Smarteyeball, I was thinking the same thing. Like you said it could remove the incentive to upgrade. I also agree if they go that route they have to bring prices down. It's going to make a lot of work for Microsoft too, patching X number of OS's. They should do a one time deal where if you mail them your Microsoft XP CD (and product code) they mail you back an equivalent windows 7 DVD. It's not like they can't afford it.

In my opinion I don't really think it matters how often they release a new OS.

I walk into businesses and notice they are still using Windows 2000, sometimes 98 etc and think they will only upgrade when the computer dies and well some computers can last a very very long time. May get outdated but they still work the same as they did when they were new.

This also is the same with consumer computers as well. Only a select few people run out and buy a new version of Windows just because it is new.

After XP, MS introduced the 10 year support for OS (5 years mainstream support with service packs, 5 years extended support with security patches only). Obvioulsy someone switching to the new OS 2-3 years after release only will have 7-8 years of support left. This is not a bad idea since it coincides with increasing hardware requirements and longevity of equipment.

Businesses that run outdated OS are bad businesses. The little money they save on OS and hardware they spend on added support cost (W7 is easier to maintain than XP etc.) and wages. Imagine the old hardware they have whne they run W98. Losing just half a workday per year to lack of computing power, and losing some data due to the lack of any security I assume they use IE 5 etc. then) is the most foolish thing a business can do to save $ 100 on an upgrade every year.

Software subscriptions alone cost more than hardware and OS annually.

Legacy apps are one the biggest reasons for companies not updating their OS. If it won't run on a newer OS and you can't get the company that wrote it to update it, you get stuck in the dark ages. Its not that they don't want to, it just that sometimes they can't go bigger better faster. I've seen it first hand, its not a pretty picture.
The other side of the picture is training. Productivity can actually go down if you update Windows and say Office, and it's a big change in the user interface. You may have to spend money on training staff on top of the money spent for the new software and hardware. Its big bucks for a large company and a small company with a small budget may not be able to afford to upgrade.
I think most people that are non technical and don't build their own systems aren't going to run out and buy windows 7. When the time comes that they need a new PC they will buy one pre-assembled with the OS already installed and move on then.

U said it

Adamd said:

In my opinion I don't really think it matters how often they release a new OS.

I walk into businesses and notice they are still using Windows 2000, sometimes 98 etc and think they will only upgrade when the computer dies and well some computers can last a very very long time. May get outdated but they still work the same as they did when they were new.

This also is the same with consumer computers as well. Only a select few people run out and buy a new version of Windows just because it is new.

AFAIK it is a fully 64 + bit OS.

Product FRED said:

They shouldn't be releasing 8 so soon. Windows 7 is going to be the next XP, lasting longer than it should. They should release 8 as a paid service pack or something, like Apple does with OSX. It can't be that much of an improvement.