Microsoft details upcoming Windows 10 editions

[excalibur2]

And that you're claiming to have no knowledge of SteamOS puts me in a position where I will just bow out of this part of the conversation, because one of us isn't even bothering to try to keep a straight face.

Well maybe 99% of computer uses in the world do not know about steam OS, and why should they if MS OS works for them, and the same analogy could be something like:- I have no idea of the latest Ferrari that is coming out, and why should I be interested as it's just not important to me. But if every one on Hexus and other computer media say "steam OS is a must have" then I would consider it.

[Saracen]

Am I an insider? No. I am not an insider. Was I an insider? At one point, yes. Do I still know people who are 'insiders'? Do I know some of the people that are writing these 'blogs' and releases? Yes, I do. Do they give me the inside scoop? No, not really - Microsoft NDA's, especially for those on the payroll, are a real bitch, up to and including criminal prosecution. But I do have enough direct knowledge of how these things actually work to be able to speak intelligently on the topic, even if I'm not involved this time around.

As for their future aim, that's common sense. They want everyone on the same page, so they can stop supporting multiple operating systems that, while they share similarities, are all fundamentally different. There are still major banking firms that use embedded versions of XP on their ATM's, and several MAJOR medical centers that are still running on systems powered by Windows 98. There is NO money in supporting those, even if the general public thinks that the corporations involved are paying through the nose. Newsflash - $10,000 a year does not even cover the cost of toilet paper for a fortune 500 company for a month.

Why the giveaway? Again, the same thing. What's more cost effective - writing code for one OS, or 4? What's more effective? 1 team working on 1 mainstream product, or 4 teams working on 3 obsolete and 1 mainstream products plus a micro-team working on an embedded system that's over 20 years old? Microsoft isn't going to lose a thing by giving away the upgrade. They're already making money from the OEM's putting it on the mass market machine (Dell, Lenovo, etc). They're making money by licensing to companies making IoT products. They're making contracts hand over fist on the Enterprise side of things with multiple government agencies around the world, which translates into more zeros and commas than most families have made across their trees going back through the beginning of time. And after a year, they will be making retail dollars from builders, who are essentially the ones getting the 'free' upgrade, and, despite the vanity in the community, is the smallest source of revenue, period. Close to orders of magnitude smaller.

Yes, there's speculation. I cannot say absolutely that this will happen or that will happen. But I'd be willing to bet money on some things, if I didn't think that I'd get busted for insider trading. I wouldn't be, but the headache involved makes it an unreasonable endeavor. As for being able to read about what's going to happen, I've been consistently posting links to genuine Microsoft insiders, telling you how some things are going to work. Unless you go to work for MS, you aren't going to get any better before release. Not that anyone should believe, at any rate.

But some of what's being added to the conversation, such as subscriptions (which have never been mentioned by anyone at MS) isn't even speculation. It's FUD - the same crap that rolls around every time MS releases a new OS. And that's why I'm posting my impressions, as well as reliable information based on both my past experience and things that are actually being posted by people that are making the OS. And I've yet to type a single thing that anyone willing to download and install the preview couldn't, if they chose, refute or verify. Otherwise, it's like saying a movie sucks because Rotten Tomatoes *MIGHT* say so.

You aren't the only one that has seen how these things work, from the inside. In my case, that's boardroom discussions at the likes of MS, IBM, Lexmark, Epson, and so forth. I've sat there and had CEO's of such companies tell me, with a straight face, that 'x' won't happen, only for it to happen, less than a week later. And I don't blame them, either. If asked a very awkward question too early, news getting out prematurely could be very damaging, up to and including potentially scuppering takeover or merger talks.

As for speculation, a lot depends on who is doing the speculating. For a certainty, some speculation is extremely well-informed. There have been occasions, including on forums, where I've speculated, for instance on how something works, only to be told I'm talking drivel when in fact what I'm describing was according to the briefing I'd had from technical or product management people at the manufacturer, days earlier.

I am also aware of 'speculation' deliberately floated by companies, but in such a way as to be both utterly deniable, and entirely unattributable.

And I'm aware that the bulk of speculation, especially on forums, is complete drivel.

MS themselves triggered this speculation, by vague remarks about changing how Windows is 'monetised' .... then shutting up.

What is speculation to you is a degree of forward planning to me. Having been entirely dependent on MS for my OS needs for ages, since Netware 4 and OS2 really, I'm now faced with the possibility that radical change is on the way. In fact, it looks pretty clear it is. But MS say enougn to stir the pot, then shut up and don't give detail. Did it occur to you that provoking such speculation, and gauging reaction, is deliberate, as a way of testing the water temp before dipping a toe in?

And it's not as if, for example, subscriptions would exactly be novel, even for MS. Office 365 proves that, and no doubt, MS have also been watching Adobe carefully.

There's nothing "silly" about considering, or discussing what MS might do, when they themselves opened the can of worms, and when those decisions directly affect my buying decisions.

For the record, though, I have NO inside knowledge, direct or otherwise, NDA'd or not, on Windows and future pricing. Nor, to be honest, do I much care. If MS go subscription, I complete the transfer of non-legacy machines to Linux. I've done dry-runs, and I'm quite content to switch, if need be. If they don't, then depending on exactly what the new windows offering is, and what the gotchas are, I might stay MS, or I might still switch. The jury is out on that.

Switching to subscription is certainly consistent with a number of statements, and design changes within Windows, but it certainly isn't the only thing that is consistent with them. At the end of the day, I rather doubt ANYONE on here knows for sure what MS will do this year, or over the next 5 or 10, in relation to pricing models. Maybe subs, maybe ad-driven, maybe a free 'base' and chargeable extras, who knows?

And if anyone on here does know, for certain, they're almost certainly not going to say, and to back that up by identifying who they are, and how they're in a position to know. What I can say for an absolute certainty, is that I am aware of some very senior people, visiting and indeed members of, some forums without publicly declaring who they are.

Unless you can say, for an absolute certainty, that this or that WILL NOT happen, then any assertions about it not happening is speculation on your part, too.

[GuidoLS]

Excellent, but long rebuttal

You'll note that in my 2nd to last paragraph, I openly admitted that what I was positing was speculation, albeit I feel it is speculation with a solid foundation. And I'm not going to say that MS will never go to a subscription service for their OS for consumers, because it's not my company, and I can't predict what will happen 5 or 10 years down the road. I am comfortable in my feeling that *THIS* version of Windows 10 won't become a subscription service. Perhaps when 8/8.1 goes EOL, there's a chance, as people won't have a real option, at least in regards to MS software. I'm also fairly certain that MS is not likely to follow Adobe as a model of operation - it doesn't really make a lot of sense when they're one of the more reviled companies out there amongst the tech and security side of the game.

Office 365 is program suite and a list of services. I won't argue the software is free for the cost of the services, although some may. But it's not necessary. MS isn't likely to block LibreOffice, and I am still getting regular updates for Office 2007.

As far as me making comments about something being silly, I have 2 modes - one where I am making a generic statement (the generic "you") and one where I am making a direct comment to the person I am quoting. I'm fairly certain you've seen examples of both by now. It's far less impolite than I am capable of, and considering I am a guest here, and rather enjoy the scenery, I'll be certain to remain, at the very least, civil. And I'll leave it at that.

[Corky34]

Just like we ask someone to not leak.

It's happens when you get old.

[Saracen]

You'll note that in my 2nd to last paragraph, I openly admitted that what I was positing was speculation, albeit I feel it is speculation with a solid foundation. And I'm not going to say that MS will never go to a subscription service for their OS for consumers, because it's not my company, and I can't predict what will happen 5 or 10 years down the road. I am comfortable in my feeling that *THIS* version of Windows 10 won't become a subscription service. Perhaps when 8/8.1 goes EOL, there's a chance, as people won't have a real option, at least in regards to MS software. I'm also fairly certain that MS is not likely to follow Adobe as a model of operation - it doesn't really make a lot of sense when they're one of the more reviled companies out there amongst the tech and security side of the game.

Office 365 is program suite and a list of services. I won't argue the software is free for the cost of the services, although some may. But it's not necessary. MS isn't likely to block LibreOffice, and I am still getting regular updates for Office 2007.

As far as me making comments about something being silly, I have 2 modes - one where I am making a generic statement (the generic "you") and one where I am making a direct comment to the person I am quoting. I'm fairly certain you've seen examples of both by now. It's far less impolite than I am capable of, and considering I am a guest here, and rather enjoy the scenery, I'll be certain to remain, at the very least, civil. And I'll leave it at that.

I don't really have a view of whether *THIS* version will be subscription, though if I had to bet, I'd say it's unlikely.

When I first .... ummm .... 'speculated' () on subscriptions I did, several times, refer to it as "direction of travel" and that's still where I see subscriptions happening *IF* they do.

Essentially, it's been a series of individual things, culminating in "change how it's monetised" remarks, all of which seem consistent with subscription as a destination. But I doubt it's the next stop on the way to that destination.

If nothing else, after the backlash over Win 8 MUI, etc, I suspect the scars are still sufficiently fresh at MS Towers for them to not dare jump straight to subscriptions at this point, even if it is the long term target.

It's a bit, IMHO, like the EU. We know the long term objective is (by whatever name) a United States of Europe, and always has been. We also know the powers that be, certainly in the UK, have repeatedly denied it, because it's not politically palatable. Yet, look at the evolution of the EU, from Common Market, to EEC, to EU. Look at the contents of Maastricht, and Lisbon, and the implications of currency union. Look at treaty objectives, like "every closer union", like common passports, common passports, Euro courts rreigning over legal matters, freedom of movement of people, common external borders and, Schengen opt-outs aside, no internal borders. Hell, there's even acommon passport and calls for a common army, common embassies and both a flag and anthem.

Sooner or later, all the individual componenrs will be in place and we'll have a de-facto USE, without ever quite saying so.

And that, I suspect, is MS' s game.

[excalibur2]

Well Saracen in your guess when you say "whether *THIS* version will be subscription" it could suggest win 11 could be subscription..but who would buy it if Win 10 is ok, then we go on from there and guess there could be a version of Win 10 on subscription...same again who would buy it unless they cripple existing Win 10 on people's computers.
Anyway.... anyone can always fall back on Win 7 or Win 8 and it's reasonable to assume MS won't go bust and would continue to supply upgrades for bugs etc for a few more years

[Saracen]

Well Saracen in your guess when you say "whether *THIS* version will be subscription" it could suggest win 11 could be subscription..but who would buy it if Win 10 is ok, then we go on from there and guess there could be a version of Win 10 on subscription...same again who would buy it unless they cripple existing Win 10 on people's computers.
Anyway.... anyone can always fall back on Win 7 or Win 8 and it's reasonable to assume MS won't go bust and would continue to supply upgrades for bugs etc for a few more years

That's true, and it's where I am now. I have Win7 and Win8 (de-MUI'd) systems now, which will either stay that way, or go Linux, if Windows goes subscription. Though, in my case, that isn't the only reason I might. It would be sufficient on it's own, but isn't a necessary criteria for me to jump, anyway.

But it's always the case that there's a degree of inertia, and of resistance to change. MS and others have it every time the decide to "improve" something. For example, the UI changes in Office that came in with .... 2007??

I know a lot of people here think I'm stuck in my ways, not willing to embrace change, but in fact, it's just change I don't like that I won't embrace. Or where the price, monetarily or otherwise, is too high. And, the Office Ribbon Bar, for instance, I tried and though it was uncomfortable for a while, I get on fine with it.

So .... if (and I stress, for the sake of argument, IF) MS are going to go subscription, how do they go about it? Do they just suddenly announce

" Here's our shiny new all-singing, all-dancing Windows system, complete with much more cloud integration, cross-compatibility with mobile devices, app-store, biometric security, (blah, blah, blah). Oh, and yeah .... it's subscription-only"

.... or do they salami-slice at the steps needed to make it work effectively?

My view is that IF that's their objective, especially after bring burned by user reaction on MUI, on XB360 always-on and mandatory built-in Kinect, etc., they would (given more brains than a breezeblock) salami-slice. They'll take the long view, and introduce the necessary changes bit at a time, so that it's not a massive, inertia-generating move, all in one go.

I don't know if they will ever introduce subscriptions. If they do, my bet is it'll be one route to Windows, just like Office 365 subscription versions are one route to Office. And if they do, given recent scars, my bet is they'll salami-slice, and do it over the medium-term, not all in one go.

But, like the EU, if they nibble away at it, bit at a time, when time comes to take the final step, people will find they're really already in that situation, to all intents and purposes, already. I certainly think MS are quite capable of taking a medium to long-term strategic view, and setting overall objectives accordingly. My view is that, over the longer term, subscription is quite likely to be where they're going. And, make no mistake, no doubt for many people it's no a problem. It may even appeal.

There's nothing inherently wrong, or evil, in a subscription model. It's just not for me, so whether MS do it now or in ten years, my view won't change - they can do what they want, but I'm not going there with them. Be it now, or in ten years, that WILL be sufficient for me to go another way, probably a mix of retaining existing Win7 /Win8 licences, and Linux.

But for important, net-facing systems, I don't see W7 or W8 as long-term viable, for security readons if nothing else. I have WinXP systems doing several jobs, but they're not net-facing. They're air-gapped. Win7 or Win8 inside that air-gap, fine. But when support ceases, W7 or W8 outside it? Nah. And, by the way, that air-gap is one reason why always-connected is not a viable feature for me. Anything that requires regular MS communications, validation, etc, is an utter non-starter for me. Yet, such a capability is highly desirable, if not essential, for a subscription model.

Who would buy sub-based Win11 if Win10 is okay? Well, some people no doubt would. It depends on MS pricing model, and exactly what they meant by changing how Windows is monetised. And there are all sorts of ways that could be done. But .... will there be a Win11? If W10 is the "last" version, and will be constantly updated via a sort-of inline streaming, then, just as the Lisbon Treaty did for the EU, it implements the way by which future changes can be quietly, and almost invisibly, slipstreamed into everybody's Windows, without fanfare, salami-slice at a time.

Then, of course, a subscription could be introduced thats .... economically attractive. Starting, perhaps, with "free for a year". That'll get loads of people onboard. If, subsequently, a modest sub is introduced, say £2 a month, a lot of people will no doubt go along as it's peanuts, and not bad value. But then, if you introduce "options", for an additional fee, inertia now works in MS favour, having got lots of people on-board with "free", then "peanuts".

This strategy didn't ought to be new to people. The EU did it. Get countries in, with a "trade block", the Common Market, then in the UKs case, use inertia (and scare tactics) and offer a referendum on 'out'. Sky did it. Get loads of subscribers with great content, then start moving "premium" content, like films and sport onto pay-extra channels. Insurance companies do it by offering "new customer" discounts, hoping to get people onto auto-renew deals where inertia and sheer laziness will keep a good percentage paying uncompetitive rates. Mobile companies are always doing it with great value plans that somehow always morph into plans that are far less great. Banks do it. How many ISA's have we seen with superb tempter rates .... that drop to modest after 1 year, and abysmal after 2 years?

Well, if a bank, insurance or mobile company does that with me, I move. I NEVER let insurances auto-renew, and I move ISAs periodically, too. Etc. But it's far, FAR more hassle to move PC OS, and almost certainly, move most applications, too. So much so that the inertia factor will be huge, IF Microsoft can get large numbers of people onto a suitable implementation of Windows in the first place. Hence, salami-slicing.

I find it hard to credit that the notion of subscriptions doesn't hugely appeal to MS, with a regular, steady income stream, rather that the bulk of OS income coming in one huge version migration every couple of years, after they've invested huge subs in development with no guarantee there won't be a Vista or Win8 MUI style adverse reaction. A never-changing version number, with slipstreamed updates, and subscription customers, must be hugely appealing. A kinda developer Holy Grail, in fact.

[excalibur2]

Interesting thread for members would be:- has any member made a prediction in the past that become true

[tribaljet]

And on a slight tangent, here's a little tibit that could perhaps help explain a bit of how free consumer upgrades might be in place: http://news.xbox.com/2015/05/games-candy-crush-saga-is-coming-to-windows-10