Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account


$219 for win2k upgrade? gimme a break


Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.

  • You cannot reply to this topic
29 replies to this topic

#1 pink_daisy   Members   -  Reputation: 200

Posted 09 November 1999 - 08:57 AM

lemme say a couple preliminaries. first, gamedev.net is a great site. next, i'm surprised and delighted over how helpful and curteous people are on the message boards. finally, i'm not trying to start i flame war, i just wanted to vent...

i was over a zdnet and saw that win2k upgrade will be $219 dollars! we're not talking mexican pesos here boys and girls but real american greenbacks. there is only one thing i hate worse than big government, and that's big business.

i cannot believe how arrogant bill has become in his software pricing. while the prices of everything computer related spirals downward (cost of hardware, monitors, internet service, etc) the cost of bill's buggy, broken software continues to increase! what a joke. microsoft is certainly the most predatory business on the planet. much worse than the bell-telephone monopoly, or ibm's stranglehold on the computer market 25 years ago.

the few competitors that bill doesn't destroy he assimilates. anyone who would dare go up against him either ends up standing in the unemployment line or at the wrong end of a microsoft lawsuit.

i cannot say that i didn't see this coming though. i remember years ago when there were a few fledling OS compeititors. you remember their names: OS/2, Next OS and so on. microsoft killed them and herded us into his fold like sheep. now 95% (plus or minus a bit) of us all use microsoft OSes, microsoft browsers, and play microsoft games. bill knows this all too well and has decided that $100 for a buggy OS upgrade is simply not enough and now we should be happy to $219 for what should be a free upgrade.

bill's desire to have more money than god should worry all us game programmers too. bill has tried and tried to get programmers to use his directX API. for years we resisted, but slowly he has got most all of us to use his damned directX. but now what's to keep billionaire bill from charging us to use his directX API in our software? ANSWER: nothing. that scares me.

obviously the government doesn't scare him, and there certainly aren't any competitors that scare him. i fear the day will come when we all have to pay a $10-per-copy royalty to billy for all the great software we make that uses DX.

i know alot of you think you have the solution: linux. i agree linux is a good thing, but it needs to mature in a hurry. funny thing is i'm waiting for the day that microsoft introduces it's own version of linux. they are probably arrogant enough to charge people 200 dollars for it and to stab businessess for multi-user licenses!

philanthropy: i live in the seattle area and i'm sick and tired about all the local news coverage on what a great philanthropist billy is. sure he gave away a billion dollars. but he gave it to his OWN charity. that's not throwing the gold very far from the pot there bill. if he was truely a giving man i would think that he would give out at least 1 free software upgrade to show the world what a great guy he is (besides, us computer geeks are the ones who put those 90 or so billion dollars in his pocket to begin with).

the guy is only a few benjamins short of a 100 billion dollars and he's such a sting that he's gonna gouge us $219 dollars for a software UPGRADE. all i can say is that i hope god is taking notes on him.

finally, what a shame that the inventor of GUI OS software never made a dime from it. steve jobs and apple stole the idea of GUI (graphic user interface) and the mouse from xerox PARC (palo alto researce center), and bill inturn stole it from apple. and today bill has 90 billion bucks and xerox got squat. i think the boys over at xerox had better hire some better lawyers.

i'm not saying that miscrosoft is the anti-christ, but i am saying that it's a predatory company that needs to knocked of it's king-of-the-hill position.

that's my 2 pennies worth (plus or minus a couple)


Sponsor:

#2 ghowland   Members   -  Reputation: 134

Posted 04 November 1999 - 10:48 PM

I totally agree that $219 is too high for a consumer oriented OS, and most heartedly agree that they are gouging.

In fairness though, you cant expect something hundreds people have worked on for several years to be free. There is a lot of money that went into the development, and while they dnt need to charge $219, they do need to charge for it.

Also, the idea of placing everything on Bill Gates shoulders is just a personifcation of human evil. Like blaming or congradulating a president on the economy. Normally the situation is vastly more complex than that and in the predidency issue, was set up to happen years before that president came into office. The wave just takes time to roll one way or the other.

This is similar to the Microsoft issue. The reason WHY Microsoft is so dominant is not just because of their aggressive business tactics, but because of other peoples screw ups. Other people took risks and lost that MS didnt take. MS had the good business sense to let other people do risky ventures, then buy the people who were successful at it, or develop their own products based on the winning formula.

This isnt idea-piracy, its good business. In the business world, its called being a "Fast Follower" (or was a few years ago, maybe there is a new buzzword now). Its a method a lot of corporations take to stay the distance in an ever changing world. Small corporation can and have to take risks, big ones dont often have that luxury.

A lot of the reason people are so annoyed at Microsoft is that they are continuously successful. They want to see them lose in a big way, cause its human nature.

While MS may have a lot of the market wrapped up, they are not invincible. Other corps have been in this situation before, and in the future it WILL be someone else in this same position. Nothing lasts forever. Ask the Romans.

With regard to developers, IMO, MS is the best thing that has happened in the past 20 years.

They have gotten almost all the market onto one set of platforms which all run almost the same code (and with some work, can all run the same code). The have removed the headache (big headache) of having to customize software for hardware, and in todays diverse market, this would be an absolute nightmare.

DirectX has made game development significantly easier by removing the necessity to get to the metal in cards, while still remaining pretty fast and close. Its stability is improving, as well as its functionality. While its not perfect, Id rather pay for DirectX than go back to using DOS personally. (Luckily we dont have to).

On the final solution of having to pay MS to release products on their system. Personally, I dont see this happening. BUT, if it did happen, it wouldnt be unique. Sony, Nintendo, Sega, all the console developers ALREADY require this. They monopolize the publishing and distribution on their systems. You must be a licensed and therefore approved developer to relase things. You may use their tools. You must pay them a LOT for dek kits (think $10,000 to $25,000 PER KIT!). You must give them a percentage of all sales. You must use THEIR CD or CART manufacturing plants at a higher cost than other places could do the same thing.

So MS is not taking the lead in oligarchical development.

Just some things to think about

-Geoff


#3 LackOfKnack   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Posted 05 November 1999 - 12:23 AM

I don't just hate them because they're big; I hate them because Windows is such a pile of shit, yet they still manage to charge full price for it. In any other industry at all, this would be an unacceptable practise and nobody would buy the stuff. Also, people follow their lead: My satellite dish menu has three choices when you choose a PPV channel: Yes, No, and Cancel. No and Cancel do the exact same thing. They just used twice as much code for no reason. And the other day I was playing baseball on my friend's PlayStation (consoles used to be stable as I remember) and it FROZE! Consoles don't freeze, yet we sat there for a few seconds as the announcer said "FlyballFlyballFlyballFlyballFlyballFlyballFlyball...". Yeesh.

It's just a sad state of affairs. So is the education system, but don't get me started on that. I think people should redesign computer hardware and software from the ground up, and get it right this time. No crashes, no crazy cross-linked files, no reinstalling my OS just because I upgrade my speakers, no crashing after barely 30 seconds of uptime, no "low resources" crap blue screen stuff after 30 seconds of uptime (I have 128 megs of ram and 320 megs of virtual memory, what WTFS do you mean, low resources??!?), no 20 minutes to boot up, no software-controlled power button that won't work, but only when I need it to, no reinstalling 12 devices and 17 programs to get my one program to run, and on hardware, none of these damn ribbon cables anymore, some better cooling systems, true plug and play stuff (like nintendo- just stuff a cartridge in there), and get rid of CDs or caddy them or something (they are too easily scratched even with the best of care and eventually get toasted), more keyboard control (gimmie shortcuts, power button, volume control, speeddial), Devorak keyboards that are actually efficient, etc. I'm just spouting, but there's a lot of crap that could be remade at this point, and you could probably get your computer to run twice as fast, if you just cut out crap all along the line from hardware to software, even the hardware's core software too.

------------------

Lack


#4 Anonymous Poster_Anonymous Poster_*   Guests   -  Reputation:

Posted 05 November 1999 - 01:00 AM

woah! i sense a little hostility towards MS. i saw that $219 business too. i read professional version upgrade though. isn't there another version which is cheaper? normal, professional, server, advanced server. i didnt see any mention of the normal version. yea, windows is buggy, but so are unix windows systems. only the unix shell systems are somewhat stable and so is dos. i use irix every now and then, and it freezes on me. at least with windows i've used it enough so i can just yell at it and it obviously gets scared and goes back to working. if you happen to get some hardware that get along, bugs are seldom. the only time i get freezes or blue screens are from my own creations gone bad. ya know, tinkering with some part of video ram which must not have wanted to be tinkered with.

#5 bosjoh   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Posted 05 November 1999 - 01:50 AM

Talking about prizes:
VC++ 6.0 cost $1000! (or something like that)
And they think a 18 year old game developer can afford that! Especially with digi-hating parents. Instead of creating happy customers he is sending them away with these high prices.
He has $5.000.000.000!

#6 MikeD   Members   -  Reputation: 158

Posted 05 November 1999 - 02:49 AM

Hmmmmm, correct me if I'm wrong (like you needed the prompt) but surely it's closer to
$100,000,000,000
Fact is, if you don't want Win2K then you don't have to buy it.
He, as a businessman, is making you an offer of a product for a price. If you don't want it for $219 then don't buy it.
If you're willing to pay $219 for it then surely it means it is worth $219 to you otherwise you wouldn't bother getting it
and if it's worth $219 to you then what's the problem?
It's like saying "I want a Porsche but they're way too expensive, they shouldn't be allowed to charge that much because _I_ don't want to pay that much."
That's not a business mentality and they are a business. Which might go some way to explain why they're rich and we're not.

#7 Machaira   Moderators   -  Reputation: 1028

Posted 05 November 1999 - 03:11 AM

I'm not sure where you're shopping for your software, but a Visual Studio upgrade can be bought for around $400 for the Professional Edition. That's all most people need. The Enterprise Edition has all the tidbits for business app development which I don't think a game developer would ever need or use.

#8 Zer   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Posted 05 November 1999 - 03:26 AM

You fools, that's the same price it cost me to upgrade from NT 3.51 to NT 4.0. I admit if they are trying to market it to "consumers" that is QUITE unreasonable but if it's to the same market as NT we'll buy it (I know I will). They should make a reasonably priced ($89 or so) version which takes out multiuser and any features that you'd only need on a server. The prices are not going up, really...they just don't have a shitty 'consumer' line to go along with it. And Win9x is total shit. Admit it. You get what you pay for.

#9 Anonymous Poster_Anonymous Poster_*   Guests   -  Reputation:

Posted 05 November 1999 - 03:54 AM

Saying that you don't have to upgrade to win whatever is only partly true. If you want to run certain applications, games etc. you just try never upgrading windows again and see what happens. Because of microsofts practical monopoly they can charge more than they should. Maybe not to a massive extent but an extra £50-150( or $) isn't so much that must people won't just get pissed off and get it anyway for those things they want to run on it.

#10 Zer   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Posted 05 November 1999 - 04:05 AM

Bert, if you didn't notice, they aren't charging any more than they usually do for NT. They really shouldn't have even bothered with an upgrade option from Win9x since that's just going to get lots of whiny lamers who wish it was a cheap pile of crap like Windows 95 or 98 are. Sorry guys, it costs more, but it's better, much much better, as anything on the NT kernel is. You don't have to upgrade if you don't want to. You can ask Microsoft to release a wonderful Windows 9x based kernel again. Heaven help us if they listen to thier "customers", I have been waiting for the day when that kernel was dead.

#11 ghowland   Members   -  Reputation: 134

Posted 05 November 1999 - 04:48 AM

You can actually buy VC++ 6.0 Standard for $90. I did in CompUSA like 3 months ago. I dont believe Professional has much more than Std, besides some DB support.

If the ONLY version of Win2K they sell is $219, they are overcharging IMO. They went from $89 to $219, which is not an incremental jump.

Cost of computer $900. Cost of Win98, $90. Cost of Win2K, $220. Not very comparable.

Making pro versions that have additional options or whatever, fine, charge more.

Obviously this being a capitilistic society, and me being a capitalism freak, I believe in their right to charge whatever they want. But I will certainly feel like they are ripping me off going from $90 to $220 for the next version of the OS, when its the base level. Even if I do know I need it and so choose to pay the $220.

In the ripped off to not ripped off sense. Comparing upgrading to Win2k and buying a Porsche is not the same thing. When you buy a Porsche, you are choosing NOT to buy hundreds and hundreds of other cars that are cheaper. There are even different levels of Porsches you can buy.

With this Win2k upgrade, if $220 is all they charge it would be like the 1999 version of the Boxter being sold for $60K and the 2000 version being sold for $150K when it is not significantly more powerful, even if it was redesigned from scratch and is more powerful. On top of that, there arent any other kind of cars you can really buy, except ones you cant take on the highway or something.

Thats the comparison in the "ripped off" field that I see. Even if its totally legal and their right, they are going to piss people off IMO BIG TIME. Even people that support capitalism massively. This will be the way they lose their monopoly IMO, not by continuing as they were before.

-Geoff


#12 MikeD   Members   -  Reputation: 158

Posted 05 November 1999 - 04:58 AM

Okay my car comparison was well off (I mean look at the whole windows vs General Motors palavar) but here's the way the market forces will work.
Put out an overpriced product that the majority of people don't see the point in buying and it will not be bought forcing the price to drop.
I mean it's only just been released for chissakes it's the brand spanking new price, it's like buying the latest level of processor. Highly overpriced, not worth it compared to the one just 50mhz slower but great if you like having the latest stuff. Just wait 6 months and no doubt the price will adjust to a more reasonable level at the public's willingness to part with their cash.

#13 ghowland   Members   -  Reputation: 134

Posted 05 November 1999 - 05:51 AM

Thats probably true, and if it is the way that it works, Ill feel a lot better about the situaton. I tend to wonder how much they will really reduce their prices though. I have patience for a wait-and-see attitude though

Honestly, Ive heard a lot of good things about Win2ks stability, for me it might be worth it (as long as their DX implementation is up to snuff) to avoid the annoyances of my (not too often and usually caused by me, but sometimes not) crashes and odd memory losses.

-Geoff


#14 Zer   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Posted 05 November 1999 - 06:25 AM

That's the reason I develop under NT4 instead of Win95. Don't have to worry about memory leaks. In user land apps they don't occur Soon as you exit something its resources are freed by the OS and don't have to by the app. Which is why I'll rejoice the day when the Win9x kernels are dead and gone, and I won't have to bother with app cleanup

#15 BlueNexus   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Posted 05 November 1999 - 06:27 AM

Everyone is comparing Win9X to Win2K!!! WHY!?!?! Hey everyone, this is NT 5! This is NOT an OS for home users. This is for business users! If you've seen or used a beta of Win2K, then you know that its actually pretty good and stable.


They are making a lower consumer version, based off the Win9X kernel. Its called Windows Millenium and it will be available 2nd Quarter next year. That will be the upgrade that costs $90.


Also, there are 4 versions: Professional(Workstation), Server(Server), Advanced Server(Enterprise Server), and Data Center Server(new).

They ALL have native DirectX 7 out of the box, and its as upgradable as Win9X. No more waiting for SPs to give you the latest DX.


I think the people who are upset about the pricing are getting thier facts a little blurred.


BlueNexus




#16 mason   Members   -  Reputation: 128

Posted 05 November 1999 - 06:42 AM

People pirate software. Because of this, software prices are inflated. Microsoft knows this - if there were a way to guarantee that half the computer-using population wouldn't just take the CD home from work two days after it was released, the prices would be more reasonable. But since we live in an age where everyone pirates everything, it's no wonder software prices are outrageous.

If you *REALLY* hate MS's policy of charging an arm and a leg for upgrades, then get up and help take a stance against software piracy.

Mason McCuskey
Spin Studios
www.spin-studios.com


#17 SonicSilcion   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Posted 05 November 1999 - 08:06 AM

As BlueNexus pointed out, there will be a consumer edition called "Millenium" (for the moment.)
_ The reason everyone is complaining about Win2k is that MS hasn't said what Millenium will be, other than 9x based. This leads me (and others?) that it will be another $90 *PATCH* instead of a real OS upgrade.
_ About DirectX and WinNT, NT was never updated past DX 3. Most likely this was becuase people running NT are probably running expensive apps, and most expensive apps use OpenGL because it makes porting easier. (Or is it becuase DX was never updated? Chicken? Egg?)

#18 LackOfKnack   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Posted 05 November 1999 - 10:29 AM

I still think it's all crap.

------------------

Lack


#19 OberonZ   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Posted 05 November 1999 - 10:47 AM

Well, that's what you get for reading ZDNet. They are in the business of news, and if they can rile up the reader with "hot and juicy" news tidbits, they will have ensured return readers.

If $219 is the upgrade from 9x, does anyone know what it is from NT4 to 2K? I think more devs have NT4 and 9x than just 9x if for the simple reason that 9x is not a development platform (IMHO).

On another note, I find it hysterical that people pin all of the a product's faults to the CEO of the company. All companies have many many decision makers, I don't see why Microsoft is viewed any different.

I've used all the flavors (not counting 1.0 and 2.0 ) and when I begin developing my game, I'll only support 2k and 98/Millenium/whatever it is. Though some people would rather swim in sulfuric acid than admit it, 98 is far more stable than 95... in fact, I sometimes find bugs that only happen on 95. so there Besides, in "computer years" 95 is ancient

That's my story and I'm sticking to it
OberonZ


#20 ghowland   Members   -  Reputation: 134

Posted 05 November 1999 - 10:47 AM

This all makes a lot more sense. The only reason I dont use NT is because of DX3. Id pay $220 for NT5 (Win2k) if it can easily install any new DX, no problem.

Though I dont think they should charge $220 for a consumer upgrade of Win9x, and as it turns out they arent. So it all makes sense.

BTW Mason, helping to stamp out piracy doesnt give you any software coupons.

-Geoff





Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.



PARTNERS