Agreed. Although I think it's sad that we consider $100 to be a "reasonable" price point to pay every year or two for an OS upgrade. In contrast to Microsoft's normal pricing, that's true. But compared to Linux (whatever it's faults) it's still darn unreasonable.
---- Brian On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 2:27 PM, Ben Ruset <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The more I think about it, the more it seems like Vista is going to be the > newest Windows Me. They'll probably make Win7 more compelling to upgrade to. > > What they should really do is what Apple does. Make smaller, more frequent > OS updates with one or two "major features" that people would want. Then > price it at a reasonable $100 price point. > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> To be honest, what is in Vista that a company like Intel would actually >> NEED on desktop PCs? >> >> XP brought just about everything needed for a non-gaming desktop. What's >> the point in the upgrade costs (both software and hardware) if you do >> not see any benefit to your business? >> >> DX10, Aero and better 64bit support are the main benefits of Vista, if >> you aren't going to use them, its a costly upgrade for nothing but >> "keeping up with the Jones'" >> >> Lets just hope they allow their driver creators/testers to keep copies >> of Vista handy though ;) >> >
