Microsoft: We'll cripple Windows 7 on netbooks(15 posts)
Well, in light that they only get $15 for each netbook edition of W7, I can unserstand their attempt to roll in more revenue. I think the strategy is reasonable provided the upgrade to the next higher level is in the $40 range. In this world it is hard to get anything for nothing - and $15 is nothing considering the cost of an operating system. I am sure they will make it work.
well i hope that Microsoft got rid of the person who dreamed of that marketing nightmare.
i have a netbook and am running Windows 7 RC (build 7100) and it's damned fast so why cripple it? I jumped from the include OS Windows XP Home to Fedora because of the limitation of XP Home and now am happy there is Windows 7 and it's promise of finally being able to run a decent, fast, not half-baked, worth-the-money-i-pay-for-it OS, then they plan to do this??
man the minute they do it i'll migrate my company servers AWAY from Microsoft.
There is apparently a lack of understanding how this works:
1. Both MS and the OEMs want a low price entry point - lower than what a full function system would cost
2. You cannot market a full system for a much lower price just because it is netbooks
3. Ergo, you have to reduce function/capability (cripple) it somehow. Else the lawyers and business practice people are after you.
I have been thru that a couple of times in my own carreer. It's a nightmare because you have to spend money in order to save money (for the customer) - and it generates an additional flavor of your system which is extra cost for the maintenance. But it gets people to buy. A netbook for $300 sells easier than one for $400.
@rick, sounds like FOSS there.
i tend to agree with you but still that part of "you have NO control" is a relative term. or should i say subjective?
with FOSS, you're stuck like you get what you paid for (free) and as 98% of the users can't code they basically get the RTFM treatment. i see this all the time and since the 90s it has never subsided and would always resurface for each and every new user.
compared that to commercial product(s), there is this "they MUST obey" thing attached to it because the law says so.
@whs, we all know that. but you're talking from the point of view of the sellers. i'm talking from the point of view of the buyer which is i want more (features) for less (price). don't we all?
I have NO idea of what you are trying to explain.
All of my computer systems are custom built by me so if something goes wrong, am dependent only upon myself to repair the issue and get the piece of equipment up and running again. This fact is NOT subjective.
Of course I'm dependent on the [ general commerce laws ] like all citizens of their respective countries are.
What is FOSS ???? Never heard of the term before but am not in the legal profession.
At first I saw this is the marketing nightmare it is and through the eyes of a consumer, which I believe is fair. But I also think WHS has a fair point - regardless of crippling the system, Microsoft makes far less money on netbooks than they do on other hardware sales like laptops and desktops.
If netbooks were priced similarly to laptops, I think people would have more incentive to be upset. But as it is, when you purchase a netbook you're getting a somewhat functional machine for a very cheap price. That's the incentive, in many cases. If Microsoft is providing a path towards upgrading the OS to a normal state in a relatively painless manner, I think that's fair. They are, after all, a business and driven towards profit.
I guess what it comes down to for me is that you're getting what you pay for. If you weren't, I would be more incensed, but in reality you really do get what you pay for.
exactly, you get what you pay for. my point is this strategy of M$ is an old Jedi mind trick. dangling a carrot. why not sell a full blown Windows 7 regardless if it's a netbook or 15" laptop.
my netbook is capable of doing the same things as my Dell 1520 so i really don't see the point.
This topic has been closed to new replies. Please create a new topic instead.