Microsoft will offer biannual feature updates to Windows 10

[aniilv]

Service packs will be like DLC which you need to buy :]

[nobodyspecial]

https://www.extremetech.com/computing/248069-unofficial-patch-unblocks-windows-7-8-1-updates-kaby-lake-ryzen

https://github.com/zeffy/kb4012218-19
Link to the patch that fixes win7 updated for Kaby Lake and Ryzen cpus
screw MSFT. Die win10, DIE! What the heck would I buy an OS for if it only last 18 months? The deal is even worse now than before...LOL.

[Lucio]

At work we've had our first issue due to Windows 10 auto-patching, seems the Creator's edition has altered some or all of the cryptography components within the .Net framework and our licencing mechanism went beserk.

Cue frantic patching and much swearing from the development team in trying to isolate where and why this was failing.

Even more frustrating, the issue doesn't occur if you have Visual Studio installed, so unless we fancy doing a complete build to an installer each time Microsoft releases an update, we've got next to no hope in keeping up

[Saracen]

At work we've had our first issue due to Windows 10 auto-patching, seems the Creator's edition has altered some or all of the cryptography components within the .Net framework and our licencing mechanism went beserk.

Cue frantic patching and much swearing from the development team in trying to isolate where and why this was failing.

Even more frustrating, the issue doesn't occur if you have Visual Studio installed, so unless we fancy doing a complete build to an installer each time Microsoft releases an update, we've got next to no hope in keeping up

It's always seemed axiomatic to me that that risk was inherent in the way MS do things with Win10, and that sooner or later, for some users, it would bite.

Years ago, I had software that wouldn't run on a new version of an OS. But because I controlled when, and indeed, if I upgraded, I discovered that on a test system prior to converting live systems. I also had hardware that ceased working due to driver changes in a service pack, but again, found out in a test environment. In both cases, the software and hardware was important enough to me that my solution was to not upgrade at all.

But, in their 'wisdom', MS has decided that, except for select versions, they know better than me what I want on my systems. Well, no, MS, you blooming don't.

[DanceswithUnix]

Even more frustrating, the issue doesn't occur if you have Visual Studio installed, so unless we fancy doing a complete build to an installer each time Microsoft releases an update, we've got next to no hope in keeping up

To be fair, I think that is the whole point of giving early access to people who ask for it. I have done the same with Linux in the past, a bug fixed in the C libraries showed a bug in company code, but running a test machine against early access code meant the fix was released months before any customers hit the problem. In an era of VMs and automation, it shouldn't really be an issue to detect install problems early.

OK these things are easier in Linux, but just saying I don't think it is a Windows specific problem.

[MercutioUK]

I wonder if this is paving the way for a subscription model for Windows releases? Guaranteed updates for a monthly fee - "Windows 365"

I'd expect a MS shaped brick through your window with a "snitches get stitches" type note attached tbh

[shaithis]

I wonder if this is paving the way for a subscription model for Windows releases? Guaranteed updates for a monthly fee - "Windows 365"

Can't see how they can switch to that now. They made a bold statement that Windows 10 was the last version of Windows and then they made a big deal out of the whole free upgrade, I cannot see how they could now start charging after forcing a free upgrade on people......lawyers would rip them to bits in one of the biggest class action lawsuits ever.

Of course, they could start offering a subscription model as an alternative.

[bitbucket]

I wonder how long before Microsoft drop the '10'. Seems like it would be sensible to eventually just refer to it as 'Windows', given that they've already said that 10 is the final major release

[scaryjim]

...t because I controlled when, and indeed, if I upgraded, I discovered that on a test system prior to converting live systems. ...

To be fair, if you're running the right ring of Windows 10 Enterprise, you can already do that. CBB + WSUS means that updates don't become available until several months after they've been publicly released, and with WSUS you can delay instaling them until you're ready anyway.

Plus you can get Insider releases in advance of public availability, giving an even longer testing period to find and resolve any compatibility issues.

Of course, this only really works if you're a large enough organisation to be able to invest in an internal IT department and to run proper enterprise versions of Windows. If you're an SME it'd be difficult to justify staff just to do that testing. OTOH, to me that just screams opportunity for SME tech support companies to offer a Windows compatibility testing service....

Can't see how they can switch to that now. They made a bold statement that Windows 10 was the last version of Windows and then they made a big deal out of the whole free upgrade, I cannot see how they could now start charging after forcing a free upgrade on people....

"Windows 10 will always be free for the supported lifetime of your device". I suspect we're about to see a definition for "supported lifetime" and it's not going to be one many people will like

[spacein_vader]

To be fair, if you're running the right ring of Windows 10 Enterprise, you can already do that. CBB + WSUS means that updates don't become available until several months after they've been publicly released, and with WSUS you can delay instaling them until you're ready anyway.

Plus you can get Insider releases in advance of public availability, giving an even longer testing period to find and resolve any compatibility issues.

Of course, this only really works if you're a large enough organisation to be able to invest in an internal IT department and to run proper enterprise versions of Windows. If you're an SME it'd be difficult to justify staff just to do that testing. OTOH, to me that just screams opportunity for SME tech support companies to offer a Windows compatibility testing service....



"Windows 10 will always be free for the supported lifetime of your device". I suspect we're about to see a definition for "supported lifetime" and it's not going to be one many people will like

Alternatively, windows 10 will always be free, but the next major update we're calling Windows 365 & will cost £10 a month. Of course you don't have to pay, a free account will allow you to use UWP apps only.

[Ozaron]

I wonder if this is paving the way for a subscription model for Windows releases? Guaranteed updates for a monthly fee - "Windows 365"

Service packs will be like DLC which you need to buy :]

"Windows 10 will always be free for the supported lifetime of your device". I suspect we're about to see a definition for "supported lifetime" and it's not going to be one many people will like

Alternatively ... Of course you don't have to pay, a free account will allow you to use UWP apps only.

Well isn't this the happiest Microsoft thread in a while. I think the questions are, if people embargo Windows purchases because they don't want subscription service for OS or updates, is there still value for Microsoft in swapping to it? Will the subscription revenue substitute for the hit in user count? Will people on W7 stay there... for eternity? And how many times has Saracen said "I told you so"?

[scaryjim]

... I think the questions are:

Let's do some speculation, shall we

... if people embargo Windows purchases because they don't want subscription service for OS or updates, is there still value for Microsoft in swapping to it? ...

As long as some people continue to use Windows, yes. There are all sorts of ways they can handle the move to subscription with most people not even noticing. It will be very interesting, if they do jump to subscription for the OS, to see how they handle it. But they've been saying for years that their existing monetisation program for Windows wasn't working for them; if what they're doing now isn't working, there'll always be value in changing to something else.

... Will the subscription revenue substitute for the hit in user count? ...

That's actually two questions in one, because you're assuming there will be a hit in user count; probably because you're getting a lot of echo chamber effect from reading the same opinion many times on Hexus. It's really easy to forget that the kind of enthusiast that populates Hexus (and a number of other online forums about technology) is a tiny proportion of the total PC market.

The old financial model for Windows would bring in a whole heap of money once every 3 - 5 years as people jumped on the new OS bandwagon, and then a steady but low revenue for the remaining period as people who were out of line with the OS launches bought/built new computers ... plus a steady regular income from people on the various volume licensing scheme.

If they can move to all Windows users paying a small subscription every year, that's going to make their annual financials a lot more stable. And if you're an enterprise IT manager looking at the costing of your software licensing, MS offering you a regular per user or per device annual license for the software is going to make planning much easier than having to predict how many new licenses you're going to need to invest in each year and buying them in a block.

The unknown is how this is going to work for normal consumers. MS clearly want to move the PC into more of a consumer electronics market, and people aren't used to that - they're used to buying a computer and having it work until they get a new one. OTOH the vast majority of the market know Windows and will want to use it, so there's ahuge commercial inertia there, so if they don't make it too egregious then they'll likely keep the vast majority of those customers too.

So, will they suffer a hit in user count? Probably, but it's unlikely to be a significant one. Will the subscription revenue make up for it? In terms of planning and financial performance, probably, because their annual finances will become a lot more predictable and easier for them to manage. And that's probably more important to them than counting every last cent...

Will people on W7 stay there... for eternity? ...

Mostly, no. MS have already pulled the plug on updates for people running Windows 7 and 8.1 on Kaby Lake/Ryzen, and now that's happened I can't see AMD and Intel bothering with Win 7 chipset drivers for their latest platforms. There will be people who forge ahead with unsupported Win 7 for many years (after all, there are still people running Win XP out there, and for some purposes that will be fine. But for mainstream usage people simply won't be able to stick to Win 7 for ever, as software will eventually leave them behind.

... And how many times has Saracen said "I told you so"?

Never; that's not Saracen's style But his views are well known and he's not shy about telling people how he feels. He's also not the only one on this forum that's discussed the possibility/probability of MS moving to some form of subscription service for Windows. AND it's worth pointing out that so far MS haven't moved to a subscription model for Windows; they've just made a number of support and business decisions that make it easier for them to introduce a subscription model if they choose to. Where they go from here is anyone's guess.

[Ozaron]

But they've been saying for years that their existing monetisation program for Windows wasn't working for them; if what they're doing now isn't working, there'll always be value in changing to something else.

Sadly I think this much was always a given - Microsoft feels compelled to add more and more features and add-ons to the platform. It doesn't look like Windows Store is offering that much on returns. Thus, likely, value it is. Microsoft do have their eye on longer term decisions than us users anyway and they won't mind unless Store stays underused.

That's actually two questions in one, because you're assuming there will be a hit in user count; probably because you're getting a lot of echo chamber effect from reading the same opinion many times on Hexus. It's really easy to forget that the kind of enthusiast that populates Hexus (and a number of other online forums about technology) is a tiny proportion of the total PC market.

Quite true, but PC enthusiasts will not be the only ones who are inconvenienced by this. Just one example could be people on much lower incomes - traditionally they'd buy a device with Windows on it and that would last the lifetime of the device. What now? Do people buy a device with Windows, not pay for it and then lose it? What do they do afterwards? Sure, Windows may seem pretty critical to regular users but in the end money is king and if people swap to some other plausible alternative after a bit of google time then those are users Microsoft will lose. This group could be easily extended to people unwilling or unable to use a bank card.

Oh, and isn't the PC enthusiast group growing at a fair rate of knots?

The old financial model for Windows would bring in a whole heap of money once every 3 - 5 years as people jumped on the new OS bandwagon, and then a steady but low revenue for the remaining period as people who were out of line with the OS launches bought/built new computers ... plus a steady regular income from people on the various volume licensing scheme.

And this time Microsoft forfeited said bandwagon money, in favour of a little (I assume?) ad revenue over time and market share. And they still scrape to achieve half market share 7 has with 10. 25% is still a lot (if it is anywhere near accurate) but subscription fees might be another hurdle for prospective buyers of 10 coming from 7. Doesn't sound like stable financials at all to me yet.

If they can move to all Windows users paying a small subscription every year, that's going to make their annual financials a lot more stable. And if you're an enterprise IT manager looking at the costing of your software licensing, MS offering you a regular per user or per device annual license for the software is going to make planning much easier than having to predict how many new licenses you're going to need to invest in each year and buying them in a block.

*If* they can move them. Hell, it was hard enough work getting people to leave XP, let alone entirely change their payment method from one time to slow trickle that may well end up costing significantly more in the long term. Besides, they can't really impose subscription on current users AFAIK, which means coming up with a new Windows or version entirely. (And plausibly abandoning all non-subscription products)

I would definitely agree with the licensing strategy for firms. That said, again, Microsoft would likely have to tempt them away from whatever their current systems are over to a new subscription version, and render their old license assets much less valuable.

The unknown is how this is going to work for normal consumers. MS clearly want to move the PC into more of a consumer electronics market, and people aren't used to that - they're used to buying a computer and having it work until they get a new one. OTOH the vast majority of the market know Windows and will want to use it, so there's ahuge commercial inertia there, so if they don't make it too egregious then they'll likely keep the vast majority of those customers too.

Totally agreed. But they'll be walking on eggshells, especially if any free OS distribution from anyone becomes popular and viable. AFAIK Mint is getting that way... I'm not much of a Linux guy.
Pricing would be nigh on impossible for them to decide on; and I bet it'll start low and increase. The good news is that Windows has essentially become like a service rather than a one time product so they are sort of already in a position to swap to subscription.

Mostly, no. MS have already pulled the plug on updates for people running Windows 7 and 8.1 on Kaby Lake/Ryzen, and now that's happened I can't see AMD and Intel bothering with Win 7 chipset drivers for their latest platforms. There will be people who forge ahead with unsupported Win 7 for many years (after all, there are still people running Win XP out there, and for some purposes that will be fine. But for mainstream usage people simply won't be able to stick to Win 7 for ever, as software will eventually leave them behind.

Well, people seem to have figured out a workaround for updating with these chips. Assuming Skylake, Piledriver, Ryzen or Kaby systems are in existence, how much mileage do they have on unsupported 7? How scary is a lack of support anyway, if you can get hold of a good (and still updated for 7, what software maker could afford to ignore its market share) security package? Popular software developers would have to abandon 7 before anyone should be very concerned and even once they have, I bet it'd still be a solid environment, if outdated. Definitely enough life left to give the user time to learn Linux or Ubuntu or something open source if they wanted. ...Maybe even enough to figure out where Microsoft is going, before jumping back on their ship.

Never; that's not Saracen's style But his views are well known and he's not shy about telling people how he feels. He's also not the only one on this forum that's discussed the possibility/probability of MS moving to some form of subscription service for Windows. AND it's worth pointing out that so far MS haven't moved to a subscription model for Windows; they've just made a number of support and business decisions that make it easier for them to introduce a subscription model if they choose to. Where they go from here is anyone's guess.

Well, how many times does anyone need to say it before they become sick of doing so... But more seriously, can anyone even imagine an alternative to subscription? Windows Store would have to have a much larger user base than it currently does, Office can only work so hard to keep people interested, etc. An Apple system decreases in price when Windows grows more expensive, though it is worth admitting PCs would be cheaper than ever on their first purchase.

aaaa

[scaryjim]

... one example could be people on much lower incomes - traditionally they'd buy a device with Windows on it and that would last the lifetime of the device. What now? Do people buy a device with Windows, not pay for it and then lose it? What do they do afterwards? ...

tbh I don't have a lot to say to the rest of your points, since we're well into the realms of speculation here and I've covered pretty much everything I'm thinking above, but this kind of loops back to some of the discussions over Win 7/8.1 that are ongoing too and it seems pretty fundamental to me.

I don't believe there's any indication yet that MS are going to start bricking devices once they go out of support. Windows feature updates are supported for 18 months, then go out of support. I've not yet seen anything to say they expire (which does happen to insider updates, and that does brick your device).

So - assuming MS move to some sort of subscription model for Windows feature updates - if someone buys a new PC but opts not to subscribe for feature updates, they get still "quality updates" for 18 months*. Based on how MS have dealt with the Win 7/8.1 unsupported hardware scenario, the likelihood is they'll then cease to get any updates, but will continue to be able to use their device - although I imagine they'll get frequent reminders that they're not getting any updates and suggesting they might want to part with some cash to upgrade to the latest version.

But to reiterate my key point there - nothing I have read so far indicates that MS will brick devices that don't keep up to date with the latest version. And if that remains the case and they move to a subscription mode for feature updates, it will actually give people who don't care about being "officially supported" the update-free OS they seem to so desperately want....

*EDIT: just to add: many OEMs currently offer a trial subscription to Office 365 on new devices. I wonder if we might see something similar with Windows if it moves to a subscription model: 12 months free trail (i.e. two feature updates) and then you'd have to pay for more...