6 ms·

I love that Apple doesn't make me choose between editions. I paid $30 and I got the new OS. Did I get the upgrade edition? What features did I pay for? No i

I love that Apple doesn't make me choose between editions. I paid $30 and I got the new OS. Did I get the upgrade edition? What features did I pay for? No idea. I got it all, for $30. I didn't even want to read the whole table for all the features of windows 8. I just want Windows 8.

ckluis 15y ago
It's the best they've done so far...
- astrodust 15y ago
  Maybe they're following the grandmother rule, where if someone's grandmother can't figure it out after a ten minute explanation, they should go back and try again with a different plan.
- endlessvoid94 15y ago
  Yeah I definitely agree. I can't believe they got it down to 3. But I also can't help thinking "what the hell. haven't they learned?" It probably makes them more money overall. But with the cost of user confusion and possible frustration. I guess that's a tradeoff they're willing to make. Which is why I won't buy it for $100 bucks.
  - glesica 15y ago
    Well, if you look at the text at the bottom of the table, they've actually got it down to four, Windows 8 Enterprise will still exist as a separate SKU. So really they've only eliminated one edition (Ultimate) and changed the name of another (Starter -> RT). Not that it isn't an improvement. And the simplified naming is a big deal as well. Seriously, who thought "Home Premium" was a good idea? Premium compared to what?
    - recoiledsnake 15y ago
      .>..changed the name of another (Starter -> RT). What? You're way off base here. Please re-read article more carefully.
      - glesica 15y ago
        Windows 7 Starter was the edition for low-power devices. Previously, that meant netbooks, now it means tablets with ARM processors. The market segments are not identical, I realize that, but they're similar, hence my comment about basically renaming "Starter" to "RT". In fact, based on previous reporting, RT will even be targeted at "Home" users, which is also the same as Starter. I didn't mean they literally renamed the product, just that RT will now occupy a similar market position to that previously occupied by Windows 7 Starter.
        dpark 15y ago
        Not even a little bit. Win7 Starter was aimed at people who wanted a dirt-cheap netbook, with prices starting at about $250. It didn't even come with Aero. Windows RT is aimed at people who want a tablet. This is not the same market. This is the set of people who currently shell out $500 and up to buy an iPad, twice as much as a netbook. This is not the same market, and it's not a renaming of the cheapest OS. Starter was the most stripped-down OS. RT is actually the most feature-rich, due to the inclusion of Office. There's a bit of overlap, but only in the same way that there's overlap between people who buy a netbook and people who buy a ThinkPad.
        glesica 15y ago
        Maybe we differ in our definitions of "feature-rich"... """ Microsoft has long said that WOA will not include an x86 emulator, so legacy applications would never run directly on the platform, but there was always the possibility that existing desktop applications could be recompiled. That option is now unambiguously eliminated, with Microsoft saying "WOA does not support running, emulating, or porting existing x86/64 desktop apps." Office is a special, unique case. All third-party applications for WOA will be Metro applications delivered via the Windows Store, and must meet the restrictions imposed on those applications. """ (http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2012/02/windows-8-on-arm-the-desktop-is-there-sos-office-but-not-much-more.ars http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2012/02/windows-8-on-a...) Then there's this... """ Touting the long battery life of ARM-based devices, the guide tempers expectations: "Although the ARM-based version of Windows does not include the same manageability features that are in 32-bit and 64-bit versions, businesses can use these power-saving devices in unmanaged environments." That means ARM devices won't be able to be added to Active Directory domains and have their user access managed by system administrators, or be remotely managed through Microsoft's System Center environment. """ (http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2012/02/windows-8-for-arm-will-lack-enterprise-management-features.ars http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2012/02/windows-8-for-...) Sorry for the long quotes. Anyway, my point is that RT is targeted at "home" users looking for a portable device, same as Starter was. Price point really doesn't come into it. Netbooks aren't even a factor any more. Go check Newegg, there are basically only two models, with some spec options, still available unless you buy refurb. Tablets have taken over the really-small-but-still-afforable-computer segment and many customers who would have purchased a netbook a few years ago will now consider a tablet.
  - daemin 15y ago
    I don't think there's going to be much, and I'd say any, confusion. Firstly Windows 8 RT is only going to be pre-installed and only on ARM devices. So you can't decide to buy it at all. All home PCs and consumer laptops people will have Windows 8 installed already. Therefore people won't need to make a decision. Businesses will be able to use Window 8 or the Pro version if they require the more advanced encrpytion or domain management features. (I can also see some high end business laptops having this installed.) Enterprise users will have their computer installed for them with the Enterprise SKU. So really there will be no confusion on the users side, the most complicated choice of the whole lot will be for small businesses trying to decide between the normal or Pro version, but I'm sure there will be an upgrade path.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
astrodust 15y ago
The local store ran out of single licenses for Snow Leopard so I just bought the family pack for something like $59. I didn't even feel ripped off. It used to be $120 for a single copy, so this is like half off! Microsoft still has the audacity to charge several hundred dollars for their OS. How is it that the cost of Windows keeps going up, but the cost of computers keeps going down?
- creamyhorror 15y ago
  "Microsoft still has the audacity to charge several hundred dollars for their OS." That's really disingenuous, given that 1) the consumer versions of Windows traditionally cost less than $100 2) Microsoft doesn't make money on hardware, whereas the cost of Apple's OSes is priced into Mac hardware You don't get to tut-tut Microsoft for an expensive OS (that runs on the consumer's choice of commodity hardware, cheap or expensive) when you pay a premium on a Mac all-in-one computer. You can justify Apple's OS pricing as being easy to stomach all you want - ultimately it's your choice to buy into the intended psychology of their pricing strategy - but don't try to paint that as a rational, fair comparison.
  - astrodust 15y ago
    "Windows 7 Home Premium" is about $100, but if you want professional you must pay significantly more. "Windows 7 Professional" is $149. "Windows 7 Ultimate" is $199. You can get OEM copies for less from places like NewEgg if you buy hardware, but never as low as the big OEMs pay. When a decent computer was over $2,000 the cost of Windows + DOS was around $85-100. Now the same computer costs about $500 and Windows is as much as $199.
- gouranga 15y ago
  Well that's a load of shit. They screwed you for $59!!! 1/ I've never bought Windows. I tend to buy new hardware when it comes along every 2-3 years (which is the typical lifespan of any hardware regardless of brand/vendor). 2/ And I didn't pay $1200 for the hardware either like Apple stuff. In fact I paid equiv $800 for a Lenovo with Windows 7. 3/ The non Apple hardware is EXACTLY the same and is cheaper (try a Lenovo T/X machine which are far better put together than Apple kit). Oh and I can change the battery without a screwdriver ;-) Oh and I can get the spare bits off ebay for virtually nothing. I love how Apple fanboys enjoy telling people how they didn't get ripped off when they did...
tshtf 15y ago
If you want the features of the operating system formerly known as OS X Server, you shell over $49.99 in the App Stare: http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/os-x-lion-server/id444376097?mt=12 http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/os-x-lion-server/id444376097?...
- sigzero 15y ago
  That isn't a direct comparison though because OS X Server and OS X are different beasts really (thought they share an awful lot). Joe Public would just buy "OS X" or in the Windows 7 world Joe Public would have to choose between "Windows 7 Starter/Home Basic/Home Premium/Professional/Enterprise/Ultimate" and in the Windows 8 world "Windows 8/8 Pro/RT" and would have to ask to know the differences between each.
  - zht 15y ago
    Joe Public would have Home Premium which comes pre-installed with their laptop/is whatever their laptop's factory reset DVD resets their laptop to. Joe Public would barely be aware that there are other versions out there much less the differences between them.
  - recoiledsnake 15y ago
    That is because Apple is not a big player in the enterprise space like Windows is, thus they don't see the benefit of the same differentiation that they have with OS X server.
  - unwiredben 15y ago
    Technically, they can't choose Windows RT since it's the ARM edition and only comes bundled with Windows tablets. I expect almost everyone will get Windows 8, and the "Pro" features will be easy to purchase as an upgrade through the new Windows Store.
sliverstorm 15y ago
On the other hand, I love it when companies let me choose roughly what functionality I need, and pay accordingly.
- astrodust 15y ago
  You mean like cable companies where if you want ESPN you can buy it, but if you don't want the History Channel you can opt out? If your product aspires to be that complicated, you're probably doing it wrong.
  - sliverstorm 15y ago
    The way I see it, the level of granularity I desire is directly related to the pricing. Something less expensive should have less granularity; something more expensive ought to have more granularity. Cable is a good candidate for the "more granularity" category both because it's naturally easy to segment, and because while monthly bills are not large, they of course add up fast. For an example of a product (rather than service) that can benefit from more granularity, consider computers. Even Apple, our paragon of non-granular pricing options, offers ~4 SKU's for their higher end laptops.
- OzzyB 15y ago
  Unless of course the lowest option, functionality wise, isn't less than $30.
  - cooldeal 15y ago
    The reason being that they've already got your money by selling you hardware at a good margin.
    - endlessvoid94 15y ago
      If consumers always thought about why a company charges what it does, then sure. But that's not how consumers think. Or companies, for the most part.
dewitt 15y ago
I agree that fewer editions is the way to go, but note that OS X has always had multiple SKUs as well: http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/os-x-lion/id444303913 http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/os-x-lion-server/id444376097 And customers first need to buy Snow Leopard separately, because you can't install Lion on its own, you can only upgrade to it (somewhat amazingly): http://www.apple.com/macosx/how-to-buy/ On a related note, over the weekend I tried to install Lion on a 5-year-old iMac. Was surprised to find out it's not supported on hardware even that far back. I hope they don't continue either trend with Mountain Lion. (And a footnote, Windows RT is for an entirely different architecture—ARM—and an entirely different class of devices, so no surprise there's a separate SKU for it.)
- 2muchcoffeeman 15y ago
  Legally, i.e. according to the TOS, you need Snow Leopard. You can install Lion on it's own http://www.macworld.com/article/1161087/install_lion_over_leopard.html http://www.macworld.com/article/1161087/install_lion_over_le... But it's a bit silly.
- endlessvoid94 15y ago
  It's far less of a big deal, though, with a $30 price tag. I don't dislike upgrading from Windows 7 to windows 8 because I think it will be hard. I don't want to pay upwards of $100 to install an OS on another machine. I'll definitely pay $30 though. That's the equivalent of beer money on a night out with a few other friends.
- beagle3 15y ago
  Apple officially supports 4-year old hardware but not older (or at least, did in the past). All Apple software produced 4 years after the last PPC apple was sold had still supported PPC, and only then it stopped. I think that's reasonable. While it's technically easier to support a 5-year old Intel Mac compared to a 5-year old PPC Mac, I still think Apple is reasonable in not doing that. It's not like your 4-year old hardware or software stops working. It's just that newer software gradually stops being available for your old hardware.
PhrosTT 15y ago
You paid the apple tax when you bought your computer. You can only access that $30 price after paying a huge premium for your hardware.
- pinaceae 15y ago
  exactly, that's why all the macbook air competitors are half the price of...wait a sec...
  - yread 15y ago
    Uh... yes, they are? Macbook air i5, 4gb, 128gb vs Asus zenbook i5, 4gb, 128gb (and with higher resolution display), 950$ vs 1300$ http://store.apple.com/us/configure/MC965LL/A http://store.apple.com/us/configure/MC965LL/A? http://www.google.com/products/catalog?client=opera&rls=en&q=asus+zenbook&oe=utf-8&channel=suggest&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=shop&cid=16088316992714711222&sa=X&ei=KwGNT_KZHsaWOo6kiPUK&ved=0CGkQ8wIwAw http://www.google.com/products/catalog?client=opera&rls=...
Michiel 15y ago
> I didn't even want to read the whole table for all the features of windows 8 Took me all of 5 minutes to digest that table (and decide I want Windows 8 Pro for Boot from VHD and Client Hyper-V). That's not too much time to choose something I'm going to be using for 3 years, is it?

ckluis 15y ago

It's the best they've done so far...

astrodust 15y ago
Maybe they're following the grandmother rule, where if someone's grandmother can't figure it out after a ten minute explanation, they should go back and try again with a different plan.
endlessvoid94 15y ago
Yeah I definitely agree. I can't believe they got it down to 3. But I also can't help thinking "what the hell. haven't they learned?" It probably makes them more money overall. But with the cost of user confusion and possible frustration. I guess that's a tradeoff they're willing to make. Which is why I won't buy it for $100 bucks.
- glesica 15y ago
  Well, if you look at the text at the bottom of the table, they've actually got it down to four, Windows 8 Enterprise will still exist as a separate SKU. So really they've only eliminated one edition (Ultimate) and changed the name of another (Starter -> RT). Not that it isn't an improvement. And the simplified naming is a big deal as well. Seriously, who thought "Home Premium" was a good idea? Premium compared to what?
  - recoiledsnake 15y ago
    .>..changed the name of another (Starter -> RT). What? You're way off base here. Please re-read article more carefully.
    - glesica 15y ago
      Windows 7 Starter was the edition for low-power devices. Previously, that meant netbooks, now it means tablets with ARM processors. The market segments are not identical, I realize that, but they're similar, hence my comment about basically renaming "Starter" to "RT". In fact, based on previous reporting, RT will even be targeted at "Home" users, which is also the same as Starter. I didn't mean they literally renamed the product, just that RT will now occupy a similar market position to that previously occupied by Windows 7 Starter.
      - dpark 15y ago
        Not even a little bit. Win7 Starter was aimed at people who wanted a dirt-cheap netbook, with prices starting at about $250. It didn't even come with Aero. Windows RT is aimed at people who want a tablet. This is not the same market. This is the set of people who currently shell out $500 and up to buy an iPad, twice as much as a netbook. This is not the same market, and it's not a renaming of the cheapest OS. Starter was the most stripped-down OS. RT is actually the most feature-rich, due to the inclusion of Office. There's a bit of overlap, but only in the same way that there's overlap between people who buy a netbook and people who buy a ThinkPad.
        glesica 15y ago
        Maybe we differ in our definitions of "feature-rich"... """ Microsoft has long said that WOA will not include an x86 emulator, so legacy applications would never run directly on the platform, but there was always the possibility that existing desktop applications could be recompiled. That option is now unambiguously eliminated, with Microsoft saying "WOA does not support running, emulating, or porting existing x86/64 desktop apps." Office is a special, unique case. All third-party applications for WOA will be Metro applications delivered via the Windows Store, and must meet the restrictions imposed on those applications. """ (http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2012/02/windows-8-on-arm-the-desktop-is-there-sos-office-but-not-much-more.ars http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2012/02/windows-8-on-a...) Then there's this... """ Touting the long battery life of ARM-based devices, the guide tempers expectations: "Although the ARM-based version of Windows does not include the same manageability features that are in 32-bit and 64-bit versions, businesses can use these power-saving devices in unmanaged environments." That means ARM devices won't be able to be added to Active Directory domains and have their user access managed by system administrators, or be remotely managed through Microsoft's System Center environment. """ (http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2012/02/windows-8-for-arm-will-lack-enterprise-management-features.ars http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2012/02/windows-8-for-...) Sorry for the long quotes. Anyway, my point is that RT is targeted at "home" users looking for a portable device, same as Starter was. Price point really doesn't come into it. Netbooks aren't even a factor any more. Go check Newegg, there are basically only two models, with some spec options, still available unless you buy refurb. Tablets have taken over the really-small-but-still-afforable-computer segment and many customers who would have purchased a netbook a few years ago will now consider a tablet.
- daemin 15y ago
  I don't think there's going to be much, and I'd say any, confusion. Firstly Windows 8 RT is only going to be pre-installed and only on ARM devices. So you can't decide to buy it at all. All home PCs and consumer laptops people will have Windows 8 installed already. Therefore people won't need to make a decision. Businesses will be able to use Window 8 or the Pro version if they require the more advanced encrpytion or domain management features. (I can also see some high end business laptops having this installed.) Enterprise users will have their computer installed for them with the Enterprise SKU. So really there will be no confusion on the users side, the most complicated choice of the whole lot will be for small businesses trying to decide between the normal or Pro version, but I'm sure there will be an upgrade path.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

astrodust 15y ago

The local store ran out of single licenses for Snow Leopard so I just bought the family pack for something like $59. I didn't even feel ripped off. It used to be $120 for a single copy, so this is like half off! Microsoft still has the audacity to charge several hundred dollars for their OS. How is it that the cost of Windows keeps going up, but the cost of computers keeps going down?

creamyhorror 15y ago
"Microsoft still has the audacity to charge several hundred dollars for their OS." That's really disingenuous, given that 1) the consumer versions of Windows traditionally cost less than $100 2) Microsoft doesn't make money on hardware, whereas the cost of Apple's OSes is priced into Mac hardware You don't get to tut-tut Microsoft for an expensive OS (that runs on the consumer's choice of commodity hardware, cheap or expensive) when you pay a premium on a Mac all-in-one computer. You can justify Apple's OS pricing as being easy to stomach all you want - ultimately it's your choice to buy into the intended psychology of their pricing strategy - but don't try to paint that as a rational, fair comparison.
- astrodust 15y ago
  "Windows 7 Home Premium" is about $100, but if you want professional you must pay significantly more. "Windows 7 Professional" is $149. "Windows 7 Ultimate" is $199. You can get OEM copies for less from places like NewEgg if you buy hardware, but never as low as the big OEMs pay. When a decent computer was over $2,000 the cost of Windows + DOS was around $85-100. Now the same computer costs about $500 and Windows is as much as $199.
gouranga 15y ago
Well that's a load of shit. They screwed you for $59!!! 1/ I've never bought Windows. I tend to buy new hardware when it comes along every 2-3 years (which is the typical lifespan of any hardware regardless of brand/vendor). 2/ And I didn't pay $1200 for the hardware either like Apple stuff. In fact I paid equiv $800 for a Lenovo with Windows 7. 3/ The non Apple hardware is EXACTLY the same and is cheaper (try a Lenovo T/X machine which are far better put together than Apple kit). Oh and I can change the battery without a screwdriver ;-) Oh and I can get the spare bits off ebay for virtually nothing. I love how Apple fanboys enjoy telling people how they didn't get ripped off when they did...

tshtf 15y ago

If you want the features of the operating system formerly known as OS X Server, you shell over $49.99 in the App Stare: http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/os-x-lion-server/id444376097?mt=12 http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/os-x-lion-server/id444376097?...

sigzero 15y ago
That isn't a direct comparison though because OS X Server and OS X are different beasts really (thought they share an awful lot). Joe Public would just buy "OS X" or in the Windows 7 world Joe Public would have to choose between "Windows 7 Starter/Home Basic/Home Premium/Professional/Enterprise/Ultimate" and in the Windows 8 world "Windows 8/8 Pro/RT" and would have to ask to know the differences between each.
- zht 15y ago
  Joe Public would have Home Premium which comes pre-installed with their laptop/is whatever their laptop's factory reset DVD resets their laptop to. Joe Public would barely be aware that there are other versions out there much less the differences between them.
- recoiledsnake 15y ago
  That is because Apple is not a big player in the enterprise space like Windows is, thus they don't see the benefit of the same differentiation that they have with OS X server.
- unwiredben 15y ago
  Technically, they can't choose Windows RT since it's the ARM edition and only comes bundled with Windows tablets. I expect almost everyone will get Windows 8, and the "Pro" features will be easy to purchase as an upgrade through the new Windows Store.

sliverstorm 15y ago

On the other hand, I love it when companies let me choose roughly what functionality I need, and pay accordingly.

astrodust 15y ago
You mean like cable companies where if you want ESPN you can buy it, but if you don't want the History Channel you can opt out? If your product aspires to be that complicated, you're probably doing it wrong.
- sliverstorm 15y ago
  The way I see it, the level of granularity I desire is directly related to the pricing. Something less expensive should have less granularity; something more expensive ought to have more granularity. Cable is a good candidate for the "more granularity" category both because it's naturally easy to segment, and because while monthly bills are not large, they of course add up fast. For an example of a product (rather than service) that can benefit from more granularity, consider computers. Even Apple, our paragon of non-granular pricing options, offers ~4 SKU's for their higher end laptops.
OzzyB 15y ago
Unless of course the lowest option, functionality wise, isn't less than $30.
- cooldeal 15y ago
  The reason being that they've already got your money by selling you hardware at a good margin.
  - endlessvoid94 15y ago
    If consumers always thought about why a company charges what it does, then sure. But that's not how consumers think. Or companies, for the most part.

dewitt 15y ago

I agree that fewer editions is the way to go, but note that OS X has always had multiple SKUs as well: http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/os-x-lion/id444303913 http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/os-x-lion-server/id444376097 And customers first need to buy Snow Leopard separately, because you can't install Lion on its own, you can only upgrade to it (somewhat amazingly): http://www.apple.com/macosx/how-to-buy/ On a related note, over the weekend I tried to install Lion on a 5-year-old iMac. Was surprised to find out it's not supported on hardware even that far back. I hope they don't continue either trend with Mountain Lion. (And a footnote, Windows RT is for an entirely different architecture—ARM—and an entirely different class of devices, so no surprise there's a separate SKU for it.)

2muchcoffeeman 15y ago
Legally, i.e. according to the TOS, you need Snow Leopard. You can install Lion on it's own http://www.macworld.com/article/1161087/install_lion_over_leopard.html http://www.macworld.com/article/1161087/install_lion_over_le... But it's a bit silly.
endlessvoid94 15y ago
It's far less of a big deal, though, with a $30 price tag. I don't dislike upgrading from Windows 7 to windows 8 because I think it will be hard. I don't want to pay upwards of $100 to install an OS on another machine. I'll definitely pay $30 though. That's the equivalent of beer money on a night out with a few other friends.
beagle3 15y ago
Apple officially supports 4-year old hardware but not older (or at least, did in the past). All Apple software produced 4 years after the last PPC apple was sold had still supported PPC, and only then it stopped. I think that's reasonable. While it's technically easier to support a 5-year old Intel Mac compared to a 5-year old PPC Mac, I still think Apple is reasonable in not doing that. It's not like your 4-year old hardware or software stops working. It's just that newer software gradually stops being available for your old hardware.

PhrosTT 15y ago

You paid the apple tax when you bought your computer. You can only access that $30 price after paying a huge premium for your hardware.

pinaceae 15y ago
exactly, that's why all the macbook air competitors are half the price of...wait a sec...
- yread 15y ago
  Uh... yes, they are? Macbook air i5, 4gb, 128gb vs Asus zenbook i5, 4gb, 128gb (and with higher resolution display), 950$ vs 1300$ http://store.apple.com/us/configure/MC965LL/A http://store.apple.com/us/configure/MC965LL/A? http://www.google.com/products/catalog?client=opera&rls=en&q=asus+zenbook&oe=utf-8&channel=suggest&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=shop&cid=16088316992714711222&sa=X&ei=KwGNT_KZHsaWOo6kiPUK&ved=0CGkQ8wIwAw http://www.google.com/products/catalog?client=opera&rls=...

Michiel 15y ago

> I didn't even want to read the whole table for all the features of windows 8 Took me all of 5 minutes to digest that table (and decide I want Windows 8 Pro for Boot from VHD and Client Hyper-V). That's not too much time to choose something I'm going to be using for 3 years, is it?