Price of XP Pro? ......Hopefully not as much as Win2k Pro, L

[DosFreak 2]

Quote:

and what if i decide that i want to run dual cpu's for sh1ts and giggles? does that mean i should go out and buy Pro after i've bought Personal?
I don't think so. As for now, i could settle for the home edition since i'm only running a single cpu. A lot people have come to accept Win2k Pro not as a business OS but a home one as well, xp pro doesn't HAVE to be for business and the Home edition doesn't HAVE to be for Home use. Now server and advanced server are a different story, you wouldn't use XP AdvSvr for playing CS or Q3 would you? No, you wouldn't. You've always had a positive attitude toward things and have never been one to flame, but you shouldn't just treat people as if they were idiots unless they asked a completely "off-the-wall" stupid question. Telling someone to "grow up" isn't very nice and after reading that comment, my only words to you are "Practice what you preach"
C:\
C:\Dos\
C:\Dos\Flame\
C:\EddiE314\Reply\

Eddie,

You are taking my post entirely out of context. Compare my post to the first one in this thread. I was referring to the basic fact that ALL MS home os's have been cheaper than the work editions. I was NOT comparing features. I think his post and your post are the ones that have problems. Mine does not. (Except of course for what I just explained. )

Hopefully I do not have to point out what is wrong with his and YOUR posts. It should already be pretty obvious.

[luders 0]

You all make me laugh.... -Aaron

[Questionnaire 0]

Quote:

I hope you enjoy and continue to rip OS's.

ROTFLMFAO!!!!



Sorry, I have yet to rip them off, LOL!!! I'm a "Kid" ROTFL!!! Hey bud... I "OWN" my own business:D Do I have to prove that also? Dont try me, i'll always win:D I wont go out of my way to sound like a fag who gets it up the ass, without "lube" from bill gates, but i'll always own you! You may scream, there's no shame:D

[SHS 0]

Well Questionnaire you got some catching to with me hehe

MSDos 1.01 thur 6.22

MS Windows 1.03 thur 3.11

Windows95

Windows95A

Windows95B

Windows95C

Windows98

Windows98SE

WindowsME

WindowsNT 3.1 thur 4

Windows2000

and one copy of MS :)BoB hehe.

[Questionnaire 0]

No no no no! I'm still looking for the rest of my OS's! (Do I have to post any of my linux ones? Just bought Mandrake with like 6 CD's full of goods about two weeks ago from EB....)

 

Fark! I'll hopefully dig out the rest by tonight! (heh, i'm suprised I found the NT CD and Book, lol)

 

EDIT: I'm gonna chill with the personal attacks

 

Peace, and have fun with XP

[SHS 0]

I got lot more OS, OS/2 1 thur 4 anyone oh about Geowork 1 thur 2.1, QNX 3,4,5,6, Linux a few CD,

OpenDos 6, 7.02 aka DrDos. 8)

[sapiens74 0]

GOD I love a good flame war. Was wondering when the discussion would turn to using "Fags" and the like.

 

 

 

 

Just my 2 cents

[clutch 1]

Quote:

Why not just can lame home edition and make pro be for both? Like the whole point of XP and just name it Windows XP? No Pro, Home, Soccer Mom, Power User etc versions! (Excluding the advanced webserver versions) Price it somewhere inbetween what home and pro would cost and all confusion solved, lol!

Why should the average home user have to pay more for features that he/she wont use? Why should the corporate version be bundled with add-ons and programs that only home users might have a need for (movie maker, and whatever else they throw on). In addition, I don't know if the terminal services/remote desktop features would even make it to the home version, but in your scenario this would be a certainty. I don't believe that would be such a brilliant idea, do you?

[Questionnaire 0]

I'm not officialy allowed to agree with yaz until I get atleast over 500 posts in:p

 

Quote:

Why should the corporate version be bundled with add-ons and programs that only home users might have a need for (movie maker, and whatever else they throw on)

 

Um... I run XP "Pro" right now and Movie maker and whatever they throw in there, is in there!

 

 

Quote:

Why should the average home user have to pay more for features that he/she wont use?

 

Because!

 

Quote:

In addition, I don't know if the terminal services/remote desktop features would even make it to the home version, but in your scenario this would be a certainty. I don't believe that would be such a brilliant idea, do you?

 

I dunno.... We'll talk it over to Gates as he rams us up the butte!?

[clutch 1]

Well, XP Pro at the moment is in Beta trim, so I don't know what it will have in retail release. However, I don't see a real reason to combine both versions of the OS into one as there are different sets of needs to be met still. And as far as your homoerotic fascination with Bill Gates goes, you are being such a "hard a$$" that I am sure you would be a turn off for him.

 

[CrazyKillerMan 0]

I think this is a pretty touchy subject, with no right or wrong answer.

 

Some may say to integrate more options intoa home OS would be more expensive, which is true. Some ppl will never, ever think of taking advantage of new utils and appz in the "integrated" home OS. Which is also true.

But...

There is also the side that may say that its up to M$ to make a cheap version for home with all the services as the work os's. This can be true...but i think that to make money, to distribute your product evenly and to best suit the needs and wants for each seperate os, that the best way to do this is seperate them, and charge more money for the more integrated program.

 

A quick thought...

 

Some people buy trucks, some 4x4s,ome not, some diesel, some not. Basiclly...there is a need and a want for everything. You pay for what you get.

[EddiE314 0]

my point was that Pro and Home don't have to be what their names' suggest.

[BladeRunner 0]

Well I think I'll leave this thread.

As usual it has turned into:

 

A. Here is a good argument

B. Nah, you're a fag!!

A. OK, let me put things in simple terms

B. Nah, bend over and brace yourself!!

 

"I'm a "Kid" ROTFL!!! Hey bud... I "OWN" my own business Do I have to prove that also? Dont try me, i'll always win I wont go out of my way to sound like a fag who gets it up the ***, without "lube" from bill gates, but i'll always own you! You may scream, there's no shame"

 

All I can say to this is I'm assuming the business you 'own' or is it 'ownzz' isn't in the computer industry.

No CEO I know of would take that kind of outlook at currently available products.

If the best argument you can come up with is 'You're a fag' then yes I do doubt your company owning status.

You're no better than the LINUX zealots who instead of singing the praises of their own product 'slag-off' the competition.

It's the usual tactic of somebody who doesn't have an argument, attack the competitor instead.

 

You go on living in you're dream world, where all computer products should be free.

To stop you from screaming, stamping, balling and saying 'somebody stole my lollipop' I wont reply again.

I'll let you get the last word in.

Oh, just to make you laugh 'boobs & fart' - I'm assuming that's the level of you're humour.

[Brian Frank 0]

Yeah, some of those hard-core Linux users are really *******s.

"Oh, my OS doesnt crash...games run faster...blah,blah,blah..."

 

Dont get me wrong, I like Linux a whole lot, but its a pain in the neck to set up hardware. Solutions usually involve recompiling the kernel, which Ive been far too lazy to even learn, but that requires some console crap which Im not too fond of.

They compare to 98 and not 2000. Im sorry, but Win2k is better than Linux in its current state, and even with the 2.4 kernel, it still has miles to go before its really a viable alternative to Windows.

 

Games may run faster, but look how many games there are for Linux and compare that to Windows. And they run well enough for me on Windows, thank you very much.

 

I think Linux will be in a much better position when it comes preinstalled on home users pc like Windows. At that point, the superior OS factor can be debated, providing Gates hasnt achieved world domination.

 

Also, I wonder why Linux doesnt come preinstalled on home pc's. Maybe because Windows is easier to use!? *shock*

 

Im not saying Linux is a bad OS, but in comparison with Windows 2000, its gonna be much harder than if 98 was still the hot item, since Win2k solves problems in the crashing area of 98.

 

End rant.

[Questionnaire 0]

*Sigh* I can see when I bring home, home edititon already. No real user accounts- You can bypass the logon password by pressing cancel like in 9x. None of the prime administrative features/power/control of pro. (i'll let dual cpu support slide even though i'd like the option when/if ever I wanted to go that route ) Like I said, I run XP Pro beta 2, 2462 right now, and for all i'm concerned, this *is* a home, multimedia, business, everything OS! If you've run it, then you'd understand there's no need to split them up! You can change from the new Luna to the Win2k look on the fly! But I havnt actualy run home edition yet (mabye i'll go d/l that version to check out), but from the people I talked to that has, they said it's either *identical to pro*, or *almost identical*. So if its that close to being that same, then why waste the time?

 

Oh and about: "Blah blah blah..... Business users dont need Movie make or whatever else they put in there, blah blah blah blah blah" Thats why I said a few months ago that all that fud should be user selectable on the intitial install or un-installable at a later time and not *forced up the butte* on the user.

 

Oh and BladeRunner, don't let the flaming get to ya! After its all said and done, i'll still let you, or any other fellow M$ zealots get me in the butte! We can take all are windows cd's, oil them up and rub them over each others bodies.... oh yea....mub that windows cd all over me ya stud... oh... oh... now rub the win2k cd on me... ooooooohhhh baby...... ive never had win2k yet.... oooooohhhhhhhhhhhh:D

 

 

HAHAHAHAHAHA LMFAO!!!!

[Son_Gohan 0]

Well, I agree both with Questionaire and BladeRunner.

 

It is not so easy to determinate what is a home user and what is a pro user. What if I work at home, and play games? What If I want to use my system for Image Retouching, and after that, code my programs (with a legal copy of VIsual C++ 5).?

 

 

Bladerunner is also right when he says that:

You go on living in you're dream world, where all computer products should be free.

 

but products ARE overpriced indeed. Many people gotten used to *****, and now it will be hard to take them out of it with €200 Windows XP home Edition (Full, no VAT included).

 

With lower prices, people would be encouraged to buy a legal product. And with good promotional upgrades, there would be no need of "I want this, then I download it from ***** servers".

 

But not only single users comply about the prices. Big companies don't simple upgrade to a newer version just as it comes out. They have to evaluate, both the costs of hardware and license, and the learning curve.

 

 

 

PS:

1-I ocasionally use linux just to experiment with it. Although it's not really "soccer mum friendly" (I'd rather say "newbie friendly"), it has some features that Windows lacks, or MS hasn't thought. Some people like messing with their machines, and linux is a nice option for doing so.

 

2-I'd love to see a Pro+home Windows XP version merged. Maybe I'm a "professional at home" user 8)

 

3-didn't we have a long discussion about linux in "I don't mean to piss anyone off..." topic Bladerunner ?

[Questionnaire 0]

Quote:

It is not so easy to determinate what is a home user and what is a pro user. What if I work at home, and play games? What If I want to use my system for Image Retouching, and after that, code my programs (with a legal copy of VIsual C++ 5).?

No need for comment on that one!

Quote:

You go on living in you're dream world, where all computer products should be free.

I didn't say anything should be "free"! I just pointed out that most software is overpriced and perhaps the very reason of the majority of warezed software out there. And after he/she misjudged me, saying I "ripped OS's" then I put him/her in their place when I started posting pics of my bought and paid for legit OS's Anytime you're ready, i'll start scanning in reciepts to all my software=) But I gotta admit, just like I have yet to try 2kpro because of its price, if XP pro comes out at over 0.00, then for the first time I might rip a OS. I don't want to....But hanging out here, by butte is already to sore to take it anymore.

Quote:

With lower prices, people would be encouraged to buy a legal product. And with good promotional upgrades, there would be no need of "I want this, then I download it from ***** servers".

If only we could get M$ to "understand" that!

Quote:

2-I'd love to see a Pro+home Windows XP version merged. Maybe I'm a "professional at home" user

Thats exactly what XP Pro beta 2 is right now!! Just leave it that way and can home, price it inbetween the two!! Same profit in the end:D

[sapiens74 0]

Questionare your definately a sick bastard

 

Please buy a MAC

[clutch 1]

No, it isn't the same profit in the end. Why sell a ton of admin functionality to home users that don't need them, and then charge them $50 or more for the "combined" version of the OS? That will be another reason for them not to upgrade. It will also bump up the cost of new PCs as well. The difference between the full 9x and 2K OSs seems to be about $100, so if you split the difference in half you will wind up adding another $50 to the home version of the OS. And with the softened market for home PCs lately, why increase the price of them now? As a business man, you should see that this is not good business.

[CrazyKillerMan 0]

I agree with clutch

 

Alot of my friends parents (of the docotr/architect kind) go out and buy Win2k Pro....but the funny thing is....they dont do anything with it...all they want, is their computer to be bad *** fast at start up so they can get their email from Uncle Ron in the bahamas.

 

I can understand this:

"well....i only look at email and surf...so ill spend money on the product that best suits my needs"

Because I am like that, alot of smart people are like that. YOu know...if i wanted to run a business at home and play games....id have win2k. If i was a (hate to use it again) soccer mom and didnt know how to open IE without my 6 yr old son reminding me of the button to press...i wouldnt want to spend and extra $50+ dollars on something i didnt need.

 

Its just business. Plain and simple...different products for different people.

 

Btw...Linux does come installed on some custom computer systems .

[Questionnaire 0]

Quote:

Why sell a ton of admin functionality to home users that don't need them, and then charge them or more for the "combined" version of the OS? That will be another reason for them not to upgrade.

Then whats the reason to upgrade? Um, I thought the big hype of XP was it was finaly bringing the home and business OS together? Or did we all forget all the hype ups from a few months back? A reason for people not to upgrade is why buy XP when they already have 98/ME and all their current programs are well supported and work prime? Just for a blue and green toolbar and some other useless graphical updates? Heck, you could just use Windows Blinds or Lightstep and make 98 look just like XP or better! So lets see, why would anyone want XP?? Hhhmmm.... Well, the very reason I wanted it was to have the gaming, multimedia and compadibility of Win98/Me with the added features, admin power, security and the like of win2k all in one OS! Exactly what all the hype about it was!

Um, have any of you been paying attention to computer sales? Computers arent selling like they used to and I see no reason for people to upgrade to XP if they already have 98 - win2k. Like I said, for what other reason other then a blue and green toolbar and um, mabye the new start menu? So you guys fill me in on why someone would want XP if their system already runs everything prime with what they got? It must be the new icons, LOL!!!!

[CrazyKillerMan 0]

Thats funny because it is so ignorant!!!

[BladeRunner 0]

Look, some people posting into this thread, actually not that many, seem to be missing what the whole point of WinXP was.

OK, in it's simplest form the idea is to do away with multi-platforms and return one platform for all.

If you play games at home, use a workstation at work, or serve applications and domains in a network.

Now this is where some people seem to be having an issue.

Again, in the simplest form there is no difference between WinXP Home, WinXP Pro, WinXP Server etc.

They are all based on the Win2k 32bit Kernel.

They will all offer the same compatibility, if something runs on one it will run on the others.

Think of it this way:

 

WinXP Home - Office2k Standard

WinXP Professional - Office2k Professional

WinXP Server - Office2k Premium

 

Take the basic components of the office packages and you have something standard, a standard word processor a standard spreadsheet etc.

However if you move up the product tree you get some extra goodies, FrontPage, Publisher etc.

It's the same with WinXP, the basics are all the same, however as you move up the tree you get extra features, support for dual processors etc.

So why WinXP Home?

Well the biggest point has already been made, why charge home users the extra for features they wont use.

The Win9x users and new computer owners are not going to be running dual CPU's.

The people in this area also usually don't know the in's and out's of the OS, they want to switch on and use it, hence the idea of downloading the drivers for your hardware from MS's product update site (this feature is probably only going to be in WinXP home).

They want to switch on, have all the features they need, no features they don't, easy updates as they appear etc.

They don't want to download 5 different versions of a video card driver just to find which one gives them those extra 50 3DMark2001 points.

 

The idea of sub-dividing the WinXP platform is sound.

Your still going to have totaly compatability between all users eventually, but you have a simplified version for those users (and they make up a very, very high percentage) who really don't want to or don't know how to mess about with their systems.

I class myself as an advanced user and I feel the extra features in WinXP Professional will be on benefit.

My brother on the other hand will probably purchase WinXP Home, he's a Win98 user now and it's exactly the kind of OS for him.

[Brian Frank 0]

Judging just by what Ive read about XP, I have no compelling reason to go there. However, Jdulmage, put up a post about WindowsXPLite---which basically takes XP and removes the stuff people wont use. The retail price is ~$25, but could drop to ~$20 if there's enough support for it.

Im really more concerned with MS supporting 98/ME/2000 after they start pumping out XP. Ive seen something that hinted at 98/ME getting dropped as well as 2000:(

 

Well, when Beta 2 comes in the mail, I'll try it out, and then see if I still dont have a good reason, other than looks to go to it. The only problem is the activation thing, but Im positive that wont be an issue.

[clutch 1]

Questionnaire, MS wants to make money on anything they sell. That's why they sell different versions of things. If they followed you idea, then why not ship a version of SQL2K with office rather than Access? They use a stipped down version with office extensions already when you install them on a server, so why not do this? Because the average user does not need the complexity of an actively running database server (even if they aren't that complex lately) and would steer away from a version of office that includes it. They can't use it, so why pay for it? That is already an issue with some suites, and the OS is falling into the same category. Operating Systems come with so many "features" and "add-ons" that people don't use, why try to cover the cost of development of more of these by raising the price of an OS and forcing them onto low end users? You don't seem to be familiar with most basic common business practices even though you claim to own your own business. Let me ask you something, how well do you think business would do if they only sold one version of something and forced all the options onto everybody? Then, tried to cover the increased cost per unit of this "idea" by passing it along to anybody that walked in the door?