The Only 3 Editions You’ll Care About

With Windows Vista, Microsoft split up the 2.5 editions of Windows XP in to 6 editions of Vista. It was confusing, it was pricey, and if you were an Ultimate user it was downright infuriating (see: Ultimate Extras). For Windows 7, things are going to get slightly better from a logical standpoint, but as there’s going to be 6 editions of Win7, we’re not going back to the simplicity of XP.

Microsoft has simplified things from Vista in two major ways. First and foremost, all editions are now supersets of each other. In particular this means that Professional (née: Business) now has all of Home Premium’s features, as opposed to cutting out certain entertainment features like Vista did. This makes each edition “better” than the previous edition in a straightforward manner, and removes the slight schism we saw between Vista Business and Vista Home Premium users. It also makes Win7 Ultimate an oddity; in Vista it unified the feature set of Business and Home Premium editions, but in Win7 it simply adds the niche features that keep Enterprise and Professional editions differentiated.

The second simplification is that Home Basic is gone from the market of developed nations, period. Home Basic is now Microsoft’s “emerging markets” edition, offering a more limited feature set amid a significantly lower price. But as far as we’re concerned, what this means is that the only home edition is now Home Premium, as opposed to having a few Home Basic machines sprinkled around to make things frustrating.

This leaves us with 5 editions we’re going to see in the developed world: Starter, Home Premium, Professional, Enterprise, and Ultimate. Starter is now the “super cheap” edition for OEMs (and only OEMs), but we don’t know much beyond that. We still haven’t seen it appear on any computers, and quite frankly we’re not sure how Microsoft is going to push such a feature-castrated version to OEMs that have previously been enjoying cheap full copies of Windows XP. Meanwhile Enterprise maintains its status as the volume license version of Windows, and as such it’s not something that regular users can buy (if you need its features, that’s what Ultimate is for).

  Win7 Home Premium Win7 HP Family Pack Win7 Professional Win7 Ultimate
Retail Price $200 X $300 $320
OEM Price $110 X $150 $190
Upgrade Price $120 $150 $200 $220
RAM Limit 16GB 16GB 192GB 192GB
Notable features Windows Media Center 3 copies of Win7 Home Premium Remote Desktop hosting, WinXP Virtual Machine BitLocker, VHD booting

This leaves us with the 3 editions you actually need to care about: Home Premium ($110/$200), Professional ($150/$300), and Ultimate ($190/$320). Given the prices in particular, I expect to see Home Premium being the most common version among techies and regular users alike, but this does mean giving up Remote Desktop hosting and Windows XP Mode (the WinXP virtual machine), among other things. Ultimate has very little going for it unless you’re going to use BitLocker or boot off of VHD files. But then again at retail it’s only $20 more.

Meanwhile Microsoft has finally taken a page out of the Apple playbook by offering a family pack. The Windows 7 Home Premium Family Pack ($150) is a set of 3 Home Premium upgrade licenses in a single box and using a single key, for those of you who want to upgrade every computer in the house at once. This brings the per-license cost down to $50, more than half-off the price of a single license. Now if Microsoft would just offer Office in a similar manner… (Ed: Turns out they do)

Finally, there’s a pretty big difference in hardware support that we should note: Home Premium tops out at 16GB of RAM, Professional/Ultimate top out at 192GB. The ramifications of this being that if you’re considering throwing Home Premium on to a high-end Core i7 system, or even just intend to carry forward a retail licensed copy for a number of years, then it’s possible you’re going to hit the 16GB cap of Home Premium.

Finally, while we’re on the subject, we’re going to once again remind everyone that Microsoft has locked out the ability to install multiple versions of Windows with the same disc (One Disc mode). This will have little impact at the most for regular users, but techies are going to want to burn a disc with ei.cfg stripped out to make fixing computers easier. We’ve said it before and we’ll say it again, locking out One Disc mode is an extremely disappointing move from Microsoft.

What’s New Since Win 7 RC The Rough Edges
Comments Locked

207 Comments

View All Comments

  • xrror - Tuesday, October 27, 2009 - link

    Well businesses that are stuck with an Exchange server and need computers on a Domain for it probably are still interested in a volume license.

    Heh, a small SOHO probably just get the "Family Pack"... or just keep running the WinXP machines they have into the ground. Why upgrade at all?
  • darwinosx - Monday, October 26, 2009 - link

    Yet another superficial look at Windows 7. Not a word about the registry and it's egregious affect on stability and performance. Not a word about the malware fest that is still Windows. Nothing about Windows very poor utilization of multi-core procs and large amounts of memory. No, its all as if the only thing that matters about an OS is the UI. Is Anand the only one at Anandtech that has taken an operating system class? Is he the only one who knows anything about OS X? It would appear so.

    Your brief "comparison" of Snow Leopard and Windows 7 was worse. Of course. It is not a minor upgrade at all unless..you only look at superficial things as you did the Windows 7 review. SL has had a few minor issues affecting a few people. Hardly "teething problems". The only differentiator between 7 and SL is now hardware? Unbelievable. When did Anandtech turn into CNET?

    You can barely spell Linux apparently so I don't think we will see any kind of comparison there.

    If you don't know anything about OS X or Linux then don't bother to mention ether in the future.
  • Genx87 - Tuesday, October 27, 2009 - link

    Did you make a Youtube video about this? lol

  • xrror - Tuesday, October 27, 2009 - link

    Which operating systems can I legally run on hardware I own:
    [X] Linux
    [X] Windows XP
    [X] Windows Server 2003
    [X] Windows Vista
    [X] Windows Server 2008
    [X] Windows 7
    [ ] Mac OS9
    [ ] Mac OSX

    When I visit AnandTech what computer trends/items do I find most relevant to me:
    [X] Upcoming and exciting computer technologies
    [ ] The latest and greatest media platform with DRM capitalization
    [X] Upgrades for open and standards based x86 platforms
    [ ] Hacks and modifications for closed x86 platforms
    [X] Price/performance comparisons for gaming hardware
    [ ] Articles denying relation of mal-ware output and OS marketshare
  • Griswold - Tuesday, October 27, 2009 - link

    Hello clown boy!
  • tomaccogoats - Monday, October 26, 2009 - link

    While I can't support this tirade, I will say Anandtech definitely suffers in Mac and Linux areas. Then again, their slogan is "your source for hardware analysis and news", which I guess doesn't really warrant that it needs to be classed in those areas. Still, the latest Linux articles are August 2009, and then 2005!
  • JimmyJimmington - Monday, October 26, 2009 - link

    Mind if I log into your guest account?
  • darwinosx - Monday, October 26, 2009 - link

    If thats all you got it isn't much. That is certainly a bug and a highly visible one. But it affects a tiny number of users who upgraded Leopard to Snow Leopard in a very specific way under a certain set of circumstances and even not all of them have the issue. Apple has a fix in 10.6.2 which will be out in a matter of days. To bring that up in the face of the yawning chasm of security vulnerabilities that is Windows 7 is pretty laughable.
  • ibarskiy - Monday, October 26, 2009 - link

    Once again, it's time you actually supported your statements with facts. What security chasm? Please cite vulnerabilities and extent to which OSX is not subject to them. And while you are at it, please explain how come it is that Mac OS got broken into faster when the compensation for the break in was the same between Mac OS and (at the time, but for all practical purposes immaterially) Vista [pwn2own 2009]. Oh, and MacOS was broken into twice to Vista's one time. So which again is more secure?
  • ibarskiy - Monday, October 26, 2009 - link

    Correction; it was Windows 7, indeed.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now