Posted on 08/28/2006 3:01:32 PM PDT by Panerai
Microsoft on Monday briefly posted pricing for Windows Vista on its Canadian Web site, giving an eye into what the company will charge for the new operating system.
The posting indicates that the Home Basic edition of Windows Vista will be priced the same as Windows XP Home, at $233 ($259 Canadian). The Home Premium version, which includes support for Media Center and tablet PC abilities will sell for 13 percent higher rate, a price that translates to about $269 in American dollars.
Microsoft quickly removed the price information, but blogger Ed Bott, who spotted the price list earlier Monday, included the price list in a ZDNet posting. Bott cautioned that those trying to figure out U.S. pricing would be better off comparing the Canadian Vista prices to their XP counterparts than to try and just convert to U.S. dollars.
A Microsoft representative said the company "inadvertently posted Windows Vista Canadian retail prices" on its Web site but said it has removed the posting and is not ready to share U.S. pricing information. The company said it would announce those prices when it ships the "Release Candidate 1" test version, due out by September.
On the business side, Microsoft listed Windows Vista Business at a price that equates to $341 in U.S. currency, 7 percent less than what Microsoft charges in Canada for Windows XP Professional.
The company is still wrapping up development work on the oft-delayed Windows update, which will come more than five years after its predecessor, Windows XP. After issuing the near-final release candidate next month, the company hopes to finalize the code in November in time for a mainstream launch in January.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.com.com ...
Wow!
ping
There goes the $100 laptop idea.
That is why they are doing a test run of DRM with Windows Genuine Advantage, so that they can sell the same video to a million people and not let you share it.
Today I started setting up a MacBook for a client. It is a dream of a system.
But there are some tools around that. I thought this article was too short for its own thread, but ikka's comment was a great segui....
LOL
They are pricing themselves out of the market.
$129 upgrade, $199 to upgrade up to five of your computers, and it's the complete version, all features included.
And what they didn't say is that you will have to buy a new computer to handle the bloatware that's required just to boot up the machine. (And that's just for the stripped down version of Vista -- I understand they had to drop features originally planned to be included.)
Amen. I have customers who still spec, for various reasons, that any PC we supply for their operation has to be on Windows 2000, and it has me wondering how long I could stay on XP for my home and office PCs, and still be able to obtain new licenses for any new machines.
Wait a sec--OS X runs on a standard PC?
I thought it did only with some serious hacking...
yeah they have an x86 version now....
I know that--it only runs on Apple Intel hardware.
There is stuff built into the operating system that refuses to install if the system detects
Not to mention it uses EFI by default; it has to be hacked to use BIOS.
To get it legally, you need to buy a Macintosh or have a computer built with the right hardware or pay $500 or more via becoming an official Apple developer.
Other than that, it's illegal to install OS X on a standard x86 PC.
IOW, I cannot go out to the computer store, buy a copy of Mac OS X and install it on my crappy eMachines (though it'd be nice...)--I'd have to literally buy a Mac or pay heaps of money for a developer license.
Greets Rzenznikj,
Do you have any information as to where it states that it's illegal to install it on a generic X86 pc? Is that because they only sell an "upgrade" version?
I'd like to see them try to enforce that in court in any case.
Apple is afraid of competition and makes it illegal to install on a standard PC, do a search for OSX86 on google or yahoo
It's against the EULA for OS X, and IIRC, Apple served OSX86 with a DMCA infringement notice.
Though if they did offer a copy for standard PC's, I'd snap it up in a heartbeat and just run that. Heck, I'd even pay $150 for a copy...8^)
It's probably more that they don't want to get into legal issues with MS over infringement. You can already run Windows on the new Macs, so why would Apple be afraid of competition from a PC?
Apple is not afraid of competition, but they don't condone piracy of their intellectual property.
It's the other guys who are afraid. Dell is afraid to design a DellOS operating system. Microsoft is afraid to manufacture computer systems, although they've been selling game systems for a while and will attempt to sell music players soon. Apple is the only company with enough courage to make "the whole widget".
Very true...
It'd be nice though if I could run Mac OS X on my cruddy pee-cee...8^)
how is it piracy if i buy the OS X software and put it on my PC? hmmm
yea and if you want one part you gotta go "all in"
uhhh, do you really want me to answer this?
Apple is afraid that their hardware business would colapse if the opened OS X up to PC's...
That would be a violation of the License Agreement. The outside of the Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger box says "IMPORTANT: Use of this product is subject to acceptance of the software license agreements included in this package"
The License Agreement says "IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THIS LICENSE, DO NOT USE THE SOFTWARE. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THIS LICENSE, YOU MAY RETURN THE APPLE SOFTWARE TO THE PLACE WHERE YOU OBTAINED IT FOR A REFUND."
The Permitted License Uses and Restrictions say "This License allows you to install and use one copy of the Apple Software on a single Apple-labeled computer at at time."
Apple has the right to set the terms and conditions of usage for their intellectual property. They have the right to restrict the installation of the operating system to their hardware only. They do allow other operating systems to be installed on Apple hardware, like Windows XP, Windows Vista, Linux, etc. It's a reasonable deal for everyone.
Apple has good reasons to restrict Mac OS X to Apple hardware. It allows Apple to provide the best quality systems on the market, it keeps support costs down, and it keeps the price of the products affordable.
I don't want Apple to waste everyone's time and money by trying to support their OS on junk from Dell, HP and everyone else. Maybe someday Apple will allow third-party manufacturers to certify their hardware for Mac OS X, but until then, Apple should not allow it on PC clones.
The License Agreement says "IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THIS LICENSE, DO NOT USE THE SOFTWARE. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THIS LICENSE, YOU MAY RETURN THE APPLE SOFTWARE TO THE PLACE WHERE YOU OBTAINED IT FOR A REFUND."
Like i said, call the Wammmmbulance...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.