Vista, Office 2007 cracked. Kind of.

[Techno_Funky]

Why can't people just buy the damn software? :no:

So when are you gifting me a copy :)

[Somnus]

well in australia the ultimate version costs $700AUD which is $535US

$400US is $523AUD

i would be perfectly fine if the ultimate version cost $550AUD which is still $30AUD more then the us price, but it is not. it is almost $200 more just for an even larger profit

In Canada I believe the Ultimate Edition will retail for something like $600CDN.

That is completely fine with me.

Lucerne milk is $3.29 for a 4L jug. A Mars bar is $0.93. Pizza Hut charges $17.99 for 2 medium 2 topping pizzas not including tax and delivery.

I pay for all those without bitching. Vista will be no different.

Company's set their retail prices. If I want what they offer, I purchase it. I make a consumer choice.

If you can't afford the Ultimate Edition, choose a version you can afford, or stick with what you have.

Whatever you do, just don't steal it.

[Deniss]

Why can't people who can't afford Vista just stick with XP? If you're complaining about having to upgrade software and hardware for something that you claim isn't worth it, then don't bother doing so.

And really, if someone offered you 9.95$ for something that you've worked 40 hours a week on for the last 5 years, wouldn't you tell them to go to hell?

That's just silly. You're acting as if Microsoft is poor. And if only prices can make them rich, that is their problem, then they shouldn't be in their business at all. They aren't efficient. Let there be another company, but there is not, since Microsoft is a corporation.

In Canada I believe the Ultimate Edition will retail for something like $600CDN.

That is completely fine with me.

Lucerne milk is $3.29 for a 4L jug. A Mars bar is $0.93. Pizza Hut charges $17.99 for 2 medium 2 topping pizzas not including tax and delivery.

I pay for all those without bitching. Vista will be no different.

Company's set their retail prices. If I want what they offer, I purchase it. I make a consumer choice.

If you can't afford the Ultimate Edition, choose a version you can afford, or stick with what you have.

Whatever you do, just don't steal it.

That's right you make a consumer choice. With Windows, it's just Windows. Pay us money and use better software or just pay us money and use what you have, and then we just give you no support.

[liquidcore]

But why exactly are they higher? Why should I pay more? Can you provide me with a breakdown? As far as I am concerned Microsoft has done nothing to make this Windows version run EVEN better on my EVEN older computer.

All I see is this: I need a better computer (costs me money), better monitor (costs me money) and I need to pay for all the other NEW applications that are compatible with this version of Windows (costs me money).

My main point is: we cannot determine how much we need to pay for Windows and other Microsoft software because there ARE NO alternatives for us to compare with.

I am not saying you should stop paying Microsoft employees, no you shouldn't. But not by the cost of end user.

Since it's a corporation, government should finance Microsoft so that it can offer better prices of consumers.

And what exactly is new in Windows Vista? Better graphics? I shouldn't even start on the amounts that designers make. They make so little... most of them of course.

You would. Even for 2000, because that's the only way to go. Oh yes, and there is piracy of course.

By no means I will encourage piracy, but this is what happens with big companies.

Thank God we don't have a pirated BMW or Mercedes or whatever from that class :)

When you look at the Price of Ultimate, you think "Wow, $400! (Depending on where you are) Thats Way too Much" What you have to think about is that Ultimate Edition is not aimed at your average home user who, besides us geeks, has a few games and applications that they run. Ultimate is just that, It is the top of the line fuly featured operating system juiced up for those power users that actually need all of the features that it comes with. Most people seem to be bitching about the price of ultimate because they want to able to say that they have Ultimate edition. Bragging rights.

Does everyone need XP Media Center? No they don't. You can have a TV, a VCR, a radio, and whatever else you WANT. Is it cool to have? Sure, but you need the equipment in the pc to get the functionality out of it. Same with Vista. You want Vista Media Center? Then pay for it, but do you need it? No. So for your average home user, do you need Vista Home Basic? No you don't. There are plenty of applications that run on your existing operating system, and plenty of open source applications that you can get that interact the same as Microsoft design products.

Sure there are still machines that are running Windows ME or Windows 98, or, heaven forbid Windows 95. Do they run? Well, yes they do, in relationship with what you are doing on them. Support for those products has ended, why you ask, because people constantly want a new, better, more intuitive product, something to make their lives easier, something to enable them to do more, quicker, and they want it now. You can only support outdated software for so long, because people want new and shiny. If you spend all of your time and resources on software that people ultimately agree doesn't handle the spftware that people expect now, you would never release a new product, that people want. A company that did that would have no shelf life. You wouldn't make enough money to put into the research and development that goes into creating something better that people want. So yes, at some point in time that piece of software you have now will no longer be supported, making way for bigger and better. Just like that old 286 you might have lying around doesn't really run todays applications well, in 10 years, will your copy of XP run new applications well?

So the Vista Versions are as follows, its just up to you to decide what you need, if you need it:

Home Basic Edition, which is really the sibling to today's Windows XP Home. However, as the name suggests, there's also Home Premium Edition, and this is where we start to split features like hairs and create a gaggle of products. HPE will build on the the Basic Edition by adding, most notably, the next-generation of Media Center capabilities, including support for HDTV, DVD authoring, and even DVD ripping backed up (of course) by Windows DRM. For non-corporate types, this is probably going to be the OS that most people use. It's similar to XP Pro in power, but with all of the added bells and whistles for entertainment. Well, most of them.

Windows Vista Professional Edition won't occupy the same spot that XP Pro occupies today, because this time it's truly aimed at businesses. It won't feature the MCE functionality that Home Premium Edition has, but it begins to provide the kind of functionality you'd expect in a business environment, such as support for non-Microsoft networking protocols and Domain support. But don't expect too many businesses to necessarily turn to PE. Microsoft is also planning both a Small Business Edition and an Enterprise Edition, which build upon pro by adding (seemingly minor) features aimed at appealing to each market. SBE, for instance, includes a networked backup solution, while EE will include things like Virtual PC integration, and the ability to encrypt an entire volume of information.

Last but not least, there's Ultimate Edition. Windows Vista Ultimate is the most comprehensive edition of Windows Vista. It is the first operating system that combines all of the advanced infrastructure features of a business-focused operating system, all of the management and efficiency features of a mobility-focused operating system, and all of the digital entertainment features of a consumer-focused operating system. For the person who wants one operating system that is great for working from home, working on the road, and for entertainment, Windows Vista Ultimate is the operating system that lets you have it all.

[Daybreak]

If that was the only way to obtain a legal copy of Windows XP Professional, then yes. I would pay $1000US.

There is no gray area when it comes to piracy. White your right. Black your a hack. Simple as that.

Oh bull****. If you were dying of thirst and next to a stream to which I owned, and I charged you $100,000 for a drink from that stream, would you pay for it? Or simply just ignore me and drink straight from it?

Nothing is ever in black and white. Piracy is legally wrong, sure, but is it wholly morally wrong?

(A) Reproduction costs for such products are very low. Unlike say cars or hardware, essentially, once you recoup your R&D and marketing costs, each piece of software you sell is nearly pure profit.

(B) Most of the individuals pirating them aren't using them to generate revenue of any sort. Companies that use pirated products to make money should be relentlessly prosecuted, that I agree, but home users/students?

© Despite the claimed lowering of piracy rates with WGA, we have not seen any drop in prices for any products. Essentially, this seems to me then that one argument against piracy (that they are shifting the burdens of cost to paying customers) falls flat on its face since even though piracy has been reduced, the costs are still the same.

[Xerxes]

well in australia the ultimate version costs $700AUD which is $535US

$400US is $523AUD

i would be perfectly fine if the ultimate version cost $550AUD which is still $30AUD more then the us price, but it is not. it is almost $200 more just for an even larger profit

As a fellow Aussie I agree it sucks we must pay $200 more then the Americans. However, it does not mean MS are making an extra ~$200 profit off each sale, don't forget there is the good old GST and possibly other taxes and/or charges our government will be taking off it..so in the end MS is probably not making that much more then what they make off it in North America (which could be why we pay more then they do)

[Somnus]

Piracy doesn't reduce companys earnings. High price does.

Piracy = theft.

Theft does in fact reduce a company's overall profit margin.

Whenever you in-cure costs to earn revenue, you reduce your amount of overall earnings. Security and anti-piracy measures are earning reducing factors.

That is simple economics.

The Gap has high prices, and they seem to be doing just fine.

[Xab]

And really, if someone offered you 9.95$ for something that you've worked 40 hours a week on for the last 5 years, wouldn't you tell them to go to hell?

Uh, not if 20 million people offered me that. Vista isn't being sold to just one guy.

[Deniss]

Piracy = theft.

Theft does in fact reduce a company's overall profit margin.

Whenever you in-cure costs to earn revenue, you reduce your amount of overall earnings. Security and anti-piracy measures are earning reducing factors.

That is simple economics.

The Gap has high prices, and they seem to be doing just fine.

That's economics for markets that have competition, but not for corporation markets, where there is no competition. Bad analogy imo.

[Scirwode]

I thought I come in and say a few things here. I come from a country where you can easily find a pirated version of Windows at a major shopping centre without any problems. They cost at the most RM5 which is about 2$ if I'm not mistaken. You're not only limited to OS as you can get games and software of just about any version and they will package it in a nice cover. That is how far piracy has gone from. Yet, I still use an original Windows, bought with my own money by saving from buying cheap food and walking to my university in KL instead of using the LRT.

The reason why I do this is simple - piracy is stealing, full stop. You can lie to yourself that it's justifiable since it's expensive but for me that is a lame excuse. You are willing to pay 600$ to 2000$ to get a PS3 and I don't even have a console, let alone can I afford one. You can get big screen tv's that are HDTV compliant or have HDMI input but I still have an old TV that has lasted with me for almost 12 years. The only new thing that I have is my notebook, which is necessary for my work and studies, and my phone which I use a lot considering the calls I have to make.

I think there are a lot of people who have the wrong idea here despite what you think. You believe that because the software is buggy and such, you just pirate it and not pay for it? How would you feel if I pirate something that you had spent days, weeks or maybe months for others to use only to find that they do not appreciate your work by pirating it. Maybe you get paid for it and you salary is not affected. But ask yourself, how would you feel if you see someone using your software without the proper license?

I can't believe some of the comments in this thread. I'm not poor but I'm not rich either so I have to work hard to get what I want. Some of you are willing to get three gaming consoles at once, buy a graphic card that costs almost RM2000 over here and then change it again in a few months, replace a perfectly working phone for a new model, get a big car even if you're the only one driving it, hold elaborate birthday parties - the list goes on.

Maybe you are not like the people that I have just described. Maybe I'm just spouting hot air. But ask yourself this, if you see someone trying to steal a car, what goes through your head and what is the action you would take? Exchange the same scenario with piracy and you'll find they're one and the same. I paid RM350 for a Windows XP Home and RM500 for a Windows XP Pro. I could easily have gotten both for RM10 or get a special DVD version that has numerous enhancements made by crackers but I don't. I believe that says it all.

Sure, the software is expensive and in a way it is buggy, but that does not give you any right to steal it. If they lower the price, then well done, I'm all for it. But I rather be an honest man with a clear conscience than a thief with no morals. You decide.

Scirwode

[Somnus]

That's right you make a consumer choice. With Windows, it's just Windows. Pay us money and use better software or just pay us money and use what you have, and then we just give you no support.

Where does is it stated that for $189 (the cost of XP Home) that you get lifetime support? How does that make any business sense at all?

Does your car come with a lifetime warranty? The toaster in your kitchen? The sofa in your livingroom? Of course not!

Why in blazing hell would you think that Microsoft should support a certain version of Windows for anything more than their projected life span?

I paid $39,000 for my car and I only got a 5 yr bumper to bumper warranty. So for $600 with Vista I should expect 20 yrs of support?

After 5 yrs if something goes wrong with my car, I either fix it, or get a new car. Same thing with software.

Now I have truly heard all the excuses for whining against Microsoft. This one takes the cake though.

[macmax]

Why dont people stick with Older version of Windows ? Win 2K/XP SP2 ? There is no reason for people to upgrade if you dont have the cash to buy. Microsoft isnt asking anyone to buy their NEW OS.

If you have a car that you got 6 months back and if Toyoto or some other company come up with a new model do you go and steal it just because its new ? You dont, you stick with your old model dont you.

Stealing any piece of software and pirating it is just like you do some work and someone else comes and takes all the credit. As simple as that.

[Deniss]

I can't believe some of the comments in this thread. I'm not poor but I'm not rich either so I have to work hard to get what I want. Some of you are willing to get three gaming consoles at once, buy a graphic card that costs almost RM2000 over here and then change it again in a few months, replace a perfectly working phone for a new model, get a big car even if you're the only one driving it, hold elaborate birthday parties - the list goes on.

Maybe you are not like the people that I have just described. Maybe I'm just spouting hot air. But ask yourself this, if you see someone trying to steal a car, what goes through your head and what is the action you would take? Exchange the same scenario with piracy and you'll find they're one and the same. I paid RM350 for a Windows XP Home and RM500 for a Windows XP Pro. I could easily have gotten both for RM10 or get a special DVD version that has numerous enhancements made by crackers but I don't. I believe that says it all.

Sure, the software is expensive and in a way it is buggy, but that does not give you any right to steal it. If they lower the price, then well done, I'm all for it. But I rather be an honest man with a clear conscience than a thief with no morals. You decide.

Scirwode

You're a honest man, that's good for you. But is the software giant honest with you? You decide. It's good that we have good people, who have their beliefs, but that doesn't stop others from seeking truth and pushing further.

Like stealing a car is a bad analogy. It's not the same thing. Microsoft has no alternative. Making the price higher isn't the right thing to do. It's just not efficient for consumers who have no choice. Government should finance half of Microsoft's losses, but they don't. That's why we have no real choice and high prices = high piracy.

People need to know why they need to pay big money and why the company that is working in favor of other's is charging them more and getting more overall.

Where does is it stated that for $189 (the cost of XP Home) that you get lifetime support? How does that make any business sense at all?

Does your car come with a lifetime warranty? The toaster in your kitchen? The sofa in your livingroom? Of course not!

Why in blazing hell would you think that Microsoft should support a certain version of Windows for anything more than their projected life span?

I paid $39,000 for my car and I only got a 5 yr bumper to bumper warranty. So for $600 with Vista I should expect 20 yrs of support?

After 5 yrs if something goes wrong with my car, I either fix it, or get a new car. Same thing with software.

Now I have truly heard all the excuses for whining against Microsoft. This one takes the cake though.

You misunderstood me, I am not saying they should give you a life-long support, I am just saying that their support is only so much. It's not full support.

Just tell me, what is more profitable for you if you were Microsoft: make updates for software that you have already sold, or make new software and sell that for another price (even the same)?

Yes, I know the answer, but that is def. at an expense of consumers. That's not efficient for a company that is only one in the market.

[Somnus]

Oh bull****. If you were dying of thirst and next to a stream to which I owned, and I charged you $100,000 for a drink from that stream, would you pay for it? Or simply just ignore me and drink straight from it?

Nothing is ever in black and white. Piracy is legally wrong, sure, but is it wholly morally wrong?

(A) Reproduction costs for such products are very low. Unlike say cars or hardware, essentially, once you recoup your R&D and marketing costs, each piece of software you sell is nearly pure profit.

(B) Most of the individuals pirating them aren't using them to generate revenue of any sort. Companies that use pirated products to make money should be relentlessly prosecuted, that I agree, but home users/students?

? Despite the claimed lowering of piracy rates with WGA, we have not seen any drop in prices for any products. Essentially, this seems to me then that one argument against piracy (that they are shifting the burdens of cost to paying customers) falls flat on its face since even though piracy has been reduced, the costs are still the same.

Piracy is black and white. Honestly it is.

If you think piracy has reduced, then your facts are wrong. Very wrong.

Piracy is currently at an all time high. As broadband internet increases in speed, piracy levels rise parallel. Piracy is becoming so blatant that people are trying to sell pirated software directly on Ebay, or on websites where they clearly define it as pirated.

New torrent sites pop up daily, and the more popular/older sites are making in excess of $2000 off their users per month. These aren't even the BIG torrent sites. The larger ones are making over $6000 off their users after paying the server bills.

These are direct stats from seized PayPal accounts belonging to torrent site owners and SIIA officials.

There are quite a few people here talking about piracy and how it isn't hurting anyone, or how it is reduced when they really don't their facts.

I highly suggest you read the SIIA website for factual information, and to get yourself educated to the cold hard facts.

[Miuku.]

Hypocrisy reeks here.

Raise your hands, all of you, who have copied games, have mp3s (illegal) on your harddrive or have otherwise conducted in non-legal activity anytime during your personal history? What, everyone?

What's that saying about throwing stones in a glass house ..

[lol911]

Maybe you are not like the people that I have just described. Maybe I'm just spouting hot air. But ask yourself this, if you see someone trying to steal a car, what goes through your head and what is the action you would take? Exchange the same scenario with piracy and you'll find they're one and the same. I paid RM350 for a Windows XP Home and RM500 for a Windows XP Pro. I could easily have gotten both for RM10 or get a special DVD version that has numerous enhancements made by crackers but I don't. I believe that says it all.

It ain't the same stealing a car as pirating software. A car is a real world object, software is just bits and bytes. Now let's say it was 100 years in the future and you could replicate that car in minutes just by pointing a gadget to it, that would be the same as pirating software. Pirating is not stealing anything but future revenue from a company, it ain't stealing their product by any means.

I would like to say against your arguement: I can't believe there are so many people in this thread defending a monopolist company like Microsoft which doesn't support open standards and sue 500 smaller companies each year. I can't believe you defend the insanely high price of Vista.

[zhangm Supervisor]

That's just silly. You're acting as if Microsoft is poor. And if only prices can make them rich, that is their problem, then they shouldn't be in their business at all. They aren't efficient. Let there be another company, but there is not, since Microsoft is a corporation.

That is among the most asinine and selfish arguments that I've ever heard. Everyone - I mean, everyone at Microsoft works for their wages, from the people that wipe the grunge off the keyboards, to Bill Gates himself. Yes, Microsoft is a corporation, but corporations are built by, and around people. You see some cold dead entity, whereas in reality, Microsoft means jobs for many tens of thousands of people, another 5 years of stable, reliable work, food on the table, maybe a decent car in the garage of a house. But this stuff isn't served on a plate. It doesn't grow on trees. It involves earning it, something your sorry ass apparently doesn't understand.

Yes, prices make them rich. How else do you think they get rich? Give away their software for free and hope the tooth fairy tips them big the next time a tooth falls out?

You seem under the delusion that "Microsoft is rich" because someone walked into the office one day and said, "Hey Billy, I'll give you 15 billion dollars and you can build a company with buildings of solid gold." Is that the way you think big companies work? Wrong. You start small, and work your ass off to get big. And when you see profits coming in, you reinvest it in more employees, and bringing more ideas into reality. Otherwise, you get stagnant and die. Yes, Microsoft rakes in money. Then it spends it on developing more software, hiring more workers so they can live out a nice happy life, etc. But all this involves working for it. Nothing comes freely.

See where software pirates fit into this? They don't. They're leeches. Filth. :yes:

[Pitreck]

1) There are the free alternatives. No one says you HAVE to have certain software.

2) For Office At some point, people are in school, even those people with higher eduction that you spoke of. Thats all you need to get Office Student Edition free of charge.

3) If you don't make that much money, the chances your computer could reasonably operate Windows Vista Ultimate Edition? Slim to none, which makes that entire section of your post irrelevant.

1) What alternatives are you talking about? Linux? Give me a break. By the programs and file formats I use everyday I am somewhat forced to use Windows. Besides, Linux it's nowhere near Windows in look and usability.

2) I don't know too much about it. I've only heard that some high schools and universities in Poland give that opportunity.

3) I have Athlon XP 2600+, 768MB of ram and GF 6600GT. With that Vista operates on a descent level for me.

[Deniss]

I would like to say against your arguement: I can't believe there are so many people in this thread defending a monopolist company like Microsoft which doesn't support open standards and sue 500 smaller companies each year. I can't believe you defend the insanely high price of Vista.

100% correct!

[Somnus]

Just tell me, what is more profitable for you if you were Microsoft: make updates for software that you have already sold, or make new software and sell that for another price (even the same)?

Yes, I know the answer, but that is def. at an expense of consumers. That's not efficient for a company that is only one in the market.

My belief on your first question is this:

Customer service in my mind has no compromise.

With that said, I don't mean the support has to be 100% free or last forever.

Personally I have always found Microsoft's support to be excellent. When you purchase a retail version you get two free phone calls and all the free email tech support you want. They release monthly patches and emergency patches if the problem is severe enough.

For my $300.. that is more than enough to satisfy me. I don't expect much more for a product that cost me $300. My TV cost me $4200 and it only came with a 1 yr default factory warranty.

So far MS is looking pretty good.

To answer the second part of your question.

Of course company's like MS have to make new products to survive. It is the nature of the beast. They invest a sum of money into producing a line of products for a given year, set the retail price, and hope for the best. It could be a complete flop. We all do remember Windows ME right? Then Windows 2000 hit the shelves and it was a huge success. Business is hit or miss. They take the risk in that we make the ultimate decision at the cash registers.

If no one buys it, they lose money.

Boycott them. Take legal approaches to changing their pricing views. All I am saying is piracy is the _wrong_ approach.

[Deniss]

That is among the most asinine and selfish arguments that I've ever heard. Everyone - I mean, everyone at Microsoft works for their wages, from the people that wipe the grunge off the keyboards, to Bill Gates himself. Yes, Microsoft is a corporation, but corporations are built by, and around people. You see some cold dead entity, whereas in reality, Microsoft means jobs for many tens of thousands of people, another 5 years of stable, reliable work, food on the table, maybe a decent car in the garage of a house. But this stuff isn't served on a plate. It doesn't grow on trees. It involves earning it, something your sorry ass apparently doesn't understand.

Yes, prices make them rich. How else do you think they get rich? Give away their software for free and hope the tooth fairy tips them big the next time a tooth falls out?

You seem under the delusion that "Microsoft is rich" because someone walked into the office one day and said, "Hey Billy, I'll give you 15 billion dollars and you can build a company with buildings of solid gold." Is that the way you think big companies work? Wrong. You start small, and work your ass off to get big. And when you see profits coming in, you reinvest it in more employees, and bringing more ideas into reality. Otherwise, you get stagnant and die. Yes, Microsoft rakes in money. Then it spends it on developing more software, hiring more workers so they can live out a nice happy life, etc. But all this involves working for it. Nothing comes freely.

See where software pirates fit into this? They don't. They're leeches. Filth. :yes:

You are incorrect. Government should be paying half of their salary. Not us. It's a monopoly.

Boycott them. Take legal approaches to changing their pricing views. All I am saying is piracy is the _wrong_ approach.

Their approach is also wrong which leads to piracy. You have to understand that I am in no way supporting piracy. No! It's just what happens when huge companies try to cover their costs by the lowest in the group - consumers.

[liquidcore]

Really, all it comes down to is this example:

You and a freind spend 10 years designing the Next big thing in computers, Something that revolutionizes the way the world works. The second its released someone is already stating that it needs this, and needs that. so to keep on top if it, you start working on a new version with everything you couldn't put in the first version. There are also problems with the first version, so you need to hire more and more people to keep the existing version operational, and keep developing the second version. Thats how Microsoft began, a couple people trying to make it easier for them, and for others. Does it invalidate everything they did, the work that they put into it years ago writing the code from scratch that no one had ever thought of, because now years down the line people know this code that had never existed back then, and how that code could have jsut as easily been passed from person to person? No, they make products, and people seem to fault them for being an evil corporation? Lets see all the corporations that went to school, have ideas, and want to make some money for making things better. Corporations dont make the product, the people there do, and the people deserve to be paid.

The products that they release aren't worth paying the extra money for? What about the companies that manufacture toilet paper? How many times can you reinvent that? all they are doing is making the same product better. And now that you think about it you'll probably **** on them too (Pun intended), but does Charmin offer support if your toilet paper isn't soft enough? No, they make you buy a whole new product.

[Malisk]

Why dont people stick with Older version of Windows ? Win 2K/XP SP2 ? There is no reason for people to upgrade if you dont have the cash to buy. Microsoft isnt asking anyone to buy their NEW OS.

If you have a car that you got 6 months back and if Toyoto or some other company come up with a new model do you go and steal it just because its new ? You dont, you stick with your old model dont you.

Stealing any piece of software and pirating it is just like you do some work and someone else comes and takes all the credit. As simple as that.

Windows isn't a car, so car analogies don't work.

The problem is usually twofold:

1. OS support by Microsoft.

2. Preserved third party software compatibility.

Microsoft isn't directly asking people to upgrade, but they're indirectly giving people who don't more problems in the long run. A company using Windows 2000, what are they supposed to do now that Microsoft has stopped releasing security patches? XP is facing the same fate. This is a slightly easier problem to solve in the open source world as the source is open for people to keep improving the application, at least bug fixing-wise, but not an as easy one for Microsoft. So it's hard to blame someone in particular, but that doesn't take away the problem and requirement to upgrade your OS within reasonable time if you're not to fall behind in support.

[excalpius]

The reason MS software is so over priced is simple.

The price represents the much more profitable BUSINESS price for buying the OS or Office Suite, not what would be a reasonable CONSUMER PRICE. They tried this with having two prices for Home and Pro, with artificially disabled features in Home, like proper domain connection, etc.

The same is true for Adobe, etc. Adobe handles this with Photoshop via low end products that no one uses and by tolerating a certain amount of piracy. This allowed people to get really good with it for free, then those people got jobs, started companies, etc. and Photoshop, for example, became the de facto standard (despite it's really quite unintuitive tool/menu/design logic). Then, at their companies, they bought the software, at full price, in volume. Ka-chinga.

MS accomplishes this by (loosely enforced) student/academic discounts in the case of Office and by OEM bundling (so the consumer doesn't really see the full add-in price) in the case of the OS...and yes, by accepting a certain amount of piracy. Unfortunately, the internet and broadband made it REALLY easy to pirate the OS, making it so easy, it made sense to upgrade legit, licensed XP Home licenses to pirated XP Pro licenses, just to keep everything "even" on the home computer "farm", so to speak. So, WGA is added to be just annoying enough to get average users to cough up for the real OS, while the true pirates (who often do this only because the can) can never be stopped in this marketplace.

MS's new policy for Vista is also simple to understand. Bundle low end/crippleware versions of the OS (like Home), so they discount as little as possible through the OEM, and then charge a straight upgrade fee direct to the consumer in order to get their OS upgraded to the same version of Vista that had the features all the magazines and articles were really talking about/reviewing (like Aero, Media Center, etc.). It is simply an end run around the OEM price "loophole"...and it would be quite clever and effective IF AND ONLY IF MS lowered the overall prices down from the ridiculous Ultimate pricing for example. Right now, they have monopoly pricing in extremis AND a high passthru upgrade price...

Which makes it look to the consumer like they are paying for the same OS TWICE...which will NOT make them happy...especially considering the historically poor quality of MS bundleware (does anyone anywhere use moviemaker?). While I am not a Mac OSX fanboy (it is just a 1970's OS with a clean but uninspired gui), at least Apple is smart enough to deliver ONE VERSION of a full featured OS, with a small iLife application bundle upgrade (which has applications that are actually worth paying for, ahem), and not charging for the OS again until 6-12 months later. Smart, smart, smart.

MS marketing is driving the Vista and Office pricing schema, and it is five years out of date.

[webskater1]

Why can't people just buy the damn software? :no:

maybe because some families monthly income is 600$ or less? and they still need that software for work..