Vista Home Basic or Premium

[Panic Button]

A computer in our price range appears to have the right level of widgets for our needs.

However it has Vista Basic, while others have Vista Premium. Is this a problem?

It would be used for sixth former and eventually university type work, loads of internet cruising, and some gaming.

[VHG]

Vista Home Basic, as the name implies, is the most basic versions of Vista and does not include some of the extra features and applications that Vista Home Premium has.

Probably nothing missing you cannot live without, but personally I would never buy a PC with Vista Home Basic on it.

Here is a list that Microsoft put together of what is in each verson and even they could not find many ticks to put in the Home Basic column.

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windows-vista /compare-editions/default.aspx

[VHG]

If he is in to gaming, and has an XBox, then I believe you cannot connect an XBox to Vista Home Basic.

One other thing to consider.

Microsoft are due to bring out a new version of Windows later this year, and you can upgrade from Vista to his new version EXCEPT if you are running Home Basic.

A good reason for avoiding Vista Home Basic.

[Panic Button]

Thanks.

Mind you that chart includes vague things like
'Have more fun on your PC'

Sounds like salesman speak.

[VHG]

In fact in the NEXT version of Windows they are discontinuing the Home Basic version (except for certain emerging markets like Russia and so on where there is a lot of pirating of Windows going on).

Another reason for avoiding Vista Home Basic.

(If you read my three appends I think you get the general idea it is worth avoiding Vista Home Basic).

[Panic Button]

Aaah. your second post makes a good point.

[VHG]

>Mind you that chart includes vague things like
>'Have more fun on your PC'

I think that means the Windows games are not included (not a great loss to anyone).

It is not a very technical list and is only for general guidance.

[johnny7]

VHG - are you saying that if you have Vista Home Premium, you will get a free upgrade to Windows 7?

[VHG]

XBox support site says

To use Windows Media Center with your Xbox 360 console, you must have a PC running Windows Media Center. You have a compatible Windows Media Center PC if you have:

*Windows XP Media Center Edition 2005
*Windows Vista Home Premium
*Windows Vista Ultimate

http://support.xbox.com/support/en/us/nxe/xbox live/troubleshooting/NetworkHelp_mcxpc.aspx

[VHG]

>VHG - are you saying that if you have Vista Home >Premium, you will get a free upgrade to Windows 7?

NO.

I am saying TECHNICALLY you cannot upgrade from Vista Home Basic to Windows V7.

All other versions of Vista can be upgraded except Home Basic.

I have heard that from late June Microsoft are going to offer a deal where if you buy a Vista computer you get an upgrade to V7 (not sure of cost).

They did a similar thing from XP to Vista (although it did not go that smoothly)

http://www.cheaplaptops.org.uk/20090615/window s-7-upgrade-coupon-begins-with-varying-vendors -on-june-27th/

[johnny7]

What a bunch of pubic hair. Bill Gates is gonna charge a few more hundred quid just for a handful of added features. He's raping us broad daylight.

[ACtheTROLL]

johnny
it's business ... does your local papershop upgrade your copy of the sun each morning?

just don't do the upgrade to 7 ...
it's not compulsory

[johnny7]

ACtheTroll - that's a rubbish comparison. The new added features that will be included in Windows 7, despite them being decent features, does not justify the price they are gonna charge for it. Don't know exactly how much it will be but I'm sure it's gonna be a shedload. They should include it free as a Vista update.

[ChuckFickens]

And at what point does your reasoning stop johnny?

Vista has got a lot of features in it that windows3.1 didn't have, should that be a free upgrade?

if you really need the extra features then pay for it, if you don't need them don't upgrade, simples!

I only changed my home server from windows2000 a couple of years ago, it done the job so why bother, the company I work for has not got a single vista PC in it, XP works so why upgrade.

Nobody is forcing you to upgrade, your upgrading because you want to (note want, not need)

(and if you don't want to pay MS anymore cash, use linux, that's what my home server and the laptop I am using now is running)

[johnny7]

My reasoning will only stop when I win the argument or I grow a second head. I see where you are coming from ChuckFickens but if you take a look at , for example, the Download.com website and check the specs required to run these programs. You'll see that some, if not most, of the these programs can't run on Windows 95. Why should consumers spend more money on new Windows operating systems just to keep their PC safe from viruses and spyware?

[ChuckFickens]

They (and I) don't

As I said, Linux.

it is more secure, I will happily click on links that others warn about..... ok, It's not always as simple to do everything on as windows is, but I've yet to find anything that can't be done if you work at it and for the average user it will do everything they want for free.

you pay MS for convenience more than anything

[ACtheTROLL]

I'm getting a bit of pasty today - first I get called and idiot ... now rubbish .... strangely no one has called me tom jones yet...........it's not that unusual

is that pimple on your shoulder turning into a head yet johnny7?

I especially like this one
Why should consumers spend more money on new Windows operating systems just to keep their PC safe from viruses and spyware?

rofl ....

actually you can still download 7 for free - it's got to be about identical to the release
and it's good for about a year .... (1 june 2010)
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windows-7/dow nload.aspx

[johnny7]

I don't know what Linux is and I don't think any of my friends or family have it so I don't think I would get it, whatever it is. I would only stick to Windows or maybe switch to a Mac and I'm sure most consumers would do the same thing because Windows and Macs are quite heavily marketed. So for some, MS is not a convenience but the only known way to access the Internet, send emails, chat to friends etc either because they hate using macs or have no idea what Linux is, as in my situation. So if this is the case, consumers shouldn't have to pay extra to run essential software that can only be run on the newer Windows operating systems.

[johnny7]

ACtheTroll - I wasn't calling you rubbish, I said your argument was rubbish. There's a difference.

[ChuckFickens]

Sorry, I hadn't realised that being able to "access the Internet, send emails, chat to friends etc" had become a basic human right and was no longer regarded as a luxury.

In that case of course it should all be free!

[johnny7]

I especially like this one
Why should consumers spend more money on new Windows operating systems just to keep their PC safe from viruses and spyware?

Let me rephrase that. Whatever OS you have, they should all be as secure as each other. Consumers shouldn't have to spend more money to keep their existing OS as safe as the latest OS.