Busy week indeed! Thanks to NeverEVERKerry for the heads-up!!
Posted on 05/07/2015 9:05:31 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
M icrosoft unveiled Windows 10, its forthcoming operating system for the desktop, mobile, Xbox, and IoT late last year. The Windows 10 moniker was interesting, as ideally, Microsoft was expected to call the successor to Windows 8 (and 8.1) as Windows 9. The Redmond-based company explained why it didn’t go with ‘Windows 9’: it would have created conflict with older versions of Windows. Alright, so what will the next version of Windows be called? Windows 10, apparently.
At Ignite conference earlier this week, Jerry Nixon, a Microsoft Developer Evangelist, said that Windows 10 “is the last version of Windows (so we’re always working on Windows 10).” The company apparently isn’t going to release anymore versions of Windows as instead it plans to keep updating the existing version.
"Windows 10 is the last version of Windows so we're always working on Windows 10" – Jerry Nixon. Very interesting #msignite #YouthSpark
— James Croft (@jamzc92) May 6, 2015
Nixon’s comment solifies Mary Jo Foley’s report from late last year where she had casually mentioned that Windows 10 will be the last major version of Windows. “Microsoft went instead with Windows 10 because they wanted to signify that the coming Windows release would be the last “major” Windows update.” Okay, but what does it mean?
Changing Windows’ business model from software as a product to software as a service.
Windows as of now is sold as a standalone product. You buy it, you use it for months, and when the next version of the operating system hits the retail, you have to purchase it again and replace your existing Windows’ version. You, however, have the ability to keep using your old version of Windows forever. Sure, the company will stop providing security updates after a couple of years but you still own that software and are lawfully entitled to use it for as long as you want. This is known as software as a product business model.
The company is seemingly moving to software as a service model wherein you purchase the software for a specified period of time. Once the duration expires, you have to pay the company again to use their app. If Microsoft does change gears on how it wants to sell Windows operating system to you, it won’t be the first time the company is opting to use software as a service model. Office 365 — the productivity suite from the company is also sold in a similar way.
Come to think of it, Windows as a service makes perfect sense. Microsoft has announced that Windows 10 will be available to people for free for the first year. Afterwards, the company is likely to charge users every few years to renew their licence. If it works, it could boost the revenue it is making from its operating system.
We’ve contacted Microsoft for confirmation and the company has requested for some time before it could offer a statement. We will update the post as it develops.
I hate not buying programs. If I download a program, it supposedly still belongs to the company. This allows them to just take it back whenever.
I’d rather pay the extra to have something that belongs to me.
I paid for Microsoft Windows 10 and all I got was this lousy t-shirt.
Another one. Been a busy week.
Call it “Windows Update” then.
Busy week indeed! Thanks to NeverEVERKerry for the heads-up!!
My theory was right after all, looks like they are going the way of apple a bit, and about damn time, tired of new window operating systems every 5 years, just update what needs to be updated and leave everything else alone.
Red Hat Enterprise Linux has been using this marketing model for at least 10 years now.
The difference is that with Red Hat, the software and all the source files are free.
However, if you want updates and security fixes, you need an annual subscription. IIRC, there are three levels of tech support, silver, gold, and platinum, starting at $50/year for silver support for a single system. There are probably discounts for multiple users and enterprise subscriptions.
Alternatively, there is Red Hat’s CentOS, which is completely free, including sources, and tracks Red Hat Enterprise Linux, release for release. CentOS includes updates, but tech support is limited to their user forum and your favorite search engine.
I think Ubuntu Linux runs on a donation basis.
Don’t know offhand how the other Linux flavors make their money.
According to my insider sources...Jesse Jacksomes meeting with Bill Gates was a very prodcutive one, at least as far as Mr Jacksome was concerned!!
I’m told that the next Microsloth operating system will be named Trayvon!
“Jerry Nixon, a Microsoft Developer Evangelist”
Sounds like he used the Silicon Valley Job Title Generator:
http://siliconvalleyjobtitlegenerator.tumblr.com/
(BTW, I am a “Cryptocurrency Hacker”)
“If I download a program, it supposedly still belongs to the company.”
Even if you download the program it still belongs to the company. All you are buying is a license to use it.
there be world wide outrage if they make people pay for windoows again. Bait and switch
You are exactly right.
It’s just like music and videos. You can listen to it or watch it but can’t profit from it. Although, many do.
Can you imagine how much money Microsoft would have made in the 80’s and 90’s if people hadn’t copied their O/S and other software.
Hmm.. So what happens when everything advances from 64-bit to 128-bit? Will a software patch cover that?
Your computer will be a doorstop without a fulltime internet connection.
The thing is, if Microsoft actually ever released a secure operating system, they couldn’t get away with the strategy of planned obsolescence wherein the chip and peripheral vendors they are in cahoots with quit making drivers for older Windows versions.
Without this inherent insecurity, one could buy copies of Windows and then pretty much use them forever because a few years of bug patches would fix the bugs, and since security patches wouldn’t be needed, so-called Microsoft support wouldn’t be needed either, and one could use a stable and secure Windows for decades, and vendors of new chips and peripherals would be willing to keep making new drivers.
This is the real reason Microsoft refuses to secure their operating systems, because it’s not really that difficult for them to do that, namely quit making all login ids superuser by default and forbidding the execution of software that hasn’t been installed by a superuser into a secured location, and perhaps setting and enforcing security (and crapware avoidance) standards for major software vendors.
Months? Have to? Huh?
Apparently whoever came up with Device Guard didn't get that memo.
Yeah, step off the ledge.
Nothing in the software world is secure. Not OSX not Linuux, not BSD. Some are more secure than others but the fact is when it comes down to it if someone wants into your system they will find a way.
If you wanted 100% security you would never log on, you would never buy new peripherals. Of course if the USA and the world went that way we would still be in the 80’s with computing power.
But thank G— luddites like you do not drive the software community.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.