Imho free for personal use would be appropriate, and then add some cost for support options. A higher pricetag for commercial use is not uncommon, starting at $100/license for the basic version up to whatever reasonable a volume license could be worth...

Looking at a more "realistic" pricing, I'd say $25 for upgrade from vista (let's face it, unless they add some really dazzling extras, it's nothing more than just a big service pack...) and $100 upgrade from XP... That's not likely to happen either though...

I think we'll see the same pricing as we got now, from microsofts point of view "if it works don't fix it" is not strange. They are probably more interested in milking as much cash as possible from everyone before they have to either jump onto the "free-wagon" or fade away as "once-a-dominant-OS".

well i dont agree >.>   ive got xp  for the sole reason that i knew vista sucked,   just becuase i took time in looking up some information b4 purchase doesnt mean i should pay more...

rly i do think it should be sold cheap... just to repay people for making such a miserable piece of software...  and for the sake of my wallet....

im glad theyre not yet throwing away 32-bit,  there's plenty of programs that i still use,  stuff wich is jsut not replaceable   not until something just like it is released now i just i'll just run a multi-boot using 64-bit and 32-bit  both the same only able to run 32 and 64 -bit seperatly...  that's really gonna be helpfull

it wouldnt be very fair either,  becuase sotfware wich runs on 32-bit is still being released... or has been released not that long ago,   some game's will just not run on 64-bit, so wont be played anymore, even tough it's still fun playing

hopefully something i can afford......if that fails ill wait a few months and try to score a decent priced unopened version on ebay.

Netbooks. Atom and such don't come in 64bit flavours.

I don't really want Windows.  But whether I want it or not, it's necessary in order to play the vast majority of games made for the PC.  I'd happily have a dual-booting system if there were two operating systems that competed for PC titles and each had their own merits, but that fiction has yet to become a reality.

The reason I don't like Windows is that it just doesn't quite deliver what I want from an operating system.  There's a limit to how much I can customise it to my tastes, one which at times seriously tests my patience.  I'll give you an example.  If I want to switch from desktop speakers to wearing headphones, I have to open the control panel, pick Sounds and Audio Devices, and then pick Advanced to adjust things accordingly.  And even then, on a dual monitor set up, if I didn't have a control panel shortcut on the second screen, the control panel and the subsequent Sounds panel would open over top of my game window, no matter how many times I dragged that panel over onto the second screen.  Things like that make me wonder, why the bloody hell bother having an extended desktop if everything is going to be sent to screen 1?

Don't sponsor laziness and lack of foresight, is all I'm saying.

wow.

I said it should.. because no one is going to buy them now because they are old enough..

As MS did for MsDos and Win 3.1.....releasing them free..its time now for win 95/98/00.....

Releasing them free wont mean they should give support too. There are many freewares without support...

This wlll help them to spread some goodwill about them too because they have been enough criticised for their pricing....

Giving them free will at least help students... Here are many in India and developing nations who still use Win 98/00..

Mostly in Cyber Cafes....... There are many books on which softwares are taught even on Win95...

These OS are not that much outdated... I still have to run my backup through win 98.... and most softwares still run on them... so they are better for learning... because they are economical and if they are free they will be most welcomed by students and Linux community..

And for looks Win 98/00 with windowblinds  can at  least match XP and even Vista......

The current pricing much depends on how free OS can compete against Mac and Windows.... I think there will be some discount for Vista users.... lets see what happens....

Because those of us who have Vista already paid for most major features that Windows 7 bring.

Personally, I don't think the OS should cost over $150 - for any version.

Given the cost of development vs. the return for investment (the man-hours versus the users cost), the OS should be the lowest common denominator in a computer system.

After all, MS Windows is used by, what, nearly 90% of all computer users?

That is so close to a monopoly that it makes little difference.

If Microsoft makes Windows 7 truly affordable to everyone - they will reap the good crop... in spades.

Erm, these days, China?  Korea (at least back when I was stationed there in '89).

When I was stationed in Korea in '89, if you went to a software shop downtown,
maybe at best, 10% of thier stock was original, packaged software.
All the rest was pirated floppies, MANY were virus-infected.
And this was not a dark backalley place, this was a rather large store on a main street.
And if you DID go in there to buy something, obviously they would know you were a US Soldier,
and would hit on you to bring them original software so they could copy it.
There was no copyright laws in effect in that country at that time, dunno about now.
This was also not limited to software, but also to any other goods,
aka, a Rolex on the street-corner for 40 bucks, Gucci bags for 20 dollars,
35 bucks for an ORIGINAL pair of Nike sneakers, the SAME sneakers costing 125 bucks in the PX.

Back then, we had a choice, buy our games in the PX at "x" dollars,
or go to one of the software shops, and buy it for half the PX price.
Yes, I did buy some of those floppies, but no, I never did give them one of my purchased games.

These days, the only software I buy is my OS, the occasional game,
and software I want, for which I cannot find equivelant freeware,
with the functions I want or need, for example, WindowBlinds or DeskScapes.
If you look around, there's freeware, real freeware, not that 'less-functionality'
or 'fully functional for 30 days' freeware,
for almost EVERYTHING you could ever need...

100% correct, bebi. And Vista users were their 'guinea pigs'. Why should they pay a price for what is essentially a Vista Service Pack?

Unfortunately, M$ has earned it's rep for incompletely developed products which are then resold as a brand new OS.

Yes I did try it. And yes, there has been a few changes to the UI... WB and WinStep does big UI changes too... So back to what I said... Just a few new apps.