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

It's a way to significantly increase the total cost of owning Windows. I have tons of PCs that are 10 years old and have a $100-200 Windows license on them. There's no way on earth Microsoft is going to offer a $10-20 per year subscription for Windows.

My guess is that we'll be looking at something in the range of $5 USD per-month with some kind of bundle deal around $100 USD per year that includes MS365. A best case scenario would be some type of MS365 family plan that includes a Windows license.

It's going to be the same as when Adobe switched to subscriptions. The internet will be filled with people proclaiming how great it is for everyone because "updates aren't free", but then we'll see the total cost of ownership go up drastically.

I think we'll see a solid 3x increase in the total cost of owning Windows for anyone that keeps their computer for 10 years. That's about where Office got priced. It broke even at about a 3 year lifecycle IIRC, so any individuals or small businesses that ran a longer lifecycle saw a dramatic increase in cost.

> It also incentivized keeping Windows good and working so those subscriptions don't get cancelled.

Lol. For most people, they need it and don't have any other options, so the status quo is going to be paying a subscription, watching ads, and giving up all your personal data. The subscription is a price increase, not a move to give us a better product.

If they bundle it with MS365, that's the time to break up Microsoft. If it were up to me they'd get split into so many different companies that each product within the Office suite would be a separate company. Excel should absolutely be it's own company at this point.

I fully defend Microsoft's right to do this (whether they actually will do it is as yet unknown), but it in no way benefits users. There is competition in the OS area, and a few people will gravitate to Linux; more might go to ChromeOS or MacOS. The subscription rate will have to be set so that it's not more expensive over say 3 years to buy a PC with Windows than it is to buy a comparable Mac (if they don't do that, they will be handing Apple a massive tool to increase sales).

I think Chromebooks might do well in that environment, especially for naïve users (though they have their uses even for advanced users; I like my Chromebooks and their Linux VMs). You buy the machine, plug it in, and it fires up almost immediately; and your machine has software support now for 10 years at no cost (if you trust Google to deliver on that). I suspect that many canny purchasers will compare Microsoft's subscription cost to Google's ($0), and decide accordingly.

My guess (and my track record is clear, in 1976 I predicted that Apple would be bankrupt within a year) is that Microsoft will offer a combined Windows/Office365 subscription, and a barebones “free” Windows that nags the user to “upgrade”.

I hear System76 has some decent machines that don't have to stomach the cost of a Windows license.

I believe Dell also offers a variant of the Dell XPS that is cheaper for having Linux?

> The subscription rate will have to be set so that it’s not more expensive over say 3 years to buy a PC with Windows and than it is to buy a comparable Mac…

i agree with your overall point. tho for me, i suspect the price would need to be significantly less than than that (PC price included.)

my main driver is linux, but im on windows for probably 40% of work stuff. however, i have incredible subscription fatigue. its to the point now that i forego products regularly if i cant just buy it outright. i’ll happily even pay more than i would over time just to 1) not have to manage and deal with the constant little pin pricks of soooo many subscriptions, and 2) to feel like i own the thing.

if windows goes subscription, i will almost certainly just move to mac for the things i cant do with linux and if my read of others is correct, i suspect many many others would do the same.

Eh, you can just get the price and include it in the budget as a monthly expense, no different from any other. Consider that the normal one time price will only last for as long as you use the OS. Why is a one time fee that will last an undetermined but long time always simpler than a repeating fee? And what if the one-time fee is too expensive and I wanted to spread it?

Unless Microsoft decides to change the price later of course. In which case you'd have little recourse since changing OSes is hard.