Vista pricing leaked (all prices in US dollars)
-
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
Are they out of their f****ing minds?.
Who's they? Microsoft? Remember that retailers, Microsoft included, will only charge what people are willing to pay. If people are willing to pay $233 for Vista Home Basic, they'd be foolish to charge less. I'd be more inclinded to blame the consumers.
"Money talks. When my money starts to talk, I get a bill to shut it up." - Frank
"Judge not by the eye but by the heart." - Native American Proverb
DavidCrow wrote:
I'd be more inclinded to blame the consumers.
So you wouldn't buy Windows off the shelf for $50, eh?
Jeremy Falcon A multithreaded, OpenGL-enabled application.[^]
-
Those new Macs are looking nicer every day, and Linux tools and apps are getting better all the time. I think it's time to change platforms; Microsoft has finally lost its last, feeble grip on reality.
"...a photo album is like Life, but flat and stuck to pages." - Shog9
Roger Wright wrote:
Those new Macs are looking nicer every day
Funny thing about that is the MacOS has always been cheaper. It's just the hardware that's not. Walk into a CompUSA and price the two. It's kinda funny to see actually. [edit] Don't forget you'll see it already has the functionality of Vista too, and more. Yeah, I had to throw that in. :rolleyes: [/edit]
Jeremy Falcon A multithreaded, OpenGL-enabled application.[^]
-
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
and the newer your hardware, the less likely it is that your install will be a reasonably good experience.
I have yet to have a bad experience and I wouldn't exactly call my hardware old. I think this was once true, and still true for "some" distributions, but most of the ones I have tried have all been pretty clean and simplier than windows. Oddly enough, Linux even recognized the printer, iPod, scanner and other devices that Windows ignored until I installed the device drivers for. My HP printer is old, but that is about it for old hardware in my place.
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
System: ASRock 939Dual Sata2 motherboard with 2.10 BIOS AMD64X2 4200(not overclocked) 2GB Patriot PC3200 RAM (not overclocked) eVGA 7900GTX (not the overclocked one, and not overclocked by me) (brand new) hda=new Seagate 200gb EIDE (brand new) hdb=80gb Western Digital EIDE sda=SATA1 160gb Western Digital sdb=SATA2 160gb Western Digital cda=LITE-ON CD/DVD writer (brand new) keyboard and mouse are PS/2 19-inch LCD monitor with native resolution of 1280x1024. I'm using the onboard NIC. I'm using the onboard sound. SATA channels are setup as IDE. USB Legacy support is disabled. I've tried Ubuntu 6.06 (32-bit and 64-bit, including the alternate install CD, Kubuntu, and Xubuntu), Fedora Core 5, Debian, Suse 10.x, Gentoo, Knoppix, and PC Linux, and Mandriva 7 beta. I've checked each ISO before burning at different speeds to different brands of media. While my hardware is all new, I don't have anything in the box that jumps out and says "driver problem". The various live CD's (if the distro had one) boot up just fine, and even see my onboard NIC and sound devices. Fedora Core is the only distro that actually completed the install process, but it freezes during the boot process. I've changed the motherboard to a brand new copy of the same board. I've tried different versions of the BIOS from 1.5 all the way up to 2.1. I've tried THREE different CPUs (two single-core and one dual core). I've tried removing all but one stick of RAM. I've tried removing (well, disconnecting anyway) all other hard drives except the one I'm trying to install to. I've tried installing to FOUR different hard drives. Yes, the machine can run memtest all day long without any errors. Everyone I've asked (and I've posted on pretty much every Linux forum I thought would be helpful) says something like "Wow, that shouldn't be happening." I've had people suggest that I put a less-capable video card in the box. Well, that's where I draw the line - I shouldn't have to remove or disable ANY hardware to get an OS to install. Besides, if the Live CD boots up fine, that tells me the distro can handle the video card. Not a single distro refused to display. As you can see, I've tried a number of things, and nothing has worked - at all. I figure I've been more than patient about the whole things, and I have made what could be described as heroic efforts to get Linux installed on this box. It simply will NOT install, and nobody can tell me why... This is my first negative experience installin
-
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
Are they out of their f****ing minds?.
Funny enough, the Mac OS has always been cheaper (it's about $100 for the whole thing last I checked). It's the hardware that's expensive on the Macs. Besides, it's obvious MS needs the money considering they are so broke. :rolleyes: I mean, if they're willing to loose money on the xbox, you gotta screw people over make it back up somehow.
Jeremy Falcon A multithreaded, OpenGL-enabled application.[^]
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
It's the hardware that's expensive on the Macs.
Actually, the Mac hardware isn't any more expensive than a PC built without OEM parts. Compare the 17-inch iMac with your typical PC... iMac 17-inch: $1169 without OS 1.83ghz Core Duo w/ 2mb cache 512MB (single SO-DIMM) 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM 160GB Serial ATA hard drive Slot-load 8x double-layer SuperDrive ATI Radeon X1600 graphics with 128MB GDDR3 memory Built-in AirPort Extreme and Bluetooth 2.0 Built-in NIC Built-in sound Homebuilt PC (parts from NewEgg): $1004 Case - Antec P180B - $114 PSU - $50 Motherboard (ASUS N4L-VM, built-in sound/NIC) - $140 CPU - $253 (OEM=$205) Memory (Transcend JetRam 667Mhxz ddr2) 512mb - $41 160gb SATA HD (Western Digital Caviar SE WD1600JS 160GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s) - $58 DVD reader (Lite-On Model SHW-160P6S-04) - $33 Keyboard/mouse - $30 ATI X1600 video card (SAPPHIRE 100144ADVL Radeon X1600PRO 256MB) - $85 17-inch widescreen monitor (Acer 19-inch widescreen) - $200
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 -
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
It's the hardware that's expensive on the Macs.
Actually, the Mac hardware isn't any more expensive than a PC built without OEM parts. Compare the 17-inch iMac with your typical PC... iMac 17-inch: $1169 without OS 1.83ghz Core Duo w/ 2mb cache 512MB (single SO-DIMM) 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM 160GB Serial ATA hard drive Slot-load 8x double-layer SuperDrive ATI Radeon X1600 graphics with 128MB GDDR3 memory Built-in AirPort Extreme and Bluetooth 2.0 Built-in NIC Built-in sound Homebuilt PC (parts from NewEgg): $1004 Case - Antec P180B - $114 PSU - $50 Motherboard (ASUS N4L-VM, built-in sound/NIC) - $140 CPU - $253 (OEM=$205) Memory (Transcend JetRam 667Mhxz ddr2) 512mb - $41 160gb SATA HD (Western Digital Caviar SE WD1600JS 160GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s) - $58 DVD reader (Lite-On Model SHW-160P6S-04) - $33 Keyboard/mouse - $30 ATI X1600 video card (SAPPHIRE 100144ADVL Radeon X1600PRO 256MB) - $85 17-inch widescreen monitor (Acer 19-inch widescreen) - $200
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001That's kinda interesting to see.
Jeremy Falcon A multithreaded, OpenGL-enabled application.[^]
-
actually, you can buy an oem version with "any" hardware. E.g. a mouse. Then you install the version on your pc and is obliged to attach the sticker to your cabinet. Followingly, if you change any hardware from which the hash-code (or whatever it is) that the license has bound itself to, you will be requested to re-register the operating system. This also applies to any pre-installed version from HP, Dell or whatever. However, you can just re-register with the newly generated hash-code and repeat that process each time you change motherboard, disk, graphics card etc. untill you reach a limit (3 times I think) - then you have to call their automated phone service where you enter a code generated on your screen and they give you a new code so that re-registering works anyway. In short: get an oem with a disk or something like that and use that. It's cheaper, but you cannot resell it. Would you ever do that anyway ? Not likely.
Do you know why it's important to make fast decisions? Because you give yourself more time to correct your mistakes, when you find out that you made the wrong one. Chris Meech on deciding whether to go to his daughters graduation or a Neil Young concert
Jan R Hansen wrote:
actually, you can buy an oem version with "any" hardware. E.g. a mouse.
Not anymore. That was changed about a year ago. Apparently it now has to be pre-installed. Check out the Microsoft OEM site[^] for details (specifically the 2nd FAQ on the right). Cheers, Drew.
-
That's kinda interesting to see.
Jeremy Falcon A multithreaded, OpenGL-enabled application.[^]
Yeah, the recent price drop in dual core CPU's gave the home-built PC a wider gap. Six months ago, the PC was actually a lot more expensive. I couldn't find a ATI X1600 with 128mb of RAM, nor a 17-inch wide-screen monitor, so I substituted them with a X1600 with 256MB of RAM and a 19-inch wide-screen. If I was going to build a machine right now, I'd have to give the iMac a serious look because it also requires very little desk/floor space compared to a typical PC. At the same time, I get a serious case of heebee-jeebees concerning the all-in-one (and pretty much un-serviceable by the end user) nature of the iMac. If you took that extra $150 you saved with the home-built PC, and used it to buy more memory and/or a better (nVidia) video card, it would be a reasonably well-equipped system. In the end though, neither the iMac nor the PC would be turning any heads performance-wise. Apple is missing an opportunity here. If they would refactor OS-X to be compatible with PC's (without raising the price), they could steal a lot of current Windows AND future Linux customers...
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 -
Yeah, the recent price drop in dual core CPU's gave the home-built PC a wider gap. Six months ago, the PC was actually a lot more expensive. I couldn't find a ATI X1600 with 128mb of RAM, nor a 17-inch wide-screen monitor, so I substituted them with a X1600 with 256MB of RAM and a 19-inch wide-screen. If I was going to build a machine right now, I'd have to give the iMac a serious look because it also requires very little desk/floor space compared to a typical PC. At the same time, I get a serious case of heebee-jeebees concerning the all-in-one (and pretty much un-serviceable by the end user) nature of the iMac. If you took that extra $150 you saved with the home-built PC, and used it to buy more memory and/or a better (nVidia) video card, it would be a reasonably well-equipped system. In the end though, neither the iMac nor the PC would be turning any heads performance-wise. Apple is missing an opportunity here. If they would refactor OS-X to be compatible with PC's (without raising the price), they could steal a lot of current Windows AND future Linux customers...
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
Apple is missing an opportunity here. If they would refactor OS-X to be compatible with PC's (without raising the price), they could steal a lot of current Windows AND future Linux customers...
It would be neat, but I don't know if it'll happen. Their claim to fame has always been ease of use. One of the benefits of this is they control what goes into the machines, drivers, what needs to be in the OS that it runs with, etc. Using Macs is not like using Windows, where the driver you get is crap, etc. Use a default b/c the hardware you got isn't supported (think 64-bit support) and what not. You just plug the stuff in and it works - end of story. I do agree though. They'd probably be in a great position right now, more than ever, to steal some Windows market share if they dumped this restriction. But, to open it up like that means it'll have to face some of the same issues as Windows, possible BSOD b/c of bad drivers by other manufacturers, etc. Then again, I could be blowing smoke out my ass b/c I don't know the internals of MacOS. Maybe it has better fault tolerance for all I know. But with MS overcharging and under delivering and just copying off of Macs anyway, I'd love to see some real competition hit MS strong. Even if it made MS stop jacking us around, we'd still benifit from it no matter what happens.
Jeremy Falcon A multithreaded, OpenGL-enabled application.[^]
-
Those new Macs are looking nicer every day, and Linux tools and apps are getting better all the time. I think it's time to change platforms; Microsoft has finally lost its last, feeble grip on reality.
"...a photo album is like Life, but flat and stuck to pages." - Shog9
Actually, paying for the full cycle of Mac upgrades would cost you more.
Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
-
Roger Wright wrote:
Those new Macs are looking nicer every day
Funny thing about that is the MacOS has always been cheaper. It's just the hardware that's not. Walk into a CompUSA and price the two. It's kinda funny to see actually. [edit] Don't forget you'll see it already has the functionality of Vista too, and more. Yeah, I had to throw that in. :rolleyes: [/edit]
Jeremy Falcon A multithreaded, OpenGL-enabled application.[^]
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
Funny thing about that is the MacOS has always been cheaper.
Yes, but you pay that cheaper cost much more frequently. (Though, to be honest, I'd gladly pay Microsoft more frequently if they'd release more stable releases.)
Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
-
MS has always been overpriced, going all the way back to DOS. It seems inline with earlier releases when you account for inflation. My main concern is all the hidden costs associated with the upgrade. I wonder how many programs will break under the new release, forcing an upgrade.
I strongly disagree. Compared to other operating systems, Microsoft's have been remarkably cheap. Compared to other software, it's even cheaper. (A good game costs $50 new and can usually be played through within 30 hours of gameplay at the most. If you want a real heart attack, look at prices for Game Boy Advance games.)
Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
-
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
Funny thing about that is the MacOS has always been cheaper.
Yes, but you pay that cheaper cost much more frequently. (Though, to be honest, I'd gladly pay Microsoft more frequently if they'd release more stable releases.)
Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
Joe Woodbury wrote:
Yes, but you pay that cheaper cost much more frequently.
Nobody sticks a gun to customer's heads to make them upgrade the OS. But yeah, realistically though people do want to though; at least I know I would.
Joe Woodbury wrote:
Though, to be honest, I'd gladly pay Microsoft more frequently if they'd release more stable releases.
Hear, hear!
Jeremy Falcon A multithreaded, OpenGL-enabled application.[^]
-
Actually, paying for the full cycle of Mac upgrades would cost you more.
Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
With Windows you get a few OS releases and a lot of service pack *updates* that just fix the bugs and update IE. With Macs you get more OS releases with new features and service pack *updates* to fix the bugs.
Jeremy Falcon A multithreaded, OpenGL-enabled application.[^]
-
I strongly disagree. Compared to other operating systems, Microsoft's have been remarkably cheap. Compared to other software, it's even cheaper. (A good game costs $50 new and can usually be played through within 30 hours of gameplay at the most. If you want a real heart attack, look at prices for Game Boy Advance games.)
Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
Joe Woodbury wrote:
A good game costs $50 new and can usually be played through within 30 hours of gameplay at the most. If you want a real heart attack, look at prices for Game Boy Advance games.
Yeah, it's crazy to think about that. Of course, a game is typically a very complex peice of software, but still.
Jeremy Falcon A multithreaded, OpenGL-enabled application.[^]
-
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
Apple is missing an opportunity here. If they would refactor OS-X to be compatible with PC's (without raising the price), they could steal a lot of current Windows AND future Linux customers...
It would be neat, but I don't know if it'll happen. Their claim to fame has always been ease of use. One of the benefits of this is they control what goes into the machines, drivers, what needs to be in the OS that it runs with, etc. Using Macs is not like using Windows, where the driver you get is crap, etc. Use a default b/c the hardware you got isn't supported (think 64-bit support) and what not. You just plug the stuff in and it works - end of story. I do agree though. They'd probably be in a great position right now, more than ever, to steal some Windows market share if they dumped this restriction. But, to open it up like that means it'll have to face some of the same issues as Windows, possible BSOD b/c of bad drivers by other manufacturers, etc. Then again, I could be blowing smoke out my ass b/c I don't know the internals of MacOS. Maybe it has better fault tolerance for all I know. But with MS overcharging and under delivering and just copying off of Macs anyway, I'd love to see some real competition hit MS strong. Even if it made MS stop jacking us around, we'd still benifit from it no matter what happens.
Jeremy Falcon A multithreaded, OpenGL-enabled application.[^]
I do think Apple could come up with a half-way method, like licensing their hardware security to select companies. This would have the advantage of greater control over the hardware, but would reduce costs. I'd bet Dell is in talks with Apple as we speak. I wouldn't be surprised if HP/Compaq is as well.
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
Even if it made MS stop jacking us around, we'd still benifit from it no matter what happens.
It's when any company has competition that they makes their best products. (Without Airbus, I doubt Boeing would be creating the awesome jets they are today.)
Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
-
I do think Apple could come up with a half-way method, like licensing their hardware security to select companies. This would have the advantage of greater control over the hardware, but would reduce costs. I'd bet Dell is in talks with Apple as we speak. I wouldn't be surprised if HP/Compaq is as well.
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
Even if it made MS stop jacking us around, we'd still benifit from it no matter what happens.
It's when any company has competition that they makes their best products. (Without Airbus, I doubt Boeing would be creating the awesome jets they are today.)
Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
Joe Woodbury wrote:
It's when any company has competition that they makes their best products.
Totally. MS may not like the competition, but I think the consumers would benifit from it no matter what ends up happening.
Jeremy Falcon A multithreaded, OpenGL-enabled application.[^]
-
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
Apple is missing an opportunity here. If they would refactor OS-X to be compatible with PC's (without raising the price), they could steal a lot of current Windows AND future Linux customers...
It would be neat, but I don't know if it'll happen. Their claim to fame has always been ease of use. One of the benefits of this is they control what goes into the machines, drivers, what needs to be in the OS that it runs with, etc. Using Macs is not like using Windows, where the driver you get is crap, etc. Use a default b/c the hardware you got isn't supported (think 64-bit support) and what not. You just plug the stuff in and it works - end of story. I do agree though. They'd probably be in a great position right now, more than ever, to steal some Windows market share if they dumped this restriction. But, to open it up like that means it'll have to face some of the same issues as Windows, possible BSOD b/c of bad drivers by other manufacturers, etc. Then again, I could be blowing smoke out my ass b/c I don't know the internals of MacOS. Maybe it has better fault tolerance for all I know. But with MS overcharging and under delivering and just copying off of Macs anyway, I'd love to see some real competition hit MS strong. Even if it made MS stop jacking us around, we'd still benifit from it no matter what happens.
Jeremy Falcon A multithreaded, OpenGL-enabled application.[^]
OS-x is based on a BSD core - essentially Unix. The reason their OS works so well is because Apple has intentionally restricted what hardware their systems support. Notice that all of their graphics cards are ATI. All of their machines use the same onboard NIC/sound components. USB, SATA and IDE are standards, so there's no driver issues there. The sticky issues arise when you start talking about RAID, or any add-on card. If they simply choose to support one or two raid cards and add nVidia and VESA to the supported video cards, they would have few (if any) problems porting OS-X to non-apple hardware.
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 -
I do think Apple could come up with a half-way method, like licensing their hardware security to select companies. This would have the advantage of greater control over the hardware, but would reduce costs. I'd bet Dell is in talks with Apple as we speak. I wouldn't be surprised if HP/Compaq is as well.
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
Even if it made MS stop jacking us around, we'd still benifit from it no matter what happens.
It's when any company has competition that they makes their best products. (Without Airbus, I doubt Boeing would be creating the awesome jets they are today.)
Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
Joe Woodbury wrote:
I do think Apple could come up with a half-way method, like licensing their hardware security to select companies.
They tried this some years ago. The problem was that the hardware division was more profitable than the OS div (IIRC the OS was actaully a loss leader). Once it was seen that the clones were eating into apple's marketshare they killed the program.
-
OS-x is based on a BSD core - essentially Unix. The reason their OS works so well is because Apple has intentionally restricted what hardware their systems support. Notice that all of their graphics cards are ATI. All of their machines use the same onboard NIC/sound components. USB, SATA and IDE are standards, so there's no driver issues there. The sticky issues arise when you start talking about RAID, or any add-on card. If they simply choose to support one or two raid cards and add nVidia and VESA to the supported video cards, they would have few (if any) problems porting OS-X to non-apple hardware.
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
OS-x is based on a BSD core - essentially Unix.
I loooooove Unix stability, but even faulty drivers for Unix can bring it to a halt. The main difference is, unlike Windows, it's a LOT easier to recover from.
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
The reason their OS works so well is because Apple has intentionally restricted what hardware their systems support.
Yup
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
Notice that all of their graphics cards are ATI.
Well, their higher stuff at least uses nVidia cards. Or at least you can choose the option of them when configuring one on apple.com, so they gotta be supported.
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
USB, SATA and IDE are standards, so there's no driver issues there.
Yeah true.
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
The sticky issues arise when you start talking about RAID
There's already RAID support for MacOS X Server. Maybe the workstation version has it too (I don't know). I'd like the think so, I just haven't looked into it.
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
they would have few (if any) problems porting OS-X to non-apple hardware.
Well, I don't think the porting would be the problem. I think the stuff written for Macs after they did would be like faulty drivers made from a 3rd party. I do like Joe's halfway idea though, it's probably one of the only few ways to get and get the best of both worlds.
Jeremy Falcon A multithreaded, OpenGL-enabled application.[^]
-
Joe Woodbury wrote:
I do think Apple could come up with a half-way method, like licensing their hardware security to select companies.
They tried this some years ago. The problem was that the hardware division was more profitable than the OS div (IIRC the OS was actaully a loss leader). Once it was seen that the clones were eating into apple's marketshare they killed the program.
dan neely wrote:
Once it was seen that the clones were eating into apple's marketshare they killed the program.
Maybe they can find a different way to restructure it to keep them in the loop?
Jeremy Falcon A multithreaded, OpenGL-enabled application.[^]
