Slashdot Mirror
Would You Use Ad-Supported Windows?
An anonymous reader writes "ZDNet reported earlier this week that Microsoft was thinking of offering an Ad-Supported version of Windows. A blog post by John Carroll offers some reasons why Ad-Supported Windows makes sense. From the article: '4. More revenue through targeted marketing: The holy grail of marketing is to target an audience with the sort of ads that most appeal to them. Sending a bunch of male programmers advertisements for breast enlargement isn't terribly useful. Sending a bunch of male programmers advertisements for a four hour extended version of Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan is useful.' Is there any situation where you can see yourself open to the possibility of using an Ad-Supported operating system?"
I've done this with Windows, although not with an ad-supported version, for my church. I wrote a simple VBA program to show announcements by displaying PowerPoint slides (using the free viewer). It also ring bells on a schedule to signal the beginning and end of classes. It is still running on a 166 MHz clunker.
There's a 4-hour version of Wrath of Khan?
> Sending a bunch of male programmers advertisements for breast enlargement isn't terribly useful.
Breast reduction, on the other hand...
Open Source only - every thing else is evil. -RMS
peoplepc tried this (essentially) in the late 90s or early 00s.
it didn't last long.
-- lol pwned
Ad-Supported Windows + Ad-Aware = What, I wonder?
"I Know You Are But What Am I?"
No, but I will happily use Linux and watch as Microsoft's revenue growth continues to decline as their two core monopoly revenue streams are decimated as the two products they are based on become commodity items.
Linux + OpenOffice for the win.
... oh hell no
don't we have spyware blockers to stop annoying ads popping up on our desktop already? and now we want to make it part of the OS?
I can see it now, in the middle of an RTS with 3 other people and all of the sudden an add for Viagra pops up (no pun intended.) Wouldn't that be fun?
GeneralKael -- Slacker Extraordinaire
... Redhat buy ads?
Sigs are so 1990s. No way would I be seen dead with one.
I wouldn't use Windows if no advertisement is in it, so that doesn't make a big difference for me.
No, it's just not my kind of system. Also, there is enough adware in windows already after a while spent using the Internet from that kind of operating system, why add more?
IF someone wants to use Windows, he/she buys it, pirates it, or simply uses something else. Advertisement-supported windows would be the remaining few percent maybe.
It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
Be yourself no matter what they say
What they don't tell you is that the entire extra four hours is just Captain Kirk saying "...AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA..."
Sending a bunch of male programmers advertisements for breast enlargement isn't terribly useful. Sending a bunch of male programmers advertisements for a four hour extended version of Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan is useful.'
Ah, but if I had BOTH, I'd never leave the house.
good that the summary didn't use 'penis enlargement' as a counterexample, as it was my first thought - 40% of spam is about that.
#
#\ @ ? Colonize Mars
#
In University, I had my mattress supported on a bunch of bricks & books, so I don't see why I wouldn't support windows with bricks either. Air flow is good.
I keep calling that Jim Morrison guy for help with my Door problems also, but he never shows up...so I've just put in some powdered carbon to lubricate the hinges.
TDz.
Even if it were free to me, by using such a product, I would be providing funding for a monopolistic corporate empire. And that I will not do. I do not use Windows for daily use at home, and I long for the day when I do not use it at work either.
If there is an ad-supported version of Windows, the ads would be intergrated on the level of the operating system (like a rootkit). Doesn't this sound like a bad idea? What will happen when a less-than-well-intending firm finds out how to use the ad system and hijack it? It would be almost, if not impossible, to remove.
He assumes all programmers like stupid bullshit like Star Trek.
WHO NEEDS SHIFT WHEN YOU HAVE CAPSLOCK/ DAMN1
I spend too much of my time dodging ads as is.
The American computer-using public is used to "ad-supported" meaning "free to me." We're also used to "ad-supported" meaning "not going to last very long."
Would the OS be crippled? Could a purchase un-cripple it (and remove advertisements)?
And how intrusive are these ads? Is this a thirty second video commercial while the OS loads, or am I going to be receiving pop-ups every 30-45 seconds? Am I sacrificing monitor space to keep a banner ad on the screen at all times?
x = x + ++x;
It's not that I would use it given any choice in the matter. At issue is if M$ will be able to sell it to the PHBs of the world. And I'm afraid that the answer is "yes".
#include "humorous_pop_culture_reference.h"
If a business like an internet cafe could get a break on liscensing and initial payout they would probably jump all over it.
...using ad-supported windows on my other partition. No anti-spyware/anti-adware and voila!
Sending a bunch of male programmers advertisements for breast enlargement isn't terribly useful because they don't have girlfriends to buy the product for...
Windows is not yet ad-supported??? Does that mean that all these porn and viagra ads popping around when I use winodws are not normal?
I gave up with the idea of an useful sig...
For my own computers, I'm willing to pay to keep the ads off.
I could see this catching on at large companies.
A few dollars here and there can add up fast when you're working with 100's or 1000's of computers.
The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously.
Isn't it already ad supported within like 10 minutes of being connected to the internet ???
Do I have a choice?
Is there any situation where you can see yourself open to the possibility of using an Ad-Supported operating system?
No
Not that an ad supported browser wasn't bad enough, now we can get an OS that spams us constantly no matter what. Imagine writting an email then a big popup comes up the same time you hit space so the popup thinks you want to goto the site and opens IE to take you there...wow, that would be sweet if the OS could take over my life!
"Some things have to be believed to be seen." - Ralph Hodgson
An ad-supported windows will never work. If one thinks about where the majority of computers are deployed / used; I can see no fortune 500 companies that would appreciate their employees bombarded by ads while doing their work. Netzero and Juno both tried this model and they couldn't even get email / internet to work for ads.. let alone ads all the time..
Free Windows. We all know the security in Windows isn't all that great. I suspect if they went this route, the ad schema would be cracked and removeable almost immediately.
Gotta big spyware problem here.
Let me think about this... NO!!!!
Thats the most craptastic proposal I've heard all week.
1) Have you heard of Linux, John?
2) Can we pick up a copy before we go to the movies where we now have to sit through ads not targeted at us to see how much better the ad-enhanced Windows experience is? Have you heard of Tivo, John? I know trendspotting is an art, but...
3) All your base are belong to us.
i got ball this is my adress 108 20 37 av corona come n do it iam give u the sidekick so I can hit you wit it
I think an ad supported version of Windows and other Microsoft applications is an excellent idea! I know a few people that, if given the choice between an ad supported OS and a completely free OS, would gladly choose Linux. ;)
I won't use non-ad supported Windows. But I'm bombarded with ads everywhere. The last place I want them is on my desktop. Leave us alone already. I don't want any of your crap anyway! I'll gladly pay for a copy of my OS just so I can have it and be left alone. Maybe people would pay more for your OS if it was worth the money.
Developers: We can use your help.
Is there any situation where you can see yourself open to the possibility of using an Ad-Supported operating system?
... but we already have solutions to those Microsoft problems. So, no.
No.
On the other hand, if the operating system took security seriously and did not use anti-competitive tactics, well,
... the end of pirated Windows and the end of the dream of making Linux the desktop SO of preference.
If anyone knows where to get this, let me know. :)
Is for testing. It would be a great way to get exposed to a new OS.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
...is Windows not ad supported ?
Windows IS one big ad.
WHY? Ads have been tried by the free pc people and how many of those are around now? I am convinced that we must be in the beginnings of another nutty web bubble. 2 million to Revision3 and another 2 million to podshow. VC money going to REALLY wacky ideas.....crazy ideas like AD supported OS's? Stupid. A OS is supposed to allow you to run programs and manage the hard stuff that programmers used to have to do when writing for bare hardware. It should not have anothe rlayer of crud on it.
Gorkman
A non-intrusive Google-Ads-like system I could live with. A bar containing seizure inducing banners and annoying "Catch the monkey and win a gazillion iPods" flash ads would be intolerable. It depends on how it is implemented. Of course, why not just use a prexisting free OS?
I have a machine at home that is an old system running Windows 98 - because of a couple apps that I have to use and they only run on windows. It is flaky as all get out and last night as I dealt with its hiccups and what nots I thought, 'I would love to run XP on this, but there is no way I'm paying for it'. If I could upgrade the OS but not shell out any cash, I'd be all over that.
It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
the adware riddled Windows most folks currently use?
Life is pleasant. Death is peaceful. It's the transition that's troublesome. - Isaac Asimov
"Add your .NET Passport to Windows XP!"
Be a real patriot: Question authority. Think for yourself. Formulate your own conclusions.
isnt that what we have already? Isnt this a violation of their monopoly? I mean building adware and malware into windows, isnt that leveraging their monopoly to monopolize another industry? I wouldnt use a non-ad supported windows, why would I use an ad supported windows?
why dont they make just better products ?
like apple ?
btw: open source rox0rz.
Given that people use computers for taxes, shopping, and other personal activities, how much of this information would be picked up by the Microsoft Ad Servers? Personally, I would rather pay for Windows than take even more risk of my personal information being exposed in this manner.
This should be a slashdot poll, and these could be the response:
No
No!!!
Hell No!!!
OH FUCK THAT!!!
Wait, that adware isn't suppose to be their?
Hey, look! It's Bono's brother.
NO WAY!!!!
Puts a new twist on MS AntiSpyware (Beta). We'll only show you the ads we want you to see....
No way am I going to tolerate my HL2 session being sent to the taskbar for some c1@lis popup to gain the focus in the background .... no F'n way ...
The end is near...
-everphilski-
Geez, with all the adware, spyware, and rootkits, you would Windows is already an ad-supported operating system!
You don't have to be smart to use a Mac, you just have to be smart enough to buy one
NO!!
Not unless, of course, the ads can be "hacked out"
"No."
Now that that's out of the way, I wonder how well "Windows Defender" (the Microsoft "anti"-spyware offering) would work on an ad-supported version of Windows. I wonder if this has anything to do with the fact that Microsoft purchased Gator^H^H^H^H^HClaria.
I wonder about these things, and I change my original opinion.
"Fuck, no. Not if you managed to throw a chair through Brin's head. Not if you manage suffocate Torvalds by stuffing his head up a penguin's ass. Not if you travelled back in time and shot the parents of Ada Lovelace, Alan Turing, and Steve Wozniak before any of them were born."
The only obvious thing is that you are an A-1 grade fucking moron. Go back to study hall, dipshit, before I come over there and shove you in your locker after administering a fierce atomic wedgie. Nice try, Napoleon, but you fail it.
Ad-supported operating systems? Give me a break. I want my OS to manage my hardware resources and programs, and I want it to be fast, secure, and reliable. I personally cannot stand advertisements, and even if I wanted to see advertisements, I'd go to the many other mediums that advertisement has creeped into, such as television, radio, internet, etc. I personally can see no use in typing away happily at my computer, programming or writing in an attempt to be productive, and being distracted by banner ads on my desktop or my programs.
This is not innovative or interesting, hell NetZero/Juno/Opera have done this to death with their advertising-based browsers (to limited success). What would make this different is that it would remove any way of avoiding the advertising... built into the window manager (OS in MS terms).
I don't see this as very attractive to many users, since it'd probably be much easier to just get a pirate version of windows (even an older version will often do).
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
Which free os shall I use? I could take the ad supported one which will bombard me with junk offers to ignore and be as secure as a rickety wooden shack surrounded by zombies. Or shall I use the one which is just plain free and secure? Nope, I just can't decide.
Don't put off until tomorrow what you can leave until the day after.
No. There is no situation where I would be open to using an ad-supported OS.
My philosophy about an OS is that it's merely a functional component of my computer, like the processor, or the RAM, or the hard drive, or the keyboard, etc. Would you be open to using ad-supported RAM?
Anyhow. . . I'm sick of ads. Even my tolerance for ad-supported TV has almost run out. The only thing that keeps me watching TV is the ability to record shows on my DVR and skip over commercials when I watch later.
I'll keep my Free (as in speech) community supported operating system.
Its funny how the ad supported idea comes back every once in a while. I remember the ad supported ISPs like Netzero... wasn't a great success. People dont want so many ads.
Is there any situation where you can see yourself open to the possibility of using an Ad-Supported operating system?"
Yeah, the situation in which it is offered for free and I can find a patch to disable the ads.
Arguing about vi versus Emacs is like arguing whether it's better to make fire by rubbing sticks or banging rocks.
One big problem I've always felt about targeted advertising is making sure the intended target is the actuall target.
When a family shares a computer, and little sis sees the ads for Axe body spray and Mom sees the adds for new golf clubs and dad sees the adds for femine hygiene products, well,what purpose is actually served?
Or when the targeted advertising hits somewhat embarrasing subjects and you are using somebody else's computer. Imagine going over to Dad's to help out a computer problem and seeing tons of porn popups, or showtunes, or viagra ads. Or showing mom something cool on your computer and her seeing internet dating, porn, perperation H, whatever.
Or, all this information is collated and 50 years from now when you run for president, and all the information is "leaked" cause your not microsofts favorite candidate and it turns out that you liked politically sensitive pasttimes, like Basetall (who knows what will be politically sensitive in 50 years)
"I'm a Genius!"*
*Not an actual Genius
Is this a trick?
I'd use it, but it wouldn't be long before me or someone else would find a way around the adverts and hence have a free OS. A friend had a free internet connection a few years ago which was advert powered, I simply made a program to hide the ad window, and we had a free connection. If this caught on MS would pull the product. URL blocking would not be enough, they'd simply include the ads in the windows update or something.
No, I wouldn't.
http://teasphere.wordpress.com - A little spot of tea
Um, no.
Ad-supported or money-supported, I won't use Windows, thanks.
Short answer: No.
Longer answer: No, I already have enough stuff that I need to focus on. If I needed to be distracted I would take off my headphones or check email every 5 minutes. If you could guarantee that the ads wouldn't be animated, flashy or colored in some way to try and draw my attention to it, then maybe. However, this would go against the whole point of advertising, where you want people to notice your ad.
Just my $0.02.
Reading code is like reading the dictionary - you have to read half of it before you can go back and understand it.
Windows with adware and spyware built-in! Could it get any better?
Honestly, from my perspective, Windows is already free. Free as in "comes with the laptop I ordered". Today, when I get a laptop with Windows on it, the first thing I do is erase Windows and replace it with an OS where I am more productive. The only way I'd use an ad-supported version is if they were to pay me to do so, i.e. funnel some of the advertiser $$ they collect from my usage back to me. Even then, the amount they'd have to pay would need to make up for the productivity loss using Windows would impose.
.sig: file not found
Right after you start up your Windows PC and a pop-up box comes up saying "A fatal exception XY has occurred at xxxx:xxxxxxxx," you get an ad for the Quad 2.4GHz Apple G5.
I think this might actually work.
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
ctrl+f KHAAAAAAAaaaaaaN! not found
of what we have now: Windows-supported ads.
Coming from a sys admin standpoint, an ad-supported anything fits right in with the average user base. Most people are willing to put up with advertisements as long as it is free/cheap (spyware included). I don't see this as being any different than your typical ad-supported website anyway.
Victory shall be mine!
Great question. Combination of 'Would you use ad-supported Foo?' and 'Would you use Foo Windows?'. Its not often Ask Slashdot reads like flamebait or trolling!
My GOD folks, they're putting ads EVERYWHERE these days...
-in video games (matrix revoutions)
-location-based ads (google's wifi service)
-cellphone ads (around for a while now)
-television
-radio
-print media
-the SKY
-IM clients
-email
-vehicles
-a rather high percentage of websites
Is there no place that's sacred, no place safe from this? Wherever we go, we are bombarded with ads. Hell, even Churches advertise!
------- "From bored to fanboy in 3.8 asian girls" ----------
Of course, no, I don't want any ads ... I don't want the OS wasting cycles even dealing with ads. I'd rather my simulations run faster, fuck you very much.
...no matter how "targeted" it is.
Gotta hand it to the Redmond Empire. They've come up with some whack-job ideas in times past (anyone remember 'Bob?'), but this one gives new meaning to 'whack-job.' I can't believe that M$ thinks people would actually be dumb enough to fall for this, even if the OS was offered at no cost (which would, most likely, be the counter-factor to get people to try it).
I suppose the ads will feature characters like Clippy and Bonzi Buddy, doing a song-and-dance for each product. Brrr.....
Bruce Lane, KC7GR,
Blue Feather Technologies
I cannot imagine a circumstance or set thereof that would permit me to use such a system. Even a requirement foisted upon me by an employer would only result in them becoming my former employer.
RHCE; are you certified? Karma: ambiguous.
Why even bother to ask the slashdot crowd this? Of course the answer is going to be a resounding 'No!' because slashdot doesn't represent the demographic that would even entertain the idea.
The responses are going to consist of:
1) Something about Microsoft being evil
2) Something about Linux being free
3) Something about Microsoft's security track record
I can't see anything useful coming out of this at all.
I prefer Linux for routine use, but there are times when Windows in a virtual machine would be quite handy.
four hour extended version of Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan
KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA (sucks in air) AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA (sucks in air) AAAAAAAAAAANNNNN!
With all of the Windows-compatible adware/spyware/malware.. what exactly are we using now?
This is a terrible ide... no wait...
Yes Microsoft marketing research! Now that you managed to get this on the front page of Slashdot, let me be the first one to tell you that this is a wonderful idea! There are never enough ads, heck I want more ads, I have a coffee cup without ads right here, but I want ads on it. I'm gonna throw this one away and get a new one with ads...! Sorry where were we? Yes, this ad-supported Windows sounds like a great idea, and will surely allow Microsoft to soar to new heights!
While an alternative "free or low cost" version of Windows supported by ads might be attractive for some users, I have a really big feeling that if this actually gets implemented, the normal versions of Windows are going to start having ads too.
Right now, I can buy a Dell Dimension with XP home preinstalled, spend a half-hour uninstalling all the useless crap they load on there, and get the machine into a relatively professional state. If I want a machine that comes in a professional state, I have to pay a significant premium for an OptiPlex or something.
How much you want to bet that as soon as this gets implemented the next "home" version of Windows will have ads all over the place with no option to turn them off?
"My Documents...sponsored by Coca-Cola!"
What with all the spyware and adware popping up windows left and right and the random Windows Messenger popups telling me about hot porn action I thought I was using ad supported Windows. Plus all those desktop icons for AOL and Netscape and Mindspring offering free trial service. Aren't those ads?
I've hit Karma 50 and gotten a Score:5, Troll... I win!
I find it hard enough to use windows now with all the adware you get, I can't imagine using it with built in adware!
The Good Life
Instead of Shatner crying out KHAAAAAN, does he go on a rampage for an hour in the Genesis cave?
/^[A-Z0-9._%+-]+@[A-Z0-9.-]+\.[A-Z]{2,4}$/i
...I was going to Kill myself online, and charge for it! Bill would want it that way!
Sig Hansen?
Sending a bunch of male programmers advertisements for breast enlargement isn't terribly useful.
You'd be surprised.
This sig rocks the casbah.
Well, ad supported Windows might be better that malware supported windows.
Just when I was struggling to think of a way to make Windows suck more - BAM! - this shows up.
I mean I use Active Directory all the time. Is this a new Vista "Feature"?
This
It really depends on how microsoft does it. If they have you pay for a copy of windows then and absolutly NO. If I payed for it I want an AddFree version. But if it free or near free $5.00 and under, then I might consider it if it first doesn't contain reduced functionality that the non-add version gives. I don't want to see any "This version of windows will not run this applaction please upgrade to Comerical Windows." Secondly the Adds should not be annoying, Things like popups or chewing up more space then the difference in screen resolutions. Also It should not ever give personal information to the advertisers, the processing for selective adds should be on my system and then they just get the add from the catagory, not posting my preferences to a site to choose and possible be colleted by data miners. Third there will need to be a way to control what it tracks and not tracks as for your habbits. There are some adds you don't want to see for example if you use your system at work and you have done some job searching you don't want your computer to show all these adds for job search sites when your boss is considering promotions. Thirdly it should not effect perfomance of the system to a noticable degree. Adds should be small in size with pictures no bigger then 64x64 and NO SOUND, or flashing or animations.
I am not opposed to Add Delivered comerical OS's to offer the OS at no charge to help the company profit. But if it drasticly hurts my experience or makes me afraid to use it then it won't be useful.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Would I use an OS that was ad supported? Maybe, if it was better at helping me do the things I want to do.
Windows? Ummm, are the ads going to somehow give it a real command line and proper filesystem? Are the ads going to allow me to turn off the CPU and memory hogging windowing system when I need more juice for a big program? Are the ads going to make it easy to turn off all the autoloading system tray and background bullshit that turns my thorobred machine into a third hand cart mule? Are the ads going to enable it to install any of many thousands of applications with a single command? And handle all the dependencies? And ensure they're not full of spyware?
No, I don't see ad support making Windows any more appealing.
In short, it's not the price tag that leaves me flat (though it certainly doesn't help). It's the poor functionality. I switched to Linux for a while because a former job required it. I stay with Linux because, once you get past its (admittedly significant) quirks, it is more user friendly.
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
I wouldn't support an evil empire like Microsoft. That's why I don't use Windows. I don't like the sinister craftiness of Steve Jobs and all of the other God-less heathens at Apple computer, so I wouldn't bother with them either. I was going to get a Sony PlayStation, but then I was like, shit, Sony's ridiculously evil. I'm not supporting that kind of crap.
What is it with marketing suits that they think that unless everyone is told what to buy, they won't buy anything. This concept is the biggest excercise in self-justification for why marketing/advertising departments exist and is frankly a load of crap.
This would be yet another reason to decide against buying a companies product due to bad business practise. It might not be on the same scale as sweatshop factories or DRM rootkits but my priviacy is something I value and it's for me to decide as and when I give it up in return for payment.
would you use windows if you had a choice?
ART on dA
Computer manufacturers are going to look at this and say, 'Hey, we can supply a Free version of windows, and make the price of our system cheaper!', thus this will force people to buy Retail versions (unless they are already crazy enough to not be driven crazy by the advertisements)
Just not plug it into the net.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
I would be willing to use it if there is no cost to me other than putting up with the occasional add. And it better be "occasional". A constant "toolbar" with seziure enducing "SHOOT THE MONKEY" banner ads would no doubt drive me insane. No cost savings is worth that.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0000683DH/103-32 50640-8207011?v=glance&n=130&v=glance
McCoy: Damn it Jim, what the hell is the matter with you? Other people have birthdays, why are we treating yours like a funeral?
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
You can show them to me when the crows have picked my eyes out of their sockets.
I try not look at ads in a magazine. I keep the control next to me, so I can change the channel within 5 seconds to minimize ad-exposure.
Ads? You got to be kidding me
I rather zap for 5 minutes than watch one damned ad.
I block ads on my Mac, and if one gets through, I go beserk.
I have some difficulty with radio ads. Because the idiots always play them right before the news. And the news doesn't always last 10 minuts. So it might be over before turning the damned thing back on. Or you just miss the first newsitem. Luckily those ads are not that obnoxious. But still mighty annoying.
Oh, and the last few DVD's I bought here in europe have unskippable ads for second rate movies I don't even want to watch for free.
It's MY fucking DVD, if I want to SKIP your STUPID ADS, I WILL. They are MY eyes, it's MY time.
Ads, you got to kidding me.
You just keep your propaganda, I'll keep my money.
I don't see how this will fly for two reasons. First reason is that typical users hate intrusive adds and will even pay others money to clean up computers to stop this annoyance. Now they propose that these adds will come as supposedly unblockable part of the system? How intrusive are we talking about? Second reason is privacy concerns, for effective advertising it has to be targeted and for targeted adds they need to collect or access some private information. I personally have big problem with my OS collecting and sending information about my browsing, shopping habits and personal information. Considering how secure Win is there is no guarantee that information it collected is going to be secure. There is also no guarantee that even if information stays secure its not going to be abused by MS.
Now would I want my children's to grow up with ads as they browse or type document ? No way. I rather pay for the damn licences or use linux.
Serioulsy though, Microsoft will turn me into a Linux user before I support an AD supported operating system...
crazy dynamite monkey
not just no, but hell no!
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
no, it's just a longer KHAAAAAAAAAN
... what did you expect, something profound?
i wouldn't even use non-add supported windows!!
:P
Huh? Since when would a male computer geek not find anything to do with the subject interesting and useful, especially if there were pictures involved?
*Disclaimer: I'm not against OS vendors bundling stuff. IE was better than Netscape,
I read
There are actually a few places where I could see this working. Instead of having the user name on top of the start menu, put an ad there. It's not really targeted, but it's not obtrusive. Another way? Take control of the users background picture. Make sure they can still see their icons, but other than that how many people really notice their background (though I don't see that happening on the enterprise level). Users don't want to see the ads, advertisers want to ensure that the users see the ads. My guess is that Microsoft would have a real hard time finding a good balance. Take up my screen space? No. That's why I auto-hide the google sidebar. I see a two-tiered pricing system: enterprise with no ads, and personal with small initial investment and advertisements.
...for advertising security software.
I use ad-supported search engines.
I read ad-supported sites.
I use ad-supported software.
I would use ad-supported OS.
This goes on for almost three hours of it...
I think the director was right to "tighten that up" a bit.
A goal is a dream with a deadline
I never use advertisement-riddled products when an ad-free alternative is available.
Just about anyone on a P2P network would agree.
Steve
A work that expires before its copyright never enters the public domain and thus enjoys eternal copyright protection.
Sending a bunch of male programmers advertisements for breast enlargement isn't terribly useful. Sending a bunch of male programmers advertisements for a four hour extended version of Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan is useful
I encourage at least half the girls i am currently dating to get breast enlargement. I could care less about ST: WoK
I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
I use ad-supported Slashdot (although recently more Digg).
Finance tutorials and more! Understandfinance
The only good thing about it were the justification to leave the workplace every 10 minutes. "Oh, hi boss, sorry, it's advert break again!".
Windows is like decaf - it tastes like the real thing, but it won't get you through the day.
It's not for me. Ad-supported Windows will likely lower the value of the whole Windows brand, and make it harder to sustain prices at the top end of the market.
Ad-supported everything is probably just a fad and by next year the world and its 1001 MS cheerleaders will have moved on to something else. Is there even enough advertising money to go round? Advertising revenue is fickle and no substitute for a solid business plan. I suspect the problem is that the Windows world has yet to work out how to lower the price of software and still make enough to be profitable.
A guess is that the venerable subscription model may come back into play, but this time it will be on the basis of client/server webservices, where so many dollars a month gets you online access and the apps run back to you off a central server as well. Throw in an intelligent keyfob with your authentication/settings/files, and away we go.
Las qué passoun
tournoun pas maï
I would consider it but are they simply adding another layer to exploit? There would have to be some sort of mechanism to transmit information to ad services (i.e. I'm a 35 yro male pervert who likes hockey, Italian food and race cars) and receive the advertisements.
Also wouldn't there be a trust level? Not many people trust Microsoft to begin with, how do we know what they would be collecting beyond what we tell them?
I could always lie and say I'm a 300lb 62yro woman who likes lavender dish soap and I have a jumprope collection...
-Phil
Shoot questions, first ask later...
Hell no Windows must go! Hell no Windows must go!
Has anybody seen the film Coyote Ugly, set in a bar where the hot female staff dance on the bar-top? It's pretty shit, but one thing I remember was them chanting 'Hell no h20' and going crazy whenever somebody asked for water.
Reading the parent's comment, I instantly pictured him working in a computer shop, where whenever somebody asks for a copy of Windows, he and the technicians get up on the counter and start chanting 'hell no Windows must go' while gyrating and swinging their black Metallica t-shirts above their heads.
An amusing, yet utterly revolting, picture.
Mother, do you think they'll like this sig?
1. Erase HDD of old Linux box 2. Install Windows Ad-Supported Version 3. ??? Sell box to someone that knows no better ??? 4. Profit!!! (Use money to build new Linux box)
"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." - Shepard Book Quoting Malcolm Reynolds
For what I use my windows machine : running an X client (M|X) and downloading crap from gadgets,
...
testing stuff in IE, or sometimes browsing with mozilla
I must say I would be happy to see a free version as opposed to the waste of money a license for windows is....
I will be also happy to have that on my next laptop, as they tend to come with windows, then I tend to install Linux, and the damn license only tends to work on laptops and come with a crippled installation that ONLY installs on the laptop, not any desktop
No. It would be bad because.
1) It would conflict with all the other adware.
2) Spammers would join the rest of the world in anger because "Microsoft undercut them by giving their stuff away for free".
3) The advertisers would hold them liable for not keeping the systems up long enough.
Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
show announcements by displaying PowerPoint slides (using the free viewer)
That'd be fantastic with ad-supported windows.
[PowerPoint slide transitions in]
Church Potluck, 2pm
Last Name A-J, Salad
Last Name....
[popup]
ENLARG3 Y0UR P3N1S N0W!!!!111
Sony ha
The users in affluent countries might be able to aupport MicroSoft's advertisers enough to make this profitable all the way around, but in the third world, would it not be less likely for the users to buy? The ads would be an annoyance, but would not generate revenue. It would be basically the situation as now, where pirated versions are used extensively - MicroSoft's product would be used without extra cash going into the coffers.
This could have the paradoxical result where it would cost more in the third world for software than in the developed countries, since they would likely want to get some cash coming in.
Perhaps someone will explain it to me?
.. paranoid crackpot leftover from the days of Amiga.
Microsoft keeps looking at Google.
They can see that Google has found the new computing business paradigm.
They can see that Google is very successful at the new paradigm.
They know that they have to adapt or end up losing their stranglehold on the market.
They know that they have to play catch-up to do it.
But they don't really understand yet what they need to do to themselves to achieve that aim.
Right now they recognize that Google's basically an advertising business that uses search technology for targeted results, and so they're looking into what would happen if, once they develop their own search/targeted-ad tech, where they could put that technology to generate revenue. It's a blind shot in the dark from a company that is lost, confused and still trying to find direction.
OK, so should we put you down in the "not sure" column?
Reality is defined by the maddest person in the room
"Is there any situation where you can see yourself open to the possibility of using an Ad-Supported operating system?"
NO
I could see a niche for this arrangement where a company like Microsoft or maybe a hardware manufacturer provides free or cheap "embedded" PCs (where all of the equipment is completely integrated, with no expansion slots, and the OS gets booted off non-volatile memory, etc) to parts of society that wouldn't normally have access to their own PCs.
This would essentially either be querying a server for a feed for ads, or be force-fed ads. In reality, it would probably be an RSS or Atom feed of some kind.
Now, think about this a minute. Proxies? Spoofing? Firewalls? A giant hole in your OS listening on a port?
How deep in the OS will this be? What sort of compromisability would this add?
What happens when your network goes down? Does the OS just shut down?
Would it have "mandatory ad block downloads" and "mandatory patching"?
All together, this is a much more complicated issue, software wise, than people make it sound.
I don't recall the name of the company either, but I'm pretty sure it went under. Primary problem was that (IIRC) they required that you sign up with their ISP for $N/month for a while, which basically worked out to the price you'd pay for the (relatively crappy) computer in the first place. You're basically just financing the computer cost into montlhly payments.
This was also back when computers were relatively expensive, so you could take the stance that someone who couldn't afford the $1k purchase price up front could afford the $40/month (or whatever it was). I imagine the introduction of the $300 mostly functional desktop killed that initiative.
Add that to the flight risk of the computer, and you've got pretty substantial problems with your business plan. I'd guess it would be extremely difficult to enforce somebody getting the PC, and dumping the linux distro of their choice on there, so you've got the net applicance problem in spades.
I assume, on the useability side, the ads would fade into the background pretty quickly. For instance, I can't remember the last time I noticed a banner ad. Besides, if you were using it as a compile box (cygwin + dcc or whatever), you could probably run it headless and not notice at all.
ceci n'est pas un sig.
I refuse to pay for an O/S that had ads in it. I refuse to pay more for the privlege of having an ad-free O/S. If you build ads into Windows, you'll just force me to migrate to Linux or something else. I don't want to do that, but I will if I have to.
I don't remember signing anything when I was born, nor nothing since then, stating that it was my responsibility to see as many ads as possible in as many media as possible.
... I have work to do. As things stand, I already have enough distractions to deal with.
I can remember when people said cable tv channels would never have advertising because you have to pay for those. Then came the advertising in the movie theater. Even TiVo is now forcing extra advertising on some people. Could this lead to forced advertising on Windows even for paying customers?
Realistically speaking, Windows is free of charge as I'm sure everyone here realizes. I can get a free copy of Windows any time I want, and I still choose not to. So by introducing advertisements to it, is Microsoft making it more attractive to me? Is it finally worth nothing?
Nerd Rock In Progress
Gentoo's website has banners on the right of every page.
Well, if you go "by the movie", hours could seem like half-hours...
-- OpenVerse Visual Chat: http://openverse.com
This would explain why MS got a deal with Claria (former Gator), an annoying adware company.
I suppose they could try to force this by raising the price of ad-free Windows, if Microsoft were evil. OEMs will get ad supported Windows for free, or even be paid to install it. If they are paid to install it, I'd happily buy a new Windows PC and install Linux over it, if they don't lock me out.
I remember back around 6 years or so ago there was a company called FreePC that was giving away free computers and all you had to do was keep advertisements on your screen and use it so many hours a month. They also gave you free internet (dial up) access. I signed up for it and received mine, and those advertisements were annoying as heck.. but hey, I got a completely new computer for free.. no shipping or anything, I just had to put up with having my resolution set at 1024x768 and only getting to use 800x600 of it since the left side and bottom were taken up by advertisements.
Funny side note to the story was that the company went under after only a few months of sending me my computer and they sent a letter stating that I could remove the advertisements (which was just an executable that you could disable through msconfig) and keep the computer. That was right when netZero started up and they had the same type of advertisements for their free internet, but instead of taking up the left side and bottom it just took up the left side.
The Technomancer
"Men of lofty genius when they are doing the least work are most active."-
Ad supported entertainement (done)
Ad supported sports evenements (done)
Ad supported charities (done)
Ad supported applications (done)
Ad supported governement (done)
Ad supported war (done)
Ad supported OS (thinking of it)
Is it an embrace and extend thing ?
malheureusement la stupidité n'est ni curable, ni mortelle.
I wouldn't mind using an ad-supported version of Mac OSX; Windows, I doubt it, but that's not a reflection on advertising, only on Windows. I don't think it is very likely that I will be setting up a new Windows machine, or upgrading the ones I have now.
My Eudora causes me no problems, and twice I've actually clicked an ad, once buying the product at the target site. The ads take a very small proportion of the display (at 1280x1024.) In the meantime, Eudora does an excellent job of handling my email.
I know it's politically correct in the geek community to hoist up their skirts, jump on a chair, and scream MOUSE at the top of their lungs whenever an ad enters the room, but it's all just a matter of reasonable use of screen real estate and attention getting devices to me. Text ads a'la Google are entirely friendly, from my point of view; images almost as much so; one-shot animations are less; continuously looping animations are scuzzy; flashing approaches are utterly unacceptable; pop ups and other uncontrollable and unplanned UI intrusions like window resizing and plug-in installations are scum mechanisms invoked by scum merchants who (among other things) I would never buy from. That's how I'd look at an ad-supported OS; it's not a question of advertising; it's a question of what degree of advertising intrusiveness.
Finally, Eudora offers a choice: You can go ad-supported, or buy and see no ads. If the OS did this, then it's just an additional choice, and where is any legitimate objection at that point? If you don't want ads, then just use the old model and buy. <shrug>
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
And for a low low price of $2000 per week no less. Inquire now!
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
(Ask a yes/no question, get a yes/no answer)
UTF-8: There and Back Again
Sure I would use it if they gave it to me for free and someone found a way to disable the ad-words. :)
Not to mention all those icons for every big ISP sprinkled all over the desktop when you buy a PC with windows. Then there's all the stuff in "my favorites" that you didn't put there... Yes, Windows has been ad supported for some time now.
Every where I go I am inindated with ad's. I turn on the cable TV which I pay $50 a month for and get ad's, I drive down the road which I pay tax's for and get ad's, I use the internet and get ad's, I forget to run adaware and I get ad's, I pick up a magazine that I pay for and get ad's, I go to the theater pay $8 to watch a movie and set through a half hour of ad's for the mall before they even get to the half hour of previews. Oh, yea lets not forget about DVD's I pay $20 to "BUY" a dvd and get ad's(yea previews whatever) before the movie. Please just shoot me know before I am forced to view an ad before I take a crap or go to sleep or breath.
The perversity of the Universe tends towards a maximum. - O'Toole's Corollary
4. More revenue through targeted marketing: The holy grail of marketing is to target an audience with the sort of ads that most appeal to them. Sending a bunch of male programmers advertisements for breast enlargement isn't terribly useful.
But sending a bunch of male programmers advertisements about women who have had breast enlargement is very useful.
...the version i'm using now ISN'T ad-supported?
how do i turn off these ads?
I can see how this would be good for people who don't have the money or would rather save money.
However, I hope they don't pull a movie industry and not only charge us for Windows IN ADDITION to forcing us to watch a half hour of ads in order to use the computer for an hour.
Personally, I would never use this, I have enough advertisement in my life already.
Would there be a security hole (not that that ever happens) that allowed the friendly spammers to insert their own ads?
Microsoft's Anti-Spyware and Adware-removal tool's license agreement:
In a surprising turn of events, Microsoft has adopted some Open Source habits, and will be searching the spyware it removes for improvements on their own spyware removal tools and operating system itself.
I also wonder if they will sell their marketing research to the authors of spyware...
To answer the question, no. I would not use Ad-supported windows. While targeting ads may be better than untargeted ads, no-ads are even better. I have never purchased anything from a banner ad, and I never will. How will Microsoft pitch this to advertisers anyway? "We've located a huge market of people so cheap they are willing to accept advertisements to cheapen the cost of Windows, would you like to target these cheap individuals with your expensive products?"... sadly, it will probably work... hmmm... maybe open source advertisements will have a greater impact since we can target our audience! Cheap people who don't want to pay full price for opearating systems, and who by the time they see our ads are probably annoyed with windows because of all the advertisements!
"Now the trouble about trying to make yourself stupider than you really are is that you very often succeed." -C.S. Lewis
On /., the correct version of the question is not "would you use ad-supported windows?", but rather "how much would they have to pay you to use ANY form of windows?"
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
Why on earth would I subject myself to countless hours of ads, just to get Windows or Microsoft Office for free? I don't need any more crap on my desktop that I have already. As for the "this would be great for the developing world" argument, they can just use Linux, like the rest of who (sometimes) hate commercial software.
the last time i checked, most shops had ads in their windows... how is this any different?
I am unique, just like you, and you, and you...
"The only reason why viruses and spam are such a significant problem is because of the big sucking security holes in Windows."
--Nathan Curry
No, I f*ing wouldn't use an ad-supported version of Windows, because I'd have to use a tinfoil hat, tinfoil goggles, a tinfoil condom, and lots and lots of detergent just to keep myself feeling clean.
Please stop stalking me, bro.
I have enough problems trying to keep spyware/adware ads from displaying on my Windows desktop. Now you want the OS itself to support the displaying of ads?! I can see a lot of users not realizing they have spyware then. Oh that ad? it's just Windows advertising.
Having a smoking section in a public restaurant is like having a peeing section in a public swimming pool.
I didn't think it could be more annoying but they've found a way! I can't wait for non-stop "boy-cut jeans" ads popping up on my desktop.
Linux Vendors and Apple will love it. You will have virus, malware, and now ads Vs just works.
Would I use it... NOT ON YOUR FREAKING LIFE!
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
All it takes is a little work w/ the API and you could pretty much make those ads disappear ;)
Free OS for all!
We have secretly replaced these Slashdot mods' sense of humor with a rusty nail. Let's see if they notice!!
Works on sneakers!
Man, you really need that seminar!
Rather than waiting for somebody else to plant adware on your computer Microsoft will do it right out of box, that saves people a lot of trouble.
dB Masters
Yeah, I'd use it, because the "patch" to disable the ads would hit the web about 0.03 seconds after MS announced the new OS. Then you get free Windows, with a valid serial number (or product key, or activation code, or whatever it's called), with no ads. The only problem is that MS knows that this is exactly what would happen, and they aren't dumb enough to try this. The other drawback for them is that the legality of applying such a patch is fuzzy. In other words, blocking the ads might not even be illegal -- IE now comes with a pop-up blocker, right? -- so there's the possibility that they wouldn't even be able to go after people who disable the ads.
I wouldn't use completely-free, pre-installed nearly shoved-down-my-throat Windows when there are (for me) superior options that have no ads and cost nothing. Hell, I sometimes get *paid* to use Windows and while my distaste for the OS isn't strong enough that I refuse, I at least reserve the right to complain incessantly.
But, then, perhaps I'm not the target market ;-)
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Long answer: WHAT?
Who in God's name would use an add supported Windows? Windows is the worst commodity OS there is - and it's a whole add in itself.
I would however use an add-supported enviroment like Mac OS X if it came with a load of full-blown closed-source applications of the type I use for work.
Give me a sale offer of a strong Mac with widescreen, tablet, mouse a current OS X install + the entire adobe and macromedia suites, the entire Apple Video Line of Software and Lightwave, Cinema or Maya with all plugins. All of this installed and ready to run (!!) plus some offsite config backup service set up for my personal turnkey usage (my iBook HDD tanked the other week and recovering all the application configs was a pain and lost me a couple of days - aside from data backup which took 30 minutes. It royally sucked getting back to speed, even though I do regular backups).
Then you can bill me a fair amount and show me adds. And if they're intelligent, don't suck and are realted to what I actually do for a living (just look at the software I selected to see what I mean) I'll actually even look at these adds.
Adds can be cool, you know? They just need to provide the information I want - then I'll even be sold.
BTW:
Something like this will come soon, when OSS has gained large mindshare and people will start paying for not having to spend weeks to build and set up a zero-hassle unix-variant, partly/wholly OSS based box and work enviroment.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
we just need to Adblock over from firefox
I meta-moderate because I care.
No.
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
I don't wear ads
I don't watch ads (no tv, ad blocker and pop-up blocker)
I don't listen to ads (public radio)
Don't want them on my pc
I'd probably use it... that way I don't need to spend 200 bucks just to run some better than average games.
Hmmm, maybe but only for specific tasks. On one hand there is Linux which is free, doesn't require me to give away personal details or sit watching ads all day but it's quite ready for prime time. On the other hand these is an ad supported Windows which will probably be quite invasive but is well supplied with software.
I suppose it comes down to how invasive the ads are. If they require you to fill in forms and actually watch the ads (say for 5 minutes after you log in) then I wouldn't touch it with a barge pole. If it was just a box up the top that displayed new ads I would just tune it out like I do all other ads.
I used to have a better sig but it broke.
that is all that I can think they hope to achieve by creating an OS with advertisements in it... at the point that they launch ad supported Windows, who in their right mind will not think it much better to just try Linux?
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
I'd prefer not to use windows at all.
It's bad enough I have to install 3rd party tools to make windows useful. [some of which are ad-laden themselves] Why would I endure more ads?
***HEY MICROSOFT*** The Linux kernel is FREE.
Get over it. The "value" of Windows is that it's all nicely bundled and even that's rapidly becoming moot. Why would I put up with a half-ass kernel, nagware utils, etc when I can just "emerge" anything I need?
MSFT should really just bite the fucking bullet already. Linux distros are very mature [certainly ahead of things like FreeBSD which I recently installed, it's similar to Gentoo but less user friendly] and already the OS of choice for quite a few servers. I seriously doubt Vista will have as much impact as they think [or even the lasting power].
A proper [e.g. license compliant] MSFT distro would be a welcome addition since they certainly have the money to release a polished distribution.
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
Why would I want to use an Operating System that will degrade my enjoyment of entertainment when Linux is free? True, Linux doesn't really offer the entertainment options that Windows offers, but if I have to have ads for Brylcreem popping up in the middle of my Dawn of War games it might be worth it to try to get it working in Cedega.
I use Microsoft because their dominance in the Desktop market guarantees that games are coded for Windows and almost all hardware has drivers for Windows. ADs would undermine the gaming advantage. The hardware I can replace with stuff that will work in Linux (I can get the old soundcard out of my old P2, I know that one works.)
"MIT betrayed all of its basic principles."
Sending a bunch of male programmers advertisements for breast enlargement isn't terribly useful
Well, if those ads have before and after pictures, they certainly are useful.
"The cost of freedom is eternal vigilance." -Thomas Jefferson
... no.
On second thought... still no. Not just no but hell no.
The obscure we see eventually. The completely obvious, it seems, takes longer. - Edward R. Murrow
there are enough distractions to filter out in modern day living without having additional adverts on your computer. i don't doubt that within some software there already exists subliminal advertising. there are operating systems which can be acquired for nothing. if Microsoft were to release a free or heavily advert-subsidised version of windows i am sure that more people would consider those free alternatives void of advertising. this could be a good thing for the alternatives. so long as people remain altruistic enough to keep on developing alternatives without advertising. advertising is one thing that really gets my goat. to create an economically successful product a company does not need to create a good product, they simply use marketing to create the right vogue. whilst many people are happy simply satisfying the consumer that marketing has made of them, this leads to a devaluing in society. a products worth is not measured by its functionality anymore, it is measured by how much it satisfies ones consumer instincts - which are created by marketing. i strive to be influenced only by experience of a product, or by respected peers who are also striving to rid themselves of fallacious consumer instincts. and i haven't even started ranting about the effects on a human of constantly having to filter-out these bloody distractions
I'm surprised no one has mentioned what they would do in order to target these ads? I mean, they would likely snope out what you typed, to whom, where you visited, what you run, idle time, music CDs, DVDs, etc etc etc. I'd be concerned. As someone else already said, no way in hell for work. And to be honest, not for personal use either. Let me do a little research if I want something.
I'd steal the ad-free version, just like I do now.
I'm sure Microsoft will find away to mess it all up. If they offered the operating system for free, it would work well with low cost computers, to be used in low income areas and 3rd world countries; especially in the schools. It would be worth having some adds on school supplies and new toys if it gave kids more opportunities to learn on computers. And not having to pay for OS licences would definitely save money. ... Of course, all this said, you could just use Linux ;)
There are no stupid questions, But there are a LOT of inquisitive idiots.
Sending those same people Victoria Secrets catalogs would seem equally useless, yet they're all on the mailing list...
Free Wndows with ads would increase the popularity of our favorite free without ads OS.
Not a bad thing.
...that all those versions of Windows already out there were just one big advertising campaign for the REAL operating system that Microsoft has been working on...
We already support Ad-Supported web-sites such as slashdot, digg, etc... Who cares of the OS has the same ad's as long as it does not impede someone's ability to work.
... for people on low budgets who don't have techie / warez friends and so can't get hold of an unlicenced copy of Windows, or don't want to run an unlicenced copy of Windows. I know a few people who are short of money and get quite excited when they see offers for recycled no-OS 100 dollar computers, because it means they can finally get a computer. When I tell them - what about the cost of the Windows OS that you want -they get quite shocked when they realised you're supposed to pay. Yes I'd love them all to run linux flavours but some of them want to run Windows (e.g. they want to get familiar with how Windows works at home so they can be better at the jobs they do at work, etc).
Advertisement supported media has already destroyed TV and most print media, and Microsoft treats their customers bad enough already. The last thing we need is for them to start treating their customers as products to sell to advertisers.
He who pays the piper, calls the tune...
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
For the average ludite using windows and IE it is already one giant marketing tool.
I don't know how many windows machines that I've seen where the user is bombarded with popup adds, IM spam, and plain old email junk for just about everything under the sun. Having it built into the OS just seems to bypass (or augment) the third party groups (bastards) that are doing it already.
I think for the average user, there would be no noticeable change.
The Internet is NOT Television.
Just what I want! Windows with spyware INCLUDED!!!! No need to install it myself.
That's "Mr. Soulless Automaton" to you, Bub.
this is the best thing i've heard of comeing out of MS in years.
i hope they back port it all the way to Win 3.11!!!
A problem has been detected and Windows has been shut down to prevent damage to your computer. IRQL_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL If this is the first time you've seen this stop error screen, restart your computer. If this screen appears again, follow these steps: 1) Check to make sure any new hardware or software is properly installed. 2) Buy a delicious Coca-Cola beverage at your Neighborhood Mc Donalds. 3) Enlarge your penis with safe, 100% natural pills.
I think that someone would quickly figure out how to keep the ads from popping up, thus killing MS's revenue stream. I'm all for it!
-- Knowledge shared is power lost. -- Aleister Crowley
I'd say no. Even if I did use windows though, I'd still have to pass. Screen real estate is at a premium to begin with, adding adds to it would only piss me off.
I guess it was just a matter of time.
I'm happy Microsoft is in the process of marginalizing themselves but it will never fly with corporate users; the thousands of MIS shops, who own the millions of machines that people work on, are going to smother this in its bed.
This would not only destroy productivity worse than browsing the web has already done, but would potentially expose every desktop out there to the OS ITSELF contributing to the waste of time.
Can you imagine getting this 'key sniffing' going on in Word and popping up a web page for something you entered while typing up a legal brief.
Anybody want to see how quickly Microsoft can crash and burn on 64bit processors when they try to pull this shit?
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
Responding to this measure , google will start to promote FOSS even more , and maybe including some side-links about Foss on every search you do ;)
[War mode ON] Prepare to meet the creator Bill [war mode OFF]
def greetings(x): return {'friend': 'Howdy', 'enemy': 'Dye [sic]'}.get(x, 'g0 4w4y, l4m0r')
Now you can get Windows (which IMO isn't bloated enough with resource wasting code) to install itself with all your favorite spyware and adware out of the box! (Bonzi Buddy Anyone?)I've been waiting for this, now I can stop responding to all those e-mails and websites! I wonder if they can set a new record for the total number of popup ads that load at startup! I wonder how that will run on my Celeron 500 with 128MB RAM and 3GB HDD! Thanks MicroShaft!
Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a completely unintentional side effect.--Linus Torvalds
I'll assert that we Linux/Mac/BSD users should support this whole heartedly. We have all seen how bad advertising gets. How long would MS keep any business users with ad support in Windows. How many business want their bandwidth taken up with ads? Your average business firewall would likely cause significant problems for business PC's. In addition, envision yourself as an ordinary user with ad supported Windows at home and non-ad supported Windows at work. Very quickly your home PC will make you feel like you have a tooth-ache. You have a choice, buy expensive Windows (on premium business PC) or another OS. By the way, the other OS is also free, but doesn't have ads. Joe user is likely to be rather unhappy. Furthermore, how much revenue must MS spend to create and support this ad-supported version of Windows? Just maybe, there will fewer dollars for FUD, campaign contri-bribes, lawyers and so on! Therefore, I urges all who have escaped MS to encourage the ad-supported Windows idea. Anon. C.
Everybody knows that it is Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, not to be confused with the first cinematic feature of the series. Worst... submission.... ever. ;)
"target an audience with the sort of ads that most appeal to them" ?
....
Yeah, I'll enjoy those "appealing" ads on my home PC while enjoying a fine dry wine and maybe browsing some Christian Science websites... which in my objective opinion tend to be filled with a lot of passive aggressive people... that's the relative truth!
And how long do you think before some marvelous hacker comes along with a nice little hack that removes all the ads?
;)
Sign me up for the "free" Windows.
'Twixt Light and Darkness... S S H A D O W
Absolutely not! Without a popup blocker and Flash disabled, browsing the web is already a pain. Why would anyone be willing to put up with the crap regardless of what you are using the computer for? Besides, Windows isn't likely to ever be so expensive for a free version full of annoyances like ads to be worth dealing with.
Later,
-Slashdot Junky
.
Landfill Mining Co.
Managing the (Un)natural Resources of Tomorrow
I bet you $1 you would see 5x the clickthru from male viewers than from female for breast enlargement advertising
I would use an Ad-Supported version of Windows if it was free to me. Plus with the hacking community as strong as it is, a patch would be found within no time at all and voila...Ad-Free Windows for Free.
Click Click Bloody Click PANCAKES!
it shouldn't be hard to do unless they use a rotating server name so it can't be blocked by mapping the ad server names to 127.0.0.1
Short answer: NO!
Long answer: FSCK NO!
-dZ.
--
"There can be only Juan!"
- Juan McCloud of the Clann McCloud, El Highlandero.
Carol vs. Ghost
Yes, i'd consider using an ad-supported windows. After which I'd go and download a pirate copy and be done with it.
I find it highly unlikely that microsoft will release a version of ad supported windows to the public, and I find it even more unlikely that they will release said version of windows without first crippling it. (Maybe we will get an Advert window, and the ability to run FOUR windows at once?!!
The only way I see this version of Windows happening is in the event that Google, or another software company releases an advert supported OS (AdvertOS?). Even in a scenario such as this Microsoft is still the dominant player in Desktops, and could release said ad supported windows to quench the upstart, or could, quite possibly choose to monitor and ignore them until they become a threat (maybe AdvertOS fainlly gets support from game manafacturers & the small business sector).
Either way, I can't see it in the near future
Then, of course, you reformat and install Linux. A plan with no drawbacks!
(Score:5, Insightful)
I would pay NOT to see ads.I can't leak into the urinal, without looking down and seeing someone selling me something, printed on the drain-cover.
Exactly! you're right. I find that with each waking moment advertising is getting more invasive and more offensive. It needs to stop. But I don't think I should have to pay to make it stop.
See the Pictures of the Flood of '08
I think the ad supported Windows idea could work. But to sweeten the pot a little, there should be a discount or commission if the user actually clicks the ad and buys something. Jane User out there might not mind ads on the computer if it makes buying something less expensive than doing it the old fashioned way. From another angle, perhaps the computer retailer could get a commission when users of computers they sell click ads and buy something.
To the making of books there is no end, so let's get started
I will never use an ad supported version of Windows. I'd MUCH rather use a free OS that could close up shop anytime now because it relys on people to donate money or "pay for a support contract". I mean, sure Windows is fairly stabil, however have a few security bugs here and there (that do get fixed), and Microsoft is a stabil corporation that isn't going to just go away...
But Linux seems like the best choice to me.
Ad-supported Windows? Certainly not.
Game! - Where the stick is mightier than the sword!
Let me think about this for a second.
1 New Email
Title: V14gr4 4 u!!!11!
No.
Next Question?
multifariam.net -- yet another nerd blog
Hmm... so let me make sure I understand.
I'll be using an operating system with advertisements while I surf the web full of advertisements in my advertising supported browser that constantly forces me to close advertising pop-up after pop-up. I'll also get to enjoy tons of personally delivered advertisements when I check my email in my advertising supported e-mail client, all while I enjoy my new personal favorite: advertising-bots that were automagically added to my advertising-supported instant messaging client.
Yeah, it sounds great!
I can't see any reason I would want to use an OS that kept making money off of my using it. For one thing, I doubt you would ever see an upgrade. Why provide an upgrade to an OS that they keep making money off of every time it is turned on, used, hijacked, etc. M$ might even drop all other types of licensing, because then their cash cow would live on forever, $day after $day, $month after $month, $year after $year.
Just use an unencumbered OS (like linux, *BSD, etc), and you will have all the functionality you need, and NO ADS!
Nobody seems to be talking about the fact that for Microsoft to offer Wrath of Khan to male programmers, it must first determine that you are A) male, and B) a programmer. That could be done through questionaires, but this is Microsoft we're talking about. It seems much, much more likely that the OS would be watching what you do and reporting your activities back to the mothership.
Even if you trust Microsoft to have your best interests in mind, I'm sure the FBI will, shortly thereafter, be sending Microsoft those letters of theirs. And I'd really rather not have a knock on my door from reading the 'wrong' websites.
Of course, with their new powers, I'm not sure they'd actually knock.
nope - sure wouldn't
Fuck, no.
Sending a bunch of male programmers advertisements for breast enlargement isn't terribly useful.
Guess you haven't seen my wife's breasts, that makes two of us...
The amount of information that can already be determined by my browsing habits and applications that talk to a server during usage is already uncomfortable, as it is. While ad driven revenue is a solid income stream, I find it acceptable usage for services that charge no fees. Google is a good example. I understand that I am giving up a certain amount of information for usage of the service. But the difference comes down to deliniating a service from software. I choose to use a service, I could easily choose another service if it bothered me enough. Effectively telling me that by powering on my computer, I am allowing someone to know what I am doing and why is a little extreme.
The cost of the operating system is nominal, when compared to other things that I pay for to use my computer for the needs I have. Looking at how much Visual Studio costs, for example, makes Windows look like chump change. Additionally, the OS is practically given away with new computer purchases - after perks to the vendor. Most home users upgrade their OS when their system dies, and not as they are released.
And I think that is one of the things that Microsoft is relying on. Windows with Advertising would probably encourage users to upgrade their OS. This in itself is not a bad thing, and might be one of the plus factors on their end of it.
Who knows, really? The market should drive the direction of innovation, but that just is not the way that Microsoft plays the game. In the event they move to this model, they will certainly still sell non ad-supported versions, but for how long? If it comes down to an initial purchase of $X vs. a recurring revenue of $Y per unit of time, I am sure that greed will become the driving factor.
You are in a maze of little twisting passages, all different.
Is there any situation where you can see yourself open to the possibility of using an Ad-Supported operating system?" You're kidding, right?
PETA - People Eating Tasty Animals!
So i could just shoot myself rather than be onslaughted with ever present Ads?
I cant even begin to imagine how much spyware or crappy Ads would be installed. How much information would be passing between my computer and the rest of the net without me knowing it.
I shudder to think of a day when i turn my computer on, and it tells me of a great way to save money buying penis enlargements, or breast reductions, or how i should buy some other kind of propriatory p.o.s.
All this combined with the marketing and programming genius of Microsoft? Wow, the end of the civilized world as we know it.
I am sick to death of the amount of advertisements in my daily life as it is. There is no way that I would support something that would increase them. For that matter, I take steps to try and REDUCE them. If I'm interested in something or have a need for a product I just look it up online anyway. Tivo -- I NEVER watch live TV anymore. Better to let it "get ahead" of real time so that I can skip through the ads. FireFox -- with the AdBlocker extension and to cut down on popups.
Isn't Windows already supported by Microsoft Ads???
I have a bumber sticker in my cubicle that says
Then there are routers: say I block this at the router, am I breaking the DMCA? an I violating the EULA? will microsoft know? if so how? what if I block that too? and if they do catch me, what can they do? I have the right to block any domain I want in my private network with no explanation to outsiders......
NEVER GONNA WORK
I'd use it, at the very least, as an evaluation tool. Despite all of the dark mumblings about Vista around here, I'm really curious about it. I think the graphical stuff will be neat, just not sure how practically 'better' it'll end up being. I'm curious enough that if MS said "ok, here's an ad supported version. Pay us and we'll remove the ads." That'd suit me.
"Derp de derp."
Free Windows with Linux ads... that would not be much different than the Microsoft ads on my Linux box, aimed at Slashdot.
unless its free GoogleOS and open source.
Am no fek Buddhist, but this is enlightenment.
does this mean ill be booting to one Giant pop up? if so i want all the classics, punch the monkey, shoot the santa, free ipod you name it BETTER be there.
Anyway is'nt another try by Micro$oft to kill Google ?
"Insanity in individuals is something rare, but in groups, parties, nations, and epochs it is the rule." - Nietzsche
My version of Windows is already ad supported. Why just now I am getting ads about how it is at risk, how I need a vacation and how to enlarge my "Starship" :)
Unstable Apps: Our Android Apps Don't Suck
Considering how adware-infested the average window machine is nowadays, I think the users have gotten jaded to ads being tossed at them all day long, and the impact of ads presented by windows itself, if not just plain ironic, would not be nearly as effective as marketers might hope.
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
The answer is "Hell No!" or "Fuck No!" or " No!" No cost Windows is still Windows.
There's more to it than this.
I know most people here hate ads, but I have to ask this.
Assuming Microsoft releases such a product, if an ad blocking program started blocking the ads, would that be cracking the program, or mearly blocking the ads? Would Microsoft be hypocritical in providing a popup blocker with IE?
http://www.khaaan.com/
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
Every computer I fix now seems to be riddled with ads.......and spyware,virii and other nasties.
With the XBOX360 coming out in a few days shouldn't Microsoft think about offering Windows in 2 versions also. The XBOX comes in the basic $299(no HDD, extra cables version) and "normal" $399 kitchen sink version(w/ HDD and XBOX live mic). Microsoft could offer Windows as a stripped down (no WMP,IE,OE or Themes) version for free(or close to it) and the "normal version" for $89-129.
People don't trust MS as it is,(Prepare tin-foil hat) why do they think that ads served by them on an OS they have the backdoors to will be any different than having Doubleclick do it...............Oh now I remember they control Claria (nee Gator).
Nope, no thanks, gotta go..
Success is not the result of spontaneous combustion, you must set yourself on fire.
here.
:D
Imagine Powerade sponsoring these!
with all those error messeges, hot fixes, forced windows updates and of course security fixes. They keep me busy already.
Scott McNealy to Michael: "Suck my Sun!" Michael Dell to Scott : "Lick my Dell!"
Ads is not a bug, it is a feature.
Million Dollar Screenshot
So we're supposed to use this version of Windows so that the fat cats over at m$ get richer? How long do you think it would take for the revenue generated by the ads to counter the cost of Windows? Even if it was a year or so, every minute after that and m$ is making money PER MACHINE. Let's see, a few cents an ad * a few ads a minute * 24 hours a day * A BILLION MACHINES = ...well carry the 1...a metric f-ton of money.
Here's an idea...include the ads, but let the users keep the money. If m$ developed a program that legitimately coordinated ad's targeted at the users and split the profits with the users, well then maybe some people might bite.
Nullum magnum ingenium sine mixtura dementia (There is no great genius without a mixture of madness) - Aristotle
If the ads were as unobtrusive as Google's ads without having too many privacy issues (I think the privacy issues with Google/gmail are way overblown, for example, though I do think privacy should be a concern), sure I would.
Having a hardline stance of not wanting to see any advertising anywhere is futile and really teaches the industry nothing except that there's a very small niche of anti-all-ad-zealots. Doing everything we can to stop unwanted popups and other over-the-top spamish advertising while actually supporting tasteful advertisements (if the ad money subsidizes something we'd otherwise have to pay for), is a better strategy than trying to be anti-all-ads Don Quixote, IMO.
So really it comes down to how Microsoft implements the system and whether the ads bother me or not, but I won't dismiss the possibility out of hand until I see it in action.
...the targeted ad for the local funeral home that pops up on the Windows-based heart monitor just as the patient flatlines.
I mean with IE popups, adware, spam...
"Stop throwing the Constitution in my face, it's just a goddamned piece of paper!" - George W. Bush Nov. 2005
You start writing a letter, clippy pops up and says:
...
"I see you are trying to create a spreadsheet, but have you tried the latest herbal v1agra?"
or
"I see you are trying to write a loan application, but Dr. Mbuanga Gwundaga of Nigeria is looking for a partner of your caliber to transfer $60,000,000 (sixty million) dollars of government overcharges collected by his late father, the director of the clerical development department, who was killed in an industrial shredder accident involving a gerbel and three rubber bands,
Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
The best way to implement this would be to run ads when a user launches a program. It would be relatively unbothersome to users because in most cases programs don't need to be opened and closed very often. Also, because the user is engaged in what he is doing, advertisers could count on people actually watching the ads more than other advertising types.
Would you use windows:
If you purchase any computer with Windows pre-installed (any computer from a retailer) you will soon notice there are already Ads on it.
I just bought one for a school from Dell - it had 5 different dialup access companies software on it, it had "trial" versions of software from Corel, Symantec, Intuit, etc. Every program was basically a trial program (and this was with Windows XP PROFESSIONAL).
Furthermore, after uninstalling said programs, there were COMMERCIALS that popped up after I restarted the damn thing about 3 times. This commercial was for the full version of Quicken and was a full motion video!
Needless to say, after seeing that the drive was repartitioned, reformatted and Windows was reinstalled (along with Ubuntu of course).
From TFA:
Sending a bunch of male programmers advertisements for breast enlargement isn't terribly useful.
Are we talking pre-op or post-op implants here?
__ Someday, but not this morning, I'll finally learn to use the preview button.
... and not only no, but Hell NO.
I've got just one windows application to go, then this (my computing environment) is a 100% Microsoft Free Zone.
JMHO, YMMV, VWToP, HTH, HAND
Would I want to use windows - especially if it ad supported? It comes with any computer you buy, and if I wanted a free OS.. well we don't even have to go there. (suse linux user)
I don't see any use for an ad supported version of windows.
There is allready a spam and virus compatible version of windows,
why make another one that is worst?
Let's see if I can comment on this. Would I like to have ads shove in my face (more than they are now) from the operating system.
I can answer this in one word.... NO, acturally two words.... HELL NO!!
Athiesm is a religion like not collecting stamps is a hobby.
Maybe it's useful on average for the movie industry, but it's not useful for me. I'm a male programmer, but explicitly not interested in this Star Trek drivel.
Always remember that it's my time and my computer! I'm not Joe Average, I'm me.
Linux user since early January 1992.
There already a fair few bits of advertising hook ins.
-the sign up to MSN/AOL stuff on an XP home system
-default search through MSN; pre XP SP2 that would even bring in popups
-the 'buy more music like this' hint when you browse a folder full of MP3s.
-the 'print your photos right now' option when you upload photos
-the 'get a digital ID' button on the Outlook security panel
So its there, its there, just no blatantly in your face.
I'm pretty sure such a system would end up eventually showing up ads based on the content of your hard drive, much like GMail scans your email for adwords. I'm OK with e-mail but I'm not sure I want a program to scour my computer's contents for adwords.
I don't want to read
Would there be much of a change? the normal windows user already has an OS full of adds.
And it is (was) called NetZero/Juno.
Altho Juno was useful back in the days when mailing lists were "big", I was a former CRFFL (cruffler)list follower & the "throw away" Juno address was very useful.
Folks who don't have much of a "need" for net access, like my mother-in-law, still use NetZero. She's the only one of my supported "family users" that's still using dial-up in an area w/all the DSL flavors & cable.
And it's folks like these who have no bandwidth that'll fall for this scheme.(and then wonder loudly & often "Why is the computer so slow?" when you're trying to update something.
"Today's episode of WindowsTV is brought to you by Tos-Sony-Dell-HP Corporation, the people who bought the Internet."
(Max Headroom reruns anyone?)
Can you imagine trying to play some first-person shooter while the operating system is poking ads at you? How awful.
This should have been a poll
Instead of Shatner crying out KHAAAAAN [khaaan.com], does he go on a rampage for an hour in the Genesis cave?
It's two hours of Kirk gettin' busy with Carol Marcus. I hear he screams "KHAAAAANNN!" a few times during that bit also.
Downmodding is the refuge of the weak. Don't downmod, make a better argument!
"Would You Use Ad-Supported Windows?" What makes you think I'd use any form of Windows?
I rarely use my home windows box, only to play an occasional game or run a piece of windows only software Most of the time I use my powerbook. I've been too cheap to even upgrade it to XP since I use the mahcine less than 30 days a year.
That would be great, then we can use the firewall popup blockers and other software to remove these ads. I think this would be helpful as we would get the message out to Micro$oft.
It is if they include before and after pictures
Ad supported internet access was one of the hottest business models of the dot com era. And look how well that's done.
this is getting old and so are you
blog
because Sony has a marketing budget.
An ad-based Windows OS would serve completely inadequate for users of small devices (notebooks, smart phones, PDA). Mobility limits your screen space.
I have just purchased Dell's X1, their smallest laptop @ 2.5 lbs, and noticed that the price paid for mobility is a loss in user-experience and joy. We forget that point b/c of the greater advantages mobility provides us (or some).
Frustrated, I never thought I'd have to bump Windows font size to 120 DPI. With a 12.1'' screen, if the thing came with ads, I would deem both the device and myself miserable.
The only solution from this point is text ad.
Or you get away with it all by being the 3rd party developer, (AIM, *MSN Messenger*, etc). Perhaps MSN's ad revenue is proving to be extremely effective, so it's worth consideration on Microsoft's part?
Work PC, no, because advertising requires attention to it and when working, you don't need distraction. Also, businesses can afford Windows licenses and probably make up a fair potion of legal sales of Windows.
Gaming PC? Ugh, nothing like a pop-up or something to mess up your game at a critical moment. No way.
What's left? There are casual email PC type users and web serfs (I mean surfers) who I suppose don't need complete concentration and aren't running full screen games that are ruined by pop-ups. But isn't that channel already a bit saturated by the web ads that these people already are exposed to?
Fk'n right on the money. Thank you for saying what I was thinking.
And every time I add a bit of hardware or software, or even visit a web site, I get additional advertising added on top. You mean they can actually fit in MORE advertising (without making the whole thing completely useless)?!?! What am I missing, here?
"Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
--- Jerry Garcia
not just no, not just hell no, but F**K NO would i ever use ad supported windows
Only a moron would use it. bad enough i can not turn on my TV with out getting bombarded with ads from Guide+ but now they want to infect my PC too! Forget them! Linux will be my next operating system and if they go ad supported I'll stop using them too! I Seldom turn on my TV for the very reason of Guide+ ad bombardment. Next it will be my PC!
~The Seventh Sign~
I won't use Windows without ads, Why the hell would I put up with that?! I couldn't care less if it's free or $199.00 a copy.
I think not
if this became some sort of standard, I am sure that I would use whatever tools were available to me to circumvent the advertisements
I'd use it to download a copy of Ubuntu Linux and burn it to a CD so I could install it over the ad-Supported Windows installation that came on the discount computer I just bought.
And then, having a CD and a machine with a working download capability, I'd never have to do that again.
So what did Microsoft pay for the 1 or two visits its advertisers got to the back of my eyeballs? $4? $8 billion?
Some business models are fat and ugly.
What I would be most interested in about ad-supported windows apps is the terms under which advertizers got to see the content I was working on (my rough drafts, e-mails I don't send, etc). Will they get to scan my text for keywords, etc? Will they automatically get copies of my texts? Will Google Print automatically get copies of my rough drafts for people to search? Will I sign away the ownership of the content I create to the advertizers or vendors? (If MS does it, there will be copycats...) Until this is known, no one will know if ad-supported apps are a good idea or not, but if the past is any indication (AOL owning the content you chat, DRM rootkits, etc), this is probably not going to work out very well. If these ad-supported apps are wrapped in EULA-style legalese, it might be a boost for Open Office. Oh, and remember WMP 7: You can't install it now because URLs have changed and the install bombs when it tries to contact the MS site. If I write my novel in Ad-Word, MS will finally have my document linked to phoning home. This means you could literally not be able to install the software anymore. Throw in a DRM-protected file format, and all your content belongs to them. Scary.
At least Swisher is phasing out the "say no to drugs" drain covers. (Now it's "say no to germs".)
Those always made me wonder if there'd be a market (say to government agencies) for a drug tester with a loud alarm (or silent radio-linked alarm) that would fit in the drain cover where the deodorizer cake usually goes.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Somehow spammers already seem to know I'm male, based on the male enhancement ads that clog my inbox everyday ...
Working on a Mac and a Linux PC, I would then be able to test my pages in IE 5+ without the need for wine, or any other trickery. I'll be first on the list to get one!
"Is there any situation where you can see yourself open to the possibility of using an Ad-Supported operating system?"
Yeah, but they involve me being dead.
> Is there any situation where you can see yourself
> open to the possibility of using an Ad-Supported
> operating system?
NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
Seriously, though... nothing new. Didn't Mandrake try something similar? RIP Mandrake...
I wouldn't pay for an OS that would allow ads to be shoved onto my computer. Nor wouold I pay to have them stop shoving ads onto my computer.
We live in a media saturated culture. Its time to stop somewhere and my PC is where is stops.
No More ads, please. Its bad enough that a woman had "golden palace.com" tatooed on her forehead for a measly $100K.
We have too many ads, not enough people who think for themselves.
Does that mean they pay me to use windows?
It'll mean the Blue Screen of Death (try Viagra, new from our sponsors!)
Clippy: It looks like you're trying to write a letter. Would you like to buy "Letter Writing For Dummies" by our Amazon partner? Click here!
And of course:
Error: Your computer has performed an illegal operation. Our FBI partners will be down shortly to collect you.
Is there any situation where you can see yourself open to the possibility of using an Ad-Supported operating system?
Absolutely not. I am a human being, first and foremost. I am not a piece of eyeballs to be sold to the highest bidder, and there is way too much marketing bullshit and advertisement around already.
I try hard to keep my personal space ad-free. I have adblockers, popup-blockers, spamfilters. Stay the fuck out of my home with the marketing assault. It's offensive enough to see what, a thousand, two thousand? ads on the daily way to work already. Go away. Don't call me, I'll call you.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
I have a nice Windows XP SP2 CD Coaster though, for my beer.
the only permanence in existence, is the impermanence of existence.
Sounds like a great idea.
Buy a cheap copy that is ad supported, strip the ads, then count the savings.
Merely giving me ads would not be enough.
You would have to PAY ME to use Windows.
A lot.
"Is there any situation where you can see yourself open to the possibility of using an Ad-Supported operating system?"
Of course! I'd use it to download a Linux ISO and install over it.
And I'm sure hackers would use it too. They'd use it to backdoor their way into systems running it.
You mean to say that I can save $40 next time I purchase a new HP and I will be hit with Advertisements... No Thanks, I would rather spend the additional 40-50 bucks to have the normal Windows.
Doesn't everyone already have this? :-/
I know lots of people with Windows installations that pop up ads, even when they aren't doing anything on the internet!
You're kidding, right?
Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
We have enough ads bombarding us as it is.. We dont need anymore.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Marketers are rapidly becoming the latest spawn of the devil, right up there with lawyers, politicians, and extreme liberals/conservatives.
If someone wants to have their computer infected from the get go, in order to get it for free, fine, but don't try to hoiste that bullshit on the rest of us.
I could see myself using it if it was free or very low cost. Hey, you just know some clever white hat will figure out how to disable the ads anyway.
... a popup on my desktop this morning said "Special Offer". Turns out Nero 6 OEM now has pop-up adverts for their own products! How rude is that! No freakin' way would I use an ad-supported Windows version. I would rather delete my Windows partitions off both my dual-boot machines.
Does anyone think for one second that this won't be the most swiftly
hacked piece of software in history? The Internet will be full of
no_windows_ads.exe files within a week.
Or is Microsoft going to build a "protected" "unhackable" ad-supported
OS? Riiiight.
------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
there goes another freeware product into the dark alleys of ad/spyware....
oh wait... you're supposed to BUY windows??? so the bittorrent versions don't count??
eom
Supported ? I mean really, supported ? :D Now tell me how these guys can't make a flaw into a feature :P
I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I can think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.
1. The dozens of Distros out there... Big hit against Linux
2. Hardware support, if Hardware OEMs dont make/support their own drivers how the hell can you make/support a game on the platform?
The market share of Linux on the home desktop is so tiny that its not even worth the LARGE effort it would require to get the game to market. The only people who think Linux is able to do everything Windows does are the people who use Linux on a daily basis, unfortunately for you thats a very very small percentage of people :)
This was done during the windows ME launch at best buy. all the cheap computers on sale were shipped with an add bar right above the start menu. it sucked and slowed the computer way down.
...time to get a new OS vendor. Seriously!
Just "gittin-r-done," day after day.
Is there any situation where you can see yourself open to the possibility of using an Ad-Supported operating system?
None.
use ad supported windows when I have a better OS free of cost anyway.
Then what are these popups I keep getting?
How will this differ in any way from you normal spyware and adware ridden Windows machine? They might as well just give away todays Windows for free.
Since im no Windows user this isnt for me but i suspect people are as sick of ads as i am. Showcased Firefox with flashblock for my neighbor and he was stuck instantly. He said it was like surfing on a whole other internet without all the ads, the popups and the ad/spyware. He is a windows user to the bone but one thing is for sure, his tolerance for ads are as low as Microsofts business tactics.
HTTP/1.1 400
Of course I'd use Windows with Ads. Ads done the way Google does them are not exactly "ads" they're what you're trying to do on the computer. I see a perfect world where ads are intelligent ways for you to find information without searching. They're things you're probably interested in. Of course, I'd rather use Linux with Ads, Google with Ads, and then maybe Windows with Ads.
An ad-supported copy of Windows would wind up being a coaster on my desk, thrown directly into the trash, stamped with a "return to sender" label, or mircowaved to prevent infection of other computers. Is more advertizing really what we need? We already have enough issues with IM, email, telemarketers, and TV. I'm sure we could hack the advertizements out of the OS and other assorted MS Software through intercepts, but then again do we want to invest our efforst on something that is meant to "benefit" corporations instead of the individual. On the other hand, imagine all the crap system administrators would have to put up with at nonprofits who went the Windows routes. "Mary's tired of getting flower and edible underwear ads when writing word documents." Well maybe she should stop ordering that stuff from work. Profiling is bad, 'nuff said. Use *nix, BSD, or Mac OS and put the juggernaut out of its misery.
Its avaiable only to a few alpha-testers at the moment, but Google Office(*) operates this way.
(*) Working name, may not be release name.
Who here thinks that if MS does this and actually manages to nab a large portion of advertising dollars from Google, that there will be the imminent anti-trust law suit filed by Google? I'm not an expert but couldn't Google make the argument that MS is using one monopoly to corner another market? I don't know if that argument would hold water or not being that IANAL. Anyone have any idea if that would fly in a court of law? Isn't that what most of the other Anti-Trust law suits were based on? Just curious..
Switch to any non-commercial flavor of GNU/Linux. Get your work done in peace and quiet.
It is distributed for free and I can find a place on line that can show me how to disable the ads.
Ummmmm .... NO!
Windows ADX now with free adware and more security flaws then ever before! Buy now and start getting ads, now!
"Sending a bunch of male programmers advertisements for breast enlargement isn't terribly useful." ... I beg to differ
How much lower can M$ drag their poor stupid users?
When all is said and done, nothing changes...
What's all this about a 4 hour version of WoK?
Does it hurt to hear them lying? Was this the only world you had?
mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm Urinal fresh.
The days of the digital watch are numbered.
Free email, but the mail client showed ads. Rather you had mail or not, connecting to check was a bother, as the client spent a great deal of time downloading new ads - mail or not (this was in 1998).
:|
My roommates and I were so disgusted by this that we eventually wound up with a real ISP and real email accounts.
Apple tried the same ad-injection thing with OS 8.5 - Sherlock's internet search function would show banner ads. I think I used it twice.
Given the choice between ad-loaded software and less featureful free software, I've always tried to go the route that doesn't jam ads up my nose.
...gone to Linux. Seriously.
It takes too much configuring to sweep all the ads, adware, commercial start pages, etc., from clouding my workspace. Then when I've finally managed to get rid of all this shit, the bitrot hoses my system and it's back to the defaults again. I'm sick of it. So I've gone to Linux, permanently.
"You seem to be looking for bestial pornography. Have you considering e-n-l-4-r-g-i-n-g your p|e|n|i|s? 14 inch3s n*o*w, all natural!"
I have no sig at all.
We drink Fudd around here, buddy.
The days of the digital watch are numbered.
If I could run it behind an ad-blocking proxy.
doesn't it come standard w/ just about any computer? I looked into building a PC, but the dell deals where much cheaper + comes w/ xp.
hell no
.cig - what you do after winning a good flame war
Why in the world do you think TiVo is so popular? It aint just the ability to rewind and view shows whenever you want, its to skip the adverts. Some watch, most don't. So much so that I've heard talk ( a while ago , no idea what is up now) that some stations were thinking of alternatives to commercials, similar to ticker tapes at the bottom of the screen, or banner type adverts.
From a marketing standpoint, it sounds like a great idea. Targeted advertizing.
From a reality standpoint, it would have to be either free or cut way way way down or else who would buy it?
People flipped when TiVo showed the results of the infamous "wardrob malfunction" during the superbowl. Few people realized that information was being tracked, let alone at that level (being able to tell that someone viewed that channel, at that time span, that many times.
So to me, any information that is tallied on an automated bases is a no no. Someone has to draw the line as to what they allow companies to get away with in the name of money.
Just my 2cents
How about:
*NO*
Actually, if you can't figure out how to get a discount for not having Windows installed, you're talking to the wrong vendors. (But maybe I'm spoiled by living on the edge of Silicon Valley.) But I agree with the basic point: the copies of Windows that I have ended up with are completely unused. I wouldn't use Windows even if it were free-of-charge AND ad-free. Why on earth would adding ads make me any more likely to use it? We're crossing the line from "I wouldn't use it unless you paid me" to "I wouldn't use it even IF you paid me" here! :)
;)
No, I take that back. If they paid me $100 / month, I would gladly set up a Windows box somewhere in the house, and let it run ads. You don't insist that I turn on (or even attach) a monitor, do you?
I mean, will ad-driven Windows start to be bundled as OEM software on new machines from Dell? After all, which individuals pay for their OS right now anyway? People who can afford to. The rest of people upgrade their OS when they upgrade their entire machine.
It also makes me wonder what things will be advertised. If you're so skint you can't afford to buy a machine with OS bundled, what products are you going to be a fruitful target for? Beer maybe? Most of the advertising dollars for the low-end target markets get spent on TV ads.
Besides, if you're that broke you might end up buying something along the lines of the WalMart Lindows machines anyway - something powered by freeware - and you won't notice the difference anyway because all you use your machine for is email, internet, and word processing.
The pennyless geeks who are going to really use their machines but who can't afford to buy their OS are either going to be running a Linux distro or a pirated version of Windows.
A-Bomb
But presumably in future the free Windows you get by default with your laptop will be the adware version. You would probably have to pay a supplement for the non-adware version. In your case therefore (and mine) you should opt for the adware version and then erase it to make way for Linux (or whatever)
Everything a hacker can make, a hacker can break. Until thus time, no I wouldn't use it.
Personally, I'm just hoping that this will be the final step to convincing people to see the light and get rid of all this unnecessary advertising once and for all. Oh, and maybe an ad-supported Windows could help Linux developers like me. If everything else has turned into an ad I may as well plug one for myself while I'm ranting against that very thing :-)
Creative misinterpretation is your friend.
It devalues Windows while increasing the value of alternatives. It's fantastic.
is NO. And neither would anyone else here. We use Linux for God's sake. Why would we need an ad supported OS?
www.blueapples.org
Seriously, everybody stop buying Windows garbage and use Ubuntu Linux. If you must use windows for certain software, then at least pirate it. Adware supported O/S?? WTF?
Rodney Quills Dinkins | Communications Specialist | GNAA Corporate HQ
The evolution of computer-based advertising goes something like this:
1. Advertisers put static ads on users' screens.
2. Users are somewhat annoyed by screen space being wasted.
3. Users just train themselves to ignore that section of the screen.
4. Advertisers make their ads animated w/ sound to catch users' attention.
5. Users are even more annoyed by flashing noisy ads.
6. Users start using tools to block such ads.
7. Advertisers start using pop-ups and other obtrusive forms of advertising.
8. Users are even more annoyed by pop-ups.
9. Users start using pop-up blockers. (This is where we are today).
10. Software makers build obtrusive ads into the platform.
11. Users cannot block the ads, b/c they are part of the platform.
12. Users are not only annoyed, but can't get any work done.
13. Users reject the platform entirely and use something else.
14. Advertisers stop paying for ineffective ads.
15. Software makers dependent on advertising revenue go bankrupt.
There are several fundamental problems with computer-based advertising, and Microsoft hasn't explained how it intends to solve or work around them:
1. People expect software not to cost anything. This has always been true. People generally feel that because they already paid an inordinate amount of money for the hardware, that they should be able to use all possible capabilities of that hardware without any additional cost. This is why people have no ethical problems pirating copies of Windows, Office, Photoshop, SoundForge, Cakewalk, etc. People feel entitled to any software they want at no charge, because all it does is unlock the capability of the hardware they already paid for. This is especially true in more recent years, as PCs have come with loads of software preinstalled seemingly for "free" as part of buying the computer, which has just further cemented people's expectations. Any attempt to now introduce advertising where before there was none will not meet well with the general public.
2. People mostly use computers for accomplishing tasks. Anything that gets in the way of those tasks is a horrible annoyance and will be immediately rejected/ignored. People will in fact even go to great lengths to create tools to completely block any such distractions.
3. People think of their computers as their property, and they thus view anything forced upon them as an invasion of their property and control over it. So no form of obtrusive computer-based advertising will ever fly with most people.
Moderator hint: a comment is neither "Flamebait" nor "Troll" if it is true.
get a "hell no!!!" I mean WTF, if there is a market for ad blocking and we filter spam then why the hell would we want targeted ads delivered directly to desktop. HAH HAH HAH HAH Microsoft. Idiots
piss off
Please make this ask/. a Poll. /. POLL:
Would you use an ad-supported windows?
1. Er... yes, 'cause I'm already brainwashed... what wuz the question again?
2. Hell no, I'll stop using computers
3. Fuck no, I'll switch to a free, better alternative
4. Doesn't apply to me, I already switched to a free, better alternative
5. cowboyneal
A few years ago Virgin gave away essentially laptop PCs with a OS that downloaded ads and had a webbrowser, it also included free dialup access. It lasted about six months until Virgin abandoned it and the service went dark, the customers got to keep the hardware and it could be reconfigured to work with any dialup service or you could install a laptop HD and any OS you want. They sold the extras on Half.com for $30 so I bought 2 more. I converted 2 of mine into digital picture frames and they are still running!
Science is the Real TRUTH!
Well, yes i would use ad-supported window if it were free or significantly cheaper, but only if it were under a hundred dollars.
Blue screens of death, DLL Hell, poorly-written drivers, and the inability to modify and redistribute the OS will just give us another Windows.
None of these are likely to show up on Linux anytime soon (with the possible exception of poorly-written drivers, in some cases).
You ALWAYS have the option of changing the way your desktop environment works in Linux in any number of ways. The same cannot be said for Windows.
+++ATH0
Here you go!! You can watch this in your favorite Flash supporting web browser for 4 hours in a row!
Got MILF? It does a body good!
At first blush, it was pretty obvious: no, I wouldn't use an ad supported Windows.
The issue isn't so much the licensing FEE as the LICENSE. I use GNU/Linux because I get to hack it without being a criminal. Pretty simple. Hell - I might even pay for the freedom OSS gives me. Windows never does.
Then again, I thought about it.
The only place I still use Windows is a (pirated) Windows XP install in a (pirated) VMware box. I only need it to do cross-plat compatibility testing for web sites, and to whip up NSIS install packages for Windows builds of various Free software packages - mostly so I or others can access GNU/Linux systems and software.
It used to be easy to keep Windows running, but now that piracy has turned Windows into the monopoly OS, they're clamping down. Given how little time I have to spend updating Windows, updating the latest and greatest Windows cracks, it would be nice to spend what little time in Windows I do spend closing ads instead of dodging Product Activation.
This might fly if it was a version of the OS you have to download yourself, but I can imagine if this crap came bundled with grandma's new dell, people would be pissed. I can see it now... joe sixpack walks into best buy and looks at the computers. He notices how all of the seem to be acting like his computer at home with ads popping up randomly at him. He then asks the sales guy what is wrong with that PC and he is then told about how that's now "part of windows". I don't think a lot of people would go for that. After all, they are paying for the PC, including the operating system.
if i look at most peoples home windows pc, it's already add-supported ;)
On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
i will never in a thousand years have an ad supported operating system. I will sooner go back to pre-xserver days at the command prompt than deal with MORE ads than i already get.
"...say to government agencies..."
OMG, now I need a tin-foil hat for both heads!
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
I'd prefer to keep using the pirates non-adware supported version of Windows I currently use.
Yes, Microsoft does gather big revenues probably from their ads, but from people like you who don't take the time to read while configuring/installing stuff.
MSN Messenger's installer offers you the choice to setup MSN as your home page with the MSN toolbar and all the other crap. YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO UNCHECK THOSE. Therefore, it's your fault if you complain about those because they give you a choice. Same for WMP. Bookmarks with IE? Delete them or don't use IE. Products sold through Windows Catalogue? Who's pointing a gun to your head telling you to look at it?
Are you telling me, with a straight face, that you aren't a lazy geek who complains about MS-Related ads/services that can be turned off/disabled? Get that poker face out because you'll need it.
Everyone else, doing Real Work(TM), like Sysadmins, gets some sort of a conventional installation, like Linux.
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
If anyone has every used the free KDE remote desktop service from www.cosmopod.com you'll notice that they have a pane on the right that displays Google Ads. These however aren't target specific.
;)
I wouldn't really mind ads on a desktop machine so long as they were displayed at desktop level so you could have windows ontop of them hiding them, because you don't want to be distracted by some flashing ad when you're doing work
I'm not talking about stealing, either -- they get it for free when they buy a computer.
Seriously, that is the way it appears to most consumers--they pay Dell $500 and they get a PC. The PC has Windows on it. They weren't charged for Windows and it's not itemized with a dollar amount on the bill. Therefore to all perceptions there was no cost associated with it.
So what about the retail sales of Windows? Well what about them? The retail sales of XP were shall we say less-than-stellar in the consumer space, and businesses have been just as slow to upgrade. There are still millions of people out there running Windows 95 and 98, let alone ME or 2000.
Apple gets this--people buy computers now, not operating systems. Because the hardware is so cheap and the advances continues, why bother with an OS upgrade--just buy a whole new computer. The OS is then just a free part of the computer. And if people are already getting it for free, why would they want or tolerate ads all over it?
Build a man a fire, he's warm for one night. Set him on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.
I would definitely use a FREE ad-supported Windows.
Why? I wouldn't mind running Windows in a QEMU environment for testing various things for people.
Why not? It'd be great; finally, any reason that you had not to switch to linux would go away.
Need a windows app? Fear-not; start it in your ad-supported Windows virtual machine. Sure, its ugly. Sure, it has ads. But it'll help you get your work done, and then you can go back to your sublime Linux environment.
WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
I would not use ad-supported windows.
I would use linux, just like I do now.
Free as in beer means nothing to me, for my applications, it really is not terrably bad to buy windows liscenses, but the avalibility/modifibility of the source is vital.
I don't use Windoze when I have to pay for it, and if the ad-supported version fails to have any features I happen to like (such as stability, a reasonable CLI, NOT the consistency of Swiss cheese, free software) than I won't use it.
That is that.
...then I realized: Ok I may save $99 today (or whatever price it will cost) but the ads won't stop even after 2-3-4-5-6-7 years. My time (and my life) is worth more than a free Windows, sorry :)
Computer Games
I would absolutely use an ad-supported OS, so long as it came with complete source code. Then I could hack the source so the advertisers *thought* I read the ads, but I never really saw them. Then I could have what I've always wanted, a free operating system! Yay!
Too bad I'm stuck with Linux instead.
In a day of anti-spam and pop-up blockers people aren't going to pay for a version of windows that shoves even more products into their faces....
Give us this day our garlic bread and lead us not into vegetarianism but deliver us some pizza.
...and of course you simply MUST get a Troll mod for a statement such as this.
You know, it's really quite amazing. Microsoft bashin' all day all over the place, but the hawk-eyed mods can always spot that one comment truly deserving of punishment! Thank Heavens our moderator overlords are making sure that you vicious trolls get marked for what you are!
No, but seriously. Does moderation on this site mean ANYTHING WHATSOEVER anymore?
Yeah, go ahead, color me Offtopic... because I'm not, of course.
Now I don't have to waste time downloading my ad-ware... I get it preinstalled.. yipee!!!
(hmm.. what about Ad-Aware and other such products? will they unistall/block Windows?)
so what you're getting is an free OS with a bunch of spyware? doesn't windows already have enough on it already? i can see someone making a tool to remove all the ads on it anyway, and thats if ad-aware (or the like) doesnt do it already.. plus wouldnt the ads just mean windows will run slower, or is running slow another built in feature?
my opinion? definitly not worth it, since, according to current spyware, i could be saving a hundred bucks on viagra instead.
New tag line. What more can I say.
Windows AD (the replacement for Windows XP) would freeze up every so often (at random intervals) and display a new, enhanced BSOD containing targeted advertising based on what the user types. All the user's unsaved data would then be lost, and when the user reboots, it will say, "Because YOU did not shut down Windows properly, a lot of your data is now corrupt. Nanny nanny boo boo!"
Windows. It's what you should expect.
Would You Use Ad-Supported Windows?
No. Hell no. Bloody hell no.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
In soviet america, porn buys you!
> ...it really does sadden me that Microsoft is seriously considering this.
:)
Do you really have trouble seeing why they are going in this direction?
Think about this from their point of view. Until the last couple of years Microsoft was an easy company for an investor to get a handle on. It all boiled down to a few bullet points an idiot could understand.
1. Microsoft gets $30-80 on every PC sold in the developed world.
2. PC sales are increasing annually.
3. For it's sales, Microsoft has almost no overhead, it is all profit.
4. Through blatently illegal tying deals competition with Microsoft is impossible so their revenue stream is invulnerable. I.E, Microsoft prints money and you better get on the gravy train today because that stock just goes up, splits and goes up some more.
Starting about the turn of the century all that changed. The sales growth for PCs stabilized and pricing pressure on a PC means that even maintaining that $30-80 per PC is not going to be sustainable. So you play Bill Gates for a minute, just what do you do?
1. Take the money and run. Just not in Bill G or Balmer's personality, they MUST fight Heck, to not fight would be a criminal neglect of their fiduciary responsibility to the other shareholders.
2. Admit defeat and transition from a high growth company to a high dividend utility type company, slashing R&D and just soaking up the monopoly rents, keeping the investors happy with ever increasing dividends. Would be a great idea if it would work. The penguin army won't allow it so it would end up devolving to option 3:
3. Pull an AT&T and admit the market is going away and amortize everything away, assuming the corporation no longer to be 'an ongoing operation.'
4. Find new ways to extract revenue from a stable and still (although at a slower rate) growing userbase. Getting a license fee on a PC once when it is sold isn't viable anymore. We are rapidly heading to a $300 PC & monitor world made worse by an average retention time moving from three years average to five or more. Their only option is annual licensing, where the get a recurring revenue stream from the user or advertising, where they sell the user's attention for money.
Not that I really care, I have been enlisted in the penguin army for ten years now.
Democrat delenda est
because that would be stealing from Microsoft, and you can bet your sweet dupa they're not going to stand for that.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Why don't they just tatoo the insides of our eyelids so we can see ads in our sleep? What the advertizers don't realize is a little thing called diminising return. Agressive ads don't make people buy it makes them shut down and they are no longer receptive. A prime example is one of the first aggressive techniques instituted, incresing the volume during commercials. The ironic thing is since the commercials are opressively loud I reflexsively now turn off the sound during commercials. Instead of a net gain they have a total loss with me since no longer watch or listen to commercials ever. Same with on-line ads. If I notice one it's because it's being too obnoxious and I simply take note of the company, avoid buying from them if possible and switch to another web site. Gee and they wonder why ads are no longer effective? If you can't stand the ad you won't buy the product. Force feeding me advertising only turns me off of the company. Sadly a small percentage are swayed so the companies keep pushing harder but the falling numbers prove it isn't working.
I use Mac OS X, you insensetive clod!
an ad-supported windows would only serve to prove my point about microsoft. that they know nothing about what an operating system is.
Is it just me, or aren't targeted ads just another block in the wall on the way to an orwellian society? It is efficient yes, but you can't target ads properly without knowing absolutely who the person is, the demographic, how old he/she is and what his/her interests are. Google targets ads very well that I can't really believe anything about their privacy policy, there is simply no way because they correlate ads and their relevancy so well and it is only increasing in efficiency.
Google isn't the only topic on the plate here, afterall MS nearly gives the OS away to PC builders that build in mass (ie Dell, HP/Compaq, et al) in the anticipation of customers getting lockin of thier other products, most notably Office. With the OpenDocument battle and now advertisement and search battle against Google, this would be an opportune way for MS to push more of thier products and supplement it with other pre-installed software aside from the AOL/MSN signup links. They are trending more towards a subscription base for everything anyways, why bother making a quick $100.00 for a one time purchase every few years when you can milk the public for ~$15 a month (or $180 .00 a year) for a subscription (just look at WoW, EQ, Asherons call, SWG, etc.)? Supplement that with advertisement and you'll be making more with less distribution costs and rack in the dough even faster.
Read the rest of this rant...
"Is there any situation where you can see yourself open to the possibility of using an Ad-Supported operating system?"
gunpoint.Serenity now, insanity later.
People who wanted to do that just simply wouldn't bother and either:
a) Pirate Windows, or
b) Use an alternative (Linux, OS X).
In that regard, I'm all for ads in Windows!
As long as I personally NEVER have to see them.
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
Sometimes, I start reading these articles, and about 1/3 of the way through I start to realize that it probably could have been summed up in about... OH 1 Paragraph! Sometimes I actually read the whole thing out of pure boredom.... SOMETIMES... actually most of the time I think people write these long articles to simply as a way to show everyone how clever they are. You're not fooling me pal. STOP BEING RETARDS! That is all.
if this has been suggested before but how come Google doe's not make thier own branded distro of linux with all the cool versions of thier software like Google Earth and stuff like that ?, After all they are Open Source freindly right ?, so why not take advantage of that ?.
Just a thought, feel free to MOD me ultra Moron if you wish.
CH
Those of you who used un-modified are already running an ad-suppert microsoft application called MSN messenger, I find those flashy pics so disturbing I found out how to remove this at once, so I guess I wouldn't use Ad-supported windows for very long without getting terribly annoyed, unless perhaps the ads would be less distracting.
Agree. Why would I want to use MS-Windows at all? For anything? It would involve ceding a large amount of control in exchange for... what? A chance to run a cut-down version of a randomly changing bugfarm and virus beacon?
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
Stick ads in there, yet another reason to ditch the OS :)
smash.
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
So if i purchase Windows - i will make banners.
;)
And if You don't - You would watch my banners. Bid.
Windows is going to be largest advertisement network, and the 1st one to merge p2p with ads.
I wonder, does Billy pay for Windows ? And how he will fill, seeing MacOS banner at the windows of his famouse Digital House ?
All of those ads eat memory and storage space! How much processing time is taken up by the video and anamated graphics ads? Buy a smaller computer of 800Mhz to 1.2 GHz, run Linux, BeOS (Zeta), PC BSD (Unix), and get some work done--no more time wasted with stupid adds--maybe a text only web browser too.
Excuse me one moment while I download an ad-blocker...
...they open the source code up.
Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
No, I wouldn't use ad-supported Windows.
But then, I don't use non-ad-supported Windows either.
Although, I suppose if the ads mean I don't have to pay an up-front price, I might put it on Bochs for those rare occasions when I want to view a web site in MSIE or something.
I have to do the same thing.
This gives me an idea: a "free your windows" installer that automatically installs the useful stuff on a PC to set it free
-firefox, thunderbird
-VLC
-ShrinkTo5 DVD backup utility
-open office
-(maybe java, perl, python runtimes)
-purge all the stuff you dont want users at
-ad-aware
-lock down IE settings so that AX is turned off except for trusted sites; trusted sites are set to "medium" and http://.microsoft.com/ added so that windows update works.
If the google toolbar gets included, we'd make a $1 an install, which could be enough to cover costs...