[PCWorld]

Post your comments for Should Microsoft Give Vista Ultimate Users Free Windows 7 Upgrades? here

[RNR19952]

LOL When pigs fly

[waldojim]

inexpensive, yes. Free, no.

[Evildave]

Why not, when you can get a free upgrade to Linux?

Besides, that would be tantamount to admitting M$ did something 'wrong' by giving you a half-baked OS that added nothing but DRM, a click-away annoyance dialog (UAC) and a billion new bugs and incompatibilities to an already (or as most might say, 'finally') stable XP platform.

After all, XP was arguably necessary. They had to drop 16 bit support somehow.

Shista (though some spell it with another 't') added nothing but instability, incompatibility and problems, while arbitrarily changing an interface that people got used to for years. Where's that network setting? Where's that graphics setting? Just dug up and buried in new holes, and they dropped their 'Power Toys' all together for it, the bums. Thanks a lot. Every support site suddenly needs a special 'Shista' section to cover all the arbitrarily different badness Micro$uck stirred in when they threw their stable OS into a blender and poured out a slurry of vomitous goo and used their monopolistic powers to MANDATE that all PC manufacturers pour the noxious, excremental stuff into their new PCs.

If Micro$uck wants another multi-billion dollar class action lawsuit, they'll give Windoze 7 away.

Instead, they'll deactivate it when your beta is over, and make you either downgrade back to what you used to have (which will need a ton of patching, and updates to sync with what you did in '7' all this time) or 'upgrade' to their latest randomization of the same old junk.

Damn, you know what? I don't have a pet-name for '7'. The seven looks like something bent. Windoze Bent. I think maybe 'bent' will do.

That way, when your final 'upgrade' goes awry, you can do Windoze Bent over.

[WinTard]

Ha! Hell no! On an OS that started in 2001, and was in released into production in 2006?

Anyway, we've got 18 months of free use with Windows 7, since Jan 13th 2009 in my case, till June 30th 2010...

Low upgrade cost would be nice though, but required? Dream on!

Also, Microsoft has a promotion, starting next month (I think). Anyone who purchases a system preloaded with XP Pro or Vista whatever, will get a FREE upgrade to Windows 7 when released.

Since people here seem so ethical, and only operate within legal and moral bounds, everybody has a distinct license for each system? Of course! Anyone wanting to get on with the future, with the proper 64-bit hardware, and software, will probably acquire a real license to Windows 7. Because it is the right thing to do! For free if you want, play by the rules, and get onto that Microsoft promotion.

[waldojim]

They did that with vista, and a lot of customers got screwed with some of those machines.

Sorry just pointing out the facts. Buy a machine with a 1.6Ghz sempron and 512mb of ram, and get a FREE upgrade to Vista! and then feel the need to go buy a new machine....

[rgeiken]

I bought the vista ultimate version, and am underwhelmed by the features in that version versus some of the less expensive ones. I would certainly appreciate getting a free or very inexpensive upgrade to Window 7 Ultimate with its release. Wonder why someone hasn't sued Microsoft about the failure to provide value to the Vista Ultimate Edition.

[WinTard]

I also always stated that Windows Vista was well ahead of its time. It didn't run properly in 1GB RAM. Okay on 2GB, Quick on 4GB, and now, 8GB is Quad core 64-bit CPU is an entry level PC...


Not only would it be literally futile to put more than 4GB RAM into a 32-bit system, if at all possible, and more costly than that Quad core 64-bit CPU with 8GB RAM...

[WinTard]

Sue for how much? $200 ~ $300? That's small claims court petty stuff. Just a lawyer's consultation... With no guarantees. Is your time worth anything?

According to: http://www.pcworld.c...y.html?id=10230
Vista Ultimate is $75.95
> !http://wintard.freehost10.com/image/ospricevista.jpg|thumbnail=true!
[/quote]
Message was edited by: AuroraDizon - resized image.

[bbvammy]

That is exactly what Microsoft want you to do.

Use Windows 7 for about 1 year.

After installed, purchased so many softwares for WIndows 7, you will be too lazy to switch and would just pay the upgrade fine.

In my personal opinion, Microsoft is well known for their "Marketing". ]:)

[WinTard]

I look at it this way: 3 years per OS. $200 initial purchase. Divide $200/(3x365.25)days = $0.182/day. Outrageous? Not in my opinion, unless someone is really a cheapskates scrooge...

But this place wouldn't be as interesting without your input bbvammy. I am warming up to your logic and humor... ;)

Since you didn't have $399 for a complete 64-bit Quad-Core 8GB RAM system, can you afford eighteen cents per day? I suspect the answer will be NO! ]:)

Well your loss! LOL!

~~~~~~~~~~
Change is the law of life. And those who look only to the past or present are certain to miss the future.
~ John F. Kennedy, 1917-1963, 35th President of the United States

[techie4fun]

RNR19952 said:

LOL When pigs fly

If pigs did fly, but I agree.

[tek101]

"You have the right to DREAM" .....

Best ot luck ....:p

[waldojim]

8GB of ram certainly IS possible, and does have a purpose in the 32bit market. Physical Address Extension allows posix and windows environments to address up to 128GB in a 32bit system. This is moslty done for servers, but I have seen home users do this.

and lets be honest, you can break down the cost of windows to 18 cents a day all you want, but I never buy that crap, that is done to make you feel like something is cheap when it is not. "you can get life insurance for as little as 30 centsa day" yep, and that works out to $9/mo or 108/yr.sorry guys.... expensive is what it is.

Linux is damned cheap by compairson, lets see... that was 0.00/day 0/mo 0/yr

end result, you can sugar coat anything the way you want. I am smart enough to know better. If it sits wrong, it will sit wrong no matter how much sugar coating there is. Yes MS charges a TON for the products they sell. Yes THEY know that. That is why there are special licenses for school, OEM, etc. because they know it costs too much for the average user. And they know that it has no reason costing that much.

[WinTard]

Hey, everything has a cost. Even leaving your computer on uses electricity. If one can afford a coffee cup per day, one can afford Windows 7.

Let's stay on topic, instead of feelings. Things screw up when feelings or comparisons are being brought up. Leave Linux out of this thread. I am a Linux user. Leave it at that.

This inflammatory or at least controversial article name is there to fuel and feed the fire. Then people will think they are ENTITLED to a free Windows 7 upgrade. Be that as it may or may not, this isn't the point.

The point is Microsoft has outdone themselves with Windows 7 IMHO. They have put countless hours of ingenuity, design, development. Now a nobody starting an argument that it should be 'free' is a NOBODY stirring trouble just because they like to cause trouble. That is called a troublemaker.

It is my opinion Microsoft should be rewarded for their efforts. No more. No less.

Vista wasn't that bad, except for people cheaping out on the hardware in the first place.

PAE has nothing to do with the fact that as I said, it is impractical to put more than 4GB RAM to a 32-bit processor. My processor says PAE and I get 3.5GB out of 4.0GB installed in XP-SP3. When everybody says you can only get 3.2 or so GB. Bull!

But my 32-bit machines do not have enough DIMM slots to accommodate more than 4GB RAM. PERIOD. Most everybody that has been too cheap in the past, also probably doesn't have the DIMM slots available either...

Thus my statement of it is impractical stands. It would cost you LESS to purchase a new system, quad-core, 64-bit CPU with 8GB RAM than to upgrade any existing 32-bit system to 8GB.

Are there any misleading statements in what I said? Are there any fallacies?

Why do you bring up PAE? Why do you bring up Linux in a pure Vista & Windows 7 thread?

Because it is you, I know it is not to raise hell, or cause trouble... Because we're both reasonable, and consider each other friends.

~~~~~~~~~~~
Don't go around saying the world owes you a living. The world owes you nothing. It was here first.
~ Mark Twain, 1835-1910, American Writer and Humorist

True friendship is never serene. ;)

[waldojim]

aparently I need to clarrify a couple of points

PAE for 32 bit was used primarily in ther SERVER market as I mentioned before. I also know many people who use server boards to do work on at home. They have more than 4 Gb of ram, and they have to use Windows Server because it is the ONLY windows that supports PAE. Your OS must support it as well as the hardware. I brought up PAE only because it has the same end result as 64bit, allowing you to use your rams full potential. (not the processor however)

I only mention linux, as a point of cost. As I said before, cheap is cheap, expensive is expensive, I do not care how it is worded, or broken down, it is what it is. Is the lexus any cheaper if I pay $300/mo over 10 years rather than buy the sucker out right new? NO, but it does sound better to those not willing to think about what the end result is. I have had car salesmen talk to me ONLY in the monthly price because they didn't seem to think my brain worked well enough to add the numbers in my head. he seemed to think I would go "OMG $189/mo REALLY?!" when that 189 actually ends up about $3000 over market value for the car

Sorry, I just don't like people trying to play numbers games to make something sound cheap when it is not.

[WinTard]

waldojim said:

aparently I need to clarrify a couple of points

PAE for 32 bit was used primarily in ther SERVER market as I mentioned before. I also know many people who use server boards to do work on at home. They have more than 4 Gb of ram, and they have to use Windows Server because it is the ONLY windows that supports PAE. Your OS must support it as well as the hardware. I brought up PAE only because it has the same end result as 64bit, allowing you to use your rams full potential. (not the processor however)

I only mention linux, as a point of cost. As I said before, cheap is cheap, expensive is expensive, I do not care how it is worded, or broken down, it is what it is. Is the lexus any cheaper if I pay $300/mo over 10 years rather than buy the sucker out right new? NO, but it does sound better to those not willing to think about what the end result is. I have had car salesmen talk to me ONLY in the monthly price because they didn't seem to think my brain worked well enough to add the numbers in my head. he seemed to think I would go "OMG $189/mo REALLY?!" when that 189 actually ends up about $3000 over market value for the car

Sorry, I just don't like people trying to play numbers games to make something sound cheap when it is not.

Hey, don't be sorry, we're exchanging ideas, and pushing the envelope. All points well taken.

As well, being a technocrat, I like precision, and loathe double-meanings, or FUD. I try not spread FUD, as this is the one thing I am opposed to in principle. That doesn't mean I never do it, but it is probably inadvertently if / when I do.

A slip-up, as we all do from time to time.

Now, to correct some of your misconceptions:

http://www.microsoft...AE/pae_os.mspx]

> [Google: Results 1 - 10 of about 50,000 for does windows xp support PAE. (0.34 seconds)

Quote

Operating Systems and PAE Support14 Jul 2006 ... Although support for PAE memory is typically associated with support for more than 4 GB of RAM, PAE can be enabled on Windows XP SP2, ...
www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/server/PAE/pae_os.mspx - 35k - Cached - Similar pages

Memory Support and Windows Operating Systems9 Feb 2005 ... Support for PAE is provided under Windows 2000 and 32-bit versions of Windows XP and Windows Server 2003. 64-bit versions of Windows do not ...
www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/server/PAE/PAEmem.mspx - 12k - Cached - Similar pages
More results from www.microsoft.com »

As for costs, I wasn't trying to pull a fast one here. I was simply stating my belief that on the average, an OS lasts for me about three years of daily use. To me then, it represents a certain dollar value? How to measure it? I provided my rationale. I do not believe comparing what is free (like air and oxygen) to something that isn't free...

And to give another insight into my behavior. In 1999, I purchased my first single-detached 3000+ sq ft house, in a spiffy neighborhood. Without going into details, as a 'reward' for acheiving that objective, I also purchased the top-of-the-line 53" Pioneer Elite HDTV Reference Monitor of the time, Full HDTV 1920x1080 back in 1999! The TV was over $10,000 (without a tuner!). The way I justified that purchase was: I and my family will enjoy FULL HD, for about $1000 per year. After 10 years of use, (it still works beautifully BTW), I'll go for the next ultimate HDTV, cost no matter. I'm ok to spend $25K on this... And 1K/year represents $2.74 per day... Is the ultimate viewing experience worth $2.74/day? You bet! To me at least...

Thus my statement that quality is never expensive. But quality is also not a direct function of absolute price either... As for me being frugal, I am simply showing respect to money, and being extremely selective in my acquisitions...

:^0

[waldojim]

Then MS disables it intentionally. http://msdn.microsof...y/aa366778.aspx
They have a nice chart showing memory limitations.
Even 64bit Vista Home premium is limited to 16GB killing the most extreme users with 24GB on their i7's

Now this is just me being picky - you have mentioned that in home use, this is not likely to be an issue. I just want to point out - it can be, and probably will be with enthusiasts. When you consider that Vista is a very recent os, and people are already pushing its limits, it just seems that it was never intended to be around for a while. It SEEMS (opinion) like MS was launching Vista prematurely, and was not prepared for market needs.

for the money spent, I would have to say that I had XP for nearly 8 years, thus worth every dime. My vista laptop I have had for just over 6 mo. My previous one nearly a year. So 1 yr and 6mo later, I can safely say I am glad I did not buy a copy for the gaming rig, Windows 7 seems like it will run circles around it. And will probably make me much happier in the long run. I do also hope to get 8 years out of Windows 7.

" I also purchased the top-of-the-line 53" Pioneer Elite HDTV Reference Monitor of the time, Full HDTV 1920x1080 back in 1999! The TV was over $10,000"
DAMN! I bet it looks good, but still, just wow.... I have yet to convince myself they are worth more than a grand... but I am glad to hear you like it.

[WinTard]

Thanks for the happy feelings! :)

Yes, I have no idea why Windows Vista Home Premium would be limited at all, being a 64-bit OS? I can't figure out Microsoft most of the times.

For me, looking forward there are only two types of Windows...

Windows 7 Ultimate/Enterprise x64
Windows 2008 Enterprise Server x64

Already Vista Ultimate OEM x64 is only $75.95... And will support 128GB RAM as is.

Not only is cost relative, but I for example find Red Hat Advanced Enterprise Linux, a bit too expensive ($1499/yr, premium $2499/yr), as one needs to purchase a license subscription, year after year, per system, just to get the security patches???

Quote

https://www.redhat.c...re/catalog.html

Even Microsoft doesn't gouge like that...

[waldojim]

that is for Tech support, not patches the patches are free. And with a GOOD RedHat Certified tech. you don't need the phone support.

also, where on earth do you keep finding vista ultimate for $80?!

I keep looking, and all I find is $180