Windows 7 SKUs announced: your worst nightmare has come to pass
By Joshua Topolsky 
posted Feb 3rd 2009 2:59PM
posted Feb 3rd 2009 2:59PM
- Windows 7 Starter (limited to three apps concurrently)
- Windows 7 Home Basic (for emerging markets)
- Windows 7 Home Premium (adds Aero, Touch, Media Center)
- Windows 7 Professional (Remote Desktop host, Mobility Center, Presentation mode)
- Windows 7 Enterprise (volume license only, boot from virtual drive, BitLocker)
- Windows 7 Ultimate (limited availability, includes everything)
Update: Just to be clear, we've checked specifically with Microsoft on all six versions, and the placement of Home Basic in emerging markets. There's now a full breakdown after the break.
Windows 7 Starter
- Available worldwide to OEMs on new PCs
- Missing Aero UI tweaks
- Limited to 3 simultaneous applications
- Only available in emerging markets
- Missing Aero UI tweaks
- Available worldwide, to OEMs and in retail
- Includes Aero UI tweaks
- Features multi-touch capabilities
- Adds "premium" games
- Adds media capabilities (Media Center, DVD playback, DVD creation, etc.)
- Can create home network groups
- Available worldwide, to OEMs and in retail
- Includes all features of Premium
- Adds enhanced networking capabilities (Remote Desktop host, domain support, offline folders, etc.)
- Adds Mobility Center
- Adds Presentation Mode
- Available only in volume licenses
- Includes all features of Professional
- Adds Branch Cache
- Adds Direct Access
- Adds BitLocker
- Limited OEM and retail availability
- Includes all features of Enterprise
actually, cracked ultimate is for emerging markets...
are ya sure it's Home Basic that's for emerging markets and not Starter?
You know for a while there I thought maybe Microsoft would have changed how they did business. They put out a good product in Beta for us to try and for the most part we like it... I personally love it.
Then I see this and think they really need to fire the guy who wants to sell us different levels of
Windows... I mean fire his/her ass.
Seven Versions? Six even?
Dude....
And if they offered you just one, then you will bitch about how bloated the damn thing is.
And then you will have people complaining because they dont know which components they should or shouldn't install because they now are presented with a list of stuff they have to check off. Do I want the animated backgrounds? Do I need business-grade networking? The bitching would be off the charts and these same people who hate all 6 of these SKUs being offered would wonder why MS didnt offer them in the first place!
My My My didnt we get morning sex? Or maybe a coffee?
You like Seven flavors of Windows? I happen to be a proponent of Microsoft and if you even read my post you would see that I love my Windows 7. So go back to your Macintosh and PS3 you dolt
@Look_Around_You
If ticking off Checkboxes is so hard a thing, why not use the Wondrous Radiobuttons™?
Here, let me give you an example:
Option 1: Install Basic Features
Option 2: Install Home Features
Option 3: Install Business Features
Option 4: Install Enterprise Features
Tick the one you want. Too hard? Still need different physical disks to choose? Ah, I thought so... never mind.
Guys, you're ignoring the corporate structure at M$. They've got like 1000 product managers, with only regular and pro versions, how are these people going to keep their jobs? It ain't for the consumer, it's to keep people at MS busy.
"If ticking off Checkboxes is so hard a thing, why not use the Wondrous Radiobuttons™?
Here, let me give you an example:
Option 1: Install Basic Features
Option 2: Install Home Features
Option 3: Install Business Features
Option 4: Install Enterprise Features
Tick the one you want. Too hard? Still need different physical disks to choose? Ah, I thought so... never mind."
And using the line pushed by the parrots here...HOW WOULD YOU KNOW WHICH ONE YOU WANTED?
If you cant read a damn box in the store, how much better are you going to be when you install it. Again using the silly logic used on this story.
And did anyone care to wonder how all of these versions are going to fit on one DVD? Oh the shrills from these folks if 7 came with......
(((((((MULTIPLE INSTALL CDs!!!!!))))))
Multiple DVDs?
Are you sure that's an issue we'll have?
The 'Windows Any Time Upgrade DVD' had the full OS for Vista on it for each version, since it is ALL there and controlled by a few flags and registry keys.
I doubt it will be much different for Windows 7.
7 SKUs, but only 3 real editions. Please try a LITTLE harder.
I defy you to come out with a single version of a product that serves a billion customers. Go ahead, name one product of ANY kind where everyone uses the same one.
FCUK Microsoft! Goddamn.
Is anyone really surprised? I will continue to download the betas, and then probably pirate some final version when it's all said and done. As long as the compatibility issues are kept to a minimum, I'm ok with it.
lol - I was just about to say the same thing. I know plenty of people who would have purchased/upgraded but now they'll "obtain" Windows the same way they've been doing it.
They won't care that much, just so long as you're using Windows.
It doesn't surprised me that you guys are creating a stupid excuse not to buy the OS because they happen to add more than one version. First of all i'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say that you guys know very well which version you want so in the end that should be no problem. Now the different version is proper to have for the reason that Microsoft is marketing different markets so there should be no issue here. If you are saying that you are not buying it because there are too many versions and it confuses you than you guys are probably a bunch of idiots. nuff said!
Well this is unfortunate...
F.U.D
**** IT, I'm buying a MAC now.
Why would you buy a Media Access Control? They come on every network device.
OHH, you mean Mac, not MAC. Sorry.
LMAO
I guess I'm missing the fuss, we have different variants of operating systems since Windows XP, why would you expect Windows 7 to be any different?
XP was done tastefully, with Home, Pro, and Media Center (though I still believe Media Center should be a downloadable program, like other media center applications).
I'M SO OUTRAGED, I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHY!!!!
Sums this whole topic up if you ask me. So what, there's a couple of versions. 95% of all people will take the one that comes with their new PC, and the rest is hopefully smart enough to take the one they need. Much ado about nothing...
Yeah, because with XP you had:
XP Home
XP Pro
XP Media Center
XP Tablet Edition
XP Pro x64
Also, don't forget XP embedded
Yeah, that's much more simple.
@Backlin: XP had Home, Pro, Media Center, Tablet, Starter, Enterprise, Edition N, Edition K, Edition KN, Fundamentals, and Embedded.
Of course, just like with Vista, you only ever saw a few of those editions in a store. Same as it will be with 7.
Why not add one more SKU to follow suit with the OS name? I mean.. why not.. it's a circus already anyway.
Come on. Who needs that many versions? It's just going to confuse people, especially the less tech savvy. I can understand Windows 7 Home and Windows 7 Business versions, but this is just overkill.
So you can have 100000 versions of Linux, one locked-down version of OSX or 6 choices for Windows, and the thing that ticks people off is the 6 choices for Windows?
Are some of you serious or are you just repeating what you think you should say?
GRRRRRRR woof woof... watch out the watch dog is after you!!!!
Look_Around_You @ Feb 3rd 2009 12:43PM
So you can have 100000 versions of Linux, one locked-down version of OSX or 6 choices for Windows, and the thing that ticks people off is the 6 choices for Windows?
Are some of you serious or are you just repeating what you think you should say?
Dude, I love me some linux, because it's open source, and user supported/tweak-able
OSX has one locked-down, but full-featured and solid OS.
...And the OS with 90% market share makes a (what could be) good OS, only to cripple it six ways to sundat (literally) and confuse people who already don't know what the hell they're talking about.
Sounds like exactly why windows is slipping market share to mac.
Because the people that DO know what they want/need are the minority, and the people who have no freaking idea and don't even get why they should (?) upgrade from XP or install more RAM are the ones left to go:
avg. consumer: " hmm... but this one's $100 more! It's gotta be super wicked better! And look, I can clearly tell the difference because MS is so considerate that they made a list of feature differences that I still don't #$%@ing understand!"
MS: (hides snicker as it pockets an extra $100 for nothing) ..yeah, that's it! It's waaaaay better...
*Sunday
@Look_Around_You:
Are you brain-dead or something? "10000 Linux distros"? You do realise that they are all produced by different people, right? This isn't at all comparable to what Microsoft has done. If 7 Home Premium, 7 Ultimate, etc. were all produced by different companies competing with each other, then your comparison might have some legs to stand on. Instead it's just Microsoft competing with itself, creating confusion and generally being a thorn in the side of just about any sensible user.
@ noandthen
MS: (snicker and pockets $100 for nothing)
OK wait... so MS spent no money on developing network integration for businesses and enterprises?
and .... oh..... wait....... Steve Jobs: (snickers as he pockets $300 for nothing with every single fookin mac sold out there.... yeah- the hardware doesnt cost as much as they say it does.....)
and are we forgetting that the only version of OSX is the "Ultimate" one? the overpriced one? yah - no choice with macs because you dont need a choice right? you can just throw money at them and chock it up to good looks and a feeling of superiority?
Your attempt as accusing MS of pocketing xtra cash for nothin = FAIL.... mac's been doing it for 10 years now......
I don't even think there's a need for all those Linux versions. But, it's free. So how do you control that? The latest OS X isn't even full 64-bit. What everybody and their brother that makes 64-bit versions of their OS is to make a 32-bit emulator so you have no compatibility issues.
Plus, the reason OS X is only is because everything comes with it, you can deselect what you don't want in the installer if you want to keep it light. Thats why the Mac OS is only produced as one.
Micro$oft you just ruined all of your Windows 7 momentum. F you guys. I'll stick to Linux and WinXP forever, maybe even consider a Mac someday (other than my iPhone).
Ha ha ha. I understand being disappointed, but if this is all it took for you to become disheartened then you weren't really into Windows 7 in the first place.
Seriously? because I hear there are a few more than 6 distros of Linux...
So what's the big problem?
'Seriously? because I hear there are a few more than 6 distros of Linux...
So what's the big problem?'
@Pedro: My linux distributions are free. Many of them are specialized for specific usage.
It's not about the quantity per se but about the lack of real difference in between them besides cut features.
Microsoft is not really specializing for specific usage but cutting out features to try to make the higher end versions more attractive to power users.
For instance, unless they changed it from Vista, Business/Professional and Ultimate are the ONLY versions that can connect to a domain.
Sure the average user doesn't know much about it but average users are known to take their notebook to work and find themselves unable to join the domain to use it at work. It's not TOO major but it's not like the functionality isn't on the DVD with your OS, they just decided it's a feature you need to pay an extra $100 USD for.
Linux distros are free, there can be an infinite amount of them but it makes no difference because you can put every Linux feature on every one of them there are no incompatibilities. All they are is different software packages preinstalled, and there are two main ones (Ubuntu and Fedora) most users use now anyway. Your argument makes no sense at all. M$ on the other hand is going about this all wrong and everyone knows it.
no incompatability in linux? I mean i can understand that yeah they are pretty much compatible alot of times but don't kid yourself with that. I'll give you a perfect a example... compiz berryl needs differrent configuration depending on which distro you are using so i see no difference here. If you want a version which most consumer will use is home premium or professionals will like to stick with Professional just to satisfied their ego even thought many of them don't use the features in Professional.
I really don't understand people saying they don't want to buy Windows 7 now because their are so many versions, but the only people concern are mostly geeks which if you can read an arstecnica article then i assume that you are pretty much into the geek thing. If you don't want to select the different versions than don't and choose the one you feel confortable with. This is stupid the way engadget made this post because they didn't even do good reporting on having a fair article but then again i was not expecting that from a subsidiary of Jobs & Co.(Mind you i think Steve Jobs is great, but as he says his followers are a bunch of IDIOTS)
I was going to buy it if it was one version, but now...... arrrrrgggh!!!
agreed
You are obviously a geek - you are in Engadget, talking about OS that is out in Beta only. Why oh why does it bug you that there will be more than one or two version? Do you not know which one you would like?
How is this confusing? If you are buying computers in a store, they come preloaded. Most people don't even care. If you are building one, you probably have an idea of what you are after.
My only issue is that they have Home Basic and Home Premium, it could have been just home.
Come on... There were like 15 versions of xp. Is it really that confusing?
Starter: Crap
Home Basic: Ok, but still very basic.
Home Premium: Good.
Professional and Enterprise: Business.
Ultimate: Best.
Was that so hard?
for those of us in the know, it's not hard, but Grandma will be confused, and the BestBuy idiot will try and sell her Starter or Ultimate not asking questions about her PC or anything else.
Well, dear z0phi3l, your granny will never buy a new OS for her existing PC anyway, so that point is utterly moot.
Yeah because its too hard to pick one you bunch of stupid morons.
It's all about money. This isn't your grandma's family company.
They did a study, and more versions simply means more money, than one unified version with extra benefits some users won't use, and more benefits other users would be willing to pay more for.
You're right it's basic economics. Look up 'consumer surplus' with respect to supply and demand curves.
Windows is Microsoft's flagship product and their main source of revenue...they "have" to milk Windows for all it's worth...and by that I mean charging 3x as much for "Ultimate" as opposed to "Starter"....and by that I mean changing a few registry keys and serial numbers.
Well, that seals the deal for me. I've been a loyal windows user for 20 years, and stuck with XP. Looks like I won't be getting windows 7 either. My budget is now allocated for a mac.
> "Well, that seals the deal for me. Looks like I won't be getting windows 7 either."
Really? Even though there were many versions of XP?
I don't understand the problem. You choose the version of Windows 7 that fits your needs... and you use it for the next 5 years. Done. Or you buy a computer with whatever Windows 7 version is on it, and you use it until you buy your next computer. OSs will work forever if you wanted them to. Just because there are many versions available... the only one that matters is the one on YOUR computer. Who cares what else is out there? I still see machines running XP Home. Do those people care that there was also XP Pro and XP x64?
Thank God for OS X. I wanted 7 to be good, but this is to much.
Just stop.
The faux disappointment isn't even clever.
We get it. The MS bashers needed some desperate FUD against Win7, and this is the best you could come up with, so you are going to beat yourselves off to the idea that people actually give 1/1000th of damn you some of you are pretending to.
Really, just stop.
haha, i think we found the dude responsible for making the 7 versions decision.....the one hanging around an engadget comment thread and getting more and more hopped up that everyone else disagrees with him.
also that show is awful.
Faux disappointment, you say?
We still have Windows Geniune Advantage to contend with. UAC. Activations. The Registry and a future OS that runs slower than an eight year old operating system and now we have multiple versions to top everything else. This isn't faux disappointment. This is HISTORIC disappointment!
We've been living with Microsoft's stupidity for almost 2 decades now.
@Steve
No, I'm just appalled that people that a supposedly so savvy about technology are actually trying to pretend that this is some major issue that people need to be outraged over.
Not only is it not, but their attempts at trying to push their disgust just come across as campy and scripted. It would be triple screwed-up if all of these people were actually adults, which I pray they are not.
"also that show is awful."
Requires a base understanding of the concept they are parodying, which those of us who get it actually can get the SKU concept as well.
Ah yes, have an OPINION and people bash you. I am a System Admin, I manage a Windows network, so I not just some person that bashes MS. I tried Vista, our corporation said no, and i tested 7. I don't know if I will fly. I personally like OS X. I really don't give a fuck what people think. XP was a great OS, but MS went after greed. Hate Jobs/Apple/OS X but the one version works. Low rank me to death, I could care less.
@Paul A. Chapel
Hey new flash man. Your comparison of windows 7 being slower than a eight year old OS.
Hey guess what Windows 2000 runs faster than XP... oh wait windows NT runs faster than XP too.
Holly shit windows 3.1 runs,,, oh wait... faster than XP.
You put any of those OS on the same type of computer running XP, guess what..... OH YEA!!!! they will run faster.
So if one of the points that we are so pushing on is performance on this new OS being slower than XP, than i guess we should just being using Windows 3.1 cause hell, it definitely is faster than XP.
So what is your point?
Grow the fuck up, know your shit, and embrace choice. Oh wait, you can't...
Me dumb, don't get it. Can someone explain this to me really slowly?
you're such an ass. obviously, english isn't his native language.
Ah! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!
think "i"suck? let me know!
I am so glad your apple corporation is drawing the young-American idol watching-mall rat-Birkenstock wearing-VW Bug driving-tree hugging-idiots out of the PC game, I hate helping them out because they cant lay off the trojan laden porn sites. Finally, one of the clear benefits to a complex windows 7 launch.
All you guys make me laugh. Microsoft are not a stupid company. In fact, they're one of the richest and most successful companies in the world. I'm sure they have their reasons for multiple editions and I doubt they'll care about you guys crying and moaning about it on the Internet.
Don't be so quick to declare that Microsoft knows better. I'm sure Microsoft had these very same debates internally and I bet people on each side were pretty adamant. Remember that Steve Ballmer fought hard to use the word "Microsoft" in the title of the Xbox. Glad he lost that battle.
I personally think that a single, cheaper, option will be best. People clever enough to know the differences in the versions and truly know what they actually want/need also probably know how to pirate the OS and will do so when "what they need" costs $250+.
Multiple versions piss off the average consumer, and didn't MS kick off a several hundred million dollar advertising campaign to get back some customer goodwill???? Something about being a PC? Oh well, I'm a mac (that is currently enjoying the Windows 7 beta).
Multiple SKU's are pretty much used by Microsoft to allow average users to get a 'standard' version of the OS while they can charge a lot more for professional level versions.
Why are there so many?
Simply to make the price gap between the versions seem more reasonable.
What should there be?
Well there are SOME reasons to have different SKUs such as system requirements and home or commercial features (average user versus company or power user usage).
I propose a slim down to:
Windows 7 - Netbook Edition (lower system requirements for netbooks since people want to see it on their netbooks now)
Windows 7 - Standard Edition (Home edition - ie: Home Premium)
Windows 7 - Professional Edition (For usage by IT Professionals ie: comporate or power users)
Proprosed pricing:
Windows 7 - Netbook Edition (Somewhere between $0 to $50 USD. Closer to $0 since Ubuntu is free and pretty heavy on netbooks)
Windows 7 - Standard Edition (Sub $100, $50 to $75 USD. You know, the price of a decent quality program with a 5 year life span.)
Windows 7 - Professional Edition (Maximum of $150. Maybe allow +$50 per additional system it can be installed on.)
Why the lower pricing:
1) Competition with other operating systems namely Linux. Home users may not know about it yet but enterprises do and home users will soon.
2) Continued push to low life span OSes. If Microsoft wants to replace our operating systems every few years then they need to stop pricing their software high enough that most people won't consider the OS because by the time the core bugs are worked out, they're replacing next year anyway.
Just my two cents.
Someone from Microsoft with a brain please harm your marketing teams.
Thanks.
About the price gaps/multiple versions:
It makes absolute sense.
You start out with wanting the basic, then you pick up the next box, a few features sway you to pay "just a little more", you do this 3 more times and pay much more than you originally intended, winner = MS.
Good strategy, for MS... one of the reasons I haven't purchased a windows OS since XP pro. I do have vista home premium on my laptop though.
Paul Thurrot has a different list, which makes more sense. Who is right?
http://www.winsupersite.com/win7/win7_skus.asp
This *does* make more sense... and it looks like there are really only two versions here that most people will ever come in contact with (Home Premium and Professional). I like it.
Thanks for the link. It offers a much better explanation than Joshua's knee-jerk.
Thanks for the link to Thurrott. I usually check his site every week or so, but it's good to see his coverage. Much more believable than Geekzone.
Meh.
The group of people that buy Windows to install themselves but don't know/can't find out what version they need/want must be pretty damn small.
A one size fits all system isn't necessarily better.
Why can't they just call it Home and Professional? That scheme seems to have served XP well.
Actually there were more than 2 versions of XP, there was also XP Media Center (which was strictly OEM) and XP Enterprise (Which really isn't different from Pro just sold in volume licensing, nothing a consumer needs to worry about).
I think it makes sense that if you have a netbook that you aren't gonna pay for Aero and Media Center which comes with Home Premium but that Home Basic will do you fine. The problem with Vista was to many Home Basic and not enough Home Premium computers at launch and I think Microsoft will be strict in telling OEMs to put it on very low end hardware. But if your not gonna use Aero or use advanced Media capabilities in Home Premium then way pay for it. On the other hand, Aero is not free nor is WMC. Also the Business/Professional licenses are designed to have tools to work with Business, Windows Server, and ActiveDirectory. Additionally you don't need to reinstall to upgrade to a better version if in the future you find out you want certain media capabilities.
OS X works fine on a single license because it is exclusively tied to Mac hardware that is labeled as consumer or pro. In additional all purchases are seen as upgrade and thus should be compared to Windows Upgrade prices, not Retail prices.
Another thing to note is that Windows comes with more software installed than OS X (If you consider iLife a separate purchase, which upgrading is). For example more games, paint, character map, etc..
Microsoft definitely missed the mark on this one.
I'm confused. There is a bunch of versions, 50% are useless to 99% of people, 25% that are not for the typical market, which leaves a total of like two for typical usage. There has been multiple versions of XP, and Vista, however, I guess by the sounds of it, even the typical Engadget user doesn't know the difference. Fortunately, indeed, there is OS X. Which is already on the 5th soon to be 6th iteration of Version 10. Nice :P
First off, love the "worse than you could possibly imagine" line. Right, because keeping the status quo/making it slightly less confusing than Vista is beyond our nightmares.
Secondly, this is exactly like having a bunch of different Linux distros. One size doesn't fit all anymore, folks. There are businesses who want Remote Desktop and Bitlocker but don't care about Media Center, and there are home users who want to view their media but will never remote into somebody else's computer. And is it really that hard to check out a feature chart before you buy?
If these can run on a netbook, why cant they just license home premium to emerging markets for less? Why so many versions? I don't undeerstand why Microsoft must always separate us by income.
Lame Lame Lame.
$100-$150 for the 'only' version would be such a better model. So much less confusion and piracy. Charge $250+ and most everyone that knows how to pirate it will do so.
I really don't see why people care so much, the average consumer should go with premium, the gamer ultimate of premium, it's not all that hard.
people are just gonna torrent win7 ultimate anyways.
I listened to all epps of the podcast during CES and although the guys were very sleep deprived and sometimes a fair way from lucid it was really clear that this was a bad idea. I would've thought that at least someone in Redmond in the marketing division would listen to the Engadget podcast.
Really Microsoft? Are they ever going to listen to the consumer the way Apple at least attempts?
Another sad, sad day in Microsoft history.
How hard can it be to choose whether you want home use or professional use or both or are you just too stupid.
Are they ever going to listen to the consumer the way Apple at least attempts?
They probably did and that's why there are Business and Enterprise versions.
MICROSOFT!!!!
You have ruined Windows 7!
I want to buy a single copy of 7, it is called Windows 7.
When I install I want to be asked if I want windows media center ETC...
Am I the only person who just doesn't care? I look at the little feature table, pick the one I want, and I'm done. I'm on Vista Home Premium (I wanted Aero and Media Center, don't care about ultimate extras or the ability to join a domain).
I am a little disappointed that there's no slimmed down Netbook SKU though.
And don't compare this to OS X. I think the Windows SKUs splits pricing across multiple markets, most of which Apple doesn't really have a foothold in anyways.
I don't like the naming.
Home Edition sounds so lame! ..Sure, that is the version for my needs.. but Professional Edition sounds so cool... i don't need his features.. but, again, sounds so cool!!!1
way to go Microsoft , nothing like screwing the pooch yet again. Ballmer needs to pull his head out of his cavity and make a decent decision.
You know, for all the complaining about Vista, myself included, I've been running ultimate for a couple months now - since my latest build, and I've gotta say it's a heck of a lot smoother than I expected.
Of course, I'm running a horse of a machine, including 6 gig of DDR2 1066 memory, which probably helps. Still, I think they've managed to work through the worst of it's problems - it's mainly a PR problem these days.
That being said, they're just going to repeat the problems by trying to push 7 out of the door too fast, it will wind up being unpolished and feature poor and have it's own host of problems. You don't fix a mistake by making another one Microsoft! Put the time in, make it -right- and then all the PR nightmares go away.
You're still only going to see 3 versions on store shelves: Home Premium, Professional and Ultimate (just like Vista). Starter will be what they throw on $300 laptops and PCs. Enterprise is pretty much for businesses only and you'll probably only find it online. I don't see how this is confusing. They've always had multiple versions of Windows. Yeah it'd be nice if they just made 1 version, but it's nice to have a choice and only get the features you want.
There are a shitload of Linux distributions but you people don't bitch about that. It's all or nothing folks. It's pretty simple:
Windows 7 Starter - If you're reading this, chances are you aren't in an emerging market so this doesn't matter to you
Windows 7 Basic - If you're on a netbook or a shitty computer you might want this, since it'll be very undemanding
Windows 7 Premium - For the rest of us
Windows 7 Business - I really doubt that, for example, Bank of America's office computers need Windows Media Center. However, they may want features like Bitlocker.
Windows 7 Enterprise - I assume it's like Business but with a VLK
Windows 7 Ultimate - I do agree this is useless
It's no different than the aforementioned linux distros or the various flavors of iPods.
Dude, that's not even remotely like the different ipod flavors.
That'd be like apple making just the classic ipod, with all of them having a working touchscreen, scrollwheel and 120GB of storage, only to have the 'shuffle' have a non-functioning screen and a partitioned hdd that you can only access a small amount of storage, even though it's actually there.
Yeah, can't imagine why this is frustrating to consumers.
A shitload of Linux distributions made by a shitload of different companies. That's kind of where the whole "1000000 versions of Linux" analogy falls over.
NoAndThen: You cannot compare this to iPods. iPods have one and only one function: listening to audio. And do not compare this to OS X because OS X has absolutely no foothold in the markets that Microsoft is breaking the SKUs down for: developing markets, small/medium businesses, and large businesses.
Think of it this way. Microsoft spends a crap-ton of money developing corporate-centric features like support for active directory, domain controllers, bitlocker, and tons of other stuff we've never heard of. Would you prefer that they shipped only one version, and charged you to cover their costs of all the corporate features you'll never use?
If you want to go back to your iPod analogy, it would be like if Apple shipped every iPod with an integrated ivory ball-scratcher that causes it to cost $40 extra. But you have no choice but to buy that ball-scratcher, even if you don't want it.
Microsoft is breaking down the SKUs so that you don't have to buy things that you don't want to pay for.
@Noandthen
Yes it is. If you want just a simple music player, you get the shuffle (Basic). If you want video support, you get the nano or the iPod (consider these the Business and Premium versions... Business gets you some stuff, Premium gets you some other stuff). Then you can get the iPod Touch, which has all the features. So it's the "Ultimate" version.
So, if you just need simple Windows 7 you get Basic. If you want more advanced Windows 7 you get Premium or Professional depending on your needs. If you want it all, you get Ultimate.
I never saw the outrage with this. As far as I know, the only versions that most people care about are Home Premium and Business. Ultimate, seemingly, is just fluff--if people actually think that's necessary, they can spend more for added features. The rest of us can roll with Home/Business.
Starter and Basic shouldn't really apply for most of us, so that leaves us with exactly the same amount of versions that XP ended up having.
how about any of the following?
windows 7 embedded
windows 7 mediacenter edition
windows 7 home server edition
windows 7 data center edition
NooOOOoooOOOooooooOOooo!!!!
What crappy reporting... Only 2 of these skus will be widely available at the retail level..