Slashdot Mirror
Windows 10 the Last Version of Windows? Not So Fast.
A multitude of tech sites are breathlessly reporting that Windows 10 will be the last version of Windows. These claims are based on a brief comment from developer evangelist Jerry Nixon while speaking a Microsoft Ignite session on "Tiles, Notifications, and Action Center." However, as Paul Thurrott points out, you probably shouldn't take this news too seriously. Windows development has been changing for the past several years. At the very least, we've known since we learned Windows 8 would be developed for multiple form factors. We've known it specifically about Windows 10 since it was announced — Microsoft has talked about transitioning away from giant, monolithic updates. Thurrott says,
The reason anyone is talking like this is that Microsoft is pushing a "Windows as a service" vision, which doesn't mean "subscription service" but rather that it plans to upgrade Windows 10 going forward with both functional and security updates, plus of course bug fixes. You know, just like it's done with every single version of Windows. Ever. ... In other words, nothing to see here. Beyond the usual: things change. If it makes sense to keep updating Windows 10 and not change the brand or version number, Microsoft will do that. If it makes sense to release something called Windows 10 R2, Windows 11, or Windows Yoghurt — seriously, who cares? — then they'll do that.
MS is known to break MS Windows every few years, then taking a few years to fix it. We See this with MS Windows 8, MS Vista, Windows ME, Windows 98. This is OK Because most commercial users stick with a version that works. Historical stochastics predict that MS Windows 10 will be a workable version, around 2017, but I expect to be on MS Windows 7 until then. My understanding is that MS Windows X is going to be a rolling upgrade. I interpret this to mean that when one uses the update service, new features will be included with bug fixes and the like. The will be no way to avoid a product like Vista and work will come to a halt. This is different from Mac OS X, where each version is a separate, if now free and almost forcible pushed on users. However, it is not hard to stay with the old version for the lifetime of a machine.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
Where are my mod points when I need them?
Totally agree. Windows 7 is an OS that does what's supposed to: Stay away and let you do your work. Windows 10 is a giant advertisement for Microsoft services: Don't like OneDrive? Sorry you can't uninstall it. Don't want to use Bing search? Sorry it's baked in to run when you try to do a search on your computer.
You even get suggestions (ads) for apps on the Start Menu! Also it's a bipolar UI, an unholy mix of touch/mobile and desktop flavors and applications and even in the desktop you're sometimes forced to use a touch UI for some tasks.
Windows 7 was a nice OS for users, Win 10 it's only for Microsoft sake, no wonder it's a free upgrade: They're hoping to get the money from you through your data, the money they'll get from you using their services, etc...
So when some whiny punk says "just run Linux", they demonstrate how utterly clueless they are. In the real world, that's rarely an option.
Maybe, maybe not. If you have a truly mission-critical application that requires Windows, it's clear what you're going to do.
I'm not so sure about the whole support thing, though. How good is most commercial support, really? Not so great, and that's true for a lot of "big name" things like ERP packages, databases, etc. Sure, you pay for support. Generally you pay a lot. Do you get a lot? My own experience (decades in the industry) is quite mixed, but a "big name" and a big fee don't necessarily correlate with quality support.
A lot of the free stuff that you deride is actually supported better, for free, in online forums. Now, that's not the type of guarantee that corporate types want to see. But the idea that paid support is solid support is not necessarily true. I remember some years ago being pushed by management to move from Apache to Microsoft Internet Server (or whatever it was called) so we could get "support." That would not have been such a great idea, because --- get this --- the servers were mission critical and the FOSS solution worked better and was better supported.
So I'm saying there's no one answer. Commercial software is not a guarantee of anything. You do what you have to do to run your business. Sometimes it's one way, sometimes the other. I've done everything I've needed to do for many years using mostly free open source software. It meets my needs. If I had some real specialty application, that might not hold true. To each his own.