Windows OS... easing into yearly "subscription" updates?

[VirtualLarry]

Just thinking about how MS wants to iterate versions of Windows faster (first Chrome, then Firefox, now Windows), and how, it is likely, you would have to pay a (smaller?) fee for each update, possibly with a free update within 6 months of purchase of a computer (as MS has often offered, as a "technology guarantee"), and getting people in the habit of paying yearly for Windows. Once that trend is established, possibly MS will go full-in on a subscription model.

Edit: Think too, about cloud services. Once you are paying monthly / yearly for "cloud" services from MS (think OneDrive), then the habit is also established, and paying a little extra on top for OS updates, is just a bigger $$$ amount, but not different.

Edit: Thinking further, expect MS to enforce a "TOS" on OS users, such that if you use their OS in any way that they don't want you to, they will revoke and refuse to renew your OS license(s).

Thank God for Free (Libre) Software!

 

[Elixer]

Thank God for Free (Libre) Software!

Of course, said software won't work if the system is locked down...

Then hardware makers will also play that game...they will require only certain software to run on their platform (think of UEFI secure boot, but nastier), and then CPU makers will want a piece of the action, so, if the software isn't signed to run on only their specific model of CPU, then it will refuse to run the software at all, then the RAM/ SSD / HD / GPU makers will also want a piece of the pie, and each lock everything down unless you pay more to 'unlock'.

Fun times are coming ahead! :hmm: :ninja:

 

[lxskllr]

Of course, said software won't work if the system is locked down...

Then hardware makers will also play that game...they will require only certain software to run on their platform (think of UEFI secure boot, but nastier), and then CPU makers will want a piece of the action, so, if the software isn't signed to run on only their specific model of CPU, then it will refuse to run the software at all, then the RAM/ SSD / HD / GPU makers will also want a piece of the pie, and each lock everything down unless you pay more to 'unlock'.

Fun times are coming ahead! :hmm: :ninja:

A little far-fetched, but unfortunately, not entirely. Good thing there's plenty of hardware on the market *now* that'll keep me in antiques for the rest of my life. If the antiques don't work for the task, I won't use it. Most of what I require could be accomplished on a PentiumPro. Everything else is just fluff. Something like an I5 is luxurious :^D

 

[code65536]

Microsoft did slash licensing costs for Windows on low-end system to zero, in response to the encroachment from Chrome OS. And Windows Phone licensing is now zero, too.

Google has painted them into a corner, and I doubt they're stupid enough to go subscription without a pay-to-own option. Surely they've seen the backlash of the subscription model against Adobe, and it just doesn't seem like something that they'll want to push when their main agenda at the moment seems to be preventing the erosion of their market share.

Given all that, I think moving to freemium is more likely than moving to some subscription-only thing.

 

[ninaholic37]

Thank God for Free (Libre) Software!

Well said VirtualLarry! I prefer changing things at my own pace and in ways that I want, instead of having to follow and understand all the new rushed trends and calendars of the fickle and unstable Microsoft. Speeding up your software intake leads to quicker death too (but has only been tested on mice so far) I hear. D:

Then hardware makers will also play that game...they will require only certain software to run on their platform (think of UEFI secure boot, but nastier), and then CPU makers will want a piece of the action, so, if the software isn't signed to run on only their specific model of CPU, then it will refuse to run the software at all, then the RAM/ SSD / HD / GPU makers will also want a piece of the pie, and each lock everything down unless you pay more to 'unlock'.

I was thinking they will eventually superglue everything together to make it un-openable (have to buy a new computer every time something breaks)... but your 'pay to unlock' idea sounds even sneakier, so is probably more likely. Doesn't the iPad use a combination of those two ideas already? :awe:

Good thing there's plenty of hardware on the market *now* that'll keep me in antiques for the rest of my life. If the antiques don't work for the task, I won't use it. Most of what I require could be accomplished on a PentiumPro.

Same here. I love it how so many people are selling their XP laptops for cheap, thinking they must upgrade to something to that works better on Windows 7/8/9. Nice to know that whenever your hardware ends up dying, you can always count on these types of people to have something that still works well waiting for you.

 

[escrow4]

Good. $100 or $200 a year for 3 Windows + Office licences (at least) and I'll line up and throw hundred's at you. Constantly updated, don't have to worry about the next version. You will likely need to offer an easily downloadable .iso which has all the updates at a point in time though, just in case of an offline install. TAKE MY MONEY.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Good. $100 or $200 a year for 3 Windows + Office licences (at least) and I'll line up and throw hundred's at you. Constantly updated, don't have to worry about the next version. You will likely need to offer an easily downloadable .iso which has all the updates at a point in time though, just in case of an offline install. TAKE MY MONEY.

What if the newer versions of Windows suck? And auto-updates are forced ON (no choice to say no)? (Something that the Threshold preview will apparently be implementing.)

Why would you want to give up control over your software (OS) so quickly?

 

[Imaginer]

Short answer, no. It would be suicidal.

Paying for either a retail/OEM install is as same as one would be in a subscription service anyways (over time), but with the freedom to use a newer version. (This is no different than using a newer version of ANY software - with libraries one would get down and dirty to manipulate and add or libraries one is provided with no hassle - thus leaving a user to work on their work instead of needing to worrying about self support)

If one were to really complain about the need to be on a support/service model, then I would like for that very same voice to be leveraged AGAINST autonomous, self diagnosis, needing to be brought in for service, automobiles/cars/etc. I would argue that any apartment complex should be outfitted with a autoshop of personal use too for ease of self repair... I would argue that any living complex (subdivition, apartments, condos, etc) be outfitted with a farm, woodshop, machine shop, and autoshop for self work.

Also, if a subscription service was in play, it would also be suicidal to stop access to the software upon discontinuing (some subscription models let you keep that last version you work with, barring new features and upgrades later on, until one re-ups the support).

And if one were to use libre software, I would also start vouching that people pay their dues to those people making and supporting the software at a fair exchange (give to good tools after all). The mentality behind libre has been overshadowed over the years by that idea of "free", no cost access - but nothing really is without effort. I support the idea of libre out of faster idea, process, and concept exchange for better improvements - which has been lost over time in that spirit.

TL-DR - rage at this title.

 

[Maximilian]

Good. $100 or $200 a year for 3 Windows + Office licences (at least) and I'll line up and throw hundred's at you. Constantly updated, don't have to worry about the next version. You will likely need to offer an easily downloadable .iso which has all the updates at a point in time though, just in case of an offline install. TAKE MY MONEY.

 

[escrow4]

What if the newer versions of Windows suck? And auto-updates are forced ON (no choice to say no)? (Something that the Threshold preview will apparently be implementing.)

Why would you want to give up control over your software (OS) so quickly?

You have no control anyway. You rent a licence from MS when you buy an OEM copy anyway. And suck? I upgrade always anyway.

 

[VirtualLarry]

http://techreport.com/news/27485/microsoft-may-be-hatching-a-new-business-model-for-windows-10

Those of you wishing for a subscription model for Windows, may be getting your wish.

(I've just installed Linux Mint 17.1 on my quad-core desktop. )

 

[bbhaag]

http://techreport.com/news/27485/microsoft-may-be-hatching-a-new-business-model-for-windows-10

Those of you wishing for a subscription model for Windows, may be getting your wish.

(I've just installed Linux Mint 17.1 on my quad-core desktop. )

Congratulations Larry. You've just taken your first step into a much larger world. I love my Mint laptop. It took me a couple months to get it configured correctly but once I did it was smooth sailing.
I like the Mint distro a lot better than Peppermint which it what I was using before. I used Peppermint for years because I was use to it but Mint is awesome. So much easier to use that I'll never go back.

 

[Rhonda the Sly]

http://techreport.com/news/27485/microsoft-may-be-hatching-a-new-business-model-for-windows-10

Those of you wishing for a subscription model for Windows, may be getting your wish.

There they only mentioned bringing additional services to Windows 10, not making it itself SaaS.

Even still, I'm not sure what services Microsoft has left to bring into the fold. I can't see how XBox Live fits in with Windows (giving XBL Gold members Games/Deals with Gold on the Store couldn't hurt, though). OneDrive, Skype, and XBox Music Pass are available from the get-go in Windows 8 and Office 365 isn't very hard to come across. There are a slew of Bing services ranging from Maps to Health which I'm sure they'll continue to pursue but those are already largely in the box. The "Offline Mapping Data" feature in Windows 10, however, could very well be a subscription version of "Streets and Trips."

And, of course, they could always try a subscription version of "Ultimate Extras.

 

[IamDavid]

It'll go both directions like Office 365/2013. I'll go with the subscription version. I'd be more than happy to pay $25 to $50 subscription for the OS. Office is a bit high for my liking at +$100 per year? I bought the actual 2013 Pro.

 

[amyklai]

It'll go both directions like Office 365/2013. I'll go with the subscription version. I'd be more than happy to pay $25 to $50 subscription for the OS. Office is a bit high for my liking at +$100 per year? I bought the actual 2013 Pro.

Office 365 is currently sold for 35€ over here (Germany), down from the original 65€. 50€ for Windows + Office would probably be the right pice if they want to reach a lot of people, anything above will be too much for many casual users.

 

[escrow4]

I agreed months ago and I still do now. 3 licences of Windows + Office always updated to the latest for $100 a year say is gold.

 

[Maximilian]

Office 365 is currently sold for 35€ over here (Germany), down from the original 65€. 50€ for Windows + Office would probably be the right pice if they want to reach a lot of people, anything above will be too much for many casual users.

Anything more than free is too much for casual users when things like libreoffice exist.

 

[Insert_Nickname]

Office 365 is currently sold for 35€ over here (Germany), down from the original 65€. 50€ for Windows + Office would probably be the right pice if they want to reach a lot of people, anything above will be too much for many casual users.

If they are going to (and I'm not saying MS will) charge €50 for Windows + Office per PC, I'm going Linux. I've got 5 PCs with various versions of Windows, that'll add up to €250 yearly. As it is, I can buy two Windows or Office licences yearly for that money, and get 10 years of support on them. What's more, those are only my "personal" machines. There are a couple of other PCs in the household.

No thanks MS, you're going to loose customers if you do that. But I'd be quite willing to pay €50 yearly for a 5 licence Windows + Office package. That seems fair enough. Just keep the option of buying single licences separate...

 

[Morbus]

Good. $100 or $200 a year for 3 Windows + Office licences (at least) and I'll line up and throw hundred's at you. Constantly updated, don't have to worry about the next version. You will likely need to offer an easily downloadable .iso which has all the updates at a point in time though, just in case of an offline install. TAKE MY MONEY.

"hundred's"

Says it all.

As for the topic itself, it depends on what they're willing to charge. If they want to increase costs at all costs and be greedy, they should do the following maths:

all users SHOULD update to the newest OS when it comes out == 90% of the market paying us 70USD every 3 years = 25 bucks a year per license.

25 bucks a year for a windows license is pushing it though. 15 bucks a year, is more ok, or maybe 25 a year if they include their craptastic office suite. But 50 a year for both is totally unreasonable, and I don't believe they'll go that far. Even being greedy and doing the unreasonable math I did above, it's still too expensive.

 

[escrow4]

"hundred's"

Says it all.

As for the topic itself, it depends on what they're willing to charge. If they want to increase costs at all costs and be greedy, they should do the following maths:

all users SHOULD update to the newest OS when it comes out == 90% of the market paying us 70USD every 3 years = 25 bucks a year per license.

25 bucks a year for a windows license is pushing it though. 15 bucks a year, is more ok, or maybe 25 a year if they include their craptastic office suite. But 50 a year for both is totally unreasonable, and I don't believe they'll go that far. Even being greedy and doing the unreasonable math I did above, it's still too expensive.

How cheap can you go? $100 a year for 3 + 3 windows and OS licences is less than $12 a month. Which is nothing. A single licence should be poor value so you are pushed onto the yearly offering.

 

[gmaster456]

"hundred's"

Says it all.

As for the topic itself, it depends on what they're willing to charge. If they want to increase costs at all costs and be greedy, they should do the following maths:

all users SHOULD update to the newest OS when it comes out == 90% of the market paying us 70USD every 3 years = 25 bucks a year per license.

25 bucks a year for a windows license is pushing it though. 15 bucks a year, is more ok, or maybe 25 a year if they include their craptastic office suite. But 50 a year for both is totally unreasonable, and I don't believe they'll go that far. Even being greedy and doing the unreasonable math I did above, it's still too expensive.

Right now they charge $70 a year for a office 365 personal license. So $50 a year for both won't happen because it will probably be more than that.