Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Would You Use Ad-Supported Windows?

Posted by Zonk on from the not-if-you-paid-me dept.

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?"

16 of 643 comments (clear)

  1. Two good uses by waynegoode · · Score: 4, Interesting
    A good use of an ad-supported version of an operating system would be as a file server or an embedded controller.

    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.

    1. Re:Two good uses by Karzz1 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I am gonna go out on a limb here. Isnt this the ideal way for MS to get consumers to adopt Palladium (or whatever they are calling it this week)? I mean, isnt it much easier to avoid liability for product performance, restrictions, etc... if there is no charge? This sounds like the MS of old -- give it away for free.. keep em / get em hooked, then unleash the dogs (in the form of DRM etc...). Just my 2cents.

      --
      Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master.
    2. Re:Two good uses by BeatRyder · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Mod the above post up!! I agree, MS is just looking for another way to invade our computing experience with more junk. The concept of an add supported windows is appealing, but as I see it, if MS didnt charge so much to begin with it would not be an issue at all. When you have to pay $350 for XP pro and there are free alternatives its a little rediculous. I am not saying that one is better cause its free, but instead of adding new features to every release that does nothing but force feed more garbage to the consumer and also confuses the heck out of them to boot, fix things, make them smaller/faster/cheaper. There is no need for new features untill the old ones work right. So getting back the point here, mine is that ad-supported windows would not be needed if they did things better.

    3. Re:Two good uses by ergo98 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It might work for home editions or home users, but professional uses - NO. I don't care how contextual the ads are, they are a distraction and I bet they will be flash based or something more silly and obnoxious or at least they will evolve in to those.

      No on every single level. Even contextual ads are terrible. This is an unbelievably bad idea, and it really does sadden me that Microsoft is seriously considering this.

  2. Not so much by j_cavera · · Score: 2, Interesting

    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"
  3. No Thanks by Zobeid · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

    1. Re:No Thanks by coinreturn · · Score: 2, Interesting

      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.

      Yeah, but with all the product placement in TV shows, the ads are now embedded and you can't get away from them. Don't even get me started on the fake entertainment news where the evening news just advertises their own shows (or parent company's movies).

  4. Re:Free Windows? by NewWorldDan · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Ad supported software can be done perfectly legitimately. Take for example Google. And ummm, ok, let's take for example Google, 'cuz I can't think of any others the do ads without raping your PC.

  5. Re:Free Windows? by st0rmshad0w · · Score: 2, Interesting

    More like Ad-Supported Windows + Hosts file entry = Ad-Less Windows!

  6. Re:Free Windows? by xtracto · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Believe it or not, I remember once I saw there was an experiment in which a company (I do not remember if it was Dell) gave away free computers to the users which where add suported (this was more than 8 years ago).

    The thing worked this way, they gave you a PC with a 17 inches monitor with a resolution of 1024x768 pixels, but you only used 800x600 pixels , the rest was used for advertisment.

    Back then, I remember wanting one of those (unfortunately, the offer was just for USA, and I am from outside) as I didnt had money for a new computer and I was frustrated with the my 200mhz compile times (djgpp). At that time I thought I didnt care for the ads, anyway, I was used to see ads in TV, and the computer they were offering was the the best technology available back then.

    I do not know what happened with the experiment, did it worked? I think the problem back then was how to update the ads.

    Now that I think, it may be a nice way for renting computers here at my undeveloped country (may be a nice buisness).

    1. Offer ad space for computers
    2. Rent (or even just offer for free) computers at a low cost to people.
    3. Cash in ad money
    4. Profit!

    sounds good (I guess)

    --
    Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
  7. "Free or Low Cost..." I'm suspicious... by edashofy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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!"

    1. Re:"Free or Low Cost..." I'm suspicious... by glesga_kiss · · Score: 2, Interesting
      They dropped that silly "My" stuff. :)

      It wasn't "silly". It was a great idea as it forced developers to deal with paths with spaces in them. Otherwise half of the Windows freeware wouldn't work in a non-standard configuration as free stuff is rarely tested well. Commercial stuff is only marginally better. By forcing the space in the most common places ("Program Files", "My Documents") you couldn't just ignore it.

  8. It depends. by jellomizer · · Score: 2, Interesting

    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.
  9. Uh, no by ShadyG · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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
  10. Insightful on the Piss Ads by Anonym1ty · · Score: 4, Interesting

    (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
  11. Re:OMG!!! by raoul666 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You know, this line in the summary really bothered me. I feel that Wrath of Khan is genius, partly because of the pacing of it. It isn't too long, and it doesn't drag - a big problem in most of the odd movies.

    --
    When cryptography is outlawed, bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl