Google for OEM versions of Windows 7 - you should find reasonable pricing there. IANAL, but the licensing would appear to cover cases like yours.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Microsoft to Cut Windows Licensing Price by 70% to Compete with Apple
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Google for OEM versions of Windows 7 - you should find reasonable pricing there. IANAL, but the licensing would appear to cover cases like yours.
Doesn't change the fact that they're competing against Android not iOS - Android has costs associated with it and if Microsoft can make Windows cheaper than the total cost of building and support Android builds over multiple devices then it'll give them an advantage over the competition. The problem though with Windows 8.1 is two fold - lack of applications from big names and the attempt to ram a touch paradigm down the collective throats of end users on the desktop. Modern UI is great on the phone (I have a Lumia 1020) but it is a mess on the desktop - something Apple did well was to keep the two separate and only share the underlying frameworks where it makes sense such as AV Foundation/AV Kit, OpenGL, OpenCL etc.
Last edited:
Maybe I'm spoiled by using OS X for a while but from reading your post, it makes me cringed. Now I know this is not a lot of hoops when in term of "windows installations" as I know things can get even worse. However when comparing with OS X, this is a lot of hoops that one have to jump through just to have a functional machine. In OS X land, things are pretty straight forward and painless. I usually just install software, let it run, go get a cup of coffee and by the time I got back, everything is ready to go. Backing up, migrating from one machine to another are pretty painless, even preserving user data and apps. To each his own.
I've been computers since the late 80s, have been using Mac OS since 2005, and have used Windows from 3.11 through Windows 8.
Seriously, with the issues I had with the ISO, it took me no less than 7 hours from start to finish, until I had Windows 8.1 with all the updates, security patches, etc. And that was 7 hours with just a bare OS, no apps. I can do a clean install of Mavericks (which I did) and have all my 30+ apps up and going, with my settings in under 3 hours.
We don't realize how good with have it with Mac OS until you try installing/upgrading Windows.
And windows phone.
They've achieved a higher percentage of smartphone marketshare in just a couple years than apple ever achieved in the desktop market over 30 years.
----------
The new guy's first action is to rearrange the deck chairs on the Titantic?
There are more computers running windows today than every apple device ever made. Microsoft isn't going anywhere soon.
Apple has targeted higher minimum hardware prices across much of its line over the past 2-3 years. At the same time they reduced the cost of OS upgrades to nothing. You always pay for it. It's part of the business model. Microsoft doesn't sell you hardware, so they charge directly for the OS. Even so the opportunity cost may not be higher, even when you ignore the low end of PC oem offerings.
Cheap Windows is probably going to help a bit with upgrades, at least if consumers can get the same discount. But if this only applies to cheapo laptops, meh.
What would help more is dropping the Visual Studio price a lot
Right now there are, I think, 4 variants of VS Express, all for different purposes. If you want a handy IDE which supports plugins and has all the different build environments (managed .NET, compiled C#/C/C++ etc.) in one, it gets *really* expensive. The US price may be around $500 from Amazon (and it's probably not the top version either), but here in Europe MS prices are well above US pricing + sales tax/VAT.
If they care so much about developers they should give away the *good* development tools.
What would help more is dropping the Visual Studio price a lot
Right now there are, I think, 4 variants of VS Express, all for different purposes. If you want a handy IDE which supports plugins and has all the different build environments (managed .NET, compiled C#/C/C++ etc.) in one, it gets *really* expensive. The US price may be around $500 from Amazon (and it's probably not the top version either), but here in Europe MS prices are well above US pricing + sales tax/VAT.
If they care so much about developers they should give away the *good* development tools.
And still have a really low market share (albeit much better than the niche products they had before for mobile). Also you are comparing Mobile market share to Desktop market share, which have much different dynamics and a huge difference in number of devices out in the wild.
Not that I don't think Microsoft has done well these last couple of years with the Windows phones, just that your methodology for comparison is a little wonky.
Cheap Windows is probably going to help a bit with upgrades, at least if consumers can get the same discount. But if this only applies to cheapo laptops, meh.
What would help more is dropping the Visual Studio price a lot
Right now there are, I think, 4 variants of VS Express, all for different purposes. If you want a handy IDE which supports plugins and has all the different build environments (managed .NET, compiled C#/C/C++ etc.) in one, it gets *really* expensive. The US price may be around $500 from Amazon (and it's probably not the top version either), but here in Europe MS prices are well above US pricing + sales tax/VAT.
If they care so much about developers they should give away the *good* development tools.
Small developers that won't pay for the cost of a $500 license aren't who they are targeting. To put it another way, if they cut the cost in half, they would need to attract twice as many paying developers to make as much as they were making before. Seeing as adapting development to new languages or marginally different environments is a slow and tentative process, I wouldn't think that cost is a primary concern to adoption.
Disclaimer: I am not a small developer or any level above that.
It gets bought out by Google first, and then Google gets tired of it and passes it next to some ambitious Chinese company. Was that the right answer?
Sorry to cut through the myopia, but the Windows price drop is for sub-$250 computers/tablets and Apple doesn't have product in that market, so the motivation here wasn't "to compete with Apple."
Microsoft's problem is it's hard to compete with free, especially when free (Android) has developed into an excellent tablet OS, and it's hard to compete at the high end (IOS) when what you have to offer is prima facie inferior. Beyond that, their real problem is they were too late to the game. Google beat them to market for the alternate tablet OS.
The problem is that Win8 is a POS. If this offer applied to Win7 I could be interested in running it on my Mac.
This is because Win8 is a POS.
They also have the highest rate of buyer remorse for the past 2 years hovering around 50%.
Just imagine what would happen if apple made OSX for PC's..
I'll be switching to Hackintosh soon.
I'll be switching to Hackintosh soon.
Microsoft shouldn't look at developer tools as a source of income. They should be seen as a source of programs that will drive demand for their OS.
And no, I've never run a Fortune 500 company, but I don't think I could do any worse than Ballmer.
Indeed many prefer Windows XP. Fortunately I'm able to run XP under Parallels Desktop, so I have been able to junk all my Windows-based machines...
As a mac user, I don't understand what everyone is bitching about. Windows 8 is awesome. Metro is like dashboard and launch pad all-in-one.
Plus, you can use a basic desktop and have a small portable monitor like the gechic on lap which has 10-point touch support natively.
So you get a 15.6 in trackpad, that is also a screen, that supports stylus and 10-point finger touch and works great with metro.
OSX doesn't have anything like it.
Microsoft nailed it. It's their customers who are too stupid to realise how to use it properly.
This is the first ever version of windows where I am actually considering ditching OSX, which has gotten progressively worse since snow leopard. Apples value was always the software, and Since apple killed fcp there isn't really any value in apple computers anymore.
How is this competing with Apple. Apple sell no PC for less than $250. So MS is discounting Windows for a segment of the market Apple does not enter. And secondly what device that windows can run on can be bought for less than $250?
Or maybe I misunderstand this? If so please explain it to me.