Windows 10 [2014 - 2017]

[Silent_Buddha]

Vista was quite good if you ask me, BUT there were some really awkward usability issues at a very basic interface level, like huge icons with no text, strange layout inheritence logic when you changed it, etc. Windows 7 was only really a UI fix, but one that did wonders for its image, and showing once again that good user interaces are hugely important. Windows 8, although a necessary step, was a step backward for many in that regard (though there were as many advances that particularly power-users like me really appreciated, such as far better multi-display support)

Windows 7 was also a regression in some ways compared to Vista. Windows explorer, was significantly worse, IMO. Losing the ability to easily sort content regardless of which view you were in was absolutely horrible and wrecked my workflow when working with many files. 2-3 additional clicks may seem minor, but gets to be a huge time waste (and annoyance) when you are used to easily doing it (single click) multiple times in the span of a minute or so.

That said, it did make things less cumbersome for casual users. UAC being less intrusive, for instance.

Regards,
SB

 

[hoom]

how succesful Apple has been selling service packs for $20, one can wonder why they didn't change earlier.

Yah I can totally see them moving to a charged yearly service pack type model.

interestingly enough many of the same vendors that were bad with drivers on XP were bad with drivers on Vista. HP, for example took a year or more to get working drivers for some of their printers for XP.

Netgear only had proper 64bit Vista drivers for my Wifi card just before Win7 launch...
I understand MS put a lot of pressure on (or gave a bunch of cash to?) Vendors to provide proper drivers in time for Win7.

 

[Gubbi]

Never. Who would accept having to insert $10 or whatever into their floppy disc hatch to be able to continue using their own PC? Absolutely nobody, that's who...

For always having an up-to-date Windows ? Always the newest DX version? Without the hazzle of reinstalling ? I'd force everybody I know on it.

I'd imagine pricing would be similar to how Office 365 pricing is structured, something like:
1. Windows w. Bing: Free
2. Windows Personal: $10/year
3. Windows Home (5 licenses): $20-25/year
4. Windows Pro (5 licenses): $40-50/year

New PCs could come with 5 year prepaid Personal version.

Cheers

 

[Rodéric]

What about good old pay once and own forever ?
No subscription for me thank you, already avoiding it for games, won't do for an OS either.

I'm waiting for MS to be clearer about it before switching.

 

[Albuquerque]

It's both pro and con, your own internal bias will color the result.

Anyone who already hates Microsoft for being "greedy", who wants to "own" a piece of software and act like the proverbial old man with "I bought this here thang 20 yurrz ago and it ain' broke so staahhp tryin'na fix it ya yungin whipper snapper!", or anyone who is going to invariably compare Windows to their personal favorite distro of *nix OS and declare it thus invalid for costing money is going to hate it.

I'll just go ahead and submit my broken link for the picture of my surprised face: <WebObjectStore.Memes.MyMemeURL=this_space_left_intentionally_blank.gif>

Yes, I acknowledge that I've oversimplified the matter greatly, there are other reasons why people will not appreciate the subscription model. Despite your well-reasoned opinions, here's the news flash: this is the unfortunate life in which we live. Let me bring you all up to current, in case you've somehow missed it:

• Software companies make money by selling software.
• You don't "own" any piece of modern software at all
• Purposefully keeping an old operating system doesn't only hurt you, it hurts everyone who has to listen to your incessant bitching about why Feature XYZ or Application ABC somehow wasn't written for your antiquated OS. <internet_idiocy_outrage>ZOMG DX10 COULDVE TOTALLY HAPPENED ON XP! WTFFFF M$ YOU SUXOR</internet_idiocy_outrage>
• To some degree, you get what you pay for with "free". Yes, there are people in this world who can have their computing needs delivered by a solid Linux distribution. If you are one of these lucky folks, then stop bitching about Windows since ultimately it's "helping win your argument."

You can either continue telling yourself that *Nix is going to eventually "win", or you can continue paying Apple for updates, or you can continue paying Microsoft for updates. Here's the interesting part: both Apple and Microsoft can, for the moment, can be opted-out for taking the updates. I wouldn't expect either of these opportunities to survive in perpetuity, and neither should anyone else on this forum.

There's a reason why O365 has sold as well as it has; the rest of the OS is simply the next step in that evolution.

 

[Davros]

there are other reasons why people will not appreciate the subscription model

If there was considering I dont have a bank account/credit card how would I pay ?

 

[AlexV]

What about good old pay once and own forever ?
No subscription for me thank you, already avoiding it for games, won't do for an OS either.

I'm waiting for MS to be clearer about it before switching.

I presume you want to pay once and not only own, but also have support forever. That's a pretty good deal for you, but might not be such a good deal for the one stuck providing the support.

 

[nutball]

If there was considering I dont have a bank account/credit card how would I pay ?

Take goats/chickens/whatever to your local Microsoft store once a month?

 

[Grall]

I presume you want to pay once and not only own, but also have support forever. That's a pretty good deal for you, but might not be such a good deal for the one stuck providing the support.

I presume to pay once and have support for roughly as long as MS usually has support; fixing its shit it should have gotten right the first time around but didn't, for whatever reason. Not going to keep paying and paying just to be able to use my own god damn computer, thank you.

 

[Gubbi]

I presume to pay once and have support for roughly as long as MS usually has support;

Mainstream support is five years, where you get new features/apps and, typically, ten years for extended support. So you'd rather pay $120 every five years than amortize that cost over five years?

The internal fragmentation of the Windows install base is a hindrance.

Windows 7 still has 58% marketshare despite mainstream support ended Jan 1st this year. Developers has to support multiple old versions of the OS. MS wants to solve that.

If you don't want to sign up for that you can always go with one of the free Linux distros.

Cheers

 

[Arwin]

I installed this on my wife's old PC, moving her other PC (laptop) to the bedroom. She ends up using the Windows 10 machine more, and apart from a rare display bug (screen becomes gray), it seems to run really well even on that relatively old hardware (though it's not too bad, just old - 4GB, Q6600 quad, low-profile 4350 with 512MB).

 

[MfA]

Mainstream support is five years, where you get new features/apps and, typically, ten years for extended support. So you'd rather pay $120 every five years than amortize that cost over five years

I'd like to be able to use my computer if I'm overdrawn, not that I think it's very likely but out of principle ... and I don't mean with a pop up every 15 minutes to remind me to pay up.

 

[Grall]

Mainstream support is five years, where you get new features/apps and, typically, ten years for extended support. So you'd rather pay $120 every five years than amortize that cost over five years?

Yeah, because it means I can retire an older PC to have as a backup/side rig and still have a valid license when I need to boot it up again. Also, most of my windowses have NOT cost $120, btw.

Also - general principle, alright? Subscribe to microsoft to use my own goddamn PC? Fuck that!

 

[Rodéric]

I don't care about eternal support, 5 years is fine.
I don't want to rent my OS thank you.

I'm not renting my car, I bought it, why should I have to rent it ? That makes no sense, now if you have the option to rent it to get additionnal stuff, I'm fine with it, but don't make that choice for me.

 

[Rikimaru]

There are always linux distributions. KDE is much more coherent than Windows UI nowdays.

 

[Blazkowicz]

I installed this on my wife's old PC, moving her other PC (laptop) to the bedroom. She ends up using the Windows 10 machine more, and apart from a rare display bug (screen becomes gray), it seems to run really well even on that relatively old hardware (though it's not too bad, just old - 4GB, Q6600 quad, low-profile 4350 with 512MB).

I still see these specs and go like, wow it's powerful.
I still remember that linux community machine with same specs (different graphics card) that two to four people could use seamlessly (one "real" seat with 3D graphics and USB, and a few thin clients - any old PC with a floppy or network card to boot from network)

It's fun to do that but it has always been an inacessible "server" feature on Windows, except for the "remote desktop assistance" you might know from XP.
With more lenient and modular licensing, that feature would be able to be extended to consumer Windows. Imagine that $30 computer-on-hdmi-stick, or even $100 Windows-PC-on-stick : they run stuff on their own, with 1GB to 2GB RAM etc. But they might as well show you a desktop and apps running on your monster desktop, while allowing someone else to use said desktop PC (typically on a different user account).
It could be about fair to susbcribe for that feature..

There are always linux distributions. KDE is much more coherent than Windows UI nowdays.

Beware there's a transition from KDE Plasma 4 to KDE Plasma 5 and it's messy so there's a need to wait or carefully choose the distro.

 

[Arwin]

I agree it was a really great offer, for 399 euro, I think now six years or seven years ago?

 

[pjbliverpool]

According to Techspot, once you buy (or upgrade to from Win7/8) Win10, it is supported for life. No subscription charges mentioned:

http://www.techspot.com/article/1002-windows-10-free-or-not-explained/

 

[Gubbi]

I'm not renting my car, I bought it, why should I have to rent it ?

Lower TCO, better service (constantly updated) and better freedom of choice (yes, really !); The high up front cost of acquiring a new version in the existing model is a barrier to upgrading.

That makes no sense, now if you have the option to rent it to get additionnal stuff, I'm fine with it, but don't make that choice for me.

If renting has lower average cost than the amortized cost of buying it outright, then why not ?

Cheers

 

[Kaotik]

I'll repeat myself:
While no-one can at this point deny the possibility of subscription based Windows, there will be free (pay once) option besides it, called Windows 10.
Windows 10 will stay free and will get constant updates rather than new OS every couple years.
MS is putting their eggs in Store- and Bing-baskets for continued Windows revenue, as I explained earlier. And yes, this is straight from MS, they already went public with it.