10 ms·

Windows 8 Pro Upgrade to cost $39.99

216 points by rkrishnakumar 14y ago

gouranga 14y ago
Good price. I genuinely can't argue with that!
3JPLW 14y ago
Competition is great! I'm very glad that Apple has managed to exert some pressure on Microsoft here. I really don't think that this would have occurred otherwise.
- gouranga 14y ago
  I don't think it's related to Apple at all. I can't believe people are trying to give Apple some credit for it. Two real things: 1) No one ever buys Windows upgrades, so this is a motivator to shift to Win8. Consumers and businesses just buy a new PC and large businesses get licenses automatically. 2) They now have the opportunity of upselling inside the operating system (which they've been playing with for a long time - since 2007!). That is it. No pressure from Apple.
  - ahsteele 14y ago
    Whether or not a business just buys new machines or upgrades their OS depends on a variety of factors. Coporations who have bought Microsoft Software Assurance can upgrade to the latest MS Software on any machine without incurring any new licensing costs. http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/software-assurance/new-version-rights.aspx http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/software-assurance/new-ve...
  - vonmoltke 14y ago
    > 1) No one ever buys Windows upgrades, so this is a motivator to shift to Win8. Consumers and businesses just buy a new PC and large businesses get licenses automatically. Maybe I'm in a very small minority, but I have bought Windows upgrades. I don't buy prebuilt computers, but still have reason to keep a Windows box around. Plus, my Mom gets my retired boxes, so I need a couple additional installs at her house. One of those is still an XP box, so I will definitely be taking advantage of this upgrade deal for that.
  - greedo 14y ago
    If #1 is true in terms of past behavior, then expecting this price point to change that is doubtful. In my experience, the reason no on upgrades is because they then inherit all the cruft from their old install. I'm not sure that upgrading will ever be popular with the Windows crows. #2 is also doubtful for the same reason. If users are faced with 900 versions of Windows to choose from while upgrading, they'll choose the cheapest. And if they find out that Feature X requires them to pony up more money through the MS Store, they'll be supremely irritated. And you haven't really given any evidence to show that it's not related to Apple's pricing.
    - gouranga 14y ago
      Correlation does not imply causality. The burden of proof is on the inclusive case. Windows upgrades allow fresh installs so that's rubbish.
      - greedo 14y ago
        So if a user is going to do a fresh install, they need to back up their existing data, perform a fresh install, restore their data, find all the old install disks from their existing software, install those. Look for the license keys for this software, fail since they bought the software ages ago, or pirated it from a buddy. Then throw their hands up in the air and get mad at MS. It's a fact of Windows in the consumer market that upgrades just don't happen. Consumers almost always run their computers into the ground, then get the latest version of Windows when they purchase a new PC. This is something you stated in your post, yet you seem to think that MS will magically change this behaviour with this price point. I see no evidence to support that. Additionally, the MS Store is almost a direct response to Apple's App Store on OSX.
        Mythbusters 14y ago
        The experience you described regarding upgrade is grossly outdated. Have you upgraded recently? The transfer wizard (forgot the actual name) does such as awesome job of moving your data to new OS that I have seen even the cookies persist after OS upgrade without me having to do any tweaking.
- starpilot 14y ago
  Windows users consider the paid OS X upgrades blatant cash grabs for updates that should be free. They see it as charging for service packs.
  - shinratdr 14y ago
    That's because they don't use OS X. No service pack has ever made the kind of changes an OS X upgrade has, period. Anyone who spends time in both operating systems knows that's a ridiculous sentiment only spouted by the most ignorant users. I've also never heard it from someone who has ever actually used OS X for any real length of time. Ignorant OS X users tend to consider Windows upgrades overpriced. That's not true either. It's just a different release strategy. Microsoft can't work on that kind of incremental release schedule without upsetting enterprise customers. The only real difference is Apple has stuck with the original OS X UI and chosen to refine it, whereas Microsoft throws out the old skin for every release and designs a new one which makes updates seem more drastic. That's just the UI though. Behind the scenes, OS X has made as much progress between 10.0 and 10.8 as Windows has between XP and 8.
vijayr 14y ago
should we upgrade, or wait for the initial reaction from the public? So far, its only the tech crowd that has commented on Win 8, and it seems that people either hate it, or love it
- freehunter 14y ago
  Unfortunately, negative public reaction is heavily influenced by word of mouth. Will you lose anything by not upgrading? Not immediately, but over time yes. Will you gain anything by upgrading? Possibly, depending on your needs, leaning more towards yes over time. I've been using it 100% for a few weeks and spend 90% of my time in desktop mode (due to using Chrome, AIM, and Media Player Classic). Most of the time I forget I'm in Windows 8, it feels just like Windows 7. The only time I see Metro is when I hit the windows key, type "chro" and hit enter to launch Chrome. In this use case, Metro isn't anything more than a bigger start menu.
  - keithpeter 14y ago
    "The only time I see $UI is when I hit the windows key, type "chro" and hit enter to launch Chrome. In this use case, $UI isn't anything more than a bigger start menu" $UI = [Metro|Ubuntu Unity|DWM/dmenu] Strange how these changes all come along at the same time. Does Mac OS have a text based launcher at all?
    - amccloud 14y ago
      Spotlight?
      - keithpeter 14y ago
        Thanks all three parent posters, I had tried to put Spotlight out of my mind (iBook G4 with the appropriate upgrade). I imagine it works a lot faster now. So that is all three main end user desktop/laptop OSes using type and go interfaces.
        14y ago
Alex3917 14y ago
It's great to see Apple really sticking it to MS. Apple has no need to make money off their OS upgrades since the cost of the OS is already built into the hardware, but for MS, Windows is over 25% of their total revenue. Plus this is great news for web developers. Hopefully this means that IE6-8 will be going away much faster than was previously anticipated.
- zitterbewegung 14y ago
  Why is it great? Apple is worse than MS in so many other ways. In a few years you are going to see Apple being the person that everyone hates. Now, people seem to like it.
  - annon 14y ago
    Because Apple's cost cutting has increased competition. Increased competition is usually better for consumers.
    - jmduke 14y ago
      While I agree that increased competition is better for consumers, Apple hasn't cut costs for the consumers -- they've merely absorbed the cost of the OS into their hardware.
      - annon 14y ago
        If the average price of hardware hasn't gone up, which it hasn't, then they have cut costs for consumers. Regardless of where they handle the accounting on their end, cost of ownership has gone down.
  - SpikeDad 14y ago
    Eh? Next you'll be telling us W8 is going to be the nail in the coffin of Appple? There's NO question that the W8 upgrade pricing is a DIRECT result of Apple's usual $40 upgrade pricing. BTW: Lets see how easy it is to update WXP to W8 - a single click in the Microsoft Store?
nathan_long 14y ago
Can you upgrade if your computer doesn't support "Secure Boot"? If so: 1) Buy a box with no OS 2) Install an older Windows 3) Upgrade. Permanent path to 8 without secure boot?
- fleitz 14y ago
  Secure Boot support is only required for Win 8 ARM, so yes, you can upgrade with out secure boot (unless you've some how gotten Win7/XP to run on ARM)
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- UnoriginalGuy 14y ago
  Why wouldn't you? Secure Boot is a root-kit protection mechanism; and Microsoft has required OEM partners to provide a way for users to disable it in the UEFI/BIOS. I think you're either trolling or hugely misinformed.
  - mythz 14y ago
    "As currently proposed, Secure Boot impedes free software adoption. It is already bad enough that nearly all computers sold come with Microsoft Windows pre-installed. In order to convince users to try free software, we must convince them to remove the operating system that came on their computers (or to divide their hard drives and make room for a new system, perceptually risking their data in the process). With Secure Boot, new free software users must take an additional step to install free software operating systems. Because these operating systems do not have keys stored in every computer's firmware by default like Microsoft does, users will have to disable Secure Boot before booting the new system's installer. Proprietary software companies may present this requirement under the guise of "disable security on your computer," which will mislead new users into thinking free software is insecure." https://www.fsf.org/campaigns/secure-boot-vs-restricted-boot/whitepaper-web https://www.fsf.org/campaigns/secure-boot-vs-restricted-boot...
    - 14y ago
rcchen 14y ago
Apple has historically made its profit through selling hardware, investing into the software to make the hardware and software work well together but extracting negligible returns on software. What would pursuing this type of upgrade pricing mean for a company like Microsoft, which relies primarily on software for revenue?
- ConstantineXVI 14y ago
  It's possible they've realized that your average person isn't interested in spending $100-200 to upgrade Windows; so they're making the price more palatable. More upgrades, less people stuck on old Windows, easier for developers to consider targeting newer Windows APIs (who then buy new copies of MSVS). Everyone wins. Also, I'm under the impression MS charges OEMs much less than the retail price for Windows licenses. I doubt they're taking much of a loss, if any.
- fleitz 14y ago
  Historically Apple (remember Apple from 1985 to 2001) has been a severely under performing company, in the last 10 years they've made boatloads of cash by optimizing their supply chain and extracting huge volume discounts on the latest technology. Microsoft needs to figure out how to get its hardware and its OEMs hardware prices inline with Apple. If MS and their OEMs put pressure on manufacturers they'll no longer be able to offer the same discounts to Apple. OEMs, VARs, volume licensing holders already pay close to this price for windows and make up the bulk of purchases. Making Windows available to retail at ~$40 will not have a significant impact on revenue. Not dealing with Apple's competitive prices on phones and tablets will spell death for MS. MS at this point could give a shit about cannibalizing Windows retail upgrades for desktop operating systems. The key is to leverage their desktop OS, developer base and corporate relations into something thats competitive in mobile and tablets.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- mutagen 14y ago
  This upgrade pricing is good for Microsoft. Currently they face more competition from current windows users not upgrading to Microsoft's newest OS than they do from OSX and Linux. Microsoft gets people off XP and Vista, an old operating system and its widely reviled successor. They get to tout fast adoption rates and wide availability of the new features which helps them with both developer relations and with goes hand in hand with their tablet strategy.
Koldark 14y ago
This might actually make me upgrade!
neovive 14y ago
I wouldn't chalk this up as just a competitive response to the relatively low price Apple charges for its OS upgrades. I think Microsoft really wants/needs to accelerate the adoption of Windows 8 even if that means taking a hit on license fees. Whatever they can do to accelerate adoption of W8 in the enterprise and consumer markets will more than pay off in the long-term. A major reduction in legacy support requirements, enables them to innovate faster and will help improve the Windows brand that has been tarnished over the past decade. They essentially bet the farm on W8 being multi-platform at the core and need people to upgrade.
- KeyBoardG 14y ago
  I beleive its both. If they are going to live up to their promise of more frequent, smaller OS versions then they'd have to come in at a lower price. Lets hope this is the beginning of a trend.
- greenyoda 14y ago
  My guess is that it will take a long, long time for enterprises to move to Windows 8, with most sticking with Windows 7 for as long as Microsoft continues to provide security patches for it. If you're an enterprise with 10000 or 50000 non-technical users running Windows 7, the cost of moving to Windows 8 will be primarily IT staff hours, including all the support questions from users puzzled by the new user interface. What compelling benefits would there be for a bank or insurance company to move to Windows 8 that would offset the steep costs?
  - hcurtiss 14y ago
    Exactly. Our law firm is almost -- almost -- ready to roll out our Windows 7 build. And we only have about 650 users.
    - hk__2 14y ago
      That's the same in my University. And there is 20K students.
    - 14y ago
UnoriginalGuy 14y ago
This is all about the app store. Remember Microsoft can make a good chunk of profit from each app purchase and nobody will be developing let alone buying apps if Microsoft cannot get eyes on it.
- r00fus 14y ago
  Apple has consistently stated that they don't make much money from their App Store (or iTunes content in general). How are Microsoft (and Amazon, whose entire $199 Kindle Fire pricing) going to make money in this market? No doubt they want folks on the store, but I question whether this is the reason behind the $40 upgrade pricing.
  - FreshCode 14y ago
    I would wager MS wants to foster a stronger Windows App ecosystem and not necessarily App Store profits.
- bishnu 14y ago
  Citation needed? Apple's app store isn't a huge revenue source by any means [1], let alone profit. I've seen no evidence that App Stores can be any kind of profit center. [1] http://www.businessinsider.com/chart-of-the-day-apple-revenue-2010-10 http://www.businessinsider.com/chart-of-the-day-apple-revenu...
  - kmfrk 14y ago
    The guy they probably took the data from: http://www.asymco.com/2011/06/13/itunes-now-costs-1-3-billionyr-to-run/ http://www.asymco.com/2011/06/13/itunes-now-costs-1-3-billio....
  - greedo 14y ago
    Sure, Apple doesn't generate a lot of earnings or revenue directly from each of their app stores, but the indirect revenue is what matters. Apple is a hardware company first, a software company second. App store purchases reinforce user stickiness as well as improving the overall purchasing experience. The bottom line is what matters, not the line item profitability.
WiseWeasel 14y ago
I have a hard time imagining that many Windows 7 users are eager to upgrade to Windows 8 on their desktops and laptops, given the drastic changes catering to touch interaction, bringing them little apparent value at best, and significant lost productivity and frustration at worst. My Windows 7 box is for gaming and productivity (not necessarily in that order), and after all I've seen of it, I wouldn't touch Windows 8 for that with a ten-foot pole. I'll wait for Windows 9 Classic Desktop Professional Edition (Win7 tarted up with a new skin including 30% more alpha blending effects for some reason).
- anigbrowl 14y ago
  I'm pretty stoked about it actually.
  - WiseWeasel 14y ago
    I think the Surface Pro looks like a nice device, and Windows 8 makes perfect sense there. For my gaming rig/media productivity desktop with a large monitor, however, it seems detrimental to me. What has you stoked about it?
    - anigbrowl 14y ago
      Much tighter multimedia kernel, which is a big deal for me. Downside: not on the ARM tablets. So paradoxically, the opposite of your pro/cons. I'm neutral on teh tablets; I have an Asus Eee pad and Android just got a major audio shot int he arm with Jellybean, so I haven't decided whether to stick with that platform or switch to Surface (or indeed an iPad). But for big projects, you need a desktop. http://createdigitalmusic.com/2012/06/music-developer-on-windows-8-a-leap-forward-for-desktops-a-leap-backward-for-metro-winrt/ http://createdigitalmusic.com/2012/06/music-developer-on-win...
- novalis 14y ago
  I'll use it in a VM until the dev tools I work with start to support it, then I'll go all in. It is always the same thing when a full OS update comes, this is not any diff from the others. I'll keep my linux machines handy on the side as always. I don't see what the ten-foot pole security counter measures bring to the table at this point.
polshaw 14y ago
Lets be clear; this has little/nothing to do with apple. You can't spend $40 to switch to the latest OSX on your regular PC, so it is just not direct competition. I can only assume they think this way is how they will get most money from selling to end users, and I wouldn't be surprised at that being the case. No doubt they make most of window's licence money from OEMs.
- yuhong 14y ago
  Except this is the upgrade version, so this requires a previous version on Windows too.
  - spicyj 14y ago
    The Mac OS X price is essentially also an "upgrade" price because you can only install it on Macs (which already have OS X installed).
    - dhughes 14y ago
      It's like Xbox versus PS3, you pay for XboxLive! but the Xbox is cheaper or (when new) you paid nearly $1000 for a PS3 but got PS3 Network free, either way you're paying. The old options was buy a lower priced computer with Windows but pay more for the OS/upgrades or buy a very expensive Apple computer but $40.00 for an OS upgrade.
      - polshaw 14y ago
        There is also the fact that a point upgrade in OSX is almost never as significant as a new Microsoft OS, that MS provides free service packs, and that (IIRC) apple allows upgrades to multiple macs with one purchase. So, really, they need to be assessed on their own merit.
        rbanffy 14y ago
        Since the first OSX, all upgrades were point upgrades and all of them were very significant. They were also more frequent than Windows upgrades.
thekungfuman 14y ago
The main complaint I hear is the change of start menu behavior, but most people I know use a keyboard based launcher anyway. If you're typing the name of the thing you want does it matter if it's going into Launchy, the Win7 start menu or the Metro interface? As long as you quickly get to the app or file you want, the interaction (typing) is pretty much identical.
- barrkel 14y ago
  It's not the most frequent method for launching. According to MS, their metrics indicate pinned task bar items are, or are trending to be, the most frequent method. When I don't remember the name of the thing I want to launch (which is quite frequent), I rely mostly on positional navigation through a customized start menu. That is, I don't remember programs by name, I remember them by where I left them. Windows Vista / 7's start menu was a major regression for my use case (the scrollable treeview with expandable items destroyed absolute screen positioning); I had to replace it with Classic Shell to get usability back.
  - MatthewPhillips 14y ago
    For most people the "All Programs" menu quickly turns into a circus. Curating it is a chore. They are messing this up in Windows 8, as every time you install a application, including desktop applications, all of its start menu items get pinned onto the start screen. I'm afraid most users will never bother to unpin them.
    - barrkel 14y ago
      I used to curate the All Programs menu. What that did was mess up uninstallers, because they could no longer find shortcuts to delete them, so I ended up with lots of dead shortcuts that needed clearing out. So now, I create a bunch of category folders (Work, Development, Entertainment, you get the idea) in the Start Menu profile folder (rather than the Start Menu\Programs folder), and copy the handful of app and applet shortcuts that I actually need in. I leave the All Programs menu to fester and ignore it. With Classic Shell, this works well; the classic start menu, in XP mode, shows my folders as top-level expanding menu items.
joeybaker 14y ago
This is huge for webdevs. With MS making upgrades to Win8 (and therefore IE10) so cheap/easy, the death of OldIE is that much closer.
- kmfrk 14y ago
  If. Enterprise and Chinese pirates[1] might not be able to upgrade anytime soon. [1]: http://www.troyhunt.com/2010/08/aye-pirates-be-reason-ie6-just-wont-die.html http://www.troyhunt.com/2010/08/aye-pirates-be-reason-ie6-ju...
  - luchs 14y ago
    When the Chinese pirates upgrade their system to pirated Windows 8, they will still have IE10 preinstalled, so it's even going to work for them.
- lifeguard 14y ago
  You are overlooking the fact that MS is introducing yet another browser variant that web devs have to accommodate. And also the QA dept. And also customer service. And also internal IT. On second though; Yes, this will be exciting! ;)
  - joeybaker 14y ago
    True, it's another IE version, but an auto-updating, mostly-standards compliant version. IE 10 brings IE into the "modern browser" realm.
    - lifeguard 14y ago
      It doesn't matter how wonderful IE 10 is until over 70% of IE users are upgraded to it. For a period of a few years there will be a flood of IE 10 users because this is what their computer came with. There will still be too many other IE users for commercial websites to ignore. So there will have to be a lot of web code bloat and complexity to accommodate them. I was a professional web developer before IE 1.0 and am speaking from experience.
kevinflo 14y ago
This price feels to me like a lack of confidence in the product. Microsoft needs adoption rates of 8 to be high. $40 might not be much, but anything is too high when the OS feels like a UI downgrade instead of an upgrade.
- kmfrk 14y ago
  Look at the lessons learnt cutting the prices of videogames in the Steam store. Lower prices can spur people to buy your videogames in ways that are actually much more profitable than pricing it higher. Pirates will always try to rationalize themselves to a reason to pirate software. Microsoft is doing a great job of making Windows 8 an attractive upgrade to people. I was personally planning to hold off on buying it, but that price tag is extremely compelling, so I'll probably buy it, shortly after any launch kinks are sorted out.
lifeguard 14y ago
Everyone remember to wait for SP1 to be released before using this on important systems.
lambada 14y ago
What no-one has mentioned that I find interesting, is that Microsoft are calling this a 'promotion' "This upgrade promotion for Windows 8 Pro both online and at retail runs through January 31st, 2013." I wonder why this price is only temporary, and what the price will be afterwards?
- Useful_Idiot 14y ago
  All such deals are offered as "promotions" to the start of the next year. They merely get extended ("through January 31st 2014") as a legal formality once the date is hit. Essentially it's the Legal department's requirement.
- Gustomaximus 14y ago
  Often legal will ask for this kind of wording so they have an out if they want it later. So it may be more future proofing than an expectation of price changes next year.
- ams6110 14y ago
  They can say that the retail price of the upgrade is $139, then with each sale they can take a $100 "promotional" expense off their taxable income.
  - gte910h 14y ago
    I was under the impression the value of the promotion is based off production and transport cost, not equivalent sale price. Is this not true?
forgotAgain 14y ago
You have to figure that people who are running XP and Vista weren't going to spend much to upgrade so this part of it doesn't cost MS much in lost revenue. For users running Windows 7 I don't see the rush to upgrade even at the low price. You have a good OS in W7. Most will figure if it's not broke, don't fix it. It's a nice gesture from MS that won't cost it much. For myself, I have an old dual-core Vista notebook that may now get an SSD and Windows 8 just so I can have the latest OS available. That's one more developer that stays current with the latest Microsoft OS which is where I think they see the payoff.
- brudgers 14y ago
  Outside of enterprise, I suspect that a lot of people still running XP may be short of the hardware to run Windows 7/8. So it's largely a feel good gesture in those cases - and perhaps an indirect marketing boost for Microsoft's hardware partners.
jsz0 14y ago
It's a smart price but I suspect that Microsoft has burned too many bridges for most people to ever consider upgrading their computer's operating system. For the average person a (Windows) operating system upgrade has traditionally been cost prohibitive and often not a smooth process. That's going to scare a lot of people off even at $39.99 I'm also not convinced Microsoft has found a compelling way to sell Windows 8 yet. There's no one button buy/install option here. People will have to go seek out the software and justify the price tag to themselves. That's going to be an up-hill battle. I'm betting the percentage of users upgrading will be about the same as previous Windows releases.
- mkr-hn 14y ago
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_systems http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_system... Around 10% upgrading per year isn't bad considering how big a jump it is from XP to 7. 7 to 8 is less of a jump and this announcement makes it much cheaper.
- ams6110 14y ago
  For the average person a (Windows) operating system upgrade has traditionally been cost prohibitive and often not a smooth process I'm firmly in this camp. I've done clean installs of Windows 7 on both VMs and physical hardware and it was flawless every time. I have no doubt clean Windows 8 installs are also easy. But I would be afraid of an in-place upgrade. My PC at home is an old HP with an AMD Athlon. It runs XP. It does everything I need it to do. I will never upgrade the OS, even if Windows 8 were free I would not consider it. When the time comes, I will buy a new computer and migrate my files, but until then it will keep on as-is.
- FreshCode 14y ago
  I've been waiting for MS to wake up to cheaper (and more frequent) upgrades for a long time and I am happy to upgrade at that price.
jony_m 14y ago
"$39.99 in 131 markets" - sounds to me like this is for emerging markets only (?)
robomartin 14y ago
Is this the "new" Microsoft? I generally like what I am seeing them do. Surface looks incredible. Not completely sold on the Metro interface on the desktop but understand what they are trying to do. In general there seems to be new energy and focus coming out of MS. I wonder what's going on inside.
- smallblacksun 14y ago
  The court oversight of Microsoft stemming from the antitrust lawsuit ended in May 2011. I don't think it is a coincidence that Microsoft's initial publicity about the new Metro stuff cam in June 2011.
- corysama 14y ago
  For the first time in a long time, they are becoming underdogs. The surprising thing is that they are smart enough to start acting like one! http://www.theverge.com/2012/3/15/2874513/microsoft-internet-explorer-loved-to-hate-video http://www.theverge.com/2012/3/15/2874513/microsoft-internet... Most huge, old companies finding themselves in such a position prefer to pretend nothing changed no matter what.
ori_b 14y ago
That's a lot go charge for crippling my desktop UI by trying to turn it into a mobile UI.
SCdF 14y ago
Here's the thing: if the Windows 8 upgrade was free I wouldn't take it. Not because I have any great hatred of Windows 8-- I got bored one night and played around with it in a VM, it seems nice enough-- but Windows 7 works fine already. Windows is the thing that I have to run on my computer so I can run the things I actually care about using. As long as it stays out of my way and doesn't have lots of bugs or security issues, I'm happy with it. Until I'm forced off 7 due to incompatibilities I see no reason to switch. (for the record, I still run Snow Leopard on my mac for similar reasons).
- josteink 14y ago
  Different people, different wiggles I guess. I'm running the Release Preview as my main OS now, and I'm just amazed at how much faster and smoother everything is. When this preview expires and I'm forced to go get Windows 8 proper if I want to keep using it, I'm pretty sure going back to Windows 7 wont be an option for me. Just like going back to Ice Cream Sandwich isn't an option once you've tried Jelly Bean. There are just so many small (and some major) incremental improvement all over the line. For me, I'm getting Windows 8 for sure, and I like the news about it not going to cost me a fortune.
rbanffy 14y ago
My bet is that someone's bonus is tied to licenses sold rather than sales revenue.
ommunist 14y ago
The pnly plus for me is that MSIE6 installation base will be contracted. For those who already paid over $100 for WinXP->Win7 upgrade, this $40 figure looks ugly.
saturdaysaint 14y ago
The more I think about this, the more the protestations that Apple had nothing to do with this seem bizarre. A price drop of this magnitude - $120 for the cheapest Win 7 upgrade to $40! - does not occur without competitive pressure. Can you imagine Adobe doing this kind of upgrade price drop on their (essentially competitor-less) creative software? If the iPad were not taking a serious bite out of the consumer PC business, Microsoft would be in no such hurry to spread the platform to existing PC users (who they've been happy to not-so-subtly push to a whole new PC in past years). PC makers can't be too happy - OS upgrades might not represent much of a buying cycle, even in the consumer sphere. If anything, Windows 8's improved performance across the board might extend the life of old PCs. I don't say any of this to damn Microsoft, who are doing good work but are against bigger forces. It is fascinating watching the sudden commoditization of a once revered, culturally central product.
vishaldpatel 14y ago
Have they announced the price of a new copy? Would be nice if it was similarly priced.

216 points by rkrishnakumar 14y ago

Good price. I genuinely can't argue with that!

3JPLW 14y ago

Competition is great! I'm very glad that Apple has managed to exert some pressure on Microsoft here. I really don't think that this would have occurred otherwise.

gouranga 14y ago
I don't think it's related to Apple at all. I can't believe people are trying to give Apple some credit for it. Two real things: 1) No one ever buys Windows upgrades, so this is a motivator to shift to Win8. Consumers and businesses just buy a new PC and large businesses get licenses automatically. 2) They now have the opportunity of upselling inside the operating system (which they've been playing with for a long time - since 2007!). That is it. No pressure from Apple.
- ahsteele 14y ago
  Whether or not a business just buys new machines or upgrades their OS depends on a variety of factors. Coporations who have bought Microsoft Software Assurance can upgrade to the latest MS Software on any machine without incurring any new licensing costs. http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/software-assurance/new-version-rights.aspx http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/software-assurance/new-ve...
- vonmoltke 14y ago
  > 1) No one ever buys Windows upgrades, so this is a motivator to shift to Win8. Consumers and businesses just buy a new PC and large businesses get licenses automatically. Maybe I'm in a very small minority, but I have bought Windows upgrades. I don't buy prebuilt computers, but still have reason to keep a Windows box around. Plus, my Mom gets my retired boxes, so I need a couple additional installs at her house. One of those is still an XP box, so I will definitely be taking advantage of this upgrade deal for that.
- greedo 14y ago
  If #1 is true in terms of past behavior, then expecting this price point to change that is doubtful. In my experience, the reason no on upgrades is because they then inherit all the cruft from their old install. I'm not sure that upgrading will ever be popular with the Windows crows. #2 is also doubtful for the same reason. If users are faced with 900 versions of Windows to choose from while upgrading, they'll choose the cheapest. And if they find out that Feature X requires them to pony up more money through the MS Store, they'll be supremely irritated. And you haven't really given any evidence to show that it's not related to Apple's pricing.
  - gouranga 14y ago
    Correlation does not imply causality. The burden of proof is on the inclusive case. Windows upgrades allow fresh installs so that's rubbish.
    - greedo 14y ago
      So if a user is going to do a fresh install, they need to back up their existing data, perform a fresh install, restore their data, find all the old install disks from their existing software, install those. Look for the license keys for this software, fail since they bought the software ages ago, or pirated it from a buddy. Then throw their hands up in the air and get mad at MS. It's a fact of Windows in the consumer market that upgrades just don't happen. Consumers almost always run their computers into the ground, then get the latest version of Windows when they purchase a new PC. This is something you stated in your post, yet you seem to think that MS will magically change this behaviour with this price point. I see no evidence to support that. Additionally, the MS Store is almost a direct response to Apple's App Store on OSX.
      - Mythbusters 14y ago
        The experience you described regarding upgrade is grossly outdated. Have you upgraded recently? The transfer wizard (forgot the actual name) does such as awesome job of moving your data to new OS that I have seen even the cookies persist after OS upgrade without me having to do any tweaking.
starpilot 14y ago
Windows users consider the paid OS X upgrades blatant cash grabs for updates that should be free. They see it as charging for service packs.
- shinratdr 14y ago
  That's because they don't use OS X. No service pack has ever made the kind of changes an OS X upgrade has, period. Anyone who spends time in both operating systems knows that's a ridiculous sentiment only spouted by the most ignorant users. I've also never heard it from someone who has ever actually used OS X for any real length of time. Ignorant OS X users tend to consider Windows upgrades overpriced. That's not true either. It's just a different release strategy. Microsoft can't work on that kind of incremental release schedule without upsetting enterprise customers. The only real difference is Apple has stuck with the original OS X UI and chosen to refine it, whereas Microsoft throws out the old skin for every release and designs a new one which makes updates seem more drastic. That's just the UI though. Behind the scenes, OS X has made as much progress between 10.0 and 10.8 as Windows has between XP and 8.

vijayr 14y ago

should we upgrade, or wait for the initial reaction from the public? So far, its only the tech crowd that has commented on Win 8, and it seems that people either hate it, or love it

freehunter 14y ago
Unfortunately, negative public reaction is heavily influenced by word of mouth. Will you lose anything by not upgrading? Not immediately, but over time yes. Will you gain anything by upgrading? Possibly, depending on your needs, leaning more towards yes over time. I've been using it 100% for a few weeks and spend 90% of my time in desktop mode (due to using Chrome, AIM, and Media Player Classic). Most of the time I forget I'm in Windows 8, it feels just like Windows 7. The only time I see Metro is when I hit the windows key, type "chro" and hit enter to launch Chrome. In this use case, Metro isn't anything more than a bigger start menu.
- keithpeter 14y ago
  "The only time I see $UI is when I hit the windows key, type "chro" and hit enter to launch Chrome. In this use case, $UI isn't anything more than a bigger start menu" $UI = [Metro|Ubuntu Unity|DWM/dmenu] Strange how these changes all come along at the same time. Does Mac OS have a text based launcher at all?
  - amccloud 14y ago
    Spotlight?
    - keithpeter 14y ago
      Thanks all three parent posters, I had tried to put Spotlight out of my mind (iBook G4 with the appropriate upgrade). I imagine it works a lot faster now. So that is all three main end user desktop/laptop OSes using type and go interfaces.
      - 14y ago

Alex3917 14y ago

It's great to see Apple really sticking it to MS. Apple has no need to make money off their OS upgrades since the cost of the OS is already built into the hardware, but for MS, Windows is over 25% of their total revenue. Plus this is great news for web developers. Hopefully this means that IE6-8 will be going away much faster than was previously anticipated.

zitterbewegung 14y ago
Why is it great? Apple is worse than MS in so many other ways. In a few years you are going to see Apple being the person that everyone hates. Now, people seem to like it.
- annon 14y ago
  Because Apple's cost cutting has increased competition. Increased competition is usually better for consumers.
  - jmduke 14y ago
    While I agree that increased competition is better for consumers, Apple hasn't cut costs for the consumers -- they've merely absorbed the cost of the OS into their hardware.
    - annon 14y ago
      If the average price of hardware hasn't gone up, which it hasn't, then they have cut costs for consumers. Regardless of where they handle the accounting on their end, cost of ownership has gone down.
- SpikeDad 14y ago
  Eh? Next you'll be telling us W8 is going to be the nail in the coffin of Appple? There's NO question that the W8 upgrade pricing is a DIRECT result of Apple's usual $40 upgrade pricing. BTW: Lets see how easy it is to update WXP to W8 - a single click in the Microsoft Store?

nathan_long 14y ago

Can you upgrade if your computer doesn't support "Secure Boot"? If so: 1) Buy a box with no OS 2) Install an older Windows 3) Upgrade. Permanent path to 8 without secure boot?

fleitz 14y ago
Secure Boot support is only required for Win 8 ARM, so yes, you can upgrade with out secure boot (unless you've some how gotten Win7/XP to run on ARM)
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
UnoriginalGuy 14y ago
Why wouldn't you? Secure Boot is a root-kit protection mechanism; and Microsoft has required OEM partners to provide a way for users to disable it in the UEFI/BIOS. I think you're either trolling or hugely misinformed.
- mythz 14y ago
  "As currently proposed, Secure Boot impedes free software adoption. It is already bad enough that nearly all computers sold come with Microsoft Windows pre-installed. In order to convince users to try free software, we must convince them to remove the operating system that came on their computers (or to divide their hard drives and make room for a new system, perceptually risking their data in the process). With Secure Boot, new free software users must take an additional step to install free software operating systems. Because these operating systems do not have keys stored in every computer's firmware by default like Microsoft does, users will have to disable Secure Boot before booting the new system's installer. Proprietary software companies may present this requirement under the guise of "disable security on your computer," which will mislead new users into thinking free software is insecure." https://www.fsf.org/campaigns/secure-boot-vs-restricted-boot/whitepaper-web https://www.fsf.org/campaigns/secure-boot-vs-restricted-boot...
  - 14y ago

rcchen 14y ago

Apple has historically made its profit through selling hardware, investing into the software to make the hardware and software work well together but extracting negligible returns on software. What would pursuing this type of upgrade pricing mean for a company like Microsoft, which relies primarily on software for revenue?

ConstantineXVI 14y ago
It's possible they've realized that your average person isn't interested in spending $100-200 to upgrade Windows; so they're making the price more palatable. More upgrades, less people stuck on old Windows, easier for developers to consider targeting newer Windows APIs (who then buy new copies of MSVS). Everyone wins. Also, I'm under the impression MS charges OEMs much less than the retail price for Windows licenses. I doubt they're taking much of a loss, if any.
fleitz 14y ago
Historically Apple (remember Apple from 1985 to 2001) has been a severely under performing company, in the last 10 years they've made boatloads of cash by optimizing their supply chain and extracting huge volume discounts on the latest technology. Microsoft needs to figure out how to get its hardware and its OEMs hardware prices inline with Apple. If MS and their OEMs put pressure on manufacturers they'll no longer be able to offer the same discounts to Apple. OEMs, VARs, volume licensing holders already pay close to this price for windows and make up the bulk of purchases. Making Windows available to retail at ~$40 will not have a significant impact on revenue. Not dealing with Apple's competitive prices on phones and tablets will spell death for MS. MS at this point could give a shit about cannibalizing Windows retail upgrades for desktop operating systems. The key is to leverage their desktop OS, developer base and corporate relations into something thats competitive in mobile and tablets.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
mutagen 14y ago
This upgrade pricing is good for Microsoft. Currently they face more competition from current windows users not upgrading to Microsoft's newest OS than they do from OSX and Linux. Microsoft gets people off XP and Vista, an old operating system and its widely reviled successor. They get to tout fast adoption rates and wide availability of the new features which helps them with both developer relations and with goes hand in hand with their tablet strategy.

Koldark 14y ago

This might actually make me upgrade!

neovive 14y ago

I wouldn't chalk this up as just a competitive response to the relatively low price Apple charges for its OS upgrades. I think Microsoft really wants/needs to accelerate the adoption of Windows 8 even if that means taking a hit on license fees. Whatever they can do to accelerate adoption of W8 in the enterprise and consumer markets will more than pay off in the long-term. A major reduction in legacy support requirements, enables them to innovate faster and will help improve the Windows brand that has been tarnished over the past decade. They essentially bet the farm on W8 being multi-platform at the core and need people to upgrade.

KeyBoardG 14y ago
I beleive its both. If they are going to live up to their promise of more frequent, smaller OS versions then they'd have to come in at a lower price. Lets hope this is the beginning of a trend.
greenyoda 14y ago
My guess is that it will take a long, long time for enterprises to move to Windows 8, with most sticking with Windows 7 for as long as Microsoft continues to provide security patches for it. If you're an enterprise with 10000 or 50000 non-technical users running Windows 7, the cost of moving to Windows 8 will be primarily IT staff hours, including all the support questions from users puzzled by the new user interface. What compelling benefits would there be for a bank or insurance company to move to Windows 8 that would offset the steep costs?
- hcurtiss 14y ago
  Exactly. Our law firm is almost -- almost -- ready to roll out our Windows 7 build. And we only have about 650 users.
  - hk__2 14y ago
    That's the same in my University. And there is 20K students.
  - 14y ago

UnoriginalGuy 14y ago

This is all about the app store. Remember Microsoft can make a good chunk of profit from each app purchase and nobody will be developing let alone buying apps if Microsoft cannot get eyes on it.

r00fus 14y ago
Apple has consistently stated that they don't make much money from their App Store (or iTunes content in general). How are Microsoft (and Amazon, whose entire $199 Kindle Fire pricing) going to make money in this market? No doubt they want folks on the store, but I question whether this is the reason behind the $40 upgrade pricing.
- FreshCode 14y ago
  I would wager MS wants to foster a stronger Windows App ecosystem and not necessarily App Store profits.
bishnu 14y ago
Citation needed? Apple's app store isn't a huge revenue source by any means [1], let alone profit. I've seen no evidence that App Stores can be any kind of profit center. [1] http://www.businessinsider.com/chart-of-the-day-apple-revenue-2010-10 http://www.businessinsider.com/chart-of-the-day-apple-revenu...
- kmfrk 14y ago
  The guy they probably took the data from: http://www.asymco.com/2011/06/13/itunes-now-costs-1-3-billionyr-to-run/ http://www.asymco.com/2011/06/13/itunes-now-costs-1-3-billio....
- greedo 14y ago
  Sure, Apple doesn't generate a lot of earnings or revenue directly from each of their app stores, but the indirect revenue is what matters. Apple is a hardware company first, a software company second. App store purchases reinforce user stickiness as well as improving the overall purchasing experience. The bottom line is what matters, not the line item profitability.

WiseWeasel 14y ago

I have a hard time imagining that many Windows 7 users are eager to upgrade to Windows 8 on their desktops and laptops, given the drastic changes catering to touch interaction, bringing them little apparent value at best, and significant lost productivity and frustration at worst. My Windows 7 box is for gaming and productivity (not necessarily in that order), and after all I've seen of it, I wouldn't touch Windows 8 for that with a ten-foot pole. I'll wait for Windows 9 Classic Desktop Professional Edition (Win7 tarted up with a new skin including 30% more alpha blending effects for some reason).

anigbrowl 14y ago
I'm pretty stoked about it actually.
- WiseWeasel 14y ago
  I think the Surface Pro looks like a nice device, and Windows 8 makes perfect sense there. For my gaming rig/media productivity desktop with a large monitor, however, it seems detrimental to me. What has you stoked about it?
  - anigbrowl 14y ago
    Much tighter multimedia kernel, which is a big deal for me. Downside: not on the ARM tablets. So paradoxically, the opposite of your pro/cons. I'm neutral on teh tablets; I have an Asus Eee pad and Android just got a major audio shot int he arm with Jellybean, so I haven't decided whether to stick with that platform or switch to Surface (or indeed an iPad). But for big projects, you need a desktop. http://createdigitalmusic.com/2012/06/music-developer-on-windows-8-a-leap-forward-for-desktops-a-leap-backward-for-metro-winrt/ http://createdigitalmusic.com/2012/06/music-developer-on-win...
novalis 14y ago
I'll use it in a VM until the dev tools I work with start to support it, then I'll go all in. It is always the same thing when a full OS update comes, this is not any diff from the others. I'll keep my linux machines handy on the side as always. I don't see what the ten-foot pole security counter measures bring to the table at this point.

polshaw 14y ago

Lets be clear; this has little/nothing to do with apple. You can't spend $40 to switch to the latest OSX on your regular PC, so it is just not direct competition. I can only assume they think this way is how they will get most money from selling to end users, and I wouldn't be surprised at that being the case. No doubt they make most of window's licence money from OEMs.

yuhong 14y ago
Except this is the upgrade version, so this requires a previous version on Windows too.
- spicyj 14y ago
  The Mac OS X price is essentially also an "upgrade" price because you can only install it on Macs (which already have OS X installed).
  - dhughes 14y ago
    It's like Xbox versus PS3, you pay for XboxLive! but the Xbox is cheaper or (when new) you paid nearly $1000 for a PS3 but got PS3 Network free, either way you're paying. The old options was buy a lower priced computer with Windows but pay more for the OS/upgrades or buy a very expensive Apple computer but $40.00 for an OS upgrade.
    - polshaw 14y ago
      There is also the fact that a point upgrade in OSX is almost never as significant as a new Microsoft OS, that MS provides free service packs, and that (IIRC) apple allows upgrades to multiple macs with one purchase. So, really, they need to be assessed on their own merit.
      - rbanffy 14y ago
        Since the first OSX, all upgrades were point upgrades and all of them were very significant. They were also more frequent than Windows upgrades.

thekungfuman 14y ago

The main complaint I hear is the change of start menu behavior, but most people I know use a keyboard based launcher anyway. If you're typing the name of the thing you want does it matter if it's going into Launchy, the Win7 start menu or the Metro interface? As long as you quickly get to the app or file you want, the interaction (typing) is pretty much identical.

barrkel 14y ago
It's not the most frequent method for launching. According to MS, their metrics indicate pinned task bar items are, or are trending to be, the most frequent method. When I don't remember the name of the thing I want to launch (which is quite frequent), I rely mostly on positional navigation through a customized start menu. That is, I don't remember programs by name, I remember them by where I left them. Windows Vista / 7's start menu was a major regression for my use case (the scrollable treeview with expandable items destroyed absolute screen positioning); I had to replace it with Classic Shell to get usability back.
- MatthewPhillips 14y ago
  For most people the "All Programs" menu quickly turns into a circus. Curating it is a chore. They are messing this up in Windows 8, as every time you install a application, including desktop applications, all of its start menu items get pinned onto the start screen. I'm afraid most users will never bother to unpin them.
  - barrkel 14y ago
    I used to curate the All Programs menu. What that did was mess up uninstallers, because they could no longer find shortcuts to delete them, so I ended up with lots of dead shortcuts that needed clearing out. So now, I create a bunch of category folders (Work, Development, Entertainment, you get the idea) in the Start Menu profile folder (rather than the Start Menu\Programs folder), and copy the handful of app and applet shortcuts that I actually need in. I leave the All Programs menu to fester and ignore it. With Classic Shell, this works well; the classic start menu, in XP mode, shows my folders as top-level expanding menu items.

joeybaker 14y ago

This is huge for webdevs. With MS making upgrades to Win8 (and therefore IE10) so cheap/easy, the death of OldIE is that much closer.

kmfrk 14y ago
If. Enterprise and Chinese pirates[1] might not be able to upgrade anytime soon. [1]: http://www.troyhunt.com/2010/08/aye-pirates-be-reason-ie6-just-wont-die.html http://www.troyhunt.com/2010/08/aye-pirates-be-reason-ie6-ju...
- luchs 14y ago
  When the Chinese pirates upgrade their system to pirated Windows 8, they will still have IE10 preinstalled, so it's even going to work for them.
lifeguard 14y ago
You are overlooking the fact that MS is introducing yet another browser variant that web devs have to accommodate. And also the QA dept. And also customer service. And also internal IT. On second though; Yes, this will be exciting! ;)
- joeybaker 14y ago
  True, it's another IE version, but an auto-updating, mostly-standards compliant version. IE 10 brings IE into the "modern browser" realm.
  - lifeguard 14y ago
    It doesn't matter how wonderful IE 10 is until over 70% of IE users are upgraded to it. For a period of a few years there will be a flood of IE 10 users because this is what their computer came with. There will still be too many other IE users for commercial websites to ignore. So there will have to be a lot of web code bloat and complexity to accommodate them. I was a professional web developer before IE 1.0 and am speaking from experience.

kevinflo 14y ago

This price feels to me like a lack of confidence in the product. Microsoft needs adoption rates of 8 to be high. $40 might not be much, but anything is too high when the OS feels like a UI downgrade instead of an upgrade.

kmfrk 14y ago
Look at the lessons learnt cutting the prices of videogames in the Steam store. Lower prices can spur people to buy your videogames in ways that are actually much more profitable than pricing it higher. Pirates will always try to rationalize themselves to a reason to pirate software. Microsoft is doing a great job of making Windows 8 an attractive upgrade to people. I was personally planning to hold off on buying it, but that price tag is extremely compelling, so I'll probably buy it, shortly after any launch kinks are sorted out.

lifeguard 14y ago

Everyone remember to wait for SP1 to be released before using this on important systems.

lambada 14y ago

What no-one has mentioned that I find interesting, is that Microsoft are calling this a 'promotion' "This upgrade promotion for Windows 8 Pro both online and at retail runs through January 31st, 2013." I wonder why this price is only temporary, and what the price will be afterwards?

Useful_Idiot 14y ago
All such deals are offered as "promotions" to the start of the next year. They merely get extended ("through January 31st 2014") as a legal formality once the date is hit. Essentially it's the Legal department's requirement.
Gustomaximus 14y ago
Often legal will ask for this kind of wording so they have an out if they want it later. So it may be more future proofing than an expectation of price changes next year.
ams6110 14y ago
They can say that the retail price of the upgrade is $139, then with each sale they can take a $100 "promotional" expense off their taxable income.
- gte910h 14y ago
  I was under the impression the value of the promotion is based off production and transport cost, not equivalent sale price. Is this not true?

forgotAgain 14y ago

You have to figure that people who are running XP and Vista weren't going to spend much to upgrade so this part of it doesn't cost MS much in lost revenue. For users running Windows 7 I don't see the rush to upgrade even at the low price. You have a good OS in W7. Most will figure if it's not broke, don't fix it. It's a nice gesture from MS that won't cost it much. For myself, I have an old dual-core Vista notebook that may now get an SSD and Windows 8 just so I can have the latest OS available. That's one more developer that stays current with the latest Microsoft OS which is where I think they see the payoff.

brudgers 14y ago
Outside of enterprise, I suspect that a lot of people still running XP may be short of the hardware to run Windows 7/8. So it's largely a feel good gesture in those cases - and perhaps an indirect marketing boost for Microsoft's hardware partners.

jsz0 14y ago

It's a smart price but I suspect that Microsoft has burned too many bridges for most people to ever consider upgrading their computer's operating system. For the average person a (Windows) operating system upgrade has traditionally been cost prohibitive and often not a smooth process. That's going to scare a lot of people off even at $39.99 I'm also not convinced Microsoft has found a compelling way to sell Windows 8 yet. There's no one button buy/install option here. People will have to go seek out the software and justify the price tag to themselves. That's going to be an up-hill battle. I'm betting the percentage of users upgrading will be about the same as previous Windows releases.

mkr-hn 14y ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_systems http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_system... Around 10% upgrading per year isn't bad considering how big a jump it is from XP to 7. 7 to 8 is less of a jump and this announcement makes it much cheaper.
ams6110 14y ago
For the average person a (Windows) operating system upgrade has traditionally been cost prohibitive and often not a smooth process I'm firmly in this camp. I've done clean installs of Windows 7 on both VMs and physical hardware and it was flawless every time. I have no doubt clean Windows 8 installs are also easy. But I would be afraid of an in-place upgrade. My PC at home is an old HP with an AMD Athlon. It runs XP. It does everything I need it to do. I will never upgrade the OS, even if Windows 8 were free I would not consider it. When the time comes, I will buy a new computer and migrate my files, but until then it will keep on as-is.
FreshCode 14y ago
I've been waiting for MS to wake up to cheaper (and more frequent) upgrades for a long time and I am happy to upgrade at that price.

jony_m 14y ago

"$39.99 in 131 markets" - sounds to me like this is for emerging markets only (?)

robomartin 14y ago

Is this the "new" Microsoft? I generally like what I am seeing them do. Surface looks incredible. Not completely sold on the Metro interface on the desktop but understand what they are trying to do. In general there seems to be new energy and focus coming out of MS. I wonder what's going on inside.

smallblacksun 14y ago
The court oversight of Microsoft stemming from the antitrust lawsuit ended in May 2011. I don't think it is a coincidence that Microsoft's initial publicity about the new Metro stuff cam in June 2011.
corysama 14y ago
For the first time in a long time, they are becoming underdogs. The surprising thing is that they are smart enough to start acting like one! http://www.theverge.com/2012/3/15/2874513/microsoft-internet-explorer-loved-to-hate-video http://www.theverge.com/2012/3/15/2874513/microsoft-internet... Most huge, old companies finding themselves in such a position prefer to pretend nothing changed no matter what.

ori_b 14y ago

That's a lot go charge for crippling my desktop UI by trying to turn it into a mobile UI.

SCdF 14y ago

Here's the thing: if the Windows 8 upgrade was free I wouldn't take it. Not because I have any great hatred of Windows 8-- I got bored one night and played around with it in a VM, it seems nice enough-- but Windows 7 works fine already. Windows is the thing that I have to run on my computer so I can run the things I actually care about using. As long as it stays out of my way and doesn't have lots of bugs or security issues, I'm happy with it. Until I'm forced off 7 due to incompatibilities I see no reason to switch. (for the record, I still run Snow Leopard on my mac for similar reasons).

josteink 14y ago
Different people, different wiggles I guess. I'm running the Release Preview as my main OS now, and I'm just amazed at how much faster and smoother everything is. When this preview expires and I'm forced to go get Windows 8 proper if I want to keep using it, I'm pretty sure going back to Windows 7 wont be an option for me. Just like going back to Ice Cream Sandwich isn't an option once you've tried Jelly Bean. There are just so many small (and some major) incremental improvement all over the line. For me, I'm getting Windows 8 for sure, and I like the news about it not going to cost me a fortune.

rbanffy 14y ago

My bet is that someone's bonus is tied to licenses sold rather than sales revenue.

ommunist 14y ago

The pnly plus for me is that MSIE6 installation base will be contracted. For those who already paid over $100 for WinXP->Win7 upgrade, this $40 figure looks ugly.

saturdaysaint 14y ago

The more I think about this, the more the protestations that Apple had nothing to do with this seem bizarre. A price drop of this magnitude - $120 for the cheapest Win 7 upgrade to $40! - does not occur without competitive pressure. Can you imagine Adobe doing this kind of upgrade price drop on their (essentially competitor-less) creative software? If the iPad were not taking a serious bite out of the consumer PC business, Microsoft would be in no such hurry to spread the platform to existing PC users (who they've been happy to not-so-subtly push to a whole new PC in past years). PC makers can't be too happy - OS upgrades might not represent much of a buying cycle, even in the consumer sphere. If anything, Windows 8's improved performance across the board might extend the life of old PCs. I don't say any of this to damn Microsoft, who are doing good work but are against bigger forces. It is fascinating watching the sudden commoditization of a once revered, culturally central product.

vishaldpatel 14y ago

Have they announced the price of a new copy? Would be nice if it was similarly priced.