Windows Vista pricing leaks out

Through a blunder on Microsoft’s Canadian site, Redmond has inadvertently revealed pricing for its upcoming Windows Vista operating system. The leaked prices were in Canadian dollars, but Ed Bott from ZDNet has converted the values and adjusted them based on current differences in Windows XP pricing between the U.S. and Canada. Ed’s estimated prices for full and upgrade versions are as follows:

  • Windows Vista Ultimate $349 [full]/$199 [upgrade]
  • Windows Vista Business $269/179
  • Windows Vista Home Premium $239/$139
  • Windows Vista Home Basic $199/$99

Those converted prices are only guesses, Bott says. However, the leaked Canadian price list definitely says Vista Home Basic will cost the same as Windows XP Home does right now, and the current Windows XP Professional is about half-way between the upcoming Vista Business and Vista Ultimate editions. Full Canadian prices, meanwhile, range from $129 CAD for the Vista Home Basic Upgrade version to $499 CAD for the full retail Vista Ultimate.

Comments closed
    • derFunkenstein
    • 13 years ago

    Who pays retail? I’m going to wait for Newegg to get OEM versions before I buy. 🙂

    • link626
    • 13 years ago

    did M$ just jack up the prices on the operating system again?

    damn price costs more than an emachine.

    • provoko
    • 13 years ago

    What the hell does Ultimate have that Premium doesn’t have thats worth 100 dollars more?

      • Krogoth
      • 13 years ago

      probably some more bulid-in apps and the easy to access option to kill most of the eye candy.

        • derFunkenstein
        • 13 years ago

        Eye candy is easy to kill in Pre-RC1. Just pick the Windows CLassic theme…just like in XP.

    • Retiky
    • 13 years ago

    I believe I heard something about direct x 10 only being available on vista. If thats the truth, I’ve got enough reason to upgrade. I really hope we see some performance improvments before the final release. I don’t mean anything mindblowing, but something that makes it not suck.

    Don’t take this in the wrong sence. I know nobody here wants to upgrade their os so their comp can run “vista smooth.” But we have to move on. The next generation will engulf the last; and if we need 8gig of ram to run smoothly, someday we’ll have it.

      • Inkedsphynx
      • 13 years ago

      The biggest benefit I see to Vista is the fact that it seperates video drivers from the kernal or some such, which means if a game crashes out on you, your desktop doesn’t crash out as well. I hate it when a game goes fubar for whatever reason, and subsequentially every program I have running, including winblows, immediately throws up it’s hands in exasperation and shuts down.

    • lemonhead
    • 13 years ago

    They better bring more to the table besides a flasy interface or lower the prices if they want my money. My brother-in-law works at MS and after they dumped the database file system there wasnt much to it as far as ‘innovation’.

    • wierdo
    • 13 years ago

    Too expensive for a DRM ball and chain OS imho. Actually they should pay the consumer to put the ball and chain on.

    • Fighterpilot
    • 13 years ago

    Shame we cant get cars for the same prices as they were in 2001…
    So you buy a new video card in the $250-400 range that is out of date in what..18 months?….yet an O/S that is the core of the system and will be good for 4-5 years is WAY overpriced?

      • Sniper
      • 13 years ago

      Yeah, you rabid microsoft fanboy.

      Video cards provide a lot of value for their time. You can not compare an OS to a piece of high end gaming hardware.

      Not to mention, you can buy a good and pretty damn fast AMD processor, the brains of a system, for $90.

      $239 for Vista Home Premium, the cheapest non-crippled version of the OS, is asking for too much.

        • WaltC
        • 13 years ago

        /[<$239 for Vista Home Premium, the cheapest non-crippled version of the OS, is asking for too much.<]/ First of all, these are "leaked" price quotes as opposed to official price quotes, and so nobody knows what the actual prices are going to be because Microsoft hasn't announced them yet. That's probably because Vista isn't being sold yet. Second, talking about cpus and 3d-cards being "different" and incomparable to an OS is certainly true as far as it goes, but the fact I think the original poster was trying to make is simply that without an OS then it doesn't matter what kind of hardware you own because it just won't work--although, you could of course use your hardware components as doorstops or paperweights, alternatively (but they sure would be outrageously expensive paperweights)...;) Whatever OS you may choose to use, it's the "glue" that allows all of the hardware you buy to function as a discrete whole. The OS is the glue that makes a "platform" a platform, and provides software developers with a target for the software they choose to develop. Thus, I have to agree with the original poster that the OS one chooses is probably more critical than any other particular, discrete hardware component on its own might ever be. While our choices of 3d-cards and cpus abound, our choices of the OSes which allow them to have some value for us, in that they allow us to meaningfully /[

          • Sniper
          • 13 years ago

          Yeah, same to you fruitcake.

        • Vrock
        • 13 years ago

        q[

      • Gandhi
      • 13 years ago

      At least the vid cards improve and provide better performance with each gen.

      I still think Win2k was the last best OS out of MS.

        • blastdoor
        • 13 years ago

        I concur. I installed w2k on my first PC build in 1999 (after switching from the Mac) and it’s still my OS today. I had briefly tried XP but found it to be less stable than w2k and so switched back. The only reason I’m going to switch to Vista is that MS had stopped supporting W2k (and I wouldn’t mind a UI change — the same old thing does get boring after a while).

      • Severus
      • 13 years ago

      Seconded… Given that the OS is an absolutely essential component and given that it will most likely outlast every other component in your system even if you’re only on a 4 year upgrade cycle its churlish to complain about its cost.

      Its worth remembering that we’re actually talking about as little as $100 for the OS, which even in a budget build is unlikely to attribute to much more than 10% of the system cost. Those buying from OEMs will see the Microsoft Tax as an even smaller component of the total purchase price.

      A more realistic way to look at it is to compare it to the price of other retail software products – it equates to a few full price PC games, but will likely be in use long after those games have lost any replay value. Its cheaper than Microsoft Word or Photoshop Elements and will receive far more use.

      Highschool and college students and the underemployed have a legitimate concern that Ultimate edition is priced above their means, but the various Basic editions are there to cater to just that market segment.

      Not that any of this will make much difference, I’m pretty sure they could release Vista at $600 and still not see market share take more than a couple of percentage drop. Such is the nature of a monopoly.

    • blastdoor
    • 13 years ago

    My biggest grip with MS pricing is that there’s no “family pack” option like what Apple gives for OSX. $200 to cover 5 computers is a pretty sweet deal.

        • blastdoor
        • 13 years ago

        I suppose perhaps you are suggesting that OEM pricing is somehow equivalent to Apple’s Family Pack. I don’t think that is the case at all. One can go to Apple’s website and buy the family pack for $200 without jumping through any hoops — it’s a retail product, not an obscure loophole with a bunch of fine print “gotchas”.

        I see no transparent way to get Windows at $40 per install. For a family, Apple has a clearly superior pricing structure.

          • StashTheVampede
          • 13 years ago

          Apple wins this situation, hands down — $199 is less than the cost of two full licenses of OSX.

            • Wajo
            • 13 years ago

            But with apple you have to buy your “really really cheap” family packs once a year.

            • indeego
            • 13 years ago

            $200×5 releases. Go Swiss Family RDFg{

            • Bauxite
            • 13 years ago

            Heh…

            For $200-300 a year to M$ [insert penny arcade comic here]:

            I get a ton of stuff, I can’t even remember it all.
            Its at least these CDs and license keys I put in the binder that came with it:

            10 * XP Pro SP2
            10 * XP 64bit
            10 * Office 2003 Prof + lots of addons (visio, project, onenote, infopath, etc…what is all this crap)
            Server 2003 R2 Std
            Server 2003 Web Edition
            SBS 2003
            Exchange Server
            etc (I’ll never use all this crap)

            I can request 1 more copy of OEM + preinstall kits for most of those too.

            When vista releases, it comes within the next quarterly update. I’m not sure how they will do it exactly, but 10 keys for ultimate and 10 keys for a lesser kind wouldn’t be unusual at all.

            Its not a family pack, you have to be a corporation…though that can be useful in other areas as well. (as long as you do your taxes right)

            Nothing is resellable and theres some restrictions, but its not OEM tied to a particular piece of hardware.

            • blastdoor
            • 13 years ago

            You don’t “have” to do anything. I’m sure there are plenty of people who have skipped one big cat or another, just as I skipped Win XP and still run W2k. And of course the great thing about W2k is that I *can* install it on all the computers in my house. And I bought it at a student discount. So for me, W2k is the best price/performance software I’ve ever owned.

            But with respect to their current pricing strategies, I think Apple clearly has the better deal (and the interval between OS X releases appears to be expanding).

            • Hattig
            • 13 years ago

            “have to”?

            Surely you mean “have the option to upgrade”, something that Microsoft haven’t even offered. You can safely skip a release and not miss much, and many people do.

            Also the gap between consumer revisions is quite long for Microsoft. Remember 95, 98, 98SE, ME then XP. 5 releases in 7 years. No different from Apple now.

            Buying XP early was an unexpectedly good deal for the people that did. You cannot assume that Microsoft will wait until 2012 to release their next paid-for OS though, making Vista as good value.

            • derFunkenstein
            • 13 years ago

            2005->2007 is 1 year?

          • Retiky
          • 13 years ago

          If apples operating system costs so little, why are their machines so expensive? It, was, my beliefe that the operating system was the reason for the “value” in these overpriced packages.

            • blastdoor
            • 13 years ago

            I don’t think that Apple is consistently more expensive than any first tier PC vendor, with the notable exception of buying extra RAM from them. But it’s easy enough to get RAM elsewhere and install it yourself (granted, it’s not ideal, and Apple really should fix that, but the workaround is fairly straight forward).

            • derFunkenstein
            • 13 years ago

            The FB-DIMM cost at Apple is less than at Dell’s site, just saying…;)

    • steelcity_ballin
    • 13 years ago

    Are they allowing Pirates to “get genuine” by upgrading from a priated XP to a retail vista by purchasing only the vista upgrade?

      • Krogoth
      • 13 years ago

      It seems so

      • StashTheVampede
      • 13 years ago

      Vista shouldn’t lock out a user b/c their Windows isn’t genuine. MS *wants* Vista on as many machines as possible — to further enforce WGA checking.

      • derFunkenstein
      • 13 years ago

      considering you only have to feed it the CD during the install process (assuming it works like XP) to do a clean install, I’d say definitely, if you like backing up. Not sure about pirated -> legit upgrades tho.

    • indeego
    • 13 years ago

    I’ve always wondered this, but never tried it.

    Get 10 machines
    install upgrade version of vista on 1st machine
    it prompts for earlier XP version, you provide it.
    Product activation approves the install.
    You wipe the computer of the OS
    repeat on computer #2
    eventually product activation starts to see different hardware and forces you to call MS.
    Eventually MS gets pissed, but everything you have done until now is legit and legal.
    This costs MS money to hire people to man the phones/etcg{<...<}g

    • nerdrage
    • 13 years ago

    I doubt anyone at TR buys the retail version of any MS O/S. The OEM version can be picked up relatively cheap if you buy a piece of hardware with it. Any word on what the OEM pricing will be? (that’s the one that most of us would actually care about IMO)

      • arb_npx
      • 13 years ago

      yes, but through the OEM license, that Windows seat is bound to that piece of hardware. I think there’s a provision in the license for replacing the bound hardware, but it’s been a while since I’ve read through the license text thoroughly.

        • emkubed
        • 13 years ago

        Your OEM license doesn’t become invalid if the HDD you purchased with it crashes. It is a full-on Windows version, just cheaper w/o the cardboard box and shrinkwrap.

        • thecoldanddarkone
        • 13 years ago

        you can change pretty much anything except motherboard. (even then you might be able to get away with that, key word might).

          • Ethyriel
          • 13 years ago

          You just call the authentication number and tell them your customer’s motherboard died and you needed to replace it. If they actually complain, just remind them that SLED is only $125 for three years and does more than enough for most of your customers.

            • Forge
            • 13 years ago

            SLED? SLES?

    • MixedPower
    • 13 years ago

    #2, Compared to…?

    Linux maybe?

    • Krogoth
    • 13 years ago

    MS better cut those “prices” by 50-60% if they ever hope of obtaining legit retail sales. If the current betas are any indictation of the final verison.

      • StashTheVampede
      • 13 years ago

      Vista’s going to have WGA throughout. You’re easily going to get the ISO and keys to install, but activation is here and it’s not getting removed automatically.

      It’ll be pirated, but it’s going to be far more annoying to pass around a cd/key for Vista than XP or 2k.

      • packfan_dave
      • 13 years ago

      They’re pretty much charging the same price they did for XP. No real surprises here.

        • thecoldanddarkone
        • 13 years ago

        actually there charging the same price as they are now, look at retail versions and upgrade versions on newegg.

        • Krogoth
        • 13 years ago

        The difference is that Vista offers little more then pretty eye candy and different interface layout. The XP price tag was more jusifiable because the previous mainstream OS was 9x series and XP was a massive improvement in every way.

        I am annoyed that prehaps the largest “useful” improvement with Vista is that you can now install 3rd party controllers without a floppy. IMO, MS could have easily done it with W2K.

    • albundy
    • 13 years ago

    you could always go for 4 times less and use linux.

      • StashTheVampede
      • 13 years ago

      You could also get something a little more responsive like FreeBSD.

        • SGT Lindy
        • 13 years ago

        Then you can come to my next LAN party and talk to the MAC guy in the corner while we play games:)

          • Forge
          • 13 years ago

          Last LAN I went to, I ran Linux most of the night, and very few people even realized. UT2K4 ran native 64bit, the rest went through Cedega, but everything ran, and I had fewer issues than most folks there.

            • wierdo
            • 13 years ago

            UT? I’m not familiar with Linux much, wanted to try it but was too lazy to switch, might be interested soon if Vista picks up steam and W2k doesn’t cut it anymore.

            So how did you run the game, do they simply have a linux version out or is there some sort of emulation + hardware acceleration development in the linux world that I don’t know of? If it’s a Linux version then that’s a shame, main obstacle to moving is incompatability with windows based software for me.

            • Vhalidictes
            • 13 years ago

            I seem to recall that Linux support is a big deal among “Proof-of-concept/Engine-demo” games.

            Both UT2004 and Doom3 supported installation on Linux, although Doom3’s install process was somewhat involved, IIRC.

            The 64-bit version UT2004 was first available on Linux, I believe.

            Actually, although I know next to nothing about Linux game support, I’m going to websearch “Cedega” to find out what that is. I assume that he edited his post to add that bit, since you don’t mention it.

            Maybe I’ll be able to move off of WinXP sometime soon, I doubt it though, if WINE is anything to go by.

            EDIT: The irony! “Cedega” is the new name for WineX! Hopefully it’s different now, the name change apparently happened in late 2004, after I had given up on Windows game support in Linux. Time to get a copy of SUSE and try again, I guess.

          • Grigory
          • 13 years ago

          Haha, zing! 😀

          • StashTheVampede
          • 13 years ago

          Mac’s are much more gamer friendly. Heck, Mac’s have MORE games available for them now that they run Linux, OSX and Windows. Your PC has two bases covered, a new Mac has all three.

            • Retiky
            • 13 years ago

            Is this sarcasm?

            Mac for games?

            Don’t have time to begin…will start later hopefully.

            • willyolio
            • 13 years ago

            10x something that’s almost zero is still almost zero.

            • StashTheVampede
            • 13 years ago

            Where have you been? Mac’s can run Windows now — that means any game that runs on Windows will run on a Mac. Wait until the next LAN party comes down, someone with a MacBook Pro will be able to play any and all games you have installed.

            • Bauxite
            • 13 years ago

            At how many fps?

            oops!

            Apple pissed on game developers a decade ago or so, it ranks up high there on the list of ‘we want to be niche market/cult forever’ failures.

            If anyone says games don’t matter, I would like to introduce you to the year 2006 and GPUs with 3 digit * million transistor counts…they don’t pull those designs out of thin air.

            PS, a warning for apple fanboy posters: I grew up using macs for a good 15 years starting with a Plus, I’m a former mac cult member, so I’ll eat you for lunch.

    • StashTheVampede
    • 13 years ago

    Could have sworn these were posted earlier this year — probably NOT official pricing at the time.

    • Gandhi
    • 13 years ago

    Four versions of Vista?! Thats a bit much no?

      • titan
      • 13 years ago

      Where have you been? At one point there were seven or eight. I can’t remember how many. Those may have been for third world countries though.

        • Gandhi
        • 13 years ago

        Not following Vista, since I dont ever plan on upgrading to it.

      • TheMikeness
      • 13 years ago

      “Four versions of Vista?! Thats a bit much no?”

      Actually…

      Ultimate
      Business
      Home Premium
      Home Basic
      Starter
      Enterprise

      theres actually at least 6 planned (that ive been made aware of). However, compare this to the 7 or so flavours of xp (that i know of) for a moment:

      Home
      Professional
      64-bit Edition (based on Professional apparently)
      Tablet PC Edition
      Media Center Edition
      Embedded
      Starter Edition

      compare this to their variety of Windows Server 2003 flavours that i know of (at least 7):

      Small Business Server
      Web Edition
      Standard Edition
      Enterprise Edition
      Datacenter Edition
      Compute Cluster Server
      Storage Server

      Im not sure if theyre rolling their server products into the same group as their home/office products, but it looks like they are, and this would mean a decrease from 14 distinct products, to 6, if this is true.

      If this is true, I welcome the change of their ways of releasing so many versions that are usually just stripped of the functionality of one or the other version for a moneygrab. At least now theyre offering “ultimate”, which is going to have both the business and home/office tools in it, so if you want it all, you can get it all (probably with some exceptions though, such as enterprise features, as its not likely to go OEM).

      From what ive seen from vista beta 1+2, and am probably going to see in RC2 as soon as i install it (im told RC1 keys work with RC2), this operating system is a step towards real responsibility on microsofts part. finally, they are trying to make things more simple to understand, and making security easier. The sheer amount of money made off third-party software and service vendors by the use of previous windows versions by people who probably dont really need anything beyond windows 98 and dont even understand how to use DOS, is mind boggling.

      The fact that computer prices are falling is meaning that its worth it for a person to buy a new system every year rather than get their current system fixed when they get a virus or screw something up by a few click+drag/delete accidents, and this is terrible. it means its cheaper to throw out a computer than to fix it, and thats what people are doing, actually. If you think of all the third-party security software out there used in order to make windows products reasonably secure, you for sure realize that its possible to spend more money on security software on a system than the hardware or OS costs, and this is ridiculous.

      Now the anti virus and anti spyware vendors are going to be mad because microsoft has finally gone and at least tried to fix the security of their OS product, and these guys cant go around ripping stupid people off nearly as much anymore.

      Microsoft by far is the most critisized computer company in the world, and also the largest. I find it funny that they cant win no matter what they do, if they improve security, the security firms try to sue them and claim they have a monopoly because they finally did their job, if they dont do their job and make security a priority, they get criticized for writing crappy software and making huge money.

      Most of the software problems most people have with windows is due to programmers who dont know what theyre doing on the platform, or people who dont know how to use the platform, not the platform itself. With all that said, one thing is for sure – the platform is going to get a whole lot better.

    • Sniper
    • 13 years ago

    Hey cool, another reason to not upgrade to Vista.

    That’s too expensive.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This