That’s another thing they should change; revert to only two editions – Business and Home. Notice, I said “Business” and not “Pro”. Even “XP Pro” and XP Home Edition” confused people. When it comes to technology one on the most difficult aspects is making a decision. Even in this age of information, people don’t want to spend hours educating themselves as to which of five (5) versions of a product to purchase. K.I.S.S (keep It Simple, Stupid!) and the people will pucker up (with their wallets that is).

I like CoryC’s idea, if we are on the same page, that is. Every year, MS would release an update to the OS, one which would add new features and improvements to the existing ones (such as the sidebar), at no cost to the user. Then, after a few years (3-5), they would release a major upgrade, one that would have new major features (like DX10).
This would accomplish three things. The first is that the OS would not stagnate, held back by the principle that only major updates can have new features. The second is that MS would be able to space these minor upgrades over a period of time, giving them more time and flexibility with developing the major features. Third, it would allow them to delay if necessary without having to worry that the current OS is getting too old. Also, as a bonus, these free updates could be about equivalent to Apple’s paid ones, giving MS an edge.

Exactly!

Apple also disappoints me with how they charge for what they label as a more minor update, but everyone I talk to say that they can easily get it illegally. Mac, unlike Vista, does not have any sort of activation so all you need is a serial number and your good as gold. Of course I’m not condoning piracy, but the fact is many Apple users hate having to pay for these upgrades as well…and they’re looking for another solution.

@Slasher: I’ve had a lot of hands-on experience with both Vista and XP (been a Windows user all my life and jumped on the Vista Beta bandwagon almost a year ago) and I can see where you’re coming from. One of the biggest concerns for me with Vista was how long it would take developers to come up with compatible applications. As of right now I would say that application compatibility is very high and I’m surprised at how many updates have been released to make programs work with Vista. The only program that I use which isn’t officially labeled as Vista compatible is…iTunes.

Some people (like family) that I have had play with Vista, who have used XP just a little bit, say that Vista has things a little more intuitively laid out…especially the Control Panel. They can just start to type a setting that they are looking for and it will pull it right up, so now users don’t feel so intimidated when wanting to change something. This was a great move by Microsoft.

@MetaMan: I didn’t really think about that giving an edge to Microsoft, but you’re definitely right. Since Vista is priced higher than what Mac OS normally costs it would give it more value if people knew that they would get updates similar to what Mac users have to pay for. I think this is something Microsoft might take more advantage of with the “Ultimate Extras” for Vista Ultimate, but as of right now those extras are a little disappointing.

This would accomplish three things. The first is that the OS would not stagnate, held back by the principle that only major updates can have new features. The second is that MS would be able to space these minor upgrades over a period of time, giving them more time and flexibility with developing the major features. Third, it would allow them to delay if necessary without having to worry that the current OS is getting too old. Also, as a bonus, these free updates could be about equivalent to Apple’s paid ones, giving MS an edge.

It’s my belief that customers never pay for minor upgrades, only major ones (ex: Windows 7.0).

Apple rubs me the wrong way because with each new version of Mac OS X, customers have to fork over money to upgrade when there isn’t much that changes.