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...
If you think about it OSX has very much moved to Software as Service - it costs nothing anymore, it's just that Apple offers as a service, that it will keep your device current for a while. Or maybe it is the updating that is the service, since OSX does not have activation codes or anything and you can stay on one version forever if you prefer.
To the extent that is not working out for Windows, they need to figure out why Apple seems to do SAS in a way that most people like, whereas Windows does not (I always hated Windows Update).
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
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.
It is amazing to still hear after all these years that people think that Microsoft takes telling. They don't. Microsoft will decide what you are going to accept.
I'll probably get marked as troll for this, perhaps only because the truth triggers some folks.
There is a conversation going on CNet right now that brings out all of the reasons why the faithful will accept whatever Microsoft tells them they will accept.
The locked in factor. Some people look at the lock-in to Microsoft almost like it is some advantage.
The Macs are too expensive. Will they be too expensive when they pay a monthly fee for Windows?
Linux is something something
The fact is that Many Windows users will simply accept whatever Microsoft decides that they will accept. Microsoft knows this, and has no reason to change tactics.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Microsoft has always been insufficiently and badly managed. But now Microsoft is carrying foolish, self-destructive and other-destructive management much farther than before.
One of the many, many articles:
Windows 10 is possibly the worst spyware ever made. "Buried in the service agreement is permission to poke through everything on your PC." (Aug. 4, 2015)
A previous comment of mine:
Microsoft is damaging customers and itself. (Oct. 22, 2018)
So.......no new releases ever?
https://slashdot.org/comments....
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B - D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
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.
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."
The commodity PC wars in the 2000's drove down the price of desktop systems down to less that $600. This made the price of the Windows OS way more conspicuous to vendors and customers, who disliked the fact that the OS (which they called the Microsoft Windows Tax) cost a good percentage of the price of a new PC even with vendor discounts and the fact the users weren't planning to use Windows.
Then laptops and netbooks became powerful enough to read email and surf the web. These are quickly followed by netbooks and smartphones. Users weren't willing to fork out another hundred $$$$ every year for upgraded Microsoft Word/Spreadsheet and other applications. So they all have had to move to the "service" model with annual or monthly licenses, and advertising in order to continue to bring in revenue. The problems with malware led to the development of app stores. Virus databases on PC's were taking up 250 Megabytes of disk space.
Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
As somebody who works in IT, go shoot the person who said we want a new version of Windows every year. We do not.
Wait... did MS really force Candy Crush on people's PCs? I mean, I'm not surprised or anything, what with shoving down ads down your start menu etc. I'm more appalled that they're getting away with this shit at all. God, I'm never letting go of that Win7 disc.
Bryan Lunduke, who worked for Microsoft, and talks a lot about Linux subjects, made a good point in one of his Linux lectures that really opened my mind.
The "Who asked for this?" question. systemd having a full network stack and various other huge features instead of just being a better init script. With Wayland, and Mir, was anyone really going "OMG, X Windows sucks so bad. I really hate being able to stream a graphics shell over ssh on a system that was fast enough to use on a 486." I can't really do his arguments justice with my old man's memory, but the point is sound.
With Windows 8 Metro, or the Ribbon interface, or any of the other Microsoft failures... was anyone explicitly ASKING for this? Or, was it just some middle or upper manager type trying to justify his existence by pushing something his intuition told him would be "the future" with no science and user studies to back it up? Did the decision get made BECAUSE users complained, or, was the decision made, and any evidence contrary (such as research or users) simply thrown under the rug?
Are people DEMANDING lootboxes? Are people demanding DRM?
Are people demanding phones with shit battery life that are thinner and thinner and easier to bend? Or "notches" in their screens instead of full screens?
Where do these anti-features come from? I don't know. But I've at least started to ask the question "Who asked for this?" to help me identify those features and the examples are boundless.
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.
Execs can't figure out why people pirate software.
It's because it becomes a better product. Even if they paid for it.
Windows has been in beta since 1.0. I know, I've attempted them all. I didn't figure it out until 3.1 though...
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!!!
I see no reason why I shouldn't be allowed to keep using old software as long as I want to.
You can do that with Apple - I have very old Apple laptops that still work perfectly well.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Cigarette is to "nicotine delivery device" as Windows OS is to cash delivery machine!
This is their real business model. Microsoft dreams of being Google.
i think the plan is to convert to a service, then in a few years, start charging a monthly service fee, if they do it right away,there could be lots of legal problems, but if they "phase" it in less problems
Cleaning up old folders immediately after redirection is fine; they should have been moved as part of the redirection process, so there should be an empty folder that gets deleted upon completion of redirection. Cleaning up old folders DURING A FEATURE UPDATE that WOULD HAVE been cleaned up after a redirection is a big fat no-no that never should have been written into the code in the first place. Anyone who understands what user shell folder redirection is and what its purpose is can plainly see how bad of an idea it is: if the folder exists after redirection then it's a user-created data folder, not part of a redirection, and should be considered untouchable by all OS self-maintenance such as updates. There are clearly some seriously dysfunctional programmers and sysadmins making their way into Microsoft. The simple fact that this sort of stupid mistake made it out the door is proof that Microsoft has a staff competence issue. Perhaps they can't help in MS Answers because they are losing the ability to maintain the system properly in the first place.
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.
"As A Service" means that you're not buying something you can keep, but agreeing to pay a monthly fee to use the service. When Micro$oft tries to do that, don't do that upgrade. And start making plans to escape.
In fact, when Blizzard games become available on Linux, I'm going!
There is a difference in liability between, say, Ford, and someone who built a kit car in their garage.
There is none at all when Ford and the kit car sell in the same volume, as would be true of compassion Microsoft with Open Source software.
In fact if you considered it, open source would be the Ford really, being used by many more people...
The only question would be where would the liability fall, but probably if you took every contributor from larger open source repos you could extract quite a lot of money from personal finances.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
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..
Someone mod this AC up from -1, he's not wrong.
That's complete and utter bullshit. The Ubuntu installation I'm on at this moment isn't going to just stop booting because I forgot to pay a bill. Go back to Redmond and tell them you failed, you fucking shill.
Silicon has one, maybe two more major node jumps in it and then that's that, you can't shrink any more, all that's left is to polish the architecture and try to sell the same thing for cheaper.
Warning: you might be surrounded by idiots.
Cost and value are dependent on your point of view. Cost went down for us; value went down for Microsoft.
One thing everyone always misses with Microsoft's twice-a-year updates (same frequency as Ubuntu Linux mind you) is that they recompile every single binary in the OS now, rather than just replacing the few that have been touched in each update here n there. What does this mean? There have been new advances in compiler optimizations, plus new advances in memory allocators to help protect against certain types of exploits. There are also the mitigations for things like Specter and Meltdown, which are also baked into the compiler chain. "Features" are not always new toys for people to play with, but also fixes to outstanding issues.
Noted, this is by no means perfect. I'm still pissed the fuck off that Microsoft decided to remove a critical video codec that was used in countless webcams.
But really, what is "software as a service" even mean? It is just another buzz phrase for C-suites, that's it. Again, Windows update schedule mirrors that of Ubuntu and countless other open source distributions. Those F/OSS distros have had their plentiful fair share of fuckups too, but their user base is almost entirely technical users that can work around issues, and is a significantly smaller user base so mass media wont report on it. As someone who services Windows, Debian, and FreeBSD machines, I could rant all day long about amazing new features in each release, side by side with all the amazing new boneheaded fuck ups each has done on those same releases.
Quote: "Microsoft keeps adding new *features* like the Timeline and Paint 3D"
Sorry, Timeline, Paint 3D & etc. are *NOT* features. They are programs (and IMHO, crapware).
Linux isn't any more stable than another other modern OS. In fact if you look at the ubuntu security notices you'll find that it has quite a number of vulnerabilities and bugs.
You should see someone about your paranoia.
Windows 10 also had huge swathes of that "extra functionality" cribbed directly from earlier Windows OSes that you had already paid for and therefore MS had already paid for. So please remove the features that were there in previous versions before you make the claim that newer versions are better value because of the features it contained.
Remember too to remove the loss of value for things like activation and "Windows Assurance Program" et al. Along with all the spying to monetise you, the purchaser, for the benefit of Microsoft alone.
I think you really underestimate how many computers still run Windows. And since windows 10 people didn't have to pay for an upgrade (hell even since 8.0 (because you could upgrade to 8.1 and W10 for free).
Also running a Linux upgrade isn't really any less problematic as an upgrade for windows 10, every single upgrade with ubuntu I had to reset stuff to get it working again, with W10 I only had to do it once, and that was due to not having upgraded the firmware of my SSD (ofcourse IMHO W10 should have checked that before continuing upgrading).
Linux has come a long way in the past decade, but it's still way to fragmented in regard to all the different distro's. And IMHO W10 is going the other way, from being very user-/expertfriendly to getting crap.
And MS IS selling Office 365 licenses for other OSses, but MacOS is still only a very VERY small percentage compared to Windows (and Apple is on the way of dumping MacOS and replacing it with iOS).
Actually, I do see the (or at least a) point: product placement. I wouldn't have learned that there's a thing like Paint3D. Now I desperately want that. Too bad I switched to Linux like 13 years ago
Until an update made it unbootable again a few weeks ago, my Linux partition updated almost every day. Reboots were required in these updates once every couple of weeks or so. Several times a year, I'd have to spend significant time fixing a problem caused by an update. I imagine updates cost me around a week a year on average. This time, I decided to go back to my Windows partition. It just works better with my hardware - a laptop with the NVidia Optimus graphics configuration that Linux has never supported well.
I could have configured my Linux installation to be more stable by only allowing security updates, but that's not what I like as a user. I opt in to every beta I can. I've always liked being on the bleeding edge.
Windows needs to offer every user a choice in the frequency of their updates. Many are like me and want them sooner than later. I am in the preview program. Others want more stability. One size doesn't fit all.
Actually Windows is a service, in the sense of "the farmer got a bull to service his cows". Windows 10 is Microsoft servicing their customers.
With Windows 10 alone we work to deliver quality to over 700 million monthly active Windows 10 devices
So, Microsoft, out of those 700 million that you work on, how many do you actually succeed in delivery quality to?
Most people don't want a computer, they just use their phone or tablet. That's why Android has a bigger userbase than Windows.
One of the benefits of being retired, I know longer have to pay the MS tax anymore.
The value of windows.
you have choice, even more so today then 10 years ago.
you don't have to use windows at all.
if you don't like it, use something else!
On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
Does most - or even much - of it run on a server? No? Then how is it a service?
You forgot the BEST part: "If this answer solves your issue, please mark this as Answered"...that MS pesters you with if you post a technet forum question.
Oh yeah, that's right, but you forgot the bestest part: 9/10 times, they just go ahead and mark their boilerplate as the "solution" and then the comments get flooded with extremely angry techies who can see that the suggestions will do nothing to help. If someone said that their printer was printing PCL errors, the idiots would suggest a "clean boot state" and mark that as answered when it's plain to anyone that "clean boot" will do nothing to help at all.
Then guess what the follow-up advice is? "Reinstall Windows." Except imagine it with more flowery non-native speaker nonsense. "Kindly please install the operating system to a clean status." Or perhaps "kindly bend over and let Microsoft service the customer."
Instead of unpredictable (e.g. sales of Windows 8, Windows ME) bursts of income at the release of a new Windows version in addition to relying on sales of new devices, selling Windows as a service generates a steady flow of income, which is really great for the cash flow and predictability of it. From a development point of view it might even be a motivation to put out a steady stream of improvements instead of bundling them up as a sales argument for Windows n+1. That'd be closer to open-source development where larger version jumps are dictated by the development process, not by the sales department.
For some big customers windows as a service may well make sense, to them it's the flip side of the same cash flow problem: they may prefer a steady flow instead of decision making and paying whenever a new windows is on the market, but usually they already got deals to upgrade their license pool.
For a private PC- or Laptop owner it makes no sense at all. Someone who buys a PC doesn't want it to run under a rented license so his device becomes a useless brick the moment he doesn't pay his fees or there is a hiccup in the licensing system.
"By the way if anyone here is in advertising or marketing... kill yourself." -- Bill Hicks
Linux has nothing to do with why no one will stand in line to buy the next version of Windows, or even why they won't pay lots of money for it.
The reason no one will do those things is because, as of Windows XP, there are no new compelling features for an OS to offer. Windows XP did everything I, as a private individual, needed an OS to do. Microsoft has added some security features, and some things which I, as a computer professional, appreciate since then. Of course,since Windows 3.1 I have advised people to only upgrade their Microsoft OS when they upgrade their PC.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
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!
Except neither of those things is true, which is why Windows 10 really isn't that big of a deal for the vast majority of people. The insistence of people like you that this overly dramatized thing is indeed happening does the community as a whole a disservice by normalizing the idea you're presenting. Stop trying to normalize problematic behavior!
Microsoft explains what data their telemetry collects and certainly the only advertising is a one-line text "suggestion" in the start menu that you can simply turn off in the settings.
Linux has nothing to do with why no one will stand in line to buy the next version of Windows, or even why they won't pay lots of money for it.
No one has stood in line to buy an OS for decades.
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
From the bull's perspective, the cows are servicing him.
sig: sauer
Where has Windows ever "stopped booting" because you didn't pay a bill?
Every time it looses my activation key. Gets about halfway there, enter key. Don't have it? Endless Reboot cycle.
For anything to change at Microsoft, the management mentality has to change. Getting an Engineer in the hot seat at the top is the key to ensuring that their poorest performing students aren't the ones being taught to. They need someone in there that says, "Let's teach to the top students and not treat everyone like they're a fucking idiot by trying to do everything for you with some sort of 'we know what's best' attitude." Having a sales-y guy at the top who is just trying to blow the investors by raising the EPS of the company is how you arrive at Win 10 and the respective future of the GUI based OS. Microsoft is not apple. They should stop trying to cash in on an app store for the operating system. No one gives a fuck about candy crush on their OS -- especially in the Enterprise. Until a level headed engineer is in the top spot over at M$, you will continue to see advertising in the OS, data whoring, forced automatic updates (unless you're in a domain,) and buried settings that force average users to put up with their crap.
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.
However you want to agree/disagree with this, it has no bearing on the desktop OS market, where none of these pressures directly manifested.
The factors that led to Windows 10 being the way it is are:
-Microsoft got stuck supporting XP a *long* time after they stopped making money on it, which was an excessively unprofitable endeavor. When they tried to drop XP support in the way they had always said they would, it was a PR disaster. They did the math to compare the revenue of the rare customer that would buy an OS upgrade without a hardware upgrade to the expenses incurred in their obligation to support dead-end users and concluded it was better to 'freely' upgrade the OS software rather than get stuck supporting old editions.
-The culture of 'automated testing' and 'getting direct feedback from enthusiast' became 'scale back expensive in-house QA because it's automated away and otherwise covered by people that *paid* to be testers rather than demanding payment'.
-The wave of 'as a service' being seen as a hip and trendy thing to do, with the software vendors empowered to change whatever and the users always going for it.
No one is going to pay lots of money for an upgrade nor stand in line at CompUSA at midnight for the latest version of Windows anymore.
In absolute terms, that was never many people, it's just the total PC market was also small and mostly comprised of aggressive enthusiasts. As PCs became more and more mainstream, the proportion of the target market comprised of enthusiasts decreased and the money became about people who would never bother to do such a thing.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
If / when Microsoft decides to go with the subscription plan, I would think it would seriously impact a lot of software that relies upon it as the backbone OS to work. I wonder if they would get sued for effectively denying access to the OS without ongoing subscription payments.
Much of the software I have is license locked to my system via a permanent key. Any one of them costs far more than what the operating system does, yet if I fail to pay what will effectively be ransomware to MS, I will be unable to use said software in any form. Some of them have Linux or OSx variants I can switch to, but not all of them.
I am curious just how many folks are going to be willing to go with a monthly / annual subscription for an OS that has already taken too much control from the folks who use it. For the first time in my life, I think I would actually consider a " Yar Matey " version of the OS that has been stripped of all the controversial bullshit because re-licensing all the software I use on Windows would be quite a financial undertaking.
I know we've been saying this for years but, I think the year of the Linux Desktop is, in a hilarious ironic twist, going to be brought about by none other than Microsoft itself.
Tech companies love "software as a service" because it is never paid for and provides them with an eternal revenue stream. You can buy the PC, but if you want to use it, you need to keep making payments to Microsoft forever. It also simplifies their service load because everyone has the same version of the system, getting gradual updates as time passes. They don't need to keep providing fixes and maintenance for Windows Vista, for example, because old releases don't exist in the service model. The benefits for users are a lot more sparse: We get steady updates, but we also get a wave of advertising and continuous reporting of our activities back to Mama Microsoft. I made the decision to just use Linux for everything a long time ago.
Not quite true. If ever your filesystem gets corrupted you probably have no simple way (if any) of reinstalling the Apple software you currently have.
A) Backups
B) App store
But mainly A, especially for old computers using any OS you are going to have a hell of a time getting older software so you should keep a backup.
For OS X you can easily download older versions.
How do you install an old version of Keynote? Or GarageBand? Or anything really.
Apple's App Store keeps around older versions for just that purpose - I can still restore older apps on an iPad 2.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
The Dark Side is, once companies switch to a subscription based service, is they no longer feel that bug fixes and development of new features the users want are important.
Once they have an infinite amount of cash coming in via subscription, they don't really give a damn about much of anything really.
Already seeing this behavior with some of the software that has gone subscription only.
That's not from "not paying a bill" though.
The funniest think is that even Bing knows that W10 is a crap. I just opened Bing and entered "windows 10 is a ", it showed me the following suggestions:
"windows 10 is a joke",
"windows 10 is a mess",
"windows 10 is a piece of garbage",
"windows 10 is a pig",
"windows 10 is a dog",
"windows 10 is a spy",
"windows 10 is a pain" and
"windows 10 is a disease".
It didn't showed such negative suggestions for Windows 7/8/8.1 . This shows that Windows 10 has serious problems, it's even worse than Vista. If MS continues to ignore its users, then I guess after the end of Windows 7/8.1 support Windows will start dying slowly and painfully and will be replaced by something like Chrome/Fuchsia OS.
Got Windows at all? Well then you agreed to the same conditions on Windows 10 with one of the later service packs or updates. All the spyware and malware in Windows 10 was backported to windows 7 within the first year windows 10 was out.
If you use Windows at all these days you are giving microsoft full access to all your data.
The service part is "software updates" and continued renewal of the limited term license to use updates to the software that you purchased a limited license for.
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.
Security notices and bug fixes aren't related at all to the word stable. But if you want to talk about security notices and bugs lets discuss the ability of Linux to be owned by a webpage. Go to the wrong website with windows and javascript running and you can get ransomware installed. Such a thing happening on Linux is virtually impossible.
Microsoft "helpfully" remembers some of the applications that it closed before doing an automatic update and reopens them when it restarts (and annoyingly frequently starts one or more Youtube channels playing when it does so) and some applications auto-save on a regular basis and will prompt you to restore lost data when you reopen them. But some applications don't, and even though a warning will pop up if you try to shut down windows with those programs still open with unsaved data the Windows update will just ignore those flags and go ahead and purge all your data.
I realize that to a certain extent that it's my own fault for not saving as early and often as i ought to, but I still feel like Microsoft bears some of the blame for the malicious way in which they go about handling updates.
This Space Intentionally Left Blank
Back when Windows NT 4.0 was Microsoft's latest / greatest (??) server OS, you had to have a license for the OS and you had to have a number of Client Access Licenses (CALs). If you wanted to operate an internet server, the number of CALs limited how many requests it could handle at a time.
Many companies bought servers which came bundled with WinNT 4.0 and a certain number of CALs. They promptly wiped the servers, installed Linux and started reselling the software and / or CALs on eBay. Microsoft fought that long and hard; they didn't want those selling "used." They wanted companies to just buy more CALs from them. But, insomuch as software considered a product, it was subject to First Sale Doctrine. You can't sell more copies of it but, if you have purchased something physical (usually a booklet / certificate with the necessary keys printed on it), you can resell it if you aren't going to be using it.
They finally ditched the ridiculous CALs but, after that, you found yourself not with a product but with a license. Products are subject to First Sale, licenses are not. Indeed, there were cases where one company ("predator") bought another ("prey") and, because the prey's licenses were NOT transferable to predator, they had to go out and buy licenses just to keep operating the servers / applications the prey was using.
MS has been getting evermore militant ever since.
I'm regularly amazed that they haven't killed off their market. There's something to be said, though, for lock-in, both real and mental.
... by the Dew of Mountains the thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shakes, the shakes become a warning
Considering Microsoft does not charge OEMs the same price that consumers pay, the price of Windows isn't nearly as high as people think. For those buying custom built machines, spending $1000 or more for a desktop isn't a terrible thing. Many still have Windows 7 licenses as well, and those still can be used to install Windows 10 on new systems.
Those who even call continual updates, "Windows as a service" also fail to notice that there is no paid monthly/annual fee in place for Windows, so that also fails if you want to try to define Windows as a service. What we have is Windows 10 gets frequent updates, and Microsoft is doing what Apple does not, push for changes and improvements on a frequent basis.
Yes, Windows 10 has issues, but in the grand scheme of things, there have been a lot of positive improvements. One nice feature is to map the print screen key to the "snipping tool", which was added in 1809(Settings/Ease of access/keyboard section to turn it on or off). Many people are so focused on looking for reasons to hate this company or that, that they really can't see anything positive that comes out over the years. Apple deserves a lot more hate than Microsoft at this point, and the stagnation of their operating systems is obvious.
"Windows 3.1 cost $39 to install on $1000 PC's."
Wrong. Windows 3.1 was $149.99 (https://www.computerhistory.org/tdih/april/6/) when it was released.
Ninjas don't carry tic tacs
Linux reduced the cost of operating systems, not the value.
Just the usability.
Lie to yourself all you want, my Mother and Father dont want to use Linux to do anything more than surf the web and send PMs and discord messages.
While Linux is perfectly suited to that task, they all look and feel like complete "ASS" my parents, and subsequent people i try to get on the Linux bus.
People are not interested (common) in bullshit tech they might be able to use down low.
Just in case you're one of those ACs who doesn't ever check back in on a thread: read this guy's comment, he's got it right.
..which is one of the myriad reasons I decided to jump ship to Linux.
To be fair it's not always fun, there's a learning curve for me (see below* for a prime example), but in the long run it's worth it.
* Last night Ubuntu decided, for no reason I could discern, to start using IPv6 DNS resolution for the cluster of POP3 servers I have to use, even though ethernet had IPv6 disabled. Took me two hours to figure out that's what it was, and only then by running PING -4 (which then worked). Had to add lines to GRUB config file to disable IPv6 system-wide, but now it's fine. Still no idea why, after months of no problems, this suddenly happened. Almost believe someone misconfigured a DNS server somewhere and the error propagated. Guess I'll never know exactly why!
The key difference is that with free software, you can hire any willing vendor, not just the original publisher, to backport security fixes to your legacy system. You don't have to have, say, half the publisher's market capitalization to force your will on the publisher.
it is far cheaper to just upgrade to a supported machine than it is to spend my time (or money employing somebody) to keep the operating system up to date for old hardware.
Yet 35-year-old video game consoles still get new commercial releases for them. Family Computer in 1983; Micro Mages in 2018. What explains that?
FFS, please just install them from the package repos on B.
Many distributions have a policy of not carrying in their repositories any software that is not free software.
If not possible, get the application's source code, compile and install it.
That would cost half the publisher's market capitalization.
Please consider using FOSS alternatives to the software you think you can't live without
How does one go about finding free software replacements for A. video games in particular genres with a substantial player population, B. players for rented movies, and C. individual income tax return preparation wizards? If you can't think of any, the reasons in this article might be why.
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.
When "tech illiterate morons" decide to become no longer "tech illiterate morons", is it also a good idea for them to have to repurchase most of their computing hardware from scratch? This is the case for those who use iOS or a game console.
First off, no they do not. Plenty of things in the world have no expectation of support once they are released, and yet people are perfectly fine purchasing that still even knowing that it may not be supported and will have issues. I have a refrigerator from Samsung that has serious design issues with the bottom of it freezing up. I spent 1500 dollars on that and guess what? I barely got the opportunity to complain about that, but now that it is out of warranty I'm SOL and pretty much everyone acknowledges that. Just because software has the mechanism available doesn't mean you have the right to demand a software developer or company to do anything and everything you want whenever you want. Reasonable expectations and terms are still fine, but who the fuck would want to do anything in the software world if they were contractually obligated to be your fucking code slave regardless of any monetary benefit? Especially given a lot of software that is designed well could easily hit a saturation point where no one is buying it at all anymore. If that software has free updates and support for forever who is paying for that? Do you want subsidized software support or just a bunch of devs living in a fucking hovel with just a laptop so you can keep your software up to date with them as your slave labor? A bit hyperbolic maybe, but this is the logical conclusion for the scenario you propose.
Now, all of that said, there is a grain of truth to your ranting. I am ok with the idea that they should allow modifications to it such that someone skilled in that work can roll their own repairs and even provide that service for free or at a cost to others if they don't want to do it. The only reason they get away with it is they are technically making money off of the designs still of the obsolete product and it would be severely detrimental to their business to release source code and trade secrets knowledge that would be required to do most of it effectively. Again, people and other businesses are not expected to release everything they have ever designed but don't sell/use any more into the public domain immediately. This expectation is still something that seems to be unique to software for some reason, and I feel it is unreasonable and unfounded in reality.
Now, if you want to rail against changing copyright laws to allow for an earlier expiration date that puts things in public domain that is fine. Hell, that I even agree should be the case because our current copyright timelines are crazy long for a lot of things.
In fact, when Blizzard games become available on Linux, I'm going!
This list of Android/Linux apps published by Blizzard Entertainment probably doesn't count, as the only actual games there are Hearthstone and the forthcoming Diablo Immortal. The rest are apps for authenticating to its Windows games' multiplayer service or for following high-level competitions in its Windows games.
Challenge accepted.
-- Microsoft
For those asking for citation, The first link is the WAAS (windows as as service is the microsoft name) information for businesses, IIRC business deployment is scheduled for first deployment with retail deployment afterwards. WAAS will follow the same model as office 365, it'll likely start as an optional subscription for a year or two before the only option will be the monthly subscription just like office 2019 is the last standalone version after only a few years of 365 existing.
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-...
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-...
The microsoft windows 365 plan, like office 365 will be the first step in the shift:
https://wccftech.com/microsoft...
Other sources without looking too hard:
https://www.informationweek.co...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/g...
https://blog.juriba.com/window...
As you'll note in the links most of the information is in the financial press that the bulk of the public doesn't pay attention to, but what Microsoft promises wall street will occur.
Lie to yourself all you want, my Mother and Father dont want to use Linux to do anything more than surf the web and send PMs and discord messages. While Linux is perfectly suited to that task, they all look and feel like complete "ASS" my parents, and subsequent people i try to get on the Linux bus. People are not interested (common) in bullshit tech they might be able to use down low.
Have you looked at Windows 10 lately, and compared it to a recent Linux desktop? Win10 looks like ASS compared to Linux these days. I moved my completely non-technical mother to Linux years ago, and she is very pleased with it. Better yet, my support calls tapered off to almost nothing.
First law of people: People are generally stupid.
This goes back to the decline in competent support that started back in the late 1990s, and using outsourced support instead of skilled support staff working for the company. A big part of this came from corporate executives with zero technical knowledge wanting to "save money" by outsourcing technical support, not understanding that having a staff with real understanding of the products/services really helps customers decide which products to buy.
With that said, there are times when doing a re-upgrade to Windows 10 is needed, in the same way that when something is broken, rather than tracking which component broke, fixing installation problems in Windows 10 by just doing a re-upgrade makes more sense than spending hours trying to figure out what part of the update went wrong.
People who read from scripts as their way of helping a customer should not be paid to work in technical support, since customers could easily just find these same scripts on the company support site! Helping the customer understand what is going on so that the proper solution can be provided does require knowing what you are doing, and reading from scripts will not do the job.
I had an old but still good laptop with Windows XP. This OS was not supported anymore, so an annoying popup messages was appearing every five minutes or so.
I installed Ubuntu Linux instead and gave this laptop to my relative, a relativly poor elderly lady. She is still using it.
The only problem she has is that Ubuntu from time to time begin to offer updates, and she is not capable to install them. It disturbs her. And I have to do it. The update offers disappear for some time and she is happy. She uses it for email, photos, seeing movies, etc. But OS updates are too much for her. Probably Ubuntu developers think erroneously that only advanced geeks use Ubuntu linux.
For Windows to operate remotely is nothing new, we've been doing it for literally decades. The only things new here are A) it's being marketed to individuals and at a global level, instead of aimed at enterprises for use in-house. B) Microsoft is hoping to completely redefine what it means to have a PC by rent seeking. (I know, arguably it isn't "rent seeking" since Microsoft would be providing something of value. But it would be looking to get annual or even monthly payments for the life of the device instead of a single license fee. Who here is willing to believe that this will result in lower revenue?)
What I'm very curious to know is what will happen to the _massive_ subsidies Microsoft currently pays to the big OEMs. Once the OEMs and system integrators are reduced to appliance manufacturers, I think we'll see those subsidies disappear and profit margins for those companies to get even thinner.
From Microsofts point of view, this is a total win on several levels:
a) They get to increase and smooth out their revenue stream from the Windows UI
b) As others have noted, their development and support costs go way down.
c) They get their own captive audience for targeted ads.
d) They get to further develop their own walled garden of apps. Central control will undoubtedly be used to block arbitrary 3rd parties software.
e) They get to cut back or even end the payola that the big OEM's have been dependant on.
And the ironic thing? We can probably thank Google and Apple for this. Microsoft is just trying to combine the two business models those companies have proven to be very lucrative. I can't see any easy way for them to tackle Amazon's business model, it's just too different from dealing in software. Otherwise I'm sure they'd be doing that as well.
I need a wheelchair van for my son. Help me get the word out. https://www.gofundme.com/wheelchair-van-for-jj
You can't be sure things will stay that way. Proprietary software grants proprietors the exclusive power to change how that software works. This means that at any time the program's behavior could change (as far as your perception goes); limits you haven't yet bumped into and therefore don't yet know about could be revealed to you. Add in networked computers that check for updates and that's a universal backdoor allowing the proprietor to change things they didn't think to set up earlier. It's always dangerous to make claims on behalf of how proprietary software works no matter how many time you've run that software and you therefore believe you're familiar with how that software operates. Free software lets you run, inspect, share, and modify the software so you can be sure of what you're running.
Digital Citizen
Microsoft cannot "slow down." Do we want security patches only after a year? No. No operating system exists without bugs, because that's impossible. Any software past a given size, of course, will have bugs, both known and unknown, and nothing can be done with that. Fixing them in flight is a better option than waiting, "until the OS is stable." Apple might be able to do once a year because they don't have the numbers and device types that Microsoft faces. I hate all operating systems equally. But as far as breadth of hardware and usability, No one touches Windows 10.
What do you think as a service means?
Everything that is outlined here about their update strategy.
Microsoft said THEMSELVES this is the route they are heading. 1 operating system receiving monthly paid updates. That's their goal THEY stated.
Where did "they" state this?
I don't disagree with you, but I don't see ads on Windows 10. Of course, I run Classic Start Menu, because the Start Menu hasn't been good since XP.
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
Keep in mind that Windows 3.1 was useless by itself. You also had to buy MS-DOS.
When "tech illiterate morons" decide to become no longer "tech illiterate morons", is it also a good idea for them to have to repurchase most of their computing hardware from scratch?
That is the great thing about Macs - you do not have to. If you become more tech literate you can make greater use of what they offer by unlocking things.
Personally I originally bought Macs because I wanted a real lid stable UNIX system and that choice has not failed me yet.
Apple has done a good job shipping defaults that protect users that need it, and allow technically people fuller access if they know what they are doing.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
1. That doesn't mention anything about a monthly bill
2. Even if it did, it would be about a future version of Windows and therefore not the cause of deadwill69's issue
I would never base my business on this, thanks god I mostly run Linux. And each time I boot a Windows test VM it is unusable for some minutes doing zillions of updates :-/ Also wonder why people and business use something with some much "telemetry" sent back to companies and advertising servers, ..!?
True of Mac. Not true of iPad Pro
You can always Jailbreak it of course.
But aside from that, I can keep using an iPad of any kind (pro or not) as long as the hardware stays alive. I can replace the battery. I can program anything I like for even my oldest iPad.
The iPad absolutely is a computer, and like any computer can do anything you are capable of making it do.
So how Is it not true of any iPad, pro or otherwise?
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
If you have dual stack triggered at all the configuration assumes a preference for ipv6, this is per the standard. If you don't have Ipv6 make sure you disable Ipv6 altogether sorta like you did or you'll run into the same issues again. Ideally you don't even what your interfaces to load up with a link-local ipv6 address so there is no ipv6 at all.
..well, there's 2 hours of my life, spent tearing my hair out, that I'll never get back. :-( :-(
Seriously, this is the sort of shit that always made everybody crazy that Windows updates would do. Thought I was leaving all that bullshit behind.
IPv6 is a complicated transition. It's going to catch a lot of people off guard because of how different it is from IPv4 in both configuration and use. All dual stack systems assume that if IPv6 is detected that IPv6 should be the priority per the RFC's this is the standard behavior and that's going to cause issues just like yours when you have a network that doesn't have IPv6 available.
I'd recommend you plan for IPv6 now so it doesn't do this to you again, even going so far as to setup your local network with IPv6 so that when your ISP deploys it everything works without you having to spend a week troubleshooting it. IPv6 has a pretty steep learning curve and some very significant differences from IPv4. It's not the kind of thing you want to learn at 2am in the morning because your network just went dead, trust me on that one because I learned it the hard way when IPv6 deployed and I wasn't configured for it and suddenly nothing routed.
No thanks. There's no reason for the 3 or 4 devices on my internal network to use IPv6, and I don't think all of them support it anyway. I won't change the WAN side until I'm forced to, then a router will handle the NAT.