If you upgrade to Windows 10 you have 30 days to change your mind

[Saracen]

...

Yes, it matters. Misinformation is misinformation, no matter how well intentioned. All it provides is more ammunition for those that seem to have come to conclusions based on bias, hatred, or.... well, I'm sure people can further fill out that thought process.

Indeed.

Though, that "misinformation" should include vague, provocative, innaccurate or ambiguous information resulting from MSs recent tendency to dribble out snippets via Tweet.

Either MS set out to cause confusion and controversy for the sake of publicity, which would be pretty disgraceful, or the management of the flow of information has been hopelessly incompetent, which in itself would be pretty worrying, given the source of much of it.

[GuidoLS]

Indeed.

Though, that "misinformation" should include vague, provocative, innaccurate or ambiguous information resulting from MSs recent tendency to dribble out snippets via Tweet.

Either MS set out to cause confusion and controversy for the sake of publicity, which would be pretty disgraceful, or the management of the flow of information has been hopelessly incompetent, which in itself would be pretty worrying, given the source of much of it.

I'll be the first to admit that MS has done a very poor job of communication. No doubt about it. That, IMO, does not excuse anyone else to do the same, or in this case, worse (worse in that people are fabricating 'facts' out of thin air). It galls me to no end to be in the position of being a MS cheerleader. I don't like the company. I don't care for the public face of many of the employees (and even less so some of their volunteers). I do like the product, and it kind of trips a trigger when I see misinformation posted, regardless of the source. I send e-mails to people at MS. Lots of e-mails. The vast majority go unanswered. I hope it doesn't annoy the writers here too terribly, but I'm going to continue to point it out here as well. I'm sure it's not intentional (here, at least) but sometimes, it takes an outside eye to notice errors.

[DemonHighwayman]

I sure wont be upgrading any win 7 licenses, however I do have a couple unused windows 8 ones which will be sacrificed asap !

[GuidoLS]

I sure wont be upgrading any win 7 licenses, however I do have a couple unused windows 8 ones which will be sacrificed asap !

Depending on machine usage, that's not really a bad idea. If you do any gaming, you are going to want to have at least one good Windows 10 outfitted machine.

[Saracen]

I'll be the first to admit that MS has done a very poor job of communication. No doubt about it. That, IMO, does not excuse anyone else to do the same, or in this case, worse (worse in that people are fabricating 'facts' out of thin air). It galls me to no end to be in the position of being a MS cheerleader. I don't like the company. I don't care for the public face of many of the employees (and even less so some of their volunteers). I do like the product, and it kind of trips a trigger when I see misinformation posted, regardless of the source. I send e-mails to people at MS. Lots of e-mails. The vast majority go unanswered. I hope it doesn't annoy the writers here too terribly, but I'm going to continue to point it out here as well. I'm sure it's not intentional (here, at least) but sometimes, it takes an outside eye to notice errors.

I entirely agree about making up "facts", but when MS make ambiguous statements, and then go silent, for instance, it should not be a surprise that users speculate as to what it means. A classic example is "free for 12 months", and "changing how we monetise", and "last ever version".

Someone like me is going to look at that, think about the advent of Office 365 and Adobe's move to subscription-only, and wonder if MS are going the same way, be it now or in a year or two. Or five. Or whenever. And I'm certainly still not convinced that's not the direction of travel, though the timescale is unclear.

It's a bit like trying to draw a picture of a dinosaur, though, based on an incomplete set of bones and fossils - you might get it right, or you might be way out. But the dinosaur .... sorry, MS, could have used it's PR department to issue a photo, but didn't/hasn't yet.

[KeyboardDemon]

My plan was to clone my Windows 8.1 install to another SSD and then upgrade that version, run it for a month or more and then either move the install back or possibly install Windows 10 as a clean install on my original SSD and migrate any new data and settings across.

[crossy]

I'll be the first to admit that MS has done a very poor job of communication. No doubt about it. That, IMO, does not excuse anyone else to do the same, or in this case, worse (worse in that people are fabricating 'facts' out of thin air). It galls me to no end to be in the position of being a MS cheerleader. I don't like the company. I don't care for the public face of many of the employees (and even less so some of their volunteers). I do like the product, and it kind of trips a trigger when I see misinformation posted, regardless of the source. I send e-mails to people at MS. Lots of e-mails. The vast majority go unanswered. I hope it doesn't annoy the writers here too terribly, but I'm going to continue to point it out here as well. I'm sure it's not intentional (here, at least) but sometimes, it takes an outside eye to notice errors.

I'm going to agree with you here - MS has definitely been "on message" but that message seems to change by the day, or depending on whose Twitter/Farcebook account you follow. Not a means to inspire confidence. And thanks for taking the time out to fill in for an official MS reply.

Perhaps the best hope is a leak from one of the large OEMs - since I'm 100% certain that this kind of social-media inspired wooliness will NOT be the case when MS is talking to their Lenovo's, Dell's, HP's, etc.

As to the latest "info", I'm quietly pleased. From what I've seen W10 is a heck of a lot better than W8 (i.e. it annoys me less) and if they remove the "need" to have a Microsoft account to log in and/or do any OS updates then I'm "sold". I'm also impressed that my Win7Pro license ends up as a Win10Pro one - big saving if I opt for the free upgrade.

My Win7 system has been getting slower - the usual Windows bit-rot - so it's due for a refresh, but there's no way that I'm going to screw up my workflows by having to work around Win8. So yes, a Win10 upgrade looks to be in my future. However, I want to be able to do a clean install (no previous OS) in which case I'm wondering how MS's licensing is going to deal with this - unless there's some kind of fingerprinting "registration" program that I can run before blowing away Win7. I'll be using Acronis to do a "whole system backup" before doing the W10 so the info in the article at least gives me a warm feeling that if I hate it after a week or two then I'll be able to restore that backup and get back to where I am (and still be licensed).

It'll be interesting to see if the upgrade on the Win7 box is easier or more problematic than the one I have to do on my main system - Ubuntu 12.04LTS to 14.04LTS. I suspect that the Win10 one will be more painful.

Of course once I am at that "31 days of W10" then I guess there's no going back in which case I'm an unwilling "participant" in whatever plans MS have for future monetization...

[Corky34]

My guess would be that we won't see what Microsoft's full plans for Windows are for at least another 5-8 years, that being the time when people can't switch back to the old licensing model without running an unsupported OS, then again I'm probably what most people would consider a tin foil hat wearing loon.

[DanceswithUnix]

My guess would be that we won't see what Microsoft's full plans for Windows are for at least another 5-8 years, that being the time when people can't switch back to the old licensing model without running an unsupported OS, then again I'm probably what most people would consider a tin foil hat wearing loon.

The only time I can think of them doing something like that was with client connection license costs in their trying to take market share from Novell, which is around 20 years ago now. It worked well then, but I don't think that such tactics work these days when their competition seem better run than Novell ever were, and profitable despite giving the OS away.

They seem to be trying this atm by giving away Hyper-V to starve out VMware from licence fees. Will be interested to see how many companies convert, the savings will be substantial short term, but to people like me putting critical infrastructure onto MS platforms feels like storing an open can of petrol under your server. *Probably* safe, although definitely makes the environment a bit unpleasant. That is made double by having to convert NAS NFS exports hosting the VM images into SMB shares so that Windows can get to them. But some day the price for HyperV will go up, and probably quite high too.

[Saracen]

My guess would be that we won't see what Microsoft's full plans for Windows are for at least another 5-8 years, that being the time when people can't switch back to the old licensing model without running an unsupported OS, then again I'm probably what most people would consider a tin foil hat wearing loon.

And that is part of my "direction of travel" concern.

Since Windows was first released, I've been using it, and in most versions. In the early 80s, for instance, I was doing viability work for a large computer company on Windows versus proprietary versions of DOS. Until recently, with Win8, what was implied by new versions was pretty clear, and yeah, you tested for compatibility issues and of course, bugs, but the world ethos remained consistent.

But that ethos distinctly wobbled with Win8, and wobbled again and more severely with Win10. It is NOT clear what we are buying into, in the medium let alone long term, if we go Win10, precisely because MS say things like that they're changing "monetisation", without giving any explanation of what they mean.

Now, if, and I stress "if", this '30 days to change your mind' thing proves of be true, that ups the "buying in" ante significantly.

If I 'upgrade' on day 1 of the official launch, I have 30 days or I burn my previous version licences.

If I don't, I have a year during which I can wait, watch and listen, and then STILL use the free upgrade.

But at some point, I have to poop or get off the potty.

Either I go Win10, or I don't. If I do, then currently it's unclear what that implies. If I don't, then it's either stick with Win7, or go Linux, or some mix of both. I KNOW, because I tested it, that I can do the latter, and it won't seriously affect my day to day usage.

So, when push comes to shove, I'm not buying into a vague uncertain but changing MS model, with a far more certain and perfectly workable alternative available and waiting for me. If the future direction MS are taking hasn't clarified into an acceptable (to me) mindset by the time I jump, I jump to plan B. I'm not wild about quitting Windows after using it for about 30 years, give or take, but I will unless it becomes clear what I'd be buying into, and the 30 days thing (if true) is the kiss of death for Windows, for me, UNLESS the picture clarifies.

It no longer matters to me if Win10 is better than W7, or by how much, or in what ways, until and unless the Windows world view fog lifts. The notion of irrevocable licence destruction (if true) ensures that.

But, on the "if true" point, I take Guido's comments about it being effectively single-source rumour, and unconfirmed, and a break with Windows tradition. Of course, Win10 is itself breaking with tradition, so I'm not convinced how much weight that point has. Companies, including MS (and politicians) have also been known to 'test fly' ideas by 'leaking' through deniable sources.

And it's easy to do. Just tell a 2nd-rate journalist something, phrased in a way it can be denied and put down to misinterpretation. Any competent and self-respecting journalist is going to want proper confirmation, be it several independent sources, or "official" (and unambiguous) on-the-record statements. But part of the "charm" of the web is that not all web journalists are properly trained .... or properly cynical. And the result is that you, dear reader, have to be cautious, and at least sceptical if not cynical, for them. And of them.

And, personally, I do give MS credit for being crafty enough to be 100% aware of the above, and using/misusing it for all it's worth. Is this drip-drip-drip of Twitter 'comment', from very senior people, accidental? I have doubts. Rather like I doubt the Pope is Jewish.

[Tabbykatze]

If you look really carefully at the desktop of Windows 10, it grows big red demon eyes. If you listen carefully you can hear the screams of children and small animals being tortured within its depths. The only way to escape hell is through the portal at Microsoft headquarters and all that.

People assume things due to ambiguity and therefore generates controversy and makes people talk about it. That's organic advertisement. Not the best way to do it, mind.

But you start assuming things about what little information you think you have, ie the fact that ms are moving to subscription licensing, then you make an ass out of us all.

[DemonHighwayman]

Depending on machine usage, that's not really a bad idea. If you do any gaming, you are going to want to have at least one good Windows 10 outfitted machine.

Yes I game on my win7 PC, I thought I could use my old 1tb sshd I used to use for my steam library to install win8 to then do the upgrade to win10 just to try it out, if it's no good I can just disconnect that drive and put my current win7 ssd back in. My win8 licenses will never be used for anything ever again anyway so I might as well give it a try.

[Saracen]

If you look really carefully at the desktop of Windows 10, it grows big red demon eyes. If you listen carefully you can hear the screams of children and small animals being tortured within its depths. The only way to escape hell is through the portal at Microsoft headquarters and all that.

People assume things due to ambiguity and therefore generates controversy and makes people talk about it. That's organic advertisement. Not the best way to do it, mind.

But you start assuming things about what little information you think you have, ie the fact that ms are moving to subscription licensing, then you make an ass out of us all.

Dunno about others but I'm certainly not assuming they are moving to subscriptions. I'm also, based on their comments, not assuming they're not.

I question where they're going, not assume it. Which is why I use phrases like "possible direction of travel".

And it matters to me. Last count, IIRC, I had 13 machines here in my home-office. I'm working on #14 now. Not all will be upgraded, whatever MS do or say, but enough will, and to 'Pro' that it's a significant decision, and cost, and IF they go subscription, I certainly won't be going with them.

I can put off any decisions for quite a while, but sooner I later I arrive at a fork in the road, one marked MS, one Linux. I simply want to be SURE where the MS fork leads before starting down it. To mangle my metaphors more than usual, before I bite the bullet I want to be sure I'm not going to shoot myself in the foot.

[Corky34]

People assume things due to ambiguity and therefore generates controversy and makes people talk about it. That's organic advertisement. Not the best way to do it, mind.

But you start assuming things about what little information you think you have, ie the fact that ms are moving to subscription licensing, then you make an ass out of us all.

Maybe people view Microsoft in that fashion because of their past behaviour, like the saying goes the best predictor of future behaviour is … past behaviour.

Who knows maybe they've turned over a new leaf now Satya Nadella has taken charge and they no longer follow the strategy of embrace, extend and extinguish, maybe we should forgive and forget about the long list of misdemeanour's that litter Microsoft's history, unfortunately even if someone says they've turned over a new leaf it can take a long time to re-establish a level of trust that they won't return to past behaviours.

[crossy]

But you start assuming things about what little information you think you have, ie the fact that ms are moving to subscription licensing, then you make an ass out of us all.

Agreed, but there's a country mile between "assumption" and "speculation" and the latter is something that's "good clean fun for all the family". Microsoft have made clear (i.e. not hosted on social media) statements that they're "looking into" the future monetization of Windows. So just off the top of my head I can think of a couple of ways they could do that:
1. Keep the status quo - users purchase the license and it's there's do to whatever with;
2. Move to subscription model - so you don't get a license, you only rent your OS. Subscription expires and basically the OS goes into lockdown mode - only good enough for you to register and perhaps offload your data, nothing more;
3. Ad-supported. Puhleeeze - there's so many people chasing the ad "buck" that I'm not sure that'd work. And pretty soon someone will figure out "AdBlockPlus for Windows" and bang goes that revenue stream;
4. Pay to play. Basically, same as iOS/Android - so you get the OS for a low cost, but all software has to be loaded from the "Windows App Store" and developers have to pay to go through that process.
5. Upsell. Give away a basic package, but then sell "feature upgrade" packs like the old "Plus" pack that they used to do. Could work as long as the "base" OS is feature filled enough to be usable, but not so usable that you'd want to do that without buying at least one upgrade.
And that's just what I came up with in about 60 seconds, I'm sure the fertile brains in Redmond have got more options they could use. If there's a slow week then maybe this'd be a good QOTW - "How would you handle Windows monetization?"

The only time I can think of them doing something like that was with client connection license costs in their trying to take market share from Novell, which is around 20 years ago now. It worked well then, but I don't think that such tactics work these days when their competition seem better run than Novell ever were, and profitable despite giving the OS away.

They seem to be trying this atm by giving away Hyper-V to starve out VMware from licence fees. Will be interested to see how many companies convert, the savings will be substantial short term, but to people like me putting critical infrastructure onto MS platforms feels like storing an open can of petrol under your server.

Problem is that VMware has a lot of supporting tools that HyperV misses out on, and VMware - like it or not - is pretty much the industry standard. Then again, there's the perception that HyperV is really designed to run Windows best, not various Linuxes, or whatever other OS's you can find (Solaris/Indiana anyone?)

[Siuko]

I've been watching this thread with a bit of interest...

It also concerned my that my Full retail copies would be used up and changed to an upgrade license.

What do people think to the post on

http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/i...4-45f4b7ed2fb9

Under the question - When I upgrade a preinstalled (OEM) or retail version of Windows 7 or Windows 8/8.1 license to Windows 10, does that license remain OEM or become a retail license?

It states - If you upgrade from a OEM or retail version of Windows 7 or Windows 8/8.1 to the free Windows 10 upgrade this summer, the license is consumed into it. Because the free upgrade is derived from the base qualifying license, Windows 10 will carry that licensing too.
If you upgrade from a retail version, it carries the rights of a retail version.
If you upgrade from a OEM version, it carries the rights of a OEM version.

Is that classed as official microsoft?