This is the retail versions, correct? I thought they would be that expensive anyway. OEM will be cheaper otherwise.

I thought retail versions usually cost that much anyway? OEM will be cheaper.

Who cares about starter at $200? It could be a thousand and it would make no difference. Every story I've read has stated it is exclusively OEM bound so the "list" price is pointless (well I'm sure it will surface in third world countries but under a whole new pricing scheme). OEM pricing is negotiated and is always below list.... (but lets not mention that in the article, otherwise you'd have to title it "Windows 7 Prices To Be Same As Vista" with little shock value).

If you plan to install on one computer and use that version on that particular computer until it has no value at all 10 years later, than, yes, OEM version is for you.

If you're the enthusiast who build computers for fun, and, therefore, swap mobo every 6 months, then you'd better pay for retail version.

I already have my mobo "burnt" once, and M$ gave me another activation for replacement mobo. That's something you have to take into account when purchasing M$ products.

Lame, Lame, Lame

too expensive! BOO!

"Someone" told you that the starter price for an OS that isn't coming out this year is going to cost $200 and you decided to write a story about it. LOL

Well.. it looks like I won't be buying windows 7 then. It's a fine product but judging from the beta I doubt I will get much out of it that Vista isn't already giving me. I have 4 computers and will not shell out $1000 for an OS. I'll get the OEM versions eventually when I upgrade my equipment.
As for the enthusiast who is worried about loosing his activation code...
Just get the cracked version. I'm not advocating piracy, but after several calls to microsoft to re-activate my windows XP system years ago. I've decided it's easier to just bypass the process altogether.

How could starter edition be so... overly priced? If they could see Vista Home Basic for $89... granted, it didn't start out at that price either...

I hope Win7 will be customizable to a Win2000/98 look!
I absolutely loathe having a slower system (less responsive) due to too many graphical changes.
Even my desktop background is plain black, in order to save memory.
The inability to view live thumbnails is plain stupid!
I think the option should be there to enable or disable as one likes, though one should be able to disable all the icons for say adobe reader, or txt files.
That's taking up memory and system speed!
I rather have a set of 20 custom icons, than having 100's of icons for every program,and every program installed only adds to the load.
Netbooks should respond quick!
I don't think pricing Win7 starters $200 is right, if it does less than XP.

I've never used anything aside from OEM for my stuff, and I change, swap, and test install ALL the time. That's not what the retail version is for.

The retail version is for both the retail box, and the retail support. OEM doesnt have an ounce of support to go along with it, because it's the responsibility of the 'OEM' (Or you, if you're building your own) to provide complete software support for the machine.

If we're going by retail prices, yeah, this makes sense. Infact, it's expected. Remove the Indian support and the fancy retail fixin's, and you've got a starter edition down to something more like 70-80 dollars, with basic starting right around $89.99. Which prices it exactly where the current windows stands.

Wasted article, wasted time.

Please tell me you're joking about the black background for your desktop. LOL

I wonder if we will still get the same response of 'nice, but for that price I'll stick to my perfectly working copy of XP'. I mean, why fork over money for the upgrade when you have a working computer? Especially considering the rising rate of unemployment and the slowly sinking global economy...

So...they overcharge for Vista...and this is better so just charge us the same...? I like how there is all this Basic, Starter, Premium, Ultimate, Pro version stuff... 320$ for the final version? OSX was 100$ a copy as far as I know, and like 150$ for a 5 computer site license....PLEASE MICROSOFT take your head out of your *(&*^ and wake up in the real world.

Yeah, but OSX is just the software and the disk. The Apple branded computer is your user license and your claim to tech support (which is one of the reasons Macs are expensive... the price includes the user license for all future OS releases that will be able to run on the system). M$ Windows is bought as software, user license, and tech support (except OEM).

Two hundred bucks?! Forget it! I am not giving Microsoft one penny.

Windows 7 should be and update to Vista users.

Why should I give them money for an updated OS when they can't even update Streets & Trips 08. Microsoft just wants you to keep buying new software that you already own then release a new version and charge you for it when it should be an update.

Don't get me wrong. I'm willing to give a company a small fee for software that I own to be updated when a major update is involved but asking me to update Streets & Trips 08 for the 09 version and ask for full retail price is insane.

Vista owners should try Windows 7. It corrects many flaws of Vista. But lets be honest here, it is an updated Vista, nothing special here just Vista without the bugs if you ask me.

Microsoft if your listening, Charge whatever you want for your new OS to retailers and the public. Just don't leave your Vista owners in the dark. Give Vista owners an update ok?

Those prices are a bit steep in these times. With Vista's unpopularity and undoubtedly a uncertainty will come to Windows 7. I think this will make most users simply not jump over right away. Most businesses will not simply move over either as they like to stick with what they know and works for them. So Windows 7 could see some very disappointing sales and these prices certainly are going to have a reverse effect then Microsoft intends. They really need to lure the consumer with a lower price and promises of a better OS.

if they to keep or gain market share, they should price it at $99 and give a family pack at $149.

Just charge like a $50 fee for existing Vista users (at Premium and above or something.) to just upgrade. That will at least make the existing users with the frustrating operating system a little happier considering we have spent the last 2 years dealing with vista's bull%$^@.

Starter is only sold to OEMs. So this would be OEM pricing.

Lol why would they sell a crippled version starter meant for developing nations that will only be sold in OEM at 200 that's just bad marketing. I could see home premium or w.e the like standard US home version that will be sold at retail at 200 that's easily can be true.

Aside from the fact that after starter, which we're first seeeing, every other version listed in the article follows the current retail pricing perfectly. This is not OEM pricing.

No, the others aren't OEM, I was talking about Starter (which is what the article is mainly about). But it's only logical that you don't have retail prices for something that isn't retail. That's why these prices can't be realistic, at least for Starter, because no OEM will pay $199 for an OS more crippled than Windows 95.

You need $200 to buy an OS that can only run 3 applications at a time?

HAS EVERYONE LOST THEIR FUCKING MINDS????????????

It's called journalism author, go find out the story.

for god sakes how can they be charging us so much, windows 7 is basically vista with some lipstick, man how greedy can you get. i'm sticking with xp it runs great. i guess microsoft wants to help linux / apple increase market share.

i agree with you 100%, they should just have priced it at $50 for existing vista users, even that is too much for what is not much more than a service pack with tweaks to mitigate vista weaknesses.

Sounds about right. With all the people that didn't buy Vista they have to make up for the loss. I don't think its too much to ask for people to pay these prices for Windows. I don't even make a ton of money and its a drop in the bucket to me considering how much use I get out of it.

Already this is hurting their image just by looking at the posts above. What ever happened to the multi-million dollar ad campaign to turn the company image around. I noticed they didn't have one superbowl ad.

I think MS is not prepared for the shock that is coming. They feel they are going in the right direction, but they are failing again. The steps from 98se to 2000 were too little to hit mass market appeal, even though it is the best OS that MS has put out to date (with XP nipping at it's heels). XP users see win7 as just another vista failure and see no need to update. Vista users see win7 as service pack2 that they have to pay for. Vista works fine after some tweaking and they will eventually see no reason to update (for this price). They should just name this thing VistaSE... I really see this as being one of the biggest flops in MS history. They aren't moving toward what end users want and that is a clean, intuitive, customizable interface. The ability to find their files quickly and navigate to do the things they want to do. Though if they gave us customizable interfaces, it would been hard for them to have sold us XP from 2000.

Don't you love rumors! I know M$ can do some stupid shit but no way would they sell a 200 buck os at oem prices to 3rd-ish world countrys a high schooler could tell you that's probably stupid and wont roll over well you know they stick to their 2000 and IE6 for a reason over there.