Slashdot Log In
Windows 7 Likely Going Modular, Subscription-based
Posted by
Zonk
on Tue Mar 25, 2008 09:45 AM
from the what's-not-to-love dept.
from the what's-not-to-love dept.
Microsoft CRM writes "When Windows 7 launches sometime after the start of 2010, the desktop OS will be Microsoft's most 'modular' operating system to date. That's not necessarily a good thing, of course; Windows Vista is a sprawling, complex OS. From Microsoft's perspective, though, there are many possible benefits. The OS's developers can add/remove functionality module by module. New modules could be sold post-launch, keeping revenue streams strong. A modular approach could also allow the company to make functionality available on a time-limited basis, potentially allowing users to 'rent' a feature if it's needed on a one-off basis. Microsoft is already testing 'pay as you go' consumer subscriptions in developing countries."
Related Stories
[+]
Microsoft 'Open Value Subscription' is None of the Above 202 comments
daveofdoom writes "This week Microsoft launched an SMB program that contains the words 'open', 'value' and 'subscription', none of which are common to Microsoft products, culture, or marketing. Digging in a bit I found myself confused not only by what the program portends to be but why it would be called 'Open Value Subscription' unless they were hoping to leverage buzzwords and concepts related to open source and SaaS (software as a service). It's such lame and dishonest branding the marketing group should be ashamed."
[+]
Microsoft "Albany" Offers Office and Security as Subscription 281 comments
News.com is reporting that Microsoft has confirmed a subscription service is in the works for the next consumer version of their Office Suite. "Code-named Albany, the product has a single installer that puts Office Home and Student, OneCare, as well as a host of Windows Live services, onto a user's PC. As long as users keep paying for the subscription, they are entitled to the latest versions of the products. Once they stop paying, they lose the right to use any version."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
The primary idea (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The primary idea (Score:5, Funny)
1. open command prompt
2. yum install msoffice2010.msi
3. cat "http://www.officeupdate.com" >>
4. apt-get update
5. emerge -pDNu windows
Parent
Re:The primary idea (Score:5, Funny)
apt-get remove msie7
cat "http://3rdparty.windowsupdate.com" >>
apt-get install firefox
apt-get install openoffice
If they're going to go to the bother of making it modular, they'd make life a lot easier for many geeks if they let users choose their "modules".
Parent
Re:The primary idea (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:The primary idea (Score:5, Funny)
ps> Get-An-Install-File microsoft_office_2010.msi
ps> Append-String-To-Text-Document "http://www.officeupdate.com", "C:\WINDOWS\7\module\installer\config.txt"
ps> Update-Installer-With-The-New-Config-File
ps> Update-The-Computer-To-The-Newest-Version-Of "Everything"
Parent
Re:The primary idea (Score:5, Funny)
won't it be called something like PowerShell Professional Enterprise Level Home Edition Plus Networking, Five Seats, Single Core?
Parent
Re:The primary idea (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:The transparent idea (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:The transparent idea (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Mach (Score:5, Insightful)
I wouldn't call the bizarre mess of the MacOS kernel "modular". It's certainly not a micro-kernel, if that's what you mean.
All the mainstream operating systems today are somewhat modular, in that you can swap components in and out if they implement the same interface. This is especially true for Windows, in which long-term heavy usage of COM (which was explicitly designed to promote modularity) has meant that you can do things like swap out the IE rendering engine for Firefox, and it'll work. Well, assuming that Firefox supports the features the embedding app in question needs, of course. If you doubt this, feel free to download the Gecko ActiveX plugin and try it ... most apps use IE just as a convenient rendering engine and can run when Gecko replaces it.
That might not sound impressive, but try swapping out Gecko for WebKit or Opera on Linux and see what a mess you get into. Hell, just try upgrading Firefox on Ubuntu. You will almost certainly fail. I know, because I've tried it. About the only sane way forward is to leave the old version in place and install a new, parallel copy - but that has its own problems due to general brokenness in the way ELF was designed (it doesn't seal off shared libraries from each other properly, so they can interfere and cause crashes). Although to be fair, Linux (really, unix) does let you swap out your display subsystem for another one thanks to X. So they all have strengths and weaknesses in this area.
I'm not really sure why you think Apple has "specced out its software at a maximum consistent level". Dealing with missing features is just a part of the software development game, and Apple supports that with what they call weak symbols. It's important because not everybody upgrades their OS at once, so even if you only have one edition of your operating system, developers still need to adapt at runtime to things that are missing. The piss-poor support for this in Linux is another reason upgrades are so flaky (it's only done at compile time for most programs).
I'll be interested to see what Windows 7 actually ends up being. I suspect that this whole modularity drive is coming from upper management somewhere, and by the time it reaches the engineers they will say "well .... but windows is already modular!". They'll make some token gestures, clean up some cruft that users won't really notice except in worse app compatibility, marketing will trumpet the changes as meaning that things will Really Be Different This Time! and nothing will really change.
Parent
Re:Mach (Score:5, Informative)
Ubuntu uses Debian's apt package management system. It's a great thing, fast as hell (especially when one's coming from Gentoo or source-y relatives), easy through Synaptic and so on. It does, however, have one major difference to Gentoo's way of handling new releases: Only security fixes are applied to packages after a release.
That's a great advantage to admin staff. Never touch a running system's config unless upgrading to a new release. It's also a (rather large) disadvantage to people favouring the bleeding edge. A seperate "backports" repository will contain some new releases but it's not as extensive or current as gentoo's. The actual updating process itself, though, is typically orders of magnitude faster because packages are distributed binary (source optional) instead of as source and compiled locally.
Updating Ubuntu's embraced and extended* edition of Firefox to it's newest version is as easy as "apt-get upgrade" (emerge -u world) or "apt-get install ubufox" (emerge firefox) after an "apt-get update" (emerge --sync). Updating to vanilla Firefox from mozilla.org is, as GP stated, another beast.
* I'm seriously hoping for that third "e" there -- all those annoying Fx banners and buttons and other nuisances are enough to ruin an already mediocre product completely. Freedom in software should mean letting people use whatever browser they like. Be it Opera, Safari, ELinks, Lynx or even a properly secured instance of MSIE.
Parent
Re:Mach (Score:5, Informative)
The Linux kernel is monolithic, even if you compile everything as a module, it's basically stitched back together as a big monolith. Linux modules are just excised chunks of the kernel that you can load on demand, but you still need something specifically compiled into the kernel for each specific module to hook into.
With XNU, kernel extensions are more self-contained, and insert themselves into the kernel using more generic/universal interfaces.
That's why OS X device drivers don't have strict requirements for kernel version while binary Linux device drivers require a specific kernel version with specific compile-time options, and source drivers need the kernel to be compiled with support for them.
Parent
Well... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Well... (Score:5, Funny)
Have some faith! Microsoft can always do worse!
Parent
Re:Well... (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re:Well... (Score:5, Insightful)
a) What? You want to use ALL of your installed 8 GB or RAM, not only 2 GB? Sure! The "improved memory accessibility module" subscription goes for just $1.50/GB/month!
b) So, you say you want to use all 4 of your cores instead of just 2? Plus have access to the 2nd processor in your 3D graphics board? Why, no problem! We're selling a PERMANENT, I say PERMANENT license to the "multi-core compatibility mode" for just $35! Offers end by July 13th, 2011.
c) Ah, you need to have 5 USB devices connected simultaneously, and need them all to work in fast USB 3.0 mode instead of USB 2.0? We had a promotion for that last month, but unfortunately now we're back to the standard price, sorry. It'll be $0.50/USB device/month for every device above the 4th, plus $14.99 for the permanent 3.0 functionality, or $0.90/month for the subscription version. The module name is "FastUSB expansion/speed-up bundle package", and you can find the different option in the Connectivity tab at the Module Shop window.
And so on and an so forth.
Not a pretty picture.
Parent
Re:Well... (Score:5, Interesting)
It was a bit before my time, but the story goes [findarticles.com] that IBM used to operate in pretty much exactly this way back in the mainframe days. They would sell the customer a mainframe at a certain performance level, but actually ship them a much more powerful machine with some of its resources disabled/limited/throttled via software, so that it performed at the (lower) level the customer had been sold. Then when the customer needed an upgrade, they would bill them a ginormous amount, then send out a service tech to "install the upgrade" -- but all he really did was remove the limiters. This was called a "golden screwdriver" upgrade because the tech could earn IBM hundreds of thousands of dollars just with the proverbial turn of a screw.
Parent
Re:Well... (Score:5, Informative)
The big difference here is that we are talking about software, not hardware. If MS really does this, it will either be a wild success or a dismal failure. Personally, I will stick with my Mac or move back to Linux.
Parent
Re:Well... (Score:5, Insightful)
Selling the OS as on-demand modules could be the first great leap in converting the Windows user base to 100% open source.
Parent
Artificial Bundling? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Artificial Bundling? (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:Artificial Bundling? (Score:5, Interesting)
I dont think its about selling the add-ons for hundreds of dollars. I honestly think the basic Windows will eventually be free but by then it'll just be stripped down to the basic OS & browser. They wont sell the add-ons, they'll license them to people for a monthly fee. As the mess they made with Vista shows... if the OS doesn't sell they make less money and the hardware vendors make less money.
By giving away Core Windows with every new PC they get around the MS Tax on buying computers by charging you more later. Then you can upgrade as much as you wish...
Multimedia upgrade for $10 per month
DirectX upgrade for $15 per month
Office upgrade for $30 per month (or $7 per app per month)
Microsoft wants a continuous revenue stream from its users. They want you to keep giving them money whether you upgrade or not. They wont care if you insist on running your 4 years out of date OS as you'll still be paying your MS Rent. All the software will be auto-installed, auto-patched, auto-scanned and made nice and safe. They'll get people to upgrade to newer versions by charging more for older OSes which encourages them to upgrade their hardware (so the system feels less sluggish).
Its all leading to TPM/NGSCB machines riddled with DRM-locked hardware. Only 'approved' software will run (cue the protection from malware excuse) and any attempts to bypass security or normal operating functions will be reported. Future Windows versions will check all the files on your PC to make sure its safe, deleting anything they decide is bad for you.
Parent
Promises, promises ... nothing. Microsoft is over. (Score:4, Insightful)
Once again, Microsoft is making fantastic promisses that have little to do with their last set [roughlydrafted.com]. I wonder how many current features will evaporate [wikipedia.org].
This is not a good way to make money. Vista is a failure and Windows 7 will be an even bigger failure. At a minimum, the next three years belong to GNU/Linux. Users and hardware makers alike know better than to buy into Vista now and people looking for new hardware and software are going to go Linux. By 2010, Microsoft's base will be erroded. The Microsoft game, at long last, is over.
Re:Promises, promises ... nothing. Microsoft is ov (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Promises, promises ... nothing. Microsoft is ov (Score:5, Funny)
Because, in the next 5 years, Linux will really be ready for prime time. Trust me.
Parent
Re:Promises, promises ... nothing. Microsoft is ov (Score:5, Interesting)
Anybody remember Vista Ultimate edition? The one that promised Ultimate Extras - regular extras that you could download through Windows Update? They released 3 things through that: an small card game, DreamScene (sucks up CPU to animate your desktop background), and Bitlocker full drive encryption. That was all just a little after RTM - nothing since then.
When they came up with the idea I thought it might be interesting, but they've shown they can't follow through. If this is at all similar I'm sure it will fail. Microsoft won't be overthrown just from this, certainly not by 2010, but I'm sure it will pave more of the Disappointment Road that Vista started.
When they say "subscription" I get kind of worried. Valve carefully calls their Steam games "subscriptions" to remove your right of resale.
Parent
A bit risky? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:A bit risky? (Score:5, Interesting)
This would be great for lots of people: other companies could write competing modules to replace Windows functionality (why pay for Microsoft's system-wide search module when Google's is so much better?). Also, free and open-source modules will probably be created for many of those features.
Of course, it may be that Microsoft intends to create a complicated system of internal certificates and code signing so that only MS-approved modules can use these hidden APIs. It seems like that would add a considerable performance penalty, but then again I guess that's not too different from the decisions they made in designing Vista.
Parent
Here's where the technological shackles come in.. (Score:5, Informative)
- Installation of Windows 7: the OS communicates with the TPM and 'takes ownership' of the TPM. (The tech docs can't spell it out any clearer: the programmer controls the computer, not the user.) When taking ownership of the TPM, Windows provides the public key of Microsoft to the TPM.
- Booting the computer: During installation, Windows installs a hash of the bootloader code and the OS code into the TPM. The bootloader performs a sanity check using the TPM to ensure that it has not been compromised. The bootloader then verifies the OS against the TPM and only loads 'genuine' copies of Windows. Note that the definition of genuine is entirely up to MS; at any time the TPM can be instructed, only by its owner, to invalidate any credentials. It's perfectly possible, and in fact designed into the specs, for the TPM owner to completely disable TPM protected software at any time. Irreversibly, because the binaries are encrypted and require the TPM's cooperation to run.
- Updating Windows: Before updating, the OS instructs the TPM to provide a guarantee that it is a genuine TPM (using information manufactured into the chip), and the TPM signs MS's public key. This cryptographically proves that the computer has a TPM and that Microsoft owns the TPM. Microsoft then transmits the update to the computer, encrypting it with the TPM's key to prevent the native code from being revealed to the user or installed on a non-authenticated machine.
- Installing a module: Similar to updating, but more insidious. The user purchases a certificate to run a module, then the module is securely transferred to the machine. The certificate is stored by the TPM itself to prevent it from being read from disk or RAM by a third party. This is done for all the TPM's information. The module is then installed if and only if it is authenticated by Microsoft. This may seem to have some flaws, but that's taken care of with the following...
- Running a binary executable: The OS can require that every single binary be signed by a person who is authenticated by the owner. The TPM verifies this, and then either provides the OS with the decrypted binary or a failure notice. 'Configuration states' are a key principle here; at any time the state of the system (all programs that are running) can be saved into the TPM. This can be used for example by Windows update. The updater saves a configuration where only the core OS and the updater are running, and then can ensure that it will not update if not in this configuration. This keeps any on-the-fly memory editors out.
A lot of very smart people put a lot of effort into this system; it works. It's just been waiting for that 'killer app' to use it...Parent
Stupid Is as Stupid Does (Score:5, Insightful)
What Microsoft doesn't get is that operating systems and computers, in general, are just appliances. Yes, people like to tinker, but, when one opens up the box, they want everything. This fascination with dynamically installed and dynamically loaded modularity has been the ruin of Microsoft ever since Windows 3.1 began prompting me for Disk 5 when I tried to do something, and it continues to this day. All the Windows versions continually ask for the CD/DVD, whatever, Visual Studio defaults to online help - which sucks when you are on the train, and now they want to make Windows even more modular?
By contrast, I put in a Linux DVD, and I install everything. If I want to install something more, I can do the insanely difficult exercise of typing "sudo apt get install [programname]".
competitive? (Score:5, Insightful)
I wonder if this will backfire. A modular OS means that each component is easier to replace, as it's not intrinsically linked with the rest of the OS.
If you can replace a component, and choose which pieces to run piece by piece, people might make choices that aren't in Microsoft's interest.
It makes me laugh... (Score:5, Interesting)
Since NT 3.5 we've had:
True multi-user (Terminal services, fast-user switching), sudo (UAC), headless servers (server core), decent scripting (PowerShell), and now more modularity?
Yeah I know, some of these aren't exactly the same, but you see my point.
Let me get this straight... (Score:5, Insightful)
In other words... (Score:5, Insightful)
... if you haven't started your plans for moving away from Windows, now would be a good time.
I think Microsoft is starting to realize the gig is up. In Vista, the whole "we'll just produce a mound of crap, and people will have to buy it" model is starting to dwindle. Unfortunately, it looks like the new model is "we'll only force half the amount of crap we used to, and you can pay for the rest when it's released."
I honestly like using Windows 2000 and Windows XP. I don't like it as much as my Ubuntu installation, but it isn't terrible... at least, not after SP2. I simply just can't tolerate Vista, though. I was somewhat hopeful for Windows 7, but news like this (albeit far from 100% sure to happen) puts a big dimmer on it.
Module? (Score:4, Interesting)
How is this any different to what they have done all along, where custom installations allow you to pick and choose components? I remember doing that all the way back in the mid-90s.
I guess what I'm saying is: what separates a "module" from an application or a library? There appears to be no meaningful difference.
Rentier economy (Score:5, Insightful)
This is an issue that both liberals and conservatives should be united on. The desire to own stuff goes deep in the human psyche. The person who rents everything is utterly dependent on a high, steady stream of income can't survive even a short interruption or reduction in that stream. It's a very insecure and anxiety-provoking way to live.
Because (Score:4, Funny)
I have one of those (Score:5, Funny)
but what I'm scared of is I've been hitting the shopping cart too often, apt-get this and apt-get that.
I'm dreading the day the bill for all these nifty modules comes in the mail.
So? (Score:5, Insightful)
I've been an exclusive linux user for ~10 years. I know more than some, less than many. But friends, relatives, and co-workers are suddenly coming up to me and asking about "Ubuntu." And three days ago I read an article in CIO magazine posing the question, "Is is time to dump Vista?" to which many replied, "switch to Ubuntu."
That's significant. I've been happy to be ahead of the curve in terms of usability, stability, and security. And I can't lie--it gives me pleasure still to hear about people having problems with Windows issues while knowing I'm immune. But when people who've previously given me blank stares when I extolled the virtues of FOSS come to me and ask about a distro whose name is based on an African language, I can't help but wonder at the exigency that drove them to such extremes.
I look forward to the era of the 2nd coming of Apple, and the underlying gospel of *nix. For a time, Apple will collect those who have money and favor dead-easy implementation. But eventually they too will succumb to the ineluctable realities of *nix.
It was already "modular" (Score:5, Interesting)
I *fully* expect that the first version of Office that runs on "Windows 7" will have formerly free features that no require you to pay for add-ons to Windows before they will work.
I actually like Microsoft for the most part, but their push towards software-as-a-service is really turning me off. If anything is going to bring them down, it will be this. I don't think they understand just how much of a backlash their is going to be. No one wants to be nickeled-and-dimed to death. Business won't do it, and consumers won't care.
Won't somebody think of the developers? (Score:5, Insightful)
Can I just say, "Holy crap!"? On the surface, my first response was - "Huh. Actually, that sounds pretty cool. I'm tired of getting Windows installs with all the extra shit I don't want."
Then I put on my developer hat, and reached the aforementioned "holy crap" conclusion. The best thing that Windows has going for it from a development perspective is its consistency. (I know enough people disagree with this, but just let it ride for argument's sake.) What I mean by that is that you know, for a target OS version, exactly what is available to you. If you have Windows 2000+, various security APIs work. If you have win98+, various common controls are available, etc.
This obviously isn't ideal, but it does work well; and IMO it makes Windows easier to develop for than Linux (yes, I've done both). You know exactly what to expect for a given version of the OS, and for most of the functionality you want, you don't have to worry about a large number of external dependencies.
Now... enter subscription components. Let's say I build something that expects to use the Mail API that MS provides. Oops! the customer hasn't subscribed to the mail option! Does MS get the call? Nope, but I sure do...
WGA Control (Score:5, Insightful)
This time it's not once that they need to check for validity but they constantly need to keep checking. (I do know WGA does this at the moment.)
That must be quite horrific to code though, they had enough trouble with XP and Vista. Now they need to start checking those modules in multiple configurations
Does this also mean the end of specific 'roles' of windows such as home premium, business and ultimate?
The Microsoft car dealership (Score:5, Funny)
Customer: Thanks, and just in time its starting to rain. (gets in car and buckles up)
Salesman: Are you sure you don't want any upgrades?
Customer: No, a million times no. Just the basic car!
Salesman: Your choice. Have a nice day!
Customer: Hey! Why won't the widow roll up?
Salesman: Oh, You wanted a Window?
Customer: Of course I wanted a Window!
Salesman: But you said you didn't want any upgrades.
Customer: Well I NEED a window, my car is getting wet inside.
Salesman: Ok, that will be another two thousand dollars.
Customer: TWO THOUSAND!!?? Are you crazy? Why that much.
Salesman: That particular option package is bundled with the expensive model radio.
Customer: Thats crazy! Why would you bundle the window with a radio option.
Salesman: Now that would be silly to put an expensive radio in a car if its just going to get wet now isn't it?
Customer: Ok, Ok, just give me the window now.
Salesman: (reaches in his pocket, click click) There you go, you can put the window up now.
Customer: What about the radio? You said I get a radio with that option!
Salesman: You already have the radio installed, it should be activated now.
Customer: But wouldn't the radio get wet without the window?
Salesman: Thats why its bundled with the Window. If you don't have the good sense to put your window up we are certainly not going to waste a good radio by leaving it out in the rain.
Customer: That still makes no sense!
(Salesman reaches in his pocket again; click, click, Window rolls up automatically, sprinkler on the roof turns off, engine starts, and the tires start laying rubber through the parking lot.)
Salesman: (shouting) Are you still sure you don't want any other options? We have a great deal on breaks today!
Re:To be expected (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:To be expected (Score:5, Funny)
Bullshit. English is so damn easy compared to, for example, Polish. Polish is the Perl of spoken languages. I speak both, and am a native speaker of Polish, so I guess I can say so.
Parent
Re:To be expected (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:To be expected (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:To be expected (Score:5, Interesting)
A German guy once told me that he felt his language was one of the hardest in the world, and all the reasons he described reminded me of English to be honest (which makes sense considering English is Germanic, with lots of Romance vocab bolted on).
Parent
Re:To be expected (Score:5, Funny)
Mein Englisch ist besser als Dein Deutsch! Parlez vouz français, je ne comprende pas!
Ciao,
-S
Parent
Re:Hmmm (Score:5, Insightful)
If you're no longer dependant on the OS, then why rent one if you can get an identical one (from a productivity perspective) for free?
Parent