Windows 7

[.jayderyu]

Avalach21 said:

Username just got owned :)

 

 

I'm not sure he really did.  While I agree it's not a big deal there are different versions, I don't get why there even needs to be?  When they're buring a DVD, it costs the same whether they put Windows Basic or Ultimate or Business or whatever on it.  They also already sunk the R & D into all of the windows features they have developed.

So why not just have Windows 7 (which would be the ultimate version) which includes all the multimedia and all of the business options.  Then if your a casual user, you don't use the multimedia options or business options, but if you become more "avid" at some point, they are there for you.  If you're a business user and don't want the multimedia features, then they are there if you want them, but you don't need to use them.

There's no reason to cut features out of versions, especially when it doesn't even reduce the production cost in anyway.  Just put all of the features in every version.

Second. Theres no issue on is choice good or bad. The presentation of Apple OSX for $100 had nothing to due with presenting option. It had/has everything to do with giving everything at the same price at a low cost not a high one. Have you tried the difference between OSX and XP. It's vast and OSX is just stuffed full of features in comparison. So why even bother breaking them up into packages. 

Owned, no. Person wasting time trying to justify actions of MS compared to another company, yes. Hypotheticly(not that I have used 7) if OSX current and Windows 7 Ultimate provided exactly the same features why would it make sense that OSX is $100-$150 and Windows 7 at $450(or whatever Ultimate price). OSX was never a gimped version compared to the Home editions. OSX had othert problems, like exlusive driver support.