Comments on: Windows 7 Starter Edition aka Netbook Edition

By: Earl

Earl — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 12:49:22 +0000

Two words: Research and Development. It takes a lot of time, money, and resources to create good software and hardware. While I myself never buy software, the $50 preorder price for Windows 7 last July was a great deal. Now it’s $120. So I agree on the overpriced thing.

But research and development takes a lot of resources.

By: hasslepissedoff

hasslepissedoff — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 04:29:22 +0000

boisterousnob your a *********. you do realize that the production costs of windows 7 is very small compared to windows vista? for christ sake, windows 7 was built off vista to save time. before you speak you should know what **** your talking about. Microsoft has always been overpriced. I haven’t payed for a MS product since windows 2000NT. Microsoft doesn’t need the money, at all. If we can get the basic edition for such a cheap price, then why skyrocket each other edition? Its called corner the market. MS is the only operating system that you pay for now a days except maybe linux, but you can get that for free without it being illegal anyway, you just pay for the convenience. apple is the same way, charge you out the ass for the operating system. the reason they get away with it? because both apple and microsoft over charge. the only difference is a pc is upgradeable to a far more superior side than mac. If they both overcharge, then no-one is technically cornering the market. Its like nvidia, they overcharge for their chips, but then again so does intel, so its okay because two different company’s do it.

learn something, then make a intelligent comment.

By: boisterousnob

boisterousnob — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 02:20:09 +0000

I don’t understand this comment “Don`t know at what point Microsoft are going to figure out that users will NOT buy a $350 machine and then pay $150 for an Operating System.”

This is just silly. If the machine with the functions you want actually costs $500 then people can either buy it or not. There is no reason MSFT should give away its product just because people are able to make less expensive hardware.

You may as well argue that because regular pc’s have become less expensive, so should all software. After all, if the thing you run it on is less expensive then the software is less valuable, right?

Sorry, the value of software is based upon functionality not the value of the hardware it runs on.

By all means argue that microsoft products are overpriced. But do so based upon the cost of production or utility of the software itself, not some extraneous factor such as the price of different product from a different manufacturer.