Slashdot Mirror
'Windows Isn't a Service, It's an Operating System' (howtogeek.com)
Iwastheone shares an article by former PC World columnist Chris Hoffman.
"No PC users asked Microsoft for Windows as a service," Hoffman complains. "It was all Microsoft's idea." "Software as a service" is trendy. But these types of services are generally hosted on a remote platform, like Amazon Web Services or even Microsoft Azure. Web applications like Gmail and Facebook are services. That all makes sense -- the company maintains the software, and you access it remotely. An operating system that runs on millions of different hardware configurations is not a service. It can't be updated as easily, and you'll run into issues with hardware, drivers, and software when you change things. The upgrade process isn't instant and transparent -- it's a big download and can take a while to install... [M]illions of applications (or computers!) could break if Microsoft makes a mistake with Windows.
What has Windows as a service even gotten us? How much has Windows 10 improved since its release? Sure, Microsoft keeps adding new features like the Timeline and Paint 3D, but how many Windows users care about those? Many of these new features, like Paint 3D and updates to Microsoft Edge, could be delivered without major operating system upgrades. Just take a look at the many features in Windows 10's October 2018 Update and ask whether they were worth all the deleted files and drama. Texting from your PC is great, but Microsoft could release an app that does that -- in fact, this was once supposed to be a Skype feature. Clipboard history is cool, and a dark theme for File Explorer is cute. But couldn't we have waited another six months for Microsoft to properly polish and test this stuff?
"Windows as a Service" does get us a few things. It gets us applications like Candy Crush installed on our PCs. It gets us an ever-increasing number of built-in advertisements. And it gets us activation problems when Windows phones home once a day and discovers that Microsoft has a server problem.
"Please Microsoft, slow down," the article concludes. "How about releasing a new version of Windows once per year instead? That's what Apple does, and Apple doesn't need 'macOS as a Service' to do it. Just create a new version of Windows every year, give it a new name, and spend a lot of time polishing it and fixing bugs.
"Wait until it's stable to release it, even if you have to delay it."
"No PC users asked Microsoft for Windows as a service," Hoffman complains. "It was all Microsoft's idea." "Software as a service" is trendy. But these types of services are generally hosted on a remote platform, like Amazon Web Services or even Microsoft Azure. Web applications like Gmail and Facebook are services. That all makes sense -- the company maintains the software, and you access it remotely. An operating system that runs on millions of different hardware configurations is not a service. It can't be updated as easily, and you'll run into issues with hardware, drivers, and software when you change things. The upgrade process isn't instant and transparent -- it's a big download and can take a while to install... [M]illions of applications (or computers!) could break if Microsoft makes a mistake with Windows.
What has Windows as a service even gotten us? How much has Windows 10 improved since its release? Sure, Microsoft keeps adding new features like the Timeline and Paint 3D, but how many Windows users care about those? Many of these new features, like Paint 3D and updates to Microsoft Edge, could be delivered without major operating system upgrades. Just take a look at the many features in Windows 10's October 2018 Update and ask whether they were worth all the deleted files and drama. Texting from your PC is great, but Microsoft could release an app that does that -- in fact, this was once supposed to be a Skype feature. Clipboard history is cool, and a dark theme for File Explorer is cute. But couldn't we have waited another six months for Microsoft to properly polish and test this stuff?
"Windows as a Service" does get us a few things. It gets us applications like Candy Crush installed on our PCs. It gets us an ever-increasing number of built-in advertisements. And it gets us activation problems when Windows phones home once a day and discovers that Microsoft has a server problem.
"Please Microsoft, slow down," the article concludes. "How about releasing a new version of Windows once per year instead? That's what Apple does, and Apple doesn't need 'macOS as a Service' to do it. Just create a new version of Windows every year, give it a new name, and spend a lot of time polishing it and fixing bugs.
"Wait until it's stable to release it, even if you have to delay it."
they're after eyeballs and dollars. and not necessarily in that order.
frequent updates, forced upon users, is a platform for them to shove shit up your ass and down your throat at the same time. ads. paid placement. paid installs. more ads. user data. user tracking. more ads. more placements.
fuck windows 10. most people with windows computers don't need windows to do what they do on them. switch to linux. switch to macs or fuck, even chromebooks (even with google's own addiction to paid placements and ads). but just fucking go cold turkey on microsoft.
your windows 7 gonna kick the bucket in 14 months? here's your next operating system: https://news.slashdot.org/stor...
we can thank Linux in terms of hosting web apps and making Android tablets which devalued operating systems to nothing.
Linux reduced the cost of operating systems, not the value.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
Swap “Microsoft” and “Apple” and the statements still hold true.
AC comments get piped to
In this day and age we can thank Linux in terms of hosting web apps and making Android tablets which devalued operating systems to nothing.
These days Windows is not the only one come loaded with useless baggage, Linux too, come loaded with insane stuffs like systemd .
No one asked Windows users if they like their Windows to be loaded with garbage.
Similarly, no one asked us, the Linux users, if we want that insane garbage systemd , before they forced us to use it !!
... is really about.
It's about the final move to take control of the customers PC out of the users hand and move all apps into authenticated spaces controlled my corporations. Big companies like Apple and Google pioneered app walled gardens behind their smart phones over the last 10 years, and the the videogame gaming industry, being tech companies, have always wanted to take control of software out of the end users hands for profit.
The internet allowed all this to happen because the average citizen is a tech illiterate moron. The last 20 years for anyone who was involved in tech in the 90's has been surreal, everything we were worried about in the 90's like trusted computing is slowly coming fruition due to ignorant people getting smart phones and the internet removing any and all ability to hold software companies accountable.
What are you going to do when Microsoft, Valve, or Activivison develop some new locked down piece of software? You are hundreds of miles away from these companies, you have ZERO market power in this relationship. In ye old days, they were forced to give you the complete software, otherwise they would be comitting fraud. "software as a service" is really just another name for fraud where companies undermine your ability to own, control, and operate your PC and software free from company influence.
All companies want to turn every piece of tech into a dumb terminal and they are largely getting their way because 90% of the population is tech clueless, those of us who know how technology works, were pretty horrified when say RPG's like ultima were rebadged and labelled mmo's in the 90's and a gullible and lay public lapped it up. Things like Ultima online, EQ, world of warcraft were paving the way towards an era where companies can steal whatever isn't nailed down outright because the average person is a moron.
You have no freedom and rights under big business because many aspects of how we are socially organized would need to be rethought in an internet enabled society, there's no accountability, it's just a one way fuck you free for all and companies are making mad bank.
Is microsoft a bacteria or a virus? /s
When their "services" become so network centric that you can't use your computing device for anything when your network connection is unavailable, then you can ask the users the original question.
Apple offers as a service, that it will keep your device current for a while.
A good reason to never use Apple. Linux will keep your device current forever.
As much as I abhor the direction Microsoft has taken Windows and many of their software offerings to this subscription based bullshit, you can't ask a vendor to sell you a one time license and then keep everything up to date forever. People and companies have to make money to fund operations and their lives. Gouging is one thing, I will rail against that all day, but you're straight up insane if you think I am going to write you a piece of software, charge a reasonable license fee once and now I work for you for free until I die.
This is why long term, Linux is basically a charity case on a lot of distributions.
There is nothing more embarrassing than loading up your laptop for a important conference presentation than to say "Sorry, My computer decided to update, Everyone, please wait while Microsoft eat's our time."
As somebody who works in IT, go shoot the person who said we want a new version of Windows every year. We do not.
While I agree with your basic idea (infinite support is an unreasonable expectation) I see no reason why I shouldn't be allowed to keep using old software as long as I want to. If I have legally bought a licence to use software X then I should be allowed to use it as long as I see fit, not as long as some other company sees fit. If I am happy using eg a fifteen year old word processor to type my important documents, why should I be forced to upgrade?
As for software that by design needs communication with a supplier-run server (most modern games) I think they should have some sort of fall-back mode, in which you can still play single player games when the company decides to switch off the servers needed for multi-player games. I can't see why any non-game software should need constant (or at least very often) contact with a supplier-run server for it's proper working.
I'm going to copy and paste the most salient points of the stock BS answer that is given to almost EVERYONE that has an issue with Windows 10 these days and says something about it on the Microsoft Answers forum:
... If it does not help, then perform clean boot and check. Refer this article: How to perform a clean boot in Windows ... After you have finished troubleshooting, follow these steps from section “How to reset the computer to start as usual after clean boot troubleshooting” to reset the computer to start as usual.
/dev/null because Microsoft seems to ignore all user feedback that doesn't align with what they wanted to do anyway.
This issue may occur either due to software conflicts or if unused files are present in Windows. I would suggest you to run system maintenance troubleshooter and check if it helps.
And then in the following comments there are floods of users saying THIS DID NOT HELP, PLEASE GIVE US SOME F***ING REAL HELP. It's like this regardless of the actual problem. It's always someone with an Indian name posting the "solution" and it's always the same basic boilerplate garbage suggestions that don't solve the problem. There is never any follow-up. There is an intervention by an actual Microsoft product team employee that can legitimately help on an extremely rare basis. On a related note, I'm fairly convinced that Feedback Hub is a fancy way of referring to
I swear, dealing with the Windows 8+ era Microsoft is like dealing with a petulant three-year-old on a constant basis, one that will deactivate or crash your shit at random and pull a South Park BP executive style "we're sorry!" when it becomes big tech news.
<troll>Shouldn't we say the same about Linux users and systemd?</troll>
On a more serious note though, if you look at the migration off XP and Win7 it's clear that most users don't want OS updates twice a year but more like twice a decade. Linux distributions are different because there you upgrade all your applications too, I don't think I've ever upgraded because of OS-level services.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Linux has the same problem. People who write software can't ever stop updating things. At some point you reach the design pinnacle and from there on its downhill. A hammer from today still looks like a hammer from centuries ago.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
The internet allowed all this to happen because the average citizen is a tech illiterate moron.
No-one "allowed" anything. What happened was Apple built more locked down systems by default, and people responded by buying systems for personal use they did not have to administer or rely on an entire industry of charlatans to fix things like viruses (read: Best Buy PC repair).
The thing is, it really *is* a good idea for "tech illiterate morons" to have locked down systems. They really need that because they simply cannot manage handling computer security as you and I know it today.
It's not like there are no ways around this. On OSX you can still run apps from untrusted developers - if you tell the machine to allow that. And that seems like a pretty good compromise to me, ship a locked down system by default and let people open it up more if they can handle the extra responsibility.
Do not forget the consequences of security failure are worse now than they have ever been. Even ten years ago, if a phone or computer got hacked to most people it wouldn't be a huge deal losing a whole system. Now so many people have entire lives stored on computers and phones, keeping at least the ability to restore a system and/or prevent access is a lot more important than it has been.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Windows 10 is not an operating system, nor is it a service! Windows is a combination of a virus and spyware! It is not a service for Windows 10 to steal every possible scrap of data from your computer so that they can sell your computer to advertisers! And this was the plan for Windows 10 all along...why do you think that they gave it away for free for over a year!! Only now people that fell for the Windows 10 scam are seeing that it really wasn't free as they start to show ads! Next will be the subscription that they will have to pay to keep Windows 10 working!!!
CS 101
An operating system provides basic services to interface with the hardware - which in old times was little more than drivers. Thus a browser/explorer is not part of the operating system, nor a bunch of unwanted 'services that have no hardware dependancies.
This a a scam to rent you something that should be owned outright. Radio Rentals and TV Rental services mostly went out of business, but some scam artists thing there are enough fools out there willing to be held to ransom.
Predictions. Like electricity, such services will sometimes fail. There will be a zillion plans and discrimatory pricing. Legally a contract with a MINOR is a big problem. Bound data also become a problem.
Security problems will remain. Lets sayWin10 as a service. Why is Remote diagnostics running? Why are all these SMB shares, phone syncs, spoof syncs.
When you delete your service - is it really deleted - come in Europe.
The real kicker is chain of evidence.Something goes wrong/illegal and the exact configuration details are needed to prove the defendant did it?
Lastly as a service. Good 15% VAT, GST Sales tax will be imposed. Lets talk about taxation implications.
The price of Windows is a great point. Windows 3.1 cost $39 to install on $1000 PC's. Windows 7 through 10 cost $99 to $139 to install on PC's that you can build for under $400. The cost of Windows is now excessive in many ways..
The Macs are too expensive.
That sounds like a rational decision, not "locked in".
Speaking about being flagged as a troll, I'll tell you the absolute truth: Windows survives because it is still the best overall OS. It has big support, (usually) excellent backwards compatibility, tons of games, and is reasonably easy to use. MacOS is expensive and sold by a control freak of a company that's just as bad as Microsoft. Linux still sucks, even after 25+ years, and you can't even tell what Linux is since every distro is different and just copying application files from point A to point B is still a complicated mess. Android is spyware so bad, it makes MS look like saints by comparison, since Google doesn't even try to convince you they're not doing it. Everything else sucks as bad as Linux, but has even less support. On top of this, we have Siri, Home, and Alexa monitoring us day in and day out, and we're even paying through the nose for the privilege.
I remember 20 years ago all the Linux people said Windows would be dead in 5 years. Having spent the last 15 years trying to switch to Linux, I'm not the least bit surprised that they're still wrong and don't know why.
Because you have the source, you can update it yourself, or you can find a like-minded group to maintain it. This sort of thing goes on all the time with Linux.
Of course, you may find one day that the 486 is just too slow (though they did live on as industrial controllers a lot longer than commonly known) and you will move on for that reason. Never because you can't update the software.
I know, this concept is hard to understand by someone who is used to just being screwed by companies that control hardware and software, the latter being jealously guarded, and hidden away rather than shared with those who need it.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
If you've spent the last 15 years trying to switch to Linux and haven't succeeded, that is not the Linux people's fault but yours. The comment "just copying application files from point A to point B is still a complicated mess" tells me that you do not want to change your Windows-derived habits, no matter how bad they are, to a superior Linux workflow. Why would I want to copy application files from A to B anyway? FFS, please just install them from the package repos on B. If not possible, try to get the application as a Snap/AppImage. If not possible, get the application's source code, compile and install it.
Please consider using FOSS alternatives to the software you think you can't live without, and you might be surprised by how good they actually are.
Another thing: it's in fact easier to copy an application's data/config from A to B, since reasonable applications store that data in (plain text) config files/folders in your home directory. No obscure registry wizardry upon running some installer. That is one of the best things in Linux: I've kept my home partition with the relevant configuration over years while updating/upgrading the underlying system, no need to reconfigure everything (save major KDE version upgrades).
I was initially inclined to agree with you. But, remember, Windows 10 did that very thing. How many people were tricked into moving from Win7 to Win10?
sig: sauer
Windows as a service with a monthly bill is scheduled to go into effect in 2020 and 2022 depending on the market.
This is a set in stone date, you are in the beta update period right now and they are baking in all the support infrastructure for this right now. There will be a point in the 2020's where you boot that windows computer and it's going to ask for a credit card.