Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Windows Vista Prices and Release Date Leaked 378

Posted by Zonk
from the keep-that-stuff-quiet-if-you-don't-want-us-to-know dept.
Nieske writes "Prices and the release date for Windows Vista have leaked online. Ed Bott's Microsoft Report has information on pricing, and the release date is currently January 30th, 2007. Are they really going to make the deadline this time?" From the ZDNet article: "In Canada, at least, the rumors of a 'modest' price increase were true, based on this list. Will these same relative prices hold true in the U.S.? Who knows? But if they do, then it's mostly good news for Windows customers. There's no price increase for Home Basic. Home Premium, the Vista version that maps most closely to the OEM-only Windows XP Media Center Edition, will finally be available as a retail product for a slight bump over the Home Basic product, similar to the $39 premium typically charged by large OEMs for Media Center upgrades. And Vista Business buyers will get a break with a small discount relative to XP Professional."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Windows Vista Prices and Release Date Leaked

Comments Filter:
  • Not Quite (Score:5, Insightful)

    by eldavojohn (898314) * <eldavojohn@nOsPam.gmail.com> on Tuesday August 29, 2006 @09:21AM (#15999517) Journal
    So our "authority" is a man from Microsoft Monitor Weblog that is owned by Jupitermedia, not Microsoft. And he's speculating that these are the leaked prices. Has anyone stopped and thought that if Amazon is posting these, that they probably weren't leaked? Or maybe the fact that Amazon constantly offers products and pushes back the release date means that these aren't the real release dates?

    What I'm guessing is that these are estimates for the release date but it will most likely be pushed back and that these prices are correct and direct from Microsoft. Intentional, though, not 'leaked.'
    • by johnlittledotorg (858326) on Tuesday August 29, 2006 @09:25AM (#15999545) Homepage
      But "leaked" just makes it sound so so cool. I have to jump right in and post it on my blog too. Gotta show the peeps I have my ear to the streets!
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Regarding the leak date, I think January 30th is probably not a wise move (or maybe it is?) After the holiday spending spree, most people won't have money left and those who got new computers as gifts will need to upgrade their OS.
      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        I agree about the timing. Why spend even more money when there's no real compelling reason to upgrade in the first place? New PC owners may want to upgrade but they certainly won't need to.
      • by vmcto (833771) * on Tuesday August 29, 2006 @10:46AM (#16000199) Homepage Journal
        The 30th is a Tuesday.

        Is it going to come bundled with the first security patch or will I have to download it separately?
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by IIH (33751)

        Regarding the leak date, I think January 30th is probably not a wise move (or maybe it is?) After the holiday spending spree, most people won't have money left and those who got new computers as gifts will need to upgrade their OS.

        As you said, people who get computers for Christmas will be tempted/forced/suggested to upgrade their OS to the latest one, if not immediately, sooner than if they were sold vista on day one.

        As a sales ploy, it's cunning, how many other companys can make you an offer of sellin

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by frdmfghtr (603968)

          As you said, people who get computers for Christmas will be tempted/forced/suggested to upgrade their OS to the latest one, if not immediately, sooner than if they were sold vista on day one.

          When I got my iBook shortly after the release of OS X Tiger, it came with a free upgrade CD. Now, granted that the order here is different (hardware first, then release the new OS) I wonder if MS would do the same; heavy discount/free upgrade to Vista if you bought yuor PC after such-and-such a date.

          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            Way back when I bought a computer that came with window 3.11, I received a coupon for a free upgrade to win95 when it came out. They could end up doing the same thing.
      • Re:Not Quite (Score:4, Informative)

        by Martin Blank (154261) on Tuesday August 29, 2006 @12:30PM (#16000971) Journal
        Microsoft has been working up with OEMs to allow free upgrades to Vista for computers bought from October on through the actual release date. Customers wishing to upgrade will probably be provided free media to perform the upgrade, as I recall that's how it was handled when XP was nearing its release date.
    • by Khuffie (818093)
      http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=124 [zdnet.com] It's the second link in the summary. Yesterday MS's Canadian website listed the prices, and then immediately pull them.
  • by Dance_Dance_Karnov (793804) on Tuesday August 29, 2006 @09:22AM (#15999528) Homepage
    FULL versions (all prices Canadian)

            Windows Vista Ultimate $499

            Windows Vista Business $379

            Windows Vista Home Premium $299

            Windows Vista Home Basic $259

            UPGRADE versions (all prices Canadian)

            Windows Vista Ultimate Upgrade $299

            Windows Vista Business Upgrade $249

            Windows Vista Home Premium Upgrade $199

            Windows Vista Home Basic Upgrade $129

    I didn't do the conversion to real money.
    • by GoatMonkey2112 (875417) on Tuesday August 29, 2006 @09:24AM (#15999539)
      I want to see the OEM version prices. Nobody here normally pays full retail price for Windows.
      • by TheGreek (2403) on Tuesday August 29, 2006 @09:26AM (#15999564)
        I want to see the OEM version prices. Nobody here normally pays full retail price for Windows.
        Is "OEM" some new BitTorrent client?
        • Hehe, funny. But you know what I mean. Out of the people who read Slashdot and will actually buy it, one way or the other they're not paying retail price.
      • by Dance_Dance_Karnov (793804) on Tuesday August 29, 2006 @09:26AM (#15999565) Homepage
        remove "full retail price" from your comment, and you would be closer to the mark.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Guppy06 (410832)
        Call me "nobody," then. I refuse to pay for an OS I can't move from one machine to another.
        • by Tim C (15259)
          "Can't" or "shouldn't"? I bought an OEM copy of XP Pro a couple of years ago, and it installed and runs just fine after a complete upgrade to the machine - the only things that are original are the monitor and the case.
          • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

            by yeremein (678037)

            "Can't" or "shouldn't"? I bought an OEM copy of XP Pro a couple of years ago, and it installed and runs just fine after a complete upgrade to the machine - the only things that are original are the monitor and the case.

            Me too--after a power surge killed the mobo and hard drive, I built what amounted to a completely new PC. I installed the OEM copy of XP I originally purchased on the new machine and noticed in the EULA that it only applied to the original "computer".

            So I actually e-mailed Microsoft and ak

            • by Jarnis (266190) on Tuesday August 29, 2006 @10:55AM (#16000289)
              I work at a VAR and went thru a very long and convoluted email exchange with Microsoft about this.

              The end result is: OEM is tied to a computer. However, you can change anything except the motherboard, and it's still the same computer. You can also exchange the board if it's due to a 'defect'.

              And 'defects'... well, accidents happen. It's a dangerous world.

              Only drawback is that once you do change motherboard, you are required to activate the copy over the phone, and if it was a big-name OEM (those that don't normally ask for product key when you use the recovery disc), you may have to replace the key that's on the OEM sticker with a replacement issued by MS phone support. But in the end, the license is still valid - as long as the board swap was due to 'defect' (or, essentially, if you lie it was due to a defect). So in reality OEM is transferrable, if you know what you are doing.
              • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

                by Aranel Alasse (880862)
                I recently came across this exact issue. Some capacitors on the mobo leaked (definitely what I'd call a defect!), and I had to replace it. The thing that annoys me is that no one tells you ahead of time that the license for the OS is tied to the mobo, when you have a OEM version of the OS. (Sure, maybe something was said in the original agreement (and I'm the paranoid type who actually reads those things), but did I understand that the OS was tied to the motherboard it at the time? Obviously not. They
      • by GundamFan (848341)
        Indeed... I don't think I have ever A) "stolen" Windows or B) paid retail for it.

        It pays to have a good relationship with the big computer store in your neghborhood, and the address for Newegg.com handy.
        • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

          by thelenm (213782)
          It pays to have a good relationship with the big computer store in your neghborhood, and the address for Newegg.com handy.

          Well, don't just tease us... what's the address for Newegg.com?
      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        by spyrochaete (707033)
        I was right about to post about OEM pricing.

        In order to buy a cheaper OEM copy of Windows you need to qualify as an equipment manufacturer. The easiest way to do so is to purchase the prerequisite hardware from a vendor to prove that you are a PC builder. Some vendors require you to purchase as much as a motherboard and CPU, while others simply require a $10 mouse. Check into some such online retailers (sorry I have no examples) to land yourself an OEM copy of Vista.
    • by legoburner (702695) on Tuesday August 29, 2006 @09:28AM (#15999579) Homepage Journal
      In real money:

      Windows Vista Ultimate 22.9 g / gold
      Windows Vista Business 18 g / gold
      Windows Vista Home Premium 14.2 g / gold
      Windows Vista Home Basic 12.3 g / gold
      Windows Vista Ultimate Upgrade 14.2 g/ gold
      Windows Vista Business Upgrade 12.3 g / gold
      Windows Vista Home Premium Upgrade 9.4 g / gold
      Windows Vista Home Basic Upgrade 6.1 g / gold

      That's a lot of gold arrrrrr.
      • by spidereyes (599443) on Tuesday August 29, 2006 @10:11AM (#15999907)
        More like:

        Windows Vista Ultimate 1 leg 1 arm
        Windows Vista Business 1 leg 1 ear
        Windows Vista Home Premium 1 arm 3 toes
        Windows Vista Home Basic 1 eye 1 ear (you won't be getting Aero anyway)
        Windows Vista Ultimate Upgrade 1 arm 4 toes
        Windows Vista Business Upgrade 1 arm
        Windows Vista Home Premium Upgrade 1 ear 3 toes 2 fingers
        Windows Vista Home Basic Upgrade 1 eye

        All prices include your soul.
      • by jkabbe (631234) on Tuesday August 29, 2006 @10:14AM (#15999943)
        Wouldn't it be more useful to list the prices in a gold currency that most people here probably have, like WoW gold? Currently the exchange rate seems to be 0.173 USD per gold, which makes Windows Vista Ultimate come out to about 2600 gold (US servers).
    • Prices in US dollars (Score:2, Informative)

      by LotsOfPhil (982823)
      FULL versions
      Windows Vista Ultimate ~$450
      Windows XP Professional w/SP2 ~$387
      Windows Vista Business ~$342
      Windows Vista Home Premium ~$270
      Windows Vista Home Basic ~$234
      Windows XP Home w/SP2 ~$234


      UPGRADE versions
      Windows Vista Ultimate Upgrade ~$270
      Windows XP Professional w/SP2 Upgrade ~$234
      Windows Vista Business Upgrade ~$225
      Windows Vista Home Premium Upgrade ~$180
      Windows Vista Home Basic Upgrade ~$117
      Windows XP Home w/SP2 Upgrade ~$117
      • by Phisbut (761268)
        Prices in US dollars

        That's more like "Canadian prices converted to US according to current rate" rather than expected price. I think companies rarely base their price in different countries on the change rate. Just look at how they constantly screw the Brits...

    • by xtracto (837672) on Tuesday August 29, 2006 @09:31AM (#15999596) Journal
      Just go to Amazon [amazon.com] and see the prices in USD.

      Wow $399.00 for the Operating System... and, how much is the hardware?, and what can this Operating System can do?
      I guess we (in Mexico) will continue to get it the Aye! way, it would be stupid to think that people will pay $400 for Windows when they payed $300 for the computer.

      Ha!
    • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 29, 2006 @09:59AM (#15999808)
      Why are there so few of them? I want a copy that customized for me.

      I can't wait to watch tech support with all of these versions floating around.

      User: "I have Windows Vista, and I want to do x, can I? How do I?"

      Tech: "Uhhhh...god. Ummmm, what version of Vista do you have?"

      User: "Version, what version? It's Vista."

      Tech: "Is it Home Basic, Home Premium, Homosexual, Gamer, Business, Business Gamer, I Think I'm Running A Business But Might Be Delusional, OpenVista, NetVista, Free...oh wait, Ultimate?"

      User: "It's Home...I think."

      Tech: "Which Home?"

      User: "I just want to do some network stuff. sob-sob-sob"

      Tech: "Is it 9:00am yet? I need a drink."
    • They are always forking versions. I mean 8 versions? And this does not include 'compact' or 'mobile' editions, or 'data center' versions.
  • SP1 Release date (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Wiseazz (267052) on Tuesday August 29, 2006 @09:23AM (#15999533)
    That's the important one!
  • by Anonymous Coward
    There is also the loss of your freedom. To paraphrase the "Linux is only free.." corollary:

    Windows is only reasonably priced because you can't put a price on freedom.


    Enjoy your DRM.

  • I would have expected it to be released for Christmas. To boost computer sales.

    ----
    http://world4.monstersgame.co.uk/?ac=vid&vid=47010 693 [monstersgame.co.uk]
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by cp.tar (871488)
      Well, they're announcing January 30th now. So I guess they still have time till next Christmas.
    • To boost computer sales.

      Microsoft would rather prefer to boost Windows sales. As in: one XP license that is shipped with that brand-new Christmas computer, and a month later a Vista license when the sheep decides to upgrade its OS.

      • Actually, new Vista-capable computers will come with a free upgrade to Vista coupon if I recall correctly.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 29, 2006 @09:29AM (#15999583)
    Does anybody outside of Microsoft actually care about Vista? WinXP is fairly stable, it runs all the software (or nearly all of it) developed for every version of Windows since Win95. Also, WinXP does not have perverted-control-freak class DRM embedded into it, like Vista does/will. Personally I view Vista as a significant downgrade from WinXP - it will negatively affect the utility offered by a Windows computer.
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by eln (21727) *
      No, clearly nobody cares about Vista. This is obvious when you look at the total lack of coverage it receives on sites such as Slashdot.
    • by rtaylor (70602)
      Does anybody outside of Microsoft actually care about Vista? WinXP is fairly stable

      You're today's latest and greatest, so what makes you think that you won't run Vista when the time comes?

      Win2k was also fairly stable and ran everything at the time, yet you went to XP. You will care about Vista for the same reasons that you run XP today.
      • by Knara (9377)
        While that's true, my question is, is the number of people who care about the release date of Windows Vista anywhere near the number of people who cared about the release date of W2k or XP? Is that number reasonably similar to the percentage of total users who cared for those releases?

        [oblig eve post]Eve-online just this _week_ made Win2k the minimum OS version (which blew me away that they were still supporting Win98 clients until this week). How long will XP remain a eminently useful OS to the majorit

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by kestasjk (933987)
      This will probably end up only for the people who read at -1, but here's a list of some of Vista's main improvements:

      Lots of security features (drive encryption, much improved firewall, address space randomization, users aren't admin, lots of IE security improvements), loads of revamped new stacks (audio, print, network, video), IPv6 by default, new memory manager, .NET better integrated in, nicer interface all around (yes, lots of stuff from OS X, but that's a good thing), lots of bundled applications a
  • Market segmentation (Score:5, Interesting)

    by pubjames (468013) on Tuesday August 29, 2006 @09:32AM (#15999606)
    The windows pricing is a classic example of what marketeers call "market segmentation". When deciding how to price a product, you ask "How much will people pay?", and the answer is different people will pay different prices - some people actually want to pay more for essentially the same product.

    It is an increasingly unpopular pricing method because people resent it. Note, for instance, the rapid growth of budget airlines (in Europe at least) - a lot of their popularity can be put down to the fact the traditional pricing model for flights was highly segmented - customers have come to resent paying different prices for essentially the same thing and so the budget airlines, with their simpler pricing model, have grown in popularity.

    It is interesting that Apple do not do this, they don't even have separate "upgrade" prices. If you want the latest version of their OS or basic software (iWorks or iLife), then you pay one price. As a customer I like that.
     
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by wild_quinine (998562)
      No, the reason budget airlines have grown in popularity is that they are undercutting ALL of the segmented prices of the major airlines. Trust me, if British Airways had a 'Cargo Class' flight that was cheaper than all the 'budget' airlines, I'd be packing myself into a suitcase and going on a cheap holiday. The reason that Apple don't have seperate upgrade prices, is because their market is loyal enough that they can be meticulously gouged, and will still come back for more. Enjoy your overpriced branding
      • No, the reason budget airlines have grown in popularity is that they are undercutting ALL of the segmented prices of the major airlines.

        That is incorrect, at least in North America (I know firsthand about Canada and I'm told the US it was the same). I remember when WestJet began operations (it was the first truly viable independent budget airline in Canada). It was less than a week before the competition had seat sales that often matched or even slightly undercut WestJet's offerings. If price alone was a
    • by hyfe (641811)
      It is an increasingly unpopular pricing method because people resent it. Note, for instance, the rapid growth of budget airlines (in Europe at least)
      Or rather, they grew because they were cheap. You get what you pay for though.
    • by rbarreira (836272)
      It is interesting that Apple do not do this, they don't even have separate "upgrade" prices. If you want the latest version of their OS or basic software (iWorks or iLife), then you pay one price. As a customer I like that.

      And do you like that you have to pay for every small upgrade on the OS, which is not the case with Windows?
      • by pubjames (468013)
        And do you like that you have to pay for every small upgrade on the OS, which is not the case with Windows?

        I would rather pay for good, gradual additions of things that I actually want than get gradual additions of stuff I don't want and then have to pay a lot for essentially a completely new operating system which I need to buy a new computer for. So yes, I prefer the Apple way.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Bastian (66383)
      It is interesting that Apple do not do this, they don't even have separate "upgrade" prices.


      Of course, at least on the OS it doesn't make sense for Apple to offer a separate upgrade price. All Macs come with OS X, so all Mac users are upgrade users.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Zevon 2000 (593515)
      Apple does do it. What do you think that 10% student discount is?

      Also, I second the others who question your assertion that price discrimination is becoming less popular. It's never been popular when done poorly, and isn't usually noticed when done well. To wit: Old Navy, The Gap, and Banana Republic are all owned by Gap Stores (GPS). They get their clothes from the same factories. But they are marketed differently in different stores and with different tags, and people will pay a lot more for the same
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by dfghjk (711126)
      "It is interesting that Apple do not do this, they don't even have separate "upgrade" prices. If you want the latest version of their OS or basic software (iWorks or iLife), then you pay one price. As a customer I like that."

      Apple does have two versions of OS X and they sell iLife versions seperately as well. Considering their market share, that's probably all they can justify. I see no point in MS having so many versions of Windows but it would be amazingly absurd if Apple did that.

      Since Apple brags abou
  • 29th will be (Score:2, Interesting)

    by jlebrech (810586)
    When all the competitors (sun, ibm, mozilla, etc..) join to make a giant Linux advertising campain, on all tv channels.
  • At those prices, we'll definitely not bother to upgrade our existing systems from WinXP Pro to WinVista Business. If those upgrade prices were about 50% of what is listed, it would be worthwhile. There's just no worthwhile gain in moving from WinXP to WinV.

    (And to think I already thought that WinXP Pro prices were too expensive.)

    • If you company has at least 5 people you can check out some licensing options [microsoft.com] besides paying retail. If your smaller than that, your best bet is to try to chat up some local PC builder who gets OEM pricing. Anyway, I haven't seen any Vita pricing besides whats in TFA yet, but through these other non-retail channels your 50% request should certainly be at least in the ball-park.
  • by clickclickdrone (964164) on Tuesday August 29, 2006 @09:41AM (#15999675)
    They want me to pay $450 for something that will almost certainly force me to upgrade some bits of hardware to give it a chance of running, will potentially fail to run some of my software and in return does what exactly? Look pretty whilst constantly asking me if I'm sure?
    Call me negative but I'm not exactly in hurry to join that particular queue.
    • not high that many people will buy a single boxed copy with no hardware, at least at first. The vast majority of sales are "upgrade" licenses or one where they sell the OS plus a keyboard or a case or something.

      They quite intentionally want you to buy a new PC with the OS preinstalled. It's where the volume is and it's where the perception "buying a computer" means buying hardware with a windows OS installed.

      As another post mentioned, the OEM prices are where the action is. It will be very interesting to
  • by mytrip (940886) on Tuesday August 29, 2006 @09:46AM (#15999708) Homepage Journal
    Amazon.com is taking orders for Windows Vista.

    http://news.com.com/2300-1016_3-6110494-1.html?par t=rss&tag=6110494&subj=news [com.com]
    • by Tim C (15259)
      Amazon was taking orders for Doom 3, Quake 4 and Half Life 2 about a year before they were released...
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 29, 2006 @09:48AM (#15999721)
    to figure out Vista's release date.

    i was just going to watch the Weather Channel and check for frost warnings for Hell and its surrounding counties...
  • by VincenzoRomano (881055) on Tuesday August 29, 2006 @09:51AM (#15999736) Homepage Journal
    Are they really going to make the deadline this time?
    I would rather ask:
    Are they really going to make a release that will resist to cracking more than 15 minutes?
    You all know both answers, however.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by symbolic (11752)
      Are they really going to make a release that will resist to cracking more than 15 minutes?
      You all know both answers, however.


      I hear they're shooting for 20 minutes this time. One step at a time.
  • by Anonymous Coward
    What is the real worth of Windows? Is an OPerating system really worth $129 for a BASIC stripped down version?
    Essentially a single-user operating system:

    For:

    -NO BACKUP Utility (Even *NIX has tar/gzip) and crond
    -An integrated Web browser, inseperable (or with great effort) from the core OS
    -NO Support for Firewall (I don't trust Microsoft's FireWall)
    -NO NATIVE DVD Player (due to "licence" cost)
    -NO Ability to set permissions on files for multiple users
    -PISS-POOR Command Line Interface (try renaming 10 files, u
  • by jonesy16 (595988)
    I'm confused why Microsoft would make a move like this. Their pricing scheme is not competitive with any other OS's on the market that I can think of. Retail boxes of most Linux distributions are between $50 and $100 USD. A new copy of OSX costs $129 (and people still complain about that!). But at least with OSX you can buy a 5-pack "family" license for $199. And yet, Microsoft comes out and expects people to pay $199 minimum to run Windows on their non-Dell/HP/SONY prebundled computer. I mean, if Mic
  • by maynard (3337) <`j.maynard.gelinas' `at' `gmail.com'> on Tuesday August 29, 2006 @10:09AM (#15999892) Journal
    * Windows Vista Home Basic, $199/$99.95
    * Windows Vista Home Premium, $239/$159
    * Windows Vista Business, $299/$199
    * Windows Vista Ultimate, $399/$259

    * MacOS X Tiger (single user) $129
    * MacOS X Tiger (family license) $199
    * MacOS X Server $999

    I suspect that Windows Vista Ultimate is not the server edition, which will almost certainly be more expensive than $399. So... assuming comparable hardware prices for Apple x86 PCs vs. the generic market, Microsoft has now priced themselves above the competition. I seem to remember Microsoft taking the market by _undercutting_ their competitors some decades ago. It would appear they have forgotten what competition does to the market leader. Perhaps it's time they relearn that lesson?
    • by RzUpAnmsCwrds (262647) on Tuesday August 29, 2006 @01:34PM (#16001346)
      Here's a point: ALL Mac OS X sales are upgrades because Mac OS X only runs on Macs which were already preloaded with OS X in the first place.

      Here's another point: Most people get their copy of Windows preloaded on a system. OEMs don't pay anywhere near retail for Windows XP. Windows XP Home, for example, is around $85-$90 for OEM System Builders and about 1/2 that for the big tier-1 OEMs.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 29, 2006 @10:28AM (#16000057)
    Vista Ultimate: $399

    Mac OS X: $599. To be fair, there is a Mac Mini bundled with.
  • by blanks (108019) on Tuesday August 29, 2006 @10:43AM (#16000176) Homepage Journal

    The prices he lists are for canada only. The information for America is just him guessing what the prices will be.

    "Based on current U.S. prices (which I wrote about last week), I would expect Windows Vista to sell in the U.S. for the following prices (full/upgrade):"

    "Of course, these are guesses only. Some discounts will probably be available in the retail channel"

    This isn't leaked information, it's guesses made by the guy.

  • by Captain Sarcastic (109765) * on Tuesday August 29, 2006 @11:31AM (#16000541)
    "Hey, Rocky! Watch me pull a rabbit out of my hat!

    "But that trick never works!"

    "This time for sure! Presto!"

"Don't talk to me about disclaimers! I invented disclaimers!" -- The Censored Hacker

Working...