Dell: Windows 7 beats Vista on everything but price
A lot of information is now known about Windows 7. The Release Candidate has shown us what it’s likely to look and feel like, the final release date has been narrowed to a couple of months, and we know there will be six editions released. What we don’t yet know, however, is how much it’s going to cost. Which is rather an important question, particularly as the OS is making its debut in the middle of a recession.
Windows 7 is so close to being released now that there’s a palpable sense of anticipation in the air. A large amount of people, ordinary consumers as well as companies and business clients, are eager to get their hands on Microsoft’s latest and, many would say, greatest operating system. But there’s still a few months to wait, at the least.
When Windows 7 finally does make its first appearance in the wild, estimated to be between September and November of this year, there will be an inevitable rush by many to upgrade. People happy with Vista will see it as an improvement, people not happy with Vista will be eager to move on, and those who have stuck with XP until now may finally want to move on.
Initially there will be two editions available to buy, both at retail and by OEM. These will be Windows 7 Home Premium and Windows 7 Professional. While the computer manufacturer Dell feels confident that Windows 7 will be better than Vista in every department, it is worried that the price, especially at launch, could be a problem.
Darrel Ward, director of product management for Dell’s business client product group, told CNET:
If there’s one thing that may influence adoption, make things slower or cause customers to pause, it’s that generally the ASPs (average selling price) of the operating systems are higher than they were for Vista and XP.
In tough economic times, I think it’s naive to believe that you can increase your prices on average and then still see a strong swell than if you held prices flat or even lowered them. I can tell you that the licensing tiers at retail are more expensive than they were for Vista.
Schools and government agencies may not be able to afford (the additional cost). Some of the smaller businesses may not be able to enjoy the software as soon as they’d like.
So it looks as though Microsoft has increased its prices for Windows 7, partly due to inflation I’m sure but also maybe partly due to the buzz surrounding the new OS. The feeling at Microsoft may be that if people want something bad enough then they’ll be willing to pay through the nose for it. But is that the case?
I tend to agree with Ward that pricing Windows 7 too high may have a negative effect on sales. People may want to upgrade but a recession means prioritizing spending and a new version of Windows is unlikely to be top of most people’s lists. Is Microsoft about to do the unthinkable and mess up the launch of Windows 7?
Related Posts:
May 18th, 2009
I am still using Windows XP and Windows Server 2003, and has not “upgraded” to Vista.
Vista is already too expensive in my opinion. If Windows 7 will cost as much as Vista or even more expensive than Vista, then there is no chance in hell that I will upgrade (from XP). I don’t care how “good” it may be (and it may not even be as good as XP, in terms of performance).
And even if Windows 7 is priced lower than Vista, I will still hold off until I know what kind of “Windows Activation Technologies” I can expect from Microsoft this time. One of the most important reasons I do not upgrade to Vista, besides its bloat, poor performance and incompatibilities, is the “Reduced Functionality Mode”, and if Microsoft employs equally draconian activation technology, then I won’t give any of my money to Microsoft over this thing.
It is becoming more and more likely that Windows XP and Windows Server 2003 will be the last versions of Windows that I will use.
May 18th, 2009
Is it any real shock? MS needs to pay for the development of Vista as well as W7 through sales of W7. There’s no way that they will take a loss on either . . . and we get to pay for it.
May 18th, 2009
Windows 7 is going to be a hit and the price doesn’t matter, consumers will still but it. Take for example, Apple.
May 19th, 2009
I am running Vista Ultimate on my main desktop PC.
I have been testing the latest RC of Windows 7 on my laptop, and quite apart from all sorts of issues surrounding shutting down, sleeping and waking, I am disappointed that it shows very little improvement on Vista.
The only thing that I have noticed it has going for it is a slight improvement in networking performance.
It LOOKS identical to Vista, and I can’t find a single feature that I, as a home user, would shell out ANOTHER full retail price for.
So I am surprised that they are thinking of charging MORE for it. Anyone who has paid in full for a retail version of Vista Ultimate, (like I have) is unlikely to pay through the nose again, to basically “fix it”, so it works properly.
You will effectively be paying twice for the same OS.
As far as I am concerned, those with a legitimate copy of Vista should be entitled to a FREE upgrade to the SAME version of Windows 7.
Otherwise I’ll “make do” with Vista, and when I need to update, I’ll go with Mac or Linux, which are now both quite realistic alternatives.
May 19th, 2009
Performance and reliability is everything to the computer. Price, especially in this economic climate, is important to everyone, no matter how good a product is dressed up to be.
Pricing something high just because hype is building around a product is repulsive.
Designing and creating a product that fails, is unreliable, constantly has problems, needs upgrades to fix bugs and then needs upgrades to fix the upgrades is not value for money.
If I ran my business selling faulty goods – and this is what the windows operating system has been for decades, I would be run out of town- to say the least. Yet the world still buys this windows crap, put up with problems, whine about the raw deal they get and make these fat cats fatter than before.
Sorry, but in my book Linux rules
May 19th, 2009
Believe it or not, Apple is not overpriced – it is absolute value for money. The build of the machine is absolutely grand. Sliding trays to drop your Sata drive into. No web of cables running everywhere. Wonderful aluminium case with dust seals. Components that fit properly and don’t have to be made to fit in the slot or have the mounting screw left out so the graphics board wont pull of of the slot .
PC manufacturer’s – generic and the like have a lot to learn from a well made Apple – where everything fits perfectly.
The only thing that is overpriced is the addition of windows to the apple family
May 19th, 2009
If Microsoft had any brains, they’d bring the price right down. Sell the operating system for $50 for the home edition, $100 for the Pro edition. Reduce the demand from people wanting uncrackable Cracked version of Windows. What an influx of sales and market holding they would get.
Crackers will always be out there and they won’t stop trying to break code, but there would be a lot less demand for “Pirate copies” if the operating system was within the reach of every one.
I find it painful to purchase an unreliable, expensive operating system to find that I run a business program for 1/3rd of the price of the operating system …
May 20th, 2009
@Peter
You are absolutely correct that
“If I ran my business selling faulty goods – and this is what the windows operating system has been for decades, I would be run out of town- to say the least. Yet the world still buys this windows crap, put up with problems, whine about the raw deal they get and make these fat cats fatter than before.”
You’ve just stated why your argument is wrong. No one would keep using Windows if it had the issues you say it does. You won’t walk into a business with a large number of Windows PCs and see the employees staring at a BSODed screens or running agonizing slow because it’s full of malware. If they are, someone needs to be fired.
You can walk into many homes and find the problems. You can also walk out to their driveways and find the oil hasn’t been changed even though the mileage is 3 times the recommended interval. Their doors and Windows aren’t sealed and leak heat or AC coolness. The faucets drip, the wood is warping or full of dry rot because it should have been painted 3 years ago.
Apple is a PC. Seriously, give it a rest. There is a plethora of PC models and options in all price and quality ranges. It’s just as easy to find a quality PC to put next to crap commodity PC.
You should be happy that a commodity PC is there to keep Apple customers from total abuse.
As to the rest, Microsoft hasn’t announced the price of 7. You get a guy who works for Dell yammering about Microsoft tier pricing. He might be trying to get Dells cost dropped so they make better margin.
Based on what I’ve seen, those versions of 7 seem to be like XP home and Professional. What exactly are we discussing here? Are we going to to match up the features per $, is the price 2%, 28% or 35% more ?
It’s stuff like this that makes the Windows section of this site a joke. How about calling Dell and asking them to substantiate? Since you used Dell in the headline and it’s going to turn up in searches that way perhaps some attention to detail is warranted. Dell manager is quite different.
May 21st, 2009
@Aquaadverse:
Pinch me I must be dreaming…and actual well thought out, unbiased, and logical response to a article that is intended to make the reader question whether or not they will upgrade to Windows 7. Good stuff.
May 21st, 2009
I imagine that many folks will be ‘upset’ Q1 of ‘10 when their ‘free’ W7 dies. that is when the Release Candidate will terminate itself.
Beyond that, W7 should be available as a free upgrade from it’s equal version of Vista (Business to Business, Home Ult to Home Ult, etc) due to the fact that it really is just Vista SP2 and I don’t think that too much work/effort from the MSOS team will be spent on XP or Vista upgrades beyond security updates once W7 hits the OEM channel.
Costs to the average buyer will go up. Big surprise. I’m just waiting to see what the pricepoint difference is with those of us that have MSEA contracts. That will be the real measure of whether or not W7 is a success or not; if Medium/Enterprise corporations do NOT upgrade to this OS, it may just be the worst selling one yet.
In this climate, costing more to buy new equipment from the OEM channel that has this OS pre-installed would result in fewer new PCs sold but would increase the number of upgrades sold for current equipment. If the price difference between W7 and Vista at the same OS level is beyond the pale for what a consumer would buy, then this will be the next Windows 2000 Workstation or XP Pro, almost zero penetration to non-corporate users.
May 21st, 2009
Consumers have never upgraded the OS in meaningful numbers, they have always purchased new equipment.
It’s not surprising XP Pro had little penetration to non-corporate users. Unless you needed AD at home XP Home had everything Pro did.
If you are going to be using 64bit Software and be a Microsoft shop you’ll have little choice except running 7.
There is little reason to think upgrading the hardware and a OS upgrade is going to beat an OEM license and new machine. Microsoft prefers it that way because the drivers are already installed and customers will hammer the vendor with issues.
7 is going to be a success simply because there isn’t anything close to realistically replace it from a logistical standpoint. All Vista did was create a pent up demand. Neither Apple or Linux made much of a dent.
August 29th, 2009
Is it any real shock? MS needs to pay for the development of Vista as well as W7 through sales of W7. There’s no way that they will take a loss on either . . . and we get to pay for it.