microsoft supporting all windows versions forever

[emosun]

I had this sort of crazy idea and perhaps maybe a few would be on board with this idea.

So currently worldwide windows 7 is still the most common operating system (soon to finally be globally surpassed by windows 10). This after years of essentially being a free upgrade from 7 or 8. Very soon will the upgrade finally not be free any more. Most tech sites typically blame this lack of windows 10 interest from the bad initial press it received , bad malware like tactics it initially used , and of course windows 7 essentially being good enough for most peoples needs and not seeing any reason to change. There's plenty of articles that dive deep into the lack of windows 10 adaption rate online if you wish to read more.

 

So my idea is this.... Why not simply upgrade all machines to windows 10 same as they did , but retain the entire visual look and branding of the original os? So essentially you would be running windows 10 , but still use the same start bar , same windows , same icons , same logo's and boot screen of windows 7. Surely the same people who opted out of windows 10 wouldn't opt out of a "mechanical" windows update as opposed to an entire UI overhaul. One thing that led me to believe this might actually have worked better is that most people are loyal to windows 7/xp due to it's simplicity and purposeful lack of features they don't need or want. Security and support updates are important , but changes to the UI and branding make the os look and feel like it's new/unreliable/untested/unproven.

I feel as though this might have worked pretty well. A unified windows simply with older "skins" applied to make the transition seem invisible.

[Ashley MLP Fangirl]

microsoft won't do that. that makes no sense. 

 

the whole idea of Windows 10 is consistency with other products. think about the xbox ui, and hololens etc. to stick withthe Windows 7 looks would make no sense at all. 

[IKnight]

Because most systems that still use win7/XP have a real reason. Think of programs and machines at just hospitals. They would need to all be replaced/updated, a seriously large undertaking. Another example could be CNC mill programs. Switching over is an incredibly difficult endeavour, and there wouldn't be any benefits. 

TL;DR; if it ain't broke, don't fix it.  

[emosun]

I'm not too sure either of you understood what I was trying to say. I forget that most users here tend to skim.

even if I elaborate then that'll also be skimmed , unsolvable problem. lol

[captain_to_fire]

6 minutes ago, emosun said:

So my idea is this.... Why not simply upgrade all machines to windows 10 same as they did , but retain the entire visual look and branding of the original os? So essentially you would be running windows 10 , but still use the same start bar , same windows , same icons , same logo's and boot screen of windows 7

Not happening for one, it doesn't make a lot of sense for them to add Windows 10 features while keeping the old interface. It's like saying let's keep the Windows 95 Classic Theme but with Windows 10 features. 

[Odur32]

I think the OP might be onto something, in a way. If updating to a new version of windows didn't mean you had to change anything visually or even functionally. I think there would be many home users who would be more inclined to upgrade. As someone who encounters many "Users" who are not really thrilled with change in general. The most common excuse I get for not upgrading is actually because they like how Windows 7 looks, and they are used to it. On the other side also still offering a new UI for those who want it, should still be available.

[IKnight]

9 minutes ago, emosun said:

I'm not too sure either of you understood what I was trying to say. I forget that most users here tend to skim.

You're saying to overhaul the mechanical bits and keep the old UI. That simply wouldn't work. My point is that most specialized software is only made to work on one OS, the original win7 or whatever. If you switch the windows version, there are high chances of it not being compatible. 

[Odur32]

imo the biggest reason that I keep windows 10 has nothing to do with the look or many features. It is the Direct X 12 Support.

[IKnight]

2 minutes ago, Odur32 said:

I think the OP might be onto something, in a way. If updating to a new version of windows didn't mean you had to change anything visually or even functionally. I think there would be many home users who would be more inclined to upgrade. As someone who encounters many "Users" who are not really thrilled with change in general. The most common excuse I get for not upgrading is actually because they like how Windows 7 looks, and they are used to it. On the other side also still offering a new UI for those who want it, should still be available.

I doubt home users still use Win 7. Its mostly companies, school, healthcare..... All of which would have a hard time updating.

[Belzebuth]

2 minutes ago, IKnight said:

You're saying to overhaul the mechanical bits and keep the old UI. That simply wouldn't work. My point is that most specialized software is only made to work on one OS, the original win7 it whatever. If you switch the windows version, there are high chances of it not being compatible. 

You have a point here, and mostly those pc are off-network anyway. 

 

[Odur32]

1 minute ago, IKnight said:

You're saying to overhaul the mechanical bits and keep the old UI. That simply wouldn't work. My point is that most specialized software is only made to work on one OS, the original win7 it whatever. If you switch the windows version, there are high chances of it not being compatible. 

I think you'd find that it could work, I don't think using a more classic UI would hold any functionality back. I'm actually almost sure of it. You can dress anything up to look classic if you really want to, without loss of functionality.

[emosun]

4 minutes ago, IKnight said:

You're saying to overhaul the mechanical bits and keep the old UI. That simply wouldn't work. My point is that most specialized software is only made to work on one OS, the original win7 it whatever. If you switch the windows version, there are high chances of it not being compatible. 

again I dont think you understand what I'm saying but it's fine you don't have to understand.

[emosun]

1 minute ago, Odur32 said:

I think you'd find that it could work, I don't think using a more classic UI would hold any functionality back. I'm actually almost sure of it. You can dress anything up to look classic if you really want to, without loss of functionality.

Yeah I think most people aren't aware of how little the interface matters when it's an overlay.

[SansVarnic]

@emosun RainMeter was created just for this very reason and other various skin mods for Windows. Just saying.

 

Nice idea but MS has already put out their goal of how "Windows as a Service" will Progress over the years. Here soon Windows 10 will no longer be known as Windows 10 but just "Windows" or "Windows Andromeda" (or whatever the official public name will be).

 

Not trying to be a sourpuss ... it really is a good idea, problem is the current CEO is to enterprise and cloud/server oriented so your vision would not be able to pass the muster unfortunately. /shrug

[IKnight]

2 minutes ago, Odur32 said:

I think you'd find that it could work, I don't think using a more classic UI would hold any functionality back. I'm actually almost sure of it. You can dress anything up to look classic if you really want to, without loss of functionality.

The UI doesn't matter. It's changing the underlying architecture that's the problem. 

2 minutes ago, emosun said:

again I dont think you understand what I'm saying but it's fine you don't have to understand.

This is clearly getting nowhere. Don't go actively looking for an argument. 

[Odur32]

3 minutes ago, IKnight said:

I doubt home users still use Win 7. Its mostly companies, school, healthcare..... All of which would have a hard time updating.

You'd be very surprised, how many home users, especially older people, who still use windows 7. Actually, there are many companies who do regular hardware/software upgrade cycles. However, some schools do not, I am not sure about hospitals.

[kilgore_T]

there is no profit in it

 

ms is a publically traded corporation - no profit means no go

[emosun]

Just now, kilgore_T said:

there is no profit in it

windows phone
microsoft edge
free windows 10

which one of these was profitable?

[kilgore_T]

Just now, emosun said:

windows phone
microsoft edge
free windows 10

which one of these was profitable?

they was intention to create profit with these products

 

[Odur32]

You could make Windows 10 almost identical to Windows 7 just by changing the UI, there shouldn't be any need to screw around with the base code to alter functionality. Sure, some features have been added changed or removed, but that can happen during the life cycle of any software.

[emosun]

1 minute ago, kilgore_T said:

they was intention to create profit with these products

there was also quite a large failure to as well. Unless you count all the telemetry data they sell to the nsa and all the doritos advertisements in the start menu on windows 10.

it's more a "what if". might have helped the adoption rate a lot more if it didn't seem like an os change but rather a very large update.

[SansVarnic]

2 minutes ago, emosun said:

windows phone
microsoft edge
free windows 10

which one of these was profitable?

Windows could have been very profitable but had the company actually invested in the product it would have succeeded very well. Problem was it was plagued by 2 men that could not see it's part in the bigger picture. 

 

Edge was slow to get moving, but it is gaining traction, Edge was never meant to be a profit garner. IE was not either.

 

WIN10is actually a bit profitable but the intention, as announced by MS, was not expected to be a profit source.

[emosun]

1 minute ago, Odur32 said:

You could make Windows 10 almost identical to Windows 7 just by changing the UI, there shouldn't be any need to screw around with the base code to alter functionality. Sure, some features have been added changed or removed, but that can happen during the life cycle of any software.

Yeah.

few people realize that when you reskin something you can even leave feature in , and simply not make a button for it in the skin. so technically you wouldn't have to change the software at all , just the skin which can sometimes be done automatically. 

[Odur32]

3 minutes ago, emosun said:

there is no profit in it

If you could get more widespread adoption of a product simply by dressing it up as something else that would essentially be profitable in and of itself. Provided the amount of work to do said dress up was less than you made from selling the product to the new adopters. Companies do it all the time, they essentially rework existing products to fit the appeal of a wider audience.

[emosun]

Just now, Odur32 said:

If you could get more widespread adoption of a product simply by dressing it up as something else that would essentially be profitable in and of itself. Provided the amount of work to do said dress up was less than you made from selling the product to the new adopters. Companies do it all the time, they essentially rework existing products to fit the appeal of a wider audience.

Yeah like when they rebadge fords into lincolns.