Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 21st Nov 2008 00:11 UTC, submitted by Moulinneuf
Every now and then, an article pops up which argues that it would make sense for Microsoft to offer a free, ad-powered version of Windows. "We are all aware that Google is the king of online advertising. Microsoft has wanted to compete in that space forever, which is why giving away Windows 7 makes so much sense," Business Pundit argues, "Let's look at the numbers; Microsoft's operating systems are on 90% of the world's computers, or roughly one billion machines. That's penetration on a massive scale. Even Google has to be impressed." While these articles make some valid points, they rarely dive into the actual details.
Thread beginning with comment 337933
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2008-04-10
I was about to post something to that effect - about MS making it ad-supported and non-free, I mean. People with pay TV still see ads, and they still sit down to watch those "World's Greatest Commercials" specials once in a while. The vast majority wouldn't care, unfortunately, and Microsoft would have a new way to make their OS slower, less secure, and grow fatter off the public. They could get away with murder and the stupid (and obviously masochistic) public would put up with it and ask nicely for more.
Member since:2006-08-10
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2005-08-07
Microsoft's Windows revenue is at least 50% bigger than Google's total revenue. So why should they kill one of their biggest cash cows to compete in another (smaller) market?
Btw. What keeps MS from making Windows 7 both ad-supported and non-free?