Apple wisdom ignored by Windows 7 sextuplets

Discussion in ' News Discussion' started by MacBytes, Feb 4, 2009.

  1. MacBytes macrumors bot

    Jul 5, 2003


    Category: Microsoft
    Link: Apple wisdom ignored by Windows 7 sextuplets
    Description:: Thought that Windows 7 would avoid the complicated marketing mess that was Vista by coming in an easy to understand single version like OS X? Think again, Microsoft has confirmed no less than six versions of the new operating system.

    Posted on
    Approved by Mudbug
  2. Hyde244 macrumors member


    Mar 16, 2008
    Cincinnati, OH
    You've gotta be kidding me.

    Windows 7 has looked good so far, but comeon Microsoft! Don't repeat the failure!
  3. r0k macrumors 68040


    Mar 3, 2008
    Send a flashlight to Microsoft

    Go down to your local home center and pick up a flashlight. You know. The one that shines around when windows is looking for things? Yeah. One that looks like that. Now get a box large enough for the flashlight. Put the flashlight in the box. Print out this note and put it in the box:

    Ok now seal the box, apply postage (which of course costs more than a copy of Ubuntu but this is for a good cause). Address the package as follows:

    1 Microsoft Way
    Redmond, WA 98052

    Now put the package in the mail and hope somebody at M$ opens and reads it before M$ manages to alienate the Windows fanboys they still have.

    And yes, I deleted my iso of windows 7 after I saw the sku list for Windows 7. In fact, I also deleted some older Ubuntu iso's I had lying around and I got over 5 gig back, including the now gone windows 7 dvd iso. It felt good.

    ( I posted this elsewhere but it really belongs here too)
  4. speakerwizard macrumors 68000


    Aug 8, 2006
    people are now reporting they are doing away with the basic ones for the western market now.
  5. zombitronic macrumors 65816


    Feb 9, 2007
    Guys! I just got an exclusive screen shot of Snow Leopard Starter!!

  6. Santa Rosa macrumors 65816

    Santa Rosa

    Aug 22, 2007
    Will still be more advanced than Windows 7 Ultimate :D
  7. bobdgil macrumors member

    Mar 9, 2006
    Let's Be Honest

    I love Apple products as much as the next guy, but let's be honest. Apple does not have only one version of OS X. Even ignoring the iPhone OS, which is definitely not the same operating system as Mac OS X, there is this thing called Mac OS X Server, which I don't see as being any different than selling a premium version. Regardless of the fact that most consumers don't need the server version, and that servers can easily run on regular OS X, the fact still remains that there are multiple versions of OS X, albeit fewer than Windows.
  8. johnqh macrumors regular

    Mar 31, 2008
    Actually, Snow Leopard Starter would be great for netbooks. ;-)
  9. fireb0x macrumors member

    Jul 3, 2008
    In Microsoft's Defense,

    Only 2 of these will REALLY be market to consumers.

    Starter seems like a netbook kind of OS (smart if you ask me) and Home Basic will not be wide spread. Home basic will be marketed for third world countries who need basic computers to use. The US will not likely see this very much at all. The US may likely not see starter very much (except hopefully netbooks) and home basic will probably not make US shores.

    The two marketed to consumers are Home Premium and Professional.

    Enterprise is for volume licensing only, so consumers will not have this option, and ultimate is listed for limited OEM and Retail. It is fully featured and directed at tweakers and need everything.

    So there are 2 versions that will be marketed toward consumers (Leopard / Leopard Server).

    You guys REALLY need to start reading before you post and think about this stuff. The OS X market isn't near as big as the Windows Market. Windows requires multiplle versions because if not, then everyone pays full price for ultimate instead of only getting what they need in Home Premium.

    Most people don't even know what Branch Cache, Bitlocking, and Direct Access are. And if they do know, then they need it and they will buy Ultimate. If not, then they really only have professional and home premium to fall back on. Then, when you have only those 2 options, then you are back to where Windows XP was. Retail users has the option for Premium (Home) and Professional (Professional).

    Get over yourselves and stop foaming at the mouth. The decision makes sense and it allows Microsoft to target the smallest of markets and the biggest of markets.

    It makes sense.
  10. MarkSTi04 macrumors regular

    Nov 18, 2008
    Illinois Side of St. Louis, MO
    All I can say is WOW!

    I'm sure glad I got my Mac. There is no way I was gonna buy a Vista machine. Now this windows 7 stuff just turns me off more from MS. If I do have to run windows it will be XP in boot camp on my mac untill I can update the internals on my tower.
  11. Santa Rosa macrumors 65816

    Santa Rosa

    Aug 22, 2007
    You make a fair point about how they say that only two versions will be marketed. Thats the consensus at the moment.

    I can't see Microsoft sticking to this for some reason. They will get greedy again and have all the version available for purchase in some form or other. It seems strange to make a range of products and only allow a few of them to be purchase, where the other products fill the gaps by being installed only when you buy specific hardware.

    I think their best strategy would have been to develop Windows 7 with all the features in one, maybe two editions, then have the operating system enable and disable certain features depending upon what hardware it was running on, while also giving the end user the ability to make adjustments to its judgement.

    Im really liking Apple's strategy to be perfectly honest. One system that's feature complete and highly optimized. In my opinion the Windows 7 strategy compared to that doesn't make sense.
  12. Theophany macrumors 6502a


    Nov 16, 2008
    NW London.
    You could have summed that up much more easily by saying that Microsoft is a software company, only making the OS, and is thus incomparable to Apple in that respect. The two business work differently to promote and sell their product, you can't compare six versions of W7 to one version of OS X for all consumers and one version of OS X for server monkeys.

    Six versions is ridiculous, but it isn't an opportunity for one-upmanship and saying it's a reason that Apple is better.
  13. MarkSTi04 macrumors regular

    Nov 18, 2008
    Illinois Side of St. Louis, MO
    To that effect though the cost of Windows 7 with the 2 versions that they are gonna promote will still cost more than OS X. I think Vista Basic is still $199.00 when OS X is only $129.00

    The price difference alone between these two and compare the features right out of the box, OS X has it beat!
  14. fireb0x macrumors member

    Jul 3, 2008
    OS X is not 1 version and feature complete. If it was feature complete, then I wouldn't have to buy OS X Server to have proper server capability. Just like OS X has the 2 versions windows will have 2 primary market versions of Windows.

    We REALLY need to remember how many amounts of enterprise installations Windows has. OSX can not currently come anywhere near the Enterprise options of Windows simply because of the software support.

    Enterprise practically REQUIRES Exchange and OS X has no proper Exchange support. Even Entourage is a terrible program.

    There is no way that Microsoft can have 2 versions and done. It just isn't possible.

    The reason they shy away from "Checkmark this, checkmark that..." is the same reason that Apple doesn't do that. Users do not know what they need because they don't need anything special. And the users who DO know what they need KNOW what they need.

    Survey after survey, and demographic study after demographic study shows that people hate unchecking and checking options because it is too much to think about and they do not know what they need normally.

    This will all work itself out. The multiple versions of Vista was terrible because they were ALL available to end users (except enterprise). This time around, we will only be seeing 2 and those are the equivalent of Home and Professional.
  15. d21mike macrumors 68040


    Jul 11, 2007
    Torrance, CA
    If you go to your local best buy you will only see 1 version. Home Premium. This was the same as with XP. If you wanted the Professional Version it was more difficulat to get. Most people will never see more the 1 version so really not a problem. Also, with Windows 7 I understand that you only need to get a new key instead of another install disk. So easy to upgrade.

    Now, if you want to complain you may want to look into the 64 bit versions. I just bought a new laptop with 4gb of memory. With 4gb you get the 64 bit version and with 3gb (or less) you get the 32bit version. So far no problems with the 64 bit version. Keeping fingers crossed. I tested the 64 bit version when Vista first came out and I had too many problems so switch back to the 32 bit verson.
  16. fireb0x macrumors member

    Jul 3, 2008
    You can install Windows on practically any machine you want (EVEN A MAC!).

    You HAVE to own a mac to use OS X. And by the time you own a mac, 9 times out of 10 you have paid the apple premium. I own 4 macs at home and rock several mac pros at work, so I know what that premium is.

    Apple makes hardware too. Everytime they sell a computer, they guarantee OS sales. Windows does not have that luxury. They are software only and their sales are not guaranteed.

    Even iTunes uses a tiered pricing scheme now. Sure you can limit yourself to an iPod for $.99 cents, but for $1.29, you can play your songs on pretty much anything. This is very similiar to Mac and Windows.

    Ultimately, as mentioned above, Apple is a Hardware/Software company, and Windows is a Software company. What kind of business would they be running if they didn't make their software available to all sorts of markets?
  17. zombitronic macrumors 65816


    Feb 9, 2007
    I don't think this is a valid comparison. Leopard Server is not really marketed towards consumers, especially considering its price tag of $499, compared to Leopard Client at $129.

    Windows 2008 Server is a valid comparison to Leopard Server.

    Home Premium and Professional would be comparable to a hypothetical Crippled Leopard Client and the real Leopard Client.
  18. fireb0x macrumors member

    Jul 3, 2008
    You can't even begin to compare Leopard Server and Windows Server 2008 because you can install Server 2008 on any currently exist server pretty much. In order to install leopard server for its intended use, you need to buy at the very least a Mac Pro with FiberOptic card and for ACTUAL server use you would need to buy an actual Apple Server. The cost to move to Apple server is so great that many business are scared of it.

    I belive a move to Apple server is worth it, but lets not get ahead of ourselves.

    Windows Enterprise environments are ridiculously widespread. The software support is amazing and the best point of all.

    OS X Server will NEVER support exchange and apple has nothing like exchange for it's users to take advantage of on an enterprise level.

    There is no comparison to be made for OS X Server vs. Windows Server 2008. Windows Server 2008 is just more capable, more widespread, and the fact it has exchange is the killswitch. Do you realize how many enterprises rely on exchange to run the fundamentals of their business? There will be no switching going on there, I guarantee you.
  19. BlizzardBomb macrumors 68030


    Jun 15, 2005
    There's only two versions really, but what really baffles me is that they've already spent the money developing the Ultimate version so surely developing a Home Premium version means even more development time (to differentiate, take out features), which means more costs. You've already got the "best" version, stop wasting money crippling it!
  20. nagromme macrumors G5


    May 2, 2002
    Not true. iTunes DRM-free songs (which is most of them now--soon to be all) cost the SAME as the old DRM format. 99 cents US. The music labels have insisted on variable pricing (.69, .99, 1.29) based on popularity, but that doesn't start until April. And there was a short time when iTunes Plus was new that the labels demanded a higher price (1.29) for DRM-free, but that was short-lived.

    Apple has been adding Exchange support, actually, as well as Exchange-like features in other apps, and there already HAS been switching going on from Windows to OS X servers.

    OS X Server is in fact superior in many ways to Windows. It's not the right choice for every company (especially if Microsoft has them trapped in legacy requirements) but IS the right choice for some companies--and it's a choice some have been making, with great results.
  21. mkrishnan Moderator emeritus


    Jan 9, 2004
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    I don't think anyone argues against this. But you do have to bear in mind that, while there are two versions of Leopard (the standard version and Server), in addition to all the versions of Windows Vista, there is also still Windows Server, which is a completely different product that is not included in the extensive version list of Vista.

    Anyways, I think MS should really look at how much additional money they make off this morass and seriously just consider shipping a single disk that can be installed in different ways for different systems... the different levels of functionality are fine -- making a user buy one and then upgrade between them is confusing and silly, and I really don't believe MS makes a lot of money off it.
  22. nick9191 macrumors 68040

    Feb 17, 2008
    Firstly Home Basic is not for third world countries. Starter is for third world countries (where they sell about 3 copies a year because of the high rate of piracy and non existent piracy laws there). Secondly Business is not marketed to consumers at all, Ultimate, Home Premium and... you guessed it Home Basic are the three consumer versions within the developed world. Whilst Ultimate technically is for businesses, there are a lot of people who just want the most expensive version whether they need it or not. All the OEM's offer Ultimate on their high end consumer machines.

    Home Basic is the full deal, The only thing it lacks is Aero, Media Center (which is not included in Business or Enterprise anyway), and the business features found in business editions.

    Lastly, you are absolutely mad if you think Leopard Server is marketed towards consumers. There is one consumer version of Leopard, it's called Leopard, that's it.

    All music on iTunes, whether it costs $.69, $.99 or $1.29 is DRM free 256kbit AAC. You can run it on as many computers or devices (that support AAC) as you own.
  23. fireb0x macrumors member

    Jul 3, 2008
    There will always be switchers, it is not like some big movement began and people began to flock to OS X Server.

    What I meant was that OS X Server will never be able to act as an exchange server. Apple is "adding" things is not good enough. The exchange foothold on the market is strong because it works and it works well. Mid size and enterprise businesses will not switch to "Exchange Like features" that their mobile devices do not support. Too many businesses users require mail to go and whether it is Blackberry Enterprise Server or Exchange, you can't use it on a Mac Server. Even SMALL businesses require this functionality.

    Now if Apple releases MobileMEnterprise, then we are talking a different story. When that happens, then there is practically nothing that needs to be said. As long as people are willing to move to leopard server (initial hardware and client licensing investment) and as long as they are willing to setup new open directory users from active directory and switch over their entire infrastructure, then perfect.

    Otherwise, businesses are dominated by Win Servers.
  24. fireb0x macrumors member

    Jul 3, 2008

    Let's get some facts straight here. Starter is for OEM use and limited to 3 applications running at a time (likely a netbook solution). Home Basic is for "Emerging Markets" which means third world countries and developing communities. US will likely not see this version. Here is the full breakdown directly from Microsoft:

    Windows 7 Starter

    * Available worldwide to OEMs on new PCs
    * Missing Aero UI tweaks
    * Limited to 3 simultaneous applications

    Windows 7 Home Basic (Vista equivalent: $200)

    * Only available in emerging markets
    * Missing Aero UI tweaks

    Windows 7 Home Premium (Vista equivalent: $260)

    * Available worldwide, to OEMs and in retail
    * Includes Aero UI tweaks
    * Features multi-touch capabilities
    * Adds "premium" games
    * Adds media capabilities (Media Center, DVD playback, DVD creation, etc.)
    * Can create home network groups

    Windows 7 Professional (Vista equivalent: $300)

    * Available worldwide, to OEMs and in retail
    * Includes all features of Premium
    * Adds enhanced networking capabilities (Remote Desktop host, domain support, offline folders, etc.)
    * Adds Mobility Center
    * Adds Presentation Mode

    Windows 7 Enterprise

    * Available only in volume licenses
    * Includes all features of Professional
    * Adds Branch Cache
    * Adds Direct Access
    * Adds BitLocker

    Windows 7 Ultimate (Vista equivalent: $320)

    * Limited OEM and retail availability
    * Includes all features of Enterprise

    Second, I perhaps used the wrong terminology when I said "marketed to consumers." I meant there are two available versions, both of which are sold in retail shops. I can admit I used the wrong terminology there and know perfectly well it is not "marketed" to consumers.

    Finally, I was wrong about the iTunes things, it doesn't change the fact that Windows can run on damn near anything. Even Win XP runs perfectly on netbooks. You can only run OS X on a mac (except hackint0sh, since I know somebody will call me out on that). By the time you have invested in a mac, the "mac premium" already has payed for your OS 5 times over.

    Apple is a hardware/software company that produces solely for itself. Windows is a Software company. Just like there are multiple tiers of MacBook Pros, there are multiple tiers of Windows Software.

    Some would argue that last generation, the lowest end MacBook model should have had a SuperDrive, but it didn't. How about firewire on the current MacBooks.

    No matter what any company does, nobody will be happy.

    I am happy with my MacPro running Windows 7 under parallels. that is my choice. Everybody should have a choice like I did. There is no need to limit something to 1 price and 1 sku when you hold such a massive portion of the market. It is to many people to market to, too many incomes to span across, too many variables to consider.
  25. Speedy2 macrumors 65816

    Nov 19, 2008
    Why does everyone mention OSX Server, which has nothing to do with Windows 7 ?

    There will be a dedicated Windows Server with even more flavours and versions / license models / with or without Exchange+SQL Server etc

    So please don't say 2 marketed Windows versions vs 2 marketed Mac OS versions, since this is simply WRONG. There is only one client Mac OS you can choose from, whereas regular PC consumers will have a confusing choice between at least 3 client Windows versions. If they buy from the business section of the Dell website, which is perfectly sensible for some, there will be even more.

    Microsoft is milking its monopoly, that's all. There are no other reasons for the multitude of Windows versions, since the differences are tiny but well-chosen. Compare the price of Windows Ultimate to Windows XP Professional. It's a LOT more expensive.

Share This Page