Announcing the Windows 8 Editions(windowsteamblog.com)
windowsteamblog.com
Announcing the Windows 8 Editions
http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2012/04/16/announcing-the-windows-8-editions.aspx
13 comments
I agree that fewer editions is the way to go, but note that OS X has always had multiple SKUs as well:
(And a footnote, Windows RT is for an entirely different architecture—ARM—and an entirely different class of devices, so no surprise there's a separate SKU for it.)
http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/os-x-lion/id444303913
http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/os-x-lion-server/id444376097
http://www.apple.com/macosx/how-to-buy/
(And a footnote, Windows RT is for an entirely different architecture—ARM—and an entirely different class of devices, so no surprise there's a separate SKU for it.)
Apple officially supports 4-year old hardware but not older (or at least, did in the past). All Apple software produced 4 years after the last PPC apple was sold had still supported PPC, and only then it stopped. I think that's reasonable. While it's technically easier to support a 5-year old Intel Mac compared to a 5-year old PPC Mac, I still think Apple is reasonable in not doing that.
It's not like your 4-year old hardware or software stops working. It's just that newer software gradually stops being available for your old hardware.
It's not like your 4-year old hardware or software stops working. It's just that newer software gradually stops being available for your old hardware.
It's far less of a big deal, though, with a $30 price tag. I don't dislike upgrading from Windows 7 to windows 8 because I think it will be hard. I don't want to pay upwards of $100 to install an OS on another machine. I'll definitely pay $30 though. That's the equivalent of beer money on a night out with a few other friends.
Legally, i.e. according to the TOS, you need Snow Leopard.
You can install Lion on it's own http://www.macworld.com/article/1161087/install_lion_over_le...
But it's a bit silly.
You can install Lion on it's own http://www.macworld.com/article/1161087/install_lion_over_le...
But it's a bit silly.
If you want the features of the operating system formerly known as OS X Server, you shell over $49.99 in the App Stare: http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/os-x-lion-server/id444376097?...
That isn't a direct comparison though because OS X Server and OS X are different beasts really (thought they share an awful lot). Joe Public would just buy "OS X" or in the Windows 7 world Joe Public would have to choose between "Windows 7 Starter/Home Basic/Home Premium/Professional/Enterprise/Ultimate" and in the Windows 8 world "Windows 8/8 Pro/RT" and would have to ask to know the differences between each.
Joe Public would have Home Premium which comes pre-installed with their laptop/is whatever their laptop's factory reset DVD resets their laptop to. Joe Public would barely be aware that there are other versions out there much less the differences between them.
Technically, they can't choose Windows RT since it's the ARM edition and only comes bundled with Windows tablets. I expect almost everyone will get Windows 8, and the "Pro" features will be easy to purchase as an upgrade through the new Windows Store.
That is because Apple is not a big player in the enterprise space like Windows is, thus they don't see the benefit of the same differentiation that they have with OS X server.
The local store ran out of single licenses for Snow Leopard so I just bought the family pack for something like $59. I didn't even feel ripped off. It used to be $120 for a single copy, so this is like half off!
Microsoft still has the audacity to charge several hundred dollars for their OS. How is it that the cost of Windows keeps going up, but the cost of computers keeps going down?
Microsoft still has the audacity to charge several hundred dollars for their OS. How is it that the cost of Windows keeps going up, but the cost of computers keeps going down?
"Microsoft still has the audacity to charge several hundred dollars for their OS."
That's really disingenuous, given that
1) the consumer versions of Windows traditionally cost less than $100
2) Microsoft doesn't make money on hardware, whereas the cost of Apple's OSes is priced into Mac hardware
You don't get to tut-tut Microsoft for an expensive OS (that runs on the consumer's choice of commodity hardware, cheap or expensive) when you pay a premium on a Mac all-in-one computer. You can justify Apple's OS pricing as being easy to stomach all you want - ultimately it's your choice to buy into the intended psychology of their pricing strategy - but don't try to paint that as a rational, fair comparison.
That's really disingenuous, given that
1) the consumer versions of Windows traditionally cost less than $100
2) Microsoft doesn't make money on hardware, whereas the cost of Apple's OSes is priced into Mac hardware
You don't get to tut-tut Microsoft for an expensive OS (that runs on the consumer's choice of commodity hardware, cheap or expensive) when you pay a premium on a Mac all-in-one computer. You can justify Apple's OS pricing as being easy to stomach all you want - ultimately it's your choice to buy into the intended psychology of their pricing strategy - but don't try to paint that as a rational, fair comparison.
"Windows 7 Home Premium" is about $100, but if you want professional you must pay significantly more. "Windows 7 Professional" is $149. "Windows 7 Ultimate" is $199.
You can get OEM copies for less from places like NewEgg if you buy hardware, but never as low as the big OEMs pay.
When a decent computer was over $2,000 the cost of Windows + DOS was around $85-100. Now the same computer costs about $500 and Windows is as much as $199.
You can get OEM copies for less from places like NewEgg if you buy hardware, but never as low as the big OEMs pay.
When a decent computer was over $2,000 the cost of Windows + DOS was around $85-100. Now the same computer costs about $500 and Windows is as much as $199.
Well that's a load of shit. They screwed you for $59!!!
1/ I've never bought Windows. I tend to buy new hardware when it comes along every 2-3 years (which is the typical lifespan of any hardware regardless of brand/vendor).
2/ And I didn't pay $1200 for the hardware either like Apple stuff. In fact I paid equiv $800 for a Lenovo with Windows 7.
3/ The non Apple hardware is EXACTLY the same and is cheaper (try a Lenovo T/X machine which are far better put together than Apple kit). Oh and I can change the battery without a screwdriver ;-) Oh and I can get the spare bits off ebay for virtually nothing.
I love how Apple fanboys enjoy telling people how they didn't get ripped off when they did...
1/ I've never bought Windows. I tend to buy new hardware when it comes along every 2-3 years (which is the typical lifespan of any hardware regardless of brand/vendor).
2/ And I didn't pay $1200 for the hardware either like Apple stuff. In fact I paid equiv $800 for a Lenovo with Windows 7.
3/ The non Apple hardware is EXACTLY the same and is cheaper (try a Lenovo T/X machine which are far better put together than Apple kit). Oh and I can change the battery without a screwdriver ;-) Oh and I can get the spare bits off ebay for virtually nothing.
I love how Apple fanboys enjoy telling people how they didn't get ripped off when they did...
"Apple hardware is EXACTLY the same and is cheaper" is simply not true. Spec-wise, perhaps, but not in terms of build quality, and especially not in terms of support. Lenovo is arguably better than others, but it's not comparable. A MacBook Air is made out of solid metal, not plastic, for instance. HP makes some metal cases but they are always priced at a premium.
My main notebook I bought in early 2008 and I've upgraded the OS several times. Most people with Apple equipment hang on to their systems significantly longer. They're not treated as disposable like a $600 netbook might be.
The reason I'd want Windows is not always because of a new machine, but to run it in VMWare or BootCamp. Paying $100+ for this privilege seems crazy in this age.
My main notebook I bought in early 2008 and I've upgraded the OS several times. Most people with Apple equipment hang on to their systems significantly longer. They're not treated as disposable like a $600 netbook might be.
The reason I'd want Windows is not always because of a new machine, but to run it in VMWare or BootCamp. Paying $100+ for this privilege seems crazy in this age.
Apple build quality is terrible.
Why:
You can't remove the battery without a screwdriver. That's dangerous, especially with LiPoly cells. We had a 2010 MacBook Pro which had an electrical fault on the logic board which caused a fire with no possibility to remove the battery i.e. stop the short. It basically got thrown out of a second floor window into the street to stop it taking the building out.
Apple stuff is designed around appearance and not durability and maintenance. Metal doesn't make it good. Lenovo particularly concentrate on the latter two. My T61 has a titanium chassis, titanium screen protection. You can throw it around and stand on it quite happily. The plastic around it protects everything from shock. My T61 has been down a flight of stairs, has been fallen on and had 2 drinks poured in it - it's fine. I can also replace ANY part inside it in about 10 mins flat. HP EliteBooks are what you are referring to - they are poorly designed like the MacBooks are and suffer failures regularly. They are a copycat machine. I cannot count the number of times my colleagues have had to take their MacBooks and MacBook Pros back to Apple for failures. None of our (35) Lenovo T-series laptops have EVER been taken out of service for maintenance or damage.
My T61 was made in 2007 - it's still fine. It's had memory and an SSD chucked in it (which took 5 mins each).
Apple hardware is for penis enthusiasts. It doesn't give you anything over a quality non-Apple laptop other than smugness.
Basically, your argument is based on comparing a MacBook to a shitty netbook, spending all your money on Apple love and not having enough cash left over for a Windows license which you're too cheap to pay out for.
Idiot.
Why:
You can't remove the battery without a screwdriver. That's dangerous, especially with LiPoly cells. We had a 2010 MacBook Pro which had an electrical fault on the logic board which caused a fire with no possibility to remove the battery i.e. stop the short. It basically got thrown out of a second floor window into the street to stop it taking the building out.
Apple stuff is designed around appearance and not durability and maintenance. Metal doesn't make it good. Lenovo particularly concentrate on the latter two. My T61 has a titanium chassis, titanium screen protection. You can throw it around and stand on it quite happily. The plastic around it protects everything from shock. My T61 has been down a flight of stairs, has been fallen on and had 2 drinks poured in it - it's fine. I can also replace ANY part inside it in about 10 mins flat. HP EliteBooks are what you are referring to - they are poorly designed like the MacBooks are and suffer failures regularly. They are a copycat machine. I cannot count the number of times my colleagues have had to take their MacBooks and MacBook Pros back to Apple for failures. None of our (35) Lenovo T-series laptops have EVER been taken out of service for maintenance or damage.
My T61 was made in 2007 - it's still fine. It's had memory and an SSD chucked in it (which took 5 mins each).
Apple hardware is for penis enthusiasts. It doesn't give you anything over a quality non-Apple laptop other than smugness.
Basically, your argument is based on comparing a MacBook to a shitty netbook, spending all your money on Apple love and not having enough cash left over for a Windows license which you're too cheap to pay out for.
Idiot.
What is wrong with you? Are you always suck a dick?
MacBooks from 2007 had removable batteries just like your beloved plastic brick. Your argument is based on ignorance and apparent hatred.
"Penis enthusiasts"? You must be charming to be around.
Go away.
MacBooks from 2007 had removable batteries just like your beloved plastic brick. Your argument is based on ignorance and apparent hatred.
"Penis enthusiasts"? You must be charming to be around.
Go away.
You paid the apple tax when you bought your computer. You can only access that $30 price after paying a huge premium for your hardware.
exactly, that's why all the macbook air competitors are half the price of...wait a sec...
Uh... yes, they are? Macbook air i5, 4gb, 128gb vs Asus zenbook i5, 4gb, 128gb (and with higher resolution display), 950$ vs 1300$
http://store.apple.com/us/configure/MC965LL/A?
http://www.google.com/products/catalog?client=opera&rls=...
http://store.apple.com/us/configure/MC965LL/A?
http://www.google.com/products/catalog?client=opera&rls=...
It's the best they've done so far...
Yeah I definitely agree. I can't believe they got it down to 3. But I also can't help thinking "what the hell. haven't they learned?"
It probably makes them more money overall. But with the cost of user confusion and possible frustration. I guess that's a tradeoff they're willing to make. Which is why I won't buy it for $100 bucks.
It probably makes them more money overall. But with the cost of user confusion and possible frustration. I guess that's a tradeoff they're willing to make. Which is why I won't buy it for $100 bucks.
I don't think there's going to be much, and I'd say any, confusion.
Firstly Windows 8 RT is only going to be pre-installed and only on ARM devices. So you can't decide to buy it at all.
All home PCs and consumer laptops people will have Windows 8 installed already. Therefore people won't need to make a decision.
Businesses will be able to use Window 8 or the Pro version if they require the more advanced encrpytion or domain management features. (I can also see some high end business laptops having this installed.)
Enterprise users will have their computer installed for them with the Enterprise SKU.
So really there will be no confusion on the users side, the most complicated choice of the whole lot will be for small businesses trying to decide between the normal or Pro version, but I'm sure there will be an upgrade path.
Firstly Windows 8 RT is only going to be pre-installed and only on ARM devices. So you can't decide to buy it at all.
All home PCs and consumer laptops people will have Windows 8 installed already. Therefore people won't need to make a decision.
Businesses will be able to use Window 8 or the Pro version if they require the more advanced encrpytion or domain management features. (I can also see some high end business laptops having this installed.)
Enterprise users will have their computer installed for them with the Enterprise SKU.
So really there will be no confusion on the users side, the most complicated choice of the whole lot will be for small businesses trying to decide between the normal or Pro version, but I'm sure there will be an upgrade path.
Well, if you look at the text at the bottom of the table, they've actually got it down to four, Windows 8 Enterprise will still exist as a separate SKU.
So really they've only eliminated one edition (Ultimate) and changed the name of another (Starter -> RT).
Not that it isn't an improvement. And the simplified naming is a big deal as well. Seriously, who thought "Home Premium" was a good idea? Premium compared to what?
So really they've only eliminated one edition (Ultimate) and changed the name of another (Starter -> RT).
Not that it isn't an improvement. And the simplified naming is a big deal as well. Seriously, who thought "Home Premium" was a good idea? Premium compared to what?
.>..changed the name of another (Starter -> RT).
What? You're way off base here. Please re-read article more carefully.
What? You're way off base here. Please re-read article more carefully.
Windows 7 Starter was the edition for low-power devices. Previously, that meant netbooks, now it means tablets with ARM processors.
The market segments are not identical, I realize that, but they're similar, hence my comment about basically renaming "Starter" to "RT". In fact, based on previous reporting, RT will even be targeted at "Home" users, which is also the same as Starter.
I didn't mean they literally renamed the product, just that RT will now occupy a similar market position to that previously occupied by Windows 7 Starter.
The market segments are not identical, I realize that, but they're similar, hence my comment about basically renaming "Starter" to "RT". In fact, based on previous reporting, RT will even be targeted at "Home" users, which is also the same as Starter.
I didn't mean they literally renamed the product, just that RT will now occupy a similar market position to that previously occupied by Windows 7 Starter.
Not even a little bit. Win7 Starter was aimed at people who wanted a dirt-cheap netbook, with prices starting at about $250. It didn't even come with Aero.
Windows RT is aimed at people who want a tablet. This is not the same market. This is the set of people who currently shell out $500 and up to buy an iPad, twice as much as a netbook.
This is not the same market, and it's not a renaming of the cheapest OS. Starter was the most stripped-down OS. RT is actually the most feature-rich, due to the inclusion of Office. There's a bit of overlap, but only in the same way that there's overlap between people who buy a netbook and people who buy a ThinkPad.
Windows RT is aimed at people who want a tablet. This is not the same market. This is the set of people who currently shell out $500 and up to buy an iPad, twice as much as a netbook.
This is not the same market, and it's not a renaming of the cheapest OS. Starter was the most stripped-down OS. RT is actually the most feature-rich, due to the inclusion of Office. There's a bit of overlap, but only in the same way that there's overlap between people who buy a netbook and people who buy a ThinkPad.
Maybe we differ in our definitions of "feature-rich"...
""" Microsoft has long said that WOA will not include an x86 emulator, so legacy applications would never run directly on the platform, but there was always the possibility that existing desktop applications could be recompiled. That option is now unambiguously eliminated, with Microsoft saying "WOA does not support running, emulating, or porting existing x86/64 desktop apps." Office is a special, unique case. All third-party applications for WOA will be Metro applications delivered via the Windows Store, and must meet the restrictions imposed on those applications. """ (http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2012/02/windows-8-on-a...)
Then there's this...
""" Touting the long battery life of ARM-based devices, the guide tempers expectations: "Although the ARM-based version of Windows does not include the same manageability features that are in 32-bit and 64-bit versions, businesses can use these power-saving devices in unmanaged environments." That means ARM devices won't be able to be added to Active Directory domains and have their user access managed by system administrators, or be remotely managed through Microsoft's System Center environment. """ (http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2012/02/windows-8-for-...)
Sorry for the long quotes.
Anyway, my point is that RT is targeted at "home" users looking for a portable device, same as Starter was. Price point really doesn't come into it.
Netbooks aren't even a factor any more. Go check Newegg, there are basically only two models, with some spec options, still available unless you buy refurb. Tablets have taken over the really-small-but-still-afforable-computer segment and many customers who would have purchased a netbook a few years ago will now consider a tablet.
""" Microsoft has long said that WOA will not include an x86 emulator, so legacy applications would never run directly on the platform, but there was always the possibility that existing desktop applications could be recompiled. That option is now unambiguously eliminated, with Microsoft saying "WOA does not support running, emulating, or porting existing x86/64 desktop apps." Office is a special, unique case. All third-party applications for WOA will be Metro applications delivered via the Windows Store, and must meet the restrictions imposed on those applications. """ (http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2012/02/windows-8-on-a...)
Then there's this...
""" Touting the long battery life of ARM-based devices, the guide tempers expectations: "Although the ARM-based version of Windows does not include the same manageability features that are in 32-bit and 64-bit versions, businesses can use these power-saving devices in unmanaged environments." That means ARM devices won't be able to be added to Active Directory domains and have their user access managed by system administrators, or be remotely managed through Microsoft's System Center environment. """ (http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2012/02/windows-8-for-...)
Sorry for the long quotes.
Anyway, my point is that RT is targeted at "home" users looking for a portable device, same as Starter was. Price point really doesn't come into it.
Netbooks aren't even a factor any more. Go check Newegg, there are basically only two models, with some spec options, still available unless you buy refurb. Tablets have taken over the really-small-but-still-afforable-computer segment and many customers who would have purchased a netbook a few years ago will now consider a tablet.
Id say we definitely disagree about the definition of "feature-rich" if you consider domain join to be a bigger feature than the inclusion of Office.
As for not including an x86 emulator, that would be a wasted nonfeature. Emulating x86 on ARM would be painfully slow, to the point that it's inclusion would likely be worse than its exclusion. Can you imagine how many people would complain about Windows RT if it promised x86 compatibility, yet was unable to run any modern games, or Photoshop, or anything, really, that demands a powerful processor?
I still disagree that Starter was aimed at the same market as tablets. Netbooks are just crappy laptops. Tablets are a different experience altogether. The key selling feature of the netbook was low price, with portability being next. Tablets aren't really in the low price competition. The iPad starts at the same price as a reasonable laptop, and goes up in price to match pretty good laptops.
As for not including an x86 emulator, that would be a wasted nonfeature. Emulating x86 on ARM would be painfully slow, to the point that it's inclusion would likely be worse than its exclusion. Can you imagine how many people would complain about Windows RT if it promised x86 compatibility, yet was unable to run any modern games, or Photoshop, or anything, really, that demands a powerful processor?
I still disagree that Starter was aimed at the same market as tablets. Netbooks are just crappy laptops. Tablets are a different experience altogether. The key selling feature of the netbook was low price, with portability being next. Tablets aren't really in the low price competition. The iPad starts at the same price as a reasonable laptop, and goes up in price to match pretty good laptops.
Maybe they're following the grandmother rule, where if someone's grandmother can't figure it out after a ten minute explanation, they should go back and try again with a different plan.
> I didn't even want to read the whole table for all the features of windows 8
Took me all of 5 minutes to digest that table (and decide I want Windows 8 Pro for Boot from VHD and Client Hyper-V). That's not too much time to choose something I'm going to be using for 3 years, is it?
Took me all of 5 minutes to digest that table (and decide I want Windows 8 Pro for Boot from VHD and Client Hyper-V). That's not too much time to choose something I'm going to be using for 3 years, is it?
On the other hand, I love it when companies let me choose roughly what functionality I need, and pay accordingly.
Unless of course the lowest option, functionality wise, isn't less than $30.
The reason being that they've already got your money by selling you hardware at a good margin.
If consumers always thought about why a company charges what it does, then sure.
But that's not how consumers think. Or companies, for the most part.
But that's not how consumers think. Or companies, for the most part.
You mean like cable companies where if you want ESPN you can buy it, but if you don't want the History Channel you can opt out?
If your product aspires to be that complicated, you're probably doing it wrong.
If your product aspires to be that complicated, you're probably doing it wrong.
The way I see it, the level of granularity I desire is directly related to the pricing. Something less expensive should have less granularity; something more expensive ought to have more granularity.
Cable is a good candidate for the "more granularity" category both because it's naturally easy to segment, and because while monthly bills are not large, they of course add up fast.
For an example of a product (rather than service) that can benefit from more granularity, consider computers. Even Apple, our paragon of non-granular pricing options, offers ~4 SKU's for their higher end laptops.
Cable is a good candidate for the "more granularity" category both because it's naturally easy to segment, and because while monthly bills are not large, they of course add up fast.
For an example of a product (rather than service) that can benefit from more granularity, consider computers. Even Apple, our paragon of non-granular pricing options, offers ~4 SKU's for their higher end laptops.
[deleted]
Windows 8: Normal person edition
Windows 8: I work in a big company edition
Windows 8: At least I get Office for free edition
Also what's with this:
Windows 8: I work in a big company edition
Windows 8: At least I get Office for free edition
Also what's with this:
All editions of Windows 8 offer a no-compromise experience.
Rather, the only compromise is price and for 100% of consumers that makes the choice completely obvious.
There isn't Windows 8: Productivity Crippled Edition, or Windows 8: Red and Blue editions where both have pros and cons. You don't have to labor over the difference because you're not losing anything by picking one over the other.
The kicker is that even if you bought Home and find yourself needing one of the extra features (BitLocker or joining a domain), you can upgrade to big company edition for the price difference without making any real changes but paying the price (no need to reinstall, etc).
For a given consumer there's literally zero reason to choose Pro until you need one of the features, and at that point you upgrade with Windows Anytime Upgrade and pay the price difference on the spot, and get your feature.
Because of this there's literally zero compromising, or decision making at all really. You just get Home and keep it until the day you need Pro, a day that will never come for most people.
There isn't Windows 8: Productivity Crippled Edition, or Windows 8: Red and Blue editions where both have pros and cons. You don't have to labor over the difference because you're not losing anything by picking one over the other.
The kicker is that even if you bought Home and find yourself needing one of the extra features (BitLocker or joining a domain), you can upgrade to big company edition for the price difference without making any real changes but paying the price (no need to reinstall, etc).
For a given consumer there's literally zero reason to choose Pro until you need one of the features, and at that point you upgrade with Windows Anytime Upgrade and pay the price difference on the spot, and get your feature.
Because of this there's literally zero compromising, or decision making at all really. You just get Home and keep it until the day you need Pro, a day that will never come for most people.
Awesome! They listened to feedback and killed off the mess of SKUs. Now only if they'd allow disk encryption (Bitlocker) in the basic SKU, so non-Pro users can use the OS instead of having to install TrueCrypt.
I personally would choose TrueCrypt, but I understand the "let's go with default version" even if it's $100 or so more (upgrading Win 7 Home to the Bitlocker version costs about that).
I suspect the ones with Bitlocker will do well if MS scares the crap out of big corps about losing private information
I suspect the ones with Bitlocker will do well if MS scares the crap out of big corps about losing private information
As a long time linux user and recent OSX laptop user, I hadn't used Windows with any regularity since 2001. Recently I bought a copy of Windows 7 to run some niche software that lacks wine support and is cumbersome to run in a vm.
My first impression was that Windows 7 was great, it appeared to have removed many of the rough edges from XP and Vista.
Soon enough though I began to run into issues relating to legacy programs' security needs. Turns out, the only option I had was to run the programs as Administrator, since the crippled version of Windows 7 I bought has the ntfs permissions essentially disabled.
Why of all things would the secure filesystem be one of the disabled features on the consumer focused OS version?
This realization was a bit jarring, b/c I felt that the "tax" to use the OS properly in this case was fairly high. I can see charging more money for actual features, but NTFS permissions are clearly used behind the scenes in the Home version, so it feels more like using crippleware than opting out of advanced capabilities.
So I hope that Windows 8 uses a more reasonable way to determine what is a basic and what is a pro feature.
My first impression was that Windows 7 was great, it appeared to have removed many of the rough edges from XP and Vista.
Soon enough though I began to run into issues relating to legacy programs' security needs. Turns out, the only option I had was to run the programs as Administrator, since the crippled version of Windows 7 I bought has the ntfs permissions essentially disabled.
Why of all things would the secure filesystem be one of the disabled features on the consumer focused OS version?
This realization was a bit jarring, b/c I felt that the "tax" to use the OS properly in this case was fairly high. I can see charging more money for actual features, but NTFS permissions are clearly used behind the scenes in the Home version, so it feels more like using crippleware than opting out of advanced capabilities.
So I hope that Windows 8 uses a more reasonable way to determine what is a basic and what is a pro feature.
The Home version just lacks a nice GUI for the security stuff. You can still manage file and directory permissions from the command line using cacls.exe.
See http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb490872.aspx
See http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb490872.aspx
Cool! Do you know if anyone has written a ui that wraps this?
http://helgeklein.com/setacl-studio/ (seems to do that; haven't used it, though)
That giant table looks pretty awful, but I guess this is a huge improvement for Windows releases. For desktop users, it's really a choice between Pro and regular. For Vista, it was this mess: http://www.helpwithwindows.com/WindowsVista/vista-which-vers...
Narrower, but longer.
While we all have our gripes, I am enjoying the various ways developers can write software for Windows RT. I understand Microsoft is (probably) just trying to play catchup to iOs and Android in terms of apps but allowing developers to create apps using languages they already know (C, C++, or C#(via Visual Studio 11)) is a nice touch.
Don't forget JS+HTML. That's a first-class option in WinRT.
Disclaimer: MSFT employee, yadda yadda
Disclaimer: MSFT employee, yadda yadda
No 'features for encryption' for "regular Windows." seems short sighted.
This is something that is only going to become more important as time goes on.
This is something that is only going to become more important as time goes on.
For a home user, what attacks does BitLocker prevent? Where would home users escrow their keys?
While not necessarily "attacks", BitLocker will help home users against data theft from the loss or theft of a laptop.
Apple offers a full disk encryption variant of FileVault for every Lion user for this very reason. Thanks to Lion, I'm able to track my laptop and can remotely nuke the drive (with, granted, some big caveats) and, if the computer's not communicative, I at least know my data is encrypted behind some level of password protection.
And I was able to turn it on through a quick series of sheets, one of which helped me set up an escrowed recovery key that's encrypted with keys only I know and stored with Apple. Should I not trust the encryption process, I'm able to opt out of escrow entirely.
It would have been wonderful to see Microsoft acknowledge that everyone can benefit from full disk encryption, not just "pro" users.
Apple offers a full disk encryption variant of FileVault for every Lion user for this very reason. Thanks to Lion, I'm able to track my laptop and can remotely nuke the drive (with, granted, some big caveats) and, if the computer's not communicative, I at least know my data is encrypted behind some level of password protection.
And I was able to turn it on through a quick series of sheets, one of which helped me set up an escrowed recovery key that's encrypted with keys only I know and stored with Apple. Should I not trust the encryption process, I'm able to opt out of escrow entirely.
It would have been wonderful to see Microsoft acknowledge that everyone can benefit from full disk encryption, not just "pro" users.
They need to integrate RT to remote very well to a real win8 or win7 machine and then I'm sold.
'Windows Media Center will be available as an economical “media pack” add-on to Windows 8 Pro.'
Does this mean it is not available for the non-Pro version of Windows 8?
Does this mean it is not available for the non-Pro version of Windows 8?
Well, it doesn't look like it will be available for Windows 8 RT, which is somewhat strange, considering that I would assume the ARM devices are media-centric.
I think it's included in the non-Pro version by default versus being a paid (that's how I'm reading "economical") add-on to the Pro version.
Look for "no comprises" in this thread. If what you think is true, then .. Microsoft still doesn't get what "don't make me decide" means.
They're taking 'Remote Desktop (host)' away from standard (non-pro) editions. That sucks.
One thing jumps out at me... so only WindowsRT has Microsoft Office - that's pretty much a required app for many business PC users and severe fragmentation if it's seriously not available on the other Windows8 editions.
Am I missing something? Does this imply shift to "cloud" office?
Am I missing something? Does this imply shift to "cloud" office?
It means that it's the only one that comes bundled with Office - of course you'll be able to install Office on Windows 8, but you will have to purchase it separately.
Windows RT is an ARM version of Windows. On that version, a touch optimized version of Microsoft Office will be included with the windows license.
I think this implies "We already can sell Office on x86, but we're not even sure we can sell Windows on ARM".
I think it's more like they're driving home the point...
"Why get an artificially crippled consumption device when you can have the choice to hookup a keyboard/mouse and do real work?"
..by bundling Office with the ARM tablets.
"Why get an artificially crippled consumption device when you can have the choice to hookup a keyboard/mouse and do real work?"
..by bundling Office with the ARM tablets.
Of course Office is available on all Windows versions. It's included with Windows RT, which is an interesting choice. It's likely going to be crippled in some way, otherwise an ARM laptop suddenly looks like a far better value than an Intel laptop. Intel can't be happy about this.
It's a completely different version of Office. I imagine it's at least partially recycled from Office for Windows Phone (which is bundled for free). It's actually rather good.
Why would Microsoft care about Intel while competing against the iPad juggernaut?
Also, the Intel tablet/laptop has the huge advantage of being able to run all Windows software to date. The ARM will only run Office and Metro apps.
Also, the Intel tablet/laptop has the huge advantage of being able to run all Windows software to date. The ARM will only run Office and Metro apps.
That's silly. Microsoft sees the ARM-based tablet future, and doesn't want to miss out. But, they don't want to piss Intel off too bad, since they work hand in hand to develop Windows' interaction with Intel chips in desktop/server environments.
Saying ARM will only run Office and Metro apps is like saying Macbooks have the huge advantage of being able to run all Mac software to date. iOS will only run iOS apps. That's the point.
Saying ARM will only run Office and Metro apps is like saying Macbooks have the huge advantage of being able to run all Mac software to date. iOS will only run iOS apps. That's the point.
[deleted]
No, I take it simply to mean that Office is included with WinRT (but not Winx86) which makes sense- they are making a custom Office interface, and probably see WinRT more as an opportunity to make Office indispensable on ARM, rather than Windows. This is how they have always won- it's not about the OS, it's about the 'apps. (Apple has re-demonstrated that with iOS) Office is their "killer app"- Windows is an enabler.
I have not taken a detailed look at this Win 8, but from an "ignorant dumb punter" POV, from a brief look, it looks like it turns my expensive PC in to a dumbed down toy. It sort of reminds me of an old heavily restricted Win Terminal Server session with flash bits.
Am I only seeing one mode and one can have the traditional windows look, or is that what we are all supposed to use now? If so, it look like a horrific wrench to get used to and there for very off putting.
Am I only seeing one mode and one can have the traditional windows look, or is that what we are all supposed to use now? If so, it look like a horrific wrench to get used to and there for very off putting.
Yea, you can switch to the Windows desktop from the Metro start screen, though the old Start menu is gone and the start screen replaces it.
There are some slick elements of the Metro UI design, but it does feel hemmed in, restrictive, and more akin to tablets.
No idea. I got it all, for $30.
I didn't even want to read the whole table for all the features of windows 8. I just want Windows 8.