Microsoft Canada leaks Vista pricing

Cnet ^ | 08/28/2006 | Ina Fried

[KoRn]

"$341 in U.S"

Wow!

[KoRn]

ping

[darkwing104]

Linux looks better every day.

[ShadowAce]

[stainlessbanner]

There goes the $100 laptop idea.

[ikka]

WHO CARES about Vista. It is clear that MS has lost touch with its users, and now sees them as sheap to be sheared; the installed base, as a cash cow to be milked while they try to become a "media company" or whatnot.

That is why they are doing a test run of DRM with Windows Genuine Advantage, so that they can sell the same video to a million people and not let you share it.

Today I started setting up a MacBook for a client. It is a dream of a system.

[ShadowAce]

That is why they are doing a test run of DRM with Windows Genuine Advantage, so that they can sell the same video to a million people and not let you share it.

But there are some tools around that. I thought this article was too short for its own thread, but ikka's comment was a great segui....

[MikefromOhio]

LOL

They are pricing themselves out of the market.

[antiRepublicrat]

$129 upgrade, $199 to upgrade up to five of your computers, and it's the complete version, all features included.

[CedarDave]

And what they didn't say is that you will have to buy a new computer to handle the bloatware that's required just to boot up the machine. (And that's just for the stripped down version of Vista -- I understand they had to drop features originally planned to be included.)

[andy58-in-nh]

XP works perfectly well on all of my (4) computers. I have no problems, nor any foreseeable difficulties with hardware or software applications I am likely to use. Why would I spend several hundred dollars on an OS that requires huge amounts of memory and hard drive space - requiring additional expensive upgrades - and that does not appear likely to improve my enjoyment or productivity?

[Turbopilot]

Amen. I have customers who still spec, for various reasons, that any PC we supply for their operation has to be on Windows 2000, and it has me wondering how long I could stay on XP for my home and office PCs, and still be able to obtain new licenses for any new machines.

[rzeznikj at stout]

Wait a sec--OS X runs on a standard PC?

I thought it did only with some serious hacking...

[MikefromOhio]

yeah they have an x86 version now....

[rzeznikj at stout]

I know that--it only runs on Apple Intel hardware.

There is stuff built into the operating system that refuses to install if the system detects

Not to mention it uses EFI by default; it has to be hacked to use BIOS.

To get it legally, you need to buy a Macintosh or have a computer built with the right hardware or pay $500 or more via becoming an official Apple developer.

Other than that, it's illegal to install OS X on a standard x86 PC.

IOW, I cannot go out to the computer store, buy a copy of Mac OS X and install it on my crappy eMachines (though it'd be nice...)--I'd have to literally buy a Mac or pay heaps of money for a developer license.

[zeugma]

Other than that, it's illegal to install OS X on a standard x86 PC.

Greets Rzenznikj,

Do you have any information as to where it states that it's illegal to install it on a generic X86 pc? Is that because they only sell an "upgrade" version?

I'd like to see them try to enforce that in court in any case. 

[Echo Talon]

Apple is afraid of competition and makes it illegal to install on a standard PC, do a search for OSX86 on google or yahoo

[Echo Talon]

here i made 10 KDE wallpapers thought you might like them... :) www.linuxpapers.blogspot.com

[rzeznikj at stout]

It's against the EULA for OS X, and IIRC, Apple served OSX86 with a DMCA infringement notice.

Though if they did offer a copy for standard PC's, I'd snap it up in a heartbeat and just run that. Heck, I'd even pay $150 for a copy...8^)