No plans for Windows 7 SP2

Carl, the point of a service pack is that it is very useful to those who need to deploy/reinstall.

It makes the process much less tedious.

It is especially useful when MS include it in the operating installation media.

If they don't want to make it easier to do that - then they won't release a service pack.

Fantail said:

What's an avg. $ for W8 pro about 150$?
OK so let's say they don't roll out 7sp2, but updates proceed. May I offer an alternate solution;
Spend the $ on a nice SSD & 7 will last like XP has.

The whole 'metro' / 8 deal reminds me of a movie line from an old comedy called Head Office, some guy said something about a made in Moscow cabbage roll shoved down his throught.

I only spent $15 to upgrade two computers to W8
$55 if you count the money that I will be getting back.

Fantail said:

What's an avg. $ for W8 pro about 150$?
OK so let's say they don't roll out 7sp2, but updates proceed. May I offer an alternate solution; Spend the $ on a nice SSD & 7 will last like XP has.

True but Microsoft's purpose will have been served. They will have eliminated the possibility of selling new customers software packages based upon Windows 7. If you are an ISV, this is an ultimately fatal restriction. For the better part of two decades, this has not been a serious problem with NT based software. Revisions of special purpose device drivers is generally all that has been required.

Windows 8 is a direct attack on the existence of ISV's ability to deliver complex, high performance, and highly capable systems. It suggests that Windows 9 will make such a thing impossible. All software will have to pass through Microsoft hands and can be sold only by the Microsoft Store. Microsoft will determine what can be sold and will take a major cut of the value delivered. I suspect the agreement between the ISV and Microsoft will eventually include the notion that Microsoft really owns the intellectual property behind the software sold on its so called store and can replicate and use it without compensating its creators. At which time, Microsoft finally becomes Master of the Universe.

Microsoft will continue to ignore that such actions will guarantee the end of Microsoft. If the threatened ISVs got together, we could eliminate Microsoft as a serious contender in the field in three to six years. I doubt that ISVs will be able to get their act together anytime soon but I am quite willing to work toward that end.

Open Source is NOT the answer. It is not even the question. Each ISV must be able to own and control the distribution of its intellectual property and to make a living from selling it. Open Source is based upon the principle that each contributor gives up his rights to his product to any and all who ask free of charge. Even though most who will ask for free stuff have and will contribute little to nothing of value to the body of work. I have not, do not, and will not cooperate with such an abomination. It is worse than Microsoft's worst and most predatory action.

So, you're saying that you want to use your 20+ year old APIs that Microsoft wants to remove because of security and performance issues? that's all I understand.

And as for the Windows Store: it's primarily designed to ensure that your application meets the new Windows requirements, and ensure it will continue to work during OS updates. Microsoft wants to sandbox the OS and try to make it secure.

And as for ISVs creating a replacement to Windows: how would that work? how would you resolve security issues.

What you're describing would be like Windows 2k, where the entire OS is open and applications and malware can change things to however they like, regardless of end user experience.

FuturDreamz said:

So, you're saying that you want to use your 20+ year old APIs that Microsoft wants to remove because of security and performance issues? that's all I understand.

If that is what you want to believe, go ahead. It's your choice.

I would ask, have you ever attempted to process eight to thirty two 7 to 24 meg pixel images in real time using managed code defined by XML in a thing called an "app" to be run on the "start" screen? Further, have you ever attempted to drive the view computed by that process using a six axis mouse at better than 10 Hz? If you have, send me your resume and we might like to hire you. If not, try to do it and report back on your results.

It is a dangerous point atm.

MS is angling for virtually complete control.

Win8 lovers cannot see the obvious.

It is the launching pad for MS new direction.

It works ok as an os for the average user with simple needs , better suited to a tablet, it has (to some ) a cool new interface, etc.

The point of it is to get people into the MS clouds -and the forthcoming subscription service. MS will have contol over what you are allowed to run on it, and what you can do with it.

They don't necessarily make money on all the apps. - but they do "approve" or censor them .

This is all very dangerous and if it goes the way MS wants - it will be a disaster for everyone except MS.

"...it will be a disaster for everyone except MS."

Ultimately, it will be a disaster for Microsoft as well. All who attempt to be "Master of the Universe" or master of any part that they do not legitimately own, will fall. The primary reason is they confuse themselves with god and believe they can define the nature of the universe and truth itself. This cannot be done. The universe and any part of it is what it is no matter how many masters try to assert otherwise. Therein lies their fatal flaw that will cause their eventual demise. Unfortunately, they may take many of the rest of us as they go down in flames.

If you claim yourself only the master of what you legitimately own and try to deem it other that it is, you will be the one to fall. Few others will go with you or even shed a tear in celebration of your demise. You will have proved that you were simply a stupid fool by attempting to fake reality.

Not to mention doing that would make Windows hard to market and make rival OSs much more attractive to customers.

Microsoft is a company, but they realize that they have to actually work to create what consumers want and NEED (as security isn't always a customer's top priority. Windows 95 proves this)

I agree that Microsoft once realized that but I am not so sure the current crop of so called managers do. At least not judging by their recent words and actions. Those of us who want and need a fully functional supported desktop OS rather than a pretense of one are treated worse than second class citizens or even burnt toast. We are aggressively ignored and considered to be no better than buzzing flies who are going to die over the winter.

It is almost enough to make me go over to the dark side and start developing for Apple. That is except for the fact I would be treated exactly the same if I wanted to use some hardware and software not approved by the sacred and unquestionable Apple priesthood.