Windows Vista Versus XP Pricing

At the moment, NONE. MS has priced itself out of my consideration. Why should I pay the ridiculous cost of an upgrade when as fine or finer an OS- ie: OS X goes for $109 RETAIL. And there's no garbage marketing like vista- OS X is COMPLETE.

Only a monopoly could jack consumers around like MS does.

crescentdave: AMEN.

crescentdave:

OS X Tiger (upgrade) = $129
Vista Home Premium (upgrade) = $160

Tiger can only be compared to Vista Home Premium. Besides Vista Home Premium has media center extender and Tablet PC utilities, which Tiger doesn't.

Now, XP was released 6 years back. So you would pay $160 once in 6 years. On the other hand, OS X has more frequent releases. So in the end, OS X is more expensive over a period of time.

Talking of monopoly,

MacWorld = Apple Software + Apple Hardware + no choices.

So apple fanboy, don't even talk about monopolies.

"Tiger can only be compared to Vista Home Premium."

That's quite amusing because Tiger has been released and Vista hasn't :D

"Now, XP was released 6 years back. So you would pay $160 once in 6 years. On the other hand, OS X has more frequent releases. So in the end, OS X is more expensive over a period of time."

Case in point: Apple continuously innovate, Microsoft do not. Apple users don't have to upgrade, we choose to!

Microsoft's *ridiculous* pricing just shows how it is monopolizing the market. (It can over-charge because many people can't see the alternatives) And what's with the 'special' versions that cost more? Its all bull... go out to your nearest Apple Store and GET A MAC!... One OS price (Which Microsoft cannot compete with - especially in the educational market) and you'll get one complete OS that has all the features you could ever desire!

GET VISTA NOW!... The features are already here in Mac OS X! Or you could wait untill spring and get Vista 2.0 (Leopard)

"...and you'll get one complete OS that has all the features you could ever desire!"

Except for the ability to play games, which the majority of PC enthusiasts like to do. Sure, I could dual boot Windows XP, but wouldn't that completely undermine the reason for getting a mac in the first place? I mean, why bother if you have to throw XP on it anyway?

Funny how the "Apple experience" isn't complete without Windows XP.

damn!!! i really do not understand why do ppl hate microsoft,,,they up to date has never cause harm to any one in real life(they harm only companies but that is in business competition)and at current google is harming them,,so you people says google is rite,,and all of you support google for that,,but in future when microsoft start to harm google you ppl would start blaming microsoft for not being good enough,,,,you ppl hate OS xp ,,,heck y??what is damn bad in it...i am very sure that most of you who hates OS XP have had used it more then any of the current you ppl r using...is that you ppl hate them because they are perfect or you hate cause being perfect how could thy do mistake,,,i guess you hate them cause they are rich company and so starting to support some another comapniese,,,i dont understand why u do what you like,,,and if dont like microsoft products why do u have to hate thm????strange...i guess if all of you who hates them,,think for a while that why do you hate thm

damn!!! i really do not understand why do ppl hate microsoft,,,they up to date has never cause harm to any one in real life(they harm only companies but that is in business competition)and at current google is harming them,,so you people says google is rite,,and all of you support google for that,,but in future when microsoft start to harm google you ppl would start blaming microsoft for not being good enough,,,,you ppl hate OS xp ,,,heck y??what is damn bad in it...i am very sure that most of you who hates OS XP have had used it more then any of the current you ppl r using...is that you ppl hate them because they are perfect or you hate cause being perfect how could thy do mistake,,,i guess you hate them cause they are rich company and so starting to support some another comapniese,,,i dont understand why u do what you like,,,and if dont like microsoft products why do u have to hate thm????strange...i guess if all of you who hates them,,think for a while that why do you hate thm

A very valid point John, Gaming isn't exactly the Mac's strongest point. However, Mac gaming is improving and will continue to do so. I am not a gamer myself and for me the Mac is complete without Windows and in my humble opinion Mac OS X surpasses Windows by miles in every other aspect.

For me, the "Apple experience" that you mention is that right from the hardware all the way up to the OS and software, Apple products are just more well-designed than any competitor.

Again, this is just my opinion. Everyone is entitled to one and if you want to buy and use Windows that is your choice. (Well, did you actually buy it? Or was it bundled with the PC? Pirated copy? The latter seems to apply to the majority of PC users I know.)

I think you need to take into account and inflation factor when comparing prices from 6 years ago. Even with a modest 2% inflation rate assumed over 5 years for XP you would have the following cost:
XP Home $221/$110
XP Pro $331/$221

I am using the Pre-RC1 release of vista right now and find it a nice change to XP. I am personally not a mac person, but thats probably more to do with the fact that I never bothered to learn them plus from the outside looking in they seem too closed box. I don't find the price too overwhelming seeming how I only have to buy from them every half decade. I will be one of the many to buy on release day.

its funny that their is always someone posting some kind of comment about what OS X has already done in the OS world and how Vista' UI ripped it off (i.e. widgets-gadgets). Then there is always some person who has to comment about how someone is a mac "fanboy"-what a word! And then provide evidence as to how Macs are a ripoff and a monopoly or they can't play their beloved games. to all you dorks i would like to thank you all for making these stupid blogs worth reading. While I use both a Mac and a PC and feel neither is a perfect machine nor is that important its is always intresting see what other peoples takes and info may be. Unfortunatly the comment spaces of the world seem to have been over run with a bunch of bickering OS pundints who have almost zero factual info and an overload hearsay. you guys have been watching to much CNN and FOX news!

its funny that their is always someone posting some kind of comment about what OS X has already done in the OS world and how Vista' UI ripped it off (i.e. widgets-gadgets). Then there is always some person who has to comment about how someone is a mac "fanboy"-what a word! And then provide evidence as to how Macs are a ripoff and a monopoly or they can't play their beloved games. to all you dorks i would like to thank you all for making these stupid blogs worth reading. While I use both a Mac and a PC and feel neither is a perfect machine nor is that important its is always intresting see what other peoples takes and info may be. Unfortunatly the comment spaces of the world seem to have been over run with a bunch of bickering OS pundints who have almost zero factual info and an overload hearsay. you guys have been watching to much CNN and FOX news!

its funny that their is always someone posting some kind of comment about what OS X has already done in the OS world and how Vista' UI ripped it off (i.e. widgets-gadgets). Then there is always some person who has to comment about how someone is a mac "fanboy"-what a word! And then provide evidence as to how Macs are a ripoff and a monopoly or they can't play their beloved games. to all you dorks i would like to thank you all for making these stupid blogs worth reading. While I use both a Mac and a PC and feel neither is a perfect machine nor is that important its is always intresting see what other peoples takes and info may be. Unfortunatly the comment spaces of the world seem to have been over run with a bunch of bickering OS pundints who have almost zero factual info and an overload hearsay. you guys have been watching to much CNN and FOX news!

"Which edition of Vista interests you the most?"

Absolutely ZERO!
Why should I use an OS that restricts my rights as a consumer? If I buy a copy of Vista, am I able to hand my buddy copy legally? Not at all, if I buy a copy of SUSE Linux from Novell (Or any Linux distro for that matter), I can hand my buddy a copy, hack the thing to do anything I want, tinker with the internals of the OS, reverse engineer everything in it, and just generally do anything I want to.
Plus I'm never forced to upgrade, or to accept digital restrictions management (The FSF's term for DRM, that I feel describes DRM a lot better) schemes.

Let alone be the fact that I can run Linux on a five year old AMD Athlon box, with a cheasy Geforce2 graphics card.

i'm surprised no one has mentioned the fact that Apple essentially boot legged another OS and put a new visual environment on there.

I love how apple innovates soo much - you mean they change little things in the GUI - like this time, they are going to be going to 512x512 icons. I CAN NOT WAIT.

Meanwhile you have Microsoft - their last OS release was 6 years ago, I'll drop $400 bucks once every 6 years. With Vista, Aero, new file system, directx 10 - Microsoft contributes more to the cmputer world in a day then Apple does throughout the entire year.

And nobody should talk about the "Monopoly" anymore - someone said that Microsoft can overprice because they are a monopoly - $2500 for 17 inch laptop if your purchasing Apple products? I have a 17 inch wide screen dual core laptop running xp pro that I picked up for $1200. Apple may have cheap operating systems but they rape and kill your family when your paying for everything else.

Well, going back to the mac arguments, Apple no longer has the "superior" os as far crap that comes with it and their harware sucks! The new firmware upgrade forced apple to run all mac book's fans continiously since they over heat within 20 min. Furthermore, mac games are not "getting better and better" just because the mac could finally handle pong doesn't mean that I could have a similar Prey, CS, or WOW experiance on these little white power machines. (Yes I know apple has black ones, yeahhhh go affirmative action)

Well, going back to the mac arguments, Apple no longer has the "superior" os as far crap that comes with it and their harware sucks! The new firmware upgrade forced apple to run all mac book's fans continiously since they over heat within 20 min. Furthermore, mac games are not "getting better and better" just because the mac could finally handle pong doesn't mean that I could have a similar Prey, CS, or WOW experiance on these little white power machines. (Yes I know apple has black ones, yeahhhh go affirmative action)

Well, going back to the mac arguments, Apple no longer has the "superior" os as far crap that comes with it and their harware sucks! The new firmware upgrade forced apple to run all mac book's fans continiously since they over heat within 20 min. Furthermore, mac games are not "getting better and better" just because the mac could finally handle pong doesn't mean that I could have a similar Prey, CS, or WOW experiance on these little white power machines. (Yes I know apple has black ones, yeahhhh go affirmative action)

As far as pricing goes, Microsoft has run out of ideas to increase profits and Wall Street is pretty upset. So, come out with a new OS where they have a monopoly and jack up the prices.

I seriously don't see a reason for most people to upgrage. You have at least a few solid choices, let's list a few options here:

Apple -- cheaper than Dell on the high end, and the OS is better than Windows XP and maybe even Vista. Even if Vista has a couple of unique features, how many (percentage of users) really care?

Ubuntu: Great product and it's free. Works on various processors, including non Intel and AMD.

SuSE: Same benefits as Ubuntu

Windows XP: Stick with Windows XP. There is really no need to upgrade.

Nothing.

Sorry all... My issue with MS is the EULA. I do not let the cops into my house to check "incase" I stole something....what allows MS to feel they can? As a company, their extent, embrass and extinguish culture - the NEED to control file formats. The illigal activities to fight dirty because it appears they do not have faith in their products to stand on their own. The notion from the IE/Netscape filings which stated that MS does make (understandably) a very very small profite from the charity pricing of office - charity office pro retails for under 40$ bucks - retail office pro is 416$ (+/- depending on where you are)

I'm not saying Mac would be better if they had a Monopoly (linux would however given the GNU GPL license)

I am saying that I would love the market Without an OS monopoly
(even though there are some downsides yes thank you).
Say 40% windows, 30% Mac's, 30% Linux?
That I hope would help keep them honest!

Thanks
Dobie.

If the windows operating system that included all that OSX has to offer would skyrocket in price. How much would similar app to garageband($40, $50...$100) cost, how about iPhoto($40, $50...$100), iDvd($40, $50...$100) or iMovie.($40, $50...$100) What about the new stuff coming like Timemachine and Spaces(???). Non have comparable apps included with the Windows OS. Does windows include the ability to run other operating systems like Bootcamp does? No. How about Photobooth, iWeb and iCal? I could go on and on, like command line and X11 supoport which opens our systems to the vast (free) unix/linux world. What about security, which is a joke on windows.

Which version of Vista would you compare that to? At least Ultimate, and beyond! Were is the value? Would windows now cost $400, $500 or more? Lets not even mention the value in the hardware. Built in iSight, firewire 800, expresscard, quadcore xeon..... How much would it cost at Dell if you could even get it? Much more.

I'm somewhat embarassed to be a PC user, listening to some of these knothead comments. First of all, I'm no Mac "fanboi." Second, Newegg is offering a FULL RETAIL version of OS 10.4.6 for $103.90.

Ya gotta love the inability of Microsoft to upgrade its operating system. 6 years and counting- midstream it had to junk EVERYTHING it was doing and begin over- it's approach was dead wrong. FINALLY, after missing yet another ship date, it MIGHT be ready to go in January of 2007.

Finally, could some fanboi tell me all about the "new file system" ckrimmel mentions? Oh yeah, I thought not. I

By several of you clowns this is seen as a POSITIVE, since you only have to pay "every six years" for a new OS. Might I suggest you have had NO CHOICE?

PC gaming? Oooh. Now THAT'S the ONLY compelling reason for buying a computer ... after all, what else could you actually DO with one?

t's really simple: MS is leveraging its bulk in order to sell an OVERPRICED and fragmented OS offering

Trik - after reading your post... I believe I understand how you managed to triple post it. The last line was the only 'clever', or 'whitty' thing you said... however, like the rest of post..it was a bit narrow and closed off.
Apples portiable computers are not just white, but have other colours too.
This makes you seamingly clever 'affirmitive action' line simply reflect poorly on you.

This fits with your post about Apple games not getting better.
Market share defines the level of support companies will give you. If Apple climbed to say 20% of the market - they would get most all the games. I've read a couple stories on the web about Mac's market share climbing lately (thanks to the Ipod help), and the expansion of software being ported which has come with it.
The hardware works well - just try to find a teck mag which didn't have a mac involved.
Your triple posting just put the frosting on the cake.

In the end the only statement I'll take form you post is the fans bother you.

Point 1: OS X is always a full release. Per Apple's store, there is no "upgrade" silliness. And all the intermediate upgrades e.g. 10.4.1, 10.4.2, etc are FREE.

Point 2: OS X regular price is normally around $129 ($79 for students, and no crippling)

Point 3: Tiger is more fully functional than either XP or Vista at the moment. "Group Management"? Native. Disc Authoring? Native. And the list goes on. I work with Vista on a daily basis doing Q/A and it is in a terrible way atm. Any version of OS X can be set up with nearly the same functionality as OS X Server, for those that care to do it. All for free. Is this the case on any Windows OS, save, server edition(s)?

Point 4: At this point in time (provided you want a reasonably high end system) Mac Pro's are cheaper than competitor equivalents, and for you that actually care to run an, arguably, inferior OS, Windows is easily run on them.

. . .choose what you will, but at least make the choice an informed one.

If Microsoft included all the applications jbroket mentioned on his post (Garageband, iPhoto, iDVD, iMovie, iWeb, iCal, etc) in its OS it would be crucified by everybody (and the State Department) as an evil monopoly that destroys all the other software vendors that were in those markets.
When Apple does the same thing, it gets praises from people about how complete their OS X is.

Why nobody else sees it? If MS does it: evil. If Apple does the same thing: brilliant. What a double standard!!!

i think you have a point nandos. if microsoft were to try and bundle a suite such as iLife, it would be sued almost out of existance. What they could do, is make a suite such as iLife, and just have an option to exclude it when buying a pc/OS. i think the main reason that microsoft has not released an iLife-like suite with or without the OS, is because of the typical microsoft lack of innovation. They've got their hands full trying to get Vista out.

Vista is an OS that started out as Longhorn, was restarted as Vista and has missed countless deadlines. the only reson i can see buy Vista would be for gaming, and then i say, stick with XP, it will probably end up being more reliable because it will not have the frills that Vista does, and being a smaller (in terms of code lines) OS, it will run faster. any true gamer will not care so much about the OS, and how the OS looks, but instead about how the games run, and games will likely run faster with XP. almost all the gamers i know, myself included, will not be "upgrading" to Vista.

however, microsoft has updated the directx engine in Vista to 9.0L and plans on version 10. In E3, simulations of Direct X 10 showed signifigantly better performance in gaming than 9.0c

however, microsoft has updated the directx engine in Vista to 9.0L and plans on version 10. In E3, simulations of Direct X 10 showed signifigantly better performance in gaming than 9.0c

Ubuntu: $0
Debian: $0 ($0 upgrade)
Fedora Core $0
Mandriva $0
The freedom of software: Priceless

One of the glaring issues I have with Windows is the lack of a full OS. I dont care if they bundle software...but to dumb down an OS and sell it as a 'Home' version isnt fair - and you cant 'upgrade' to a pro version to fix this without a full reinstall.

I will continue to use OS-X personally as I prefer to get what I pay for...if $200 cant buy me the ability to network my computer, then I will buy something else. Hell, I use my MacBook Pro even when I am working putting my MCSE/MCSA:m to good use...

There were some great posts in support of both Windows and OS-X. But for those of you who have no idea what you are talking about...(marhathoda, Trik, ckrimmel) I will clear up a few points...
*The Home editions are crippled networking wise...this is exactly why they cant be compared to OS-X.
*If anyone thinks 512x512 is the only innovative feature in 10.5 then you may be mentally deficient and should be checked.
*Trik - nothing you said was fact - perhaps read more or *gasp* use one.

dmcbride - Actually MS have made it very clear that with Vista you can easily upgrade from any of the more limited versions to any of the more complete versions. I think they're actually the same disks with different codes so you don't even need to pick up or download anything, just pay online for an extended license.
the only thing you can't do I think, but I'm not sure, is upgrade straight form the x86 to the 64bit version.

Yakumo- I agree with your description. Which really supports a generalized distaste for this kind of marketing- all MS is doing is crippling the OS to provide dubious points of distinction between the versions. And it STILL will cost $$ to escape their deliberately dumbed-down versions, even though there are no additional costs associated with the product. It's just a dishonest way of making more money.

Please tell me whats cheap and affordable about what apple makes? well... erm... their laptops are easily $100-$200 more than most all competitors with the same specs. WHat about accessories. heaven forbid you may want an apple brand version of an iPod. $100 for a leather case?... what? or.. $50 for a dock. didn't they use to include that for free? what about all the overheating problems associated with macs? has apple every heard of a vent? or is it not asthetically pleasing enough? drives me crazy.

as for all of the iSoftware... there are lots of both linux and windows versions of the same software that work just as effectively for... free. who cares if they don;t come bundled with the OS? ohh yeah.. mac users want everything laid out for them right out of the box, like those dumbass ads they have on TV.

I'll take a PC over a mac any day. Simply so I never have to be associated with those mac fanboys. macs are cheaper? my ass.

bigbadgoat, enough with all the insults and sarcasm. you're making yourself look bad. Right now you're not associating yourself with "those mac fanboys", you're associating yourself with those pc "fanboys". seriously, you sound a lot more fanatic than any of the pro-mac guys i've heard here. so, if you've got something to say, put the facts on the table, and leave the insults out. it's people like you and Trik that make pc users look bad.

Microsoft is using monopolistic tactics with its pricing, this is called greed. Plain, pure, greed. They are knowingly; joyfully, and with great attention to detail, maintaining the integration of the microsoft OS as much as they can. Its HOW business is done. Its an ugly waste of their money ( money to politicians, vendors, ), and promotes the existence of dumb computer users thru their automation. Vista IS purty, and maybe its even secure, but... that DX 10 label will sway most in the long run. As for everyone's comments.. you all don't seem offended by the base greed of microsoft; and even though I think the Mac OS is probably wonderful since its based on Unix, I think the cost of their machines is prohibitive to the dominance I do truly with they had.
BTW, the attitude and language of most of the posts is just so much juvie sounding tripe. If you can't make a post and make your point nicely, then you're just drunk, angry, or looking for a fight.. not discourse.

The day that XP stops working is the day I start using Linux exclusively.

Vista is something that only a bloated monopoly could think up.

The day that XP stops working is the day I start using Linux exclusively.

Vista is something that only a bloated monopoly could think up.

Since a couple of weeks, I use Ubuntu Linux, for 90 % of the time. The remaining 10 % I use Windows XP, because I haven't found a good Linux alternative yet for one or two Windows applications.

Windows Vista? Not on your life, Bill!

I am intrigued by Linux. It appears to be a lean OS instead of a bloated suite of applications packaged as an OS. But I am wary about how to jump in: there are so many choices! Does anyone want to recommend and easy migration strategy?

This argument reminds me of the old "Chevy, Ford, or Chrysler; which is better" arguments of years ago. The question, if your existing car is working and the new one costs a lot, then what is the benefit of purchasing the new one? What do I get for my $100 to $360 (based on the chrome options) that I don't have today with an OS I have already paid for?

Home Premium, as an upgrade. I built a computer with Vista in mind. It has a 64 bit cpu, 2gigs ram, 7600 nvidia card, free standing sound card, and much room for future expansion. I can't wait for it, even though I have to. My next computer will be an iMac, for music and pictures. I need some to get pictures off my iPod.

The argument that someone needs Windows to play video games is just ridiculous. If you want to play video games, get a video game console. Microsoft is moving toward a unified Windows/Xbox 360 gaming software platform anyway, so ditch the PC and get the Xbox. Who wants to support millions of different gaming platforms of vastly different capabilities when you can support one (or two or three) and be done with it?

Anyone who can afford a hot, gaming PC and the games that play on it can easily afford a console too. I suspect most PC gamers do have at least one console because much of that content is just not available on the PC. Sound familiar?

Does a Windows PC run more games than a Mac? Probably. Does it matter? No. The consoles have made that point moot.

Now, if you live to build and tweak the fastest gaming system on the planet so you get an extra 2 frames-per-second in your favorite game, then more power to you. You need to use whichever OS runs your favorite game fastest.

None of them interest me enough to pay that much for them.

Home Basic promises a better experience (whatever that means), improved search and better security. But I already have a firewall/anti-virus/anti-spyware package (ZASuite) and Google Desktop Search. My family already knows how to use this interface and all the drivers work with XP so why would I want to break that?

The Windows Aero interface looks interesting but I'm not going to pay $160 for Home premium for it.

Simple sollution to everyone's whining about prices of operating systems. Just use the one that you want and don't worry about who has what to offer. I for one am a pc person and don't intend to change. I also use Microsoft products and again, don't intend to change. Windows Vista is nice and has a lot of new features. And one small thing to remember is: XP was up in the higher price category when it was first released and Vista will be, too. Just give it some time and the prices will come down, as everything eventually does in the technological world.

Speaking of what marhathoda said above:
"So apple fanboy, don't even talk about monopolies."

Hey Microsoft has a monopoly on the entire PC industry.

Bottom line..Vista is the best Windows ever created. It's more secure (relatively speaking). It handles a few things in a more logical manner. And frankly, it looks better than expected. That said, this doesnt mean that it is particularly "better", nor is it significantly worse than OSX. MS is simply "UNCOOL" and playing games with us. OS X is stylish and in some very tangible ways more effective (gaming sucks, but leave that for the consoles!!!). Apple has locked up the "COOL FACTOR". MS is simply trying to co-opt "cool". As we all know, that just doesn't work (Zune?, C'mon!). Gates is in the wind, Ballmer is wack, and Mr. Lotus Notes (Ray Ozzie) is too little too late. That doesn't mean that Vista won't be a success. It simply means that OS X and Linux will have greater market penetration where they best fit...and where opensource rules.It's about CHOICE. I also use XP, Linux and OSX (clients and servers). Vista is too expensive, & doesn't solve most old problems. Choice is good!!

Wow guys lets talk about pricing options for Apple. http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore?family=iMac
They really need to update their hardware thats like 2-3 years old specs besides the screen resolution which i do like alot. However the fact of the matter is its expensive for what u get for that price i can build a pc thats 2-3x better than that i build my pcs and find the windows os better i didnt really like the simplistic os of the mac its to simple for sum 1 like me i how ever run windows vista 5728 and i Love it. I think every thing runs better than on old ass xp ill admit it i did get tired looking at the same boring desktop every day, from now on i hope it is different for MS because vienna is apparently already in developement. I mainly dont like apple because lack of upgrades lack of software as far as going to any store besides apple stores and expensive upgrades such as mouse and keyboard and thats my story.

I run windows vista rc1 (build 5728) and peformane wise it realy nice in games i get stable frames and there are many features that i also found nice the only problem was the lack of driver and software support witch was not up to date but givin this is only n beta realese i eagerly awaite the full reasle, For now i will be moving back to windows xp till next year when vesta is launched. I hope the competetors keep up there fight becuse it will keep everybody on there toes wich will provide lots of new inovation and software realese to keep everyone happy.

In all intents and purposes, each OS provider fills the need of a section of the clientele. Mac has always been viewed as the premeir graphic design system, and Wintel machines as the business provider. Arguing about which is better is ridulous, becuase now, more than ever, all of the OS's are becoming similar - all based of the LINUX/UNIX environments. Each OS has their good and bad, and has to be viewed in that way. I think they have both come a long way - MAC now offers many business apps, and Wintel offers the graphic capabilities. It is still true that Wintel's tend to be more configurable, but even that is changing. To pick one is to go with what appeals to you and provides the compatibility that you require.

I use them all, UNIX, LINUX, Wintels & MAC's and have my likes and dislikes of them all, but that is how it goes.

As far as VISTA is concerned, I think it would be a great release, and seems to address many issues plaguing the present OS.

Way too funny what I read in blogs like this. Listen folks, this argument will never be resolved because people are unwilling to reason, understand, relate to perspectives, and simply are too cheap.
I’m a System Administrator for a large global company. We have just about every OS I can think of: Sun 7-10, Linux (several flavors and colors), Win 3.1-XP Pro, Win2k-3k, Vista RC2 basic-ultimate as well as Longhorn, and several helpings of MAC with their respective OS’s (yes I am fluent in every single one of them). We even have multi (as in more than 4) OS boxes used for weird testing by R&D. Guess what? They all have their strengths and weaknesses.
Personally, at my residence I have Fedora core 5 as my server, my gaming pc runs Xp Pro, 3 laptops: one Fedora 5, one Win XP Pro and one OS 10. I have gaming consoles as well (Xbox-360 and PS2).They all have their purpose and value. It’s up to me, my family and or co-workers to decide which is best for the intended task (work, fun, reliability

testing, etc).
As for the dumbass arguments about how much it cost for one OS over the other, grow up. As I once heard a yacht sales man say in south Florida (no I purchased a 32 ft boat not the yacht) ‘If you have to ask how much it cost, you can’t afford it’. If you have to whine about the cost of an OS, then yeah get the free one and shut up. Otherwise pay for what you want, and yes, shut up. I personally do not have a problem paying for what I want and I have no complaints. Again maybe because I can afford it, or simply because I now how to use and operate all of these OS’s. Nuff said.

Your arguments about if Vista or Mac OS X are going to cost less are starting to look pathetic. I live in Chile, and here the minimum wage here is CLP 126.000 (more or less $ 220). Do you think that a normal chilean family earning $700 a month can go to the store, shell out $249 (yes, Microsoft keeps its prices constant through the world, XP here really costs $200) and buy Vista? Let alone buying a Mac. They need that money for feeding, for clothing, for sending their children to school, and normally they buy their $400 PC with Windows preinstalled, Pirated Edition of course. And Microsoft wants to punish them because they are infringing its IP. Give me a break.

Please, do yourself a favor and use Linux. I know all the problems coming from that choice. But you will be helping to solve the most important problem: you, and everyone, must force M$ to have a reasonable price scheme for the underdeveloped world.

Listen, Microsoft can charge any price it desires. If you think that $200 is too expensive, by all means, go ahead and buy a different system. Microsoft doesn't force anyone to buy their software, so obviously the price is reasonable enough for Chileans, or anybody else, to buy the product, if it wasn't, nobody would buy Vista, and Microsoft would go bankrupt. Believe it or not, Microsoft has to follow the rules of economics just like everyone else.

Remember that different systems are better for different people. If you are a computer specialist and you like to customize, Linux is the best for you. If you would like better artistic and graphical capabilities, buy a Mac. Windows is attempting to market to the run-of-the-mill shopper. Someone who is neither a programmer or a graphic artist. The kind of person who doesn't stress out about how the vista kernel will overprotected because they don't even know what the kernel is. This person doesn't need options, so Microsoft leaves them out

Hear Hear kkrauss. Articles like this amuse me; I upgraded two computers with two new operating systems just this week. Took an hour or so. Cost was zero, and both OSes (Fedora Core 6 and Ubuntu 6.10) compare facorably to Vista without requiring new hardware.

Vista will be seen as the biggest ripoff of desktop computing history.

Well said jsemmens. Saying that people in underdeveloped should have a right to cheap Windows is no different from saying that they should have a right to cheap BMW's. Windows is no more a necessity than a high class sedan is.

I get a kicked out of comments made here. I've been playing with computers since there early day in the 8086 era and when Mac was called a "Apple." Bottom line on the OS version described from Linux, Mac OS and Windows is everyone is looking for specific compatibilities. You have users that want stability go with Linux if you're a Avid PC user, then you have Mac which is a awsome product but limited to its usages then the MS Windows platform which is PC based and market dominated by its arrays of usage. I have sampled the big 3 os's and have to admit that I love them all, but I am again one of those gamers so unfortunately a Windows system wins or I can't play World of Warcraft. I am not one for a lot of flash in my OS's, of course its nice but I like ease of navigation and minor annoyances like security alets asking for admin rights. Overall XP as bugged as it is has been has done alright. Mac and Linux are just to limited in what you can do with them.. Windows takes the cake!

i had a lot of problems with vista- now i am a user of http://loadingvault.com
they have all the soft - it is rapidshare search!