
Windows 8 Pro Upgrade to cost $39.99 - rkrishnakumar
http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2012/07/02/upgrade-to-windows-8-pro-for-39-99.aspx?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
======
neovive
I wouldn't chalk this up as just a competitive response to the relatively low
price Apple charges for its OS upgrades. I think Microsoft really wants/needs
to accelerate the adoption of Windows 8 even if that means taking a hit on
license fees. Whatever they can do to accelerate adoption of W8 in the
enterprise and consumer markets will more than pay off in the long-term. A
major reduction in legacy support requirements, enables them to innovate
faster and will help improve the Windows brand that has been tarnished over
the past decade. They essentially bet the farm on W8 being multi-platform at
the core and need people to upgrade.

~~~
greenyoda
My guess is that it will take a long, long time for enterprises to move to
Windows 8, with most sticking with Windows 7 for as long as Microsoft
continues to provide security patches for it. If you're an enterprise with
10000 or 50000 non-technical users running Windows 7, the cost of moving to
Windows 8 will be primarily IT staff hours, including all the support
questions from users puzzled by the new user interface. What compelling
benefits would there be for a bank or insurance company to move to Windows 8
that would offset the steep costs?

~~~
hcurtiss
Exactly. Our law firm is almost -- _almost_ \-- ready to roll out our Windows
7 build. And we only have about 650 users.

~~~
Simucal
Can you describe a little bit about what all goes into preparing for a Windows
7 deployment for a company of your size? I'm genuinely curious.

~~~
nnnnni
The number one thing is to make sure that all of the software is compatible
without having to jump through a bunch of hoops. Law firms are notorious for
using OLD software.

~~~
NonEUCitizen
Are law firms still using WordPerfect ?

~~~
hcurtiss
I can't say my knowledge is global, but in the US I'm fairly comfortable
saying no law firm of any consequence still uses WordPerfect.

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

~~~
nemo1618
Have you actually _used_ Windows 8? I don't make much use of the metro apps,
but there are lots of smaller improvements that I appreciate, like the new
task manager, file copy dialog, login screen, etc.

The sight of the new start screen incites revulsion in most power users, but
try to remember that you won't be spending much time there. Treat the start
screen like what it really is: a fancier start menu.

Like me, you'll probably spend most of your time on the desktop, so Windows 8
really feels more like Windows 7.2. So I think your "ten-foot pole"
proclamation is a little unjustifiable.

~~~
samspot
I'll upgrade when they give us more than 2 inches to edit the PATH environment
variable.

~~~
powerslave12r
Does anyone have any answers why this has not changed over the years?

~~~
kemayo
I'd assume it's some variant on: "if you need to edit / knows what the PATH
environment variable is, you're likely not the sort of user who's going to be
scared away by an unfriendly UI".

~~~
powerslave12r
And you would think they would have launched a fancy editor environment editor
that was easy to reach and use.

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

~~~
corysama
For the first time in a long time, they are becoming underdogs. The surprising
thing is that they are smart enough to start acting like one!
[http://www.theverge.com/2012/3/15/2874513/microsoft-
internet...](http://www.theverge.com/2012/3/15/2874513/microsoft-internet-
explorer-loved-to-hate-video) Most huge, old companies finding themselves in
such a position prefer to pretend nothing changed no matter what.

------
3JPLW
Competition is great! I'm very glad that Apple has managed to exert some
pressure on Microsoft here. I really don't think that this would have occurred
otherwise.

~~~
gouranga
I don't think it's related to Apple at all. I can't believe people are trying
to give Apple some credit for it.

Two real things:

1) No one ever buys Windows upgrades, so this is a motivator to shift to Win8.
Consumers and businesses just buy a new PC and large businesses get licenses
automatically.

2) They now have the opportunity of upselling inside the operating system
(which they've been playing with for a long time - since 2007!).

That is it. No pressure from Apple.

~~~
greedo
If #1 is true in terms of past behavior, then expecting this price point to
change that is doubtful. In my experience, the reason no on upgrades is
because they then inherit all the cruft from their old install. I'm not sure
that upgrading will ever be popular with the Windows crows.

#2 is also doubtful for the same reason. If users are faced with 900 versions
of Windows to choose from while upgrading, they'll choose the cheapest. And if
they find out that Feature X requires them to pony up more money through the
MS Store, they'll be supremely irritated.

And you haven't really given any evidence to show that it's not related to
Apple's pricing.

~~~
gouranga
Correlation does not imply causality. The burden of proof is on the inclusive
case.

Windows upgrades allow fresh installs so that's rubbish.

~~~
greedo
So if a user is going to do a fresh install, they need to back up their
existing data, perform a fresh install, restore their data, find all the old
install disks from their existing software, install those. Look for the
license keys for this software, fail since they bought the software ages ago,
or pirated it from a buddy. Then throw their hands up in the air and get mad
at MS.

It's a fact of Windows in the consumer market that upgrades just don't happen.
Consumers almost always run their computers into the ground, then get the
latest version of Windows when they purchase a new PC. This is something you
stated in your post, yet you seem to think that MS will magically change this
behaviour with this price point. I see no evidence to support that.

Additionally, the MS Store is almost a direct response to Apple's App Store on
OSX.

~~~
Mythbusters
The experience you described regarding upgrade is grossly outdated. Have you
upgraded recently? The transfer wizard (forgot the actual name) does such as
awesome job of moving your data to new OS that I have seen even the cookies
persist after OS upgrade without me having to do any tweaking.

------
polshaw
Lets be clear; this has little/nothing to do with apple. You can't spend $40
to switch to the latest OSX on your regular PC, so it is just not direct
competition.

I can only assume they think this way is how they will get most money from
selling to end users, and I wouldn't be surprised at that being the case. No
doubt they make most of window's licence money from OEMs.

~~~
tzs
> Lets be clear; this has little/nothing to do with apple. You can't spend $40
> to switch to the latest OSX on your regular PC, so it is just not direct
> competition.

I can't use Chevy parts in my Honda, but if Chevy started charging 1/10th of
what Honda is charging for similar parts, Honda would need to lower prices if
they wanted me to stick with them for my next car, or to use genuine Honda
parts instead of third party parts to repair my current Honda. That's because
Chevy's price would help recalibrate my expectation as to what kind of prices
are reasonable, making Honda look overpriced.

OSes aren't as interchangeable as cars, but a Microsoft upgrade price
significantly higher than Apple's upgrade price might convince more people to
stick with what they have until it is time to buy a new PC and get Windows 8
bundled, rather than buying an upgrade, because Apple's prices lower the
expectation of what an OS upgrade should cost.

~~~
polshaw
I completely reject that anyone who would have paid $x for a windows upgrade
has then decided not to _because of the price of OSX upgrade_. It's either
worth it for them, or not. Lowering the price simply increases the number in
the first category.

And your forced car analogy is seriously flawed.

~~~
jgranby
The analogy went some way to showing how the argument based on there being "no
direct competition" is a fallacy.

I find it very hard to believe that MS hasn't had a good look at Apple's OS X
pricing strategy before making this move. It mightn't be that they feel
pressured into lowering the price so much as they've just seen what Apple has
done and think it's a good idea to get as many people to upgrade as possible.

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

~~~
kmfrk
_If_. Enterprise and Chinese pirates[1] might not be able to upgrade anytime
soon.

[1]: [http://www.troyhunt.com/2010/08/aye-pirates-be-reason-
ie6-ju...](http://www.troyhunt.com/2010/08/aye-pirates-be-reason-ie6-just-
wont-die.html)

~~~
luchs
When the Chinese pirates upgrade their system to pirated Windows 8, they will
still have IE10 preinstalled, so it's even going to work for them.

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

~~~
bishnu
Citation needed? Apple's app store isn't a huge revenue source by any means
[1], let alone profit. I've seen no evidence that App Stores can be any kind
of profit center.

[1] [http://www.businessinsider.com/chart-of-the-day-apple-
revenu...](http://www.businessinsider.com/chart-of-the-day-apple-
revenue-2010-10)

~~~
greedo
Sure, Apple doesn't generate a lot of earnings or revenue directly from each
of their app stores, but the indirect revenue is what matters. Apple is a
hardware company first, a software company second. App store purchases
reinforce user stickiness as well as improving the overall purchasing
experience. The bottom line is what matters, not the line item profitability.

------
lambada
What no-one has mentioned that I find interesting, is that Microsoft are
calling this a 'promotion'

"This upgrade promotion for Windows 8 Pro both online and at retail runs
through January 31st, 2013."

I wonder why this price is only temporary, and what the price will be
afterwards?

~~~
ams6110
They can say that the retail price of the upgrade is $139, then with each sale
they can take a $100 "promotional" expense off their taxable income.

~~~
gte910h
I was under the impression the value of the promotion is based off production
and transport cost, not equivalent sale price. Is this not true?

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

~~~
fleitz
Historically Apple (remember Apple from 1985 to 2001) has been a severely
under performing company, in the last 10 years they've made boatloads of cash
by optimizing their supply chain and extracting huge volume discounts on the
latest technology.

Microsoft needs to figure out how to get its hardware and its OEMs hardware
prices inline with Apple. If MS and their OEMs put pressure on manufacturers
they'll no longer be able to offer the same discounts to Apple.

OEMs, VARs, volume licensing holders already pay close to this price for
windows and make up the bulk of purchases. Making Windows available to retail
at ~$40 will not have a significant impact on revenue.

Not dealing with Apple's competitive prices on phones and tablets will spell
death for MS. MS at this point could give a shit about cannibalizing Windows
retail upgrades for desktop operating systems. The key is to leverage their
desktop OS, developer base and corporate relations into something thats
competitive in mobile and tablets.

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

------
saturdaysaint
The more I think about this, the more the protestations that Apple had nothing
to do with this seem bizarre. A price drop of this magnitude - $120 for the
cheapest Win 7 upgrade to $40! - does not occur without competitive pressure.
Can you imagine Adobe doing this kind of upgrade price drop on their
(essentially competitor-less) creative software? If the iPad were not taking a
serious bite out of the consumer PC business, Microsoft would be in no such
hurry to spread the platform to existing PC users (who they've been happy to
not-so-subtly push to a whole new PC in past years).

PC makers can't be too happy - OS upgrades might not represent much of a
buying cycle, even in the consumer sphere. If anything, Windows 8's improved
performance across the board might extend the life of old PCs.

I don't say any of this to damn Microsoft, who are doing good work but are
against bigger forces. It is fascinating watching the sudden commoditization
of a once revered, culturally central product.

------
Alex3917
It's great to see Apple really sticking it to MS. Apple has no need to make
money off their OS upgrades since the cost of the OS is already built into the
hardware, but for MS, Windows is over 25% of their total revenue.

Plus this is great news for web developers. Hopefully this means that IE6-8
will be going away much faster than was previously anticipated.

~~~
zitterbewegung
Why is it great? Apple is worse than MS in so many other ways. In a few years
you are going to see Apple being the person that everyone hates. Now, people
seem to like it.

~~~
annon
Because Apple's cost cutting has increased competition. Increased competition
is usually better for consumers.

~~~
jmduke
While I agree that increased competition is better for consumers, Apple hasn't
cut costs for the consumers -- they've merely absorbed the cost of the OS into
their hardware.

~~~
annon
If the average price of hardware hasn't gone up, which it hasn't, then they
have cut costs for consumers.

Regardless of where they handle the accounting on their end, cost of ownership
has gone down.

------
jsz0
It's a smart price but I suspect that Microsoft has burned too many bridges
for most people to ever consider upgrading their computer's operating system.
For the average person a (Windows) operating system upgrade has traditionally
been cost prohibitive and often not a smooth process. That's going to scare a
lot of people off even at $39.99 I'm also not convinced Microsoft has found a
compelling way to sell Windows 8 yet. There's no one button buy/install option
here. People will have to go seek out the software and justify the price tag
to themselves. That's going to be an up-hill battle. I'm betting the
percentage of users upgrading will be about the same as previous Windows
releases.

~~~
ams6110
_For the average person a (Windows) operating system upgrade has traditionally
been cost prohibitive and often not a smooth process_

I'm firmly in this camp. I've done clean installs of Windows 7 on both VMs and
physical hardware and it was flawless every time. I have no doubt clean
Windows 8 installs are also easy. But I would be afraid of an in-place
upgrade.

My PC at home is an old HP with an AMD Athlon. It runs XP. It does everything
I need it to do. I will never upgrade the OS, even if Windows 8 were free I
would not consider it. When the time comes, I will buy a new computer and
migrate my files, but until then it will keep on as-is.

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

~~~
kmfrk
Look at the lessons learnt cutting the prices of videogames in the Steam
store. Lower prices can spur people to buy your videogames in ways that are
actually much more profitable than pricing it higher.

Pirates will always try to rationalize themselves to a reason to pirate
software. Microsoft is doing a great job of making Windows 8 an attractive
upgrade to people.

I was personally planning to hold off on buying it, but that price tag is
extremely compelling, so I'll probably buy it, shortly after any launch kinks
are sorted out.

------
forgotAgain
You have to figure that people who are running XP and Vista weren't going to
spend much to upgrade so this part of it doesn't cost MS much in lost revenue.

For users running Windows 7 I don't see the rush to upgrade even at the low
price. You have a good OS in W7. Most will figure if it's not broke, don't fix
it.

It's a nice gesture from MS that won't cost it much. For myself, I have an old
dual-core Vista notebook that may now get an SSD and Windows 8 just so I can
have the latest OS available. That's one more developer that stays current
with the latest Microsoft OS which is where I think they see the payoff.

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

------
SCdF
Here's the thing: if the Windows 8 upgrade was _free_ I wouldn't take it.

Not because I have any great hatred of Windows 8-- I got bored one night and
played around with it in a VM, it seems nice enough-- but Windows 7 works fine
already.

Windows is the thing that I have to run on my computer so I can run the things
I _actually_ care about using. As long as it stays out of my way and doesn't
have lots of bugs or security issues, I'm happy with it.

Until I'm forced off 7 due to incompatibilities I see no reason to switch.

(for the record, I still run Snow Leopard on my mac for similar reasons).

~~~
josteink
Different people, different wiggles I guess.

I'm running the Release Preview as my main OS now, and I'm just amazed at how
much faster and smoother everything is.

When this preview expires and I'm forced to go get Windows 8 proper if I want
to keep using it, I'm pretty sure going back to Windows 7 wont be an option
for me.

Just like going back to Ice Cream Sandwich isn't an option once you've tried
Jelly Bean. There are just so many small (and some major) incremental
improvement all over the line.

For me, I'm getting Windows 8 for sure, and I like the news about it not going
to cost me a fortune.

------
Koldark
This might actually make me upgrade!

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

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

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

~~~
freehunter
Unfortunately, negative public reaction is heavily influenced by word of
mouth. Will you lose anything by not upgrading? Not immediately, but over time
yes. Will you gain anything by upgrading? Possibly, depending on your needs,
leaning more towards yes over time.

I've been using it 100% for a few weeks and spend 90% of my time in desktop
mode (due to using Chrome, AIM, and Media Player Classic). Most of the time I
forget I'm in Windows 8, it feels just like Windows 7. The only time I see
Metro is when I hit the windows key, type "chro" and hit enter to launch
Chrome. In this use case, Metro isn't anything more than a bigger start menu.

~~~
keithpeter
"The only time I see $UI is when I hit the windows key, type "chro" and hit
enter to launch Chrome. In this use case, $UI isn't anything more than a
bigger start menu"

    
    
      $UI = [Metro|Ubuntu Unity|DWM/dmenu]
    

Strange how these changes all come along at the same time. Does Mac OS have a
text based launcher at all?

~~~
amccloud
Spotlight?

~~~
keithpeter
Thanks all three parent posters, I had tried to put Spotlight out of my mind
(iBook G4 with the appropriate upgrade). I imagine it works a lot faster now.

So that is all three main end user desktop/laptop OSes using type and go
interfaces.

~~~
spicyj
In addition to hardware improvements, Leopard also brought speed improvements
for app launching in particular.

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

------
nathan_long
Can you upgrade if your computer doesn't support "Secure Boot"?

If so: 1) Buy a box with no OS 2) Install an older Windows 3) Upgrade.

Permanent path to 8 without secure boot?

~~~
UnoriginalGuy
Why wouldn't you?

Secure Boot is a root-kit protection mechanism; and Microsoft has required OEM
partners to provide a way for users to disable it in the UEFI/BIOS.

I think you're either trolling or hugely misinformed.

~~~
mythz
"As currently proposed, Secure Boot impedes free software adoption. It is
already bad enough that nearly all computers sold come with Microsoft Windows
pre-installed. In order to convince users to try free software, we must
convince them to remove the operating system that came on their computers (or
to divide their hard drives and make room for a new system, perceptually
risking their data in the process).

With Secure Boot, new free software users must take an additional step to
install free software operating systems. Because these operating systems do
not have keys stored in every computer's firmware by default like Microsoft
does, users will have to disable Secure Boot before booting the new system's
installer. Proprietary software companies may present this requirement under
the guise of "disable security on your computer," which will mislead new users
into thinking free software is insecure."

[https://www.fsf.org/campaigns/secure-boot-vs-restricted-
boot...](https://www.fsf.org/campaigns/secure-boot-vs-restricted-
boot/whitepaper-web)

~~~
Xuzz
If you're technical enough to be buying old computers to work around it, I bet
you could figure out how to disable it when the option is right there. :)

~~~
mythz
That still hinders FOSS's world-domination / year of the linux desktop plans.

~~~
srdjanjovcic
Fedora will support booting on secure boot hardware:
<http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/12368.html>

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

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

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

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

~~~
barrkel
It's not the most frequent method for launching. According to MS, their
metrics indicate pinned task bar items are, or are trending to be, the most
frequent method.

When I don't remember the name of the thing I want to launch (which is quite
frequent), I rely mostly on positional navigation through a customized start
menu. That is, I don't remember programs by name, I remember them by where I
left them. Windows Vista / 7's start menu was a major regression for my use
case (the scrollable treeview with expandable items destroyed absolute screen
positioning); I had to replace it with Classic Shell to get usability back.

~~~
MatthewPhillips
For most people the "All Programs" menu quickly turns into a circus. Curating
it is a chore.

They are messing this up in Windows 8, as every time you install a
application, including desktop applications, all of its start menu items get
pinned onto the start screen. I'm afraid most users will never bother to unpin
them.

~~~
barrkel
I used to curate the All Programs menu. What that did was mess up
uninstallers, because they could no longer find shortcuts to delete them, so I
ended up with lots of dead shortcuts that needed clearing out.

So now, I create a bunch of category folders (Work, Development,
Entertainment, you get the idea) in the Start Menu profile folder (rather than
the Start Menu\Programs folder), and copy the handful of app and applet
shortcuts that I actually need in. I leave the All Programs menu to fester and
ignore it. With Classic Shell, this works well; the classic start menu, in XP
mode, shows my folders as top-level expanding menu items.

