6 versions of Vista to come out.

[YourSurrogateGod]

Microsoft is planning six versions of the next incarnation of its Windows operating system.

Three versions of the software, called Vista, will be for home users, two will be for businesses and one will be for emerging markets.

One of the home versions of Vista will include features that let users store and play back TV shows.

No fixed date has been given for the release of Vista but it is expected to be launched by the end of 2006.

-snip-

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4754462.stm

The MS high brass must be smoking something that the average high school kid doesn't have his/her hands on.

[basketcase]

I thought this was the dumbest idea I have heard yet. Make one version (or 2 at most home/professional) and be done with it.

[bored2k]

Old. Anyways, what's the problem with Windows Vista and its six versions? Ubuntu already has four official versions of its distribution, and I don't see anyone arguing about how much we are "smoking" for being on top of their toes. And dare I not count the amount of Debian variants out there. In short, I don't see what's wrong with it. Is it non-free? It is. Just like every other version of their operating system Microsoft has released. Nothing new.

P.S. : I know, truth hurts.

[bored2k]

I thought this was the dumbest idea I have heard yet. Make one version (or 2 at most home/professional) and be done with it.
Well then, we at linux-land must be a really big bunch of fools without anything good to do, considering the countless Debian variants and the growing Ubuntu ones (and I'm only mentioning Debian), right?

[basketcase]

I don't look at different variants of debian as being different versions, I look at them as their own version.

Vista is vista is vista. I guess the article I read yesterday and quite possibly the time I read it at, I may not have understood their approach.

To each their own.

[bored2k]

I don't look at different variants of debian as being different versions, I look at them as their own version.

Vista is vista is vista. I guess the article I read yesterday and quite possibly the time I read it at, I may not have understood their approach.

To each their own.
So Ubuntu is completely different to Kubuntu? Ubuntu Warty, which worked ok with the Debian repositories was a "completely" new OS? My point is, if we are to diss Windows for it, for once, let's look at our mirror.


And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

[prizrak]

All I gotta say to MS is "Smart move guys"
Think about it, the biggest issue people had with Vista was that the retarded new hardware accelerated interface is not necessary for everyone. So they made a version for someone who doesn't want one and I bet it will cost less. Then they made the full featured version for home users who want the eye candy but have no need for professional functionality also makes sense. Then they made a pro version that works fine for small companies or power users (business basic). Then there is the full featured business desktop that will no doubt be in demand by large organizations. There is the crazy fanboy version that includes everything will be the lowest seller guaranteed. And of course you got the cheap version targeted at developing countries to attempt and reduce piracy as well as try to muscle Linux out.

[Arktis]

An extension of the whole Babylonian appeal of "something for eveyone".

Cartman voice: "Very interesting Clyde-Frog... very interesting indeed...".

Seems like a sound buisness move.

[bored2k]

All I gotta say to MS is "Smart move guys"
Think about it, the biggest issue people had with Vista was that the retarded new hardware accelerated interface is not necessary for everyone. So they made a version for someone who doesn't want one and I bet it will cost less. Then they made the full featured version for home users who want the eye candy but have no need for professional functionality also makes sense. Then they made a pro version that works fine for small companies or power users (business basic). Then there is the full featured business desktop that will no doubt be in demand by large organizations. There is the crazy fanboy version that includes everything will be the lowest seller guaranteed. And of course you got the cheap version targeted at developing countries to attempt and reduce piracy as well as try to muscle Linux out.
Exactly. And that's not even mentioning the unused services the system won't have to load for a regular user. I mean, why in the world does Ubuntu Dapper load up a "Bittorrent tracker" service on me?! I'm sure regular users don't use that. At all.

[basketcase]

I see your point, and you know what they say about arguing over the internet.

The above post about it being a great idea does make sense. But I still think that is a bad idea of 99% of end users who have no idea what is going on. You will catch those ppl who believe if it is the most expensive it is the best, and they will throw that HUGE OS onto their dinosaur of a box.

[Gadren]

Old. Anyways, what's the problem with Windows Vista and its six versions? Ubuntu already has four official versions of its distribution, and I don't see anyone arguing about how much we are "smoking" for being on top of their toes. And dare I not count the amount of Debian variants out there. In short, I don't see what's wrong with it. Is it non-free? It is. Just like every other version of their operating system Microsoft has released. Nothing new.

P.S. : I know, truth hurts.

Great point. When someone complains that Linux has "too many versions," they are told that it's better that way because people have more choice. When Microsoft Vista has "too many versions," it's criticized by all.

[bored2k]

You will catch those ppl who believe if it is the most expensive it is the best, and they will throw that HUGE OS onto their dinosaur of a box.
That's why people ask for advice ;).

If you ask me what OS is the best, I'm not sure I'd say Windows, so I'm not sure they'd buy the most expensive one.

[xequence]

Great point. When someone complains that Linux has "too many versions," they are told that it's better that way because people have more choice. When Microsoft Vista has "too many versions," it's criticized by all.

I agree, but not fully.

There are more differences between... Debian and Ubuntu then XP Home and XP Pro, and probably two vista versions. But that said, who decides how different they need to be for it to be OK?

[bored2k]

I agree, but not fully.

There are more differences between... Debian and Ubuntu then XP Home and XP Pro, and probably two vista versions. But that said, who decides how different they need to be for it to be OK?
Vista manages its versions in a very different manner of how XP does, so that's irrelevant (heck, NT workstation and NT server only had two different registry keys!).

[prizrak]

I see your point, and you know what they say about arguing over the internet.

The above post about it being a great idea does make sense. But I still think that is a bad idea of 99% of end users who have no idea what is going on. You will catch those ppl who believe if it is the most expensive it is the best, and they will throw that HUGE OS onto their dinosaur of a box.
I would disagree with you. A normal user will not buy an OS, to upgrade their current one. They will normally just a get a new machine that will be designed for the intended OS anyways. Budget customers will most likely choose the most basic one cuz of the price power users the most full featured one it's normal :)

[YourSurrogateGod]

Old. Anyways, what's the problem with Windows Vista and its six versions? Ubuntu already has four official versions of its distribution, and I don't see anyone arguing about how much we are "smoking" for being on top of their toes.
That's not a very good comparison. Ubuntu started with 4.10 (correct me if I'm wrong), it then moved on to 5.04 and 5.10. It's a continuation of the operating system. A better comparison to that sequence would be win 3.1, 95, 98, Me, 2000 and XP.

And dare I not count the amount of Debian variants out there. In short, I don't see what's wrong with it.
Actually this is a big problem. Imagine if you're a developer and want to write an app for all linux distros out there. Each distro introduces its own little changes that would drive you nuts. So then you reduce it to the most used distros, but even then you'll have to go through half a dozen of distros to test your code on. That would be a nightmare from a practical point of view (and imo it dogs further Linux expansion.)

P.S. : I know, truth hurts.
;)

[YourSurrogateGod]

Well then, we at linux-land must be a really big bunch of fools without anything good to do, considering the countless Debian variants and the growing Ubuntu ones (and I'm only mentioning Debian), right?
To a degree, yes.

History has shown us that too many options often leads to confusion. For example, after Steve Jobs was ousted from his company and the other CEO took over (don't remember his name) one of the things that he did was introduce many types of the apple computer, which confused the heck out of people (which, imo, will have a similar effect on consumers with Vista.)

[mstlyevil]

That's not a very good comparison. Ubuntu started with 4.10 (correct me if I'm wrong), it then moved on to 5.04 and 5.10. It's a continuation of the operating system. A better comparison to that sequence would be win 3.1, 95, 98, Me, 2000 and XP.

I think he meant Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Edubuntu and Xubuntu.

[YourSurrogateGod]

All I gotta say to MS is "Smart move guys"
Think about it, the biggest issue people had with Vista was that the retarded new hardware accelerated interface is not necessary for everyone. So they made a version for someone who doesn't want one and I bet it will cost less. Then they made the full featured version for home users who want the eye candy but have no need for professional functionality also makes sense. Then they made a pro version that works fine for small companies or power users (business basic). Then there is the full featured business desktop that will no doubt be in demand by large organizations. There is the crazy fanboy version that includes everything will be the lowest seller guaranteed. And of course you got the cheap version targeted at developing countries to attempt and reduce piracy as well as try to muscle Linux out.
To be honest, if you ask me, Mac OS might gain from this. You'll have different options for different people. Now, most of those different people might not be exactly the most computer literate individuals out there (and they'll be confused as hell.) This will also screw Microsoft over since when they have to come out with patches for their stuff, each system will have its own nuance and will be an expensive headache for the company. For Mac, there is just one OS. I'm far from a fan of Apple, but this is a likely prediction of mine.

Oh and the cheap version for the developing world will do jack, since it would be still easier, cheaper and more convenient (in terms of gained features) to pirate the full version.

[YourSurrogateGod]

I think he meant Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Edubuntu and Xubuntu.
That still doesn't change anything. With the exception of a few apps here and there that you can't run on one desktop over the other (or well), there is no change between those two in terms of the kernel and other underlying systems.

Plus, the first 2 and the last one are simply different desktop environments and I doubt that the 3rd is too different from the others with the exception of more apps added on (although I'll admit I've never got my hands on Edubuntu.)

[YourSurrogateGod]

Great point. When someone complains that Linux has "too many versions," they are told that it's better that way because people have more choice. When Microsoft Vista has "too many versions," it's criticized by all.
That's true, you do have more choice, but it becomes a major pain in the neck if you would like to implement an app that would work across different distros well.

[mstlyevil]

That still doesn't change anything. With the exception of a few apps here and there that you can't run on one desktop over the other (or well), there is no change between those two in terms of the kernel and other underlying systems.

Plus, the first 2 and the last one are simply different desktop environments and I doubt that the 3rd is too different from the others with the exception of more apps added on (although I'll admit I've never got my hands on Edubuntu.)

But new users still may be confused by four different versions of Ubuntu. Of course since you and I both are familiar with Linux in general it is easy for us to tell the difference but a complete noob may still be confused by it.

[YourSurrogateGod]

But new users still may be confused by four different versions of Ubuntu. Of course since you and I both are familiar with Linux in general it is easy for us to tell the difference but a complete noob may still be confused by it.
Ofcourse. And it wouldn't surprise me in the least if a similar thing happened with Vista.

If you ask me, the best option for Linux to start taking over would be to have a flagship distro, the one that best symbolizes the entire project. There could other smaller ones ofcourse. The problem is that if you're new to Linux and don't know where to start, you'll be overwhelmed, discouraged and confused by all the distros. By centralizing a few into a flagship of some sort, it would make things simpler. It would also make it easier to develop software for the general Linux market out there (and make money.)

[mstlyevil]

Ofcourse. And it wouldn't surprise me in the least if a similar thing happened with Vista.

If you ask me, the best option for Linux to start taking over would be to have a flagship distro, the one that best symbolizes the entire project. There could other smaller ones ofcourse. The problem is that if you're new to Linux and don't know where to start, you'll be overwhelmed, discouraged and confused by all the distros. By centralizing a few into a flagship of some sort, it would make things simpler. It would also make it easier to develop software for the general Linux market out there (and make money.)

Linspire? :mrgreen: :twisted: [-(

[YourSurrogateGod]

Linspire? :mrgreen: :twisted: [-(
Oh sweet lord no.

I'm daydreaming when I'm saying this, but if I could, I'd have Red Hat and Ubuntu merge (the companies more precisely.)

[graabein]

I bet most home/non-tech users will be very confused by the six (6) versions of Vista. Like my dad & friends. I don't think it is comparable with the number of, say, Debian derivations, but rather Novell or Red Hat's different versions like Suse and OpenSuse and RedHat and Fedora... That's just my opinion.

I'm not going to buy Vista for my computer anyways and when I do need to upgrade my hardware I'll probably build it myself and stick with GNU/Linux.

Party on.

[Leo_01]

6 version is wayyyy to much!
Basic premium is the basic home with aero and some extra "media handling abilities"?!
This is so cursed!
they better make it cheaper or it is linux for mi all the way! (currently only 1 of my PC is dualbooting Winxp and linux, the rest are on linux.)


"We don't want customers to be forced into buying something that isn't going to meet all their needs," said Barry Goffe, Microsoft's director of Windows client product management.
*bang head*

[YourSurrogateGod]

If there are new games coming out and they depend on Vista for something, then I'll probably buy it. Unless I switch to consoles completely... PS3 should be sweet.

[Leo_01]

If there are new games coming out and they depend on Vista for something, then I'll probably buy it. Unless I switch to consoles completely... PS3 should be sweet.
Don't keep your hopes too high...
maybe you are going to be required to but the premium home or the Ultimate version just to play halo 2...

[purdy hate machine]

It’s hardly surprising, Last time I counted there were 6 versions of XP out too:

Home
Pro
Tablet
Media Centre
64bit Itanium
Pro x86-64

[Leo_01]

This is diff...
There are 6 versions of Vista for PC(might work with Tablet) alone!

[prizrak]

This is diff...
There are 6 versions of Vista for PC(might work with Tablet) alone!
I don't remember which one, but one of the versions will have built in handwriting recognition specifically for Tablets. I think most of them will support 64bits as well. So what's the problem with it again?
There are like 10 different versions of Server 2K3 out right now.

[bored2k]

That's not a very good comparison. Ubuntu started with 4.10 (correct me if I'm wrong), it then moved on to 5.04 and 5.10. It's a continuation of the operating system. A better comparison to that sequence would be win 3.1, 95, 98, Me, 2000 and XP.I'm referring to Kubuntu, Ubuntu, Xubuntu and Edubuntu.


Actually this is a big problem. Well then, if we have that "problem" (that's what you call it) ourselves, why is it so hard and awkward for us to digest it when Microsoft is doing the exact same thing? On top of that, Windows XP had six versions and no one complained about it, so why now? I think this is just a case of finding something -anything- to bash Microsoft.

[bjweeks]

There is so many valid reasons to wine/bitch at mircosoft cause this is just stupid.

Edit: Anyways home users only get 2 not 6.

[YourSurrogateGod]

Well then, if we have that "problem" (that's what you call it) ourselves, why is it so hard and awkward for us to digest it when Microsoft is doing the exact same thing?
Vista has yet to come out and the consumers have yet to suffer.

On top of that, Windows XP had six versions and no one complained about it, so why now?
Because the predominant Windows OS' are XP Home and XP Pro (and those have few differences between them in the underlying structure.) Even the tablet version is quite similar. I had a friend with a Toshiba laptop which can fold into a tablet PC, there was little if any difference between his PC and what I had on my desktop.

I think this is just a case of finding something -anything- to bash Microsoft.
Oh please, I gave my reasons why this is a bad idea. Plus if you read my posts on this entire forum, you'll notice that I also pat Microsoft at times on the back. I give credit and criticism where it's due.

[YourSurrogateGod]

There is so many valid reasons to wine/bitch at mircosoft cause this is just stupid.

Edit: Anyways home users only get 2 not 6.
Yes, but if you're a developer and need to test your software in order to make sure that everything works without a hitch, it's going to be a monumental headache.

[Ultimo Aliento]

I say it's a great move :P , many people would buy the "cheap" version, just to know how Vista works, then, to do some nice stuff or to have all the aplications, they would buy the "pro" version of vista... and URGH, i repair computers, so i would probably need to know all the "#$"#$ versions of Vista, if Vista become widely popular just to know how to fix little problems.

They would sell a lot more copies with this aproach.

And... i see the Ubuntu versions vs Vista versions a little different, the Ubuntu versions present some major changes (Gnome, KDE, some different aplications) ... and Vista probably just ripe all the nice stuff in "cheap" version, and add some more in the others... and, if you install Ubuntu but you want to use Amarok, you can do that... in Vista, i bet that you need to pay for everything that dont come with your version.

I hope that here Mexico, Vista dont become too popular, or i would need to spend a LOT of money , grrrrrrrr [-(

[bored2k]

Vista has yet to come out and the consumers have yet to suffer.So that's it? You're just going off on Microsoft because they actually had a plan? That's it? Whoa. That was easy.


Because the predominant Windows OS' are XP Home and XP Pro (and those have few differences between them in the underlying structure.) Even the tablet version is quite similar. I had a friend with a Toshiba laptop which can fold into a tablet PC, there was little if any difference between his PC and what I had on my desktop.Everyone needs to simply get over this. No one argues about Microsoft Office and its N versions or do they? Can you do websites on MS Office basic? No. You know why? because it lacks Frontpage. Can you play absolutely everything on Vista Basic/Home? No. Why? because you need the super++ mac-daddy/ultimate version.


Oh please, I gave my reasons why this is a bad idea. Plus if you read my posts on this entire forum, you'll notice that I also pat Microsoft at times on the back. I give credit and criticism where it's due.You're not the first to call it a bad idea, and you won't be the last. Period.

[bored2k]

Yes, but if you're a developer and need to test your software in order to make sure that everything works without a hitch, it's going to be a monumental headache.
Can you prove why it will be a "monumental headache"? How do you know it will be harder/easier to develop applications on the different versions?

[prizrak]

Yes, but if you're a developer and need to test your software in order to make sure that everything works without a hitch, it's going to be a monumental headache.
WHY?
1) You can count the starter edition out already, it's only for very poor countries.
2) Home users still get two versions Basic (no Aero) and Full (or w/e it is) with Aero and some extra stuff.
The kernel is the same exact thing on all of them, the only possible thing I can see is having to include Aero and "classic" widgets, which I'm sure will be taken care of by MS IDE's. I am willing to bet that most of the differentiation will be taken care off in the same way as Home vs Pro right now. Couple of registry keys that turn off the "premium functionality" and you got "basic" edition. I really don't see a problem with having 6 versions, it's an attempt by MS to counter Linux. Now XP Pro has to have all the functionality required by huge IBM like companies as well as small stuff for your local gym. It also means that some of the big boys don't get the control they need over the desktops so they go with 3rd party solutions. This in turn is a threat to MS because it makes it easier to switch to another platform, if the 3rd party has a port for it or if the other platform allows for said functionality w/o having to get another piece of software. They can also be more flexible in their pricing, they can price Home basic at $50 retail on the bottom end and Enterprise at $500 a license on the top end. As opposed to XP Pro being $200 right now.

[KiwiNZ]

Tall poppies :rolleyes:

[YourSurrogateGod]

Can you prove why it will be a "monumental headache"? How do you know it will be harder/easier to develop applications on the different versions?
Ok, it says in the article that different versions of Vista will have different features for each user group that Microsoft intends to target, right? Well, there is the basic Vista thing, then there is the one with more features (like extra 3D support or something.)

Now, imagine you're a game developer. Your goal is to make a game that is rich with features and goodies that other companies might not have ever attempted (after all that's how you'll make money), so you decide to use all of the 3D goodies that Vista has in some more expensive versions in order to get things to work just right. But in order to reach a full market, you'll need this game to install and run on as many computers as you possibly can (a wider market will bring in more money), so now you have to make sure that your game runs fine on the cheap version of Vista if you want to reach this market. Someone pass me some tylenol...

[YourSurrogateGod]

2) Home users still get two versions Basic (no Aero) and Full (or w/e it is) with Aero and some extra stuff.
What if you're making an app that should run on all versions of Vista as opposed just the home/business editions? You'll need to test your app on all of them in order to ensure that this won't asplode in your face... that will be painful.

[joflow]

Ok, it says in the article that different versions of Vista will have different features for each user group that Microsoft intends to target, right? Well, there is the basic Vista thing, then there is the one with more features (like extra 3D support or something.)

Now, imagine you're a game developer. Your goal is to make a game that is rich with features and goodies that other companies might not have ever attempted (after all that's how you'll make money), so you decide to use all of the 3D goodies that Vista has in some more expensive versions in order to get things to work just right. But in order to reach a full market, you'll need this game to install and run on as many computers as you possibly can (a wider market will bring in more money), so now you have to make sure that your game runs fine on the cheap version of Vista if you want to reach this market. Someone pass me some tylenol...

I think you're confused. The "extra 3D support" is actually Aero (or whatever its called)..thats the 3D accelerated desktop. For game developers its actually going to be easier to develop games for Vista because of DirectX10. DirectX10 will not feature cap bits which basically means that if a graphics card is considered DirectX10 then it must support the entire dx10 feature set. Whereas with DirectX9, graphics card makers didn't have to support the entire feature set. So you had directx 9 cards that were missing some dx9 features that other dx9 cards had. That means that game developers couldn't be certain that all dx9 features could be used if the player had a dx9 card.

[YourSurrogateGod]

I think you're confused. The "extra 3D support" is actually Aero (or whatever its called)..thats the 3D accelerated desktop. For game developers its actually going to be easier to develop games for Vista because of DirectX10. DirectX10 will not feature cap bits which basically means that if a graphics card is considered DirectX10 then it must support the entire dx10 feature set. Whereas with DirectX9, graphics card makers didn't have to support the entire feature set. So you had directx 9 cards that were missing some dx9 features that other dx9 cards had. That means that game developers couldn't be certain that all dx9 features could be used if the player had a dx9 card.
http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=782599&postcount=43

[bored2k]

Couldn't have said it better than joflow.

YSG, your just bloating the facts up to what you want to say and understand. That's my sad opinion.

[YourSurrogateGod]

Couldn't have said it better than joflow.

YSG, your just bloating the facts up to what you want to say and understand. That's my sad opinion.
Yep... sure it I am.

[joflow]

What if you're making an app that should run on all versions of Vista as opposed just the home/business editions? You'll need to test your app on all of them in order to ensure that this won't asplode in your face... that will be painful.

I don't understand how that process would be harder then a linux developer testing his app for different linux distros, DEs, WMs, etc or a Mac developer having to test his apps for 10.1, 10.2, 10.3, 10.4, etc. It'd probably be much easier because the developer could probably count on many things being standardized. For instance, the kernel will always be the same. It seems to me that most of the differences between the verisons of vista aren't under the hood but just features/eyecandy that won't effect programs.

I've read a bit about vista and it seems that it could be a great OS. I have some issues with the DRM (but it seems to me like MS had to bow down to the MPAA or else lose any chance of vista having support for legally viewing some HD content) but there are alot of worthy changes like an overhauled kernel with better resistance to viruses and trojans, brand new network stack with good IPv6 support, built in voice recogition, per application volume control and an audio stack that runs in user mode instead of kernel mode, an "sandboxed" IE 7 that will have limited ability to make system changes, etc

Its not smart to bash an OS until you've tried it. I look forward to trying it...as well as trying Dapper+1.

[KiwiNZ]

I believe its a good idea, it gives choice.
As for consumer confusion that will not be an issue as the huge majority of Windows editions are sold with PC,s so the Manufacturers will be making the appropriate decisions. The Boxed editions are generally purchased by those who know what they are doing .

WinXP from memory already has 5 versions.

[prizrak]

What if you're making an app that should run on all versions of Vista as opposed just the home/business editions? You'll need to test your app on all of them in order to ensure that this won't asplode in your face... that will be painful.
For the love of the kernel, WHY WOULD IT BE PAINFUL? Firefox works on ANY Linux distro, ANY Windows, and OS X. All Vista versions are going to be EXACTLY the same under the hood. If we have completely cross platform applications, why would there be a problem developing for one OS that happens to have some different features. You are also forgetting the .Net push that MS is doing, which would make the OS you are running more or less irrelevant. Like I said the only possible drawback is having to include Aero and non Aero GUI for the applications to make sure they run on the non Aero versions.

[xhie]

There are a billion flavors of Debian, and 4 of ubuntu and so on... But as far as I see it the main differance is that, if you install flavor X of a linux OS, you can still get most of what makes flavor Y cool.

Like you can have ubuntu run KDE, and so forth. I dont know if the people that bought the non-tv-playback version of Vista are going to be able to get that. Or if they can but with paying something for it.

Linux flavors = the stuff you need to be confertable right away out of the box
$soft flavors = locking you into a little tiney box you can never get out of

Well maybee its not all that drastic, but you see what I'm saying.

[joflow]

There are a billion flavors of Debian, and 4 of ubuntu and so on... But as far as I see it the main differance is that, if you install flavor X of a linux OS, you can still get most of what makes flavor Y cool.

Like you can have ubuntu run KDE, and so forth. I dont know if the people that bought the non-tv-playback version of Vista are going to be able to get that. Or if they can but with paying something for it.

Linux flavors = the stuff you need to be confertable right away out of the box
$soft flavors = locking you into a little tiney box you can never get out of

Well maybee its not all that drastic, but you see what I'm saying.

How is it lock-in? From what I've been reading the basic, premium and ultimate editions will be put on the same DVD and if you want to upgrade, you'll be able to go into the control panel and upgrade (hopefully for only the difference in price between the version you have and the version you want..but I dont think pricing for upgrades are confirmed yet). So I don't see how you're locked in to one particular version..plus you should do your research and make sure you buy the version that fits your needs then you wont have to worry about upgrading.

[xhie]

How is it lock-in? From what I've been reading the basic, premium and ultimate editions will be put on the same DVD and if you want to upgrade, you'll be able to go into the control panel and upgrade (hopefully for only the difference in price between the version you have and the version you want..but I dont think pricing for upgrades are confirmed yet). So I don't see how you're locked in to one particular version..plus you should do your research and make sure you buy the version that fits your needs then you wont have to worry about upgrading.

I guess its the having to pay for upgrades part that gets me. They could just sell you all of it at the same time. I dunno... maybee I'm just cheep.

Most everyday people dont do there reaserch before they buy a microsoft OS. Hell 90% of the time it just comes preinstalled.

[newbie2]

Mar. 01, 2006

Responding to a recent article in ExtremeTech entitled "Why Windows Vista Won't Suck," DesktopLinux.com columnist Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols, who's been using Vista for months, is pulling no punches: Microsoft's replacement for Windows XP is flat-out going to "suck," he retorts.

"While I write a lot about Linux, and I prefer it, my real specialty is that I know operating systems of all types and sorts, including Vista," Vaughan-Nichols writes. "So when I say Vista sucks, well, I know what I'm talking about."

"'Suck' is a relative term, though," he adds. "Vista will be better than XP, which has easily been Microsoft's best desktop operating system to date. However, Vista also requires far more hardware oomph than previous Windows systems ... The truth is that very, very few people are going to be upgrading their existing systems to Vista. To make it work well, you're really going to need a new computer. If you didn't buy your PC in 2006, I wouldn't even try to run Vista on it."

Read Vaughan-Nichols's complete column here, to find out how he backs up his claims.

http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS4597193927.html
:rolleyes:

[prizrak]

I guess its the having to pay for upgrades part that gets me. They could just sell you all of it at the same time. I dunno... maybee I'm just cheep.

Most everyday people dont do there reaserch before they buy a microsoft OS. Hell 90% of the time it just comes preinstalled.
Yes they COULD sell everything in one version. However XP Home right now is a $100 (If I remember correctly) retail. Vista Home Basic could very well cost $50 retail. Home Full could be a $100 and so on and so forth. So if say you have a laptop (known for weak video cards) and want the features of Vista (other than Aero and some extra multimedia stuff) you get the Home Basic edition that is not very expensive and fits your needs. OEM's will most likely have a choice with different pricing options when you are getting the comp. It is also a good move on MS's part to put out a non Aero Vista because many people (myself included) hated the idea of running that on a mobile machine. You are also acting like there is no such thing as 3rd party software vendors. If you got the version of Vista that say doesn't play DVD's out of the box you get the K-lite codec pack and use MCP.