Windows 7 Prices: Scrutinize for Real Deals

Microsoft has confirmed pricing of a multi-license "family pack" for Windows 7, as well as the prices for the in-place Anytime Upgrades users can buy to bump up to the next level of the operating system.

As when , the upcoming Windows 7 Family Pack will be priced at $149.99. The pack lets buyers upgrade as many as three PCs from Windows XP or Vista to Windows 7 Home Premium. Microsoft will start selling the pack October 22, the same day as in the U.S., Canada and what Microsoft calls "select markets."

A spokeswoman said retailers will be able to take pre-orders for the pack starting Oct. 18, but added that she had no idea whether those pre-orders would be offered at a discount, as were pre-orders for Windows 7 this month.

Priced at $149.99, the Family Pack would save the buyer $210 over three separate Home Premium Upgrades. The $50 per license price tag for Windows 7 is a 38% savings compared to the $80 per license that Microsoft charged for a two-license family pack for Vista back in 2007.

Microsoft also revealed the pricing of its Anytime Upgrade scheme, which lets users move up the Windows 7 edition stack by buying, say, an upgrade from Starter, the version slated for the very cheapest netbooks, to Home Premium.

In that scenario, an AnyTime Upgrade costs $79.99, slightly less than the average price as by four online resellers, who had it listed from $80.99 to $89.98.

Upgrades from Windows 7 Home Premium to Professional or Ultimate will cost $89.99 and $139.99, respectively.

At least one analyst has said those prices are too high to tempt users, particularly those who have bought inexpensive netbooks running Windows 7 Starter. "Microsoft needs to be more aggressive," Stephen Baker, an analyst with the NPD Group, said two weeks ago. "At those prices, there won't be many opportunities to [convince users to] trade up. If people are buying cheap [PCs] they're buying cheap for a reason."

Microsoft's not giving customers much, if any, discount once they have Windows 7. At suggested list prices, there's only an $80 difference between Home Premium Upgrade and Professional Upgrade, and $100 between the two "Full" editions. The Anytime Upgrade from Home Premium to Professional, meanwhile, costs $90.

It's even less enticing to take the Home Premium-to-Ultimate path using Anytime Upgrade. Microsoft's priced that at $140, higher than both the $100 difference between the retail Home Premium Upgrade and Ultimate Upgrade, and the $120 difference between the "Full" editions of those versions.

Even so, Microsoft worked to pitch the Starter-Home Premium route. In a post to the Windows Team blog, spokesman Brandon LeBlanc cited that scenario as one where Anytime Upgrade will be useful. "A customer may purchase a netbook thinking they would primarily use it for e-mail," he said. "Over time, they find they are using that netbook as their primary every-day PC. That person then decides they want their netbook to do more."

Baker countered, saying that Microsoft's May move with Starter -- it that would have blocked users from running more than three applications at a time -- kills most users' motivation for upgrading to Home Premium. "Microsoft has said that Windows 7 runs pretty well on netbooks," Baker said, and if users take the company at its word, they won't feel the need to upgrade from Starter.

Windows Anytime Upgrades will be available Oct. 22, both as an electronic download or as a retail purchase; both will provide an upgrade product key, but no media.

metatag data

Apple Fans Uneasy Over App Store Rule on Google Voice

Apple's pretty used to doing things its way. It guards access to its , controlling access to its inviting virtual shelves by a mysterious set of .

Although Apple has reversed course on and , and , the company pretty much keeps its own counsel on such matters. And it's clear Apple

So it was a new experience for Apple when, on Friday, the FCC to Apple, Google, and AT&T asking why was from the App Store.

Although the logical thought would be that AT&T coerced Apple into making the decision in the carrier's interest, that AT&T denies any involvement in decisions about the App Store.

(We know of at least one exception to the claim of hands-off decision-making; the works only in the phone's Wi-Fi mode, and not over AT&T's 3G connection. AT&T says its terms of service prohibit apps that redirect a TV signal to mobile units, claiming it's a drain on the network.)

Then again, BlackBerry phones on the AT&T network .

Lee Lloyd wrote in a comment on TechCrunch, "Has there been any evidence of AT&T objecting to users installing [Google Voice] on their BlackBerry thus far? If not, I would say it is pretty safe to assume that it is Apple who has a problem with the app, not AT&T."

As with anything Apple, this news is generating a lot of dialogue on social media, forums, story comments, and blogs.

DUSTmurph wrote on forums, "Apple's guidelines for allowing Apps into the App Store is way too strict."

Many posts are critical of Apple's unclear and dictator-like rule over the Apps Store.

Madwh commented on , "I can't wait for the day the iPhone will be treated like a computer. How would you feel if Microsoft would first have to approve all programs on Windows?"

Apple would be wise to investigate what is being said about it. Although the company typically has a large fan base that is quick to come to its defense, most people are taking a critical stance on Apple's management of the App Store.

All that being said, it is funny to note the FCC's sudden interest. It isn't as if the Apple's approval process has been under scrutiny for several months now.

As Digitalgravity noted in a response to the , "... ‘Someone at the FCC really wanted Google Voice on their iPhone!'"

What do you think of this case and/or Apple's App Store?

Apple vs. Microsoft: Rival Strategies, Rival Results

It's been a rough year for everyone, even multi-billion-dollar companies that make computers. Well, maybe which seems to be doing okay, based on .

By contrast, Microsoft in July. In fact, its poor showing for the third fiscal quarter -- revenue down 6% year-over-year and lower than expectations, earnings per share a jolting 30% off over the same period -- was notable enough that it made the news at the top of the hour on NPR, which isn't usually seen as a capitalist media tool.

Of course, one of the reasons Microsoft cited was, "Well, the economy sucks all over." True enough, and part of was due to lousy sales of new PCs to businesses, which ate away at Microsoft's money stream of OEM Windows license fees. (I could mention the poor reception for Vista, but at this point, that's last year's news.)

There was a slight rise in sales of netbooks, for which Windows licenses cost less -- more on this later. But there were losses generally across the board, from Microsoft's search ("Let's kill Google!") to the division that runs Windows Mobile ("Let's kill Nokia!") and the Xbox ("Let's kill Sony and Nintendo!").

Over the same period, Apple had its . The company saw a rise in all stats year over year, from revenue to earnings-per-share to gross margins. Sales of Macs remained steady, inching up 4%. iPod sales dropped a slight 7% (I know the iPhone has replaced my iPod needs). iPhones, well -- up 626%.

That is not a typo. Nor is the number -- cited by research firm NPD -- for Apple's share of the market for PCs costing more than $1,000: 91%. That number should be taken with a number of caveats: NPD could only look at physical stores and not virtual ones such as Dell's; the average selling price for a Windows-based desktop was under $500; Apple's overall PC market share remains less than 10%; Apple simply doesn't make much that sells for under $999, other than the Mac mini. Still, you have to remember that the pro-level computing marketplace is a thriving one with high margins, giving Apple a healthy base for its primary revenue source: hardware.

How Printers Can Rob You Blind

Is your printer stealing from you? Yes--if it's making you replace ink or toner constantly, or if you need to buy pricey special paper to get the best output. Maybe it's stealing your time or sanity by being a lot slower than it said it'd be, or having cheapo components that break or are just plain hard to use. PC World reveals some sinners-and saints-based on our recent .

Our Top 10 charts keep tabs on this and more. We test speed and print quality; we try all the features; and we price ink and toner to see if you're going to get reamed. For instance, while you'd think any would be cheap, think again: Some models have surprisingly pricey toner, like the chart.

Multifunction printers (MFPs) are especially popular in small offices that need to do more in less space. The is a standout for being good at everything and offering cheap inks. Wish we could say the same for the , whose ink costs are ridiculous even for its high-yield cartridges. One of the most balanced among color-laser MFPs is the . And then there's the , whose toner is some of the most expensive we've ever priced.

The cost of a printer goes far beyond its purchase price. Make sure it's not stealing from you by checking ink or toner costs before you buy; and check PC World's reviews for other hidden costs or gotchas.

FCC Questions Apple Over Google Voice

The U.S. Federal Communications Commission has written to Apple, AT&T and Google questioning the and related applications from the iPhone App Store.

In a letter sent Friday to Apple, the agency asked the company which related applications have been rejected along with it, and what role AT&T may have played in the decision. It also asked what the difference is between Google Voice and other VoIP (voice over Internet Protocol) software that has been approved for the iPhone.

More broadly the agency asked Apple what other for the phone and why.

Apple's for the iPhone has drawn wide criticism for being murky and unpredictable. Google Voice is a VoIP service that lets users set up one phone number and have it ring on all of their phones at once, and control which phones ring at which times of the day or week, among other things.

The rejection of Google Voice, and the removal from the App Store of third-party applications that use it, led some observers to suspect AT&T squelched the software because it feared competition for its own voice services. In its letter, the FCC cited .

Agency Wants Answers

The agency requested answers from all three companies by the close of business on Aug. 21.

to declare that carriers can't stop consumers from using its peer-to-peer VoIP service over their mobile networks. Just last month, the agency said it would investigate exclusivity deals between handset makers and carriers to determine whether they hurt consumer choice and innovation.

In a letter addressed to Catherine Novelli, Apple's vice president of worldwide government affairs, the FCC asked in evaluating applications for the iPhone, including contractual provisions and "non-contractual understandings" between the companies.

It also asked Apple to , give the major reasons for rejecting applications, and say what percentage are turned down.

This information, if made public, would provide clarity that many developers and consumers have been clamoring for since the last year. The FCC wrote that if Apple wants to keep any of its answers confidential, it has to submit a statement giving specific reasons why. "Accordingly, 'blanket' requests for confidentiality of a large set of documents are unacceptable," the letter said. All three letters were signed by James Schlichting, acting chief of the FCC's Wireless Telecommunications Bureau.

Also Questioned: AT&T, Google

The FCC's questions for AT&T cover much the same ground, but it also asks whether any devices on AT&T's network allow use of Google Voice or other applications that have been rejected for the iPhone.

In its letter to Google, the agency asks about any communications with Apple about Google Voice. It also asks whether there are any other Google applications pending with Apple and what services they provide. The FCC also asks about for its own Android mobile platform.

Windows 7 Ultimate RTM Cracked, Fully Validated (Already?)

That didn't take long. It has only been a week since by Microsoft, but crackers have already managed to activate and validate the tricked-out Ultimate version of the OS. The hack is nothing new, as it borrows the same techniques used to bypass activation and verification of previous Vista editions.

, crackers somehow obtained a copy of an OEM Windows 7 Ultimate disc from Lenovo. From there, they were able to extract two critical bits of information: Windows 7's OEM-SLP (system-locked pre-installation) product key and the OEM certificate for Windows 7 Ultimate.

But before these can be of any value, one first has to modify a system's BIOS to fool the operating system into believing that the PC is an authentic OEM machine. This is done by tweaking the values found in the Software Licensing Description Table (SLIC) that is stored in the system's memory during boot-up.

Once a person has disguised a system as a legitimate OEM machine, the OEM-SLP and OEM certificate allow for permanent, validated activation of the operating system. To Microsoft, the PC is no different from a functional OEM machine--and the "OEM machine," in turn, has no need to call back to Microsoft's activation servers for any kind of additional verification. That would defeat the convenient basis behind the creation of SLIC-based OEM activations in the first place.

Just because the OEM disc and keys came from Lenovo doesn't mean that the crack is exclusive to that brand. According to Softpedia, the crack has proven successful on Dell, HP, and MSI machines as well.

Facebook Etiquette: 10 Rules for Better Socializing

What's okay on Facebook? On sites like MySpace, anything goes (or seems to), but the on Facebook seem to be a little more refined--not a lot, mind you, but a little. Keep these tips in mind, whether you're making your first friend or your 1000th.

Who should you friend? Some people adopt an everyone-welcome policy on Facebook and accept all friend requests; some only want real-world contacts in their friends list. In deciding on the right approach for you, bear in mind that the bigger your friend network is, the more application, event, chat session, and cause invitations you'll receive--and that can lead to some and the occasional friend purge.

Easy on the updates. As on Twitter, oversharing on Facebook can be a problem. Every meal eaten, every TV show experienced, and every weather condition observed need not be the subject of a status update. Ask yourself whether anyone is likely to care about your comment before you start typing.

"Now, choose 12 friends..." It's fine if you want to take a "Which serial killer are you?" quiz. , however, you'll almost certainly be asked to invite a dozen or so people to take the quiz, too; there's no need for this unless you think they'll really enjoy it. Look for a 'Skip this step' or 'Continue to result' button (in tiny type) somewhere on the page, click it, and you won't have to send invitations to anyone as a precondition to getting your quiz results. Clicking the 'Skip' button on the following screen will prevent the quiz from showing up on your wall or being shared on your friends' walls.

Limit Facebook chat. Just because someone has a Facebook window open doesn't mean they're automatically available for a chat session. Facebook Chat is like any other instant messaging platform--use it appropriately, and recognize that your friends may be too busy to respond immediately, especially during business hours.

No pokes. If you are over the age of 16, don't "poke" people--seriously.

Avoid "Group think.” One among many Facebook users involves creating a Group for a business concern, and then inviting everyone under the sun to join the group. This is a misuse of the feature--and bad manners--since Groups are designed to serve as gathering places to discuss genuine leisure, cultural, social, or other common interests, not as ad hoc copy shops. Common courtesy should impel you not to create a Group for your business--but if you insist on doing so anyway, please invite only employees to join the Group. If your business needs a Facebook presence, create an official Page for it; then, if you must, invite friends to becomes fans of that Page.

Beware of embarrassing photos. Resist the temptation to post every last photo from your birthday party on Facebook, particularly images that may cast your guests in an unflattering light. If you have any doubt, ask the subjects of any iffy pics in advance whether they'd mind your posting the shots; then abide by their wishes.

Tag lightly. The same thing goes for tagging: The people in a picture might not object to its being online as long as their names are not associated with it.

Or... untag thyself. It is no breach of etiquette to untag yourself from any photograph. Remember, though, that untagging is permanent: You can't be retagged to a photo once the tag is removed.

Ignore away. You are under no obligation to acknowledge a Facebook friend request, whether it comes from a stranger or from someone you know but don't want as part of your digital life. After all, you wouldn't be obliged to seat visitors at your dinner table if they showed up without warning at your house at 7 o'clock. (One alternative way of dealing with this situation is to add iffy contacts to a severely restricted limited profile list.) On the flipside, if you want to friend a stranger (for whatever reason), add a note of explanation to your friend request, explaining who you are and the reason for your request.