First Windows 10 RTM Candidate Appears 189
Mark Wilson reports that the first RTM candidate for Windows 10 has been spotted: build 10176. Leaks and sources have suggested the company intends to finalize the operating system later this week, perhaps as early as July 9th. This would give Microsoft almost three weeks to distribute it to retailers and devicemakers before the July 29th launch date. "While the RTM process has been a significant milestone for previous releases of Windows, it’s more of a minor one for Windows 10. Microsoft is moving Windows 10 to a 'Windows as a service' model that means the operating system is regularly updated."
Missing the expletive... RTM (Score:4, Funny)
Now we wait for the RTFM version so we can start screaming obscenities.
Will we get up-to-date images? (Score:4, Interesting)
I reinstall just-infrequently-enough that I don't maintain an image w/ all the updates slipstreamed in, so it invariably takes 20mins for the initial install, and then hours and hours for all the updates to get it current.
It'd be really nice if MS would be kind enough to provide up-to-date .ISO builds like they've been doing w/ the Win10 insider program
Re: (Score:2)
It'd be really nice if MS would be kind enough to provide up-to-date .ISO builds like they've been doing w/ the Win10 insider program
How about if they just made it less of a pain in the asshole to save the update files once downloaded, so you could use them again? Making windows update not delete the installers is literally the least they could do.
Re: (Score:3)
Or just use the tools provided by MS? WSUS does everything you just stated.
Re: (Score:3)
Or just use the tools provided by MS? WSUS does everything you just stated.
A home user shouldn't have to run an enterprise service in order to not have some files they want to save deleted. I considered mentioning that, but I forgot I was on slashdot and thought "surely no chucklehead will suggest using WSUS just to not have some files deleted" and then bam.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Tip of the iceberg.
Even if you have all the files on hand there's still a really REALLY long process involving the installation of sometimes hundreds of patches requiring a varied number of reboots along the way generating multiple system restore points, and then filling your Windows installation with several gigs of rollback information, uninstall information and other associated cruft that can only be partially removed by running the Disk Clean-up tool with administrator privileges (which for some reason
Re: (Score:2)
I reinstall just-infrequently-enough that I don't maintain an image w/ all the updates slipstreamed in, so it invariably takes 20mins for the initial install, and then hours and hours for all the updates to get it current.
It'd be really nice if MS would be kind enough to provide up-to-date .ISO builds like they've been doing w/ the Win10 insider program
Or Combo Updates, like Apple does with OS X (and even before).
Re: (Score:2)
Windows 8/8.1 have the option to refresh the OS without losing program or files. Also has the option for throwing everything away save the OS, but that's not what you're after as-is. You can, however, update the image it uses to do this so it lays down one that already contains your apps..
Not sure about the new model (Score:3)
I've been doing the Insider Preview thing ever since it was available, and my feeling is that something as important as an operating system should have a fixed-version servicing model. It's great to get new features over time, but could result in headaches for IT. Microsoft has said they will introduce a "long term stable" branch, but my opinion is that mixing features and fixes in the update stream is just going to lead to a mess. If they set the LTS branch root at this RTM point, and never update anything, you can bet that people are going to pressure IT to switch them to the rolling upgrade model. Now, if they keep the LTS branch primed with Service-Packs-that-are-not-Service-Packs, then this is different. The problem is that I can't see them doing this since Service Packs have traditionally reset the extended support clock. I'm assuming Server 2016 is going to be a little more stable than Windows 10, but who knows? This Windows-as-a-Service thing is a big shift.
I know we're all supposed to be running our workloads in The Cloud, preferably Azure, but I think Microsoft is ignoring a key part of its customer base. There are still a lot of use cases for solid on-premises OS deployments on physical, local machines. They're not mainstream anymore, but they exist, and trying to force people out of that model is just going to drive Linux/BSD adoption. Not every corner of the world has high-speed Internet connectivity available at reasonable prices!
Also, as people have pointed out, RTM is not the milestone it once was. No one is pressing millions of installation DVDs anymore. But, RTM did mean that all the showstopper bugs were taken care of, and the concept of "ship it, we'll patch it later" just didn't work. All I do know is this -- Microsoft is toast if Grandma can't upgrade her Windows 7 box she bought at Best Buy with zero issues.
Re: (Score:2)
There are still a lot of use cases for solid on-premises OS deployments on physical, local machines. They're not mainstream anymore
I think you can be more strong on this point. The reality is that this *is* the mainstream. 'The Cloud' work is important, but more than important, the people doing it are *louder* than everyone else and the media coverage high since it is novel, but mainstream is remarkably little changed over the last several years.
RTM did mean that all the showstopper bugs were taken care of, and the concept of "ship it, we'll patch it later" just didn't work. All I do know is this -- Microsoft is toast if Grandma can't upgrade her Windows 7 box she bought at Best Buy with zero issues.
That is the facet I find concerning, 'RTM is no big deal' statement is bad because it *should* be a big deal.
Maybe they can juggle LTS and non-LTS effectively, but they have every risk of get
Re: (Score:2)
The pro does. If you go into PC Settings go select skip releases? On the pro you can still get Updates for the previous version and just be 1 update a year behind. Enterprise licenses go up to 3 years with security updates going into each.
I will update when the 1st update comes out. THen use this setting and turn this into my LTS. Home editions will always get updates and can't turn that off
I hope it's better than the last preview (Score:2)
The preview I installed (~2 weeks ago) was shockingly unstable and slow. I was appalled at the state of an OS, especially when it is slated for release in July.
(For example, my start... panel... thing... completely hosed itself for no apparent reason, a couple days after I installed the OS, leaving me nothing with a bunch of coloured boxes with class names in them).
Re:I hope it's better than the last preview (Score:5, Insightful)
1. Come up with a list of cool features your users and best developers want to see.
2. Implement them.
3. Test them.
4. Bake them into a new OS and release it when it's ready. If it takes 14 months instead of 12, THAT'S OK!!! Really. The number of people jonesing for a new Windows release, even if it's half-baked and buggy, is incredibly close to zero.
5. Profit!
BTW, if any of this is too complicated I'm available to consult at very reasonable rates.
Re: (Score:2)
Then get the latest 10162 release and try that instead. It's a "preview" remember? It's *specifically* not finished..
Re: (Score:2)
Then get the latest 10162 release and try that instead. It's a "preview" remember? It's *specifically* not finished..
3 weeks before its released you'd think they would have the most visible and important parts of the user interface working properly.
Some localization issues with some control panel... some multimonitor flaw when the taskbar is on the left side instead of the bottom and the two screens are different resolutions...
But no, builds 10076 and 10130 literally had issues where clicking the start menu wouldn't even reliably open it; and you couldn't even turn bing searching the web off in the start menu / taskbar search. There was no way to just have windows search only the local computer.
I haven't tried 10162 yet. It wasn't available when I last fooled around with my Windows 10 test machine last weekend. (No way I'm using it as a main computer.)
3-4 weeks before release, And this stuff wasn't working properly yet.
It's a "preview" remember? It's *specifically* not finished..
But it is a preview of where Windows 10 is at right now. And its hard to imagine them getting from here to ready to release in the amount of time they have left.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
All true 6 months before release.
3 weeks before release it should be a lot closer to finalized.
They should be fixing bugs and writing documentation for what's going to be in the final release by now, not still deciding what features it should have.
Re: (Score:2)
The preview I installed (~2 weeks ago) was shockingly unstable and slow. I was appalled at the state of an OS, especially when it is slated for release in July.
You've run Windows before, right?
Re: (Score:2)
The preview I installed (~2 weeks ago) was shockingly unstable and slow. I was appalled at the state of an OS, especially when it is slated for release in July.
(For example, my start... panel... thing... completely hosed itself for no apparent reason, a couple days after I installed the OS, leaving me nothing with a bunch of coloured boxes with class names in them).
You were on preview versions, In addition to bugs they are chocked full of debug code and test features that they were previewing and deciding whether to keep, dump or polish. The difference between what you ran 2 weeks and today is light and day. huge speed, stability and polish increases as all the preview stuff that didn't make the cut has been dumped and all the test and debug stuff removed.
Re: (Score:2)
I tried the preview on my Surface Pro 3 - a Microsoft device (albeit one they warn isn't 100% ready for use with the preview) and it was unusable. I mean, I got a feel for what they were going for - I could understand the OS and see some benefits - but it was far too buggy to function. I don't see how they could go from that to ready to release OS in just 6 weeks (from when I last tried it).
I feel like someone at Microsoft
So, then... (Score:2)
I have to read the manual before I try installing this one?
DirectX 12 (Score:2)
Otherwise I'm peachy with my customized Win7x64 installs.
You can take 8.1 off my cold dead hands (Score:2)
My surface pro 3 works great with the tablet UI and metro,. I can swipe easy with my fingers and use the charms bar to send my OneNotes to my printer or MS Office.
Windows 10 is too focuses on the desktop because of the HATERS who do not want anything besides the old school desktop with the mouse and keyboard. There is a tablet mode in WIndows 10 but it is too tuned for a desktop still and not touch friendly.
WIndows 8.1 is stable and works and I am used to it now. WIth a start menu replacement it is fine on
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
I couldn't agree more.
"While the RTM process has been a significant milestone for previous releases of Windows, it’s more of a minor one for Windows 10. Microsoft is moving Windows 10 to a 'Windows as a service' model that means the operating system is regularly updated."
Yay, now my OS can also ship as bug-ridden, slow, insecure software, because "we'll patch it later".
Sounds about as promising an upgrade as moving to subscription software-for-rent for something I rely on to earn my living. Ask anyone using Creative Cloud since the latest updates how well that one works out.
Re: (Score:2)
How is that any different to how things were previously? Every OS ever shipped with bugs and was patched later, especially once online patching became a thing.
The real issue is that new features will début via Windows Update, rather than via a new version of Windows. It used to be that once a version of Windows reached SP1 it was pretty stable and debugged, and you could stick with it for years. Now they will keep adding new features and making major changes as time goes on, so if you liked the w
Deliberately shipping unfinished software (Score:3)
It is the likely change in philosophy that concerns me.
Very often, once software has moved to on-line upgrades from static installation, or from on-line upgrades being available to routinely applying rolling updates for new versions, the quality at initial launch time drops sharply, and the quality of rolling updates is significantly lower than professional standards should dictate. There's something about the mindset that means shipping half-finished products is now somehow OK, like the "perpetual beta" ju
Re: (Score:2)
It leaves Windows 7. Just because they've made a newer one doesn't mean the existing one will suddenly stop working...? (Well, at least it didn't used to mean that; no guarantees going forward...)
Re: (Score:2)
That's a flagrant non sequitur to me.
Re:Just in time (Score:5, Insightful)
Windows 10, Windows 8, Windows 7, Windows Vista, Windows XP, Windows 2000, Windows NT.
While Windows XP had a 64bit version the 32bit version was still popular, as PC's at the time were still mostly under 4 gigs of ram, and most were 32bit processors.
XP lasted too long. There was too much effort in Vista, they wanted to make an ultimate OS, thus failed miserably, a system designed to take advantage of many of the next generation Ideas, that was not implemented.
Windows 7 "the new golden age of Windows?" really took the fact that there was competition with Mac OS and Linux seriously and made one of their most Solid Consumer OS, they fixed Vista's features that were over engineered and made it work well again. Windows 7 was good enough to put an end of the "I'm a Mac and I'm a PC" commercials. Windows 7 is also when people started switching seriously to a 64bit OS. And actually loosing compatibility with many of the old 16bit apps.
Windows 8 and 8.1 isn't that bad. However they tried to make a tablet and PC OS. By in turn making a system that isn't optimal for both. Granted now with the Ultrabooks with touch screens getting more popular, the interface changes are paying off a bit more, however we are missing what we need for a good workstation OS.
Windows 10... From what I have seen so far they seem to be going back to making it more of a workstation OS, with touch capabilities. The Tablet never caught on as well as people hoped. It didn't send the Desktop/Laptop into a doom spiral. However it changed that nature of the desktop to a smaller market share. Those who need to do real computing still needed these systems. And the new Ultrabooks convertible systems have caught on.
Now what about Linux and Macs?
If you don't like windows, there isn't anything wrong with Linux or Macs, so even if Windows 10 is a huge success... It doesn't mean it will kill your favorite OS as I am sure they will be around for decades to come.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The Tablet did take off. Just not Windows Tablets. iPad and Android tablets rule that marketplace.
The Windows OS wasn't designed for a tablet, and the changes in Win 8.x were too late and focused on the wrong sector (desktop/laptops). The tablet interface in Win 8 does work, but people don't buy windows tablets. The Convertible Windows laptop/tablets are more expensive than a regular laptop and a separate tablet.
Trying to be the best of both, and being good at neither is a good way to lose market-share. Whi
Re: (Score:2)
WIndows isn't moving to the subscription model. That has been debunked over [winbeta.org] and over [howtogeek.com] again.
Re: (Score:2)
Except for the small elephant in the room, which is that they still don't seem to have defined "for the supported lifetime of your device" anywhere.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, and we can only speculate at this point. Most believe it is intended to convey that Windows will not support hardware that is 20 years old, even though (if they stick to their guns) Windows 10 will continue to be upgraded at and well beyond that point. It's probably determined by the OEM, or according to specific hardware.
I doubt anyone actually believes Microsoft considers the "supported lifetime of your device" to be only a year or two for a desktop computer. Perhaps for a phone.
Re: (Score:2)
I doubt anyone actually believes Microsoft considers the "supported lifetime of your device" to be only a year or two for a desktop computer.
True, but people would have said the same about Apple once upon a time, while lately Apple's software policies seem tailor-made to artificially limit the lifetime of its already relatively expensive product range, up to and including the high-end business laptops and such.
I think the concern is that this is a one-way trip. Once consumers and particularly businesses start making the switch to Windows 10, it is unlikely there will be any going back.
If Microsoft then ships one box-bricking Windows update to al
Re: (Score:2)
lately Apple's software policies seem tailor-made to artificially limit the lifetime of its already relatively expensive product range, up to and including the high-end business laptops and such
Really? I have a Macbook Pro that is over 2 years old, but last I checked it was still receiving updates.
Most Apple products I've owned, even phones, received updates for well beyond the 2 year mark.
If Microsoft then ships one box-bricking Windows update to all those Windows Home users, who will have no option to defer or skip any update under the current proposals, there is going to be carnage.
I would be pissed too. Though I don't see what that has to do with the topic at hand ("supported lifetime of the device")... that would be a concern even if Microsoft announced future support of all devices to the end of time.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, that was part of what I had in mind.
However, there appears to be a more general problem (and a more deliberate strategy) with Apple than any one device or platform. In theory, there are still updates available for my iPad (an early Retina model) but in practice they are widely reported to perform so poorly that we daren't "upgrade". However, that means we are locked out of various apps or upgrades, because Apple forces app developers to target its more recent versions of iOS only. Need a new app? No pr
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Considering the entire post was about Windows, and Office was never mentioned, I don't know how you interpret the phrase "as Microsoft moves to the subscription model" as dealing with Office.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If he was arguing Windows was switching to a subscription model, he wouldn't be arguing Windows will die as a result of Microsoft moving to one, would he?
I think that was exactly what he was arguing. Windows moving to a subscription model = bad and people hate it, therefore Windows would decline as a result.
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft has been pushing for renewable revenue streams. Switching to subscription is going to kill Windows, regardless of whether or not Windows is subscription. If you look at the moves MS is doing lately, they seem to be offering up a lot of trial balloons for all sorts of various Subscription models. They have decided against Windows (for now) but having paid attention for a long time, I know that is temporary.
My meaning was, it doesn't matter what is actually "subscription", but it is going to kill Wi
Re: (Score:2)
But the "subscription" part really plays no role in that. You are talking about cross-platform applications coupled with cloud services. The revenue model is a separate consideration.
Re: (Score:2)
Switching to subscription is going to kill Windows, regardless of whether or not Windows is subscription.
Why is that? Assuming Windows doesn't go subscription (there's no real need for it since the subscription stuff is being applied to services and cross-platform cloud-based applications where that model makes sense) why would the subscription model of Microsoft's other products have any effect on it?
Re: (Score:2)
well, hello Office 365, being pushed on a large percentage of Windows 8 machines, with 1 year free subscription to get people hooked.
How will that "get people hooked"? LibreOffice is free, Google Apps are free, Apple bundles its iWork suite free on OS X and iOS. Sure in some cases you may have minor formatting issues importing your MS Office docs to one of those applications but if you don't want to pay there is certainly no reason to unless it is a better experience worth paying for.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is fundamentally Microsoft tried to introduce a game changer into the market. They can do it, but as history shows they are only able to do it slowly forcing it by rote. Apple revolutionises the industry overnight, Microsoft revolutionises it by pushing shit uphill (Windows 95 being about the only exception to this rule).
Windows tablets are either horrible or expensive. People's impression of tablets is one of a consumption device rather than a working device. This is fundamentally incompatible
Re: (Score:2)
I see more and more Windows tablets in people's hands, but if you compare it statistically to the Android / iOS tablets instead of laptops then Windows tablets have abysmal market share and growth.
That's because there is no real concrete definition of a "tablet". A Windows tablet has always been a laptop with a touchscreen interface (even back to the old HPs running Windows XP) while Android and iOS tablets are large smartphones (sometimes with slightly different UI elements for the larger screens). The two types really aren't comparable, they are different tools for different jobs.
You often see iPads used as menus in restaurants because they are fairly robust (once in a case), easy to lockdown, long
Re: (Score:2)
The server side has been interesting as well. Windows Server 2000 was a major jump in features from NT 4 SP 340, Windows Server 2003 was fairly minor. Windows Server 2008 had a big step, mainly BitLocker, and wbadmin.msc.
Windows Server 2016 has some interesting features. Storage Spaces is evolving to be a serious ZFS competitor, BitLocker is probably one of the most usable drive encryption mechanisms out there, and the shift to no GUI available on the OS install (it can easily be added later) is a nudge
Re: (Score:2)
Finally, Windows finally supporting SSH is a good thing.
Note that apart from a blog post, we haven't seen a single action to confirm this. It might as well turn out to be hot air.
Re: (Score:3)
I differ ... typing this on a surface pro.
Have you tried one? How about an ultra book? Folks this is 2015 and like the mainframe era we still ahve them and there are uses but they are a dying and not an important breed.
Have you used a tablet, Surface, or an ultrabook? Thin and portable is in.
Surface is fast selling now unlike a few years ago. I seem with IT geeks all the time. I can remove the keyboard and wireshark whole ethernet connections with my usb ethernet. I can re-attach my keyboard and use it like
Re:"as a Service" = you have to buy it Every Year? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
So, they will update the one true version forever? I don't think so.
They will have to differentiate versions in order to sell new ones, or they'd just be giving away their services for free. Or they could, you know, move to a subscription service model.
Re: (Score:2)
Wrong! Stop peddling that nonsense! Microsoft has repeatedly and specifically said you do not and will never have to pay a yearly subscription for Windows once you've purchased it. What it means is that there will be no more windows 'versions', that this will just be in place updates from this point.
The only problem with this is, if Microsoft is truly going to do away with system versions and move to a "rolling release" style like some other software projects -- where will they get their Windows revenue from now on?
I mean, I know they get money from system builders but if all releases will just be updates now that means Windows 10 will be the last version anyone has to buy retail. And with computers being more than powerful enough for general consumer use for years now, and Windows system requirements
Re:"as a Service" = you have to buy it Every Year? (Score:5, Insightful)
Whether you trust microsoft or not, the fact remains that trying to push the "you need to buy it every year" line as a fact is in direct opposition to what Microsoft is publicly stating at this point.
Trying to claim that it is a factual statement because "Microsoft is always lying" is just weak.
As of the time of writing Microsoft's stance on this has been repeatedly outlined. Trying to ignore it, dismiss it, or simply state that they're lying to fit your predetermined narrative that anything that comes out of Redmond is bad just makes you look like you're grasping at straws.
Re: (Score:2)
Whether you trust microsoft or not, the fact remains that trying to push the "you need to buy it every year" line as a fact is in direct opposition to what Microsoft is publicly stating at this point.
Yes, that's true, but this whole thread is not about trying to push that as a fact. It was in response to, and I quote, "Seems like this is heading toward a yearly paid subscription model for an OS from Microsoft?" I would emphasis *seems like*. That is an *opinion* and quite a reasonable opinion given Microsoft's track record of
Re: (Score:2)
That is an *opinion* and quite a reasonable opinion given Microsoft's track record of
Their track record of? Never doing anything of this type?
Re: (Score:2)
Track record of strong-arming their OEMs, moving towards a subscription model for Office, onerous piracy-prevention mechanism using a central authority to permit their operating system to run.
Re: (Score:2)
Office is available in non-subscription model. Just saying.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes it is. I did not say it was *only* available in a subscription, but they are *moving* in that direction. As in, years ago, one bought a boxed copy and had it for as long as one wanted to use it, but now they offer both. It's a step in that direction. Maybe they'll take the next step; maybe they won't. We don't know, but they took the first step.
Re: (Score:2)
I think there's more chance they will move towards the same model as Windows 10 for home users since there are other options and it would force many users to consider the free options.
Companies that are heavily invested in Office integration would probably continue regardless of what model is in use but it would push away companies that aren't. Unless MS can offer more within it's office suite they can get away with a subscription model as long as it's value add and is extremely affordable.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes it is. I did not say it was *only* available in a subscription, but they are *moving* in that direction.
What does that even mean? They are "supporting" that model because it makes sense in that context. When you're offering a product as a service to support multiple software platforms from other vendors that subscription model makes sense but for an operating system it makes no sense at all because the operating system is tied to the hardware but the applications are not.
Re: (Score:2)
I would emphasis *seems like*.
Nonsense. It was unfounded comment with the intent to flame bait. He got rated accordingly.
Re: (Score:2)
He made an opinion and was attacked for misstating "facts", which he did not state. You are free to disagree with his opinion, of course. I, also, do not agree completely with his opinion. We don't know where Microsoft is heading. Or at least, I don't.
I can see, though, how one would feel that they are going towards subscription models for their products. They've taken the first step to do so with Office by offering subscriptions in addition to boxed copies: something they did not do years ago. On some plat
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, I left things unsaid and I meant not Troll or Flame in my comments
By suggesting people move away from MS for no reason specified is trolling. Its like saying: Why did you buy a FORD?, It's crap...
MS will head into OS subscriptions (considering their tract record of late with office).
Your comment was ill informed and this is proof. Do you even know why MS is offering the OS for free? If you know anything about what is happening in the world of operating systems you would understand that they are following the footsteps of Google since they don't have a choice to regain a portion of the mobile market. So unless Google disappears, MS won't charge a dime for the
Re: (Score:2)
The end of his comment was inflammatory, as simple as that. In addition he wasn't speaking an opinion, he's instead telling people it's time to move on which is completely absurd to do without a proper reason.
The fact that you think Windows 10 being free is the same as Office being on subscription is telling me you haven't understood why MS is offering Windows 10 for free. It's no secret, they are directly competing with Google for it's share of the mobile market and since they want to unify the OS they can
Re: (Score:2)
Whether you trust microsoft or not, the fact remains that trying to push the "you need to buy it every year" line as a fact is in direct opposition to what Microsoft is publicly stating at this point.
Yes, that's true, but this whole thread is not about trying to push that as a fact. It was in response to, and I quote, "Seems like this is heading toward a yearly paid subscription model for an OS from Microsoft?" I would emphasis *seems like*. That is an *opinion* and quite a reasonable opinion given Microsoft's track record of
Perhaps I came off a little too brashly in my comment. I wasn't intended as a specific criticism of the GP per se, more a commentary on the repeated "MS will go back on this, you just wait, it's 100% assured" type comments that I've seen on /. every time a story about windows 10 comes up.
At some point we'll know whether or not they're serious beyond the first year, but then the narrative will just switch to "just wait, any time now" sword-of-damocles type stuff.
I honestly think Microsoft took a long, hard l
Re: (Score:2)
It would be suicide anyway. Their biggest competitor now is Android, which is free forever. Chrome OS, Mac OS X, iOS, Linux... All free, forever. They already offer Windows 8 for free on devices with screens under 13", the only caveat being that the default search setting must be Bing (it can be changed by the user). That's why cheap Windows 8 tablets suddenly became competitive about a year ago - they are basically the same hardware as Android ones, and no Windows tax on top.
Re: (Score:2)
It would be suicide anyway. Their biggest competitor now is Android, which is free forever.
If you get an update, ever.
Chrome OS, Mac OS X, iOS, Linux... All free, forever.
Much better arguments, really. Especially OSX. They just can't afford to look lame next to their only credible desktop competitor.
Re: (Score:2)
Especially now that Apple have finally opened the taps on "official unofficial" third party TRIM support on SSDs (you can turn it on with a warning that Apple doesn't support it) which has been far too long coming.
I think it's a small sign that someone at Apple has finally said "enough of the attempts to make it iOS, remember what OS X used to be when we launched it?"
It's only a small change, but it may be a small ray of hope.
Re: (Score:2)
I hold the "yarg, XBone must be always connected to intertubes" to be as credible as "upgrades will always be free"
The major difference, of course, is that the first one was canceled due to consumer demand. Why would consumers demand the second to be canceled?
Re: (Score:2)
And I'm not saying that Microsoft is some benevolent entity, and totally agree with the idea that they are self-serving. But part of that self-service is to make as much money as they can, which only happens if they have customers, which only happens if customers are generally happier with Microsoft's offerings than the competition.
"Competition" being the key word, which now Microsoft has. It's not quite like their monopoly years. They actually need us to like them.
Re: (Score:2)
If Microsoft loses the revenue from selling the licenses on the update cycle, they're going to have to monetize something. If that isn't the updates, it will be something else.
And who's fault will that be? The answer is the consumer.
Google has set the playing field a while back by providing free everything as long as you accept the advertising. It's competitors now have to adjust otherwise they will endure a grim faith.
Re: (Score:2)
The Xbox One reversal was listening to consumer demand. They made a decision (a silly one) and reversed course due to unpopular backlash and the obvious threat to the bottom line.
You can't really hold that up as evidence of them lying. They changed position quite publicly in response to feedback.
If you're going with that then any company that has responded to feedback and changed the way they have done something is also a liar and untrustworthy.
Re: (Score:2)
Whether you trust microsoft or not, the fact remains that trying to push the "you need to buy it every year" line as a fact is in direct opposition to what Microsoft is publicly stating at this point.
Trying to claim that it is a factual statement because "Microsoft is always lying" is just weak.
As of the time of writing Microsoft's stance on this has been repeatedly outlined. Trying to ignore it, dismiss it, or simply state that they're lying to fit your predetermined narrative that anything that comes out of Redmond is bad just makes you look like you're grasping at straws.
The problem is, they're saying (1) There will be no more windows versions and (2) you won't have to subscribe yearly.
So my question is .... How do they intend to make any revenue on Windows? Advertising? The initial OEM sales only?
If they have to increase costs to OEMs in order to break-even on development costs, then surely that cost will be passed on to we the consumers when we buy new PCs?
The answer is, they don't have to make revenue on Windows. That is what they're banking on. Sure they'll sell it for people that don't have it, but they have realised that the concurrent model works - make it so that if you run Windows, you're likely to be running the latest Windows, and the best way to d that is to effectively make it "free" (after you buy it once, or have it come with your computer, it's yours going forwards when new versions come out).
Their revenue stream will be Xbox (games and Live) an
Re:"as a Service" = you have to buy it Every Year? (Score:5, Informative)
and they're a huge multinational who doesn't give crap what their consumers want
Wrong. MS has always done things with customers in mind. You would know this if you worked with them at any partner level. It's for the same reason their OS and Office suites carry so much baggage and often makes them look bad. It's because they believe in keeping legacy software compatible with future generations of OS and they generally do a good job at that.
Look at Windows XP. They extended their support twice. They didn't have to but they did.
I often see you flame MS so I'm not surprised by your appearance in on this subject. It's almost as if MS threatens you in some way shape or form. No offense intended.
Re: (Score:2)
That's why you can change the compatibility settings for any given program and set it to Windows XP SP3 for backwards compatibility. I have yet to find an app for the Windows 98 era that doesn't work in Windows 7 unless it was very poorly designed.
Re: (Score:2)
However the license agreement will be legally binding and unless it mentions a expiration date for the license, a subscription fee, or the like, will pretty much settle the matter as of July 29th.
Re: (Score:2)
But the current Microsoft which says Home versions of the OS can't defer patches, that they'll share your wifi password because they say so
Given that there is little to no change from the current practice, that you still can install patches at your leisure when you want;
And that they will NOT share your WiFi password unless you specifically opt-in on the device;
I'm going to call your complaints mindless hyperbole, or anti-MS FUD. Take your pick.
Re: (Score:2)
Part of what MS is doing is relinquishing certain things to the open source and third party community because they know other people can do those things better and they can focus more on the core products. That is a good thing in my opinion.
Re: (Score:2)
We've used WMC for nearly a decade in our house and it's been excellent: rock solid and dead simple. I have, from time to time, tried out alternatives and it's only now that I'd be prepared to say I've found a plausible replacement: Plex + Kodi + PVR software -- and even that is a country mile away from the out-of-the-box simplicity and elegance of WMC.
Re: (Score:2)
For example, people who "upgrade" from Windows 7 to Windows 10 will lose Windows Media Center without being told in advance, apparently.
Apparently? I guess we should all take your opinion as a valid argument then?
Fact is that Windows Media Center is barely used. There are plenty of much better alternatives which is why they are getting rid of it. I guess we will find out at launch if they warn customers about the loss of features that nobody cares about.
Windows 98, good. Windows ME, bad, Windows XP good, Windows Vista, bad. Windows 7, good, Windows 8, bad. See the pattern?
First, the failures between Windows 98, ME and 8 are all very different.
Windows ME was a huge failure. Updates helped it but it was never a good OS
Windows Vista was horrible at launch but wa
Re:"as a Service" = you have to buy it Every Year? (Score:4, Informative)
So in other words people will just be expected to buy their security patches and upgrades in the future after a year or so of patches.
No, you just made that up.
Re: (Score:2)
That said, that plan may change, who knows? But it seems logical that i
Re: (Score:2)
You're talking out of your ass and it really stinks dude!
When Win10 uptake increases, when market conditions change in a few quarters' time, there's no guarantee that Microsoft won't ask you to cough up some money for getting the next major point release update
Considering MS owns most of the PC market I doubt there worried about that market.
As for the mobile market they are just doing the same as Google. Should Google disappear they will still keep the same model since it keep competitors at bay
They are just copying Google's pricing model because you can't compete with Google otherwise. So stop reading too far into this as you clearly don't understand what is going on at the business level.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Only the big players tend to make huge claims like this and often end up eating their words. The customers spoke and MS listened.
Re: (Score:2)
Ya Microsoft is trying to improve its bottom line
All business people want that. It's normal.
Fully skinable windows UI
Important to teens and young adults but not important to most of the buyers. Windows Mobile is already skinable enough in my opinion.
Forced driver useability compliance
So you want to remove developer and manufacturer freedom? For the most part the app stores do a good job at rating the non-sense but I understand that doesn't apply to drivers.
System performance analyzer
Many of the tool requirements you listed are already present in Windows 7 and highly improved in later versions. There are some things that are just not easy t
Re: (Score:2)
So for most of your list, you've pretty much described your wish list for Windows, to be like Linux is now. Switch to Linux then.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I do not suspect so. People are used to getting Windows bundled with their computers. If those people suddenly have to start paying for Windows, they would get annoyed and start digging deeper for free alternatives. Eventually they would find Ubuntu and that would begin to hurt Microsoft's business.
Doubtful. The average Joe isn't going to install Linux unless someone turns them on to it. They would be far, far more likely to buy a Mac instead if they get that sick of Windows.
Re: (Score:3)
All they need to do is to ask their nerd friend.
- Raawh! Windows subscription payment! What is this rubbish? I'm not paying anything! Joe, can you do something about this?
- There is Ubuntu, which is free.
- Good. Is that the Linux thingy?
- Well, technically it is GNU/Linux. You see, Linux is only the...
- Whatever! Does it come with Internet?
- Sure.
- Ok. Here's my laptop. Can you install Ubanto for me?
- It will take only few moments.
- Thanks, kid. I'll buy you some beer.
Re: (Score:3)
[... 5 minutes later...]
- Hey, how come I can't run Excel anymore?
- Excel doesn't run under Linux, but here, you can use OpenOffice instead.
- Screw that, I need to run Excel! Put Windows back on!
Re:"as a Service" = you have to buy it Every Year? (Score:4, Insightful)
[... 5 minutes later...]
- Hey, how come I can't run Excel anymore? - Excel doesn't run under Linux, but here, you can use OpenOffice instead. - Screw that, I need to run Excel! Put Windows back on!
Well, there is another alternative: Get a Mac.
That way, you can have your Excel (or Libre Office) and a secure OS. And if you want to mess around in the command-line world, well, you can do that, too.
Re: (Score:2)
I do not suspect so. People are used to getting Windows bundled with their computers. If those people suddenly have to start paying for Windows, they would get annoyed and start digging deeper for free alternatives. Eventually they would find Ubuntu and that would begin to hurt Microsoft's business.
The only way linux is ever going to hurt Microsoft's business is if people start releasing software on linux instead of Windows. WINE isn't going to cut it. Too much overhead.
Re: (Score:3)
I imagine at work I will be staying on win 7 until we are forced to choose, but my next home build is going to be linux. I just don't see spending money on Windows, MS Office, Adobe, or any other commercial software when over the years I have adopted cross platform open source projects that do what I need. I don't require excel to make a list of parts for my next home depot project calc will work just as well and gimp is fine for cropping and resizing half a dozen photos.
Re: (Score:2)
I imagine at work I will be staying on win 7 until we are forced to choose
I know of major corporations that only STARTED their Win 7 ADOPTIONS in the fall of 2014, so I expect this to be the default.
Re: (Score:2)
And that will be true until Windows 7 reaches EOL in 2020.
Re: (Score:2)
Businesses are obsessed with total cost of ownership and return on investment you think getting them to migrate away from xp was hard? Just wait win 7 is going to have a shorter life cycle, I'm imagining companies trying to hold onto it for 10 years 4-5 years past the current end of life.
Re:WaaS: more cons than pros (Score:4, Informative)
That's an old article and many of the cons have already been debunked.