One of the most frequent questions I get these days comes from people who’ve been running the Windows 7 beta and RC and are planning to upgrade to the final version when it’s available on October 22. “Which edition of Windows 7 do I need?” Interestingly, this question also comes up in other contexts as well. When Apple defenders appear in the TalkBack section here, they regularly insist that the Home Premium edition is “crippled” and “stripped-down.” Sooner or later, they insist, any self-respecting Windows user will have to upgrade. Based on that argument, they say that you must use the more expensive Ultimate edition to compare the costs of a Windows PC to those of a Mac, which comes in only a single edition. As you’ll see from the table below, this isn’t accurate. On the Windows side, many users just automatically assume that more is better. By that logic, Ultimate is obviously the best and lesser versions are inferior. Because they’re power users, they assume that Home Premium’s missing features mean they’re going to be lacking a feature they really need. But is that true? If you’re buying Windows Home Premium, what features are you missing, exactly? What would you get if you paid extra for Windows 7 Professional or Ultimate? And is it fair to compare OS X and Windows 7 Home Premium? A few weeks ago, I did an exhaustive comparison of the differences between Windows 7 editions. For the comparison here, I decided to strip the list down to a single, simple table, which represents the entire list of features that are in Professional or Ultimate editions that are not in Home Premium edition (with one esoteric exception, which I documetned at the end of the notes page). For comparison’s sake, I included OS X in the table as well. As you can see, OS X has much more in common with Windows 7 Home Premium than it does with the features in Professional and Ultimate editions. That shouldn’t be a surprise, because those two upgraded Windows editions are specifically aimed at customers running on Windows-based networks. Note that this is not a Windows 7 versus Mac OS X smackdown. Rather, it’s strictly designed to help you see whether you need one or more unique features from the Professional and Ultimate editions or whether the mainstream Home Premium edition will meet your needs. source: blogs.zdnet.com
How old is Windows XP ? The question is in the same age, since Microsoft started generating different versions of the OS.
if I wanted to read keznews.com I would go to keznews.com why does the thread starter insist on copying everything from that site to these forums...
Not many people have access to legitimate free copies of Windows. I do hope you're not suggesting people pirate Windows 7 or use versions they're not entitled to use on these forums
Somebody asked : how old is XP. October 25, 2001. This is, I think, an interesting discussion which brings to light a number of facts. I believe tech writers who insist that the overwhelming majority of Windows users know and utilize very little of an apps resources. Some people say that, with MS Office (any version), in general, people are able to utilize only about 10% of its capability. In my experience, I'd say fewer than 5% know Access or Excel and of those, a fraction know those apps well enough to create meaningful relational databases or create useful formulas, respectively. Indeed, the vast majority of Office users utilize word and nothing more - and even at that, their use is primarily limited to creating documents. Yet, you see in this forum, e.g., many people who swear by the most powerful and the latest version of everything. I suppose if one relies on pirated copies of SW, it does not matter - except, of course, to go through the pains of finding the SW and then hacking it and rehacking it every time MS rewrites WGA/OGA. You see people doing that with Win7 betas even though MS makes the betas available. You will see people do that with the final release of Win7 in October even though in the US the upgrade is now on sale for only $99 for pro ($45 for home). Notwithstanding the fact that Open Office is essentially the same as MS Office, especially in terms of what most people actually need and use, I guess its human nature to forever want the biggest and "best." As someone said here, if it's free why not have the complete copy. One answer to that question might be, "I use this version because it is all I need." That, of course is a reasonable - but silly - answer. Finally, in a way I agree with HSChronic regarding lifting an article and reprinting it here. I don't object to doing such but a link would have sufficed. However, when I read such articles as these, I bear in mind that they are no more than one person's opinion about how I should behave. So, articles notwithstanding, get what you want, impelled by reason or hormones and enjoy. Monk
Well in general I would agree with you regarding users (in)experience. But I disagree with you on the following topics : Please note that in some 'evolving' countries software can (and is) be very expensive. For example - Microsoft OS (Vista) OEM costs here : - home prem. ~350 - ultimate ~700 And usually people earn here between 1500-2500. That's around 1/5 (or nearly half for ultimate) of monthly wage. That's what I call insane and because of such cases SW is cracked and will be in the future. Openoffice is essentially the same, but "the devil is in the details". Importing simple documents into OO is easy and error-free. However try to import some documents or excel spreadsheets with more advanced formulas, graphs, formatting etc. then you will know what I'm talking about. And about posting on the forums - I think we all know that by doing that we share only our opinions and views which tend to be biased - cause there are this many different point of views how many people live on earth.
Well I need the ultimate one, because my wife is japanese and I'm French, and the ultimate is the only one which is multi-language. I don't need all other ultimate features.
You can force different language on home premium by some hacks, but this is what I call a good reason mate. Offtopic : Man you are lucky - I would love to have a Japanese wife - they are so beautiful !
@PrEzi Are you justifying pirating SW, indeed, stealing anything, because you cannot afford to buy it, i.e., the end justifies the means? Monk
I'm not justifying it. I just think the price is insane and doesn't come in par with the monthly wages in some countries. I own myself an XP lic I don't use anymore and one Vista lic, but that doesn't change my mind and point of view at all.
I have used perfectly legal MS feature for years with Vista: Rearm The fact is i do a clean install minimum 4 times a year and therefore i have no need for crack or activation hacks and no problem passing any MS validation(WGA or otherwise).Besides if i remember correctly the MS EULA states that you can legally rearm 3 times(30+3x30=120 days).And in nowhere does it state that i am prohibited from doing a new install after that 120 days and start the 120 days all over again to keep using Windows . It has worked for me nearly 3 years now.Ofcourse not everyone is so tech savvy and to relatives and family i always suggest buying legal windows.Just that in my case it would be waste of money.Generally i agree that if you are pirate then there are 2 software types you need to have legal:OS and AV.I own a license of ESET NOD32+some other sofware so im not 100% pirate.If a sofware is difficult to pirate(in my case AV,Diskeeper,Fraps etc) then i rather buy full license then go trough all the hassle. I have even created a simple Task Scheduler task that finds the nessesary .cmd file(slmgr -rearm in notepad and save with .cmd extension) from my pc and run Rearm with admin rights once in 29 days.