Windows 10 is "the last version of Windows," says Microsoft dev

[HavoCnMe]

Looks like I'll be running Win8.1 until end of life.

[peterb]

Not a hope in hell I'm paying them a subscription for this OS. Microsoft can F off, I think piracy of the OS will start seeing a spike again with this kind of crap.

Steam and co must be laughing as well at this statement.

Not if your OS is sending back its serial number every so often fr revalidation. Unless you don't connect to the net of course.

I could see this being a nightmare for corporates - regression testing is bad enough as it is, Corporates are reluctant to upgrade from a locked down OS as it is - I can't see them wanting a series of ad hoc changes.

[Hicks12]

Doesnt Apple pretty much do this? They sell service packs...

I personally dont mind if it goes to a subscription model, but I am not one to care about their privacy as at the end of the day my choices as a 13 year old gave my privacy away to Microsoft and Google so I found no need to revoke it but simply embrace it... every other company gets denied my data directly mind .

[Heisuro]

Apple used to sell service packs but not any more, it's been free so long you have a Mac and updates are free forever until the hardware isn't supported.
If windows becomes a subscription based service, I'm very sure piracy will serge or people will migrate to linux. There's already really good open source software out there, and there's increasingly more support for Steam games

[GuidoLS]

Amazing. The word subscription doesn't appear anywhere in the article. ANYWHERE. Nor does it appear anywhere in any announcement. Or press release. Or Windows 10 related material from Microsoft. ANYWHERE.

Piracy? It's already through the roof, and yet MS has said they will STILL give Win10 away, for free, even to the pirates.

And what does Steam and co have to laugh at? Seriously, on an OS level, what does Steam have to laugh at?

[Hicks12]

Apple used to sell service packs but not any more, it's been free so long you have a Mac and updates are free forever until the hardware isn't supported.
If windows becomes a subscription based service, I'm very sure piracy will serge or people will migrate to linux. There's already really good open source software out there, and there's increasingly more support for Steam games

Thanks for correcting me, I dont follow much Apple news so I obviously missed that change .

Still as you say there are plenty of good open source alternatives, I personally rock Ubuntu at work and its a god send however the one thing that is lacking is a handful of Google apps and a big chunk of gaming support which is the only reason my main machine at home stays on windows as I use it for mostly games .

With Valve focusing on a linux based OS it has certainly helped get developers attention, combine this with the fact vulkan from Khronos group is looking pretty solid so we will finally have a good alternative to DX. Future looks good but I think there is plenty of room for both MS and the open source alternatives to thrive, MS have just been moving their business in the right direction I think.

[Saracen]

....

Pay to use? No thanks, watch the flood of folks moving across to other OS's - MacOSX or Linux. Annual subscription I'd be more amenable to, depending on how it's implemented. So if a failure to renew means no updates, but I can continue to use then I'd be okay with that. On the other hand if a lack of subscription means limitations on use or continued "you need to activate a new subscription" then they can stuff that.

MUI ads would last only until someone figures out a blocker app for them, then a whole lot of people would opt-out. Me being one.

....

Me being two, too.

But isn't an annual sub basically the same as a monthly sub, in principle? Which, really, is pay-to-use.

I seem to remember, not long ago, getting a chorus of dismissive and even disdainful rebuttals (I don't mean you, Crossy) when I suggested that "free for 12 months" suggested a what did I call it, "change in direction of travel" for MS strategy on Windows, and that I suspected that the "change how we monetarise Windows" was leading pretty much to this .... Windows as a "service" not a product, and that that hinted at what changing the monetisation model implied.

It still, as back then, implies to me MS sre changing from a company offering software products, to one wanting to sell hardware, be it phones or tablets, and services, be it OS services, Office services, or cloud-type services.

In short, they see the future of computing not as one in which we all own highly configurable and hence highly personal devices, like PCs, but rather one where all the computing goes on out in some amorphous computing cloud, and we all have fairly generic devices, be it next-gen phones or tablets, we use to access "services" on/in that cloud.

And for which we will pay a subscription.

Which means they want the predictability of tapping our wallets for £x/month (or per year because, ultimately, it's the same thing) rather than US having control over whether we upgrade or not.

And that is why I, personally, am not going there.

I'm not, now or indeed ever, paying a subscription for Windows. I note MS haven't yet said anything about subscriptions, about how "monetisation" will take place. But on the assumption that they do indeed to get paid, somehow, for ongoing Windows, subscription of some form (and time period) is looking increasingly likely.

Well, not doing it. I WILL keep direct control over when, and if, I upgrade and if I can't do it with Windows, I'll do it with something else. MS are not dipping into my pocket every month, or year. Not for Windows, not for Office, not for cloud services, not even for Xbox live, or whatever they call it now. I rejected it for Photoshop, and reject it for MS stuff too.

And that's why I'm keeping Win10 at arm's length.

And it's largely why I was so angry with MS when they tried to shove W8 MUI down our throats, and why I so absolutely rejected it. The agenda was the same - leverage those exact same devices, phones snd tablets, by piggybacking on the Windows installed userbase, attempting to seize a dominant market position by leveraging the Windows userbase. And it's STILL, even now, what they're up to, IMHO.

[Hicks12]

Remember Saracen they are giving Windows 10 for free if you switch to it within 12 months of release, not simply 12 months free. I suspect it will be subscription at some point however I doubt it will happen in Windows 10 or at least not within a fair amount of time, I suspect once Windows 8.1 official support has ended will be the time when they add a subscription as at that point they can then cease main updates to windows 10 users and say 'keep subscribing for more features/developments)'

At least that makes sense to me, they cant just upgrade everyone to Windows 10 only to completely take it away so I suspect they will just stop updates like their normal method of 'killing' off an OS version.

[Saracen]

The comments I've seen are distinctly ambiguous as to what's free. We won't know for sure exactly what the deal is, until full pricing and contents details are announced.

I know some people say "it's free, so what's the problem?" Well, ask the fish about to swallow the "free food" .... because he hasn't seen the hook and line.

[GuidoLS]

The comments I've seen are distinctly ambiguous as to what's free. We won't know for sure exactly what the deal is, until full pricing and contents details are announced.

I know some people say "it's free, so what's the problem?" Well, ask the fish about to swallow the "free food" .... because he hasn't seen the hook and line.

Flip that on it's head, if we're going to be fair. There's no more absolute proof of a subscription model just as there is no absolute proof of free, other than the word free has been used, multiple times, from multiple people at Microsoft, and the word subscription has never been uttered by anyone at Microsoft. And you know as well as I do that, until such time as the pricing is officially announced, every single time any tech site posts this kind of article, and allows commentary, there's going to be discussion on both sides of the topic.

And realistically, we have just shy of 5 more years on Win 7, and 8 more on 8/8.1. If everything falls apart and goes the absolute worst way possible with Windows 10, and someone can't figure out how to make Windows games run reliably on Linux 100% of the time by then, after GabeN's proclamations from on high, then we're pretty well screwed regardless.

But yes, you are correct - the bluebird of happiness does occasionally crap on someone's birthday cake. But you have to ask yourself, is it healthy to keep looking out for it to the detriment of every other possibility?

[Saracen]

Flip that on it's head, if we're going to be fair. There's no more absolute proof of a subscription model just as there is no absolute proof of free, other than the word free has been used, multiple times, from multiple people at Microsoft, and the word subscription has never been uttered by anyone at Microsoft. And you know as well as I do that, until such time as the pricing is officially announced, every single time any tech site posts this kind of article, and allows commentary, there's going to be discussion on both sides of the topic. ....

Oh sure, there's nothing categoric. And probably won't be until an official launch 'pricing' anouncement. Which is why I said, and even bolded, "suspected" direction of travel, and "looks like", etc.

It is official, though, that they are changing the way they monetise Windows. And one thing after another supports that. Quite how they do so is what's causing the debate. If they'd just come out and tell us precisely what they are, and aren't doing, or considering, it'd go a long way killing off such discussions.

For instance, if Win10 is going to be "free", what features will be in and not in that, and does the 'premium' version have the rest? Or, is it just raising revenue by commissions on MUI apps ( in which, personally, I have no interest at all), or by add-on services like cloud services (again, not interested).

As for looking for problems, well, Windows is kinda important to my computing operations, and business life. Not essential, though. What I would like to know is what to plan for? There are several things I'm planning on doing, and buying, and the last thing I want to do is buy Windows versions IF they're going to go subscription, because if they do, I quit Windows, and will need to start forward thinking in a different direction.

To be honest, I'm happy either way. If they go subscription, I go Linux. If they don't, I'll probably stay Windows provided I can use whatever Win10 proves to look like how I want to, and they don't do something functionally unacceptable to me, be it unavoidable cloud integration, or subscription, or constant online validation checks, etc.

I'd just like to know which way they're going, sooner rather than later.

[Myss_tree]

It still, as back then, implies to me MS sre changing from a company offering software products, to one wanting to sell hardware, be it phones or tablets, and services, be it OS services, Office services, or cloud-type services.

In short, they see the future of computing not as one in which we all own highly configurable and hence highly personal devices, like PCs, but rather one where all the computing goes on out in some amorphous computing cloud, and we all have fairly generic devices, be it next-gen phones or tablets, we use to access "services" on/in that cloud.

And for which we will pay a subscription.

Following a similar line to Apple then which from a business point of view is logical as Apple have been very successful though its doubtful that Microsoft could exactly replicate the same path.
Apple are a hardware company that just happen to have decent OS's whereas Microsoft have always been a software company first who are now making a more serious foray into the hardware sector. Is it possible that at some point should in the future that Windows will only be licensed to run on Microsft hardware?

[Corky34]

Piracy? It's already through the roof, and yet MS has said they will STILL give Win10 away, for free, even to the pirates.

The claim that pirates also get a free copy was widely reported but turned out to be incorrect, while they can upgrade from an illegal copy of Windows 7/8.x there not suddenly going to have a legal copy of W10, a pirated version of Windows will remain a pirated Windows 10.

Is it possible that at some point should in the future that Windows will only be licensed to run on Microsft hardware?

Well from the published system requirements for W10 it seems that's the intention, specifically the dropping of the requirement for vendors to include the ability to disable "Secure Boot" mode.

[excalibur2]

The claim that pirates also get a free copy was widely reported but turned out to be incorrect, while they can upgrade from an illegal copy of Windows 7/8.x there not suddenly going to have a legal copy of W10, a pirated version of Windows will remain a pirated Windows 10.

That doesn't make sense? So does that mean the pirate, of a copy of win 10, cannot buy any extras? Why would MS ignore possible sales erm for a say reformed pirate

[Otherhand]

I seem to remember, not long ago, getting a chorus of dismissive and even disdainful rebuttals (I don't mean you, Crossy) when I suggested that "free for 12 months" suggested a what did I call it, "change in direction of travel" for MS strategy on Windows, and that I suspected that the "change how we monetarise Windows" was leading pretty much to this .... Windows as a "service" not a product, and that that hinted at what changing the monetisation model implied.

You can go back and read what I said to you, if you like. You were arguing that Windows 10 was going to be a subscription service, and I told you that nobody could know if that would be the case in the future but we had a solid assurance right then that Windows 10 would not be a subscription service. And it still won't be.

Windows 10 will be supported for years, and it will not be a subscription service. Eventually there might be a Windows that is, but I never said it wouldn't. "Free for the first 12 months" was only a foul-up of explaining W10's grace period for accepting the update. If Windows goes subs-based in the future, that won't validate your position at the time, and nor was there some kind of hint contained within this. It'll only be coincidence; MS did not set-up a year's grace period because of subliminal leanings towards subscription models.

[Corky34]

That doesn't make sense? So does that mean the pirate, of a copy of win 10, cannot buy any extras? Why would MS ignore possible sales erm for a say reformed pirate

That's a question everyone has asked, all we know for certain is that...

With Windows 10, although non-Genuine PCs may be able to upgrade to Windows 10, the upgrade will not change the genuine state of the license. Non-Genuine Windows is not published by Microsoft. It is not properly licensed, or supported by Microsoft or a trusted partner. If a device was considered non-genuine or mislicensed prior to the upgrade, that device will continue to be considered non-genuine or mislicensed after the upgrade.

How non-genuine Windows will be treated is open for speculation, some people say they will be prevented from receiving updates perhaps after the life-time of the device, that being the end of the year long free upgrade program.