Honestly, does anyone understand Microsoft’s point in offering upgrade media for Windows 7? As well, what’s with the different versions?
Last time, we discussed the multiple versions of Windows 7 and why it’s largely silly. Now we’re going to discuss the even-sillier idea in all of this: upgrade versus full install.
Seriously, why is Microsoft even going down this road? Are we seriously believing that they’re rewarding prior customers? We’ve already seen that the really good customers (like me) who bought their most expensive version of Vista, are now getting screwed. We Vista Ultimate users aren’t getting a single penny off in upgrading to Windows 7. In the end, the extra money I spent on Vista Ultimate is gone with my move to Windows 7.
The next idea of this has to do with upgrade versions versus full install versions. What kind of freaky stupidity is this? Let’s look at the idiocy of this.
First of all, 99.999% of Windows users are not Windows users by conscious choice. It’s either what came with the computer we bought or it’s what we use at work. Or whatever. There really aren’t that many people that have an honest choice between Windows, Linux, OSX, and other OSes that choose Windows. Indeed, people who make a choice will choose to move away from Windows. The rest of us are either choosing to stay with (not move to) Windows or are simply not making a choice. So suffice it to say, pretty much every PC user on the planet is licensed to use at least one version of Windows, somewhere in their past. That makes each and every one of us eligible for an upgrade.
But Microsoft doesn’t do their upgrade that way. For Windows 7, there has to be a licensed, activated version of Windows on the PC for the upgrade to be accepted. And woe betide anyone who has an issue after that. To get back to their Windows 7 installation, they will have to reinstall the prior OS and then upgrade all over again. Thank God Windows 7 now has complete system Backup and Restore on all versions… we all need to take grand advantage of that.
In any case, there is a very small contingent of people that are not currently using Windows who might like to try Windows 7. Why are those people being punished and forced to buy the more-expensive full-install version of Windows 7? Shouldn’t Microsoft be coveting those people? After all, there might be a conversion in it. And a higher price might make some Linux users simply not bother.
This is why I believe that Windows 7 should have one single version, for no more than $75 ($50 would be even better!) and all installation should be full-installs that can also be used as in-place upgrades if the user wishes.
So here’s another way to look at this. Moving to Windows 7 is a positive thing (or at least should be). However, the installation and adaptation of the new OS is a negative thing. People have to move all their data, get used to new ways of doing things, deal with programs that won’t work in the new OS, etc. So they will have to want to move up to Windows 7 to actually go out and purchase it and install it. That makes this a precarious situation. It’s balanced between positive and negative. So what could tip it one way or the other? Well, how about price? If Windows 7 is reasonably priced, then I would be happy to go through the rigmarole of upgrading. But if the price is too high, then I’m likely to not upgrade preferring to wait until my next PC purchase to get Windows 7.
Then I might look at the difference between upgrading and full install versions and determine that the full install is definitely not worth it, but the upgrade might be affordable… but the upgrade could carry a new set of issues. What happens if I have a drive failure? If I don’t have a full system backup, then I may be S.O.L. in trying to recover my system. That added potential negative could likewise prevent me from actually going out and purchasing Windows 7.
Surely Microsoft has to see this as a customer service nightmare. Surely they have to see that the very existence of upgrade media only serves to confuse and anger customers.
Check out this upgrade chart. This complexity could be eliminated if the whole concept of the Windows 7 upgrade were eliminated, adopting instead a full-install set of media only.
As well, our friend Paul Thurrott has enumerated plenty of ways to get around the upgrade limitations, should you find yourself in that pickle. So the case for buying full-install media and licenses is far less necessary. As such, why not turn the lower-priced upgrade media into full-install media at the same price and eliminate a host of customer service issues?
Microsoft is on the right track with Windows 7. They’ve reduced the number of versions and have made things easier than they were with Vista. But hopefully they continue that trend with Windows 8 and reduce the complexity and craziness even further. What do you think? Weigh in in the comments below.
Related Posts on This Topic:
Microsoft’s Windows 7 Upgrade Folly
Windows 7 Upgrades
Apples and Microsofts
Apple vs. Microsoft
iPhone 2.0 3G And Sometimes ‘Y’
I think they should deliver an OS based on major customer requirements and then not have an upgrade for a full decade, with regular updates in between. This clearly is a money making business, whereby some problems in Vista force most people to funnel their money into the Microsoft giant.
Posted November 19th, 2009 at 1:22 pm Michael Swanberg Says:
I’m not sure I understand your point. You understand that this is a cash-earner for Microsoft but yet you suggest they not put out any totally-new OSes for 10 years. How does that work?
But I do agree somewhat… in the end, what is the big change from XP and Vista to Windows 7? Most of what people have been beaming about are simply UI enhancements. Surely someone could have designed a Windows 7-like UI that works in XP.
OTOH, I do recognize the need to move on. XP was not constructed with security in mind, and it demonstrated that every Patch Tuesday. Vista has a good deal better security, as does Windows 7. We’re still not out of the woods, of course, as no OS can prevent user stupidity, but we’re in better shape than we were. In the end, major portions of XP would need to have been re-written from the ground up to add needed security.
Of course, many would argue that they should have done just that. 
-Mike
Posted November 19th, 2009 at 2:57 pm Microsoft Windows Advertising Goes Too Far, Parents Television Council Complains | Boycott Novell Says:
[...] 7 has also just been criticised in The Daily India. Honestly, does anyone understand Microsoft’s point in offering upgrade media for Windows 7? As [...]
Posted November 22nd, 2009 at 10:03 pm
« How to Choose a Domain Name SEO Cloaking »
