Windows 7 not as popular as I thought...

[fseal]

Yeah, so many of us here have Technet and don't realize how much this stuff costs the average joe. I mean seriously, you can get Technet Standard for $199 and get dozens of copies of Windows, Server and Office....or you can spend $200+ and get 1 copy of Windows 7 retail. It just doesn't make sense.

Well the Technet subscriptions are for evaluation and testing use ONLY. They CANNOT be used in any production or end user environment.

Technet is basically an MSDN subscription with the dev tools, the same restrictions apply to the MSDN sub as well.

I.e. an IT person would get a technet subscription and use it for testing in-house software or integration of various MS software into their internal network. Then when it came time to deploy they have to buy real liscences. Same goes with any "home users" with technet accounts. They can use the software to test capabilities/compatibilities or to test software they write, but the machine that the software is actually developed ON or any machine used in the normal way a person uses an OS on a computer must have a real liscence.

So yeah it does make sense.

 

[gregrocker]

Why do that? Win7 leaves nothing to be desired.

Money...I probably don't need the Ultimate, but I'd want to at least get the Pro, and that's about $140 for an oem. If M$ would just be reasonable (around $40 to $50 bucks), I'd probably upgrade every time.

Good reason.

You'd make a good beta tester for Windows 8, which will hook you up with deals like the $50 upgrades and party-favor Signature Ultimate edition we got during 7beta. Plus you kinda get married to the OS you know it so well and feel a part of it.

 

[Aphelion]

But if only it was OSX.....ahhh... OSX what a great OS, it always works, its easy to use, and its based off a 'nix kernel.

You would never know it over on the Mac Pro audio forums, it's slow an inefficient according to most of the pro's using it for FCP and Logic Studio. Same old story, some users are reverting to older software so it can be run on Tiger as the older OS is much more efficient.

I have OSX (Snow Leopard) on this PC, Win-7 uses far less resources, plus Win-7's graphics are 2-3x's as fast.

As for overtaking Vista... 6 months, word is spreading.

Ap

 

[Jugador]

Good reason.

You'd make a good beta tester for Windows 8, which will hook you up with deals like the $50 upgrades and party-favor Signature Ultimate edition we got during 7beta. Plus you kinda get married to the OS you know it so well and feel a part of it.

Yeah, that'd be fun, where do I sign up!

 

[pparks1]

Well the Technet subscriptions are for evaluation and testing use ONLY. They CANNOT be used in any production or end user environment.

Number 1: All of the people here with Technet are using that software on their everyday home use PC's. They don't have other retail licenses other than those that come with their Technet account.

Number 2: I called Microsoft on this and they basically said if this was a personal use machine at home (or a couple of them)...I was fully entitled to use the Technet software in any way that I saw fit. As long as I didn't share it with others, and I didn't use it to support a business network...I was not in violation of the EULA. They maintained that my use of other software and games on my workstation encompassed ongoing testing and evaluation and that it was just fine.

 

[periboob]

This is a good topic for newcomers to Windows 7 such as myself. I expect a plot of the sales of the various versions of Windows would show the "7" is doing very well. I agree with the original point that the publicity/media has suggested that everyone has switched. That does not matter much to me, I am usually a late-adopter. What has surprised me, however is that I have had several substantial disappointments, when all the media promised that Vista was lame, and 7 was "...what Vista should have been..." I just thought Vista-2-Win7 was going to be a walk in the park.

Probably that I am just beginning the learning curve, I guess I will adjust. But I would love to water-board the guy who decided remove the Favorites pane (and toolbar) from Windows Explorer, and to push more "ribbons" on us vs. a user-configurable toolbar. I love new features, but I am just too old to cheerfully accept the loss of the old ways of doing things.

 

[unifex]

Most of the issues here have already been covered many times, but I guess I'll a bit regarding upgrading.

I give you an example. I have a Pentium III machine running Win2K since about the year 2000. The maintenance cost over 10 years - once I added a hard drive, so about $100. It runs the same software as several years ago and it does that as well as when it was purchased. Is there any need to upgrade? NO!

Now imagine you're running a doctor's office. What you're running there is basically a patients database. Yes, it's complicated, yes it should be accessible from any terminal in the office, even at the same time and so on. But you've got it running. Do you want to upgrade it just because Microsoft came up with a new OS? NO!

You see, most people use their PC's as TOOLs. Similar to hammers and dental machines. When do you upgrade your tools? Well, either they get old and unusable or there is some major new functionality that you're missing out. But in a small company, such as a doctor's office you're usually not missing out on anything until they come up with a new and exciting professional software for you and that does not happen very often.

Same for the "average Joe home user". So, who's upgrading really? Well, enthusiasts, who want to try out the new OS - i.e. people who are interested in the OS itself - and gamers, who want to run the latest and greatest as fast as possible. But this is a very small percentage of users. So Windows 7 is selling with new machines and that's how the market share is growing.

As to a purchasing decisions of the OP - that's a personal matter. Myself, I just buy a new PC when I need one and then it comes with whichever OS is current. Yes, I upgraded to 7 from Vista, but ... 7 is just so much nicer .

 

[housry23]

Windows 7 is the highest selling OS in history. It has sold more copies than any other OS when comparing other OS after being out as long as Win 7 has. Even XP. yes more users are still using XP, but that is a money factor and a lot of businesses won't upgrade until SP1 has been released. Wait about 6 months after SP1 and see where Windows 7 is in comparison to other Windows OS.

 

[BCXtreme]

Well the Technet subscriptions are for evaluation and testing use ONLY. They CANNOT be used in any production or end user environment.

Number 1: All of the people here with Technet are using that software on their everyday home use PC's. They don't have other retail licenses other than those that come with their Technet account.

Number 2: I called Microsoft on this and they basically said if this was a personal use machine at home (or a couple of them)...I was fully entitled to use the Technet software in any way that I saw fit. As long as I didn't share it with others, and I didn't use it to support a business network...I was not in violation of the EULA. They maintained that my use of other software and games on my workstation encompassed ongoing testing and evaluation and that it was just fine.

I've always thought that stuff like that didn't apply to personal use, and I'm glad MS agrees. Maybe Technet is in my future after all!

Most of the issues here have already been covered many times, but I guess I'll a bit regarding upgrading.

I give you an example. I have a Pentium III machine running Win2K since about the year 2000. The maintenance cost over 10 years - once I added a hard drive, so about $100. It runs the same software as several years ago and it does that as well as when it was purchased. Is there any need to upgrade? NO!

That assumes that you don't want to do anything that was invented after around the year 2000. Not to mention the argument isn't really sound because you admit around the end of your post that you have another machine with Windows 7, so obviously you wouldn't need to upgrade the old PC if you also have a new PC.

I know someone that is still using Windows 95 and still doesn't even see the need to have an Internet connection, but those people are in the minority.

Now imagine you're running a doctor's office. What you're running there is basically a patients database. Yes, it's complicated, yes it should be accessible from any terminal in the office, even at the same time and so on. But you've got it running. Do you want to upgrade it just because Microsoft came up with a new OS? NO!

You might want to upgrade though when the OS you're running becomes so old and outdated that no one you hire knows how to use it anymore.

 

[Jugador]

But I would love to water-board the guy who decided remove the Favorites pane (and toolbar) from Windows Explorer, and to push more "ribbons" on us vs. a user-configurable toolbar.

You might want to try Firefox Browser. It's the #1 independent browser, and it's free. I use it, and it works just fine.

(check out the add-ons page. Literally thousands of add-ons.

 

[neo101]

That is because so many offices,company's and bussinesses are still using XP, stuck in the past with an old Op system and old outdated software is the reason why. Not to mention the cost of upgrading all those old systems and software to work with Windows 7 is considerable. These things take time and money so the transition to Windows 7 is slow.

And cash-strapped companies will take even longer to upgrade to Seven/get rid of their old inhouse/bespoke software/upgrade all the PC's to cope with WIN 7 Xtra CPU/memory needs etc (in this World recession.)

Most are just trying to survive @ the moment! The software isn't really "outdated" if it works efficiently, correctly and with uber-low amount of crashes/system callouts.

Bet you M/soft have to extend XP SP3 security updates/support way past 2014!

 

[pparks1]

I've always thought that stuff like that didn't apply to personal use, and I'm glad MS agrees. Maybe Technet is in my future after all!

I was quite shocked when I got that response from Microsoft. I truly believed they would have set me straight when I called. I even started a thread here to let everybody else know my findings: http://www.sevenforums.com/general-discussion/20444-technet-ok-use-home-computers.html

Personally, I won't buy another retail or OEM copy of a Microsoft product again since they are so liberal with their use of Technet for my own home and personal use. When I built my machine in July of 2009...I got an OEM copy of Windows Vista Ultimate 64-bit for $179 with a free upgrade to Windows 7. Well, that's only $20 less than the Technet standard subscription these days which would have given me a whole lot more for a lot less. And the real kicker is that I attended "The New Efficiency" launch event and got a free copy of Windows 7 Ultimate (retail)...which is what I actually used. So, my $179 copy of Vista and the free Win7 upgrade are still wrapped and unused on the shelf

 

[unifex]

Most of the issues here have already been covered many times, but I guess I'll a bit regarding upgrading.

I give you an example. I have a Pentium III machine running Win2K since about the year 2000. The maintenance cost over 10 years - once I added a hard drive, so about $100. It runs the same software as several years ago and it does that as well as when it was purchased. Is there any need to upgrade? NO!

That assumes that you don't want to do anything that was invented after around the year 2000. Not to mention the argument isn't really sound because you admit around the end of your post that you have another machine with Windows 7, so obviously you wouldn't need to upgrade the old PC if you also have a new PC.

What I mean is that when I have a new task that cannot be performed by the old PC, I buy a new one. My Pentium III is perfectly capable of surfing the net, good for reading email, typing texts and so on. In fact, I do have some old piece of software there that I really need and it works great.

Now, editing HD video is rather beyond its capabilities, when I decided I want to do that, I bought a new machine.

But most importantly - I bought a new machine, not the new OS per se. I see no reason to upgrade the OS on the old machine. The new inventions will not run there really, they need new hardware, the OS upgrade will not really achieve anything. Besides, Windows 7 won't even run on PentiumIII, I think.

Now imagine you're running a doctor's office. What you're running there is basically a patients database. Yes, it's complicated, yes it should be accessible from any terminal in the office, even at the same time and so on. But you've got it running. Do you want to upgrade it just because Microsoft came up with a new OS? NO!

You might want to upgrade though when the OS you're running becomes so old and outdated that no one you hire knows how to use it anymore.

Not the OS really, people do not use the OS as such, they use their apps. As far as launching apps, nothing has really changed since Windows 95: you double-click icons on your desktop, or click you quick launch bar, or go to the start menu. As a user, what else do you really need to know?

Now, if the OS becomes so old that it's no longer supported and now has gaping security holes - that's another matter, but this has not happened to Win2K yet, I'm still getting regular updates.

 

[periboob]

But I would love to water-board the guy who decided remove the Favorites pane (and toolbar) from Windows Explorer, and to push more "ribbons" on us vs. a user-configurable toolbar.

You might want to try Firefox Browser. It's the #1 independent browser, and it's free. I use it, and it works just fine.

Thanks, but that was Windows Explorer, not IE. I have used Firefox ever since that government security office suggested that it was safer than IE (5 years?).

I feel as if Microsoft is trying to stuff me into a box where they set the size and shape, and I am not going. I like having a configurable machine, that I can set up my way. I suspect that most of their customers will just follow the sheep-butt in front of them, but I like the side paths. And I like the old paths. I am likely older than Unifex--I still have a 200MHz Pentium Pro WindowsNT machine that works fine, mostly for backups.

 

[Jugador]

Thanks, but that was Windows Explorer, not IE.

I always get those two mixed up. lol

 

[neo101]

XPired .

When can we start accusing M/soft of being anti-GREEN by refusing to support 32bit computers anymore and forcing literally Millions of computers to be dumped!

 

[unifex]

XPired .

When can we start accusing M/soft of being anti-GREEN by refusing to support 32bit computers anymore and forcing literally Millions of computers to be dumped!

How is it, exactly, that Microsoft forces you to dump you old PC? By selling a new OS? Or by stopping developing the old one? So what should they do, stop working on new things just because lots of people still have old hardware?

By the same argument you could accuse Nokia and Sony and any other electronics manufacturer who produce new models of things that everyone already has. And what about books - so many trees destroyed for new books, and pamphlets, and ads. Gees, why don't we simply go to stone age - oh no, then we'll have to kill animals every day, that will violate their rights .

 

[neo101]

XPired .

When can we start accusing M/soft of being anti-GREEN by refusing to support 32bit computers anymore and forcing literally Millions of computers to be dumped!

How is it, exactly, that Microsoft forces you to dump you old PC? By selling a new OS? Or by stopping developing the old one? So what should they do, stop working on new things just because lots of people still have old hardware?

By the same argument you could accuse Nokia and Sony and any other electronics manufacturer who produce new models of things that everyone already has. And what about books - so many trees destroyed for new books, and pamphlets, and ads. Gees, why don't we simply go to stone age - oh no, then we'll have to kill animals every day, that will violate their rights .

Trees are 'programmed' to regenerate thru sEEds or 'cuttings'!

The Earth is on auto-pilot!

 

[BCXtreme]

XPired .

When can we start accusing M/soft of being anti-GREEN by refusing to support 32bit computers anymore and forcing literally Millions of computers to be dumped!

How is it, exactly, that Microsoft forces you to dump you old PC? By selling a new OS? Or by stopping developing the old one? So what should they do, stop working on new things just because lots of people still have old hardware?

By the same argument you could accuse Nokia and Sony and any other electronics manufacturer who produce new models of things that everyone already has. And what about books - so many trees destroyed for new books, and pamphlets, and ads. Gees, why don't we simply go to stone age - oh no, then we'll have to kill animals every day, that will violate their rights .

+1. You're completely right. Unfortunately, waste is a by-product of human existence. The gas that people claim is causing the biggest environmental problems, and now want to label as a pollutant, is the very gas we breathe out, carbon dioxide.

Once 32-bit became prominent, 16-bit architecture (Windows 1.0 to 3.x) became obsolete. Once 64-bit becomes prominent, 32-bit will also become obsolete. And then once 128-bit becomes prominent, 64-bit will become obsolete. And I'll be loving every minute of it.

 

[Sbrideau]

I'm not sure that 7 will top XP. Reason: MS wants to release another OS in 3 years time.

That's an interesting point, considering XP's longevity compared to other MS OS's.

Yet before XP got out, there were new Windows OSes every few years.