Are Microsoft having a laugh? Every release of Windows has been full of bugs, slow after a few months of use, and superseded by a new version by the time you get used to it.
Sometimes I think that Microsoft are testing us all, seeing how far they can push things and get away with it.
All the different prices, all the different levels of disablement, and then you know there will be several gigabytes of security updates and patches to download each week ... it is a joke. Are we being "compliance tested" here?
Why are people prepared to use it even for free? Okay, at work you have got to use it because some idiot will have already made that stupid decision. But at home? Why torture yourself? Get a Mac or get Linux. If you share a computer with a Windows mug then install Virtual Box and use Ubuntu.
Good news that London Stock Exchange has seen the light after their spectacular Windows/.NET induced down time recently. The more corporations that turn away from this appalling bad "solution" (no MS BS machine, it is not a "solution", it is a program!), the better for us all, and for our GDP.
"Sometimes I think that Microsoft are testing us all"
You are right. That is the logical strategy of a monopoly. I remember when a private bypass was built in the midlands of the UK. The government didn't negotiate price control. Immediately the deal was done the CEO announced to the markets that:
"Once open, if our customers aren't complaining [about our prices] then we haven't done our job right."
The next thing they did was price lorries off their road (because of the damage the weight does) and back onto the route through the city the bypass was supposed to have eased congestion and air pollution on!
Only regulation or competition puts an end to that sort of business strategy. In the US Microsoft doesn't face either. In Europe there's some rather slow regulation.
Apple's growing, slowly, in the US at about 1% market share per year. If they keep that up you should see Microsoft treating customers with more respect at some point in the future.
I decided that I might as well take 50% off. So I ordered two copies of Professional and one of Home Premium. Now I just have to be ready, when it arrives...
I have a full version windows 98SE and an upgrade version of XP which I am using now. Can I use the upgrade version of Win7 or do I need to purchase the full version?
Any ideas whether it will be possible to purchase an upgrade licence for a 64 bit version of Win 7 Pro and use it to upgrade an 32 bit OEM Vista Business ?
My laptop came with 32 bit Vista and I've loaded 4 GB RAM into it, so want to move to 64 bit for my next OS.
I really would like to buy this - but the 4 month wait is ridiculous. If I install the RC candidate, can I easily install the $49 upgrade version over this?
No, you would most likely NOT be able to perform an upgrade from a free RC candidate. Upgrades work on RTM (release to manufacturer, ie. the final version) versions only - full versions that have been purchased through an OEM supplier or retail. This has not worked in the past for XP and Vista, why would it work now?
You get a reduced price on the upgrade because you have already paid for another full version of an MS OS, that is most likely what the upgrade installer is looking for during the installation. You would have to install Vista or XP and run the upgrade (or upgrade to clean install) from there.
Went to MS homepage, but it wont change country to united kingdom..!
so i cant get full copy at discount price.
And i realy realy want to buy it NOW, secure a copy for myself.
So what if i am running win7 rc only. No xp or vista am i still eligible for the upgrade. I went from xp pro to win7 ultimate rc. After i got everything that i used working left xp behind and committed myself to the RC.
i'm figuring by the fall when these deals are over, the upgrade discs will be worth more than 49 on ebay anyway. so if it turns out you dont want it..ebay it later. you're covered. of course, it still sort of hurts to lay out the cash now..
"The pre-order sales have started. Microsoft has a site up with all of the participating vendors, including Newegg, Amazon, and Fry's. Everyone has it at exactly the same price, so the differences come down to vendor preference and S&H costs."
Costco has it for $5 less than everywhere else @ $44.99
Yes, and several others (Best Buy, Newegg) offer free shipping instead, which seems to be the best option. Throw in Bing Cashback with Newegg and that's probably the best option.
Enthusiasts should keep in mind the accessible RAM limit with Home version. Last I'd heard, it would be 16GB. Not the biggest deal in the world today, but might be say 3 years down the road or so.
Well, to be objective Windows 7 Ultimate does not have the same allure as Vista Ultimate. The biggest deal with Vista Ultimate was not the Ultimate Extras that the critic's constantly lampooned (for good reason) but the fact that Vista Ultimate = Vista Business + Windows Media Center.
Windows 7 negates a lot of this. In fact the put some of the enticing features of Win7 Pro into Win7 Home Premium like IIS 7.5 and Volume Shadow Copy (Previous Version).
In fact the only reason to get Win7 Pro over Home Premium is if you want
-Offline files
-RDP Host (you can several free products for this)
-Network Backup (Not needed if you have a WHS)
-Domain Join (You either need it or you don't)
-Windows XP Mode (Or use Virtual Box/Virtual PC and your own XP license)
-Encrypting File System
-Location Aware Printing
The only reason for Win 7 Ultimate over Win 7 Pro are
-Boot from VHD
-App Locker
-Bit Locker
-Branch Cache
-Direct Access
-Federated Search
-Multi Languages
None of the Ultimate features are the sexy geek features that you'd think, just a bunch of corporate features that Joe Geek wouldn't ever use. Also OSX doesn't have any of those features so you can't really compare the two.
When you look at Win 7 Pro it is hard to justify the extra cost for the marginal extra features.
I'm by no means an expert on corporate features but some of those Windows 'only' technologies sound familiar.
VHD is Connectix file format and they wrote a Mac version... Parallels use a similar HDD file format... having said that a Mac user would be much more likely to use an external firewire HD for multiple OS booting.
App Locker - isn't that just parental controls (previously simply a limited account)? That's been in the OS a few years.
Bit Locker - FileVault? I believe that was introduced in OS X 10.5.
Network Backup - Time Machine? Mac OS X 10.5.
XP Mode - Parallels, VMWare, CrossOver or BootCamp (10.4, I believe)
Multi Languages - International Control Panel? I can't remember being without multiple language options for menus. Currently the OS also spell checks throughout the applications in various languages too... it's spell checking in English as I type this in the browser... 14 languages and Multilingual. Built in Dictionary and Thesaurus too... just put the cursor over any word and hit a keyboard command.
Federated Search - If that's just multiple searches at the same time then it's Sherlock from OS 8.5 in the 90s... but I guess there's more to it than that.
The others I'm not familiar with. Perhaps some are features of Mac OS X Server.
First of all I have the same question as an earlier person, I have OEM Vista, and I'm wondering if the retail upgrade applies to me?
My next question is, having Vista 64, I wonder if Win 7 is even worth it?
Next, I've often read that upgrade installations are to be avoided, that they're always buggy etc, and to always stick with a clean installation So..is it even advisable to upgrade at all?
Theres also the fact I believe on Vista, there was a sneaky, unapproved way to do a clean install with the upgrade version only, will the same apply to Win 7?
Also, lets say I want to do a new build, or even just reinstall (theres countless reasons or problems that may cause reinstall, hell some crazy people even reinstall every single time they change video card drivers!). Now how does that work? Would I have to reinstall my OEM Vista first, then redo the upgrade?
Even though I'm on OEM, and it's supposed to only be for one mobo, I've always heard/figured it would be good for at least one more build, as I've hear just calling MS and telling them your mobo fried will usually work for another install. Of course, that doesnt even address reinstalls on the same mobo.
All in all I'm pretty on the fence whether this 49 upgrade is worth it to me..it's rather confusing. I mean this seems only good for people who have retail vista and can move it around, do countless clean reinstalls etc.
"First of all I have the same question as an earlier person, I have OEM Vista, and I'm wondering if the retail upgrade applies to me?"
Upgrade kits have always applied to all versions of Windows; retail and OEM alike.
But of course, the reason I dont just have retail Vista is it's EXPENSIVE.
When I did my build from newegg I just picked up OEM Vista for 99 bucks. It was another added expense to be sure, but I felt it was worth it. First time I've been legit in ages (if only because pirating Vista (and then keeping MS from blacklisting it) is not the breeze XP was..) but hey it does feel good to be legit..
Hopped on this one first thing this morning. Took a little while to decide between the two versions but with my Windows Home Server I don't need most of the features in the business version, so I stuck with the cheaper Home version.
I'll take the extra $50 and apply it toward a new SSD to run it on.
Don't think the regular price is worth it if you're coming from Vista, but the pre-order price is good enough to justify the cost. If your coming from XP like I am this is a steal.
be careful with trying to install it on that new ssd. i've phoned microsoft three times regarding so-called clean installs and have gotten three different answers as well as innumerable answers on the internet. the various answers could be from my various phrasings, or they could be trying to skate around the real answer, but here goes...
the first time i asked them if i could do a "clean" install with the upgrade media. the person said, "yes, a clean install is possible." i then read varying responses on the internet, so i phoned them again. this time i asked, "is it possible to do a clean install without already having windows xp or vista installed on the harddrive?" to which the response was "yes, provided you have a valid product key." and, again i read that this was not true, so i phoned again. this time i asked the person on the line if i could speak with someone in tech support. i was transferred and i then asked the question, "is it possible to install the upgrade media on a virgin drive, on which no previous windows os has ever been installed?" the response i got was "no, it is not possible to use the upgrade media in that manner." i then asked the same person whether "having a valid key handy during the install would make this possible?" and i was told that "the upgrade media requires a previous os installed on the drive." he then continued, "there were certain work-arounds in the past, such as installing the operating system without activating, rebooting, then reinstalling the system with activation. these sorts of install methods with upgrade media are being investigated and we are considering implementing a method to thwart such installations."
so, i don't know what to buy. i prefer not installing win xp on my drive and then installing win 7. it just seems like a bit of a pain in the arse. i guess i'll wait for oem pricing.
Thanks for pointing that out. This is an important issue to resolve for an OS with a reputation for needing 6 monthly reinstalls.
If Microsoft have decided that customers buying upgrade CDs are going to have to do two installs to do a clean install of an OS that is notoriously time consuming to install they clearly still don't feel the OS market is sufficiently competitive for them to have to have to treat their customers to a pleasant experience.
Even the most vitriolic of Apple Computer's critics ought to be wishing for the day when Apple's market share causes Microsoft to think twice about how they treat users of Windows OS.
Competition between companies is good for consumers.
Disclosure: I have used both Macs and PCs since 1996. Currently a clean XP install takes me about 1.5 hours. Mac OS X 10.5 takes me 2 minutes of work and 10 minutes for the computer. The main difference is that Mac OS asks all the questions at the end, while Windows keeps hanging during the process waiting for responses.
I guess I could achieve the same with all drivers to hand, and a modified disc image updated with all patches, and if I were prepared to sit and coax Windows through it's various demands for attention.
Ok, so, how can you compare the two upgrade prices? They are completely different.
Apple - $29
Only from 10.5
Only for Intel chipped Macs (per system requirements)
10.4 Intel users get to pay full price
Non intel users get screwed
Microsoft - $49 (pre order)
from XP or Vista
Applies to anyone with a system that supports the minimum requirements (and can find Win 7 drivers for their system guts)
Very short duration at this price
Sure it's nice to try and put the $29 vs $49 argument out there, but it really meaningless...
Snow Leopard:
Mac OS X 10.6 Upgrade from 10.5 $29
Mac OS X 10.6 Upgrade from 10.5 Family Pack (5 licenses) $49
Upgrade valid for Mac OS X 10.5 and Intel chips. Apple released Intel chipped iMacs and MacBooks in early 2006. Those that feel Apple is offering less than Microsoft here need to consider the compatibility and performance Windows 7 offers on computers released in 2005 or before.
I recall complaints of slow performance from Vista on good computers at it's release in November 2006. So how will Windows 7 fare on computers a year older than that?
Leopard:
Mac OS X 10.5 Full $129 ($99 Amazon)
Mac OS X 10.5 Full Family Pack (5 licenses) $199 ($133 Amazon)
Mac OS X, ILife, iWork Box Set $169 ($129 Amazon)
Mac OS X, ILife, iWork Box Set Family Pack (5 licenses) $229 ($149 Amazon)
These are full prices at the online Apple Store, unless otherwise stated.
There are only two versions of the Macintosh OS, Client and Server. No limited functionality, cheaper versions exist.
Windows 7 comparison:
Full retail versions
Home Premium Full: $199
Professional Full: $299
Ultimate Full: $319
For retail upgrades:
Home Premium Upgrade: $119
Professional Upgrade: $199
Ultimate Upgrade: $219
At current prices a single FULL copy of the Windows OS (Ultimate) costs double the price of five full licenses for Mac OS X, accompanied by 5 licenses for iLife and iWork.
There is no reason to believe Apple will not offer the same bundles for Snow Leopard when it is released later this year.
You cannot compare the price of the full version of Windows to OS X because you cannot legally make or buy a Mac that doesn't already have the OS installed on it. In effect you can only ever upgrade your copy of OS X because you've already purchased a computer with it preinstalled.
The full version of Windows can be user-installed on 'virgin' hardware unlike OS X.
Any owner of an Intel Mac without a full license to Mac OSX 10.5 will need to buy a full copy license should they wish to run Mac OS X 10.6.
Intel Macs were launched in January, 2006, running Mac OS X 10.4.6.
Intel Macs with 10.5 pre-loaded were released in the Fall of 2007.
Microsoft is offering to upgrade XP. Whether you take them up in that, or not, depends in large part on whether or not your hardware could run it. Vista was criticised as being slow on much hardware being released in late 2006. That is now the subject of a class action suit against Microsoft for mis-selling 'Vista Capable'.
Windows 7 may be faster than Vista but isn't likely to be capable of running well on computers sold as early as January, 2006 without significant investment in upgrades. Criticism of Vista performance dogged uptake right up to the present day. It will be interesting to see to what extent Windows 7 manages to remedy that.
Apple, on the other hand, didn't create that problem. Mac OS X 10.5 runs fast on early Intel Macs... I'm typing on one. Mac OS X 10.6 is designed to be faster than 10.5 on the same hardware.
So Apple is offering a very cheap upgrade price on computers released in Fall 2007 (the point at which 10.5 was offered pre-loaded) and a midrange cost to those upgrading computers released in January 2006 (the Intel debut).
You can compare that with Windows 7's realistic hardware specs.
The European pricing is nice, but you failed to mention that Europeans will only get "Windows 7 E" - meaning no Internet Explorer. And because Microsoft hasn't fully tested upgrades from Windows Vista to Windows 7 E, the company will be disabling upgrades installs entirely (clean installs only).
So yes, it's a nice deal...if you don't mind what's in the fine print.
Not accurate. The european windows 7 box comes with an additional disc that contains IE. So, they do get IE, just not included in the OS install. I think MS could have saved some money by just making it an optional download via windows update the first time the machine is connecting to the internet...
If those are the only items of fine print, it is hardly a loss. Obviously MS won't be blocking those who want IE from installing it. And doing a clean install isn't the end of the world.
But I for one will not be rushing out to give Bill Gates my money, I will just stick to striping down my "Home Basic Vista 64 bit" as I'm used to it already.
Great Job Bill!
On how many different PCs (motherboards) will I be able to intall and activate Win7? Will I run out of licenses at some point?
There has to be limits even for the non OEM-Versions. Its funny how this cruicial information is omitted, wherever I look. Usually DRM states the number of possible installation.
There's no legal limit. You're licensed to move it to as many machines as you'd like.
However there does seem to be an undefined technical limit, at which point the activation system gets suspicious. Poor Gary is blacklisted from the online activation system because of just how frequently he reinstalls Vista due to his motherboard trials - he has to phone it in every time. At no point has he ever been denied from activating it however, to my knowledge.
How many motherboards running at the same time? One
How many motherboards changed over the lifetime of a single computer? This is an interesting question I have never heard a clear answer from Microsoft about.
At times they have tested the waters with comments suggesting full motherboard linkage: that's to say there were suggestions that one would need a new license every time one bought a motherboard. To date they have never tested the market with this and I think they haven't because they realise it wouldn't be accepted.
Does anyone know how many online re-activations of Windows are currently necessary to flag up a piracy concern at Redmond?
I've done alot of installs using OEM licenses when changing boards.. From what I can tell..
If it's not frequent it might not require a call in. But if you did say switched in your board after installing vista say .. within 6 months then it would require a call in.
I don't know how legal it is from the user agreements standpoint but I do it all the time when upgrading peoples machines or testing new boards on my own computer.
I have access to an MSDN Academic Alliance account via my college, and i plan to be enrolled in classes eligible for free software (including OSes) at the time of windows 7 launch. Do you guys have any word on which versions will be available via this particular type of MSDN subscription. I already have 2 keys for Vista Business from the same subscription, so chances are Professional will be. However, I need a Win7 copy pretty much as soon as it comes out for a project I will be working on at the time, and I am curious to know exactly what kind of disks the upgrade copies will require to properly install themselves onto your computer. All my copies of Vista are MSDN copies which I burned from the ISO I downloaded from Microsoft, as are many of the copies of XP Pro I have. I may have a retail copy of XP Pro lying around somewhere, but I cant be sure since I have been using MSDN copies since 2006. Any info on what exactly the retail upgrade copies require to work would be appreciated
I have yet to see an MSDNAA OS that wasn't Professional/Business, so your assumption is likely correct.
As for whether you can do an upgrade install with an OEM Win7 key (which is what MSDNAA keys are) I'm afraid I have no idea. I'd assume it's done in whatever manner Vista handled it.
Does the upgrade have to be from a previous retail copy? I have a OEM copy of XP MCE purchased from Newegg, can I use an upgrade? And what version does that translate to? Home Premium I assume?
I'd assume they'd allow an OEM disc to upgrade considering the number of folks out there who purchased store bought beige boxes with an OEM install of Vista on it from retailers... I doubt MS would pass up a chance to make money off of selling them an easy upgrade...
That's BS! You can't be disappointed with ultrasteal $49/upgrade deal. This will be first legal retail copy of Windows in my life, woohoo! $49 can't be freakin resisted no matter what Ryan complains about here.
I've gotten a ton of questions about the Windows 7 retail pricing stuff, as expected. But the number one question, by far, is an oldie but goodie:
"Can I use a Windows 7 Upgrade version to perform a clean install of the OS?"
This is becoming particularly antsy for people because they want to take advantage of the time-limited Windows 7 presale, which starts tomorrow.
So, what the heck, I asked.
The answer, I'm told, is ... Yes. You can perform a clean install of Windows 7 with the Upgrade media, as you could with Windows Vista.
Yes you can (possible) use an upgrade copy of Windows 7 to do a clean install but, NO, you can't (permission) if you don't have a full legal license for XP or Vista.
I thought that users who purchased a computer w/ Vista (or Vista itself) during 2009 would receive an automatic free upgrade to Win7. Was this reported wrong?
Most vendors that want to sell you a Vista PC, right now, will offer you a free upgrade to 7 voucher. Purchases before June will receive nothing for free. You can't hear it right now, but that is the sound of Microsoft giving you the finger and eagerly anticipating your upgrade purchase to add a little more cash to their huge money pile.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
70 Comments
Back to Article
mtthwbrnd - Sunday, July 5, 2009 - link
Are Microsoft having a laugh? Every release of Windows has been full of bugs, slow after a few months of use, and superseded by a new version by the time you get used to it.Sometimes I think that Microsoft are testing us all, seeing how far they can push things and get away with it.
All the different prices, all the different levels of disablement, and then you know there will be several gigabytes of security updates and patches to download each week ... it is a joke. Are we being "compliance tested" here?
Why are people prepared to use it even for free? Okay, at work you have got to use it because some idiot will have already made that stupid decision. But at home? Why torture yourself? Get a Mac or get Linux. If you share a computer with a Windows mug then install Virtual Box and use Ubuntu.
Good news that London Stock Exchange has seen the light after their spectacular Windows/.NET induced down time recently. The more corporations that turn away from this appalling bad "solution" (no MS BS machine, it is not a "solution", it is a program!), the better for us all, and for our GDP.
sebmel - Tuesday, July 7, 2009 - link
"Sometimes I think that Microsoft are testing us all"You are right. That is the logical strategy of a monopoly. I remember when a private bypass was built in the midlands of the UK. The government didn't negotiate price control. Immediately the deal was done the CEO announced to the markets that:
"Once open, if our customers aren't complaining [about our prices] then we haven't done our job right."
The next thing they did was price lorries off their road (because of the damage the weight does) and back onto the route through the city the bypass was supposed to have eased congestion and air pollution on!
Only regulation or competition puts an end to that sort of business strategy. In the US Microsoft doesn't face either. In Europe there's some rather slow regulation.
Apple's growing, slowly, in the US at about 1% market share per year. If they keep that up you should see Microsoft treating customers with more respect at some point in the future.
XPSM2010 - Thursday, July 2, 2009 - link
What's the deal if you have Windows 7 RC installed and then want to use your upgrade for a clean install?lemonadesoda - Wednesday, July 1, 2009 - link
What? "Half off" pricing?BACK TO SKOOL
How can a tech site, of all sites, do such a poor job on the math?
Embarrassing.
Cannyone - Wednesday, July 1, 2009 - link
I decided that I might as well take 50% off. So I ordered two copies of Professional and one of Home Premium. Now I just have to be ready, when it arrives...ccannon222 - Monday, June 29, 2009 - link
I have a full version windows 98SE and an upgrade version of XP which I am using now. Can I use the upgrade version of Win7 or do I need to purchase the full version?lukechip - Sunday, June 28, 2009 - link
Any ideas whether it will be possible to purchase an upgrade licence for a 64 bit version of Win 7 Pro and use it to upgrade an 32 bit OEM Vista Business ?My laptop came with 32 bit Vista and I've loaded 4 GB RAM into it, so want to move to 64 bit for my next OS.
kmmatney - Sunday, June 28, 2009 - link
I really would like to buy this - but the 4 month wait is ridiculous. If I install the RC candidate, can I easily install the $49 upgrade version over this?Rubinsson - Sunday, June 28, 2009 - link
Yes, most likely you could do an upgrade of your RC install but i doubt it is recommended by Microsoft and I do not recommend upgrade installs at all.Clean install(cleanly formatted and even better with a newly (re)created partition...) is the best way to go as you clean out a lot of crap...
brshoemak - Tuesday, June 30, 2009 - link
No, you would most likely NOT be able to perform an upgrade from a free RC candidate. Upgrades work on RTM (release to manufacturer, ie. the final version) versions only - full versions that have been purchased through an OEM supplier or retail. This has not worked in the past for XP and Vista, why would it work now?You get a reduced price on the upgrade because you have already paid for another full version of an MS OS, that is most likely what the upgrade installer is looking for during the installation. You would have to install Vista or XP and run the upgrade (or upgrade to clean install) from there.
qax - Saturday, June 27, 2009 - link
Went to MS homepage, but it wont change country to united kingdom..!so i cant get full copy at discount price.
And i realy realy want to buy it NOW, secure a copy for myself.
Can someone point to a e-retailer in europe?
Thanks guys.
chop2113 - Saturday, June 27, 2009 - link
So what if i am running win7 rc only. No xp or vista am i still eligible for the upgrade. I went from xp pro to win7 ultimate rc. After i got everything that i used working left xp behind and committed myself to the RC.Slug - Friday, June 26, 2009 - link
You can also order directly from the Microsoft Store. Link on MS home page.bill3 - Friday, June 26, 2009 - link
i'm figuring by the fall when these deals are over, the upgrade discs will be worth more than 49 on ebay anyway. so if it turns out you dont want it..ebay it later. you're covered. of course, it still sort of hurts to lay out the cash now..initialised - Friday, June 26, 2009 - link
www.cyberpowerpc.com are offering free upgrades to 7 with new PCs and their UK outfit www.cyberpowersystem.co.uk are offering the update for £10.raulr - Friday, June 26, 2009 - link
"The pre-order sales have started. Microsoft has a site up with all of the participating vendors, including Newegg, Amazon, and Fry's. Everyone has it at exactly the same price, so the differences come down to vendor preference and S&H costs."Costco has it for $5 less than everywhere else @ $44.99
Kougar - Saturday, June 27, 2009 - link
Yes, and several others (Best Buy, Newegg) offer free shipping instead, which seems to be the best option. Throw in Bing Cashback with Newegg and that's probably the best option.KITH - Friday, June 26, 2009 - link
newegg.com has Vista OEM with tech guarantee - Free win7 upgrade couponGet the preorder price for upgrade version or order Vista oem with upgrade coupon.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...">http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...
fishbits - Friday, June 26, 2009 - link
Enthusiasts should keep in mind the accessible RAM limit with Home version. Last I'd heard, it would be 16GB. Not the biggest deal in the world today, but might be say 3 years down the road or so.Jeff7181 - Friday, June 26, 2009 - link
You've GOT to be effin' kidding me...mikefarinha - Thursday, July 2, 2009 - link
Well, to be objective Windows 7 Ultimate does not have the same allure as Vista Ultimate. The biggest deal with Vista Ultimate was not the Ultimate Extras that the critic's constantly lampooned (for good reason) but the fact that Vista Ultimate = Vista Business + Windows Media Center.Windows 7 negates a lot of this. In fact the put some of the enticing features of Win7 Pro into Win7 Home Premium like IIS 7.5 and Volume Shadow Copy (Previous Version).
In fact the only reason to get Win7 Pro over Home Premium is if you want
-Offline files
-RDP Host (you can several free products for this)
-Network Backup (Not needed if you have a WHS)
-Domain Join (You either need it or you don't)
-Windows XP Mode (Or use Virtual Box/Virtual PC and your own XP license)
-Encrypting File System
-Location Aware Printing
The only reason for Win 7 Ultimate over Win 7 Pro are
-Boot from VHD
-App Locker
-Bit Locker
-Branch Cache
-Direct Access
-Federated Search
-Multi Languages
None of the Ultimate features are the sexy geek features that you'd think, just a bunch of corporate features that Joe Geek wouldn't ever use. Also OSX doesn't have any of those features so you can't really compare the two.
When you look at Win 7 Pro it is hard to justify the extra cost for the marginal extra features.
sebmel - Thursday, July 2, 2009 - link
I'm by no means an expert on corporate features but some of those Windows 'only' technologies sound familiar.VHD is Connectix file format and they wrote a Mac version... Parallels use a similar HDD file format... having said that a Mac user would be much more likely to use an external firewire HD for multiple OS booting.
App Locker - isn't that just parental controls (previously simply a limited account)? That's been in the OS a few years.
Bit Locker - FileVault? I believe that was introduced in OS X 10.5.
Network Backup - Time Machine? Mac OS X 10.5.
XP Mode - Parallels, VMWare, CrossOver or BootCamp (10.4, I believe)
Multi Languages - International Control Panel? I can't remember being without multiple language options for menus. Currently the OS also spell checks throughout the applications in various languages too... it's spell checking in English as I type this in the browser... 14 languages and Multilingual. Built in Dictionary and Thesaurus too... just put the cursor over any word and hit a keyboard command.
Federated Search - If that's just multiple searches at the same time then it's Sherlock from OS 8.5 in the 90s... but I guess there's more to it than that.
The others I'm not familiar with. Perhaps some are features of Mac OS X Server.
mcnabney - Tuesday, June 30, 2009 - link
Microsoft knows that anyone that purchased Ultimate before is their biatch and they are glad to keep milking them for more dough.dolcolax - Friday, June 26, 2009 - link
hi, i have a question, can i buy this win 7 upgrade and install it on a laptop with pre installed OS?bill3 - Friday, June 26, 2009 - link
dont expect an answer. apparently nobody knows the answers to even the most basic questions about thisi think your question is similar to mine if i can install it on oem. no answers yet though.
dolcolax - Friday, June 26, 2009 - link
i guess the best we can do is visit the store and ask someone working there.bill3 - Friday, June 26, 2009 - link
First of all I have the same question as an earlier person, I have OEM Vista, and I'm wondering if the retail upgrade applies to me?My next question is, having Vista 64, I wonder if Win 7 is even worth it?
Next, I've often read that upgrade installations are to be avoided, that they're always buggy etc, and to always stick with a clean installation So..is it even advisable to upgrade at all?
Theres also the fact I believe on Vista, there was a sneaky, unapproved way to do a clean install with the upgrade version only, will the same apply to Win 7?
Also, lets say I want to do a new build, or even just reinstall (theres countless reasons or problems that may cause reinstall, hell some crazy people even reinstall every single time they change video card drivers!). Now how does that work? Would I have to reinstall my OEM Vista first, then redo the upgrade?
Even though I'm on OEM, and it's supposed to only be for one mobo, I've always heard/figured it would be good for at least one more build, as I've hear just calling MS and telling them your mobo fried will usually work for another install. Of course, that doesnt even address reinstalls on the same mobo.
All in all I'm pretty on the fence whether this 49 upgrade is worth it to me..it's rather confusing. I mean this seems only good for people who have retail vista and can move it around, do countless clean reinstalls etc.
Ryan Smith - Friday, June 26, 2009 - link
"First of all I have the same question as an earlier person, I have OEM Vista, and I'm wondering if the retail upgrade applies to me?"Upgrade kits have always applied to all versions of Windows; retail and OEM alike.
bill3 - Friday, June 26, 2009 - link
But of course, the reason I dont just have retail Vista is it's EXPENSIVE.When I did my build from newegg I just picked up OEM Vista for 99 bucks. It was another added expense to be sure, but I felt it was worth it. First time I've been legit in ages (if only because pirating Vista (and then keeping MS from blacklisting it) is not the breeze XP was..) but hey it does feel good to be legit..
djc208 - Friday, June 26, 2009 - link
Hopped on this one first thing this morning. Took a little while to decide between the two versions but with my Windows Home Server I don't need most of the features in the business version, so I stuck with the cheaper Home version.I'll take the extra $50 and apply it toward a new SSD to run it on.
Don't think the regular price is worth it if you're coming from Vista, but the pre-order price is good enough to justify the cost. If your coming from XP like I am this is a steal.
machinegoesping - Friday, June 26, 2009 - link
be careful with trying to install it on that new ssd. i've phoned microsoft three times regarding so-called clean installs and have gotten three different answers as well as innumerable answers on the internet. the various answers could be from my various phrasings, or they could be trying to skate around the real answer, but here goes...the first time i asked them if i could do a "clean" install with the upgrade media. the person said, "yes, a clean install is possible." i then read varying responses on the internet, so i phoned them again. this time i asked, "is it possible to do a clean install without already having windows xp or vista installed on the harddrive?" to which the response was "yes, provided you have a valid product key." and, again i read that this was not true, so i phoned again. this time i asked the person on the line if i could speak with someone in tech support. i was transferred and i then asked the question, "is it possible to install the upgrade media on a virgin drive, on which no previous windows os has ever been installed?" the response i got was "no, it is not possible to use the upgrade media in that manner." i then asked the same person whether "having a valid key handy during the install would make this possible?" and i was told that "the upgrade media requires a previous os installed on the drive." he then continued, "there were certain work-arounds in the past, such as installing the operating system without activating, rebooting, then reinstalling the system with activation. these sorts of install methods with upgrade media are being investigated and we are considering implementing a method to thwart such installations."
so, i don't know what to buy. i prefer not installing win xp on my drive and then installing win 7. it just seems like a bit of a pain in the arse. i guess i'll wait for oem pricing.
sebmel - Saturday, June 27, 2009 - link
Thanks for pointing that out. This is an important issue to resolve for an OS with a reputation for needing 6 monthly reinstalls.If Microsoft have decided that customers buying upgrade CDs are going to have to do two installs to do a clean install of an OS that is notoriously time consuming to install they clearly still don't feel the OS market is sufficiently competitive for them to have to have to treat their customers to a pleasant experience.
Even the most vitriolic of Apple Computer's critics ought to be wishing for the day when Apple's market share causes Microsoft to think twice about how they treat users of Windows OS.
Competition between companies is good for consumers.
Disclosure: I have used both Macs and PCs since 1996. Currently a clean XP install takes me about 1.5 hours. Mac OS X 10.5 takes me 2 minutes of work and 10 minutes for the computer. The main difference is that Mac OS asks all the questions at the end, while Windows keeps hanging during the process waiting for responses.
mcnabney - Tuesday, June 30, 2009 - link
You must be doing something wrong.A clean XP install takes about 25 minutes, maybe 30 for Vista.
sebmel - Thursday, July 2, 2009 - link
I guess I could achieve the same with all drivers to hand, and a modified disc image updated with all patches, and if I were prepared to sit and coax Windows through it's various demands for attention.CJuser - Friday, June 26, 2009 - link
Ok, so, how can you compare the two upgrade prices? They are completely different.Apple - $29
Only from 10.5
Only for Intel chipped Macs (per system requirements)
10.4 Intel users get to pay full price
Non intel users get screwed
Microsoft - $49 (pre order)
from XP or Vista
Applies to anyone with a system that supports the minimum requirements (and can find Win 7 drivers for their system guts)
Very short duration at this price
Sure it's nice to try and put the $29 vs $49 argument out there, but it really meaningless...
sebmel - Saturday, June 27, 2009 - link
Snow Leopard:Mac OS X 10.6 Upgrade from 10.5 $29
Mac OS X 10.6 Upgrade from 10.5 Family Pack (5 licenses) $49
Upgrade valid for Mac OS X 10.5 and Intel chips. Apple released Intel chipped iMacs and MacBooks in early 2006. Those that feel Apple is offering less than Microsoft here need to consider the compatibility and performance Windows 7 offers on computers released in 2005 or before.
I recall complaints of slow performance from Vista on good computers at it's release in November 2006. So how will Windows 7 fare on computers a year older than that?
Leopard:
Mac OS X 10.5 Full $129 ($99 Amazon)
Mac OS X 10.5 Full Family Pack (5 licenses) $199 ($133 Amazon)
Mac OS X, ILife, iWork Box Set $169 ($129 Amazon)
Mac OS X, ILife, iWork Box Set Family Pack (5 licenses) $229 ($149 Amazon)
These are full prices at the online Apple Store, unless otherwise stated.
There are only two versions of the Macintosh OS, Client and Server. No limited functionality, cheaper versions exist.
Windows 7 comparison:
Full retail versions
Home Premium Full: $199
Professional Full: $299
Ultimate Full: $319
For retail upgrades:
Home Premium Upgrade: $119
Professional Upgrade: $199
Ultimate Upgrade: $219
At current prices a single FULL copy of the Windows OS (Ultimate) costs double the price of five full licenses for Mac OS X, accompanied by 5 licenses for iLife and iWork.
There is no reason to believe Apple will not offer the same bundles for Snow Leopard when it is released later this year.
mikefarinha - Thursday, July 2, 2009 - link
You cannot compare the price of the full version of Windows to OS X because you cannot legally make or buy a Mac that doesn't already have the OS installed on it. In effect you can only ever upgrade your copy of OS X because you've already purchased a computer with it preinstalled.The full version of Windows can be user-installed on 'virgin' hardware unlike OS X.
sebmel - Thursday, July 2, 2009 - link
Any owner of an Intel Mac without a full license to Mac OSX 10.5 will need to buy a full copy license should they wish to run Mac OS X 10.6.Intel Macs were launched in January, 2006, running Mac OS X 10.4.6.
Intel Macs with 10.5 pre-loaded were released in the Fall of 2007.
Microsoft is offering to upgrade XP. Whether you take them up in that, or not, depends in large part on whether or not your hardware could run it. Vista was criticised as being slow on much hardware being released in late 2006. That is now the subject of a class action suit against Microsoft for mis-selling 'Vista Capable'.
Windows 7 may be faster than Vista but isn't likely to be capable of running well on computers sold as early as January, 2006 without significant investment in upgrades. Criticism of Vista performance dogged uptake right up to the present day. It will be interesting to see to what extent Windows 7 manages to remedy that.
Apple, on the other hand, didn't create that problem. Mac OS X 10.5 runs fast on early Intel Macs... I'm typing on one. Mac OS X 10.6 is designed to be faster than 10.5 on the same hardware.
So Apple is offering a very cheap upgrade price on computers released in Fall 2007 (the point at which 10.5 was offered pre-loaded) and a midrange cost to those upgrading computers released in January 2006 (the Intel debut).
You can compare that with Windows 7's realistic hardware specs.
sebmel - Saturday, June 27, 2009 - link
Apple recently removed the serial number registration from iWorks.As a result there is no serial registration of any kind for the above mentioned products: Mac OS X, iLife and iWorks.
It is also the case that their upgrade CDs have full copies of Mac OS X, and do clean installs.
Neither are there any versions with missing functionality, or memory and multitasking limitations.
Griswold - Friday, June 26, 2009 - link
Agreed. I wonder why so many people compare this - for many old customers - rotten apple deal to the redmond orange. It just doesnt work...Digobick - Friday, June 26, 2009 - link
The European pricing is nice, but you failed to mention that Europeans will only get "Windows 7 E" - meaning no Internet Explorer. And because Microsoft hasn't fully tested upgrades from Windows Vista to Windows 7 E, the company will be disabling upgrades installs entirely (clean installs only).So yes, it's a nice deal...if you don't mind what's in the fine print.
MadAd - Thursday, July 2, 2009 - link
I think thats great, no IE tied in, wootand who wants to do overinstals anyway, whether its an upgrade or not.
Griswold - Friday, June 26, 2009 - link
Not accurate. The european windows 7 box comes with an additional disc that contains IE. So, they do get IE, just not included in the OS install. I think MS could have saved some money by just making it an optional download via windows update the first time the machine is connecting to the internet...strikeback03 - Friday, June 26, 2009 - link
If those are the only items of fine print, it is hardly a loss. Obviously MS won't be blocking those who want IE from installing it. And doing a clean install isn't the end of the world.jaggerwild - Friday, June 26, 2009 - link
But I for one will not be rushing out to give Bill Gates my money, I will just stick to striping down my "Home Basic Vista 64 bit" as I'm used to it already.Great Job Bill!
gwolfman - Friday, June 26, 2009 - link
I'm glad the pricing is more reasonable (the pre-order upgrades at least). I'd like to see this more often M$!know of fence - Friday, June 26, 2009 - link
On how many different PCs (motherboards) will I be able to intall and activate Win7? Will I run out of licenses at some point?There has to be limits even for the non OEM-Versions. Its funny how this cruicial information is omitted, wherever I look. Usually DRM states the number of possible installation.
Ryan Smith - Friday, June 26, 2009 - link
There's no legal limit. You're licensed to move it to as many machines as you'd like.However there does seem to be an undefined technical limit, at which point the activation system gets suspicious. Poor Gary is blacklisted from the online activation system because of just how frequently he reinstalls Vista due to his motherboard trials - he has to phone it in every time. At no point has he ever been denied from activating it however, to my knowledge.
sebmel - Saturday, June 27, 2009 - link
There is some ambiguity here:How many motherboards running at the same time? One
How many motherboards changed over the lifetime of a single computer? This is an interesting question I have never heard a clear answer from Microsoft about.
At times they have tested the waters with comments suggesting full motherboard linkage: that's to say there were suggestions that one would need a new license every time one bought a motherboard. To date they have never tested the market with this and I think they haven't because they realise it wouldn't be accepted.
Does anyone know how many online re-activations of Windows are currently necessary to flag up a piracy concern at Redmond?
just4U - Tuesday, June 30, 2009 - link
I've done alot of installs using OEM licenses when changing boards.. From what I can tell..If it's not frequent it might not require a call in. But if you did say switched in your board after installing vista say .. within 6 months then it would require a call in.
I don't know how legal it is from the user agreements standpoint but I do it all the time when upgrading peoples machines or testing new boards on my own computer.
anilnithi - Friday, June 26, 2009 - link
Thanks for sharing this informative blog.faxon - Friday, June 26, 2009 - link
I have access to an MSDN Academic Alliance account via my college, and i plan to be enrolled in classes eligible for free software (including OSes) at the time of windows 7 launch. Do you guys have any word on which versions will be available via this particular type of MSDN subscription. I already have 2 keys for Vista Business from the same subscription, so chances are Professional will be. However, I need a Win7 copy pretty much as soon as it comes out for a project I will be working on at the time, and I am curious to know exactly what kind of disks the upgrade copies will require to properly install themselves onto your computer. All my copies of Vista are MSDN copies which I burned from the ISO I downloaded from Microsoft, as are many of the copies of XP Pro I have. I may have a retail copy of XP Pro lying around somewhere, but I cant be sure since I have been using MSDN copies since 2006. Any info on what exactly the retail upgrade copies require to work would be appreciatedRyan Smith - Friday, June 26, 2009 - link
I have yet to see an MSDNAA OS that wasn't Professional/Business, so your assumption is likely correct.As for whether you can do an upgrade install with an OEM Win7 key (which is what MSDNAA keys are) I'm afraid I have no idea. I'd assume it's done in whatever manner Vista handled it.
faxon - Sunday, June 28, 2009 - link
thanks for the input. i will look into it next time fry's microsoft rep comes into our store, which should be soonuhhh - Friday, June 26, 2009 - link
The price of the Windows 7 Upgrade is pretty good. But what exactly does the upgrade require? How old can the previous Windows be? 95/98/NT?ViRGE - Friday, June 26, 2009 - link
Quothe the article:"The retail upgrade kits are for Vista and XP"
strikeback03 - Friday, June 26, 2009 - link
Does the upgrade have to be from a previous retail copy? I have a OEM copy of XP MCE purchased from Newegg, can I use an upgrade? And what version does that translate to? Home Premium I assume?Lemonjellow - Saturday, June 27, 2009 - link
I'd assume they'd allow an OEM disc to upgrade considering the number of folks out there who purchased store bought beige boxes with an OEM install of Vista on it from retailers... I doubt MS would pass up a chance to make money off of selling them an easy upgrade...mcnabney - Tuesday, June 30, 2009 - link
Any legal XP or Vista key.uhhh - Friday, June 26, 2009 - link
Right. Thank you, had overlooked this point.Pirks - Friday, June 26, 2009 - link
That's BS! You can't be disappointed with ultrasteal $49/upgrade deal. This will be first legal retail copy of Windows in my life, woohoo! $49 can't be freakin resisted no matter what Ryan complains about here.Homerr - Tuesday, June 30, 2009 - link
Keep in mind that to have a legit upgrade you need a legit older full OS.Jeff7181 - Friday, June 26, 2009 - link
Yes, I can be. You should be too. You can legally upgrade a stolen version of Windows to a legal version using a Windows 7 upgrade license.Jeff7181 - Friday, June 26, 2009 - link
That should read... you can't legally upgrade...Pirks - Friday, June 26, 2009 - link
Check your facts losa :Phttp://community.winsupersite.com/blogs/paul/archi...">http://community.winsupersite.com/blogs...ade-medi...
I've gotten a ton of questions about the Windows 7 retail pricing stuff, as expected. But the number one question, by far, is an oldie but goodie:
"Can I use a Windows 7 Upgrade version to perform a clean install of the OS?"
This is becoming particularly antsy for people because they want to take advantage of the time-limited Windows 7 presale, which starts tomorrow.
So, what the heck, I asked.
The answer, I'm told, is ... Yes. You can perform a clean install of Windows 7 with the Upgrade media, as you could with Windows Vista.
eat that! hahahaaaa :)))
mcnabney - Tuesday, June 30, 2009 - link
Yes, you can install it.But no, you will not be able to activate it without associating it with a legitimate XP/Vista key. So it will run for a while, then die.
sebmel - Saturday, June 27, 2009 - link
This reply highlights the ambiguity of English:can = possible
can = permission
Yes you can (possible) use an upgrade copy of Windows 7 to do a clean install but, NO, you can't (permission) if you don't have a full legal license for XP or Vista.
Ryan Smith - Friday, June 26, 2009 - link
Bear in mind that I'm referencing the regular $119/$199 pricing. The pre-orders are a good deal, but they're only for 2 weeks.vol7ron - Monday, June 29, 2009 - link
I thought that users who purchased a computer w/ Vista (or Vista itself) during 2009 would receive an automatic free upgrade to Win7. Was this reported wrong?mcnabney - Tuesday, June 30, 2009 - link
You are wrong.Most vendors that want to sell you a Vista PC, right now, will offer you a free upgrade to 7 voucher. Purchases before June will receive nothing for free. You can't hear it right now, but that is the sound of Microsoft giving you the finger and eagerly anticipating your upgrade purchase to add a little more cash to their huge money pile.