microsoft screw up again! how many times can they let their marketing team smoke crack!
carrotmadman6
· 10 months ago
Mashable has jumped on the bandwagon as well.
There are ONLY TWO versions that you'll have to choose - Home Premium & Pro (& 32-bit & 64-bit).
Enterprise is the VLK version, Ultimate is downloaded as an add-on with Enterprise features, while Starter is for OEMs & Basic is only for 'emerging markets.' Is it that hard? o_O
Ben Jacob
· 10 months ago
They might have made enough money with Windows XP and previous versions.. Now they just wanted to get a ticket to hell !
Whitney
· 10 months ago
Some people are slow learners. My husband's office took away his XP machine and "upgraded" him to VISTA and the thing is having all sorts of issues- which is why I bought an imc to join the Mac Book Pro as my computers at home.
Stan Schroeder
· 10 months ago
@carrotmadman6: and what if you are in an "emerging market"? And isn't Starter completely ridiculous?
killer
· 10 months ago
i think this is also gng to be a failure.....all tym best is WINDOWS Xp....
Matt
· 10 months ago
Those editions, your "facts", are out of date. There will only be Home, Professional and Ultimate available to consumers. Starter has the same market it always had, thus we'll never see it outside of "developing" countries. Enterprise we'll never see unless we are on the VLA - Enterprise and Ultimate are identical in all but name and licence model.
If you are in an emerging market, then you'll still only have those 3 choices... because Starter will only come on new PCs.
Kabatology
· 10 months ago
You're perfectly right, counselling becomes "wicked" with so many versions of Windows 7. It is quite difficult to explain the difference between Window Xp home and professional, figurati with up to six versions of Windows 7
Garion
· 10 months ago
How is tech support going to be harder, its not like they have different kernels. It would be harder to figure out what operating system they are using (xp/vista/7).
All it is is different software that's installed (like having a version pre installed with Office 2007).
@Waxy - what version of Windows do you use? Have you had a blue screen recently? Have you ever thought it could be driver related?
@necenzurat - Your saying your Lan driver suddenly stopped working while in Windows 7? I find it rather hard to believe
@Whitney - Did they replace machines or buy brand new ones, maybe their problem is running a modern day OS on a 2001 PC? and so because your husband was having problems, you decided to buy a mac to solve it? That makes no sense.
Richard
· 10 months ago
>> I cannot imagine one user that will benefit from this.
Uh? What about all those people who are paying less for a version of Windows that doesn't include the bits they don't need? Or are you really saying you want one version of Windows with everything in it, but at the price of the cheapest version? Get real.
Don't get me wrong, I am no Windows fan - all my own computers are Mac or Linux. But you don't have to be a genius to see why it works like this.
wizzardsblog
· 10 months ago
I was about to comment that there is only really 3 available editions until I saw carrotmadman6's comment.
Keep your finger on the pulse it prevents blog posts like this. Unless you posted it purposefully to garner such a reaction?
Vygantas
· 10 months ago
LOL @ 1 version.
So you say they would make $50 win 7 version with all the major features?
Yeah, right.
If you want more features, pay for it.
I don’t mind with 6 versions of Windows 7 (3 x 64 bit + 3 x 32 bit), it excludes server editions, etc
As first 2 are basic not for usual market anyway
whitney
· 10 months ago
Actually- the PC is vintage 2006, one of the last available XP machines plus upgraded memory and graphics card. Bought Macbook pro because of ilife and iwork applications; makes creating PDF's much less of a hassle and multimedia production both for podcasts and kid projects so much easier. When we were looking at an additional, not replacement desktop, the iMac 24" tricked out was a natural choice. Making handouts that look professionally typeset is infinitely easier on Mac than PC. I think PC's still are created for those who want ultimately customizable, personally engineered machines, for people with tons of technical experience and know how; Macs are created with the end user first and foremost in mind.
Christopher
· 10 months ago
Jumping on the bandwagon carrotmadman6 is driving....
Non-factual, blog posts like this only serve to degrade the value of Mashable.com Why is it that choices aren't ok for an OS, but are ok in every other facet of life?
From cars to shoes to (dare I say) iPods, every company seeks ways to maximize their market penetration by providing versions that meet the needs of individuals, companies, devices, locales, etc.
Good discussion, prompted by a silly assertion.
Timothy
· 10 months ago
You would think that Microsoft would have learned from past mistakes. They never do. Windows sucks. IE sucks. Microsoft sucks. But I do like the XBox...
Dan
· 10 months ago
Um.. is there a version of linux that people could use that wouldn't require a degree in comp sci to figure out? 'Cause that would be really cool. And free.
Elnerdodegeek
· 4 months ago
There is: Linux Mint... or Ubuntu... Or Mandriva... Or PCLinuxOS... or Dream Linux, or openSUSE, or SimplyMEPIS. There's one heck of a lot of good distros that normal people can use. In fact, while there are so many Linux distributions that many people get intimidated, but there is actually good reason for there to be so many; the only difference between the versions of W7 that consumers are dealing with are really just more features for more money, whereas Linux is always "Professional edition" really; unlike Windows, every single Linux distro does things a little differently, and there's always a version to your needs; you just need to phrase your Google search right, or make a post to a forum.
Sadly, though, people don't even know they have a choice. And if they do, they'll have heard of Linux's false reputation for being hard to use. And if they ignore that, they're still too intimidated to switch from what they're comfortable with. And if they try switching, a lot of people get freaked because they're not used to some of the method differences between Windows and Linux, or there's some big-name app which they need and doesn't have a Linux version. It's incredibly frustrating. But I think Linux WILL get bigger as time goes on; a lot of third-world countries have adopted it, and that's going to slowly leak into the states; and we have a lot more tech-savvy kids growing up who will adopt linux and convince their non-savvy parents to switch as well. I think; at least hope; that Linux will not remain so painfully underrated for long.
Tony
· 10 months ago
No, it doesn't make any sense from a marketing perspective. The only way it makes sense is from a "confuse them so they'll either buy more than one copy or just buy the really expensive Ultimate version" perspective.
-A faithful Mac user who loves his Xbox (the only thing MS has done right in a decade)
Christopher
· 10 months ago
Come on #22 Tony, put some more effort into your reply :)
What is so confusing about having different versions of a product? Do you think it's practical to run Ultimate on a netbook? How do you absorb the costs associated with the added features? Or what about the home user that doesn't have an interest in (or own) a 64-bit computer?
Is it any more confusing that one car model being allowed to appeal to various demographics and economic interests?
Just not understanding whether it's confusing or rather people just want to be able to pay one price and get everything.
Rugland
· 10 months ago
I do not agree that there should only be one version of windows. I would like to see 2 versions, not necessarily license vise, but that you can on install choose a default package set that will be installed.
One for business and one for regular consumers (and of course a custom button which would let you select every single packet/module you want to install). Kind of like the *nix installers.
That way I could setup the machines and tune them on install for exactly what they are going to be doing. In stead of installing Ultimate, then go back into Add/Remove Windows Features to remove the parts that I have no use for what so ever. This way the setup of a new machine would be cut down about 1 hour for me at least.
andrey
· 10 months ago
why 6? should be 7 to make sense! :)
Jonathan
· 10 months ago
"It probably makes sense from a marketing standpoint, but people hate it."
Which means it makes *no* sense from a marketing standpoint!
Vygantas
· 10 months ago
If you would read other sources, it would tell:
THERE ARE 3 REAL VERSIONS OF WINDOWS 7, other 2 are not for general market.
Rugland
· 10 months ago
@Dan
I don't think people are reaching for things to complain about W7.
It was just the same for Vista, we do not need or want that many different versions of Vista. It makes everyones daily life more difficult than it has to be. So it's more a general complaint about MS way of creating more versions than needed of something than it is a complaint about W7.
Gadget Sleuth
· 10 months ago
I agree with maybe 2 or 3 versions. A small, medium and large, so to speak.
But 6? People are defending 6 different versions of the same basic kernel as a good thing? It's confusing and pointless for all but the nerdiest of us.
That was always the case. This article was just joining a bandwagon of zealousy. What's more, about a subject that this website is not really meant for - it's meant to be about social media, web etc. not about Operating Systems. I think the author just wanted to be part of the criticism train in a public forum, but he didn't do his research - and it's backfired - you only need to read the comments to see that.
jeff_windows_team
· 10 months ago
Although MS announced six versions of Windows 7, they are distributing these versions in ways that will prevent confusion among consumers, most of whom will only have to choose between two versions, Windows 7 Home Premium and Windows 7 Professional as Vygantas, Christopher, Matt, Carrotmadman and a few others have alluded to. The decision of which version to purchase will not be as hard as many people have jumped to conclude. Here is an explanation…. Windows 7 Starter and Windows 7 home basic are for developing and/or emerging markets. The chances of consumers in developed markets (US, Europe to name two) seeing these versions as an option are slim to none. Windows 7 Home Premium is likely what most netbook/desktop users will use. It comes with most of the features Microsoft has listed on their Windows 7 page like Aero Peek, Media Center, and DivX out of the box. Windows 7 Professional comes with the Home Premium features as well as features such as file-encryption and advanced backup. This is the other choice the average consumer in a developed market will have. Windows 7 Enterprise is only sold as bulk licenses to businesses so chances are you will not come across this version unless you are responsible for making this decision for your company. Windows 7 Ultimate is similar to Enterprise, but not sold in bulk. The visibility of this will be low, so once again the average consumer will not have to worry about this version when deciding which version to purchase. I hope this calms some nerves and provides some context to the number of versions of Windows 7 that will be released. Cheers, Jeff Windows Outreach Team
Elnerdodegeek
· 4 months ago
You wanna reach out? Fire Steve Ballmer. Or teach him not to throw chairs and say he's going to "f***ing kill [x tech-related company]". Heck while you're at it, teach him how to not be a power trip who tries to take over the world by abusing software patents. Face it: Nobody likes microsoft. And you guys have a lot of apologies to make and mistakes to make up for before anyone will actually like you.
Sorry for the late comments everyone, just needed to rant.
XPH
· 10 months ago
So how is this different to Vista? They're just repackaging a old product and selling it again! And 6 different versions? Come on now. 2 is enough: basic and pro!
Matt
· 10 months ago
@XPH Did you not read all the comments, or are you just plain dumb?
In the mainstream there will only be 2 versions available. Home and Professional. Only people that really know what they are doing will ever even care or want to know about Ultimate and it won't be available through mainstream channels in the same way the others are. Consumers only need concern themselves with 2 versions. Please read the comments!
Neil
· 10 months ago
I don't know, I think Stan might be on to something.
Microsoft should make ONE version of Windows. Similarly, Ford should make ONE car. And Dannon should just make ONE flavor of yogurt. And who can believe those idiots at Nike, putting out more than one kind of shoe?
Unbelievable that different people would want different features.
Maybe Mashable should think about cutting back to just one writer. Is it too early to vote for Jennifer?
jooma
· 10 months ago
I have not even tried Vista yet coz Win XP does everything just fine. No to Windows 7. Still "Yes" to Windows XP.
madxista
· 10 months ago
@neil
Your analogy would be correct if Ford made only one type of car… let’s say Focus, and you’d have to choose between: Focus with three wheels (Windows 7 Starter); Focus without rear view mirrors (Windows 7 Home Premium); Focus with extra drink holder (Windows 7 Professional) and Focus with double boot lock (Windows 7 Corporate/Enterprise).
Neil
· 10 months ago
@madxista
That's what makes my analogy flawless. You want a Ford with feature 'X', you buy a Focus. You want 'X' plus a couple more, you buy a Taurus. Want 'X', the extras with the Taurus and to score chicks, you get the Mustang.
You really want to cry 'foul' about multiple versions of an operating system, be cool enough to Google the word "Linux distros" and then get back to me.
The original post isn't about how it's bad to have multiple versions of an OS, it's the low-hanging fruit of picking on Microsoft.
XPH
· 10 months ago
@Matt
I'm a developer so I need to be aware of all the versions available. Since our applications are mainly for business clients, having 4 commercial versions is just hassle when it comes to QA and UAT.
Neil
· 10 months ago
@Joenel
If you read the actual facts of the release, instead of Stan's deliberate misrepresentation of the truth, you'll note that the overwhelming majority of users will only have to choose between TWO versions.
Your suggestion of THREE versions would constitute a 50% increase in the number of versions most people will see.
Again...if it was really about "too many versions", people would be on here slamming Linux.
And I hate to break this to people, but Microsoft isn't in business so that you can have the OS you want. Microsoft is in business to make money. And when anyone can demonstrate that they have a more profitable business model for an operating system, my hunch is that Bill Gates and company will take note.
H.K.
· 10 months ago
As far as I understand it, there are really just the "home" and "professional" versions for the average joe (arguably 3 types). Anyone beyond that will already be aware of whether the other versions are applicable to their needs. Just for MS's own good however, they should have made it come across a little simpler. This site has a lot of material on security issues so I'm looking forward to getting their opinion on win7's supposed "enhanced" security measures.
caniso
· 10 months ago
@Dan
Learning Linux is no big deal. For the beginner, as you must be, with home based requirements only, the learning curve is no greater than fumbling through Vista.
SSBMMASTER
· 9 months ago
Seriously how the hell is 6 different versions confusing? If people are complaining about it ju about it, then they need to learn how to use google.
All Comments
There are ONLY TWO versions that you'll have to choose - Home Premium & Pro (& 32-bit & 64-bit).
Enterprise is the VLK version, Ultimate is downloaded as an add-on with Enterprise features, while Starter is for OEMs & Basic is only for 'emerging markets.'
Is it that hard? o_O
http://www.neowin.net/news/main/09/02/03/window... among about 10 others have details of this. Please research a little before you go on a zealous hating spree.
If you are in an emerging market, then you'll still only have those 3 choices... because Starter will only come on new PCs.
All it is is different software that's installed (like having a version pre installed with Office 2007).
@Waxy - what version of Windows do you use? Have you had a blue screen recently? Have you ever thought it could be driver related?
@necenzurat - Your saying your Lan driver suddenly stopped working while in Windows 7? I find it rather hard to believe
@Whitney - Did they replace machines or buy brand new ones, maybe their problem is running a modern day OS on a 2001 PC? and so because your husband was having problems, you decided to buy a mac to solve it? That makes no sense.
Uh? What about all those people who are paying less for a version of Windows that doesn't include the bits they don't need? Or are you really saying you want one version of Windows with everything in it, but at the price of the cheapest version? Get real.
Don't get me wrong, I am no Windows fan - all my own computers are Mac or Linux. But you don't have to be a genius to see why it works like this.
Keep your finger on the pulse it prevents blog posts like this. Unless you posted it purposefully to garner such a reaction?
So you say they would make $50 win 7 version with all the major features?
Yeah, right.
If you want more features, pay for it.
I don’t mind with 6 versions of Windows 7 (3 x 64 bit + 3 x 32 bit), it excludes server editions, etc
As first 2 are basic not for usual market anyway
I think PC's still are created for those who want ultimately customizable, personally engineered machines, for people with tons of technical experience and know how; Macs are created with the end user first and foremost in mind.
Non-factual, blog posts like this only serve to degrade the value of Mashable.com Why is it that choices aren't ok for an OS, but are ok in every other facet of life?
From cars to shoes to (dare I say) iPods, every company seeks ways to maximize their market penetration by providing versions that meet the needs of individuals, companies, devices, locales, etc.
Good discussion, prompted by a silly assertion.
Sadly, though, people don't even know they have a choice. And if they do, they'll have heard of Linux's false reputation for being hard to use. And if they ignore that, they're still too intimidated to switch from what they're comfortable with. And if they try switching, a lot of people get freaked because they're not used to some of the method differences between Windows and Linux, or there's some big-name app which they need and doesn't have a Linux version. It's incredibly frustrating. But I think Linux WILL get bigger as time goes on; a lot of third-world countries have adopted it, and that's going to slowly leak into the states; and we have a lot more tech-savvy kids growing up who will adopt linux and convince their non-savvy parents to switch as well. I think; at least hope; that Linux will not remain so painfully underrated for long.
-A faithful Mac user who loves his Xbox (the only thing MS has done right in a decade)
What is so confusing about having different versions of a product? Do you think it's practical to run Ultimate on a netbook? How do you absorb the costs associated with the added features? Or what about the home user that doesn't have an interest in (or own) a 64-bit computer?
Is it any more confusing that one car model being allowed to appeal to various demographics and economic interests?
Just not understanding whether it's confusing or rather people just want to be able to pay one price and get everything.
One for business and one for regular consumers (and of course a custom button which would let you select every single packet/module you want to install). Kind of like the *nix installers.
That way I could setup the machines and tune them on install for exactly what they are going to be doing. In stead of installing Ultimate, then go back into Add/Remove Windows Features to remove the parts that I have no use for what so ever. This way the setup of a new machine would be cut down about 1 hour for me at least.
Which means it makes *no* sense from a marketing standpoint!
THERE ARE 3 REAL VERSIONS OF WINDOWS 7, other 2 are not for general market.
I don't think people are reaching for things to complain about W7.
It was just the same for Vista, we do not need or want that many different versions of Vista. It makes everyones daily life more difficult than it has to be. So it's more a general complaint about MS way of creating more versions than needed of something than it is a complaint about W7.
But 6? People are defending 6 different versions of the same basic kernel as a good thing? It's confusing and pointless for all but the nerdiest of us.
That was always the case. This article was just joining a bandwagon of zealousy. What's more, about a subject that this website is not really meant for - it's meant to be about social media, web etc. not about Operating Systems. I think the author just wanted to be part of the criticism train in a public forum, but he didn't do his research - and it's backfired - you only need to read the comments to see that.
Here is an explanation…. Windows 7 Starter and Windows 7 home basic are for developing and/or emerging markets. The chances of consumers in developed markets (US, Europe to name two) seeing these versions as an option are slim to none.
Windows 7 Home Premium is likely what most netbook/desktop users will use. It comes with most of the features Microsoft has listed on their Windows 7 page like Aero Peek, Media Center, and DivX out of the box.
Windows 7 Professional comes with the Home Premium features as well as features such as file-encryption and advanced backup. This is the other choice the average consumer in a developed market will have.
Windows 7 Enterprise is only sold as bulk licenses to businesses so chances are you will not come across this version unless you are responsible for making this decision for your company.
Windows 7 Ultimate is similar to Enterprise, but not sold in bulk. The visibility of this will be low, so once again the average consumer will not have to worry about this version when deciding which version to purchase.
I hope this calms some nerves and provides some context to the number of versions of Windows 7 that will be released.
Cheers,
Jeff
Windows Outreach Team
Sorry for the late comments everyone, just needed to rant.
Did you not read all the comments, or are you just plain dumb?
In the mainstream there will only be 2 versions available. Home and Professional. Only people that really know what they are doing will ever even care or want to know about Ultimate and it won't be available through mainstream channels in the same way the others are. Consumers only need concern themselves with 2 versions. Please read the comments!
Microsoft should make ONE version of Windows.
Similarly, Ford should make ONE car. And Dannon should just make ONE flavor of yogurt. And who can believe those idiots at Nike, putting out more than one kind of shoe?
Unbelievable that different people would want different features.
Maybe Mashable should think about cutting back to just one writer. Is it too early to vote for Jennifer?
Your analogy would be correct if Ford made only one type of car… let’s say Focus, and you’d have to choose between: Focus with three wheels (Windows 7 Starter); Focus without rear view mirrors (Windows 7 Home Premium); Focus with extra drink holder (Windows 7 Professional) and Focus with double boot lock (Windows 7 Corporate/Enterprise).
That's what makes my analogy flawless.
You want a Ford with feature 'X', you buy a Focus. You want 'X' plus a couple more, you buy a Taurus. Want 'X', the extras with the Taurus and to score chicks, you get the Mustang.
You really want to cry 'foul' about multiple versions of an operating system, be cool enough to Google the word "Linux distros" and then get back to me.
The original post isn't about how it's bad to have multiple versions of an OS, it's the low-hanging fruit of picking on Microsoft.
I'm a developer so I need to be aware of all the versions available. Since our applications are mainly for business clients, having 4 commercial versions is just hassle when it comes to QA and UAT.
If you read the actual facts of the release, instead of Stan's deliberate misrepresentation of the truth, you'll note that the overwhelming majority of users will only have to choose between TWO versions.
Your suggestion of THREE versions would constitute a 50% increase in the number of versions most people will see.
Again...if it was really about "too many versions", people would be on here slamming Linux.
And I hate to break this to people, but Microsoft isn't in business so that you can have the OS you want. Microsoft is in business to make money. And when anyone can demonstrate that they have a more profitable business model for an operating system, my hunch is that Bill Gates and company will take note.
Learning Linux is no big deal. For the beginner, as you must be, with home based requirements only, the learning curve is no greater than fumbling through Vista.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windows-vista/...