vista prices confirmed :(

Energize said:
No because I got my copy of windows xp with my old pc. It's called common sense.

OEM was it?
Well you're still breaking the licensing rules as the OEM license cannot be transferred between machines.

Piracy doesn't just stop at people downloading themselves a copy off the net - it covers illegal use of the license too.
 
stoofa said:
OEM was it?
Well you're still breaking the licensing rules as the OEM license cannot be transferred between machines.

Piracy doesn't just stop at people downloading themselves a copy off the net - it covers illegal use of the license too.

No the os was a retail copy that came with the pc in a special offer.
 
basmic said:
So start making software which does not need endless patching.

I am against paying ridiculous prices for software, which will need half a dozen upgrades/patches just so it works without crashing.
For a start, these prices aren't ridiculous:

There is no real need for anyone right now to upgrade to Vista. There are benefits from doing so (better security, improved stability, enhanced UI) but nothing that means you *have* to. It'll take a while before games require DirectX 10, and support for XP as an operating system will continue for a while yet.

Think of it like your gaming hardware. You buy a decent machine and spend quite a bit of money getting it up to scratch. Then someone releases a new game and suddenly your PC isn't all that. So you go out and buy a new graphics card (for £300) or a new mobo and processor (for £500). You think nothing of it; after all, it's progress. If you want the better features, faster games, you need to pay for it. It's the same with your operating system -- after a while the current version becomes outdated, and is no longer good enough to keep running new software. So you go out and buy a new copy (for £100). In general an operating system will last as long, if not longer than a graphics card. So really it's very good value for money. For your average punter, a PC and operating system will realistically last the same amount of time.

The fact that you can't feasibly buy an operating system from another manufacturer and still expect to be able to run your games or use your applications is a separate issue. Microsoft helped create that problem and aren't interested in doing anything to resolve it. I disagree with their behaviour in that respect. But the fact that they bring out new pieces of software and charge money for them doesn't make them evil, and shouldn't make them targets for piracy. In the grand scheme of PC components, the operating system is on a par or cheaper than other essential components.

As for the point about endless patching... an operating system of the size of Vista will contain thousands of bugs. It's nigh on impossible to create a piece of software a fraction of its size that is bug-free. Microsoft of late have been very quick to respond to vulnerability reports, with patches available within days of an exploit being found. That will continue for Vista.
 
div0 said:
Of course they lose money - people are using their product, when they should be paying for it instead of stealing it?

I wouldn't go and walk into a Panasonic/Sony shop a pick up a TV and say - I'm just taking this for a week or so. Don't worry, I'll bring it back, so you're not actually losing it, and I'd have never bought it anyway so you should be glad that I'm not giving my money to one of your rivals.

People steal software because they can get away with it. There is no other reason. If the chances of getting caught and punished were the same as stealing something from a shop, then most people wouldn't do it. Also, if most people were known to have stolen from a shop then they'd be looked at differently by their friends and family. But with software there isn't the same stigma, other people are generally more accepting of it, and so there is less of a "concience" issue for the person doing it.

If people can't afford it or didn't like it enough to buy it and then downloaded it Microsoft didn't lose any money and would never have made any. Either way it's not that they lost money, rather than they didn't gain any. You can't compare it to stealing something physical as nothing was stolen, rather copied.
 
Last edited:
Energize said:
If people can't afford it or didn't like it enough to buy it and then downloaded it Microsoft didn't lose any money and would never have made any. Either way it's not that they lost money, rather than they didn't gain any. You can't compare it to stealing something physical as nothing was stolen, rather copied.

Does that apply to music, video, books and in fact any other kind of media? Can we all now just declare "I wouldn't have bought it anytway" and go steal it instead?

If you don't like/need it enough to buy it then you can hardly justify it as necessary enough for you to carry out a criminal act. You can't have your cake and eat it.

Can we clarify we're not just talking about "the evil Microsoft" here. We're talking about everyone in the supply chain including companies like Overclockers.

So, lets bring this to a head. Are you advocating stealing Vista instead of buying it from Overclockers? Yes or No?
 
Last edited:
Athanor said:
Does that apply to music, video, books and in fact any other kind of media? Can we all now just declare "I wouldn't have bought it anytway" and go steal it instead?

If you don't like/need it enough to buy it then you can hardly justify it as necessary enough for you to carry out a criminal act. You can't have your cake and eat it.

Can we clarify we're not just talking about "the evil Microsoft" here. We're talking about everyone in the supply chain including companies like Overclockers.

So, lets bring this to a head. Are you advocating stealing Vista instead of buying it from Overclockers? Yes or No?

I'm not advocating or justifying anything, sure people should pay for it if they can. I'm simply saying that people pirating Microsofts software aren't damaging Microsoft because they aren't the sort of people who would have bought it in the first place.
 
Last edited:
Athanor said:
Does that apply to music, video, books and in fact any other kind of media? Can we all now just declare "I wouldn't have bought it anytway" and go steal it instead?

Obviously that cant be used as an excuse in a court of law. However I do feel a certain amount of common sense needs to be applied.

I feel it highly arrogant of the industry to claim every act of piracy can be considered a lost sale. Take the second hand market. If I buy my product second hand, this is a lost sale, isn’t it. What if I watch a DVD at my friends. I’m not buying the DVD, but I have enjoyed the product. So chalk up another lost sale there. I visit the library and borrow a book. Another lost sale. (You don’t see the publishing industry suing its readers for visiting the library, do you?). What if a friend borrows it you? Another lost sale?

You can, beleive it or not, obtain it for free without the internet. Or you may, shock, horror, may not even bother at all if you cant get it for free. Imagine that!!!

As it stands the media companies claim that EVERY act of piracy is a lost sale. I’m sorry, but I just don’t believe that their products are THAT good.

Or Athanor, are you telling me that you agree with the media companies that if people couldn’t obtain their products for free via piracy (erm, the library, friends??) that their product is just so good that instead they would rush out and purchase the product brand new from a retailer for their own sole enjoyment and never let anybody else watch it with them and never ever even dream about selling it second hand, lending it out, or just plain giving it away? I don’t think so.

Athanor said:
If you don't like/need it enough to buy it then you can hardly justify it as necessary enough for you to carry out a criminal act. You can't have your cake and eat it.

Lord, I bet you was popular at school. So you never borrowed from freinds or to freinds CD’s, or tapes, or games, DVD’s, or anything else like that? Because if you did, you’ll find that too is a criminal act. As I’m sure you didn’t have the required “authorisation for permitted lending, hiring, distributing….”, did you? And, just because its your friend isn’t an excuse for breaking the law, is it now Athanor?

Firstly I would like the media companies to PROVE that every individual act of piracy results in a lost sale for them. Lets imagine that every act of piracy WOULDN’T result is a lost sale. Lets say, quite feasibly, you buy the product second hand, enjoy it at a friends, or be given it. Where does this leave us? Does this entitled the same companies to spy in your living room to check up on you? Or spy on what your computer is doing?


Athanor said:
Can we clarify we're not just talking about "the evil Microsoft" here. We're talking about everyone in the supply chain including companies like Overclockers.

So, lets bring this to a head. Are you advocating stealing Vista instead of buying it from Overclockers? Yes or No?

Can you prove that if people couldn’t steal Vista instead of buying it that they would buy it instead? What’s stopping them from using Linux instead?

Finally, considering that Microsoft has made Bill Gates the richest man on Earth, it could be said that piracy of his operating system has helped him achieve this. What would have occurred if it was impossible to pirate his windows OS?

Now, Athanor, before you accuse me of condoning piracy, let me state not at all. I just object to being steamrollered by aging industries that are obviously putting their bottom line before the needs of their customers. Suicide in any industry. It aggravates me that spiel out such unproven ‘lost revenue’ statements that treats us all like lemmings and glorifies there products to the point that we cant live without them so much that we have to resort to 'stealing' them...

I will continue to lend a copy (edit; not a copy, but the Original) of my DVD’s to my friends, and live on the dark side of the force. Heck, in fact tomorrow I may even invite a few friends over to watch a second hand film. Just imagine the tears at Warner Bro’s at all those ‘lost sales’

:D
 
Last edited:
OT:

The music industry spent so much time in the early 80's and late 90's buying up distribution, retail and production industries in its vertical integration that by the time the internet arrived it had too much vested interests in it's vertical market that it neglected and refused to give the market what it wanted. What started off as simple campus file sharing became Napster. By this point the genie was out of the bottle, and it was too late for the music industry. Whilst they was counting how many wagons and shops they owned whilst pricing and dictating independants out of the market, people were obtaining the products for free almost instantly.

Even today they refuse to distribute their entire back catalogue's online... Instead requiring you to order it from a retailer at inflated prices. If that isnt commercial suicide, what is? Considering the alternative is 100% cheaper.

Im sorry, but even at 79p a track from i-prunes, this is still too much. An average album has around 10-5 tracks. So if you made a 12 track CD it would cost you almost as much as a 'REAL' cd from fresco's. Something I can listen to in the car, whilst jogging, in the bedroom, in the living room and maybe borrow a friend (Withouth being sued for it)... Try doing doing that your WMV file....

And yet they wonder why....
 
Last edited:
£250 for Ultimate. Its not even worth £100. Under all its glass effects and fade in and out motions its still Windows. Microsoft need a new concept for an OS before they can start charging that much money for it.

I know im gonna get shouted at for this post but Im quite right. Im using the RC1 now and I know I cant imagine this as the final product and I dont. But Microsofts storys go the same way everytime.

So its got cool effects.. There outdated by OSX's previous 5 releases.
 
Fstop11, m8.

This is exactly what I have been arguing about. The typical MS fanboy attitude is "well dont buy it then". Believe me, I wont. I'll buy a Mac, or Linux next time i upgrade.

It was also the point I made about people having to upgrade their machines to run it. Why bother, buy a mac, install linux.

Vista HASNT got anything other than Aereo going for it. End of story. And if I hear the 'better security' argument one more time I think my sides will burst with laughter.... If thats whats on the table for £250, xp with integrated window blinds, spybot, net nanny and norton... no thanks.

Oh, wait a minute... DX10 only on vista... Woooooohooo... No thanks, i'll buy a console....
 
Last edited:
Fstop11 said:
a mac deserves to be expensive. It works.

The design and parts used on a mac is of the highest quality.

The parts are the same as a pc. Intel cpu, ati or nvidia graphics card, standard ram etc the cost for the hardware is unjustified. You can buy better looking cases for pcs.
 
Last edited:
Richdog said:
It's still forcing people, just in a different and far more subtle way.

Its not exactly "forcing" more like cleaver marketing and needing to raise the game and not keep backporting everything.

I must admit £250 for ultimate is quite a bit. Once I find out how many times I can activate it I may go for it. If i'm skint I'll buy the upgrade.

Waits for a student version :D.
 
Gandalf501 said:
/snip lots of waffle and personal snipping...

/shrug I'm not arguing that you should, or shouldn't buy any particular software. I'm saying that stealing ANY software is no different from stealing anything else and is wrong. You wouldn't walk into a shop and do it - downloading a product is no different (except for a few quids worth of packaging etc).

I'm not quite sure how buying a mac & console proves to be cheaper than £120 for home premium Vista (honestly, you really don't "need" Ultimate although of course quoting £250 and ignoring cheaper options does sound more dramatic), or presumably less on OEM. Sounds more like you have an anti MS axe to grind than anything else...

Now if somone really objects to paying for an OS, load one of the free Linux distibutions, join the community and contribute something instead of stealing someone elses hard work.

I'm all for people using Linux, OSX or whatever, choice and variety is great. I'm just pointing out that casual piracy is still theft and trying to wrap it up in nice terms that make you feel like Robin Hood doesn't change that.

I have no idea how many people that steal software would buy it, or how much lost revenue it represents. I also understand something you clearly don't. That's not the point and stealing is stealing and it's wrong.

It really is very simple...
 
Last edited:
Athanor said:
That's not the point and stealing is stealing and it's wrong.

It really is very simple...

No, it isnt 'stealing' as you put it, its 'copyright' infringement. And thats what you would be prosecuted for, and not 'theft'. A moot point, but one that is critical I think.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom