The eight guises of Vista

[Steve]

There's Windows Starter 2007, Windows Vista Home Basic (and Home Basic N), Windows Vista Home Premium, Windows Vista Business (and Business N), Windows Vista Enterprise, Windows Vista Ultimate...

What's missing from this list is Windows Vista Small Business Edition, which was to have been a superset of Vista Business with additional features presumably geared towards small businesses. As I noted in my September 2005 write-up, however, all of the product names were then placeholders and could have changed before the final product is released. This week, it's clear what those changes are.

[Windows IT Pro]

[Ross Stone]

While 8 versions of Vista is all very nice, its also very confusing. Everyone has to admit Windows has made it easier to use comuters and this goes against that by confusing cunsumers with different versions. Perhaps they should have stuck with Home and Pro.

This is just so they can make a bit of extra money. I hate to think how much Ultimate is going to cost? Anyone have any ideas about that?

[directhex]

Everyone has to admit Windows has made it easier to use comuters

most people would credit Apple with that, to this day

[Moby-Dick]

most people would credit Apple with that, to this day

but not Xerox , who actually invented the WIMP system ?

[Xaneden]

Directhex, surely even you have to admit that if it were not for the widespread use of the Windows operating system, computers would not have ventured into the public sector as succesfully as they have. No one would doubt the creators and visonaries of the GUI etc, but how can you truly say that Apple was the one that made it 'easier to use computers'; the widespread use of Windows has led to generic 'courses' for the OS and most people are trained in it rather than MacOS.

If it were not for Windows, I very much doubt computing would have been so successful and so accessible to the general public.

[[GSV]Trig]

most people would credit Apple with that, to this day

Most people would say Microsoft I would of thought, after all there marketting machine is very powerful...

[Funkstar]

It's a dodgy argument, because if Microsoft/Windows wasn't the dominant OS then potentially something else would be and people would hate them

As for Vista, yeah, damned confusing

[Syn]

I wonder how much would Ultimate Ed cost, it seems like the one for me.

I think the reason why they have to go into so many editions is becouse the system has grown so much that it CAN be split into so many systems. As most people use each system for only specific things ,unlike me who wants everything, might as well devide the OS into each market and cut down on prices.

i am fine with it as long as Ultimate Ed is not priced over the roof.

[Nox]

not sure what came first, windows 1 or something apple.

I remember Workbench and TOS/GEM being around WAY before win 3...

Nox

[Ross Stone]

Windows XP Professional is £246.74 on scan for the retail version, so seeing as from the 8 versions listed, I think XP Pro is Parallel to Windows Vista Business, which which means theres Enterprise and then Ultimate above it.

I am gonna make a guess that they will charge well over £300 for Ultimate in retail, and maybe £200 for OEM? But to be honest, it could be anything. The fact that I have a dislike to Microsoft leads me to believe that they will charge loads for the thing, and we will have updates more often then what XP does. Grr, lol.

But you never know. After all this time, they might make it work? I have tried the Beta 1, and its very nice, although Spyware broke it.

[kalniel]

Wasn't there going to be a gamer one as well? Or is that in some feature of the ultimate that's not discussed in the article? Either way, sounds like Home Basic N is the one for me - should be cheaper than XP as well

[directhex]

but not Xerox , who actually invented the WIMP system ?

PARC invented WIMP, apple put it on desktops.

not sure what came first, windows 1 or something apple.

depends where you draw the line, really. the apple macintosh GUI, from 1984, looks a lot like windows 95. windows 1.0 is basically just the "file manager" from windows 3.x

If it were not for Windows, I very much doubt computing would have been so successful and so accessible to the general public.

Windows had nothing really to do with the acceptance of computers into homes - that honour lies with MS-DOS helping the rise of the IBM-compatibles. after that, as prices started to reach "acceptable", it was purely down to clever business tactics (and the rapid commoditization of hardware). http://forums.hexus.net/showthread.php?t=67911 is a fine example of why windows *still* isn't about "easy" - deleting an application is the same on a new intel dual-core osx mac as it was on the Apple Macintosh 21 years ago.

things haven't really gotten any easier in the past 10-20 years, from the MS-DOS Executive to Windows Vista. different, sure, but no easier.

[krazy_olie]

This is far too complex for the average user, they should have had maximum 4 editions

Home (standard), Small Business (self explanatory ), Business and maybe Lite or possibly Ultracomplete edition.

I would think that the Home premium would be the one most of us go for whilst Home Basic would be shipped out on things like Dells, with Premium coming at a premium.

What's the point in starter? Just to stop people having Windows XP when it would be really cheap?

[directhex]

What's the point in starter? Just to stop people having Windows XP when it would be really cheap?

microsoft tend to sculpt their pricing such that the new os is slightly cheaper than the old one - xp pro was cheaper than 2k pro, xp home was cheaper than me was cheaper than 98. only a quid or so in it, but people notice it.

the job of "starter edition" is for developing countries, in an attempt to block adoption of linux or pirated windows (by making "legit" windows relatively affordable)

[Ross Stone]

What's the point in starter? Just to stop people having Windows XP when it would be really cheap?

Yes. lol. Microsoft will benifit as they can stop supporting XP sooner by doing this, and this will reduce costs. Also, it means more people will make the upgrade making more money for them. Even though XP might have more features than the Starter Vista? Damn there evil corperate ways!

Infact, for some people who use XP, it might be pointless for them to upgrade as they won't benifit much if they only use computers for simple things like email or internet. But the starter version is aimed at them, to try and get them to upgrade when it might not be needed? good business sence, although slightly evil.

There is another post on Hexus about why to upgrade that may be relivant? Here:http://forums.hexus.net/showthread.php?t=68426 Not read that yet though...

[Silent Shark]

A while ago an MS spokesperson said that Vista prices are likely to be lower than XP prices to discourage piracy. He said MS understood most people pirate Windows because it costs so much. That's probably what this is all about. The feature low versions will be much cheaper than XP Home and Pro (hence the starter version), but the more advanced you go, the higher the price.

I want the Media Center app, so I'm going to have to go with Ultra or Home Premium.