Microsoft to stop producing Windows versions

[carwiz]

I see your point but I don't think any of the "staff" here would be considered average users. I really doubt any of us have out-of-the-box installs. That's not what/who MS is addressing. Look at the pruning MS has already done with W8 and now with W10. They've thrown in touchy-feely stuff like Cortana but the browser and utility side of the OS is gutted or hidden so the average user can't mess it up. Probably why much of the software will be off the "cloud" with few options to customize. It's already started with Office 365.

 

[Anshad Edavana]

The direction MS is taking really worries me. It is important now to look at alternatives - and if it is only for peace of mind. As we say in German: "Other mothers have pretty daughters too".

The reality is a true alternative to Windows doesn't exist as of today. Mac is nothing but a big zero outside US and Canada. None of my tech savvy friends even heard about Chrome OS - that'show popular it is.While Linux is a great OS, it is still not an alternative to Windows except as a Server OS. While Linux is enough to perform basic tasks like surfing net, an average user will be surely confused by the too may choices it has. I would like to see a specific Linux distro emerging as a standard. Without a decent market share, peripheral manufacturers and software manufacturers like Adobe, Autodesk etc will continue to ignore Linux.

 

[groze]

The single source software precedence has already been set by Apple and Linux. Linux has a one man approval scheme for software so what's the difference if MS controls what's run on their OS?...

The difference is not all people want an OS that controls what's run on it. It's one reason why Windows has enjoyed far more popularity than Apple. Windows has a huge wealth of software to pretty much anyone's needs, no matter how odd or obscure, far more so than Apple does (with the exception of smart phones and tablets). Now M$ is heading on a path of taking away our ability to choose as freely as we want, something most users will find repugnant because it will take away something we already have.

I agree.


Carwiz,

Linux is nothing like windows.

Maybe not in the background but the desktop and start menu (or application menu) is very similar. Yes, they may have one place to download but you are still free to add unsupported and unofficial Personal Package Archives (PPAS) at your own risk. In fact, I actually have at least two third party PPAs Mozilla & Grub customizer. I also use Google Chrome, Opera, Firefox and Seamonkey browsers. Xubuntu you can add the Ubuntu software center for easier installation of software. If you are a more advanced Linux user, you can compile software to use on your system. Some distro are very hard to learn and some distro are real easy to learn. If it wasn't for my checkbook program I made and Macrium reflect, I would possibly use linux 90% of the time. I say I do 50% windows 7 and 50% Linux.

 

[groze]

The direction MS is taking really worries me. It is important now to look at alternatives - and if it is only for peace of mind. As we say in German: "Other mothers have pretty daughters too".

The reality is a true alternative to Windows doesn't exist as of today. Mac is nothing but a big zero outside US and Canada. None of my tech savvy friends even heard about Chrome OS - that'show popular it is.While Linux is a great OS, it is still not an alternative to Windows except as a Server OS. While Linux is enough to perform basic tasks like surfing net, an average user will be surely confused by the too may choices it has. I would like to see a specific Linux distro emerging as a standard. Without a decent market share, peripheral manufacturers and software manufacturers like Adobe, Autodesk etc will continue to ignore Linux.

I disagree. I think Ubuntu and its derivatives would be real easy for novices to learn and use. I don't think they would care about the ubuntu unity(gnome) Amazon search issue that was resolved. Some would even like it. I said above I use Xubuntu 50% of the time.

Dell has or had high end computers with Ubuntu pre-installed.

 

[scr]

If MS is going to go in the direction I think it is... I'm going this way:

CHIP - The World's First Nine Dollar Computer

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1598272670/chip-the-worlds-first-9-computer

More:The CHIP Is A $9 Computer That Can Almost Do It All | TechCrunch


Some pictures

Move over, Raspberry Pi. This startup is building a $9 computer | Ars Technica

 

[whs]

I agree that the amount of Linux distros is very confusing. And normal users will probably not start using Linux before it does not come standard with the PC. But that does not mean that there are no nice Linux distros with which you can do more or less anything you can do with Windows.

If you want an easy distro, get Zorin. That is all set up and very easy to use. If you want a full blown OS with a lot of possibilities, get Mint. I would not recommend Ubuntu/Unity. That's not a nice UI. But Ubuntu/Mate is a reasonable option.

 

[Lady Fitzgerald]

The problem with Linux is much, if not most, of my software will not run on it, including my $600 music notation software.

 

[bej]

I've probably tried a dozen Linux distros over the years. I had a couple of older PCs and all I wanted to do was use them to play music. Without exception, every distro would lose sound whenever ANYTHING was updated. Once it took me five hours to get the sound working again. I'll bet they still haven't fixed that problem. NO THANKS LINUX !!!!!

 

[jamis]

Does no one here remember one PC maker's attempt to offer a Linux OS based PC only to be threatened by MS with losing their Windows contract if they did offer such a machine? It was during the XP years, IIRC.

 

[Layback Bear]

I try to remember most users of Windows are Joe lunch box and Mary Lue hair curler. We are talking of a billion or more. That is the market Microsoft really wants.
Lock those billion or so with a never ending Windows 10, app stores, and clouds and they will never find their way out.

In my opinion Microsoft is looking for quantity of users not the quality of users. Most of those billions of users have never been under the hood of a operating system and will never want to.

I'm not a Enterprise person so I really don't know how corporate world is going to do. I'm thinking they will stay with what they got as long as they can.

Microsoft is trying to lure all the counterfeit Windows 7 into the Windows 10 tent. Quantity not quality. They don't care as long as the get the numbers for bragging rights.

 

[whs]

Microsoft is trying to lure all the counterfeit Windows 7 into the Windows 10 tent. Quantity not quality. They don't care as long as the get the numbers for bragging rights.

Bragging and it shows well on the charts. They don't want to have a Windows 8 repeat - although I truly wonder how they can avoid that.

It is said that W8 was rejected because there were too many changes at once. W10 will bring a lot more changes and the funny start menu is not going to save the day on the desktop. You have to see that from the perspective of a W7 or XP user - not an advanced geek user.

They probably still dream of this huge future tablet market. But that grows a lot slower now.

 

[alphanumeric]

The way I read it is, they just won't give each new OS a new name/number. It will just be Windows. Continuously updating and evolving. How that will work, of if it will work, who knows? Just my take on it. Sooner or latter the Windows kernel will be updated to a new version number. In the past that would be designated as a new version of Windows. Now that won't happen. Internally in Microsoft it might, but to the consumer its still just Windows. Seems to me its just going to confuse things for consumers? I would think it's also going to make it a pain for OEM's to maintain an install image for new PC's. Time will tell I guess.

 

[carwiz]

MS still has to maintain some order of updates even if there's no real "version". Unless they make updates mandatory (automatic with no choice), some may choose not to update and that state of the OS would have to be known.

I just hope MS doesn't move to animal, fruit or vegetable versions instead of numbers. It's too easy to loose track.

 

[RoasterMen]

I'll switch to Linux if necessary, My Microsoft experience stops to Windows 7 now. But I'll wait for updates just in case Microsoft changes mind

 

[jamis]

Even if W10 really is free forever as an upgrade, I'm still not sure about it. Maybe after it is really released with all of the details, I might change my mind. So much is unknown now that I'm going to wait until things settle out and get defined (likely a year or more after production release), as well as W10's viability. For now, I'm willing to live with W7 until all support is gone and my current tower dies.

 

[alphanumeric]

What some may forget or not realize, is if you take Microsoft up on this offer, Windows will be free to you on that device for as long as you own that device. Buy a new PC and you'll be paying for Windows on that PC. Microsoft is still going to make money on Windows on new PC sales. The OEM's are still going to have to pay Microsoft for every version of Windows they install on a PC. Build a new PC and your going to have to buy Windows. Wait until the free offer expires, your paying. Want to upgrade from XP or Vista, your paying. Anyway, my point is, Microsoft is till going to make money on Windows, despite giving it away free to some consumers. PC's don't last forever and they know that. I think you'll find out that these free upgrades are not going to be transferable to another PC. Your not getting Windows free for the rest of your life, unless that PC lasts that long that is. IMHO they don't need to try and get you into a subscription after giving you your free upgrade. Some seem to think they will never make any further money on Windows because of this free offer. It's just not so.

 

[MilesAhead]

Scr,

It is the retailers, OEMs, & printer manufactures that needs to change. I see Ubuntu and Ubuntu derivatives as the easiest to use and is real close Windows 10. We also need to get some cheap low end machine at walmart or other national chains that have computer with Ubuntu that is pre-installed. This is the only way Linux could take over. I find Ubuntu and it derivatives real easy to use and best for novices. After initial setup, you don't see the sudo prompt to often. I do change the read permission on my home folder, to read & write just for me not for others.

Linux preloaded on low end machines has already been done. Except for techies who want to run stuff on a Raspberry Pi nobody likes it. It's too much like those consoles added to TVs so people could do internet email without having a real computer. They should have made the hardware capable of doing everything a Windows PC can do but reduce the price by not having to pay for the Windows preload.

As for the Linux distro, anything Debian derived has a leg up. The apt packaging system is what really simplifies updates and installing new programs. But in any case I think trying to low ball the casual user is the wrong way to go. If anything you want to get people who don't want to become a geek to get the machine to work, but have money, to buy it. Instead of a $1200 Windows desktop sell them a $900 one with the same quad core CPU, memory etc..

 

[groze]

Scr,

It is the retailers, OEMs, & printer manufactures that needs to change. I see Ubuntu and Ubuntu derivatives as the easiest to use and is real close Windows 10. We also need to get some cheap low end machine at walmart or other national chains that have computer with Ubuntu that is pre-installed. This is the only way Linux could take over. I find Ubuntu and it derivatives real easy to use and best for novices. After initial setup, you don't see the sudo prompt to often. I do change the read permission on my home folder, to read & write just for me not for others.

Linux preloaded on low end machines has already been done. Except for techies who want to run stuff on a Raspberry Pi nobody likes it. It's too much like those consoles added to TVs so people could do internet email without having a real computer. They should have made the hardware capable of doing everything a Windows PC can do but reduce the price by not having to pay for the Windows preload.

As for the Linux distro, anything Debian derived has a leg up. The apt packaging system is what really simplifies updates and installing new programs. But in any case I think trying to low ball the casual user is the wrong way to go. If anything you want to get people who don't want to become a geek to get the machine to work, but have money, to buy it. Instead of a $1200 Windows desktop sell them a $900 one with the same quad core CPU, memory etc..

I wouldn't call $1200, $900 U.S. Dollars low end. I meant anything under $500 USD

The only thing that come without windows for a very low price under $300 that a new machine is google chromebook. Yes, Microsoft surface pro had a temporary discount but the screen/monitor size is the issue for me. I need 18 U.S. inches or above.


Comcast is testing out a box that will bring internet service to your tv. Don't know what operating system they are using. Don't know if it will have USB slots though.

 

[MilesAhead]

I wouldn't call $1200, $900 U.S. Dollars low end.

I never wrote they were. Read my post until you get it the right way around please.

 

[whs]

I don't call $1200, $900 or $500 low end systems. My low end acquisition cost $99 with a quad core CPU, an eMMC disk (kind of an SSD) and Windows 8.1. It's a beautiful 2 pound little machine that I use on travel and it does everything that I need to do.

Boots in 26 seconds (Event 100) and is quite snappy in running my office type applications. I even run a virtual Linux Mint system from an external SSD on the 8.1 host. That takes a little time to load because I have only USB2 ports, but once loaded, performance is OK.