time without having to go to the store and purchasing yet another copy.
This makes it easier on a lot of people.
Linux fans with older computers won’t have to spend so much money and can get a cheaper version and download MONAD for free and be done with it, same with college students.
I really don’t see what the problems are about this. It’s about choice and that is a good thing.
Do you want to be forced to buy Windows Ultimate with a 300 dollar version or do you want to have the choice to make a selection and if you want to upgrade in the future you can do so using the same DVD.
I know that IIS 7.0 comes with Vista Ultimate
and I think a few other versions of the OS as well.
IIS 7.0 is really supposed to be hot.
I think that what msft wants if for you to pay several times over for the same OS.
You buy a bargin PC with Vista basic, then you find it has been crippled to keep you from doing this or that. For example, you won’t be able to load a game you bought unless you upgrade to “ultimate” or whatever. Or your laptop won’t connect to the company’s domain, because it isn’t the business version.
As it is today, practically every version of windows sold is pre-installed OEM. Msft only gets paid once for the OS, and it isn’t very much, only about $100. With the new system, msft hopes to make more like $300 for each OS sold.
It will be nice to have a better install image for XP^H^HVista.
The keys will be convenient…for paying Microsoft. People will like this. Microsoft will get rich.
But Vista will have no other purpose/gain/improvement over XP. And it doesn’t need one. The MS revenue train must continue to roll, nothing else matters to them.
Floyd
http://www.just-think-it.com
Ultimate Version
Well, I guess we all know which version is going to be pirated…
As for me, I’m waiting for the totally sweet OMGWTFBBQ 73h 1337 UB3R h4x0r 3d1710n 4 1337 h4x0r g4m3rz wh0 run servers and play games and push their computer to the max all the time.
Oh wait, there’s no market for that.
Do the MS fanboys really think this “buy one DVD, pay to unlock each feature” is really going to save anyone money? Do you really think MS execs sat down with the marketing/sales/accounting teams, did the math, realized they would take in less money via this “pay per feature” robery, and said, “yeah, let’s do it.”
They’re just charging for things that otherwise would have been free. They are a very innovative company in finding new ways to charge people, I’ll give them that. But they certainly aren’t doing it because they stand to make less money off it.
Seriously, some of the comments on this board sound like they came from little 5 year old MS bashing zealots.
1. Yes, people complain about Linux being fragmented. However, the fragmentation of Windows wont be so bad. For the most part, a program that will run on Vista will run on any version of Vista. This is vastly different from Linux where one flavor wont support programs that run on another. What MS is doing here would be like Red Hat offering 6 different versions of their OS, each with different pre installed programs to suit the user’s needs.
2. So MS is charging extra for features. Hmmm… Havent seen this before. Adobe charges extra for features in Photoshop that arent in Photoshop Elements. Alias charges more for a more feature filled version of Maya as opposed to a basic edition. So all of a sudden its not ok for MS to do the same??
3. Windows XP will still be supported by MS bug/security wise for some time to come. I dont know the exact time, but they even state a period of time they will continue support after a newer OS is released. Heck, Windows 2000 is still being supported.
4. Microsoft is not going to suddenly start charging for bug/security fixes. Even if they tried, I am sure they would be met with huge lawsuits and that idea would be turned down in court.
I just had to get this off my chest.
I’m not so sure if having all the different versions is such a good idea either, but I am fairly confident that MS will have colorful packaging to help steer the consumer in the right direction. Besides, most of the time it comes bundled with a new PC so for many, they wont even need to worry about which version of Vista to get.
>Actually, no.
>They are: Home crippled, Lock-in (subscription), No >indemnity (subscription), Virus Haven, DRM Ultra and >Double-plus EULA.
You really know what I can’t stand? It is the double standard on these forums. A guy with the name Linux sucks gets modded down and his score goes below the threshold (-1), while some troll like you gets a 3 on their post. That is pathetic.
Vista Home Basic is supposed to be cheap that will run on old computers, you can download from the internet and add winamp if you wish.
The subscription is optional and doesn’t include bug fixes and security patches. Windows update already does this.
Viruses, well I haven’t seen one in a long long time.
DRM is overrated and misunderstood by a lot of people on here.
The truth is that most of the six version of windows you will never see being offered out there.
Out of Six versions you might see three at most.
Just because they said there is going to be six doesn’t mean that the market will see all six.
Enterprise for an example will never be seen by most people when they go to buy a copy, the point is really moot.
>Seriously, some of the comments on this board sound
>like they came from little 5 year old MS bashing
>zealots.
I 100 percent agree. The bad part about it, is that they are so misinformed or spreading FUD about them for no reason at all.
Case in point:
Microsoft comes out with a feature called BitLocker and this feature is mainly for notebooks and you can have the choice to turn it on or not and if you do, it encrypts the bootsector so nobody can hijack your data off of your machine.
Now this is mainly for security and its an option, all of a sudden all of the anti-microsoft folks come out and say it’s anti-compettive and its not right and it’s against freedom and open source.
I know a lot of linux folks gave up on Microsoft with Windows 98 and that is all they know, but stop making statements on things you do not know, heard a rumour of or you do not understand.
If you love linux fine, but at least know what you are talking about and are not spreading false information or FUD.
There has been a ton of misinformation and misdirection from a lot of people from this crowd and it needs to end.
If you don’t like Microsoft fine, move on with your lives and stop with the FUD, whining over something you don’t understand, and trollish type behavior.
Now this is mainly for security and its an option, all of a sudden all of the anti-microsoft folks come out and say it’s anti-compettive and its not right and it’s against freedom and open source.
——–
In the case of Microsoft, youre damned if you do, and youre damned if you dont.
if they go with one dvd with multiple keys to unlock each feature, the pirates are gna have a field day with this! This will be hack faster than u can say “vista”