Under the Microscope by Alex Serpo

A calculated look at the latest trends within technology products.

How many Windows 7s will there be?

Posted by Alex Serpo @ 16:24 14 comments

The internet has been awash with rumours about Windows 7, with a pre-beta release being handed out to attendees at the Professional Developers Conference in the US this week. But how many Windows 7 versions will there be?

(Credit: Microsoft)

While screenshots are available displaying some of the features of Windows 7, for me questions remain about two key issues — versioning and pricing. One of the key differentiators between Windows XP and Windows Vista was the proliferation of editions available.

When first released, Windows XP came out with two on-the-shelf editions; XP Home Edition and XP Professional Edition. XP Pro contained all the functions available in the OS. This presented neither an ambiguous distinction nor a difficult choice.

Compare this to Vista, which came out with four shelf editions: Home basic, Home Premium, Business and Ultimate. While not on shelves, there are also two other editions available, Windows Starter (for emerging markets), and Windows Enterprise (for enterprise desktops).

Microsoft may argue that this presents consumers with more choice, but I find this difficult to accept. Firstly, because businesses that only need a very basic OS are generally unable to get Home Basic on a business PC from large vendors. Secondly, those who forked out the extra cash for Vista Business gained extra features, but also lost features, as Windows Media Centre and the DVD burning software was stripped from Vista Business.

Finally, valuable features such as BitLocker were only available in the Ultimate Edition, meaning most businesses that did fork out to upgrade to Vista Business still only received a limited version of the OS, unless they paid the premium price.

Ultimately, I think Microsoft's move was about profit. By fragmenting its OS and then selling at different price points for different market segments, Microsoft was able to maximise volume by supply and demand.

This leaves two choices for Windows 7. Microsoft can continue with its fragmentation of its OS (Basic Home Basic? Semi-Ultimate?), or the company can return to a couple of editions or even just the one. This would give consumers and businesses that fork out for an upgrade all the bell and whistles available in the Windows 7. I know which option I prefer, what do you want to see?

Advertisement

Talkback 14 comments

    One for all, but selective install/enabling Anonymous -- 31/10/08

    I say make ONE version but with the ability to selectively install/enable blocks of functionality, including by policy (for enterprises). I know it may lower margin, but they may actually sell more because it does not require a degree to really know what version will actually be best. For me, its now Vista Ultimate as it includes everything, has bothe 32 and 64bit versions, and isn't that much more than Business.

    I have two boot partitions of Vista 64 Ultimate, one being for digital audio recording which requires limiting services and only loading what is absolutely necessary to support the recording, otherwise hiccups occur in the audio. The other is for general use and has almost everything enabled.

    Perhaps better still, it would be nice to have the facility to specify the resources (CPU %, Disc IO, video, audio, etc) bandwidth (maximum and minimum) different subsystems use, where 'Not Installed' and 'Disabled' would be two of the options. At the moment, Priority can be set, but it is obscure, not remembered at startup and cannot have a bandwidth associated with it.

    Less versions please Anonymous -- 31/10/08

    Go back to the home & pro & media center [aside from maybe the starter]. The OEM manufacturers quickly ditched Vista Home Basic because it lacked features. Pro in XP was the same whether retail, OEM or volume license [excluding how it read in the license]. Only thing that must be included in all is BitLocker.

    What is a business doing with MCE? Anonymous -- 01/11/08

    The different editions of Vista are meant to maximize value for the customer. Giving them the features they want. If you are an SMB who does not buy computers in bulk, then you are just about going to get one of the consumer SKU's.

    Vista was built around scenarios, not everyone wants to have all the features, which means there are compromises. If you want the best of both worlds, then choose Ultimate.

    SKUs Anonymous -- 01/11/08

    People expecting just one edition (comparing it to OS X) do not understand that Windows also serves the enterprise (unlike OS X that only primarily serves consumers and graphics/media professionals. The enterprise features (including countless Active Directory ones such as QoS, NAP, Smart card support, Offline files, Domain support, Folder redirection) are useless to home users and can in fact eliminate bloat from the consumer SKU. 3 SKUs is perfect. Home, Professional and Ultimate, though I saw mention of a separate unnecessary "Enterprise" SKU, pointing to the possibility of 4 SKUs.

    More misinformation about OS X Anonymous -- 02/12/08 (in reply to #320115328)

    In reply to Anonymous' SKUs post...
    You are misinformed about OS X, and your statement about Windows serving Enterprise and OS X not, is rather tainted - either by ignorance or prejudice.
    There is OS X and OS X Server that guess what... serves Enterprise, including PC clients and Active Directory. This is all 64-bit that will run without emulation on 64-bit hardware. Same goes for regular OS X - it is 64-bit. Many enterprises are still running 32-bit Windows on 64-bit hardware because of buggy or non-existent device drivers and other software incompatibilities that prevent 64-bit.
    Most people seem to have forgotten that apart from 4 versions of Vista there is also the decision of installing a 32 or 64-bit version (at least of Ultimate). This can be critical too, as it involves a complete re-install to change.
    I could go on but hopefully you've got the point (I'd be surprised), that just because Windows is more entrenched, doesn't mean it serves Enterprise better, nor does it mean that Windows Vista requires 4 versions to serve enterprise and home users.
    I agree with Alex Serpo that the pricing and versions are a marketing and profit making ploy rather than one that serves enterprise better.
    One install disc could have different install profiles. You could choose Home, Professional etc etc when you go to install and then if you're missing something or want to remove bloat you could do that post install. Isn't that more flexible? But this isn't about flexibility, this is about turning as much profit as possible from an OS release.

    Windows 7 SKU Anonymous -- 01/11/08

    I wholeheartedly agreed with your article. I demand that MS have two shelf editions of Windows 7 - one for the emerging markets aka Windows 7 Starter Edition and the other one just be named Windows 7, plain and simple. My explanation is that most consumers cannot explain the differences between Vista Home Basic and Vista Ultimate and why important features like full PC backup, BitLocker, DVD burning and Media Center is available on some editions but not others, and it seems the marketing material cannot either. With word that the Ultimate Extras will kill off (hopeful in the most horrible death ever), there is no reason to keep the Ultimate edition. Simply, sticking to the original Vista SKU is a mess (come on, there is a x64 version of Vista Home Basic, who in the right mind would buy that!!. I think one of the commentators mentioned that there should be a component manger of some description so that IT mangers and OEMs can adjust certain components be enable/disable (i.e. a small business owner buying a dozen PCs from his OEM can chose to disable Media Centre before it delivered to his workplace and in the opposite, mom and pop stores can enable Windows Live Essential software be included on their PCs for their customers)

    windows editions Anonymous -- 01/11/08

    Its all about confusing people so they throw their arms up and get the one with everything because they are not sure. This is not fair, but thats microsoft - its all about the bottom line and nothing else.
    No matter how many versions there are, they will all be 'sh@ft edition' and 'boat anchor edition' to me.

    Promise high and deliver low! Peter T. -- 02/11/08

    MS promised big and delivered little with Vista Ultimate. I have no problems with VU as an OS. I do have a major problem with MS promising "lots of extras" and "specials" and delivering next to nothing - a few pieces of Dreamscene content and a couple of sounds. Whoopee! It will be interesting to see if MS does the same with W7.

    Maximize Profit or just another project failure ? Dennis -- 05/11/08

    Right before XP, they are already trying to divide into two series of OS, one for home and one for business, does it really work ? Remember the 3.11 and NT3.51, 98 and NT, 2000 and Me ? XP is the acceptable series of its ancester, but Vista and Office family, well... another project failure for its own business, if Vista do work as they planned, why Windows 7 would be in a hurry to blablabla ? If they do listen to users, why would they generate such a failure product with a marketing proof that things not work their way.

    Hopefully this Windows 7 will have more than 7 different versions, to squeeze money from each segment and sector, or later on we have to buy OS and Office together, and that time we might need to consider buying over 50 selections of software for business from them.

    Maybe a Windows 7 basic Office for home users under 18, another Windows 7 basic office for over 18 and below 60, another Windows 7 basic Office for 60 and over...etc.

    Cant imagine when we reach Windows 8 basic Office for female home user under 18...

    Legal limitations Glen -- 07/11/08

    Firstly, we can comment and blog all we like, nothing we say or do is going to influence which SKUs will be available in a year's time... so there is NO point commenting on it other than a paid blogger to fill (and get paid for) their weekly text quota.

    Secondly and back to reality, because of all the moaning and whinging about Media Player, IE and other various components of Windows... Microsoft LEGALLY has to provide multiple SKUs for Windows.

    This is reality and its not going to change (too much) with Windows 7.

    Demanding one SKU is LEGALLY impossible for Microsoft for achieve. They'll just land back in court again.

    I have my own opinions of what should be standard in the "base" SKU but again, what I and others have to say will have no influence over Microsoft due to the legal requirements they have to work within.

    Legally impossible? Anonymous -- 13/11/08 (in reply to #320115765)

    M$ got landed in Court because of insisting that IE had to be "blended" into the Os. They were told to seperate it so that it could be uninstalled if the user so chose. They did. In XP it's "blended" again. There is absolutely no reason why the pile of bloatware can't be shove on one CD with overlaid installation templates.

    Mom and Pop machines use the template that skips Domain control and high end encryption because all they want is a glorified DVD player.

    A high end business may want local media capability so that their creative staff are kept stimulated.

    Re: Legal Limitations? Demosthenes -- 13/11/08 (in reply to #320115765)

    With all due respect, it is a nonsense to state that Microsoft must ship multiple SKUs to meet legal requirements.

    On the contrary, if the marketing department were kept out of the picture, Microsoft could fulfil its legal obligations by providing a single SKU that allowed optional installation of Media Player, IE and other various components of Windows that are included in other SKUs.

    Indeed, there is even some talk that this is the model that may well be adopted by Microsoft for Windows 7, with the final cost to the user being fixed after installation. (Not that I am advocating this pricing model, but nevertheless it is both legally and technically possible).

    'nuff said.

    Multiple-Felon M$ undercuts more elsewhere Graeme Harrison (prof at-symbol post.harvard.edu) -- 12/11/08

    All this talk about multiple versions at different prices...but the author forgot the biggest one. Vista is HEAVILY discounted in countries like South Africa, as it makes it onto the 'developing countries' list. But of course it is not all about altruism, as the real issue is which countries are most likely to go OpenSource and have pirate OS copies.

    Yes, multiple-felon M$ had to offer its media offerings separate (at least in some configurations, at least in certain markets) from the OS, to overcome the just findings that it had contravened competition laws in trying to wipe out competitors.

    For a really-stable, virus-free, regularly-updated, never-restricted OS, try Linux... it is ready, and Ubuntu dual-boot install on a workstation/home PC is the perfect place to try, for those who are not yet familiar with the inevitable upgrade from WinXP... and besides it is all free... and unlike M$ Server2008, you will not be left wondering just how many device licence packs you will need to pre-purchase. ALL of Google runs on Linux... and they're not silly!

    Someone tell me Anonymous -- 30/11/08

    Why providing one or two fully functional base OS versions, with the option of adding/removing modular 'extras' is a bad idea.

Add your opinion

Alex Serpo

Alex Serpo

Reviews Editor

[+] Read bio

Latest Videos

Sponsored content

Power Centre - Content from our premier sponsors

Tags

Back to top

Featured