Microsoft: Windows 10 will not be sold as a subscription + Windows 10 is free for 7/8.1 users

[Trik'Stari]

So then I have some very bad news.

WHY GOD WHY?!

ITS SO UGLY!

[GoodBytes]

Thank god! I think this might be the first windows i actually buy!

Watch it still being pirated and make it to the top torrented programs list.

[Hulk]

I hope there are two versions like Windows 8- Windows 8 and 8 Pro, and those with 8 Pro/ 7 Ultimate get the one with all the extra features or atleast some sort of goodie like Office. And I'm REALLY glad they didn't go for a subscription model. I prefer one large uprfront payment rather than many smaller ones over a course of time. I feel like I don't "own" my computer in that sense and would probably abandon Windows if they did do that.

[-TesseracT-]

Great news! I wouldn't like a subscription based OS.

[Misanthrope]

This is an odd one for me but I personally don't see why most people are disappointed at this: It's a fucking OS, you have to be way too much of a fucking nerd to get exited about an OS for the most part (Yay! New Linux Mint version gives us access to better drivers and the new kernell omg!) but if there was one feature that would make sense for the corporate folk it was subscription based....which they kinda already get with the Microsoft licensing program anyway but well.

[Techteen14]

Good post @X1XNobleX1XBut I personally expect that one day, Windows will be offered as a subscription like Office is. More and more companies are going that path. To be clear, I mean: subscription based is an OPTION to the RETAIL BOX full purchase. Obviously if you buy a computer it comes with Windows, you don't need to pay later on for it.

Actually, since every other OS (Linux, OS X) is free, I'd think the next step would be a free OS, not a subscription.

[Techteen14]

WHY GOD WHY?!

ITS SO UGLY!

I hate the look of Windows 7, and love Windows 8/.1/10. Win7 is so hideously skeumorphic, like Android 2.3 1.6 or iOS 4. Win8/.1/10, however, is beautifully minimalistic, like Android 5.0 and a lesser extent iOS 7/8.

initiate flame war. It IS true, though. I don't know why everyone hates the Metro UI, it looks great. Can people not adapt?

[Jormy]

I'm just stoked that I paid a stupid low amount for the 8 key I got, I think it was like 15-20 bucks and now I get to get another OS. WIN!

[swifty7]

As long as I can set the theme to windows 7 and not that ugly metro look, I will get the free upgrade

You can easily change the look of win 8/8.1/10 to that of win 7

 

http://www.addictivetips.com/windows-tips/best-windows-8-1-themes/

 

try Aero Glow 8.1, it will be to your liking.

 

I myself moved on.  I like the way windows 8.1 looks. 

 

IMPORTANT:

 

to be on the safe side, make sure you backup first before making any alterations.

[Trik'Stari]

I hate the look of Windows 7, and love Windows 8/.1/10. Win7 is so hideously skeumorphic, like Android 2.3 1.6 or iOS 4. Win8/.1/10, however, is beautifully minimalistic, like Android 5.0 and a lesser extent iOS 7/8.initiate flame war. It IS true, though. I don't know why everyone hates the Metro UI, it looks great. Can people not adapt?

it looks like a metro-sexual faux ios is why. It feels like it was made for people who don't know how to use a computer.

that and I hate the continued use of the word "app".

ITS PROG NOT APP

[alicskysareblue]

I am glad that wndows 10 will be free, I dont mind windows 8 on my yoga but for a desktop its rather annoying.

 

I also really hope they improve UAC. it really annoying to have to go into regedit  to disable it, its also equally annoying that so many windows applications (i.e modern ui applications) are tied to it

[GoodBytes]

I am glad that wndows 10 will be free, I dont mind windows 8 on my yoga but for a desktop its rather annoying.

 

I also really hope they improve UAC. it really annoying to have to go into regedit  to disable it, its also equally annoying that so many windows applications (i.e modern ui applications) are tied to it

UAC is a critical security system that should not be set to auto-continue. It has been proven to block most virus and malware from infecting your system automatically without your knowledge.

So, now if you open a picture or what ever file, and it makes Windows prompt you for admin privileges, you have this last chance of defense of hitting no, and block it.

UAC should only pop-up when you do system level changes. Something that you should not be doing on a daily basis.

[GoodBytes]

it looks like a metro-sexual faux ios is why. It feels like it was made for people who don't know how to use a computer.

that and I hate the continued use of the word "app".

ITS PROG NOT APP

Back in the 90s, where storage was limited. I had a drive called "Apps & Games"

The term was used back then.

Apps means Application, a software that give you utility

Games remains games as it is shorten to video game, or electronic interactive video games, ot be specific, but fall under interactive entertainment, which is the definition of game.

[Techteen14]

it looks like a metro-sexual faux ios is why. It feels like it was made for people who don't know how to use a computer.

…which is why they made it so that you never have to see the Metro UI (Modern UI?) anymore if you don't like it. You can remove all live tiles from the start menu as well. People with touchscreen devices or who like the look can pin Live Tiles to the start menu.

Think of Live Tiles like widgets on Android. Not mandatory, but there for people who want quick info at a glance.

Also, think of all the other features you get with Windows 10, like Cortana, whatever they call their version of Exposé and more security.

that and I hate the continued use of the word "app".

ITS PROG NOT APP

App is short for application program. App=program.

[Nowak]

that and I hate the continued use of the word "app".

ITS PROG NOT APP

I was using the word "app" long before Google, Microsoft and Apple did.

 

*dons hipster glasses*

[mr moose]

I was using the word "app" long before Google, Microsoft and Apple did.

 

*dons hipster glasses*

 

really, you were using it in 1987? Your profile says your 21?  Killer app has been in use since before the 90's to define any program that is so good people will buy brand specific hardware just to get it (especially apple products).

[Nowak]

really, you were using it in 1987? Your profile says your 21?  Killer app has been in use since before the 90's to define any program that is so good people will buy brand specific hardware just to get it (especially apple products).

Well, maybe I was exaggerating a bit. I've been calling applications "apps" since forever ago, though, way before the mobile platforms took over and "app" became very common usage.

[mr moose]

Well, maybe I was exaggerating a bit. I've been calling applications "apps" since forever ago, though, way before the mobile platforms took over and "app" became very common usage.

 

The term app was in common use long before mobile platforms.  Even bill gates defined IE a killer app before the anti trust lawsuit in 2001. 

[alicskysareblue]

UAC is a critical security system that should not be set to auto-continue. It has been proven to block most virus and malware from infecting your system automatically without your knowledge.

So, now if you open a picture or what ever file, and it makes Windows prompt you for admin privileges, you have this last chance of defense of hitting no, and block it.

UAC should only pop-up when you do system level changes. Something that you should not be doing on a daily basis.

thanks for the info

[LiamApex]

FREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE FTW 

[dalekphalm]

I call it silly, because I work with Microsoft on a professional level every day and know what they are capable off, and what they pretend to be capable off. Though I cannot share the exact names, some of the US largest corps I support are using MS's server farms and they are not that reliable. If they can't support selected business partners, i have my doubts how they would behave if they had to service both the business partners and millions of users at the same time.

 

EDIT: By not being all that reliable, I mean that they are down or partially down about once a month on average. While this is well within a business spec I don't think they would be willing to offer similar reliability to casual users. Even then having OS issues once a month could be rather annoying.

 

EDIT2: They could be reasonable and request an authentication once every month or so, with non-online builds being permanently authenticated, but reasonable and corporation are not 2 words that should be in the same sentence, unless an operator "NOT" is used...

I'm going to have to agree with @mr moose here, if you cannot back up your claims with any sources (Articles about businesses complaining about the service, or number of outages, etc), then your claim is just some random claim on the internet. Please forgive us if we take it for a grain of salt. Microsoft's network of Servers, and Azure specifically, is one of the biggest (if not the biggest) in the entire world. Only Google comes anywhere close to as powerful.

 

So you wanna just tell me you have inside information but not provide any evidence to support you're claims?  According to MS there are about 1.5B PC running windows. If MS have over a 1 million servers on line and every body decided to upgrade at once each server would only have to authenticate 1500 pc's in that day.  Doesn't sound like much to me.

[mr moose]

I'm going to have to agree with @mr moose here, if you cannot back up your claims with any sources (Articles about businesses complaining about the service, or number of outages, etc), then your claim is just some random claim on the internet. Please forgive us if we take it for a grain of salt. Microsoft's network of Servers, and Azure specifically, is one of the biggest (if not the biggest) in the entire world. Only Google comes anywhere close to as powerful.

 

And for the record I am very happy to be proven wrong,  I just need something a little more substantial to base my understanding on.

[dalekphalm]

Actually, since every other OS (Linux, OS X) is free, I'd think the next step would be a free OS, not a subscription.

OS X is not free. At least, not in the sense that you're talking about (Like Linux). OS X is paid for as part of the hardware cost when you purchase a Mac. It's essentially subsidized by hardware sales.

 

Now, before you say "Well I can get it for free and do a hackintosh!", sorry, but that's explicitly and specifically against the OS X terms of usage and EULA. It specifically states that OS X must be used on "Apple Hardware".

 

Since Microsoft doesn't make computers (Surface Pro aside), they can't do that. How are they supposed to make their money back if you build a computer, and they give you Windows for free? It's not like most of you are going to be purchasing apps in the Microsoft App store, or buying Office.

 

it looks like a metro-sexual faux ios is why. It feels like it was made for people who don't know how to use a computer.

that and I hate the continued use of the word "app".

ITS PROG NOT APP

App is short for Application. Application = Program. The terms are interchangeable. App has also been in use by Microsoft, and other old school computing companies, since the 1980's. Android and iOS popularized "App" to mean "Mobile Application", but the term still applies to full desktop Applications as well.

 

I am glad that wndows 10 will be free, I dont mind windows 8 on my yoga but for a desktop its rather annoying.

 

I also really hope they improve UAC. it really annoying to have to go into regedit  to disable it, its also equally annoying that so many windows applications (i.e modern ui applications) are tied to it

Err... please turn UAC back on. Unless you're an expert level power user, with excellent Anti-Virus, a custom built pfSense firewall, and mad networking skills, you should probably really leave it on.

 

Want to know why OS X and Linux get so few viruses? Because any system level change requires a password (Or elevating to root power, Essentially the same thing as UAC).

 

UAC is a critical security system that should not be set to auto-continue. It has been proven to block most virus and malware from infecting your system automatically without your knowledge.

So, now if you open a picture or what ever file, and it makes Windows prompt you for admin privileges, you have this last chance of defense of hitting no, and block it.

UAC should only pop-up when you do system level changes. Something that you should not be doing on a daily basis.

This! Very important! It's annoying, but if you find that annoying, then you'll hate OS X, and Linux.

 

…which is why they made it so that you never have to see the Metro UI (Modern UI?) anymore if you don't like it. You can remove all live tiles from the start menu as well. People with touchscreen devices or who like the look can pin Live Tiles to the start menu.

Think of Live Tiles like widgets on Android. Not mandatory, but there for people who want quick info at a glance.

Also, think of all the other features you get with Windows 10, like Cortana, whatever they call their version of Exposé and more security.

App is short for application program. App=program.

This. Facts!

[deathjester]

OS X is not free. At least, not in the sense that you're talking about (Like Linux). OS X is paid for as part of the hardware cost when you purchase a Mac. It's essentially subsidized by hardware sales.

 

Now, before you say "Well I can get it for free and do a hackintosh!", sorry, but that's explicitly and specifically against the OS X terms of usage and EULA. It specifically states that OS X must be used on "Apple Hardware".

 

 

Apple does not make or own the technology to Intel CPU's, LG panel's,  AMD GPU's, Nvidia GPU's, Intel integrated GPU's.

 

That is why there will never be a lawsuit to stop personal hackintoshing and there will never be one. 1) It would fail. 2) Because the "Mac" brand sells due to people being ignorant that they are now Intel PC's with parts you can buy on your own. One of the reasons the Mac brand sells, is because people see it as an ethereal device that is not a PC. You see this in media constantly "Mac Vs PC", even though they are both PC's. They can put whatever they want in the EULA, it still won't stand up in court.

 

There WAS a Hackintosh lawsuit when people sold Hackintosh's as Apple clones and profited off their name. That lawsuit was successful in this country (U.S.), but has failed in others. 

Germany? You can buy a Apple "clone".

http://www.pearc.de/

Spain? Same.

http://www.notatus.es/es/

 

I do however agree with you on Apple being a hardware company and MS being a software company. Apple makes a ton of money on their hardware. MS does not. MS makes it on the software. It's comparing two different profit models and you really can't do that. 

[dalekphalm]

Apple does not make or own the technology to Intel CPU's, LG panel's,  AMD GPU's, Nvidia GPU's, Intel integrated GPU's.

 

That is why there will never be a lawsuit to stop personal hackintoshing and there will never be one. 1) It would fail. 2) Because the "Mac" brand sells due to people being ignorant that they are now Intel PC's with parts you can buy on your own. One of the reasons the Mac brand sells, is because people see it as an ethereal device that is not a PC. You see this in media constantly "Mac Vs PC", even though they are both PC's. They can put whatever they want in the EULA, it still won't stand up in court.

 

There WAS a Hackintosh lawsuit when people sold Hackintosh's as Apple clones and profited off their name. That lawsuit was successful in this country (U.S.), but has failed in others. 

Germany? You can buy a Apple "clone".

http://www.pearc.de/

Spain? Same.

http://www.notatus.es/es/

 

I do however agree with you on Apple being a hardware company and MS being a software company. Apple makes a ton of money on their hardware. MS does not. MS makes it on the software. It's comparing two different profit models and you really can't do that. 

Agreed, the physical difference is negligible.

 

Your point in bold however was the meat of my argument. People cannot expect Microsoft to use Apple's business model, because they operate their companies in two completely different ways.

 

Microsoft would lose significantly more money when giving Windows for free compared to Apple with OS X.