Windows 'Blue' is the future, with yearly updates

Not surprising as most other software is moving to a similar model.

Sounds like abba song..Money Money Money.. XP windows 2003 out for years, then Vista/windows 7 and 2008, then bang 2008r2/2012 and now Windows 8 all this instead of issuing service packs, lets charge the people and call it an up date

Just look at the advancement and version roll of Android over the past 2 years. I would compare that to the changes windows applied from 98se(froyo) to windows 7(jelly bean) in scale. Microsoft updating yearly is both to slow and to fast. To slow for the real advancement of tech, especially if they're going to apply this to their whole windows 8 line. And to fast for the average consumer that's used a new OS every 5 years or so. I know lots of people that still refuse to upgrade from XP. Meanwhile these same people own a phone or tablet that updates every other month. It's all in how the customer perceives these updates, and microsofts changing they're very core and customers are going to drop them because of it.

Oh and I'd also like to point out, no one has ever paid for Android, or any of it's updates. Why M$ is still trying to drain money from an OS is just greedy. They get money from the manufactures to include it on PCs, they get money from consumers because of the new windows "store" they HAVE to spend money on to get apps that were part of the previous OS's, AND they get money from the developers that write the software.

It looks to me like they could be cut from all 3 of those steps and everyone would be better off.

So they are going to charge you to fix the mistakes in their software from the year before? Something sounds wrong there. Maybe just put out software that is not full of mistakes in the first place.

They were originally going to implement this in xp its the main reason they brought in activation,for whatever reason they decided not to go ahead with it.Nup don't see an issue with subscription base beauty is you don't need to update yearly,so get say windows 8.5 then wait till v9.0 comes out & get a new version for a fraction of the cost of a new OS like it is now & if it's anything like stardock objectdesktop get a discount on top,yep works for me

Originally posted by Qliphah:

---

...and hard core customers are going to drop them because of it.

---

I agree with you: But also because today most of the people unfamiliar with tech are founding that "WE" have more OS's choices to choose from; That $$$Microsoft$$$ is not the only-one and also that they are free.

I like diff. PC's with diff. OS's 'cos I have many programs: some work with this and some work with that, etc.

Originally posted by scorpNZ:

---

They were originally going to implement this in xp its the main reason they brought in activation,for whatever reason they decided not to go ahead with it.Nup don't see an issue with subscription base beauty is you don't need to update yearly,so get say windows 8.5 then wait till v9.0 comes out & get a new version for a fraction of the cost of a new OS like it is now & if it's anything like stardock objectdesktop get a discount on top,yep works for me

---

What they REALLY wanted to do w/ XP was provide the OS for a monthly subscription fee (something like $10-15/mo.)...so it would only work while the subscription was active, but there would be no up-front cost.

Sounds like Microsoft is trying to be too much like Ubuntu and Fedora while failing at both ;-)

Quote:

---

What they REALLY wanted to do w/ XP was provide the OS for a monthly subscription fee (something like $10-15/mo.)...so it would only work while the subscription was active, but there would be no up-front cost.

---

Wouldn't that be a nightmare for them.

I should add that Microsoft is trying too hard to imitate it's competitors. MS must never have heard the saying "keep it simple, stupid...". What was ever wrong with how they did things back when W2K or XP came out??? We could install W2K or XP on an unlimited number of machines we had as long as we had a genuine license key.

Microsoft is making a mistake by not listening to it's users IMHO.

10-30$ a year for an update dose not sound bad.

Originally posted by ZippyDSM:

---

10-30$ a year for an update dose not sound bad.

---

I agree, as will most consumers who are trained to pay less monthly/yearly than paying up front. $30 a year for a "new" OS compared to $100+ upfront every three years? Most will love it.

Originally posted by DVDBack23:

---

Originally posted by ZippyDSM:

---

10-30$ a year for an update dose not sound bad.

---

I agree, as will most consumers who are trained to pay less monthly/yearly than paying up front. $30 a year for a "new" OS compared to $100+ upfront every three years? Most will love it.

---

As long as they do not pull 100$ for the OS then 30 for updates LOL

I think you're both nuts. I would never stand for a subscription based OS. It would be like Chrysler saying they need to start charging a mandatory monthly fee for driving my car. An OS is an engine, or a shell at best, not something that should be subscribed to. It would be akin to always having a rental car, not even the model you want just the one they happen to be offering.

And then there's the current mindset of customers, they've never paid a subscription, in fact most never paid directly for windows. Some elderly and less tech-literate people I know just call it "starting up the Dell" not "windows". They won't want another monthly bill on top of the cable, internet, telephone, etc. Ad then there's the fact none of these people don't even comprehend how an "update" works. I've been in homes where they didn't even have XP SP1, the PC was on the internet reminding them every day for years on end but they refused to download even the first service packs as they thought it would break something. (Of course I look like a damn magician when I get the updates in place and tweak the system a bit)




Has Microsoft not actually looked at who has been buying their OS for 30 years?

& yet you continued to "upgrade" as so called new versions of windows OS's rolled out,i find that amusing if you operated on say windows 3.1 then jumped to xp or even w7 you would recognize it instantly,oh yeah it's later OS's however its somewhat familiar yes, so with chrysler how many body changes were made while still using the same engine through the range all vehicle manufacturers do it even across brands mazda/ford anyone

No not monthly article mentions yearly it was a member that said monthly the idea was scrapped back with xp,since i sub to stardock object dektop i see no issue with ms wanting to go the route they are now read my first post you'll see why,basically skip a stack then upgrade every 2-3years or more

i suspect the security updates will be free

Originally posted by Qliphah:

---

Oh and I'd also like to point out, no one has ever paid for Android, or any of it's updates. Why M$ is still trying to drain money from an OS is just greedy. They get money from the manufactures to include it on PCs, they get money from consumers because of the new windows "store" they HAVE to spend money on to get apps that were part of the previous OS's, AND they get money from the developers that write the software.

It looks to me like they could be cut from all 3 of those steps and everyone would be better off.

---

Are you serious... You ever ran any OS in a enterprise environment.... U need support... People constantly run programs that don't work on something and complain about the OS being crappy when its really their code... Ms puts a lot of work into a real OS and have a superior support system.... No opensource sw can do that... I have ran different version of Linux as well and I'm here to tell you when u have a serious problem u want real support and not a forum to answer questions.... You also need security... And at home u want things to be simple and powerful but useable

Originally posted by Qliphah:

---

I think you're both nuts. I would never stand for a subscription based OS. It would be like Chrysler saying they need to start charging a mandatory monthly fee for driving my car. An OS is an engine, or a shell at best, not something that should be subscribed to. It would be akin to always having a rental car, not even the model you want just the one they happen to be offering.

And then there's the current mindset of customers, they've never paid a subscription, in fact most never paid directly for windows. Some elderly and less tech-literate people I know just call it "starting up the Dell" not "windows". They won't want another monthly bill on top of the cable, internet, telephone, etc. Ad then there's the fact none of these people don't even comprehend how an "update" works. I've been in homes where they didn't even have XP SP1, the PC was on the internet reminding them every day for years on end but they refused to download even the first service packs as they thought it would break something. (Of course I look like a damn magician when I get the updates in place and tweak the system a bit)




Has Microsoft not actually looked at who has been buying their OS for 30 years?

---

WHoa whoa there buddy!

Not so much subscription more like under 50$ for the newest yearly OS version.

If you moved from Windows, where would you move to? Seriously, Apple is the biggest offender of this update stuff. If you are coding apps for their App Store, you can only run the new Xcode and upload to the store via OSX 10.7. You're forced to buy the new OS on top of the $99 per year to be a developer. Combine that with how they drop support for iOS devices within a year or two. I can see the phone/tablet scene moving at a much faster pace than PC, but it does get a bit ridiculous.

MS moving to this can be good or bad. I can already see how they screw gamers with updating DirectX and including for only the new OS. Since I'm not a hardcore gamer, I waited to jump from XP to Win 7, which I did the beginning of this year. However, this Win 8 is just too drastic of a change for anyone that needs to use in a work environment, at least for now until they have time to mess with it. I really only see Win8 as their push toward tablets (since the Win7 tablets did soooo well!)

Originally posted by bw5011:

---

Are you serious... You ever ran any OS in a enterprise environment.... U need support... People constantly run programs that don't work on something and complain about the OS being crappy when its really their code... Ms puts a lot of work into a real OS and have a superior support system.... No opensource sw can do that... I have ran different version of Linux as well and I'm here to tell you when u have a serious problem u want real support and not a forum to answer questions.... You also need security... And at home u want things to be simple and powerful but useable

---

You fail to see my point, the common user, the one they run commercials for, the one they show shiny objects to, the one they think are just plebs that will buy anything. They don't need or will they ever get the support you speak of. If Xerox had never given up on the business only OS, it would make things so much easier but microsoft insists on making everyone happy/miserable at the same time. But like you point out you get support in business but will they do the same for home users that pay the same subscription fee?

And I've delt with "enterprise" support. It's not like they come hold your hand or rewrite windows to fix problems. They usually tell you it's your software or 3rd party software the end user installed, so you should call their support team.

@ivymike lol you really weren't supposed to do that, one licence was meant for one computer, but the activation didn't force you to be online so they never had a foolproof way to check

Originally posted by Qliphah:

---

I think you're both nuts. I would never stand for a subscription based OS. It would be like Chrysler saying they need to start charging a mandatory monthly fee for driving my car. An OS is an engine, or a shell at best, not something that should be subscribed to. It would be akin to always having a rental car, not even the model you want just the one they happen to be offering.

And then there's the current mindset of customers, they've never paid a subscription, in fact most never paid directly for windows. Some elderly and less tech-literate people I know just call it "starting up the Dell" not "windows". They won't want another monthly bill on top of the cable, internet, telephone, etc. Ad then there's the fact none of these people don't even comprehend how an "update" works. I've been in homes where they didn't even have XP SP1, the PC was on the internet reminding them every day for years on end but they refused to download even the first service packs as they thought it would break something. (Of course I look like a damn magician when I get the updates in place and tweak the system a bit)

Has Microsoft not actually looked at who has been buying their OS for 30 years?

---

Remember, it is not subscription based. You still have the option to skip a generation if you need to. There are plenty of Mac users who still use Snow Leopard and instead of Lion.

Originally posted by Qliphah:

---

Originally posted by bw5011:

---

Are you serious... You ever ran any OS in a enterprise environment.... U need support... People constantly run programs that don't work on something and complain about the OS being crappy when its really their code... Ms puts a lot of work into a real OS and have a superior support system.... No opensource sw can do that... I have ran different version of Linux as well and I'm here to tell you when u have a serious problem u want real support and not a forum to answer questions.... You also need security... And at home u want things to be simple and powerful but useable

---

And I've delt with "enterprise" support. It's not like they come hold your hand or rewrite windows to fix problems. They usually tell you it's your software or 3rd party software the end user installed, so you should call their support team.

---

Originally posted by Qliphah:

---

Originally posted by bw5011:

---

Are you serious... You ever ran any OS in a enterprise environment.... U need support... People constantly run programs that don't work on something and complain about the OS being crappy when its really their code... Ms puts a lot of work into a real OS and have a superior support system.... No opensource sw can do that... I have ran different version of Linux as well and I'm here to tell you when u have a serious problem u want real support and not a forum to answer questions.... You also need security... And at home u want things to be simple and powerful but useable

---

They usually tell you it's your software or 3rd party software the end user installed, so you should call their support team.

---

ain't that the truth or my favorite "try a reboot"

Originally posted by Azuran:

---

Not surprising as most other software is moving to a similar model.

---

Of course.......MS and other companies have finally realised that extracting a LITTLE bit over a shorter period of time like a year from people is easier than extracting a LOT over a longer period of time like 3-5 years.

Basics of business and they are just now getting on this???? WTF were they thinking???

hey, if they make it cheap enough, it will the first windows i purchased since an oem screwed me on a windows 95 license.

Gee, maybe MS will start charging us for security updates too. And if we choose to ignore them will simply trash our computers with trojans from previous updates! Brave New World, are you listening.

Originally posted by melannap:

---

Gee, maybe MS will start charging us for security updates too. And if we choose to ignore them will simply trash our computers with trojans from previous updates! Brave New World, are you listening.

---

Been awhile since I've read Brave New World, but I'm pretty sure that book was about engineering civilization, not software metering.