Windows Blue: Microsoft's Plan To Release a New Version of Windows Every Year 712
MrSeb writes "Way back in August, three months before the release of Windows 8, we learned about the existence of a project at Microsoft codenamed Blue. At the time it wasn't clear whether this was Windows 9, or some kind of interim update/service pack for Windows 8. Now, if unnamed sources are to be believed, Windows Blue is both of those things: a major update to Windows 8, and also the beginning of a major shift that will result in a major release of Windows every 12 months — just like Apple's OS X. According to these insiders, Blue will roll out mid-2013, and will be very cheap — or possibly even free, to ensure that 'Windows Blue [is] the next OS that everyone installs.' Exact details are still rather vague, but at the very least Blue will make 'UI changes' to Windows 8. The sources also indicate that the Windows 8 and Windows Phone 8 SDKs will be merged or standardized, to further simplify the development of cross-platform apps. Perhaps more important, though, is the shift to a 12-month release cadence. Historically, Microsoft has released a major version of Windows every few years, with the intervening periods populated with stability- and security-oriented service packs. Now it seems that Microsoft wants to move to an OS X-like system, where new and exciting features will be added on an annual basis. In turn, Microsoft will drop the price of these releases — probably to around $25, just like OS X."
This is a good thing (Score:3, Insightful)
for Windows users.
Re:This is a good thing (Score:5, Insightful)
It would be better if they could get one good one to work well and stuck with that but I suppose it is more about sucking as much blood as possible out of the punters...
Re:This is a good thing (Score:5, Insightful)
Indeed, their problem is that enough people have decided that they did get one to work well enough, and only buy a new OS when they buy a new computer, that they are concerned about future OS sales. Computers are not getting 'better' as quickly as in the past to the view of the average user, and so there is less reason to buy a new one every few years. The ego upgrades are going for phones instead. To combat these factors, a strategy of convincing people somehow that upgrading their OS is something they do regularly for a nominal fee is indeed probably a good way to keep sucking blood from the users.
Re:This is a good thing (Score:5, Insightful)
That's nice for the consumer side, but I daresay the enterprise and OEMs (who have to support said enterprises) will scream bloody murder at being pushed in that direction...
Re:This is a good thing (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
I dunno, is the Ubuntu roller-coaster really much better.
Re:This is a good thing (Score:5, Insightful)
I was still getting patches for Win2K long after my old Mac became a doorstop.
Additionally, XP is still getting security fixes 11 years after release.
Re:This is a good thing (Score:5, Interesting)
I definitely agree with Enterprise shops not wanting this - unless there is some type of LTS cycle rolled in (a la Ubuntu). Usual enterprise cycles are 3 to 5 years. Nobody wants to retrain their staff every year on OS changes. Also, there are applications that don't cycle each year and would need to be retested. A lot of shops haven't even phased out Windows XP and are planning upgrades to Windows 7, not Windows 8.
More and more I see Microsoft shooting themselves in the foot with this. They want Apple and Androids market - which is appealing because they are huge markets - but they are distancing themselves from their core strongholds. That could leave them loosing ground in all areas. Even Apple knows you don't but a tablet OS on a desktop. Microsoft has seemed intent on doing that and there still is a huge market for the desktop Market. Don't care how you slice it, spreadsheets, word processing, and content development is still all best done on a traditional desktop. I wouldn't be surprised if some linux distribution pushes to fill in the holes. Too bad Canonical is also trying for a slice of the already stuffed tablet and mobile market (face it, that's where the Unity interface has been headed) as there seems to be a looming gap that could actually make 2013 or 2014 the year of the linux desktop. No joking.
Re:This is a good thing (Score:5, Funny)
A fairly large number of the oil rigs and processing plants in Norway still run on OpenVMS for servers and winxp for clients... Scarily enough...
Those who have upgraded the servers are on win2003 R2 mostly, and upgrading to anyone else is a 2-5 year process of testing and upgrading.
Even with support ending for XP in 2013, we're not scheduled to begin testing for an upgrade until mid 2014.. And even then it is to Win7.
Going to be a joy I bet... *wraps his lips around a shotgun barrel*
Re:This is a good thing (Score:5, Interesting)
Support for XP ends April 8th, 2014, not 2013. FYI. We actually had to roll out another phase of XP upgrades to 2014 because of cuts to our operating budget - so I know the date very well.
According to the Microsoft Lifecycle page [microsoft.com], you will have support for Windows 7 until 2020.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:This is a good thing (Score:4, Informative)
The real fun thing about the XP licensing now is that the OEM licenses coming with any new kit you buy with Windows 8 on it only allow you to downgrade to Vista.
Re:This is a good thing (Score:4, Insightful)
For enterprise I doubt it. However tough the desktop move is, moving to Linux for most Windows shops is still tougher. For small business, I suspect that Microsoft is planning on dropping the bottom third of consumer / small business.
Comment removed (Score:4, Informative)
Re:This is a good thing (Score:5, Interesting)
It takes enterprises years to move from one release to another. Heck, I still see businesses still on XP because "it works", even though to bring a new XP install up to speed, it takes hundreds of patches.
Enterprises would not be happy with MS, especially if a service life of a Windows release drops. It takes a lot of time for an OS to work through a company, because it takes training, security, and in some cases, legal approval for anything to be added or modified on a gold corporate image.
MS's bread and butter is the enterprise. Honking those guys off is not a good idea.
What I can see MS doing is splitting Windows into three releases: Server, Consumer, and Client. (This is different from editions.) Server and Client would be released on a four year cycle, while Consumer would feature all the latest bells and whistles and get updates on an annual basis. Presently, the closest it would be like would be XP Pro, and XP Media Center Edition.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:This is a good thing (Score:4, Funny)
So are the people in those ads.
Re:This is a good thing (Score:5, Interesting)
I can't see this working well. The masses and in particular businesses have a hard time upgrading for various reasons. It is such that they tend not to unless forced or a new computer is necessary. Manufacturers and in particular the companies designing the chipsets and selecting the chipsets for use in a particular system don't take into consideration future support. They don't provide adequate support beyond the period the system is for sale which is generally less than a year. Unlike with 100% free operating systems that are shipped with systems not dependent on proprietary drivers there is no assurance the hardware will even work with the next version of the operating system.
ThinkPenguin's the only company whom really has a system worked out that can work well with this approach on a massive scale. They only ship free software friendly hardware so there is some assurance the hardware can be supported going forward without a commercial industry supporting it. Apple's a niche player and has similar issues with support long term as Microsoft does. While it works for the niche that they have it doesn't work well for the larger population. Apple would have an impossible time gaining mass adoption with its current approach. Trying to do with Microsoft Windows what Apple does with OS X in a niche market is never going to work well for users.
Re:This is a good thing (Score:4, Informative)
The same can be said about Windows also, newer versions of Windows can't really run on older hardware.
How so? Windows 8 is no more resource-hungry than Windows 7 was and Windows 7 was less resource-hungry than Vista which was released over 5 years ago, which is around the time the first Android phones were released and you sure as hell can't run the latest version on those devices.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
When did you last use Linux, 10 years ago??
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I was trying to put Linux on my desktop computer, but it doesn't support the wireless USB dongle I use. This was last weekend. The same dongle works perfectly in Windows.
I was trying to put Linux on my work computer, but it doesn't support my three monitor, two video card display out of the box. This was about a month ago.
I love Linux, and it's fun to use on computers that have supported hardware (I love it on my ASUS netbook), but if you don't have supported hardware, it's still a nightmare.
Re:This is a good thing (Score:5, Informative)
1. Brand new hardware will have Windows drivers. That doesn't mean it will be auto-detected and work out of the box. You may just have a PCI ID and are struggling to find what device it is and hunt down drivers online. I don't think I've had a single Windows install in the past 10+ years where all the hardware worked out of the box unless I slipstreamed the drivers myself. Conversely on Linux, new and old hardware alike usually just work out of the box.
2. A good chunk of wireless devices work out of the box with Linux, whereas I'm not sure I've once in my life had a wireless adapter work without a driver install on Windows. The primary reason certain wireless dongles don't work out of the box on Linux is that they need a proprietary binary blob that can't be legally included out of the box with most Linux distros.
Re:This is a good thing (Score:4, Interesting)
Out of curiosity, when was the last fresh install you did? Are you using obscure hardware?
I ask, because I've built two Windows boxes this year. Both of them auto-detected everything perfectly, including my printer. I was extra-surprised when the random, knock-off wireless dongle worked just fine in Windows 8--it didn't even bring up an "installing driver" popup, but simply worked. It even installed the most recent nVidia drivers without my doing anything. I was pleasantly surprised, even impressed.
Re: (Score:3)
The only Windows 8 installs I've done have been in VMs. But my Windows 2000, XP, Vista, 7, XP x64, Server 2003, Server 2008, and Server 2008 R2 installs have all needed drivers from the internet, even for standard OEM hardware.
OEMs often restrict their hardware to only work with specific drivers. For instance, if you buy a Dell laptop with an NVidia graphics chip, you have to either use the Dell driver, or modify the INF for your driver to detect your card. They do this with a lot of their hardware. If you think about it, it makes sense from a support standpoint. You know exactly what drivers the end user can use, and what potential problems they have. The downside is that its a pain for anyone with a clue, who doesn't want
Re: (Score:3)
I'm happy that operating systems other than Windows aren't in danger of triggering a runaway quantum baryonic flux reversal capable of eradicating all carbon based lifeforms within an ellipsoid with a semi-principal axis of four point one six light years.
I'm not saying that Windows will do any of that, because everyone knows that's a load of crap, but I am very happy to loudly state that every operating system other than Windows won't.
Re:This is a good thing (Score:5, Insightful)
When I report a bug to Microsoft they don't tell me to fix it myself.
When I report a bug to Microsoft they don't tell me anything at all.
Re:This is a good thing (Score:5, Funny)
True... It's funny you get that bloody "send report to Microsoft" every time some software crashes for whatever reason. I think they have a dedicated server cluster called "Trash" for all of those messages.
Re: (Score:3)
Actually, I know someone who worked in that department, and they do read all of them. They're then gathered for telemetry.
Re: (Score:3)
Actually, if you sign up to the right Microsoft program (not sure what they are calling it these days) and digitally sign all your binaries, you can get all the reports for your app (and in some cases provide resolutions that can be accessed via the "check for a solution" button on the "this program has crashed" dialog)
Re: (Score:3)
Unless you're an enterprise shop, Microsoft isn't taking bug reports from people. Windows 8 is a prime example of Microsoft flying directly in the face of the feedback it got from beta users.
In the OSS world, I can file a bug ticket, email a developer and get a new feature request or bug taken care of.
Re:This is a good thing (Score:5, Insightful)
In the OSS world, I can file a bug ticket, email a developer and get a new feature request or bug taken care of.
that's pretty much crap in most cases, and telling people that aren't familiar with OSS is really misleading. common sense tells you that there isn't an army of software devs out there working for free waiting to fix your specific problems.
you can get your bug fixed in the OSS world if the project owner / contributors can take time from their paying jobs, if the project if actually still supported, and if the project owner cares about your bug.
Re:This is a good thing (Score:4, Informative)
I've had really good luck with getting bugs taken care of when I open bug tickets.
I've done so for all kinds of OSS projects, big and small, including Wordpress and Drupal plugins that have a single developer. Most bugs I've filed were taken care of by someone who wasn't paid to fix the bug.
Re: (Score:3)
I am not aware of MS (or Oracle) ever fixing any problem I reported. IBM fixed 100% as far as I can recall. Ashton Tate made several worse!
Re:This is a good thing (Score:5, Insightful)
No, it means he probably knows 'how' to file a detailed bug report. Most people can't, hell, I'm not sure how many techs can even do it right. It also means he probably tests all kinds of things before submitting a report.
Filing a bug report that says 'When I do $a, $b happens' it totally different from.
'When I do $a, $b happens in configurations $w, $x, $y, but not $z when using components $1, $2, and $3.'
A bug report with a detailed test case, and possible solutions (in the open source case) goes a long way.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Not if you have an nVidia Optimus card.
Lies (Score:5, Informative)
I have an nvidia optimus/k1000m on a shiny new thinkpad w530. The kernel-included nouveau and intel drivers work fine. Switching between these without restarting is even theoretically possible with vga_switcheroo (though it apparently doesn't entirely work on the w530 specifically). Using the "optimus" bit is also perfectly possible with bumblebee [bumblebee-project.org].
However, even with bumblebee, the drivers are included with the kernel, allowing you to fully use KMS, bootup logos, etc. For full 3D, you can even still rely on the builtin intel drivers and use the proprietary nvidia drivers with bumblebee (or not, if your system allows you to switch fully to discrete mode).
Re: (Score:3)
That doesn't work out of the box with a fresh Windows install either. You have to download the proprietary Nvidia drivers in either instance.
Re:Lies (Score:5, Insightful)
Optimus with bumblebee works just like it would in Windows. Render using the nvidia card on-demand and display using the integrated card. This is perfectly fine. There is no "screwing around" involved if you use Ubuntu or similar idiot-oriented distros.
The switching bit is additional functionality; it's like switching in the BIOS between integrated and discrete, except you don't have to reboot. The common user is unlikely to care about this, nor is it necessary, but it's pretty nifty if you want it. Or are we going from complaining about lack of options to complaining about the existence of options?
Re: (Score:3)
That isn't working "just fine" then. That's the problem with Linux hardware support and Linux software; it only kind of works and often requires a bunch of messing around to even get to that state.
And--- even assuming this is true, which it isn't most of the time--- I'm willing to do the necessary messing around, because I maintain complete control over my hardware and software. I've made my Linux Mint systems do everything necessary to accomplish real work in an efficient manner. It's cost me some time (but NO money), but I reclaim that time with a more effective and productive working environment.
Re:This is a good thing (Score:5, Informative)
No it's not a good thing. Nobody needs an upgrade of his OS every 12 months (including the people who like it). Every upgrade is a hassle and potentially creates problems. The idea is crazy and doesn't make any business sense.
Apple upgrade their OS so often in order to make hardware appear to be outdated earlier than necessary, because they still make the majority of their money with hardware sales.
Re:This is a good thing (Score:5, Interesting)
Well, Microsoft has been in the minority here:
- OS X every year or two
- Android every 6 months, sometimes 9 months to a year
- iOS every year
- Ubuntu every 6 months (LTS every 2 years)
You don't have to upgrade every time Microsoft puts out a new release. If they make it easier (say via Windows Update), then perhaps it won't be much more hassle than a service pack.
Re:This is a good thing (Score:4, Informative)
I would guess they'll also reduce the support duration of versions to force people to upgrade.
Name another mainstream OS that has been fully supported for as long as Windows XP. Microsoft has been overly generous on their support of older operating systems.
Besides, at ~$25 for an OS update every year vs. ~$200 for an update every 3-4 years, I'd say that's a bargain.
Re:This is a good thing (Score:5, Informative)
Considering that XP is just barely three versions old, it's really not that generous. RHEL 3 and Solaris 9 are still supported as well, which have been around for about as long as XP.
Re:This is a good thing (Score:4, Informative)
End of production, not end of life.
Source: Red Hat Enterprise Linux Life Cycle [redhat.com]
Re: (Score:2)
How so?
This is going to cause more fragmentation since not everyone will want to upgrade each and every year so support costs will go up for companies that provide Windows products.
Re:This is a good thing (Score:5, Insightful)
And a completely horrid thing for business users.
Microsoft has completely lost its head. It's as if they are looking at the world around them for the first time ever and are trying to be like everyone else around them without actually understanding why they are doing what they are doing.
Microsoft needs to understand not only its current customers, but the customers they want to have. I know this is not particularly Steve Jobsian, but Microsoft needs to understand what people want... or at LEAST what they don't want.
Why is Microsoft a failure in the iPod business? Where to begin? Why is Microsoft a failure in the phone and tablet business? Well? It should be obvious -- people don't want what they have come to expect from Microsoft on their phones... rebooting, slowness, crashiness and vulnerability. If Microsoft EVER wanted to participate in the phone/tablet market, they first need to address the problems people have with their current OS and Office products. The missing ingredient? USER CONFIDENCE.
In contrast, Microsoft has done well in gaming. Extremely well. I know my tiny sample of observation isn't sufficient to form a conclusion, but I can say, the Saturday after Black Friday, there were still Wii and PS3 game units for sale where I heard store people talking about how fast XBox360 disappeared. That was huge, in my opinion.
So if Microsoft wanted to make something handheld? I'd say they should make a handheld game system. Do it up like Android. Game market online and all that... a PSP competitor. I think they'd do well. Morph that into a phone and a tablet and they have their in. But don't turn Windows into a phone or a tablet. We don't want it.
And we don't want constant changes in the workplace.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
people don't want what they have come to expect from Microsoft on their phones... rebooting, slowness, crashiness and vulnerability
I was with you til this. Rebooting, slowness, and "crashiness" are just fallacies. Vulnerabilities aside, XP and Win7 do not generally suffer from rebooting, slowness, or "crashiness". Even Vista, once it finally booted and UAC was disabled, was a solid OS. I ran it for 2 years that way, and the only reason I upgraded was because I got a free copy of 7 Pro. (I do not have the time nor motivation to maintain an up to date linux system at home) User Confidence is not a general problem with Windows to th
Re: (Score:3)
Sorry, slashdot ate all my tags.
<sarcasm>I know it's difficult to learn new things with a new operating system. For example, running ipconfig.
Under windows 7, you would click the mouse on the bottom left corner of the screen, and type "cmd" <enter> and then when the command prompt comes up, you type ipconfig.
Under windows 8, you would click the mouse on the bottom left corner of the screen, and type "cmd" <enter> and then when the command prompt comes up, you type ipconfig.
</sarcasm>
So... (Score:5, Insightful)
We're renaming service packs as major releases now?
Re:So... (Score:5, Informative)
it is a good thing valve has a steam client for linux
Re:So... (Score:5, Informative)
it is a good thing valve has a steam client for linux
steam was the easy part, now we need to wait till they port all games to linux but I don't think that's gonna happen anytime soon
Re:So... (Score:4, Interesting)
Because ubuntu (the supported steam distro) doesn't do a release every 6 months requiring an upgrade proceedure (do-release-upgrade, a simple changing of sources.list and dist-upgrade typically results in broken packages) and yet another change to the window manager?
Re: (Score:3)
It works for Ubuntu.
Most Ubuntu users stick with the LTS release. Most of the rest only upgrade because it's free.
Re: (Score:3)
Depends on the pricing structure going forward. If the cost remains reasonable over time, then sure. If they expect us to spend an hundred and a half for Pro every year, then no
It's, what, the fourth sentence of the summary?
"According to these insiders, Blue will roll out mid-2013, and will be very cheap — or possibly even free, to ensure that 'Windows Blue the next OS that everyone installs.'"
Mike, (Score:3, Funny)
I wanna be like Mike!
Apple = Michael Jordan
Windows 8 = Air Jordans
Microsoft = little kid in the commercial
Re: (Score:2)
This makes perfect sense - Apple gets paid to promote Windows 8, and thus Microsoft wants to buy it.
oh great. and I have to support it all? (Score:5, Funny)
Lovely... so it'll be like automobiles.
You'll hear about recalls that affect Windows 2015, 2017, and 2018
but luckily, I'm still running Windows 2014
people in 2029 will brag about how they wish they'd bring back "classic Windows 2019, but not that crappy POS Windows 2021 that had the noise problem"
Re:oh great. and I have to support it all? (Score:5, Funny)
You'll hear about recalls that affect Windows 2015, 2017, and 2018 but luckily, I'm still running Windows 2014
people in 2029 will brag about how they wish they'd bring back "classic Windows 2019, but not that crappy POS Windows 2021 that had the noise problem"
You don't understand Microsoft's logic. Back when they only released an operating system every few years, they included the year in the version. Now that they will be switching to an annual release cycle, they're switching to colors, using the ROYGBIV order, which is why they are starting with blue. You see, Blue comes after 8, which comes after 7, which comes after Vista, which comes after XP, which comes after 2000, which comes after the millennium edition, which comes after 98, etc. They found that people were very confused about Windows 8 following Windows 7. It didn't fit the pattern at all. Hence, they are moving to colors. After ROYGBIV they're moving to Pantone color numbers, in order from Ballmer's least favorite Pantone to his favorite.
Re: (Score:3)
Project blue (Score:5, Funny)
Seems almost fitting somehow.
Re:Project blue (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Project blue (Score:4, Funny)
re-enable the Start Menu Please (Score:3)
and allow folks to disable the "tiles" thing
or have a Command Window "charm" that can be used
Re:re-enable the Start Menu Please (Score:5, Informative)
$25? (Score:4, Insightful)
Apple can charge $25 because they have made money on the hardware. Hard to see how MS makes sufficient revenue from this, unless they anticipate controlling more of the hardware than they do now.
Re:$25? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:$25? (Score:5, Interesting)
OEM copies of Windows only cost about $80, and with PC's lasting about 5 years that means MS is likely to see an ~50% increase in revenue per user if the OEM price drops to near what the upgrades cost and they get a significant attach rate. For their corporate cash cows it likely means that they'll see a higher adoption of SA which will once again increase revenue. Of course this assumes they can pull it off, and actually achieve a significant adoption rate instead of just significantly fracturing the market and driving people to seek more stable alternatives.
New coke! (Score:5, Insightful)
"Here is Metro, no start menu. Oh wait here's it back. We told you we listen to our customers!"
Re:New coke! (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Go home Microsoft, you are drunk. (Score:2)
Microsoft sold 40 million licenses off Windows 8 already - the great success must have messed up their thinking. This success may very well be temporary - corporations will probably hold back way more this time around than even with the Win XP -> Windows 7 transition (which is far from over, XP is the second OS by usage share).
I hope a bit of bitchslapping by the corporations (who won't upgrade to Win 8 for several years) will sober MS up somewhat and make them forget about Windows Blue.
Re:Go home Microsoft, you are drunk. (Score:5, Insightful)
The major PC vendors have made it very difficult to NOT buy Windows 8. That's not the same thing as saying that Windows 8 is successful...
Windows Blue (Score:3, Insightful)
Of all the colors, for Microsoft to pick something associated with blue, after all the blue screens...
Windows Blue... (Score:2)
Gotta catch 'em all!
XP User here (Score:5, Insightful)
So what MS needs to do is to find out what people really want. A good example of them not doing this would be their new tablets. Most people want enough storage to watch lots of video and some for their apps. What people didn't want was all their space taken up with MS Office on the tablet; who the hell is going to do extensive office work on those tablets? As a programmer I want tools to make my life easier. What Microsoft tries to foist upon me are tools that guide me into their suite of products such as office and SQL server. What my mother wants is a machine that is simple (like an iPad) what MS gives her is a machine that is always asking hard questions. What my mother also wants is a machine that she can't easily screw up (like an iPad). What MS give her is a machine that comes pre screwed up by the manufacturer with trialware and allows for third party crap to install itself over and over until, in the case of her browser, she has 7 inches of toolbars and one inch of browsing space.
So until MS starts actually listening to their customers and not their internal marketing departments the only customers they are going to keep are the ones who don't bother leaving them.
Re:XP User here (Score:5, Insightful)
I doubt that Apple could make a $350 MacBook any more impressive than a $350 HP laptop. The reason that the MacBook sells well, despite not having Windows, which most people are familiar with, is that it is such a beautiful machine. People are willing to get rid of Windows when they are getting a really nice machine in exchange. However, at $350, there really isn't much room to make the machine appealing. No sleek aluminium case. No solid state drive, no multi-touch touchpad, no retina display, no crazy long battery life, no custom motherboard that allows the machine to be .75 inches including screen. Basically throw out everything that makes a Mac appealing. If you're just going to have some cheap junky computer, you might as well have and OS that's familiar and runs all your old programs.
They could easily make a $350 MacBook and still make a profit on it. The chassis is basically unchanged from previous iterations, and even if they come out with a new design there's no reason they can't use the same chassis on multiple system configurations. They already do that, actually, just that all of the configurations available are mid-high end. Given that the current version of OS/X runs perfectly well on a 2008 MacBook, there is absolutely no reason it wouldn't run on a current entry-level Intel processor. If I can run an i5 or an i7 on a MacBook, then there is absolutely no reason I can't run a Celeron on the same system without needing to change the motherboard or system design.
Aluminum cases aren't that expensive: my Dell Vostro V130 was $400, and it's got an anodized aluminum case. Battery life is not great on it, but it's respectable, able to eke out 4h or so with aggressive power management settings. Oh, and it's got a multi-touch touchpad... pretty much all Synaptics makes these days are multi-touch devices, and it's software that limits them on Windows devices: install Linux, and holy shit! your touchpad is actually multitouch! It would actually be cheaper for Apple to put the better battery in the "low end" system because of the cost associated with running multiple production lines (also the reason that touchpads are multi-touch), and you know as well as I do that "retina display" is marketing bullshit that doesn't actually mean anything.
The reason they don't make a $350 MacBook isn't because they can't, it's because they don't want to be associated with the low end of the market. It would hurt their image as a "high end" company, and they wouldn't be able to command such high prices on their high end equipment.
This will work. (Score:2)
If Microsoft doesn't change anything important. Apple releases a 'new version' of iOS almost yearly, but what changes? Other than toys, we don not know.
Sure will keep the script kiddies busy validating their tools agains 'new versions'. Security through churn. Interesting concept.
Oh Microsoft... (Score:3)
Last years "Windows Blew" - so let's Blue again... (Score:5, Funny)
Last years "Windows Blew" - so let's Blue again...
Quality naming guys!
this is Win 98 all over again (Score:3, Informative)
MS feels the heat? (Score:5, Insightful)
I recall a few years ago now on Slashdot a discussion on the topic "MS doesn't matter any more" - doesn't matter, as in you don't need to use any MS software to run your business and communicate with the outside world. They are of course still a major player in the software arena, but far from as all powerful as they were. There are plenty of alternatives, they are viable, and indeed a key reason for companies to stick to MS is because they are already with MS. New businesses that still have the choice, have an alternative.
That was basically the argument, and mostly I agreed at the time. But it was ahead of time, it was before Android and the iPhone even.
Now it seems to me that MS is really risking becoming just "one of the options". And probably MS feels the same. They took nearly a decade to come with a viable successor to WinXP, and in the meantime both OS-X and various Linux distros made great strides in UI design, general usability, and indeed market share.
They completely lost control over the www - partly thanks to Firefox, Chrome, Safari and the others on the desktop, partly thanks to the proliferation of mobile devices which are pretty much all non-Microsoft devices (Windows Phone is really small compared to Android and iOS).
They will lose control over their Word lock-in, again partly thanks to mobile devices: people do want to view and edit their documents on their tablets, which means some application running on iOS or Android. MS doesn't have such an offering yet. OpenOffice in it's various incarnations is gaining significant ground at least in Europe, and Google Docs is also a major competitor sucking people away from MS Office.
And surely people will start thinking. "Why is my iPad working so much nicer than my desktop? Aren't there alternatives to Windows?" They see Apple's offerings in the stores. "That's nice but out of my budget, any cheaper alternatives?" They may have heard about Linux, about Ubuntu or Red Hat. "Hey, geek friend, how about that Ubuntu thing that I recently heard about? Can I still watch videos on YouTube, and edit some Word documents? Can I try it out a bit?"
Not many people at first, sure, but there are always people curious about what's out there, and nowadays you can see there is more out there than Windows.
MS is definitely feeling the heat of the competition. First they finally picked up development of their web browser, and made great progress there. Then after the debacle of Vista they quickly came with Win7 and now Win8. And now planning a new major release every year, that's going to be interesting. They'll have to start offering intersting features to keep people on their platform, and give people a reason to use Windows and not one of the alternatives. I'm looking forward to it.
So.... (Score:3)
By the time you learn enough to do you job of how to deal with all the annoying changes and different bugs .... you get to do it all over again....
Has anyone done a study on how much time/dollars are spent in dealing with such? (learning, bugs, other system hogs/user waits....)
The MS Strategy: be like apple. (Score:3, Insightful)
Its a shame that MS seem to feel they have only one option now... "be like apple".
Half the reason they thrive so well in corporate-enterprise-juganaut land is simply because they aren't apple and dont behave like them. A release every year is going to be an utter nightmare for a decent sized enterprise, but i guess it depends on what "next version" really means. Is it going to just an incremental update similar to what service packs used to be? In which case, the actual OS update will probably less painful, but there will be pain to be had in other places (namely licensing).
I really wouldn't be cheering for this idea if i were in a corporate desktop support role, thats for absolute certain.
Even given the job that i do (which falls into the systems integrator role), it doesn't sound good... whats it going to mean for certification? oh the pain.... then that comes with its own set of licensing nightmares (the SI role).
Still, as a linux-lover, i can only say "i love where apple and MS are taking their OS's because they seem to be working very hard to make linux as attractive as possible".
Can You Skip Upgrades? (Score:5, Insightful)
Does this mean that you have to upgrade each and every year to get the upgrade cost? Can you wait 4 years and still only pay $25 for the latest? Because if not, it doesn't sound much better than what it costs now. Sounds more like a way to charge for service packs.
I'd actually prefer a daily rental model for Windows as I only ever use it anymore for flashing devices, turbo tax or the occasional game.
Context for future archaeologist (Score:4, Insightful)
2012 was toward the end of the "PC" era, when the basic software, or "operating system" of our information appliances was still updated frequently so as to make it incompatible with older devices and applications. We did actually pay for the software that did this to us.
The rationale for this was that historically this software was very primitive, and new versions gave important improvements in utility, security and performance. By 2002 however, operating system software had become mature enough that it did not need such radical continuous improvement. It had become stable enough.
In 2012 though the customer's need for this had long passed, software and hardware companies still clung to this old tradition because they needed their old software and hardware to be made obsolete so they could sell the same products to the same customers again.
Sometime around 2010 consumers started becoming wise to this game. The result was a new "mobile" era of information appliances that didn't have this legacy tradition.
Re: (Score:3)
Wtf.... microsoft is not mozilla!!
I wonder if they plan metro-style changes every year then
Never mind Blue is the color most associated with IBM
Think that's intentional?
Re: (Score:3)
It's true that the desktop does not need this pace of innovation. Some stability is nice - at least a few years.
However, if they are serious about merging the desktop and mobile platforms, they will need to go to a yearly (or more frequent) release schedule. The mobile market is simply moving too fast, and the platforms are becoming more powerful very quickly.
Queue discussion about the wisdom of merging the desktop and mobile platforms...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But... it worked so well for Firefox: you know, "Follow that Chrome..."
All the users cheering happily at each new release. ...What? Those aren't cheers? um... Oh.
Re:Should be Windows GOLD (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
except that it's $200+ to buy in. so no, it's not $25 a year. Just wait until...whoops, you can't do an upgrade from 2013 version to 2014 version, you have to buy new (unless you bought the $250 version). Aka what MS does today and has done for years. Of which, there's really nothing wrong with that - they do whatever they want, but it's not $40.
I find this incredibly stupid because part of the purpose of windows is stability. If it changes every year people are just going to skip versions. They won't keep
Re:Should be Windows GOLD (Score:4, Insightful)
most people get Windows when they buy a new PC. So for them, the buy-in cost isn't $200+, it's more like $20 or whatever HP/Dell/Lenovo currently pays Microsoft for a copy.
Re:Should be Windows GOLD (Score:4, Insightful)
I find this incredibly stupid because part of the purpose of windows is stability.
Is that a joke, or have you simply never run any other OS? Windows is the least stable of any OS out there. Any hardware fault hoses Window while Linux will chug along without a hiccup. Plus they have a very bad habit of changing everything around with every release so you have to relearn everything. The only way I can tell one version of Windows from another is it's completely different, to the point that I had a laptop in a bar running Linux, and someone asked "which version of Windows is that?" OTOH, if you were used to Mandrake from ten years ago and switched to kubuntu you'd feel right at home. The way to tell the difference between two versions of a linux distro is the latest will be faster and have more features.
And why would anyone upgrade Windows in the first place? I seldom see new features, never see increased speed (except that it seems that way because the registry makes sure it gets slower the more you use it), and you have to figure out where they put stuff. Often it actually loses functionality; I really miss XP's search on my W7 notebook.
The only reason to upgrade Windows is often the newer software won't run on he older OS. I've never had that problem in Linux, and seldom in Windows.
Re: (Score:3)
Personally, I upgraded to windows 8 specifically because it was so cheap.
You'd have to pay me a lot more than $40 to downgrade my Windows PC to 8.
I'd be happy to pay $25 a year and always have the newest version of Windows.
Most Windows user don't pay for Windows; it's hidden in the cost of the PC they buy. Few of them are going to throw Microsoft $25 every year.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I recently upgraded my work PC to Win8. I upped the RAM to 8 GB, but the box came with the 32-bit version of Win7. I looked into the cost of buying a copy of Win7 64-bit, compared it to the cost of Win8, and figured, "Someone here has to be first, might as well be the IT guy."
It took me a few days to tweak, but I've figured out how to make the parts that piss me off mostly stay out of my way. I hate The Interface Formerly Known As Metro, including and especially the Start page. But since I've been using
you paid for 64bit window 7 when you had 32bit? (Score:5, Informative)
you paid for 64bit window 7 when you had 32bit?
You just needed to download a ISO and REUSE the key on the BOX.
Re:Should be Windows GOLD (Score:4, Funny)
$40 is indeed a bargain for the newest version of Windows.
The only problem right now is that it's the newest version of Windows.
Re:Should be Windows GOLD (Score:5, Interesting)
So instead of $129 every 4/5 years, it's $25 each year. Yes, we're all being horribly ripped off.
drivers are not Metro and metro will need side loa (Score:3)
drivers are not Metro and metro will need side loading as well.
Also metro does not work that well in multi app work flows