Windows 10 about face

[John Coloccia]

Remember that time Microsoft said Windows 10 would be the last release ever, and that it would be our forever operating system, and it will always just get updated, and it will be around forever and ever and ever as our most special operating system ever?

What they ACTUALLY meant to say is that it will follow the same exact cycle as every other version of Windows.

http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/lifecycle

As usual, they're winging it and making it up as they go along.

[Grant Wilkinson]

I must admit that I've never seen where Microsoft said that Windows 10 would be the last version of windows ever. Windows 10 is the first time, at least that I can find, that MS has said from the outset how long they will be supporting it. Until now, they were "winging it".

[Phil Thien]

I had thought MS said that Win10 was going to be the last version that followed the conventional product cycle of Windows releases.

Next-up is going to be some form of Windows 365, as I understand it, which will be a subscription-based product. Maybe they will charge for it, maybe they will offer it up free as the base to install other MS apps for which they can charge a license fee.

[John Coloccia]

They've said multiple times that Windows 10 would be the last Windows release, and that it would be supported for the lifetime of whatever product it's installed on. What they're saying now is that it will simply follow the same exact schedule as the other Windows releases. It's completely different, and they've done it very quietly. I guess they've decided that everyone's product lifetime is 5 years (10 years for security fixes, but 5 years ends the active development). It's a complete 180 from their previous comments.

Everyone had taken it at face value and assumed that Windows 10 would be continuously updated for the foreseeable future, and that would be that. I'm surprised it hasn't made bigger news, but I'm sure it will once everyone picks up on it. I just happened to see it browsing around.

Grant:
The last several versions of Windows have all followed the same cycle. 5 years mainstream support, 10 years extended support. Windows XP went longer, but that's only because Windows Vista was such a piece of junk that they had no choice. They've been consistent for a good while now, which is what makes this all the more baffling. They made such a big deal about NOT following this cycle, but now they're following this cycle. Very confusing and it makes me wonder if they've realized that Windows 10 will have major problems and will need to be replaced. Until they explain themselves, I think they're going to look very very bad.

So really the only change in the upgrade/product lifecycle arena is that updates are now automatic unless you're a pro or enterprise user...and then they're still mandatory to continue getting support, but you can defer them for a bit. Everything else stays the same. All of that talk about "Windows as a service", "Makes no sense to talk about which version you're on anymore", etc is all just nonsense and code speak for "updates are mandatory".

[Larry Browning]

I saw a Windows 10 commercial last night that showed various shots of toddlers playing and the narrator was saying stuff like these kids will grow up in a world of Windows 10, the world of the forever operating system (or something to that effect). Now this? No wonder everyone is confused. Come on Microsoft, make up your mind!

[Brian Elfert]

Microsoft would still be supporting Windows 10 at the dawn of the next century if they really planned to support until the last system quit running it. I know companies that will warehouse old hardware to keep old systems running indefinitely. The cost to move to new software is too expensive. In some cases there are computers that run expensive machinery. The manufacturer of the machinery won't support replacing the computers that run the machinery. You have to replace the machinery if you replace the computers running it. The problem is the machinery may have a 20 to 30 years expected lifetime while most computers will not last that long before being obsolete. Manufacturers of machinery should have plans to keep the supporting computers upgraded through the 20 or 30 year lifespan of the machinery, but many do not.

There are plenty of companies that would still be running Windows 2000 or Windows XP if Microsoft was still supporting it.

[Pat Barry]

I saw a Windows 10 commercial last night that showed various shots of toddlers playing and the narrator was saying stuff like these kids will grow up in a world of Windows 10, the world of the forever operating system (or something to that effect). Now this? No wonder everyone is confused. Come on Microsoft, make up your mind!


Kids grow up so fast these days....

[Phil Thien]

I saw a Windows 10 commercial last night that showed various shots of toddlers playing and the narrator was saying stuff like these kids will grow up in a world of Windows 10, the world of the forever operating system (or something to that effect). Now this? No wonder everyone is confused. Come on Microsoft, make up your mind!

This commercial?


https://youtu.be/Gu6vmNz-PhE

I don't think they say it will be a forever O/S.

Microsoft is switching to "Windows as a service," they never said they'd support Windows 10 forever (how would anyone think they could do that?), I think people just misunderstood that Windows is going to be sold like Office 365, as a service (in other words, a subscription).

[Brian Elfert]

If Microsoft starts charging a yearly fee for Windows a lot of home users are going to jump ship. Large businesses are already paying hefty fees for support and licensing of Windows to Microsoft so it probably won't affect them so much. Businesses also have a lot large installed base of Windows applications that could not easily be replaced.

[Phil Thien]

If Microsoft starts charging a yearly fee for Windows a lot of home users are going to jump ship. Large businesses are already paying hefty fees for support and licensing of Windows to Microsoft so it probably won't affect them so much. Businesses also have a lot large installed base of Windows applications that could not easily be replaced.

I concur. Lots of small business users will look for other solutions, too.

The question is, will Microsoft require a monthly fee for Windows "as a service." I've heard no, but I expect (at some point) yes.

Which would beg the question, if people aren't going to be willing to pay a monthly fee to use Windows, what will they use instead?

I'm not sure this is a brilliant move on Microsoft's part.

[Frederick Skelly]

Well, one thing is certain - Microsoft will do whatever they decide to do, whether I like it or not.

But if I have to start paying a subscription, that will be enough for me to consider switching to a Mac. Or I might investigate the feasibility of using a unix-based operating system (Linux, etc) plus Open Office for the things I do. Those options won't necessarily work for industrial users, but one of them might be a viable alternative for my personal use.

Guess we'll see what happens, huh?

[John McClanahan]

A subscription based operating system sound crazy now, but if Microsoft bundles the OS with Office it will sake some of the sting out of the idea of a periodic payout. If this new OS makes the desktop PC more of an internet terminal that does most of the booting from the internet with greatly reduced malware problems, I can see it catching on.


John

[Larry Browning]

This commercial?


https://youtu.be/Gu6vmNz-PhE

I don't think they say it will be a forever O/S.

Microsoft is switching to "Windows as a service," they never said they'd support Windows 10 forever (how would anyone think they could do that?), I think people just misunderstood that Windows is going to be sold like Office 365, as a service (in other words, a subscription).
I guess when the guy said "They'll grow up with windows 10" I heard forever implied. Man, I am a Windows guy through and through, but I really HATE the idea of a subscription. I will give serious thought to switching to a Mac or even Linux if the make that switch. We are on Office 365 at work and I HATE it compared to Office 2010!
literally 95% or more of that is completely useless to me. What a total PITA it is. Glad I'm not paying for it!

[Larry Browning]

I will be retiring in a year or so and I may start looking at a Chromebook. It's got the web and email. what else will I need in my golden years? Oh, one thing, I promised Dave Richards I would learn to use Sketchup after I retired. I bet that won't run on a Chromebook!

[Curt Harms]

I concur. Lots of small business users will look for other solutions, too.

The question is, will Microsoft require a monthly fee for Windows "as a service." I've heard no, but I expect (at some point) yes.

Which would beg the question, if people aren't going to be willing to pay a monthly fee to use Windows, what will they use instead?
I'm not sure this is a brilliant move on Microsoft's part.

For home and small business users, I wouldn't be surprised to see preinstalled Windows be supported free for a certain period, perhaps 3-4 years. Beyond that 'useful life' a user would have to pay a fee for support to continue. Do you think HP, Dell, Lenovo et. al. would be upset with that arrangement? It's cheaper to buy a new machine with its free support rather than to pay for continuing support on older but functional hardware?

[John Coloccia]

I just wish they'd make up their mind and give clear guidance on exactly what they're selling.

[Jim Becker]

I think that the "last version" thing was pure speculation...

They have provided clarification that Windows 10 will have something like 10 years of support, however.

[Larry Browning]

I think most of the confusion is due to marketing spin, with a little indecision thrown in there to boot. But mostly marketing spin.

[Brian Henderson]

I will be retiring in a year or so and I may start looking at a Chromebook. It's got the web and email. what else will I need in my golden years? Oh, one thing, I promised Dave Richards I would learn to use Sketchup after I retired. I bet that won't run on a Chromebook!

Unfortunately, pretty much anything creative won't run on a Chromebook or tablet. If you just want to consume content, they're fine. If you want to actually create all but the simplest content, you're pretty much screwed.

[Larry Browning]

Unfortunately, pretty much anything creative won't run on a Chromebook or tablet. If you just want to consume content, they're fine. If you want to actually create all but the simplest content, you're pretty much screwed.

Web browsing and email pretty much covers about 99% of what I will be doing on a computer after I retire. I can probably live without that final 1%. If I find I really need a real computer, I have children.

Well, actually that is not true. I will probably have one real computer and then get a CB for day to day stuff. I love to tinker to much!

[William Adams]

Creative app for ChromeOS, GraviT: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/gravit/pdagghjnpkeagmlbilmjmclfhjeaapaa

Also for Windows and Mac OS X: http://www.neowin.net/news/gravit-10-rc1

[Curt Harms]

I just wish they'd make up their mind and give clear guidance on exactly what they're selling.

It sounds to me like they were thinking the Microsoft equivalent of a GNU/Linux rolling distro. There really are no versions, new/updated components are rolled out as they're deemed ready for prime time.

[Julie Moriarty]

I think the problem with saying there will only ever be updates is you have to keep building on architecture that will one day become obsolete. When MS had Windows NT competing with whatever standard Windows version was playing, a programmer told me the standard version had something like 11,000,000 lines of code. NT had 4 million. The reason was the standard version was built on old architecture and they to write additional code to make it work with present day hardware and software. When I was doing CAD on a big project, our computers kept crashing. I had a lot of conversations with Autodesk techs. One told me the main problem was AutoCAD was built on old architecture and had the same problems as the old Windows.

Advances in hardware will bring about software designed to utilize those advantages and the operating system has to keep up with that. Now what would really be nice is if computers didn't need an operating system. Just load the program and run it.

[John Coloccia]

It sounds to me like they were thinking the Microsoft equivalent of a GNU/Linux rolling distro. There really are no versions, new/updated components are rolled out as they're deemed ready for prime time.


That's what we all were thinking. And why not? OSX is like that too.

[William Adams]

Now what would really be nice is if computers didn't need an operating system. Just load the program and run it.

Been there, done that. It’s what the early home computers (and before that industrial machines) were like back in the days of CP/M, &c..

Every program has its own user interface, every programmer has to work up their own windowing toolkit, text handling, encoding, &c.

Everything is different, there are no standards, and there was no interoperability save by moving files around. No clipboard, no copy-paste between apps. Networking interactions were CLI using tools such as FTP (and requiring that one make the conceptual leap that one had to move a file from the machine that it was on to the machine that one was connected to, then initiate the transfer to the machine which one was using).

[Brian Elfert]

Just about every piece of software out there occasionally just needs to be rewritten from the ground up. You often can't build world class software with 15 year old code. A number of software companies have rewritten their software from the ground up to get rid of the old crusty code. It usually upsets long term users, but it allows new technologies to be more easily supported.

[Robert Delhommer Sr]

I just wish they would quit selling a new OS that is so full of holes & bugs and perfect a OS.

[Curt Harms]

Just about every piece of software out there occasionally just needs to be rewritten from the ground up. You often can't build world class software with 15 year old code. A number of software companies have rewritten their software from the ground up to get rid of the old crusty code. It usually upsets long term users, but it allows new technologies to be more easily supported.

But that old crusty code is sometimes required to support software or machines that will never support new O.S. s for any of a number of reason. They're still working and would be $$$$ to replace. There are people here in that situation - machines with no support on newer than WinXP and no prospect of that changing. There's no magic fix.

[Jason Roehl]

Why would anyone ever need more than 640K?