Slashdot Mirror
The Cost of Bug Fixes
Well, I try to avoid posting MS stories unless they're kinda
large, but about 50 people have submitted a CNet story that
proclaims that MS might be charging as much as
$89 for a Service Patch to
Windows 98. I guess I'd try to come up with an appropriately
witty comment, but I'm at a loss for words here.
Update: 04/07 03:27 by CT : apparently Cnet is screwed up a bit here, and
CNN has a more accurate
story. Read it.
I guess MS can get away with this, since their software has no warranty. So much for the theory of suing MS if something goes wrong.
TedC
--
bgphints - internet routing news, hints and ti
If they didn't have monopoly status
Arrghh! Why do people insist on treating this as if it were settled and byond debate?
Microsoft is NOT A MONOPOLY. Look at any graph of OS use - Microsoft has competition in every segment. In the server OS segment it wasn't even the fastest growing product this year.
Microsoft abuses contracts, attempts to impose its will where it shouldn't and uses some questionable bundling practices. But these are NOT tantamount to a monopoly.
Please people, we just make ourselves look silly when we believe our own BS and throw around terms like this as if they were resolved historical facts.
Okay, okay. I used to think that Justice needed something better to do than try to break up a company like Microsoft.
.x releases that mainly contain bug fixes (and charge for them)?
Then how about Oracle, IBM, Sybase, Sun, Informix, etc. who release
I just wish there was some *usuable* competitive OS
If you don't want to use Linux, the MacOS is a passable (not preferrable) alternative to win95/98.
You're free to be as stupid as you want to be.
.x versions of software that mainly contain fixes, and charge for it.
Really. If Microsoft can get people to fall for it, then why not?
Honestly folks, every piece of software is a fix, upgrade, or amendment to something that has come before, so I don't really see a logical reason why a pricetag can't be put on the upgrade.
There were no claims that the original piece of software was defect free, and no one is claiming that users must purchase the upgrade.
I fervently disagree that the government must "do" something about this as other knee-jerk responses above have stated. Software vendors do this all the time. Database vendors, for example, typically roll out
This really isn't that abnormal.
There's a different mind set at work here than unix admins probably have. When Sun came out with Solaris 7, production administrators did not run out to CompUSA to stand in line. No, they carefully examined the fix lists, contacted their other vendors, ran a test machine and so on.
People who run out and buy the latest Microsoft product are kinda like people who trade in their 1997 Mustang for a 1999, becuase there were cosmetic changes. They don't care about techncial improvements or bug fixes, they just want the latest and greatest.
Of course these people don't call in with Bugs. Do you think they would actually go through the systematic routine to try to reproduce a bug? On the other hand, corporate IS departments do report bugs to Microsoft -- their just not very receptive, so I doubt the bug reporting from the technically adept customers is as good as it could be.
--
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
Whereas it wasn't as obvious with Windows 4.1^H^H^H98, it is now pretty obvious here where their pricing model is going. To some of us this comes as no big surprise because we've been saying it all along. To others of us we don't care anyway because we never paid for an MS OS anyway. (And no, I'm not referring to pirating.) This is bound to surprise at least a few MS advocates in the world.
I just have to wonder if their cockiness will eventually be their downfall or will it just continue to work in their favor because they are who they are.
Conspiracy theorists will of course say that this is just an excuse to obtain peoples' personal information since it looks like Win 98.1 can only be bought through their web site. This means that they will be able to associate your name, address, and credit card number to your system GUID. Theoretically, they could also use this information to build a huge database of any web sites you've visited that use Link Exchange (since they own that too). Is MS going to become the largest marketer of personal data?
Realists know that this probably isn't going to happen. An NT server could never handle the data load we are talking about. I seriously doubt that MS would actually pay Sun Microsystems money for one of their huge data mining machines. Imagining the internal psychological struggle that Bill must be going through on that one is sort of funny.
Anyway, I don't want this to turn into a Jon Katz article so I'll stop now while I'm ahead.
-Paul (pspeed@progeeks.com)
Edu. sig-line: Choose rhymes with lose. Chose rhymes with goes. Loose rhymes with goose.
Comparing? THEN use THAN.
Check the latest article on PCWeek on this topic. Betanews.com got it real wrong when they orignally posted their article, CNet picked up their story. In summary, MS is going to send you a StepUp CD, which does not cost $89, and will only be available for order from their website. They haven't mentioned price, but the PCWeek article said it would be signifacntly less then the $89. The retail Win98 SE will simply replace the Win98 out in the channel at the same price of $89, like RedHat 5.2 replaced 5.1 and 5.0 in the retail channel at $49 or $50. Also, PCWeek states MS is going to post an SP1 on their website, but it will not have any new features, unlike like the StepUp CD. Thanks.
So MS wants to move to subscription-based pricing? That's fine. This is (supposed to be) a competitive, open industry. But I think not. Instead, they'll have a faux-subscription model with paid updates every year.
Let's all suppose that MS is limited by regular economic laws for a minute and say that they can only charge what the market will bear. Let's also say that they thought about this before arriving at the prices for their Operating Systems.
Price for Windows 95: $89 (9/95)
Price for Windows 98: $89 (11/98)
Price for Windows 98 update: under $89 (6/99)
As PC Week says, the update for Win98 users will be substantially less than $89. What does that mean? We'll estimate it at half that, or about $45.
Assuming that the Win98 SE is the first rollout of their new pricing model, and assuming it's this year's only update, this means MS means to charge about $45 a year to use their OS. This compares to $89 for three years of using Win95.
But wait, they just charged $89 for Win98 last year, too! Since they deliver a new OS every three years or so, we'll assume that they'll continue to do this and charge about the same for it.
Will consumers really pay $89 every three years for a new OS, plus $45 a year for updates? I know I sure wouldn't! That's quite steep indeed!
Or maybe this is MS' way of getting more money out of the vast majority of people who get their Windows from an OEM with a computer purchase.
This makes much more sense. Assume that they give away windows for free (which they don't) and then charge $45 per year for updates. Over the three-year lifespan of a machine, this is almost $150, or a 50% increase on the price of Windows!
I always believed that the secret to MS' success was piracy. They turned a blind eye on pirates
in order to gain market share. This has worked
incredibly well for more than 10 years.
If they used subscription pricing, they would have to try to crack down on Pirates. If instead they invent a new update to charge for every year, they can let the pirates work and cement their market share, and still get a little money back... Would they really kill their golden goose by moving to a subscription model? I think not.
Stephen
It's not the price for upgrading that suprises me, but the price for bug fixes.
However, what I find MOST troubling is that most of those who purchase software (in the windows realm) aren't the least bit suprised when it has bugs in it. Or to find out that tech support can't help them because there's not a fix for it. They may be a little miffed, but they just accept it even though there is *rarely* a money-back guarantee.
I mean COME ON! I don't expect a $1 razor to be defective, but I'll return it if it is and get a new one that *works* or get my money back. Isn't facinating how a most of the software vendors for windoze put disclaimers on there software that states there is no guarantee with this software at all what-so-ever? Isn't it more amazing that those users just sit and take it?
Micro$oft has really poisoned the water of expectation that their customers have for the platform and the software that runs on it.
Win95 OSR2: $89 Install: $340.
Win98 $89 + $340? (refused to install it)
Win98 $89 + $340? (will not install it)
Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) --not counting down time in the mean time due to OS bugs-- estimated at $1287* for one year. Who says Windows is not abusing their near monopoly? DOJ, are you listening?
Cost of Linux, including latest bug fixes: $60.
Time to Install, including Backup: 4 hrs $340
TCO = $400.00. For those purists, yes, I will have to spend additional time once the 2.2X kernels are fully incorporated into an RH release.
My point?? Linux Wins!!!
...Open Source isn't the only answer -- but it's almost always a better value than the alternatives...
Secondarily, most corporations have SLA's (service level agreements) with Oracle covering upgrades, etc. The TCO for an Oracle database is usually spread across many, many users, vs. M$ which has a high TCO on every machine. [think: vulnerability due to Word Macro Virii, downtime on NT servers, etc.]
So if a corporation with 1,000 deskktops connected to the database paid $89 for every machine upgraded to Win98-Second Edition, plus the time to perform the upgrade, we're talking potentially many hundreds of thousands of dollars additional cost here, without (IMHO) a fully spec'd out list of improvements and bug fixes.
Thanks but no thanks. Up with Linux!
...Open Source isn't the only answer -- but it's almost always a better value than the alternatives...