Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft might want to be making Windows 12 a subscription OS, suggests leak

neowin.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 210 posts

Re: Microsoft might want to be making Windows 12 a subscription OS, suggests leak

#131

Post by kulahan »

orphea wrote: post #72
drofmij wrote: post #69

Wasn't windows 10 supposed to be the "last windows ever" ? Have been hearing about the subscription windows for 20+ years and it hasn't happened yet.

> Wasn't windows 10 supposed to be the "last windows ever" Microsoft has never said that. Edit: since people are still confused. 1. What was said was "...and because Windows 10 is the last version of Windows, we’re all still working on Windows 10". This was said by a Microsoft developer evangelist, never it was an official corporate position or an announcement. And most certainly no one said "ever". 2. You could argu…

I believe it was heavily implied, but either way, it was clearly something they didn't handle well if tons and tons of people believe they said it when that wasn't their intention.

Re: Microsoft might want to be making Windows 12 a subscription OS, suggests leak

#132

Post by cududa »

shmatt wrote: post #83
drofmij wrote: post #69

Wasn't windows 10 supposed to be the "last windows ever" ? Have been hearing about the subscription windows for 20+ years and it hasn't happened yet.

I remember a Windows Blackcomb demo from 2003 that had features as subscriptions. So you got it exactly right with 20 Years

I think you mean Longhorn?

Re: Microsoft might want to be making Windows 12 a subscription OS, suggests leak

#133

Post by hilbert42 »

haolez wrote: post #103

On a side note, in a universe where ReactOS[0] had comprehensive drivers support, would it be a better alternative to modern Windows? Or would desktop Linux? That's a fun thought exercize, at least for me :) [0] https://reactos.org/

I mostly use Linux but still have some Win-7 PCs and I'll never upgrade them. That said, I've tried ReactOS over the years but it's hardly even in alpha it's so incomplete. If it were usable I'd certainly use it.

In my mind ReactOS conjures images of building the pyramids with a team of three—completion date estimate sometime between forever and eternity. Never has there ever been a software project that's been so long in gestation and still going nowhere.

Unfortunately, I've given up on ReactOS but what I'd really love to know is why it's taken so long. Given the long saga of Windows and of MS's abuse of its users—many of whom are annoyed and disgruntled because they've little or no option but to continue to use Windows—then you'd think there'd be an almighty rush to develop a Windows clone. But no, there's stuff-all interest and it's always been so.

I'd go as far to say the failure of ReactOS is one of the strangest and most curious events to occur in software history. One perhaps can understand why ReactOS was never developed in the US or even any Western country but why hasn't say Russia or China or other ex-Eastern Bloc countries thrown money into its development (seeing that much of its development already comes from that part of the world)? You'd reckon there'd even be both a strategic and financial advantage for these countries (as there was during the Cold War when they threw huge sums into developing an alternative source of tech).

Re: Microsoft might want to be making Windows 12 a subscription OS, suggests leak

#134

Post by callwhendone »

the__alchemist wrote: post #108
callwhendone wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the only reason I ever log into Windows. Such an atrocious OS.

I'm perpetually surprised to see this. Windows has flaws, but every time I've tried Linux, it's been a bad experience. Ie, starts smooth from a clean install, but breaks once you install things outside the distro's package management. Turns into a cycle of internet searches, then C+Ping text into the terminal, hoping it will fix things, and the GUI will still boot afterwards.

I've been running the same Ubuntu install on my desktop for over 5 years now and I haven't run into any issues (if I did they were small enough that I don't remember them). It my experience, it's much more stable, usable, and aesthetic than Windows.

I use macOS as my main driver, though.

Re: Microsoft might want to be making Windows 12 a subscription OS, suggests leak

#135

Post by callwhendone »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #95
callwhendone wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the only reason I ever log into Windows. Such an atrocious OS.

I audibly groan when I reboot from Fedora to Windows to play a AAA game.

My bootloader is all screwed up because of the TPM2.0 requirement for Windows 11 so I have to boot to BIOS and select my drive whenever I restart. It's a pain.

Re: Microsoft might want to be making Windows 12 a subscription OS, suggests leak

#137

Post by intvocoder »

alanfranz wrote: post #123
seanw444 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$1/year is entirely unreasonable. They build a product, they sell it to you, transaction ends there. They should sell you a product that works. Bug fixes are part of making the thing you bought closer to what was advertised, so it's part of the initial purchase. An OS is not a SaaS, and nobody considered doing it until it became popular, because it's a fad.

Of course a subscription would imply no upfront fee.

They're (presumably) double-dipping, the PC OEMs are already paying for the license.

Re: Microsoft might want to be making Windows 12 a subscription OS, suggests leak

#138

Post by rakoo »

JohnFen wrote: post #114
rakoo wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes but what is the right price for a one-time payment of software ? If you're going to use maintenance, updates, all the work that comes after you paid, what do you consider is a correct price to pay in advance for all future changes ?

The "correct price" depends entirely on the specific software, so this is an impossible question to answer in its literal sense. > what do you consider is a correct price to pay in advance for all future changes ? You don't. Outside of security updates, which should never be charged for, you pay for the software as it exists when you buy it. When future changes come around, you buy the upgrade (if you want it). It's…

We're specifically talking about an OS here, so the scope is not really the same, but still: are you ok with no package updates ? No update to the documentation, the wiki, and stuff like that ? No forum or chat ?

Re: Microsoft might want to be making Windows 12 a subscription OS, suggests leak

#139

Post by warrenm »

trelane wrote: post #48
ewzimm wrote: post #37

Windows is already a subscription OS, usually for businesses. Subscription licenses are included with higher Microsoft 365 tiers. It's just one of the many ways that it's sold. This doesn't indicate that the perpetual licenses are going away, but it seems logical that they would package certain services in a subscription tier like bundling Microsoft 365 with Copilot and other future features.

This is something I don't get; don't the computers businesses buy already come with a Windows license?

only if you're an SMB

enterprise rigs normally come blank, and get imaged in-house from corporate standard image masters (and against corporate licensing)

Re: Microsoft might want to be making Windows 12 a subscription OS, suggests leak

#140

Post by warrenm »

orionblastar wrote: post #2

If Microsoft does, I am not using Windows 12, I am going to Ubuntu. I won't even pirate it. I refuse to pay a subscription for an OS, that should be pay once and be done paying.

>I refuse to pay a subscription for an OS, that should be pay once and be done paying.

Sure

But don't expect to get any updates to what you paid for - after all, updates are no longer the same OS

Post reply on HN