
Open letter to Microsoft: It's time for a single version of Windows - vaksel
http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=19633
======
nir
"Hi, I'm the editor of a website and you run the most profitable tech company
in the world - so let me now tell you what you should do with your main
product line"

~~~
edd
My favourite point is "Flatten the whole strategy and offer a single version
of Windows 7 for $50." Why would they sell windows for less than OSX? (Unless
I am mistaken while the _upgrade_ price for leopard may be just $29 I bet the
new price will still be at least $129). Why is it that everyone wants to be
one of the biggest software companies in the worlds financial advisor.

~~~
jackowayed
They frequently sell Windows for less than $129 when it comes on a new
computer. Big computer sellers (Dell, HP, etc) pay very little for Windows.
I'm not sure if the numbers are public, but I think that it's no more than
$50, at least for the base version. The cost of Windows is in development. It
costs them nothing to put it on an additional new computer and maybe 50 cents
of packaging and a CD to sell it in stores. So they really can make it up on
their huge volume pretty easily, as they already do when they practically give
the OEMs the basic versions. If every Windows user were to upgrade to Windows
7 for $50, they would make huge profits.

Now, not every Windows user will, but if they can get a lot more to upgrade
with a cheaper price, it might be worth it.

------
nopassrecover
No this is naive.

You are asking for business versions to be slowed by fancy virtualisation,
home versions to be confused by power user features etc.

Okay so let's imagine that you can pick some magic confic option when you
install to get around this. Then every version will include the price of all
features. So the home user and netbook OEM user will be required to pay the
current "Ultimate" cost.

~~~
ja2ke
Apple doesn't seem to have this problem with MacOS X -- my mom uses the same
exact operating system for Word, email, and posting photos, that I use for
graphic design and web dev, that my programmer friends use for writing desktop
and web apps and game development -- but maybe they have other problems as a
result of having only 2 SKUs (Standard and Server) that I'm not aware of.

~~~
nopassrecover
I think the mac pricing model has room for this because of the typically
bundled hardware etc.

------
solutionyogi
It's called 'segmentation' and it is used to maximize your profit.

Abstract from Joel's article:

"In the world of software, you can just make a version of your product called
"Professional" and another version called "Home" with some inconsequential
differences, and hope that the corporate purchasers (again, the people who are
not spending their own money) will be too embarassed at the thought of using
"Windows XP Home Edition" at work and they'll buy the Pro edition. Home
Edition at work? Somehow that feels like coming to work in your pyjamas! Ick!"

Ref:
[http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/CamelsandRubberDuckie...](http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/CamelsandRubberDuckies.html)

------
halo
Alternatively, just pretend the other versions don't exist and buy a PC with
Windows 7 Home Premium on it, like 99% of other users will. Starter (basically
Netbook only) and Home Basic ("developing markets" only) can largely be
ignored, as can Enterprise (volume licensing only).

I see nothing inherently wrong with Microsoft trying to sell business premium
versions with more features that the vast majority of people won't use, and
with Windows 7 they've fixed the biggest confusion with the different versions
of Vista by making sure that Business is a clear superset of Home's features.
That said, perhaps they should merge Ultimate with Business to create a rather
clear-cut two-tier system.

~~~
ijuhytgjh
Except the home can't be run in a VM so programmers can't (easily) test home.
Business can't play DVDs - becuase a business would never need to show a DVD

~~~
halo
Citation? I believe you're allowed to virtualise Windows 7 Home Premium -
Microsoft changed their EULA to allow virtualisation of the Home versions of
Vista a while back and I don't understand why they'd suddenly change it back.

------
omouse
They tried to segment the market but they segmented it incorrectly. It's
definitely better if they reduce how many versions there are, but as others
are saying, they can't go to a single version.

------
makecheck
I think the problem is that the definition of "operating system" has been
warped over the years, and customers can think only in terms of bundled
programs and not the capabilities of...well...the operating system.

From a software developer's point of view, a single target is most valuable.
If I have to worry about the availability of APIs or libraries based on
Microsoft's arbitrary bundles, it's a huge problem (not only because
explaining the "problem" to customers becomes my job, but because it means
Microsoft is arbitrarily limiting the size of the potential market).

If 3rd party programs all work the same no matter what version of Windows 7 is
in use, it should be fine.

------
CWuestefeld
Thanks to the stupid EU, Microsoft is stuck having at least one separate
version, the new one that has _NO_ web browser installed. It's clearly
impossible to make that the only version, else home customers who buy that
package will have no way to bootstrap themselves into full Web access.

In the 21st Century, product segmentation is as much a matter of satisfying
regulators as it is marketing or technology.

------
old-gregg
There should really be just one edition of Windows: an official userspace
Microsoft WINE library for OSX and Linux. It is really a waste to dedicate an
entire computer just to run Excel.

~~~
lvecsey
If you can get away with it, use Gnumeric software <http://www.gnumeric.org/>
as your spreadsheet ;)

Actually I can see a day when MSFT contributes to Wine because as they have
stated, they are hoping to preserve all their past API's and version it based
on OS release. So in that sense all of it will be a legacy eco system.

The cynical part of me thinks they will name a free software project as
Chardonnay first, or Whyne, before they consider a merge.

It sounds very doomsday like but we should be realistic too and acknowledge
where the computer industry is headed.

