Windows 7 Family Pack to cover three machines for a measly $150

Thats what I have been trying to find out, and no one seems to have an answer.

Looks like they are all upgrades, but the upgrade just requires Windows XP or Vista, so most machines should have this. You'll still have to do a clean install if you do it from XP, but you just need to have XP on it first (I'm sure workarounds will exist just like they did for the Vista Home Upgrades)

Check out the full-sized image, courtesy of Microsoft's website:
http://windowsteamblog.com/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Blogs.Components.WeblogFiles/windows7/Win7_5F00_HP_5F00_FAMPAC_5F00_3DL_5F00_EN_5F00_1F336887.jpg

Bleh, I'd rather just buy the full versions....less hassle when it comes to the install.

Rocketboy and Impulsivity: I tend to agree with both of you. New computers used to include the OS and Office along with great OEM software so I look for best deals always (I wait to get new versions of MS OS/Office always).

When one gets a computer for $300 to $2000 or more I feel OS, Office, and some OEMs should be free! (I have a fairly new copy of Corel's Word Perfect Office Suite that is a lot like Windows version plus you can build mat equations that actually work and give answers unlike MS Office just allowing symbols to be typed in! I will try it on my new "chocolate Pavillion laptop" to see how it works. (In Corel's Office it took me 30 hours to learn how to make formulas using commands in a text box a few years ago. Hope I have it on a brain cell somewhere if I ever work for the university or a grad student again!

Back to this current deal, Ahem, MS has more money than God, and they should share the wealth. (I am going after Google's Office as I've read it's great and matches or beats MS...I'll just have to see. I didn't want it on my decade-old Dell Dimension, but I'm going to try it on my brand new PAVILION DV7-1285DX I get to learn Vista Premium. I will redesign it so it resembles Win2000 with My Documents and so on. I need familiarity.

Oh, when I saw the price at $149 for Windows 7 (and more than likely no Office on it which would be another $150 perhaps), I wanted to hurl. I'll wait, thankeweverymuch!
I always am very slow at going up to a new version of Windows. Saves a lot of pulling hair. Let somebody else scream for a while. (I am bad.) Version 3.11 was a nightmare, and I waited a long time to get it. They were all bad for me at least until Win98 to May 1999, but still many problems. Win2000 will probably always be my favorite (so very stable now). Wish I could put it on the new computer somehow. I'll have to find someone who might know. I don't want to format and partition now, but there MAY be a trick. Think?

I would advise that they make one fabulous version of Windows and make it right the first time around and upgrade and add on or whatever. I will give MS a thumbs up because they fixed a serious problem on I.E. 6 this week. I have no idea what the deal was as I run or try to run the best antivirus, registry software and anti-spyware you can get (some free and some cheap).

Perhaps MS is losing its edge (why is it called "7"?). Google beats everything if I understand and believe what I'm hearing (they have a great Office suite that is much like MS Office!). With MS and Yahoo! I see perhaps troublesome times for a while. They may become the "biggest" or they could lose more money. Time will tell. Meanwhile I have to learn Vista! ERP! Scuse me.

How much more does it cost to enable RAM amounts greater then 4GBs or your second processor core in programing cost? How much more did those 8 very minor features that came as ultimate extras for Vista cost?

There are very few amazing features in the higher builds, its more that they just knee cap the lower builds. They restrict networking, limit the RAM you can use, disable encryption ect. They don't ADD much of anything, rather they remove very basic features that are required by corporate clients for no good reason. The argument that its value relative to cost makes no sense, all the "super premium features" in ultimate such as using all your hardware fully, encryption and full corporate network access are included in 29 updates to OSX and completely free versions of Linux, so how is there 200-300 dollars of research per copy going into them again?

I would have no problem paying for extra features that added value, but there's a difference between a useful value added feature worth the money and just having to pay 140 bucks to let your computer use all its resources (my personal example is having to buy Ultimate to use the 12GBs of RAM and second computer core on my desktop, they in effect were holding hardware not software features hostile for no discernible reason).

Why defend this differential pricing anyway? I mean even the biggest windows fanboy is paying more because they do this (probably disproportionally more because the enthusiast is more likely to have hardware that requires paying the Ultimate tax). EVERYONE would be better served by a reasonably priced full featured edition, especially the fanboy community.

Full featured OS for 100 bucks is about the ceiling for reasonable pricing, above that its just monopoly exploitation to everyones detriment. Why some are making "please let me pay more for stuff that would be standard under the old windows 95 one full featured version paradigm) is beyond me. If I'm going to dump hundreds of dollars into my computer I'd rather buy a graphics card or better processor that increases functionality rather then spend the money just pay through the nose removing restrictions artificially placed on my hardware by differential OS pricing.

A: Do you work for MS? Do you know what the development costs/time are?

B: Nobody is making you buy the Ultimate edition. I've never found value in it, so I've never bought it.

C: Working at a software company, sure, to some extent there are not huge differences at the core of some of our different packages. BUT. Each package does bring it's own values. Each package does require it's own development cycles. Each package requires it's own testing before it can be released.

D: Maybe we're getting a great deal on the basic package. Maybe it's the sales of Ultimate that really carry the development costs.

And only an idiot charges what the actual cost of the product being sold is. You charge what the cost of the next product will cost.