Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 6th Apr 2008 09:38 UTC, submitted by Francis Kuntz
Ars analyses the concept of a modular Windows, and concludes: "Modularization - and the discriminatory pricing it permits - might appeal to accountants and economists. But it is bad for consumers, bad for Windows, and ultimately, bad for Microsoft. A modularized Windows, or worse still, a modularized subscription-based Windows, undermines the purpose and value of the Windows OS. If it comes to pass it will surely sound the death knell of the entire Windows platform."
Thread beginning with comment 308411
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: cheaper Windows ?
by PlatformAgnostic on Sun 6th Apr 2008 18:41
in reply to "RE: cheaper Windows ?"
Member since:2006-01-02
RE[3]: cheaper Windows ?
by sbergman27 on Sun 6th Apr 2008 19:09
in reply to "RE[2]: cheaper Windows ?"
Member since:2005-07-24
Dude, it's more work to type MICROS~1 than to type Microsoft or MS. Why would you do more work just to be impolite?
Dude,^WIt's more work to start your sentence with "Dude" than to just leave it out. Why would you do more work just to be impolite? ;-)
Edited 2008-04-06 19:11 UTC
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2006-10-08
This would be a nice utopy for "windows" users, but sadly, this concept seems to open up new problems. Things that users might expect (e. g. have seen it in the office or at the neighbor's PC) arent present in fact and require manual installation afterwards. "But I want this working!" could be a common phrase. The additional installation of software that is needed to extend the product could develop into a problem for users who are fine with the concept of taking software as it is (first) and then start complaining that something isn't possible out of the box (later on). This is due to the tendency of seeing the PC as an allround device, so, following your example, as an office PC for games, file sharing and video editing.
The selection of what is minimal and what you can use as extensions is a difficult task because someone could miss something - missing something is the beginning of complaining, and complaining is a step closer to abandon a product and stopping using it.
And for the nice numbers on the price tag. :-)
This would require their modularized infrastructure to be well designed. Some users blame MICROS~1 for putting more work into the eye candy and the advertising than in testing their software before selling it. I'm not sure if MICROS~1 can reach this goal, it would imply that they break with some of the concepts they're familiar with for years...