Slashdot Mirror
First Windows 10 RTM Candidate Appears
Mark Wilson reports that the first RTM candidate for Windows 10 has been spotted: build 10176. Leaks and sources have suggested the company intends to finalize the operating system later this week, perhaps as early as July 9th. This would give Microsoft almost three weeks to distribute it to retailers and devicemakers before the July 29th launch date. "While the RTM process has been a significant milestone for previous releases of Windows, it’s more of a minor one for Windows 10. Microsoft is moving Windows 10 to a 'Windows as a service' model that means the operating system is regularly updated."
To be recalled for day--1 (minus one) exploits.
Sent as ripples into the electromagnetic field. No single photon has been harmed in the process.
Windows is an operating system.
With Microsofts track record on new "innovations", I will never install any rolling updating OS from them. One can not really be sure, if one day after mandatory update the UI is something as fabulous as Metro, existing media player gets removed or they just decide that control panel applications are too hard to use and plainly remove them. There are also still some Microsoft applications that do not have the ribbon UI, so they still can reduce their usability.
What OS will you use, then? Linux is pretty crusty on the desktop these days as well. I guess that leaves Mac.
I couldn't agree more.
"While the RTM process has been a significant milestone for previous releases of Windows, it’s more of a minor one for Windows 10. Microsoft is moving Windows 10 to a 'Windows as a service' model that means the operating system is regularly updated."
Yay, now my OS can also ship as bug-ridden, slow, insecure software, because "we'll patch it later".
Sounds about as promising an upgrade as moving to subscription software-for-rent for something I rely on to earn my living. Ask anyone using Creative Cloud since the latest updates how well that one works out.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
Seems like this is heading toward a yearly paid subscription model for an OS from Microsoft? Sounds like another great reason to move over to OSX (or any flavor of Linux)...
Mac can't run most games. Windows is the best option for most people.
But that's wrong.
Wrong! Stop peddling that nonsense! Microsoft has repeatedly and specifically said you do not and will never have to pay a yearly subscription for Windows once you've purchased it. What it means is that there will be no more windows 'versions', that this will just be in place updates from this point.
I do not suspect so. People are used to getting Windows bundled with their computers. If those people suddenly have to start paying for Windows, they would get annoyed and start digging deeper for free alternatives. Eventually they would find Ubuntu and that would begin to hurt Microsoft's business.
Now we wait for the RTFM version so we can start screaming obscenities.
If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
How is that any different to how things were previously? Every OS ever shipped with bugs and was patched later, especially once online patching became a thing.
The real issue is that new features will début via Windows Update, rather than via a new version of Windows. It used to be that once a version of Windows reached SP1 it was pretty stable and debugged, and you could stick with it for years. Now they will keep adding new features and making major changes as time goes on, so if you liked the way it used to be you can't just stick on Windows 10 and ignore Windows 11 because there won't be a Windows 11, only necessary updates to Windows 10 that you can't avoid if you want security.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
You know you cannot play over the internet without it!
It leaves Windows 7. Just because they've made a newer one doesn't mean the existing one will suddenly stop working...? (Well, at least it didn't used to mean that; no guarantees going forward...)
Honestly, how much trust do you put in what Microsoft publicly says?
It's not binding, they repeatedly change their mind, and they're a huge multinational who doesn't give crap what their consumers want.
Microsoft has said many things publicly which they've reversed course on.
But the current Microsoft which says Home versions of the OS can't defer patches, that they'll share your wifi password because they say so, wants to embed ads into the OS, and whatever other crap they feel like doing -- this entity doesn't give a fuck about what we want, and increasingly act like they get to make decisions about computers and not the owners.
So you'll pardon us for having ZERO faith in the fact that Microsoft has said anything. Because it doesn't mean a damned thing.
They will do whatever maximizes profits, and what their lawyers say they can get away with.
Your blindly saying you believe them makes you either naive, or clueless.
Microsoft will be as much greedy bastards as they can possibly manage. That is all you can count on.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
So in other words people will just be expected to buy their security patches and upgrades in the future after a year or so of patches. That would be pretty much the same thing since what this means is that older OSes won't be getting patches after Microsoft moves to a new version - because there won't be a new version officially. You want to continue to receive updates, you'll need to buy the next major patching.
Or what, you expect Microsoft would give out free updates after a single purchase of Windows 10?
Regardless of what they call it, either they're going to be releasing what use to be known as Service Packs (that were free so long as you had the base system!) as stopping points for free upgrades of previous buyers, or they're going to continue to do security patches for "older" versions of Windows 10 minus the non-bug upgrades.
So, either you'll now be paying for Service Packs, or they're going to continue with the multi-OS support system they currently got, but all the versions supported will simply be "Windows 10" of various flavors/versions.
I imagine at work I will be staying on win 7 until we are forced to choose, but my next home build is going to be linux. I just don't see spending money on Windows, MS Office, Adobe, or any other commercial software when over the years I have adopted cross platform open source projects that do what I need. I don't require excel to make a list of parts for my next home depot project calc will work just as well and gimp is fine for cropping and resizing half a dozen photos.
http://www.zdnet.com/article/windows-as-a-service-the-pros-and-cons/
I foresee plenty of headache for the enterprise folks, and sometimes it may be prudent to not update e.g. from Android 4.4.2 to Lollipop on an Android phone.
And there is no point unifying Windows, Microsoft. That won't help you to sell more phones and tablets.
I do not suspect so. People are used to getting Windows bundled with their computers. If those people suddenly have to start paying for Windows, they would get annoyed and start digging deeper for free alternatives. Eventually they would find Ubuntu and that would begin to hurt Microsoft's business.
Doubtful. The average Joe isn't going to install Linux unless someone turns them on to it. They would be far, far more likely to buy a Mac instead if they get that sick of Windows.
Yeah... it's free for NOW.
When Win10 uptake increases, when market conditions change in a few quarters' time, there's no guarantee that Microsoft won't ask you to cough up some money for getting the next major point release update.
Sooner or later they're gonna monetize Windows. I doubt ad revenue or device sales will help much. MSFT shareholders want their investment returns, you know.
Besides the "IT'S FREE!" talk is just marketspeak propaganda... it's only free for the Win 7/8 folks, and till 29th July 2016.
Whether you trust microsoft or not, the fact remains that trying to push the "you need to buy it every year" line as a fact is in direct opposition to what Microsoft is publicly stating at this point.
Trying to claim that it is a factual statement because "Microsoft is always lying" is just weak.
As of the time of writing Microsoft's stance on this has been repeatedly outlined. Trying to ignore it, dismiss it, or simply state that they're lying to fit your predetermined narrative that anything that comes out of Redmond is bad just makes you look like you're grasping at straws.
I imagine at work I will be staying on win 7 until we are forced to choose
I know of major corporations that only STARTED their Win 7 ADOPTIONS in the fall of 2014, so I expect this to be the default.
XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
You are all cows. Cows say moo. MOOOOOOOO! MOOOOOO! Mooooo cows MOOOOOO! Moo say the cows. YOU COWS!!
"... pardon us for having ZERO faith in the fact that Microsoft..."
No need for a pardon. Microsoft has a LONG history of being anti-customer, in my experience.
For example, people who "upgrade" from Windows 7 to Windows 10 will lose Windows Media Center without being told in advance, apparently.
Windows 98, good. Windows ME, bad, Windows XP good, Windows Vista, bad. Windows 7, good, Windows 8, bad. See the pattern? Microsoft makes more money alternating good and bad versions, because people who buy bad versions "upgrade".
I reinstall just-infrequently-enough that I don't maintain an image w/ all the updates slipstreamed in, so it invariably takes 20mins for the initial install, and then hours and hours for all the updates to get it current.
It'd be really nice if MS would be kind enough to provide up-to-date .ISO builds like they've been doing w/ the Win10 insider program
Whether you trust microsoft or not, the fact remains that trying to push the "you need to buy it every year" line as a fact is in direct opposition to what Microsoft is publicly stating at this point.
Yes, that's true, but this whole thread is not about trying to push that as a fact. It was in response to, and I quote, "Seems like this is heading toward a yearly paid subscription model for an OS from Microsoft?" I would emphasis *seems like*. That is an *opinion* and quite a reasonable opinion given Microsoft's track record of
So in other words people will just be expected to buy their security patches and upgrades in the future after a year or so of patches.
No, you just made that up.
All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
And that will be true until Windows 7 reaches EOL in 2020.
All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
I've been doing the Insider Preview thing ever since it was available, and my feeling is that something as important as an operating system should have a fixed-version servicing model. It's great to get new features over time, but could result in headaches for IT. Microsoft has said they will introduce a "long term stable" branch, but my opinion is that mixing features and fixes in the update stream is just going to lead to a mess. If they set the LTS branch root at this RTM point, and never update anything, you can bet that people are going to pressure IT to switch them to the rolling upgrade model. Now, if they keep the LTS branch primed with Service-Packs-that-are-not-Service-Packs, then this is different. The problem is that I can't see them doing this since Service Packs have traditionally reset the extended support clock. I'm assuming Server 2016 is going to be a little more stable than Windows 10, but who knows? This Windows-as-a-Service thing is a big shift.
I know we're all supposed to be running our workloads in The Cloud, preferably Azure, but I think Microsoft is ignoring a key part of its customer base. There are still a lot of use cases for solid on-premises OS deployments on physical, local machines. They're not mainstream anymore, but they exist, and trying to force people out of that model is just going to drive Linux/BSD adoption. Not every corner of the world has high-speed Internet connectivity available at reasonable prices!
Also, as people have pointed out, RTM is not the milestone it once was. No one is pressing millions of installation DVDs anymore. But, RTM did mean that all the showstopper bugs were taken care of, and the concept of "ship it, we'll patch it later" just didn't work. All I do know is this -- Microsoft is toast if Grandma can't upgrade her Windows 7 box she bought at Best Buy with zero issues.
It is the likely change in philosophy that concerns me.
Very often, once software has moved to on-line upgrades from static installation, or from on-line upgrades being available to routinely applying rolling updates for new versions, the quality at initial launch time drops sharply, and the quality of rolling updates is significantly lower than professional standards should dictate. There's something about the mindset that means shipping half-finished products is now somehow OK, like the "perpetual beta" junk that even some of the biggest companies in the business have inflicted on us in recent years.
This slide towards version-less rolling updates has so often been used as an excuse to ship sub-standard products, or to actively damage previously acceptable products after the fact, that I don't want anything to do with it for anything I actually rely on. Browsers have turned to sh*t since Google started doing it with Chrome and Mozilla started copying them with Firefox. Apple have been systematically nerfing iDevices by forcing apps (which are only available through the App Store that they control) to update to match recent iOS versions, even though there are widespread reports of those newer iOS versions crippling performance on "old" (like, maybe two years old) devices to the point where they are basically useless. Adobe have alienated a substantial part of the creative/design industries with the move to Creative Cloud rentware, and I have yet to see anyone say a good word about the updates they rolled out a few days ago (complete with awful performance and blatant bugs). Even Microsoft, long the champions of doing things with professional standards of stability and backward compatibility in mind, seem to have gone full see-what-sticks in recent years, and I don't see this changing given they appointed Nadella as CEO.
Personally, I like my operating systems working and staying that way. That's why I no longer install anything but designated security updates on my Windows 7 systems unless I have an active reason to do so; I just ignore everything else on the assumption that it's going to break something, hurt performance, start nagging me to update to Windows 10, or otherwise make my experience worse. And so far, after following that policy for some considerable time, I'm quite happy with not having those updates and having a stable system I can actually use.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
All they need to do is to ask their nerd friend.
- Raawh! Windows subscription payment! What is this rubbish? I'm not paying anything! Joe, can you do something about this?
- There is Ubuntu, which is free.
- Good. Is that the Linux thingy?
- Well, technically it is GNU/Linux. You see, Linux is only the...
- Whatever! Does it come with Internet?
- Sure.
- Ok. Here's my laptop. Can you install Ubanto for me?
- It will take only few moments.
- Thanks, kid. I'll buy you some beer.
They may provide optional features for a fee, but they have stated at this point that service packs and patches will always be free. I was at the Build conference SF talking to some folks from he Windows team. They were talking about the "vision" for the product. That is basically to monetize the app store, which would be the profit source for the product. Similar to the Apple store, they take a small cut of ever app sold on the store.
That said, that plan may change, who knows? But it seems logical that if MS wants to stay relevant they can't simply be making the sort of ridiculous and illogical decisions that you're suggesting they will.
WMC was a piece of junk. I for one am glad they are getting rid of it. There are better alternatives.
Part of what MS is doing is relinquishing certain things to the open source and third party community because they know other people can do those things better and they can focus more on the core products. That is a good thing in my opinion.
That is an *opinion* and quite a reasonable opinion given Microsoft's track record of
Their track record of? Never doing anything of this type?
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
I'm not grasping at straws, I think Microsoft has a long enough history as lying bastards that I simply don't believe them.
Direct opposition to what Microsoft is stating publicly? And I should believe them why?
If Microsoft loses the revenue from selling the licenses on the update cycle, they're going to have to monetize something. If that isn't the updates, it will be something else.
I don't have a need to say that everything which comes out of Redmond is evil -- I actually *do* use Windows. But that doesn't mean I believe or trust a damned thing they say publicly, because I've been watching them change their tune for a few decades now. I also don't trust Google when they claim to be benevolent.
In fact, I don't trust any corporate entity to be anything other than self-serving bastards who will do anything they can get away with.
A lot of times it seems what they state publicly is there to see how people react, and nothing more.
I hold the "yarg, XBone must be always connected to intertubes" to be as credible as "upgrades will always be free". It's a weak pledge in a press release, but is otherwise not binding, carries no weight, and is subject to whatever whims at Microsoft drives these things.
It's a statement by a corporation. Take it with as much certainty as you would a claim from any sociopath .. absolutely self serving, possibly well intentioned, but definitely not something you can take as fact.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
They also said that they would never bring back the Start Menu once Windows 8 was released, and that we would just learn to love the new Start Screen and full screen Modern UI applications.
That didn't exactly go according to plan, did it?
The preview I installed (~2 weeks ago) was shockingly unstable and slow. I was appalled at the state of an OS, especially when it is slated for release in July.
(For example, my start... panel... thing... completely hosed itself for no apparent reason, a couple days after I installed the OS, leaving me nothing with a bunch of coloured boxes with class names in them).
[... 5 minutes later...]
- Hey, how come I can't run Excel anymore?
- Excel doesn't run under Linux, but here, you can use OpenOffice instead.
- Screw that, I need to run Excel! Put Windows back on!
I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
XP64 failed due to lack of drivers and software issues.
Yes people with AMD 64 cpus still used XP 32 bit. Vista is when 64 bit drivers for the most part where good for most of us.
Ya Microsoft is trying to improve its bottom line. This in some ways is a good thing. In others it might be the end of things as we know it.
Personally I would prefer if Microsoft implemented the following features in windows.
Fully skinable windows UI: If i don't like the way windows 10, 8 or windows 7 looks then I would like to be able to change the looks, positioning, etc... This could even be a big marketing thing as well. See an awesome UI in a movie well you can have windows as that UI for a small fee. UI's can be per user, or per system, they can be for looks or useability. I mean come on Linux has had this option for over a decade, what's the deal windows. Yes, I know you can hack the OS to allow this but it should not need a hack.
Forced driver useability compliance: When you load a driver there should be no software with it, it should work as is. I don't mind having additional software to tweak special features, but in general this software should be only for tweaking. I don't care if it is a mouse, keyboard, wireless headset, camera, graphics card, etc... I should not have to run a control panel at all times to use my graphics card. I don't mind seeing this in windows control panel but not a constantly running application. If we are going to need this for graphics cards then please standardize the interface, and get it off the system tray, the same with the antivirus, printers, etc... If they cant be compliant with your standards then don't sign their drivers, or sign them with a safe but non-compliant signature to shame them into compliance. If for no other reason then to allow the custom skins option mentioned above.
System performance analyzer: Systems go unstable from time to time, we would like to know why. Maybe give us a tool to examine startup times, locate programs that have memory leaks, or are taking up excessive cpu cycles, or just go unresponsive intermittently. Allow us to take a memory snapshot of the program, see what is has loaded, etc... Also allow us to see which drivers are slow to respond. When we feel lag in a game, we should have a tool that can tell us, program hung, graphics driver hang, resources depleted, processor useage maxed, network lag, antivirus scan running, etc... Give us the tools to make our system responsive again.
Buy only what you need: I have mixed feelings about this one. But it makes sense when you think about it. Windows sells for $100 at its cheapest (and i think that is an upgrade version) I say reduce that cost to maybe $30, then make it so that we can add modular stuff in. For example, not everyone needs disk partitioning software, or disk mirroring, bitlocker, etc... But if you were to offer those things in a package or better yet individually for a small fee then you may see a lot more sales. If something is not changed with the current windows model, in a few short years linux will replace windows.
***The biggest problem I have with windows is it's lac of control, and I want to be the one in control not the application. Here are a few ideas to give the user back control of the system.
Per program registry: I should not have to hack or hook a program to determine which registry keys it's using. It was better back in the days of INI files, because back then we could simply delete the INI file and everything was deleted. I say make the registry the same way. Have the system load an registry file for the program from the program's directory at launch (over riding any entry in the system registry) any changes to the registry are stored in this file, then at program close the file is unloaded with the system registry unchanged. If a system registry change is needed the program should require additional permissions to make the change(s).
Locked directory writes: A program should not be able to write outside one of its designated directories without requesting permission. android almost got this right when they tried it, but they locked it to the SD card. The system directory is much more important. Each application sho
Don't forget...
-Hey, what do you mean $400 for Office? You can get it for me for free, right?
My take from their listings and stuff is this: I will now no longer ever have what they like to term "business" features that I've paid extra to get in the past. I get the consumer model. They claim a plan to make money from search, games and apps. To me, that sounds like a requirement for software to meet certain criteria or be excluded from running because their new model would fail under heavy piracy, unlike the old model. I'm expecting the app world to shrink down, the requirement to get software from the Window's store becoming the inevitable model to secure profits, loss of choice in exchange for "security" in my spyware/adware laden approved app list. Everything that doesn't just jump on board likely won't be allowed to run without hobbling the security somehow. I'm expecting updates to be forced on me for "the good of all". Maybe not all updates, but definitely ones I may not want. There is no reasonable expectation of any privacy as usual per government mandates. In short, their entire new platform is designed to fall into a cesspool of ad laden software. I have a high degree of confidence you will start seeing ads delivered directly into windows itself if they can pull it off. All in all, it sounds like a recipe for failure after a short run to get everyone into the platform and then start forcing "features" that aren't popular on you because what are you going to do? Switch to Linux? No, most people couldn't even install Linux. I just went through several of the major distros and the install is botched on every one. Ubuntu completely failed within days, unable to bring up the WM, 4 different machines, exact same issue on all. Fedora installed fine, but updating was broken and had to be done manually in batches, for over 1200 updates, I did about 60 at a time. Slackware is well beyond anyone who doesn't know linux, it installed perfectly but then the onus is you to know everything to make that happen. Arch? Messy, I probably botched the install on this one, so Avg Joe?. Gentoo, purposely messy, I got it up and running to the point it was downloading........for hours, I cancelled, no time for that. Ubuntu, even if it did work, is about to sell out, you can see it coming. I ended up with Debian and decided to use that but then I had to go get my video drivers. I have dual monitors, that has to be set up, on ATI drivers, with instructions for 800 install switches pulled up in a term. Point is, I hate what Windows 10 stands for THIS MUCH.
app store is a little to locked down and where is app store after dark / adults only? M$ is big and going to far with app store censorship may land them in court.
If by crusty you mean 3 times faster than win7 on the same machine, well then I guess it is.
Track record of strong-arming their OEMs, moving towards a subscription model for Office, onerous piracy-prevention mechanism using a central authority to permit their operating system to run.
It would be suicide anyway. Their biggest competitor now is Android, which is free forever. Chrome OS, Mac OS X, iOS, Linux... All free, forever. They already offer Windows 8 for free on devices with screens under 13", the only caveat being that the default search setting must be Bing (it can be changed by the user). That's why cheap Windows 8 tablets suddenly became competitive about a year ago - they are basically the same hardware as Android ones, and no Windows tax on top.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Office is available in non-subscription model. Just saying.
I hold the "yarg, XBone must be always connected to intertubes" to be as credible as "upgrades will always be free"
The major difference, of course, is that the first one was canceled due to consumer demand. Why would consumers demand the second to be canceled?
All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
I would emphasis *seems like*.
Nonsense. It was unfounded comment with the intent to flame bait. He got rated accordingly.
Whether you trust microsoft or not, the fact remains that trying to push the "you need to buy it every year" line as a fact is in direct opposition to what Microsoft is publicly stating at this point.
Trying to claim that it is a factual statement because "Microsoft is always lying" is just weak.
As of the time of writing Microsoft's stance on this has been repeatedly outlined. Trying to ignore it, dismiss it, or simply state that they're lying to fit your predetermined narrative that anything that comes out of Redmond is bad just makes you look like you're grasping at straws.
The problem is, they're saying (1) There will be no more windows versions and (2) you won't have to subscribe yearly. So my question is .... How do they intend to make any revenue on Windows? Advertising? The initial OEM sales only?
If they have to increase costs to OEMs in order to break-even on development costs, then surely that cost will be passed on to we the consumers when we buy new PCs?
And I'm not saying that Microsoft is some benevolent entity, and totally agree with the idea that they are self-serving. But part of that self-service is to make as much money as they can, which only happens if they have customers, which only happens if customers are generally happier with Microsoft's offerings than the competition.
"Competition" being the key word, which now Microsoft has. It's not quite like their monopoly years. They actually need us to like them.
All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
and they're a huge multinational who doesn't give crap what their consumers want
Wrong. MS has always done things with customers in mind. You would know this if you worked with them at any partner level. It's for the same reason their OS and Office suites carry so much baggage and often makes them look bad. It's because they believe in keeping legacy software compatible with future generations of OS and they generally do a good job at that.
Look at Windows XP. They extended their support twice. They didn't have to but they did.
I often see you flame MS so I'm not surprised by your appearance in on this subject. It's almost as if MS threatens you in some way shape or form. No offense intended.
[... 5 minutes later...]
- Hey, how come I can't run Excel anymore? - Excel doesn't run under Linux, but here, you can use OpenOffice instead. - Screw that, I need to run Excel! Put Windows back on!
Well, there is another alternative: Get a Mac.
That way, you can have your Excel (or Libre Office) and a secure OS. And if you want to mess around in the command-line world, well, you can do that, too.
If Microsoft loses the revenue from selling the licenses on the update cycle, they're going to have to monetize something. If that isn't the updates, it will be something else.
And who's fault will that be? The answer is the consumer.
Google has set the playing field a while back by providing free everything as long as you accept the advertising. It's competitors now have to adjust otherwise they will endure a grim faith.
I have to read the manual before I try installing this one?
That's pretty much the most compelling reason to switch to Windows10.
Otherwise I'm peachy with my customized Win7x64 installs.
See subject, "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" - Can ab+ do 16 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:
1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (past ads)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stops C&C communique
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stops C&C communique
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stops C&C communique
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. trackers
8.) Protect vs. spam
9.) Protect vs. phish
10.) Protect vs. caps
11.) Get you past a dnsbl
12.) Keep you off dns request logs
13.) Speed up surfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
14.) Work on anything webbound (ie email programs) multiplatform.
15.) Give you easily controlled data
16.) Do all that & block ads more efficiently in cpu + memory usage vs. addons
* ANSWER ="NO" to each on ab+ doing it or as well + hosts = already on every device natively.
APK
P.S.=> Ab+ does less than hosts & less efficiently - hosts do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried):
Ab+'s 128mb memory inefficiency -> http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte... (hosts consume 3-11mb using my program initially).
+
ClarityRay defeats it dumping addons in use in a browser via native browser methods to do so!
+
Ab+'s paid to not do its job http://finance.yahoo.com/news/...
Ab+ adds complexity + slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).
What's best?
APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...
MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus http://www.av-test.org/en/news...
&
It's GUARANTEED safe & clean per it being checked by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
+
In its 32-bit model also https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
... apk
See subject & LMAO @ U, boy -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
FACT: "AlmostALLAdsBlocked+" is INFERIOR vs. hosts - hugely so!
AB+ doesn't even DO what it's supposed to fully anymore being BRIBED http://finance.yahoo.com/news/... not to!
AB+ doesn't do a FRACTION of what hosts do for more speed, security, reliability, + anonymity online!
AB+ EATS 128mb of RAM (vs. hosts @ 11 *maybe* tops via my program with CURRENT data, the important kind vs. current threats + ads) http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte...
AB+ adds messagepassing overheads!
AB+ operates in SLOWER usermode (vs. hosts in PnP kernelmode)
AB+ creates huge CPU consumption!
AB+ is also detectable by clarityray (via native browser methods) nullifying it (not hosts).
---
I use what you already have that works & does more with LESS, no less - you by way of comparison? Pile on "MoAr" that doesn't do as nearly as much & what it's supposed to do, massively inefficiently no less (see above)?
Ab+ NO LONGER DOES!
* AFTER ALL THAT?
AB+ = "better", Coren22?? LMAO - NO f'ing way!
If you say it is, you are *TRULY* stupid & I'd reply saying "argue with the numbers" & facts above, from reputable sources & analysis proving my points for me!
APK
P.S.=> Gonna go "cry in your cereal" now, boy?
(You ought to for being STUPID enough to use OR SUGGEST a blatantly INFERIOR solution! See above - it's fact & truth via reputable sources)... apk
Windows vista with sp2 installed works quite well. Especially now with the drivers correctly written for vista and not using modified windows xp drivers which caused a ton of graphic problems.
For example, people who "upgrade" from Windows 7 to Windows 10 will lose Windows Media Center without being told in advance, apparently.
Apparently? I guess we should all take your opinion as a valid argument then?
Fact is that Windows Media Center is barely used. There are plenty of much better alternatives which is why they are getting rid of it. I guess we will find out at launch if they warn customers about the loss of features that nobody cares about.
Windows 98, good. Windows ME, bad, Windows XP good, Windows Vista, bad. Windows 7, good, Windows 8, bad. See the pattern?
First, the failures between Windows 98, ME and 8 are all very different.
Windows ME was a huge failure. Updates helped it but it was never a good OS
Windows Vista was horrible at launch but was quickly fixed with a number of updates.
Windows 8, 8.1 was very stable and brought much needed H/W support updates but had an interface nobody liked
See subject, "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" - Can ab+ do 16 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:
1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (past ads)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stops C&C communique
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stops C&C communique
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stops C&C communique
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. trackers
8.) Protect vs. spam
9.) Protect vs. phish
10.) Protect vs. caps
11.) Get you past a dnsbl
12.) Keep you off dns request logs
13.) Speed up surfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
14.) Work on anything webbound (ie email programs) multiplatform.
15.) Give you easily controlled data
16.) Do all that & block ads more efficiently in cpu + memory usage vs. addons
* ANSWER ="NO" to each on ab+ doing it or as well + hosts = already on every device natively.
APK
P.S.=> Ab+ does less than hosts & less efficiently - hosts do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried):
Ab+'s 128mb memory inefficiency -> http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte... (hosts consume 3-11mb using my program initially).
+
ClarityRay defeats it dumping addons in use in a browser via native browser methods to do so!
+
Ab+'s paid to not do its job http://finance.yahoo.com/news/...
Ab+ adds complexity + slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).
What's best?
APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...
MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus http://www.av-test.org/en/news...
&
It's GUARANTEED safe & clean per it being checked by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
+
In its 32-bit model also https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
... apk
See subject & LMAO @ U, boy -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
FACT: "AlmostALLAdsBlocked+" is INFERIOR vs. hosts - hugely so!
AB+ doesn't even DO what it's supposed to fully anymore being BRIBED http://finance.yahoo.com/news/... not to!
AB+ doesn't do a FRACTION of what hosts do for more speed, security, reliability, + anonymity online!
AB+ EATS 128mb of RAM (vs. hosts @ 11 *maybe* tops via my program with CURRENT data, the important kind vs. current threats + ads) http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte...
AB+ adds messagepassing overheads!
AB+ operates in SLOWER usermode (vs. hosts in PnP kernelmode)
AB+ creates huge CPU consumption!
AB+ is also detectable by clarityray (via native browser methods) nullifying it (not hosts).
---
I use what you already have that works & does more with LESS, no less - you by way of comparison? Pile on "MoAr" that doesn't do as nearly as much & what it's supposed to do, massively inefficiently no less (see above)?
Ab+ NO LONGER DOES!
* AFTER ALL THAT?
AB+ = "better", Coren22?? LMAO - NO f'ing way!
If you say it is, you are *TRULY* stupid & I'd reply saying "argue with the numbers" & facts above, from reputable sources & analysis proving my points for me!
APK
P.S.=> Gonna go "cry in your cereal" now, boy?
(You ought to for being STUPID enough to use OR SUGGEST a blatantly INFERIOR solution! See above - it's fact & truth via reputable sources)... apk
You're talking out of your ass and it really stinks dude!
When Win10 uptake increases, when market conditions change in a few quarters' time, there's no guarantee that Microsoft won't ask you to cough up some money for getting the next major point release update
Considering MS owns most of the PC market I doubt there worried about that market.
As for the mobile market they are just doing the same as Google. Should Google disappear they will still keep the same model since it keep competitors at bay
They are just copying Google's pricing model because you can't compete with Google otherwise. So stop reading too far into this as you clearly don't understand what is going on at the business level.
Well, they didn't really give us the start menu back, did they? It's a shrunk version of the start screen with a flat, alphabetical menu, rather then a customizable menu (as was featured in previous Windows versions AND in early builds of Windows 10).
I'm starting to think GNU is the problem with "GNU/Linux" these days.
Only the big players tend to make huge claims like this and often end up eating their words. The customers spoke and MS listened.
However the license agreement will be legally binding and unless it mentions a expiration date for the license, a subscription fee, or the like, will pretty much settle the matter as of July 29th.
Here's the thing: Announcing that Windows Seven and 8/8.1 may be upgraded to Windows 10 (for perpetuity) during the first year of release and then changing that policy upon launch day would create a tidal wave of bad publicity. You can count on large corporations doing all they can to avoid bad publicity -- if only because it significantly affects profits.
So forgive us for thinking that a corporation which has made this announcement and had months to consider how it was being interpreted, without correcting that interpretation as launch draws ever closer, is going to change their position so close to launch.
It's not going to happen. And in three weeks and two days, I just might hound you with a few I-told-you-so-s.
That's a flagrant non sequitur to me.
I also finished migrating a client to Windows 7 in March. And there was quite a few more to do along with Server 2003 migrations when I retired due to my disability becoming too much to continue working at 47. Microsoft isn't going anywhere and I guarantee that none of my old clients would move to any Linux based OS with their software being Windows based plus Office and Exchange. There still isn't a Linux based product that competes with Office/Outlook and Exchange.
Ya Microsoft is trying to improve its bottom line
All business people want that. It's normal.
Fully skinable windows UI
Important to teens and young adults but not important to most of the buyers. Windows Mobile is already skinable enough in my opinion.
Forced driver useability compliance
So you want to remove developer and manufacturer freedom? For the most part the app stores do a good job at rating the non-sense but I understand that doesn't apply to drivers.
System performance analyzer
Many of the tool requirements you listed are already present in Windows 7 and highly improved in later versions. There are some things that are just not easy to present on a GUI for end users to understand so why bother. Most people don't even use the existing system tools (other than IT)
The biggest problem I have with windows is it's lac of control
This is an OS for the masses. You have full control if you knew the OS well enough.
Locked directory writes
I can do everything you said you required except the part where the AV would restart. That's something that can be easily done by the 3rd party or as a stand alone loader but avoiding closure of said software would be the #1 solution
Allowed device list
There is 3rd party software that does this.
Read/Write/Execute:
I'm confused about this one as Windows already have this. The one thing that I find is missing is "LIST". You should have the ability to hide a folder/file at the permission level, not using the hidden flag. This is especially useful for company directories where all users see all department folders but don't have access to all of them. Maybe its possible but I have yet to find out how.
So, they will update the one true version forever? I don't think so.
They will have to differentiate versions in order to sell new ones, or they'd just be giving away their services for free. Or they could, you know, move to a subscription service model.
Yes it is. I did not say it was *only* available in a subscription, but they are *moving* in that direction. As in, years ago, one bought a boxed copy and had it for as long as one wanted to use it, but now they offer both. It's a step in that direction. Maybe they'll take the next step; maybe they won't. We don't know, but they took the first step.
He made an opinion and was attacked for misstating "facts", which he did not state. You are free to disagree with his opinion, of course. I, also, do not agree completely with his opinion. We don't know where Microsoft is heading. Or at least, I don't.
I can see, though, how one would feel that they are going towards subscription models for their products. They've taken the first step to do so with Office by offering subscriptions in addition to boxed copies: something they did not do years ago. On some platforms, such as the iPad, a subscription is requirement to have Office be anything other than a viewer only.
Again, no one said Microsoft is guaranteed to move to a subscription model for Windows. We don't know if they will or will not. It is possible, though, to interpret some of their recent moves and past philosophies in such a way such that it's a possible path for them to take.
It would be suicide anyway. Their biggest competitor now is Android, which is free forever.
If you get an update, ever.
Chrome OS, Mac OS X, iOS, Linux... All free, forever.
Much better arguments, really. Especially OSX. They just can't afford to look lame next to their only credible desktop competitor.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Linux is faster only if you use a mundane window manager and turn off desktop animations. Under Windows you can have all the cool bells and whistles.
I appreciate you not assuming my intent and being objectively respectful. Thank You. Yes, I left things unsaid and I meant not Troll or Flame in my comments, but I do not have a entirely positive opinion with this choice by MS. I believe this is a slippery sloping direction in which I predict MS will head into OS subscriptions (considering their tract record of late with office). Yes, I know you can buy non-subscription based office apps also... I have used MS DOS with Windows 1.0 through Windows 8.1, and I am expressing my opinion and predicting Microsoft will eventually be making this a subscription OS model eventually for more $$$, (but I will endure the low moderation the ad hominem attacks for expressing so)... I am predicting over time the MS will eventually have trial versions (or full versions with limited time use) of their OS' on new hardware, like Norton and McAfee and MS Office currently do, and the customer can pay more to keep using them...
that is what they say today..... but tomorrow? that is not what they truly want.. microsoft WANTS subscriptions. see xbox live, see office 365, see software assurance. as soon as they figure out how to do that with windows, you know damn well they will.
I think there's more chance they will move towards the same model as Windows 10 for home users since there are other options and it would force many users to consider the free options.
Companies that are heavily invested in Office integration would probably continue regardless of what model is in use but it would push away companies that aren't. Unless MS can offer more within it's office suite they can get away with a subscription model as long as it's value add and is extremely affordable.
I do not suspect so. People are used to getting Windows bundled with their computers. If those people suddenly have to start paying for Windows, they would get annoyed and start digging deeper for free alternatives. Eventually they would find Ubuntu and that would begin to hurt Microsoft's business.
The only way linux is ever going to hurt Microsoft's business is if people start releasing software on linux instead of Windows. WINE isn't going to cut it. Too much overhead.
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
Microsoft does not keep their legacy software compatible with future generations of OS.
They keep their future generations of OS compatible with legacy software, usually by implementing workarounds for breaking changes they have introduced themselves.
Just take a look at a Windows machines C: drive and user profile without hiding the invisible files... It is a pile of shit.
So for most of your list, you've pretty much described your wish list for Windows, to be like Linux is now. Switch to Linux then.
Take Nobody's Word For It.
The Xbox One reversal was listening to consumer demand. They made a decision (a silly one) and reversed course due to unpopular backlash and the obvious threat to the bottom line.
You can't really hold that up as evidence of them lying. They changed position quite publicly in response to feedback.
If you're going with that then any company that has responded to feedback and changed the way they have done something is also a liar and untrustworthy.
My surface pro 3 works great with the tablet UI and metro,. I can swipe easy with my fingers and use the charms bar to send my OneNotes to my printer or MS Office.
Windows 10 is too focuses on the desktop because of the HATERS who do not want anything besides the old school desktop with the mouse and keyboard. There is a tablet mode in WIndows 10 but it is too tuned for a desktop still and not touch friendly.
WIndows 8.1 is stable and works and I am used to it now. WIth a start menu replacement it is fine on the desktop too
http://saveie6.com/
The end of his comment was inflammatory, as simple as that. In addition he wasn't speaking an opinion, he's instead telling people it's time to move on which is completely absurd to do without a proper reason.
The fact that you think Windows 10 being free is the same as Office being on subscription is telling me you haven't understood why MS is offering Windows 10 for free. It's no secret, they are directly competing with Google for it's share of the mobile market and since they want to unify the OS they can't start having it free for some while not free for others (that's coming right from them by the way).
Subscription models are a way for companies to keep money flowing in for continued R&D. Do I agree with it? Yes and No. There's PROs and CONs to both. It's the same thing as getting a heating furnace on rental. Why not buy it right? What is cheaper? The answer to both those is "IT DEPENDS".
Especially now that Apple have finally opened the taps on "official unofficial" third party TRIM support on SSDs (you can turn it on with a warning that Apple doesn't support it) which has been far too long coming.
I think it's a small sign that someone at Apple has finally said "enough of the attempts to make it iOS, remember what OS X used to be when we launched it?"
It's only a small change, but it may be a small ray of hope.
Whether you trust microsoft or not, the fact remains that trying to push the "you need to buy it every year" line as a fact is in direct opposition to what Microsoft is publicly stating at this point.
Trying to claim that it is a factual statement because "Microsoft is always lying" is just weak.
As of the time of writing Microsoft's stance on this has been repeatedly outlined. Trying to ignore it, dismiss it, or simply state that they're lying to fit your predetermined narrative that anything that comes out of Redmond is bad just makes you look like you're grasping at straws.
The problem is, they're saying (1) There will be no more windows versions and (2) you won't have to subscribe yearly.
So my question is .... How do they intend to make any revenue on Windows? Advertising? The initial OEM sales only?
If they have to increase costs to OEMs in order to break-even on development costs, then surely that cost will be passed on to we the consumers when we buy new PCs?
The answer is, they don't have to make revenue on Windows. That is what they're banking on. Sure they'll sell it for people that don't have it, but they have realised that the concurrent model works - make it so that if you run Windows, you're likely to be running the latest Windows, and the best way to d that is to effectively make it "free" (after you buy it once, or have it come with your computer, it's yours going forwards when new versions come out).
Their revenue stream will be Xbox (games and Live) and Office. Making Windows a service model helps them in those areas. At least, that's the idea.
Wrong! Stop peddling that nonsense! Microsoft has repeatedly and specifically said you do not and will never have to pay a yearly subscription for Windows once you've purchased it. What it means is that there will be no more windows 'versions', that this will just be in place updates from this point.
The only problem with this is, if Microsoft is truly going to do away with system versions and move to a "rolling release" style like some other software projects -- where will they get their Windows revenue from now on?
I mean, I know they get money from system builders but if all releases will just be updates now that means Windows 10 will be the last version anyone has to buy retail. And with computers being more than powerful enough for general consumer use for years now, and Windows system requirements being rather stagnant, people aren't going to have much reason to ever buy another machine besides hardware failure of their computer.
At some point Microsoft will have to put out an update you have to pay to get -- and that's a release.
Yes, I left things unsaid and I meant not Troll or Flame in my comments
By suggesting people move away from MS for no reason specified is trolling. Its like saying: Why did you buy a FORD?, It's crap...
MS will head into OS subscriptions (considering their tract record of late with office).
Your comment was ill informed and this is proof. Do you even know why MS is offering the OS for free? If you know anything about what is happening in the world of operating systems you would understand that they are following the footsteps of Google since they don't have a choice to regain a portion of the mobile market. So unless Google disappears, MS won't charge a dime for their OS and even so I doubt they ever will once they monetize the OS through the app store like IOS and Google did.
I am expressing my opinion and predicting Microsoft will eventually be making this a subscription OS model eventually for more $$$
An ill informed opinion is garbage to anybody reading it and often results in being marked troll. There are a lot of a educated and well informed /. users here and they provide a very valuable opinion and in many cases factual information that will force many of us to change our opinion on a topic. When you post something that is based on your gut feeling you aren't doing anybody a favor especially when you speak of it from an unbiased position.
And people have to stop suggesting subscription services are garbage. They are only garbage if they aren't value add or are overpriced. Most large software packages are now subscription based as they allow for continued R&D while providing free fast support. I'm not suggesting that all software packages are worthy of subscription but many are if priced properly.
I hope you don't take this personal. None of my comments were attacks on you.
Whether you trust microsoft or not, the fact remains that trying to push the "you need to buy it every year" line as a fact is in direct opposition to what Microsoft is publicly stating at this point.
Yes, that's true, but this whole thread is not about trying to push that as a fact. It was in response to, and I quote, "Seems like this is heading toward a yearly paid subscription model for an OS from Microsoft?" I would emphasis *seems like*. That is an *opinion* and quite a reasonable opinion given Microsoft's track record of
Perhaps I came off a little too brashly in my comment. I wasn't intended as a specific criticism of the GP per se, more a commentary on the repeated "MS will go back on this, you just wait, it's 100% assured" type comments that I've seen on /. every time a story about windows 10 comes up.
At some point we'll know whether or not they're serious beyond the first year, but then the narrative will just switch to "just wait, any time now" sword-of-damocles type stuff.
I honestly think Microsoft took a long, hard look at Windows and decided to take the plunge and emulate the OS X model. Now I know that the cost of development for OS X is rolled into the hardware for Apple (as do MS I have to assume), but I am also assuming that MS have figured that they'll be better off by making Windows a one time purchase with lifetime updates and then drawing revenue and money to develop it from other areas like Office, Xbox, cloud services etc, Any other stream that generates revenue for them.
Having the majority of your user base on the most current version of Windows because it's free to continually update as long as you bought it once has to outweigh the scenario where MS would love everyone to be on the latest version but that means people buying a copy.
That's why you can change the compatibility settings for any given program and set it to Windows XP SP3 for backwards compatibility. I have yet to find an app for the Windows 98 era that doesn't work in Windows 7 unless it was very poorly designed.
But the current Microsoft which says Home versions of the OS can't defer patches, that they'll share your wifi password because they say so
Given that there is little to no change from the current practice, that you still can install patches at your leisure when you want;
And that they will NOT share your WiFi password unless you specifically opt-in on the device;
I'm going to call your complaints mindless hyperbole, or anti-MS FUD. Take your pick.
So people hated windows 8 because of the metro but are very excited for the new Windows 10 because they like the new start menu that almost* almost* resembles the old one. What a mental illness we have to deal with here in the U.S. Personally, I really don't care since I can always use a free or paid third party application to customize the OS UI but I always learn and adopt to the changes and this is why windows 8 was not an issue for me. If people can't adopt to new changes maybe they shouldn't operate a vehicle, cooking, working for a living or basically doing anything that requires brain power.
Is anybody really excited about any new operating system? I certainly am not waiting impatiently for Windows 10 and I could have easily skipped over OS X Yosemite. For a lot of users the browser is more important then the OS. Sure some new features adds some interest, but frankly I think Windows 10 is just another try at fixing Windows 8 and while that's perfectly fine, just the fact Microsoft has also decided to give it away as a upgrade just proves that the OS has much less value then a few years ago. Even Apple a company that typically makes money on everything they do decided that OS X and even some applications are just not worthy of charging for them. Windows 10 is obviously a means to separate itself from Windows 8 and yet questions remain if tablet and PC users will be anymore inclined to buy new products. With every new version of Windows I am less and less enthused or convinced that its going to affect me in a positive way. Windows 7 will probably go down as the last Windows that truly served all the users equally well because it was designed for one platform. That was the PC.
Now with Windows 8 and 10 we have a OS trying to fit many platforms and it will always come up short with at least some of them.
We've used WMC for nearly a decade in our house and it's been excellent: rock solid and dead simple. I have, from time to time, tried out alternatives and it's only now that I'd be prepared to say I've found a plausible replacement: Plex + Kodi + PVR software -- and even that is a country mile away from the out-of-the-box simplicity and elegance of WMC.
Those multiple desktops in windows are so slick. I set up my house tilt to go left and right between the desktops. So now I can quickly hide the porn when my wife walks in
But then you're stuck with a mac.
If by crusty you mean 3 times faster than win7 on the same machine, well then I guess it is.
If that is what you mean by "crusty" then no it isnt at all.
The operating system overhead isnt anything like that much, over the years Microsoft has stripped out a lot of the cruft of Windows over the years and streamlined it so as a result this version of Windows has the same system requirements of the version released 5 years ago, and even less than Windows Vista which was released a few years before that.
In that time Linux has blown out. It isn't yet a significant problem, the two are still definitely competitive in the performance space but as Windows has gotten slimmer Linux has gotten fatter. So many Linux advocates try and ignore this or pretend it's not a problem or deny it but thankfully Torvalds spoke briefly about this at LinuxCon a few years ago:
Citing an internal Intel study that tracked kernel releases, Bottomley said Linux performance had dropped about two per centage points at every release, for a cumulative drop of about 12 per cent over the last ten releases. "Is this a problem?" he asked.
We're getting bloated and huge. Yes, it's a problem ... Uh, I'd love to say we have a plan ... I mean, sometimes it's a bit sad that we are definitely not the streamlined, small, hyper-efficient kernel that I envisioned 15 years ago ... The kernel is huge and bloated, and our icache footprint is scary. I mean, there is no question about that. And whenever we add a new feature, it only gets worse.
Also just last year he spoke about the bloated kernel: "We've been bloating the kernel over the last 20 years, but hardware has grown faster".
Microsoft has said many things publicly which they've reversed course on.
Yes and the most recent examples are of them reversing their position based on what users want:
Yes it is. I did not say it was *only* available in a subscription, but they are *moving* in that direction.
What does that even mean? They are "supporting" that model because it makes sense in that context. When you're offering a product as a service to support multiple software platforms from other vendors that subscription model makes sense but for an operating system it makes no sense at all because the operating system is tied to the hardware but the applications are not.
Businesses are obsessed with total cost of ownership and return on investment you think getting them to migrate away from xp was hard? Just wait win 7 is going to have a shorter life cycle, I'm imagining companies trying to hold onto it for 10 years 4-5 years past the current end of life.
or use excel under wine
and then you aren't locked into Apple's ecosystem
Track record of strong-arming their OEMs
What does strong-arming of OEMs (whatever you mean by that) have to do with supplying their operating system under a subscription model?
moving towards a subscription model for Office
They aren't "moving towards a subscription model for Office", they have a subscription version of it because it makes sense for a software suite like that which you may have running on multiple devices and the ability to run it purely in SaaS mode without install is part of why that model works so well for that kind of thing. Why do you think that would be of any use for Windows?
onerous piracy-prevention mechanism using a central authority to permit their operating system to run.
Again what does this have to do with a "subscription" model? In fact this becomes even less of an issue once they move to the rolling release structure.
I've been watching them change their tune for a few decades now.
Because "Microsoft" is made up of different people, run by different people and exists in a different world than decades ago. And you're right about them changing their tune. They have ditched their "war on linux" and instead taken action to actively support and use Linux. Instead of an anti-Open Source stance they are actually releasing products under open source licenses. They have made the community promise (which is legally binding) regarding patents on open source code. They have ditched proprietary, platform-specific web extensions like ActiveX in favor of portable web standards. They backtracked on draconian requirements for the XBox. They introduced backwards compatibility for the XBox after saying they weren't going to do it. They have listened to customer feedback regarding Windows 8 and made changes in 10 to address them. They have run an extensive public program soliciting --- and acting on --- feedback from the community.
Companies aren't people, for some reason few of you manage to understand that. "Microsoft" 20 years ago is not "Microsoft" today and you can see the proof of that in their personnel, their products and their actions. I doubt this will worry the cynics with their illuminati conspiracy theories though.
I dont think they will go to a paid subscription model. That would change them from being the only mainstream OS that costs money to the only mainstream OS that charges subscription fees. ms is losing really badly inthe phone/tablet market. Even their console isn't doing too well this time around ( http://www.techradar.com/us/ne... )
I can believe windows 10 will be the last version of windows and it will just be continually patched. ms sees the writing on the wall and when 10 is out they will be pushing their app store hard to get more pc programs into there so they get a 30% cut. All those sales will add up to more than they will ever get from a single customer in a OS sale. The app store will help their struggling phone and tablet line too.
or use excel under wine
and then you aren't locked into Apple's ecosystem
WINE is a joke. Always was, always will be. It is fighting a losing battle, trying to reverse-engineer a moving target (Windows APIs).
Can't imagine that you would actually propose that as a long-term solution.
Oh, wait. I forgot this is Slahdot; where the more kludgy a "solution" is, the better they like it.
"... pardon us for having ZERO faith in the fact that Microsoft..."
No need for a pardon. Microsoft has a LONG history of being anti-customer, in my experience.
For example, people who "upgrade" from Windows 7 to Windows 10 will lose Windows Media Center without being told in advance, apparently.
Win7 was missing SNDREC32.exe, at 198K a down and dirty .wav player, just drag and drop .wavs on it and it plays them (it can be called and play a .wav before any other program can even load). I use it for ringtones, and other small sound files.
I copied it over and it works fine with Win7, but missing the .dll's to record (which I have no need for).
As for Windows Media Center I've never used it, so will never miss it if I have to go to Win10.
Windows 98, good. Windows ME, bad, Windows XP good, Windows Vista, bad. Windows 7, good, Windows 8, bad. See the pattern? Microsoft makes more money alternating good and bad versions, because people who buy bad versions "upgrade".
I took the high road dual booting Win95 with NT, Win98 with W2K, and XP, but yes every other "consumer" Windows OS has been a failure, I've never installed ME or Vista, I took everyones word on those two.
"I just reply to you when I see you spamming Slashdot with your nonsense"- by dave420 (699308) on Friday June 19, 2015 @10:31AM (#49945047)
Why'd you agree w/ my points on hosts then? Quoting you:
"I'm not denying all those things" - by dave420 (699308) on Wednesday September 17, 2014 @11:39AM (#47927435) FROM -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...
Of course not: It's impossible to dispute HOSTS FILES superiority to other methods!
Since my points in favor of hosts SINGLE FILE native kernelmode faster part show hosts doing more w/ less vs. so-called 'competitors' many part messagepassing + cpu/ram use overheads laden slower usermode FAR MORE COMPLEX 'solutions' doing less than hosts do for more security, speed, reliability, + anonymity!
---
* QUESTION:
DO YOU WORK FOR AN ADVERTISING FIRM, or ARE YOU A WEBMASTER/WEBCODER http://slashdot.org/comments.p... , or a MALWARE MAKER, or ARE YOU AFFILIATED WITH 1 OF MY COMPETITORS?
Answer it!
As per your usual you'll avoid every question, or lie & You've been EXPOSED in your "motives" in the last link just above, lol!
---
"I'm simply pointing out that it takes an AdBlocker to block your spamming"- by dave420 (699308) on Friday June 19, 2015 @10:31AM (#49945047)
I bother you? Then WHY DON'T YOU DO IT & use 'em? Answer that!
(You stalk/harass me instead!)
OBVIOUSLY you don't & you're a "ne'er-do-well" troll & you have "other motivations" (the QUESTION above you'll AVOID TO NO END, "Gosh, I wonder WHY?" (not!)):
---
I make creating a superior more efficient solution EASIER (That's more than a mere trolling stalking harassing "ne'er-do-well" like yourself could *EVER* manage).
APK
P.S.=> See Dave420 the "pot puffing clown" SQUIRM - evasions galore will ensue (as well as effete downmods via sockpuppets to *try* vainly "hide it" -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... )... apk
You read and assume an awful lot that neither me nor Zymergy has actually said.
The end of his comment was inflammatory, as simple as that. In addition he wasn't speaking an opinion, he's instead telling people it's time to move on which is completely absurd to do without a proper reason.
He was not telling anyone it was time to move on. He was saying it was time for him to move on. He is doing that because of his opinion. You are free to disagree with his opinion, of course, but don't put words in his mouth.
The fact that you think Windows 10 being free is the same as Office being on subscription is telling me you haven't understood why MS is offering Windows 10 for free.
You are correct, I do not know why Microsoft is offering Windows 10 for free. I am not privy to their strategy meetings and I rather not assume that my guess as to why they are giving it out for free is the actual reason they've used to make that choice. That said, I didn't bring up Windows 10 in any of my posts and I have not equated that with anything Office related. Please don't put words in *my* mouth either.
I agree we don't know what will happen. All we have is Microsoft's past behavior to go on, and that's changed over the decades and under different leadership. It would be folly to assume anything about their actions a year from now, regardless what they say, because they are not particularly consistent.
What I mean is there are here, for the sake of argument, two systems of pricing an application suit, say Office. One way is sell a license to a particular version in perpetuity. Let's call that way L. Another way is to sell a subscription to only the latest version for a limited time. Let's call that way S. In the past Microsoft offered the following set of pricing models {L}. In a potential future, they might offer another set: {S}. The current state is {L, S}. The current state is a step between {L} and {S}.
Does that clarify what I mean by taking a step towards a subscription-only model? I am asserting nothing about the likelihood they will take the next step, only that they have taken *a step* down a path that leads to subscription-only.
As to the iOS platform situation, I do wish they would offer their applications for a one-time fee rather than subscription.
You read and assume an awful lot that neither me nor Zymergy has actually said.
Please, go read his comments once more: "Sounds like another great reason to move over to OSX (or any flavor of Linux)...". I don't see anything suggesting HE would change but rather is speaking for everybody.
At the end of the day the /. users voted his comment inflammatory because it wasn't a founded opinion.
You are correct, I do not know why Microsoft is offering Windows 10 for free. I am not privy to their strategy meetings
The information is out there. There's another user that linked it in the thread for people to get informed before making an unfounded statement.
Please don't put words in *my* mouth either.
But you did through suggestion. Your comments:
"I can see, though, how one would feel that they are going towards subscription models for their products. They've taken the first step to do so with Office by offering subscriptions in addition to boxed copies"
You read and assume an awful lot that neither me nor Zymergy has actually said.
Please, go read his comments once more: "Sounds like another great reason to move over to OSX (or any flavor of Linux)...". I don't see anything suggesting HE would change but rather is speaking for everybody.
At the end of the day the /. users voted his comment inflammatory because it wasn't a founded opinion.
I never said it wasn't inflammatory. It was. I don't disagree with the moderators.
What is a founded opinion? One where one uses something, like say Microsoft adding subscription options to Office, to found an opinion, such as they might add subscription options to Windows?
You are correct, I do not know why Microsoft is offering Windows 10 for free. I am not privy to their strategy meetings
The information is out there. There's another user that linked it in the thread for people to get informed before making an unfounded statement.
I had not seen these internal strategy memo links. Would you care to provide a citation?
Please don't put words in *my* mouth either.
But you did through suggestion. Your comments:
"I can see, though, how one would feel that they are going towards subscription models for their products. They've taken the first step to do so with Office by offering subscriptions in addition to boxed copies"
And what does that comment have to do with Windows 10 being free? I don't see the connection.
I never said it wasn't inflammatory. It was. I don't disagree with the moderators.
Great, so the attacks to his comments were perfectly justified.
What is a founded opinion? One where one uses something, like say Microsoft adding subscription options to Office, to found an opinion, such as they might add subscription options to Windows?
He didn't quote that. He just blurred some random anti MS BS.
I had not seen these internal strategy memo links. Would you care to provide a citation?
I'll be happy to provide. A simple search on Windows 10 Free strategy found these two links. Was it that hard to be informed before putting BS online like all the trolls of this world?
http://www.winbeta.org/news/st...
http://www.howtogeek.com/22095...
If you believe that you are a damn fool.
This is a classic bait and switch maneuver, and it is obvious. What they are doing is baiting people in with free upgrades to Windows 10 while pretending that it will be supported for a long time. They will be giving updates that you cannot refuse and in a few years one of those updates will be the new unversioned Windows. There will be no option to go back to your previous version and this one will be a yearly subscription model. They will give you the first month or so to start your subscription, but if you do not do so your windows install will no longer work.
I'll give you two years before you are on your knees crying and exclaiming "that asshole on the internet was right, it really was a scam".
I'll be happy to provide. A simple search on Windows 10 Free strategy found these two links. Was it that hard to be informed before putting BS online like all the trolls of this world?
http://www.winbeta.org/news/st...
http://www.howtogeek.com/22095...
Perhaps you misunderstood. I was asking for primary source material. Would you happen to have a link to internal strategy documents?
The howtogeek.com article had no citations to internal strategy memos and the winbeta.org article reiterated a PR tweet.
My entire point of asking for these memos was that what the PR machine or third-party analysts say is not the same as the actual process Microsoft used to make it's choice. That's what I'm after. Why did Microsoft make the choice, not why do others think they made the choice and not what did Microsoft say to clarify the choice.
The howtogeek.com article had no citations to internal strategy memos and the winbeta.org article reiterated a PR tweet.
PR Tweets are just as good as you standing in a meeting with them. It's their name in the public saying what is happening.
The articles you'll read online are almost all based off the interview with MS CEO. If you want to get in the nuts and bolts of it read the whole 11 page script from the interview:
As for strategy here's a long script covering 90% of what you're looking for. Keep in mind that the a:https://view.officeapps.live.com/op/view.aspx?src=http://www.microsoft.com/global/Investor/RenderingAssets/Downloads/FY15/CreditSuisse_Turner.docx
I don't trust that what Microsoft says publicly to news organizations and twitter is the same as the reasons behind their decisions as much as you do. I will continue to hold the stance that *I* don't know what they want to accomplish because I don't actually know what they want to accomplish. I only know what they *say* they want to accomplish.
Which is exactly why you can only speculate based on known data. I appreciate that you don't trust their word but I would then have to assume you don't trust any publicly traded company's word. Microsoft is just another company trying to gain a share of multiple markets. It's normal for them to adjust their strategy based on what's happening out in the real world.
Anyhow, was nice trading arguments with you.
Yes i get that what you're trying to say is you think that because they are offering a subscription model that this means they then have the possibility to offer only a subscription model but there is nothing to support the assertion that they would. If you use that terminology you could also say Google is "moving towards" a pay-only model of gmail or google drive by offering a paid version. Or that Apple is "moving towards" abandoning iTunes music because they are offering a subscription music service. But that phrase is not used in that way.
The reality is equally likely that they are "moving towards" a future where you can switch between licensing models at will.
I do agree with you. Google is moving towards a pay-only model. Apple is moving towards abandoning iTunes. Moving toward is not guarantee of arriving. If in one point in time you are closer to somehwere else, you've moved towards there, even if you never will and don't intend to ever get there.
Please, don't read what I wrote as any stronger than what I have wrote.
For the record, I pay for an Office 365 subscription for home use because it is easier than pirating it while trying to avoid detection during patches. And also because its a hell of a lot cheaper than buying the full suite even over the span of several years.
Additionally, I will admit I used to pirate every new version of Photoshop when it came out. But now that Adobe offers a subscription at a reasonable cost I don't have to do that any more either and I get access to the entire Adobe suite of applications without having to worry about cracks.
Both are a win/win for me in my opinion considering how much both of those suites usually cost. And certainly a welcome change from the pirating game.
Moving toward is not guarantee of arriving.
No it is a suggestion that you think they will. You could then say they are "moving toward" subscription only and equally that they are "moving toward" abandoning subscription completely.
Moving towards abandoning something does not generally involve going from not having to having that thing, though.