Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion
Windows 10 as an Internet service?
dr_andus:
and don't get where the talks of a subscription are.
-wraith808 (January 28, 2015, 10:48 PM)
--- End quote ---
As far as I understand it, the free upgrade is only valid for the lifetime of the "device" (whatever that means). So if my Win7 device is pretty old (which it is), then if I upgrade now (and if it works like 40hz suggested, i.e. that it invalidates my Win7 licence), then I would have to start paying for a Win10 license (possibly an annual subscription fee, by the sound of it) on whatever new machine I will get. And as yet, we don't know how much that would be. So sticking with my Win7 license seems like a safer option (less uncertainty in the face of MS not revealing their cards about how exactly they are going to make money out of Win10).
40hz:
You're saying that b/c it's totally free, there has to be a catch.
-wraith808 (January 28, 2015, 10:48 PM)
--- End quote ---
On no, not at all.
I was saying that Microsoft doesn't give copies of Windows away. And that when they do no-charge upgrades, (a) it's only been for the version immediately preceding the new one; and (b) you know you qualify for it going in. Announcing after that fact that all licensees of the two previous versions of Windows qualify is (AFAIK) unprecedented.
I'm also glad to see you got two no-charge upgrades. I don't know why they did that for you...but who cares! ;D We don't look gift horses in the mouth, right? :Thmbsup:
40hz:
Everything people have said about subscriptions is based upon zero information and much speculation.
-wraith808 (January 28, 2015, 04:47 PM)
--- End quote ---
Not quite true, although it is entirely speculation (and highly unlikely) at this point.
Steve Ballmer repeatedly said he felt non-security related updates to Windows should not remain free indefinitely.
And at one time (at least) in the past, he openly opined that any software that ran on Windows should be paying Microsoft a licensing fee - because Windows was what made it possible for such software to exist in the first place. He said something to the extent that developers were getting a free ride off Microsoft's intellectual property. And he didn't think that was right. (He also called Linux "a cancer.")
Fortunately, Microsoft didn't do anything with any of Steve's musings. But there's nothing to say they couldn't. Some development tools and frameworks already do just that. You license X number of runtimes or libraries or whatever for distribution when you buy the tool. Want to sell more copies of your software? Buy more licenses to distribute what you developed. It's nothing new. Back in the days of mainframes, compilers were for the licensee's exclusive in-house use. And these were usually licensed on an annual basis. You had to pay a fee each year for support & maintenance if you wanted to continue using them. And if you wrote a program using one - and wanted to sell it commercially - you owed whoever wrote the compiler a fee, which usually had to be negotiated on a case by case basis.
PCs changed all that. Software started to be thought of as sold once the old dinosaur code devs reluctantly realized private individuals didn't have the money or patience to put up with arcane software licensing rules and restrictions. Then along came Borland to kick the bottom out from under the pricing conventions...
Now it looks like we're getting back to the bad old days. Today, people and businesses want to create just one thing, hang a taxi meter on it, and retire off a lifetime of royalties. It's already happening in the media world where the current industry position is that all IP must be owned by someone. No such thing as "fair use" or "public domain" as far as they're concerned.
So why should software and operating systems be treated any differently? Because they didn't used to be. 8)
dr_andus:
Everything people have said about subscriptions is based upon zero information and much speculation.
-wraith808 (January 28, 2015, 04:47 PM)
--- End quote ---
Not quite true, although it is entirely speculation (and highly unlikely) at this point.
-40hz (January 29, 2015, 08:21 AM)
--- End quote ---
It does raise the question though of how they're going to make money off of consumers and small businesses if there would be no subscription. If it's not the OS that has the subscription, then the software it runs does (MS Office etc.), or it's a walled garden to which developers have to pay through the teeth to access it. Or they would need to make their money on the hardware (equivalent of Apple's various devices, especially phones and tablets), and then periodically make the hardware obsolete by new OS upgrades. But this last one somehow failed to take off for MS...
wraith808:
Everything people have said about subscriptions is based upon zero information and much speculation.
-wraith808 (January 28, 2015, 04:47 PM)
--- End quote ---
Not quite true, although it is entirely speculation (and highly unlikely) at this point.
-40hz (January 29, 2015, 08:21 AM)
--- End quote ---
It does raise the question though of how they're going to make money off of consumers and small businesses if there would be no subscription. If it's not the OS that has the subscription, then the software it runs does (MS Office etc.), or it's a walled garden to which developers have to pay through the teeth to access it. Or they would need to make their money on the hardware (equivalent of Apple's various devices, especially phones and tablets), and then periodically make the hardware obsolete by new OS upgrades. But this last one somehow failed to take off for MS...
-dr_andus (January 29, 2015, 10:38 AM)
--- End quote ---
They didn't say it will always be free. They just want to up adoption rates. Which was probably the same reason that I got windows 7 and Windows 8 for free.
I think also that the wording on the device bit was based upon the fact of MS's historical fights with the OEM versions of the software, i.e. people buying them at OEM rates for builds and such for others. It might have been more clearly stated, but as it stands right now, I'm not crying foul, though that's just my take. If they didn't give you the media... that's a different story. But if I have the media for 7, 8, and 10... I'll try it and back out if its not what I wanted. Or, more likely, wait for SP1 as usual, then do it.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version