Microsoft is planning to unveil its Windows 8 successor next month at a special press event. Sources familiar with Microsoft’s plans tell The Verge that the software maker is tentatively planning its press event for September 30th to detail upcoming changes to Windows as part of a release codenamed “Threshold.” This date may change, but the Threshold version of Windows is currently in development and Microsoft plans to release a preview version of what will likely be named Windows 9 to developers on September 30th or shortly afterwards. The date follows recent reports from ZDNet that suggested Microsoft is planning to release a preview version of Windows 9 in late September or early October.
Microsoft is really stepping up its release schedule. Good.
Is this where Microsoft finally tries to get everyone to pay a subscription for the OS? I have heard rumors but cannot get confirmation.
Any shop doing serious Windows development has been doing subscriptions since the mid 90’s.
Same applies to commercial UNIX systems as well.
Edited 2014-08-22 16:33 UTC
That’s true, but most individual users and small businesses haven’t.
I can see why a dev. shop would want to write this off as a business expense.
But I haven’t heard of subscribing to UNIX systems before. I tried searching for it and didn’t find anything either.
Were you saying that UNIX shops also pay for subscriptions to Windows? I can see how that could be useful as well as helping defray costs if that was your meaning.
You keep a subscription (i.e. support contract) going with the likes of RedHat ans SUSE. This keeps the update coming but letting it expire does not suddently stop the systems running the Software from running.
What I an a lot of others are afraid of is something like this:-
Keep paying the Microsoft tithe OR …. your system suddenly blue screens and won’t boot.
They have you by the short and curlies…
If they do and the mothly cost is high then I’d expect a boost in the numbers of users that:-
1) Say ‘sod off’ MS and keep their current OS regardless of the security implications
2) Move to another OS such as OSX or Linux (please not Ubuntu but that is another story)
3) Stop using their PC altogether and stick with a tablet/smartphone.
Many people already pay for a worthless antivirus subscription. As long as the fee wasn’t too high (<$100/yr) most people would just pay up to keep their Windows.
True that a UNIX system wouldn’t stop running if your [support] contract ran out. But you could get cut off from at least some of the premium updates, ala Solaris.
Would a subscription to Windows include support? I think that although that apple may have an orange-ish cast to it it is still not an orange. If you want both you have to purchase the orange too.
I don’t expect the subscription model to replace their current revenue stream. Too many users are moving to devices and OSes that don’t have that hook in them. They would need some solid inducement to start paying extra for what they have come to feel is a standard, basic feature.
Something else would have to be put in place. The cloud is frequently cited as a possibility but analyst Keith Weiss at Morgan Stanley sees it as a gap rather than a support.
http://blogs.barrons.com/techtraderdaily/2014/08/12/microsoft-is-th…
His opinion is one out of many, but even though I am not a corporate finance maven I saw it much the same way just based on general news and announcements rather than a detailed analysis.
Actually some Unix (and other high end systems like OpenVMS) would not work unless their licenses were up to date. This was before the term “subscription” had made it to the buzzword business stream, but the spirit was the same. This also applied not just the OS, but lots of software packages were structured under the same deal of temporary recurring licenses.
I think the extreme case was the big IBM iron, which customers did not technically “own” as much as they “rented” it.
This is nothing new… the internet allows for more agile delivery/billing methods though. That’s perhaps the bigger difference. But the essence of the strategy remains the same: allow a vendor to capture guaranteed recurring revenue streams.
Besides what others already replied, it is common in the enterprise to rent commercial UNIX systems.
This means you not only get the software, but the hardware boxes as well.
The support contract most of the time, allows for the said systems to kept up to date to the latest versions.
The is not unique to UNIX, other enterprise systems like OpenVMS (already mentioned), OS/400, ClearPath and others, follow similar procedures.
I pay a monthly fee to access a VPS running GNU/Linux; isn’t that basically the same thing? If I don’t pay the monthly fee, I’m locked out of the VPS, so I’m literally subscribing to access a UNIX-like OS.
Not that I think a subscription model would work well with the average Windows user. For over 25 years now, when you buy a PC you get a complete system with a working OS that doesn’t stop working after the first year. Many people will buy a new PC after four or so years, and with it comes the new version of Windows that again will continue to work, barring a corrupted hard drive or malware attack. But the license allows them to use that OS more or less indefinitely.
Now, imagine that same huge segment of the PC buying population being told that their computer will stop working after a year, unless they pay a subscription fee to Microsoft on top of the upfront cost of the PC. I’d be willing to bet money that a significant portion of those customers would start looking elsewhere, perhaps to the company that also makes their iPhone or iPad. I don’t think Microsoft would shoot themselves in the foot like that. Then again, it’s not the same company it once was, so anything is possible. It would be a terrible idea, though.
i agree overall but keep in mind real apple users are basically on an apple subscription:
there’s your iPhone + maybe your 3G iPad monthly, +
30% of all your iTunes and apps purchases, +
the latest gadget like appleTV or beats headphones for xmas, +
the 2nd or third mac for family or business, +
a new iPhone every 2-4 years, +
a new mac every 3-5 years, +
an endless demand for $29.99 white adapter cables.
microsoft just wants a piece of that monthly that everyone else gets (netflix, cable, mobile, server bills, debt consolidation :-))
The real question is, will they manage to get all the bugs and critical flaws built into the software in time for the release?
Because if they don’t, they won’t continue to have a situation where you have to register or activate every single copy you have. If they ever released an OS that was USABLE, STABLE, FEATURE FILLED, and SECURE, no one would ever have to buy another one. They don’t innovate, there are no more critical features to add, really, so the only way Microsoft can continue to force people to pay them over and over again for what has been essentially the same thing, is by ending support for the older version.
Their entire business model is predicated on getting the customer to see INFORMATION in the form of computer instructions, the way they see their CARS, or any other consumer product with a limited lifespan. But they’re different. Imagine for a moment if your car came with a CD-ROM, and when your car became old, worn-out, run-down, dinged up, and filthy, smelling from all the gnarled, dried, petrified french fries that accumulate in all the nooks and crannies of your vehicle, you pop the CD-ROM into the CD player in the dash, pushed a button to confirm you want to reinstall your car, got out, locked the door, and an hour later, your car is in brand new condition, like the day you bought it.
Well, software basically IS like that. If you have Windows 7, let’s say, and it’s all crapped up with viruses, trojans, and other malware Windows… let’s just say, “Operating System” is so susceptible to, you just reinstall the “OS,” and you’re basically starting fresh, provided you don’t reinfect it the moment you start reloading all your old data files and programs. But Microsoft gets people to pay OVER AND OVER AND OVER for something that has only really changed cosmetically since about Windows XP. The sad part is, people ARE STILL DOING IT! They’re still falling for Redmond’s evil tricks, and paying them again and again for the same thing.
In short, what I’m saying is they basically already HAVE a subscription model! Only instead of paying per month, or per year, you pay every few years. Don’t believe? Are you still running a computer that came with Windows XP, or a previous version? If you bought a computer that had Windows XP or earlier, you should still be allowed to use it, because you PAID for it, even if it “came with” your computer, because Microsoft didn’t let any company have copies of their dreckware for FREE, so you have paid for it rolled into the cost of the computer. Do you STILL USE Windows XP or previous?
Of course you don’t. At least not connected to the internet; if you were doing that you’d surely need to have your head examined. Doing that would be insane. Why? Because Microsoft deliberately and intentionally adds bugs and security flaws to make sure you CAN’T run their old software. If they didn’t, and there were ANY copy of Windows out there that could be used, used online, and used without further patching, people would just use THAT, and never pay for another OS from them again. Don’t believe? Remember the furor over Microsoft’s plans to end support for Windows XP? Remember how many people didn’t want to be forced to buy another OS from Microsoft, because they were happy with XP, or at least happy enough?
Well, all those people were the core of individuals who only would stop using XP if they had to. If they were forced to. How did Microsoft force them to? They stopped patching all the security holes and bugs and other flaws they’d built into XP. Good thing that after a dozen years or so it STILL HAD SOME! Good thing for Microsoft! Imagine if they stopped releasing security patches, etc., because there WERE no more bugs, no more security holes, no more flaws… and word of that got out!
After decades have gone by and untold BILLIONS of dollars were poured into the festering, pus-filled sore that is Microsoft, they STILL haven’t managed to produce an operating system that isn’t susceptible to all manner of exploits, worms, trojans, viruses, etc. etc. etc.?!? That’s well beyond what could possibly be explained by simple incompetence. And don’t tell ME that it’s physically impossible to make software that’s secure out of the box, and that runs on a bunch of different hardware, because not only has it been done repeatedly, one group of people at least, have managed to do it FOR FREE, out of time and effort contributed by VOLUNTEERS!
Unix managed to be more secure, produced professionally by various groups, and GNU/Linux manages to be more secure, have less bugs etc., and runs on a FAR wider array of different kinds and combinations of hardware than Microsoft Windows! OS X (based on Unix,) manages to do all of the above, and be sexy as hell to boot! So Microsoft has NO EXCUSES for pumping out version after version. Just follow the money. Microsoft sells what is very nearly an imaginary product. It’s not a physical one, even if it comes on physical media, and comes in a box, what you’re paying for is the information on the disc, in the box. The information is a form of instructions, and if you’ve already paid for a copy, you should still be able to use it, and not have them set up what amounts to a time-bomb in your computer, whose fuse is equal in length to the amount of time left before Microsoft decides to reach into your bank account again, and steal a few hundred more dollars from every poor schmuck too dumb to run GNU/Linux, or some other operating system.
I am proud to have a Microsoft Garbageware-FREE computing ecosystem in my home, going on four years now, and that would be SIX years if I counted the time when I still had a Windows install disc, “just in case,” before I finally was able to throw it away, when I personally reached the level of confidence, (and GNU/Linux reached the level of usability,) for me to KNOW I would never need that malware-posing-as-an-operating-system EVER again! For me, LinuxMint 11, Katya (MATE) was the moment that happened. Pretty much everything just WORKED, and I couldn’t have been more pleased. Now with Qiana (still using MATE) everything remains peachy, stuff just works right out of the box, and I’m not paying over and over for crappy software that hogs system resources I could be using just to make sure I’ve paid Microsoft for the extremely dubious privilege of using their horrid software.
Remember how much trouble Novell had, the effort they had to go to to prove Microsoft deliberately made Windows hiccup at random if you tried to run it on DR-DOS rather than MS-DOS? It’s because the software itself is encrypted, and it has to decrypt itself which takes processor power. Modern versions are no doubt much worse, because how else could they force people to pay them over and over again for the same CRAP?!?
Anyway, I hope Microsoft DOES try to force people to buy subscriptions, so people will wake up and realize that ONE, they have in fact been duped into paying for the same garbage over and over again, just with a shiny new coat of paint thrown over it each time, and TWO, that there are alternatives! In the case of GNU/Linux, FREE alternatives! There’s also the various BSD’s, OS X (if you happen to have an Apple branded computer,) and that they are free to choose!
For those who say, “yeah, but Microsoft is still dominant, so I’ll just cough up more money as they command,” the reason they are still “dominant” (if they even are,) is that people like YOU pay their ransoms! How mad would you be if you got a virus that encrypted your HDD, and forced you to pay a couple hundred dollars every few years to get your own data back? That’s basically what Microsoft does, only they hold your entire computer for ransom. “PAY UP, or you won’t be able to use YOUR OWN COMPUTER THAT YOU PAID FOR!”
Screw ’em. I can’t WAIT for the day when they file for bankruptcy. I’ve got a bottle of fine wine chilling, saved for that blessèd day!
1997 called, it wants it’s huge wall of hate back…
That bottle of wine is going to age much better than you will. Every platform requires patches and tweaks as new technology evolves, new hardware is developed and new exploits are discovered and created. Operating systems are complex software. The reason people pay to maintain their Windows setups is because the platform runs applications that work well for them. And to say that the Windows releases are just a new coat of paint is just silly.
Edited 2014-08-23 15:54 UTC
The rumors I’ve read say nope, it’ll have a pay version and a “powered by Bing” free version and as far as subscription goes the rumor is they are gonna offer features ala carte so if you say have Win 9 Home but want Bitlocker or Windows 2 Go you’ll be able to buy just the features you want which sounds REALLY nice. But the only subscription rumors I’ve seen is an Office 365 style offer for SMBs and corps.
So does anybody know if the dev preview will be open to all, or will we have to wait for the consumer preview?
My thought here is totally anecdotal, but I’m interested in people’s opinions.
I installed Arch Linux in 2009. It was the first time I’d heard of the rolling release style of package management and I quickly became hooked on it. I never want to go back to what I was doing before, waiting months or even years for one big grand release. If there’s an update to an application or a new feature is added to the kernel that is deemed stable, why should I wait for it? I want it now!
Since then, it seems like the development of so many operating systems have had changes to them, almost to “compete” with this model in a sense. Windows releases are a little more frequent with earlier development previews. Mac OS X releases are annual. Ubuntu now does rolling releases of select software such as Firefox to keep old releases current. openSUSE and Linux Mint now have rolling release versions. Haiku has had an alpha release four years in a row.
Has the trend in the past five years been for the release schedules to be more frequent, for both closed source and open source operating systems?
With Windows, I kinda wish we could go back to the 6-7 year release cycle we had with XP/Vista. I just don’t find that any of the changes they make are ever worth the hassle of upgrading, yet I do it anyway because I’m sort of the default tech support for my friends and family, so I need to stay current. If not, I probably would’ve ran XP until the day they stopped supporting it. Things just tend to work more smoothly when things stay as they are for a long time. You don’t have to worry about whether some hardware device that was released 6 months ago is going to work with the new version or not.
There is a benefit in some stable base. If you split the base and certain applications which you want to update more frequently, it works out not so bad. Pure rolling nature keeps you up to date, but introduces other issues which are hard to iron out (ABI breakage, libc updates and so on).
So both approaches have pluses and minuses.
Edited 2014-08-22 22:16 UTC
Since I installed Arch, I deleted every version of Windows on my system – 2003, XP, 7 and 8.1.
I only run Windows in a VM now. Windows needs to be quarantined like Ebola.
That is morally dispicable, no! ebola is an simple for of virus and can be cured as the ft laramie experiments shows, the problem is only in the cost. Yes it is expensive and yes Africa is underdeveloped, and currently the cure is very expensive. That is not reason enough to kill them all through quarantine, it is a reason to mass produce the cure though through charitable means.
Edited 2014-08-23 12:57 UTC
Having to consider upgrading more often so they don’t get left behind
I hope the upgrade to Windows 9 will be free for Windows 8/8.1 users. I just purchased costly Windows 8.1 laptop a month ago and I cannot stand the idea of my OS becoming obsolete in just months time!
Between I have started evaluating various Linux options for my laptop. So far Ubuntu-Gnome seems the best distro for touch friendly laptops.