Microsoft Confirms 6 Versions of Vista

Darthmalt writes "The BBC has a story confirming that there will be 6 versions of Vista. They are Vista Business, Vista Enterprise, Vista Home Basic, Vista Home Premium, Vista Ultimate, Vista Starter. Also included are some of the differences between each version."

A nice vista for Microsoft

[hattig]

Nothing for you to see here. Please move along.

Um, that's not what a vista is :)

I've still got to be sold on Vista. It seems to offer less new stuff than XP, and at least most people got a benefit from going from 9x to XP, in that it was a far better OS underneath.

Most Customers Do Not Choose!

[Dareth]

"We don't want customers to be forced into buying something that isn't going to meet all their needs," said Barry Goffe, Microsoft's director of Windows client product management.

Most customers get what is bundled with their computer. Most do not know if they have Windows 98, ME, or XP. Customers will be forced to buy what is the most economical for the OEM's to include with their machines.

Computers were supposed to be "multi-purpose" machines. Now that hardware is leveling, the differences are all in the software. The purpose of these levels is marketing and price control. Do not believe for a minute that this is about providing "choice" to the consumer.

Re:Hmmm.... I guess???

[$RANDOMLUSER]

It doesn't really matter. Mom and Pop will go over to Best Buy, and the salesteenager will say "And this one comes with Microsoft Vista Foo-7..." and the folks will say "That's good, huh?", and then they'll buy it and take it home.

In other words, the manufacturers/integrators are the ones who will be making the "which version" decision. Only people like us who build our own machines are going to care.

Re:Marketing coup

[generic-man]

I count 3, maybe 4: Mac OS X PowerPC, Mac OS X Intel, Mac OS X Server PowerPC, and probably Mac OS X Server Intel once they release new Xserves. Under the hood they're quite similar, but you can say the same about Windows Vista too. If you want to deliver a solid, fast application it's got to be a universal binary; if you're going after the Mac OS X data center market you need to make sure your product works on the server versions as well.

Re:Market segmentation

[amliebsch]

Is that sensible from a business perspective?

Yes, because there will be some graphical hardware requirements for the Aero interface that not everybody can or cares to meet. This gives them the opportunity to not have to pay for a graphical interface they can't or don't want to use.

I count two versions of OS X.

[argent]

Apple hasn't released a retail version of Tiger, and Apple has frequently bundled versions targeted for the system they're bundled with... it usually turns out they're bootable on more than just that model, but it's not like a retail version.

If you count customized bundles as separate versions, there's thousands of versions of XP.

So really there's only two versions, Mac OS X and Mac OS X Server.

Has Apple stated that Leopard will be released in two versions or in a single "Universal" package?

Re:Microsoft will not fragment like linux

[Anonymous Coward]

You've "always" argued that have you? Even circa 2001, when Windows 95 A, Windows 95 B, Windows 95 C, 98 A, 98 B, ME, NT 4 Workstation, NT 4 Server, 2000 Professional, 2000 Server, 2000 Advanced Server, 2000 Datacenter, XP Professional and XP Home were all commonly found in businesses the world over, and six or seven of those were currently being sold?

The homogenity of Windows has been a myth since the late 90s. Get over it. They even recycle their version numbers, as evidenced by the three different flavours of Windows 95, the two different flavours of 98, and the huge differences between XP with and without service pack 2 applied.

Re:Translation

[Austerity Empowers]

Except it's likely to be like XP, where the only useful version for anyone to have (outside of servers) will be the XP Pro corporate version. Of course, everyone will get starter or basic with their new PCs so they'll have to buy (or pirate) the good one.

Re:Server Platform

[Pieroxy]

These guys are just plain insane. Just one more example of how being a monopoly (or overly dominant) can just blind you.

Reminds me of Apple's position before Jobs got back in there. Their catalog was HUGE, with tens of different versions.

Jobs got there and cut it down in three: iMac, Laptop and Server. Down from dozens to three, very clearly potitionned. In no time, they got back in the market.

Of course, that was not the only factor. By far, but still...

Anyways, it won't recognize my RPC-1 drive... So I guess it's time to switch this HTPC to Linux after all. Cause the MS route is definitely blocked. There is no way in hell I'm going to buy an OS that doesn't let me play my DVDs the way I want it.

--
XviD review, from 500kbps to 4000kbps [palmdrive.net]

Re:Translation

[The_Sock]

The only useful version is XP Pro Corp. Edition? No, not really. XP Home was fine for home users (I know, crazy, huh?). Really, XP Home couldn't join a domain, couldn't use more then one processor (but it could use HyperThreading if available on the processor), didn't have IIS, didn't have Dynamic Disk support, and ASR (Which is about the only feature that would have been nice, but really, most people would just say "huh?"). XP Home worked well, and saved the customer a bit of cash over XP Pro. If it allowed them to offer lower prices to their customers, more power to them. I know a lot of people still running XP Home just fine.

You may not have been happy with it.. maybe you have multiple processors, maybe you have a domain at home, but really, there are tons of XP Home machines out there that really have no need for Pro.

And the Corp. edition just meant no activation, other then that, I'm relatively certain there were no differences between it and regular XP Professional.

connect to Xbox 360

[aflat362]

from the article: "PCs running the Premium edition will also be able to connect their machine to an Xbox 360 gaming console."

What for?