Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by Da Dego, 14 Dec 2006.
A subscription based windows with all its limtations on number of PCs and reinstalls .... When that comes, I am off to get a Mac or linux OS.
They could start charging for service packs and version updates. I do not like the idea of a subscription based operating system. It would work but not very well IMHO. They could also focus on additional software like word, power point, excel, etc. make it their primary focus for money making
technically apple make you pay £100 for a service pack as the "new" os's are just updates to the core os10.. they do offer a lot more than the windows service packs do, but thats essentialy what they are
Once again, Gartner states the obvious...
I've suspected for a while this may be the last. Linux has nearly caught up with windows in terms of ease of use on the ready to use distros. And I think 400 bucks for ultimate will leave a bad taste in peoples mouth. Actually, a subscription os sounds like a possibility for windows. It seems to work for mac as the guy above posted they basically charge 100 or so a year for service packs. But for the general surf/word process/email crowd a basic linux is more than enough, most home users dont need a half grand os.
Isn't this what they said about IE6?
Subscriptions seem to work for online games and when you add up the yearly cost for one game it isn't too far out of line. The problem I see is that it pretty much requires everyone to have broadband and not everyone can get it (at least not at a reasonable price).
heh. as long as XP still works for gaming, im sticking with it... when Linux takes over im more than happy to even buy a linux OS that works right out of the box... Just because i can tweak it more to get more out of it...
Think I'll stick with XP for a while. As for a subscription based OS, no thanks. World of Warcraft subscription was bad enough
I doubt it. 95%+ of people get their OS with their box. To them they can't tell the difference, the OS and computer are one thing. An incremental update system (if they sold it in shops like the OS X system) would just confuse people and they probably wouldn't buy it.
Although, if they made updates really cheap (£10-30-free) I think it'd be a great idea.
Yeah, i don't know about you, but asking me to pay for something, THEN ask me to pay for something that is REQUIRED to keep it safe and secure, that we have a right to be provided for free seems a wee bit on the side of unreasonable.
Agreed with Ramble. The "What's an operating system?) crowd is too big of a market. THey buy a computer and expect it to work and keep working for two or three years at which point they buy a new one. Fundamentally, MS makes too much on each new windows release to ever think of giving them up. Sadly, I think we'll be seeing new retail versions for a long time to come.
Has anyone ever taken a complete computer noob, someone's grandmother say, and plunked them down in front of a fresh install of linux? Is the learning curve from zero for common applications really any steeper? Seems like it would be more secure for people who don't understand the concept of "this is not a safe website". Just free thinking before caffiene here, but...
Aha, but M$ will keep making money off those folks regardless of whether it's XP, Vista or another OS.
I'd agree with the analysists, not in the "it doesn't make sense" camp, but rather the "What else can they possibly add?". The jump from 3.1 to 95, and 9x-XP were pretty big (although increasingly smaller), eventually we have to get to a point where the OS gives us most if not everything we require from it.
All good valid points. But from my side I say I hope they dont stop windows at all I dont care if it goes the subscription route. As long as windows stays I will be happy. I ave been spoiled and love windows to heart I tried Mac and linux and they seem to poor in the way they look and to advanced. I need something simple and fun not somethign crazy. SO yeah I am an M$ fan and will support them until I die. Even with all there bugs.
On the subscription OS thing, I would wait until i saw the pricing until i decided on whether to stay or go. Unfortunatly until a simple and reliable alternative with all the games and program support comes along, there really is not a lot of alternatives
rest assured Microsoft will continue to make a profit. the world will turn, operating system debates will remain uninteresting.
I call BS on this one. There'd be no money in it for Microsoft
Technically, nobody actually pays for it But if you're so inclined, Mac addicts can buy a family-pack of five OS licenses for $200, or $40 a machine, which I think is pretty reasonable.
I kinda agree and disagree.
I really think that MS will still have box sales for many years ahead, however the company will probably try to focus more on internet based distribution. The easiest way to think about it is to look at it as Valve's Steam only for Operating Systems.
It is a bit unusual, however this nontraditional way of distribution would have many advantages.
Okay here's my vision. Through an update or a download MS OS user gets an application which would be like an "Upgrade Catalog." The user then can select the upgrade options and features he/she desires. Example: - Windows Fiji Framework + Media Center + Office Suite + enchanted GUI + Remote Desktop.
Microsoft has been slowly moving towards this with the updates to XP, and now with Vista upgrade capabilities.
But imagine a total customization. Windows Framework + gaming services... download, restart, and go crazy, later just download MCE addition. Cheaper for MS, and for users. Microsoft could contain much of pirating, update and develop OS on the go. And how evil would it be to sell cheaper subscriptions for beta versions. Just release stable OS framework, and then go crazy developing and rolling out features and application + getting fast feedback from beta testers.
However due to crappy network infrastructure in US and certain other parts of the world, MS would still have to have DVD/CD sales. So how about having blazing fast DVD/CD/mem card sales of applications/features for those without fast internet connections.
I believe Microsoft is really heading towards similar distribution method. And I personally think it would be great, since separate divisions within Microsoft/Windows development could roll out new features and updates not having to wait years and years since the new official release.
I say bring it on.
Separate names with a comma.