Microsoft Announces Windows 7 Retail Prices Ahead of General Availability

[farlex85]

Listen man, when I buy a PC game I play it on my Windows machine. That's why I have a Windows machine. When I do school work I use my Macbook. I have no bias... I use each for a purpose.

I'm just stating that yes it is easily possible for someone to play ANY Windows game on a Mac.

What do you need more power for? Gaming or school work? But which one cost you more? I love Mac OS X I really do, I just hate Mac (I'm a big bang/buck kind of guy).

I know it's possible but thanks for trying to educate me. Mac's graphics cards don't look so good once you try to game, and I don't consider an bootcamp +windows to be effective.

I have no idea how much I paid way back when, but it has been used on my Athlon XP, 3 upgrades, and then my A64 system, and now my C2D. It could be considered free.

Right now as a student all I'm doing is mainly programming and the occasional Youtube video.

And I have a desktop. You might be interested in knowing I travel a lot, so a desktop is not acceptable for a workstation. Hence why I have a Macbook pro.

What I'm saying is, if you're so worried about power enough to pay that much for a laptop you'd hope it'd play a game or two. If not (or doing the other things I mentioned), a much cheaper workstation would do just as well.

Work it out however you like, Windows retail should cost about $200 + $50-60 for boot camp, hence what I said.

 

[Dippyskoodlez]

Work it out however you like, Windows retail should cost about $200 + $50-60 for boot camp, hence what I said.

Boot camp is free.

http://www.apple.com/macosx/what-is-macosx/compatibility.html

No idea where you got the $50-$60.

 

[farlex85]

Boot camp is free.

http://www.apple.com/macosx/what-is-macosx/compatibility.html

No idea where you got the $50-$60.

B/c I've seen people charging for it and parallels. But hey, that's nice now it's just the price of Windows yay.

 

[Ravenas]

Boot camp is free.

http://www.apple.com/macosx/what-is-macosx/compatibility.html

No idea where you got the $50-$60.

Ignorance is bliss...

 

[Ravenas]

B/c I've seen people charging for it and parallels. But hey, that's nice now it's just the price of Windows yay.

Yes, it's called the price of buying Apple's operating system.

 

[Dippyskoodlez]

I like the way Macs have gotten, I really do. I hated them in their horrendous G3 / G4 days. But the more I see of the Mac attitude, the more I'm driven away from Mac's. However the Mac attitude has been fairly low key so far, but it can take off within a moments notice. But, its what's driven me to wash my hands of Apple thus far.

Realistically all apple does is GOOD marketing. Microsoft does the same.

How many times have we seen "More secure!" "Connect quickly and easily!"

Its the same hubbub from both ends of the party when it comes to advertising features.

Apple just gets scrutinized for every word said, whereas Microsoft is assumed guilty before they speak. Where would the Cellphone market be without the iPhone?

 

[farlex85]

Yes, it's called the price of buying Apple's operating system.

No it's called parallels costs money and I don't use it so I was confused. I'm sure this invalidates everything I've said and thus renders myself obviously a Windows ignorant freak.

 

[Ravenas]

No it's called parallels costs money and I don't use it so I was confused. I'm sure this invalidates everything I've said and thus renders myself obviously a Windows ignorant freak.

I realize parallels cost money, but Bootcamp is included in Apple's operating system and installs Windows natively, it's different than parallels and in my opinion the best option.

 

[El Fiendo]

Well. I know you aren't going to like this. It wouldn't be as advanced forward as the iPhone did add alot of usability with its OS, however there were touchscreen phones from before hand.

 

[Dippyskoodlez]

No it's called parallels costs money and I don't use it so I was confused. I'm sure this invalidates everything I've said and thus renders myself obviously a Windows ignorant freak.

Parallels is just a really handy tool that isn't available to windows users as accessibly(Or at all, IDK), which is why it's such a popular software to those of us that bootcamp OS's regularly.

Should look into it.

 

[farlex85]

I realize parallels cost money, but Bootcamp is included in Apple's operating system and installs Windows natively, it's different than parallels and in my opinion the best option.

I would agree free for equivalent = better in my book. I'm not sure why there's still a market for parallels if that is the case.

Parallels is just a really handy tool that isn't available to windows users as accessibly(Or at all, IDK), which is why it's such a popular software to those of us that bootcamp OS's regularly.

Should look into it.

What does it do that boot camp or Windows won't?

 

[Dippyskoodlez]

I would agree free for equivalent = better in my book. I'm not sure why there's still a market for parallels if that is the case.

Parallels and Vmware fusion provide basic Virtual machines on OS X like Vmware has done so in the past, but with some really nice features that aren't available for Windows.

i.e. Unity/Coherence, and Bootcamp support.

On my MBP I run OS X, and a Bootcamp Windows 7 right now. I can boot windows 7 up in Vmware, within OS X, and run programs (Even games! i.e. TF2), or reboot into Windows 7 directly ( The exact same install!)

unity and Coherence are just a big time bonus for doing homework in Visual studio and such This can't really be explained easily without a screenshot: http://www.pcmech.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/vmware_unity.png

Unity makes Windows windows behave like OS X windows. Dock support, etc. It's extremely handy.

 

[farlex85]

Parallels and Vmware fusion provide basic Virtual machines on OS X like Vmware has done so in the past, but with some really nice features that aren't available for Windows.

i.e. Unity/Coherence, and Bootcamp support.

On my MBP I run OS X, and a Bootcamp Windows 7 right now. I can boot windows 7 up in Vmware, within OS X, and run programs (Even games! i.e. TF2), or reboot into Windows 7 directly.

unity and Coherence are just a big time bonus for doing homework in Visual studio and such

Ah I see so it'll do VM's. I myself have no need for VM's, I'd rather just do a full reboot. But that's neato I suppose.

 

[Dippyskoodlez]

Ah I see so it'll do VM's. I myself have no need for VM's, I'd rather just do a full reboot. But that's neato I suppose.

This allows you to run your bootcamp partition in a "VM" with 3d support so you get the best of both worlds.

 

[farlex85]

This allows you to run your bootcamp partition in a "VM" with 3d support so you get the best of both worlds.

What do you mean 3D support? And generally running an OS in a VM is going to cripple it a bit, but it depends on what your doing whether that matters. For me if you're going to spend so much money on a mac why would you then turn around and spend money on Windows.

 

[Ravenas]

What do you need more power for? Gaming or school work? But which one cost you more? I love Mac OS X I really do, I just hate Mac (I'm a big bang/buck kind of guy).

The reason I use a Windows PC for gaming is because you can't make an OEM Apple machine, and Apple doesn't share its product with other computer manufactures to produce. Thus I use a Windows machine so I can be in control of my hardware, rather than my hardware being proprietary... Buying an Apple is really just as similar as buying a Dell, except better quality and longevity in my opinion. That's after my experience using Dells and HPs for 16 years of my life

Furthermore, when buying any branded computer, I will only buy a notebook. Why? Because I can't make a notebook myself. That's where Apple comes into play in my life.

 

[Ravenas]

What do you mean 3D support? And generally running an OS in a VM is going to cripple it a bit, but it depends on what your doing whether that matters. For me if you're going to spend so much money on a mac why would you then turn around and spend money on Windows.

The only thing that is going to cripple an OS running in VM is whether you have the system requirements to run it smoothly and properly.

 

[Dippyskoodlez]

What do you mean 3D support? And generally running an OS in a VM is going to cripple it a bit, but it depends on what your doing whether that matters. For me if you're going to spend so much money on a mac why would you then turn around and spend money on Windows.

Parallels and Vmware fusion have DX9 support, if that's what you're asking. The Mac virtualization department is quite a bit different from the PC VT world

I haven't actually had to "Spend money" on windows in forever. Between free college licenses, and my reliable XP retail CD, I'm all set for whatever I need.

There is no Steam for OS X That is actually the only software I run in Windows currently. However, I can play HL2 and TF2 from within my bootcamp VM (As soon as vmware fixes their ati bug ).

I don't plan on buying Windows 7 at all, Microsoft will hand me a free license eventually.. and if it takes a while, I always have Vista to fall back to for Steam (Whereas I can't resist buying Snow Leopard for $30 :O )

 

[farlex85]

The reason I use a Windows PC for gaming is because you can't make an OEM Apple machine, and Apple doesn't share its product with other computer manufactures to produce. Thus I use a Windows machine so I can be in control of my hardware, rather than my hardware being proprietary... Buying an Apple is really just as similar as buying a Dell, except better quality and longevity in my opinion. That's after my experience using Dells and HPs for 16 years of my life

Furthermore, when buying any branded computer, I will only buy a notebook. Why? Because I can't make a notebook myself. That's where Apple comes into play in my life.

I would agree with that, and as such I have no problem recommending Apple's to certain folks. They are certainly better than most dells or HPs, and hey if you got cash to burn why not. I just would never do it, b/c for me if all I'm going to be doing is school work and browsing and such (which is what I would do on a laptop), I don't feel like I should have to spend $1000 to accomplish that. Thus I'll go w/ the $500 bang/buck every time. There are some great $500 computers out there, you just have to look. I would love to have a Mac, but I think they should start at $500 (for the current $1k one).

 

[El Fiendo]

Furthermore, when buying any branded computer, I will only buy a notebook. Why? Because I can't make a notebook myself. That's where Apple comes into play in my life.

Heh, I went with no Notebooks because I couldn't customize them. I actually spent time looking up DIY notebooks to see if I'd get one that way. The only reason I actually do own one is because I shredded it apart, resoldered some chips on it and fixed my sister's broken laptop she'd given to me.

 

[Ravenas]

Parallels and Vmware fusion have DX9 support, if that's what you're asking. The Mac virtualization department is quite a bit different from the PC VT world

I haven't actually had to "Spend money" on windows in forever. Between free college licenses, and my reliable XP retail CD, I'm all set for whatever I need.

There is no Steam for OS X That is actually the only software I run in Windows currently. However, I can play HL2 and TF2 from within my bootcamp VM (As soon as vmware fixes their ati bug ).

I don't plan on buying Windows 7 at all, Microsoft will hand me a free license eventually.. and if it takes a while, I always have Vista to fall back to for Steam (Whereas I can't resist buying Snow Leopard for $30 :O )

Well really in my opinion the importance of Windows for gaming is due in large part to the proprietary Direct X software that Microsoft created. Want DirectX 10? Well Microsoft forces you to upgrade to Vista for that. I really don't think most consumers realize that.

Developers have quite literally become exclusive Direct X developers only because the computer gaming market has reached an all time low in comparison to others platforms.

OpenGL is an equivalent or if not better platform for graphics in comparison to DirectX, and it's free + open source!

Yet since the computer gaming market is beginning to fade away as time passes developers aren't going to develop their games for both OpenGL and DirectX (with the exception of id and EA, and id will probably begin to stop since they are now owned by Betheseda). The only thing keeping the PC market alive for now is mod friendly games and MMOs. Which in the future consoles will take this market from the PC as well.

 

[a_ump]

i read a couple times by posters that OEM OS's can only be activated on 1 computer at a time. I call bullshit, simply because i used the same OEM DVD for Vista on my computer, my bro's, and my friends, with no problem activating them and all 3 comps are still activated. Course i never download and install that windows update that checks the legitamecy of your copy of windows....lol who in the hell would?

I think it's a bummer that developer's went DX instead of openGL, then people wouldn't have to have a specific OS to run a game at max visuals. i'm really interested to see what DX11 brings. Honestly if it's just barely better looking that what DX10 can do i'd be fine with it so long as DX11 is more streamlined for performance. Shit if it has the same capabilities visually as DX10 i wouldn't care either, i just want them to code games for DX11 so that most games can look like crysis without requiring the top of the line video card.

 

[Ravenas]

i read a couple times by posters that OEM OS's can only be activated on 1 computer at a time. I call bullshit, simply because i used the same OEM DVD for Vista on my computer, my bro's, and my friends, with no problem activating them and all 3 comps are still activated. Course i never download and install that windows update that checks the legitamecy of your copy of windows....lol who in the hell would?

I think it's a bummer that developer's went DX instead of openGL, then people wouldn't have to have a specific OS to run a game at max visuals. i'm really interested to see what DX11 brings. Honestly if it's just barely better looking that what DX10 can do i'd be fine with it so long as DX11 is more streamlined for performance. Shit if it has the same capabilities visually as DX10 i wouldn't care either, i just want them to code games for DX11 so that most games can look like crysis without requiring the top of the line video card.

In my opinion... Developers aren't going DirectX they are quite literally locked into it. Since the PC games market is so small they are obviously going to use the operating system with the largest market share. Well if you're a games developer for Windows, then you're required to use to DirectX.

Thing is... This is also true for the Xbox. Microsoft in my opinion has created a unfair but smart, strategic advantage on its competition by doing this with the Xbox. Developers for the PC who are small and can't afford to code their game for another graphics interface such as OpenGL are obviously going to go and develop their game easily for the Xbox. Valve is a perfect example... Valve will not release Left 4 Dead or Orange Box on the PS3 simply because it will require resources that they simply don't have.

 

[Dippyskoodlez]

i read a couple times by posters that OEM OS's can only be activated on 1 computer at a time. I call bullshit, simply because i used the same OEM DVD for Vista on my computer, my bro's, and my friends, with no problem activating them and all 3 comps are still activated. Course i never download and install that windows update that checks the legitamecy of your copy of windows....lol who in the hell would?

Microsoft will activate this, yes.

Legally, the OEM license is bound to the original motherboard it was first activated with.

Legally, and what a user can get away with are vastly different as always

i.e. Read the actual EULA.

 

[a_ump]

ah so basically microsoft says "your not allowed to, but here's your key anyways" lol