Microsoft: Windows Blue to be named Windows 8.1, will be free

Microsoft's Tami Reller is in Boston today speaking at the JP Morgan Technology, Media and Telecom Conference and she has announced that there are now more than 70,000 apps in the Windows Store.

In addition, Windows Blue is officially named Windows 8.1 and it will be a free update and come from the Windows Store in addition the 8.1 update will be coming to Windows RT as well. This should appease many who thought that the update may be a paid upgrade but all of those rumors can be put to bed as the update will be free.

Reller also stated that the update will arrive by the end of the calendar year. If Windows 8.1 follows the same schedule as Windows 8, the platform will likely hit RTM in the August timeframe and will be released to the general public around late October.

In addition to final releases, Microsoft also stated that the public preview of the build will be released the first day of its BUILD conference on June 26th.

Source: Microsoft

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Study claims IE10 blocks nearly all malware on Windows 8

Next Story

Microsoft: 'We need the flexibility of ARM'

129 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Shame the damage has already been done.

It started when they released 7 as a new OS instead of SP3 for Vista, just to get away from the bad release Vista had.

Now suddenly they're doing what should've been done with Vista to 8. No, sorry, I'm not forgiving or forgetting that ****, nor should anyone else.

Shame I'm in the minority because I have a functioning brain and don't jump on bandwagons. I still use Vista because I detest 7's POINTLESS UI changes (http://imgur.com/a/DXZ0G, and don't get me started on 8). I feel like I've been punched in the face repeatedly by a friend and expected to still stay friends with them.

No download from the official Microsoft Update site? You mean I have to drive to a Windows Store to get this update? Just one more reason to avoid Windows-8--most especially for us laptop and desktop users.

TsarNikky said,
No download from the official Microsoft Update site? You mean I have to drive to a Windows Store to get this update? Just one more reason to avoid Windows-8--most especially for us laptop and desktop users.

Like in a previous comment, did you also forget to use the /s. Windows Store is not equal to Microsoft Store. Just proving that you have never used Windows 8. I will let you figure this out yourself instead of spoon-feeding you the difference between Windows Store and Microsoft Store.

Any site other than the "official" Microsoft Update site on the Internet becomes a needless aggravation, not to mention needless confusion.

Ezekiel Carsella said,
so i can upgrade from windows 7 fwee?

Assuming you meant to write "free", the answer is no. It is free for existing Windows 8 users, not for existing Windows 7 users.

And what if you don't use the store / download anything from it ?
This is not a viable option for those who do not like to use the store....

este said,
And what if you don't use the store / download anything from it ?
This is not a viable option for those who do not like to use the store....

What? What the hell are you talking about? Give me one good reason not to use the store?

este said,
And what if you don't use the store / download anything from it ?
This is not a viable option for those who do not like to use the store....

You don't need to sign in with an account to use it. There's nothing to stop you from updating through it.

Mikeffer said,

What? What the hell are you talking about? Give me one good reason not to use the store?

The Windows 8 Store cannot be automated for mass deployment, and auto-store updates don't exist until 8.1. As such 8.1 requires a WSUS or SCCM compatible deployment method, which means they must have at least one non-store update method.

Thankfully Microsoft always releases updates like this as new downloadable media, but it would be silly if that was the only update alternative for those with large environments who have already deployed 8.

Kaedrin said,

The Windows 8 Store cannot be automated for mass deployment, and auto-store updates don't exist until 8.1. As such 8.1 requires a WSUS or SCCM compatible deployment method, which means they must have at least one non-store update method.

I have never read or heard about this before. Are you sure that this cannot be automated by an admin?

What I really want Windows 8 to do is automatically install updates, like Android, instead of giving a notification on how many updates are available in the store. This is just a waste of time. I liked Android's way of deciding which 'Apps' can have updates installed automatically.

Kaedrin said,

The Windows 8 Store cannot be automated for mass deployment, and auto-store updates don't exist until 8.1. As such 8.1 requires a WSUS or SCCM compatible deployment method, which means they must have at least one non-store update method.

Thankfully Microsoft always releases updates like this as new downloadable media, but it would be silly if that was the only update alternative for those with large environments who have already deployed 8.

Comment author stated "Those who do not like to use the store" not "Those that can't use the store".

I'm 100% sure MS will deploy images as normal any way.

sanctified said,
There are no Windows Stores where I live. I hope other options to get this are available.

When they say 'Windows Store' they mean the in built app store i assume. But i'm sure you'll be able to get it in all the other traditional ways too.

You probably have to supply it with a new key only. I doubt the new Win8.1 will be activated using the win8/2012 kms key you now use.

sjaak327 said,
You probably have to supply it with a new key only. I doubt the new Win8.1 will be activated using the win8/2012 kms key you now use.
If it's a free update, why not? The current leaks can be activated with the Windows 8 keys.

Studio384 said,
If it's a free update, why not? The current leaks can be activated with the Windows 8 keys.

Not against a kms server though, they are activated using Windows 8 preview keys.

I wonder if we'll be able to get full 8.1 ISO's to do clean installs with like the current leaked builds. I'd rather not upgrade via the windows store every time I do a fresh install of windows lol.

Chris123NT said,
I wonder if we'll be able to get full 8.1 ISO's to do clean installs with like the current leaked builds. I'd rather not upgrade via the windows store every time I do a fresh install of windows lol.

There's no doubt there will be slipstreamed versions. You could make your own if you wanted but I'm still a bit perplexed as to how this is coming through the Store and the logistics.

Ficman said,
Wait let me check... Yep still not going to use it

Duly noted. Anything else you're not going to use that we need to be made aware of?

Agreed. Just another reason to not use Windows-8. Now, Microsoft requires one to get to a Microsoft App store to get the update? How absurd! What happened to the Microsoft Update site on the Internet??

Well, we did pay for Win 3.1, 3.11 and 98SE so I can see a historic context to a paid upgrade.... but I am glad that this one is free. I would assume that this is so that people will adopt Win8 further.

James Rose said,
....

I would put this halfway between those releases and say, Plus! pack for win95 or Ultimate Extras for Vista......

Definitely more than a SP.

Such a surprise.
Totally unexpected they are using the actual NT kernel version name for their naming scheme on their flagship OS. Such an eye opener, who would've thought! GENIUS.

It has improved with updates (launch version was a disaster) but it's still lacking compared to Zune and even.... Windows Media player.

They really had to regardless if they were even thinking about charging for it. 8.1 fixes a lot of issues and addresses issues in 8. So the backlash would of been huge if they charged for 8.1

Edited by techbeck, May 14 2013, 4:07pm :

Order_66 said
They don't really have a choice at this point.
100 million copies sold. Marketshare keeps rising. # of Steam users running Windows 8 keeps rising.

If people really didn't like Windows 8, they'd ditch it for another OS such as Linux..

dtourond said,

If people really didn't like Windows 8, they'd ditch it for another OS such as Linux..

Or stick with Windows 7 which a lot of people/companies are.

dtourond said,
That's a good idea, for financial reasons.

Not just financial reasons. Believe it or not, not everyone likes the Win8 interface.

techbeck said
Not just financial reasons. Believe it or not, not everyone likes the Win8 interface.
Well if they don't want to use an OS that is better than the last release just because they don't want to take a little time to learn about something new, then that's their problem.

I never liked the Start Menu. Did I stop using Windows entirely just because of that, no. I got myself Objectdock and moved on.

dtourond said,
Well if they don't want to use an OS that is better than the last release just because they don't want to take a little time to learn about something new, then that's their problem.

Not everyone thinks Windows 8 is better. I am holding my opinion until I can mess around with 8.1. But in 8, I dont like the interface very much as it is currently.

techbeck said,

Or stick with Windows 7 which a lot of people/companies are.

The fact is many people don't have a choice as it comes preinstalled with their PC purchase. The majority of Windows sales come from OEM sales.

techbeck said,

Not just financial reasons. Believe it or not, not everyone likes the Win8 interface.

True, just as not everyone even upgrades their version of Windows, best witnessed by the very large number of people (and companies) still on XP.

techbeck said
Not everyone thinks Windows 8 is better. I am holding my opinion until I can mess around with 8.1. But in 8, I dont like the interface very much as it is currently.
Well that's what separates me from the rest. For me, it's about facts and proof. And it's been proven that Windows 8 is indeed better. Now that doesn't go without saying that if the improvements that Windows 8 brings doesn't concern you in any way, then yes, in your case it isn't any better than 7.

I've been testing and comparing Windows 8 from the developer preview up 'til now with Windows 7 and there are some noticeable differences. Games run smoother. It boots up faster. It utilizes less RAM than 7, and it runs quite good on older hardware (which was a shock to me).

And I can say with all honesty that I prefer the Start Screen over the Menu for several reasons. There's still some things that I find can be improved in the MUI, but always remember that the first version of any product is never 100%.

Deihmos said,

The fact is many people don't have a choice as it comes preinstalled with their PC purchase. The majority of Windows sales come from OEM sales.

True, but different for companies.

And you can still buy systems with Win7 installed.

techbeck said,

Not everyone thinks Windows 8 is better. I am holding my opinion until I can mess around with 8.1. But in 8, I dont like the interface very much as it is currently.

I don't mind Windows 8, even with the lack of start button, and I actually do prefer the start screen now even though it made me feel sick when it was flicking between full screen and my desktop all the time, but I've got used to it now.
However, there are a few issues but that's mostly down to multi-monitor setup something the average user isn't going to care about too much anyway (still annoying for us though).

The rest of my issues with the OS comes later after a few months of use, and is based on the false promise that Microsoft has tried to brand the Metro, XBOX experiences. With their own core apps barely working, and integrated features such as Messaging hub not supporting their new message service (Skype). Photos import, also puts videos into the Pictures Library, and the store page doesn't have a way to easily copy the page link to clip board, worse still no send to messages or Skype. Basic things like that, although little, start to build up and annoy the crap out of people. It has done me. I've stopped using Metro apps at the moment and probably won't go back to them for at least several months with hopes they've improved.
The rest of the apps are "glorified" webpages, they're just apps that do a poor job at an alternative version of the webpage.

The rest of Windows 8 is amazing, I won't be going back to windows 7 simply because of the rest of the improvements. It's just a shame Microsoft have forced Metro upon us (desktop users) as they have with out any consideration or choice to not use it.

All Microsoft's problems could have been fixed right from the outset and they've have had a killer OS on their hands that would have wiped the floor with windows 7., all they would have had to do is add "Exclusive Use" to the settings.

> http://i.imgur.com/DS5LsyR.jpg
Picture very much related.

dtourond said,
100 million copies sold. Marketshare keeps rising. # of Steam users running Windows 8 keeps rising.

If people really didn't like Windows 8, they'd ditch it for another OS such as Linux..

They should put a sticky on top of every Microsoft article that says, "100 million units sold does not mean 100 million customers bought this product."

JHBrown said
They should put a sticky on top of every Microsoft article that says, "100 million units sold does not mean 100 million customers bought this product."
Like Dot Matrix had said, "Because either way, they were still sold. A sale is a sale.".

Whatever the hell they want to do with it is up to them.

There was a free update for 98 users that basically gave you 98 SE, all except one feature I think. Internet Connection Sharing if I remember right, it's been a long time.

Windows 8 was such a colossal failure at the retail level Microsoft really doesn't have any other choice than to give 8.1 to existing customers for free.

Order_66 said,
Windows 8 was such a colossal failure at the retail level Microsoft really doesn't have any other choice than to give 8.1 to existing customers for free.

100 million licences is a "colossal failure"? You have an odd choice of definitions... Even if Microsoft had sold 200, 300, 400, etc million licences, it still would have been a silly notion to charge for this update. I know of no other time I had to drop cash for an update for any supported Microsoft OS.

Did you have to pay to update Windows XP? Vista? Se7en? How about Windows Phone? Did you have to pay to update to 7.5? 7.8?

No?

So why did people think we would have to pay here?

Order_66 said,
Windows 8 was such a colossal failure at the retail level Microsoft really doesn't have any other choice than to give 8.1 to existing customers for free.

Please name ONE (1) operating system not named Windows, that retails 100 million copies in 6 months.

And please don't come with the utter irrelevant remark that all these licenses are sitting at a warehouse, as A) usage share figures suggest otherwise and B) Microsoft SOLD 100 million licenses, they received the money already, whatever you or anyone else does with these licenses is immaterial for MS's bottom line.

Dot Matrix said,

100 million licences is a "colossal failure"?

Absolutely, it really boggles the mind how quick fanboys are to ignoring reality.

Once again Dot, microsoft sales figures have ZERO relation to actual retail sales.
Why are you having so much difficulty understanding this fact?

Order_66 said,

Absolutely, it really boggles the mind how quick fanboys are to ignoring reality.

Once again Dot, microsoft sales figures have ZERO relation to actual retail sales.
Why are you having so much difficulty understanding this fact?

Well, the reality is that Microsoft has sold 100 million licences, and that number will continue to grow. If you want to argue metrics, it can be argued that Windows 7, Vista, and even XP ALL have/had millions of unused licences around somewhere, but that doesn't matter. A licence sold, is still a licence sold.

Order_66 said,

Absolutely, it really boggles the mind how quick fanboys are to ignoring reality.

Once again Dot, microsoft sales figures have ZERO relation to actual retail sales.
Why are you having so much difficulty understanding this fact?

Microsoft wouldn't care. They don't sell to customers, they sell to OEM's. OEM's are not buying a ******** of licenses if a product doesn't sell, at least not in the real world.

So your statement that MS sales figures have ZERO relation to actual retail sales is ludicrous and uninformed, unless you really believe companies like Dell or HP just buy them because they like to spend money. If you would have bother3ed to look at usage share figures (which relates to computers actually being used) you would know that there are at least 70-80 million licenses of Windows 8 actively being used, which shows there is certainly a relation between MS sales figures and retail sales. Silly to try and convince people this relationship doesn't exist, after all, some people actually use their brain..

sjaak327 said,

Please name ONE (1) operating system not named Windows, that retails 100 million copies in 6 months.


lol EXACTLY! Geez people are so quick to comment.

Like I said below....they really had to regardless if they were even thinking about charging for it. 8.1 fixes a lot of issues and addresses issues in 8. So the backlash would of been huge if they charged for 8.1

Edited by techbeck, May 14 2013, 4:57pm :

sjaak327 said,

Please name ONE (1) operating system not named Windows, that retails 100 million copies in 6 months.

Android?

It ACTIVATED 1.3M unities by day, back in semptember 2012. 6 Months =.. more then 200M. Maybe they should release a number like this.
Not to OEM. Real end users. And I guess this number has grown since then.

Edit: just found. It's 1.5M/day now.

Edited by aristofeles, May 14 2013, 3:37pm :

aristofeles said,

Android?

It ACTIVATED 1.3M unities by day, back in semptember 2012. 6 Months =.. about 180M
Not to OEM. Real end users. And I guess this number has grown since then.

Not sure, but I don't think one can actually buy Android. The Android you talk off doesn't run on Pc hardware either, which I guess should be the obvious platform I was talking about....

sjaak327 said,

Not sure, but I don't think one can actually buy Android. The Android you talk off doesn't run on Pc hardware either, which I guess should be the obvious platform I was talking about....

But the point of Windows 8 is that it's not only for PC - and the interface is touch first, they are clearly aiming more than PC. That's the competition to MS, that's what make them fear the future.
Personally I disagree - they should focus on real PC use, optimize the experience on keyboard/mouse. But who am I?

And the fact thats it's free makes no difference. Imagine a worls where Linux is a real alternative to Windows (I agree, it's hard even to imagine... but try). A free OS can be an alternative, and take the users base away from your product.

PS: i'm using windows 8 now. It has some advantages, I wont go back to 7. But I can't deny the facts. You can work with this GUI, but it's crap on a non-touch device.

Dot Matrix said,

100 million licences is a "colossal failure"? You have an odd choice of definitions... Even if Microsoft had sold 200, 300, 400, etc million licences, it still would have been a silly notion to charge for this update. I know of no other time I had to drop cash for an update for any supported Microsoft OS.

Did you have to pay to update Windows XP? Vista? Se7en? How about Windows Phone? Did you have to pay to update to 7.5? 7.8?

No?

So why did people think we would have to pay here?

Don't debunk his statement with logic! Begone! LMAO

Dot Matrix said,

100 million licences is a "colossal failure"? You have an odd choice of definitions... Even if Microsoft had sold 200, 300, 400, etc million licences, it still would have been a silly notion to charge for this update. I know of no other time I had to drop cash for an update for any supported Microsoft OS.

Did you have to pay to update Windows XP? Vista? Se7en? How about Windows Phone? Did you have to pay to update to 7.5? 7.8?

No?

So why did people think we would have to pay here?

Why do you still put an effort in replying to him?
He is such an obvious troll
Colossal failure, user hostile UI,.... these are just a few of his ridiculous definitions of Win8 with nothing to back it up

But hey, good on you for putting the effort in

aristofeles said,

But the point of Windows 8 is that it's not only for PC - and the interface is touch first, they are clearly aiming more than PC. That's the competition to MS, that's what make them fear the future.
Personally I disagree - they should focus on real PC use, optimize the experience on keyboard/mouse. But who am I?

And the fact thats it's free makes no difference. Imagine a worls where Linux is a real alternative to Windows (I agree, it's hard even to imagine... but try). A free OS can be an alternative, and take the users base away from your product.

PS: i'm using windows 8 now. It has some advantages, I wont go back to 7. But I can't deny the facts. You can work with this GUI, but it's crap on a non-touch device.

My point is that Android is not an operating system that can be compared to Windows 8. Regardless if it is free or not. Android has some impressive numbers, but these are from a market that is 5 times larger than the market that Windows 8 competes in. My original statement therfore was aimed at the pc market, and if we include the tablet market, it is still a much smaller market than the smartphone market. Windows 8 as such does not run on smartphones, for that they have WP8.

I am comparing Windows 8 with OSX and the many flavours of GNU/Linux.

Dot Matrix said,

100 million licences is a "colossal failure"? You have an odd choice of definitions... Even if Microsoft had sold 200, 300, 400, etc million licences, it still would have been a silly notion to charge for this update. I know of no other time I had to drop cash for an update for any supported Microsoft OS.

Did you have to pay to update Windows XP? Vista? Se7en? How about Windows Phone? Did you have to pay to update to 7.5? 7.8?

No?

So why did people think we would have to pay here?

Not sure why the fans of Windows 8 are throwing around that 100 million number. That is not 100 million people who bought Windows 8. Lets all use some common sense.

JHBrown said,
Not sure why the fans of Windows 8 are throwing around that 100 million number. That is not 100 million people who bought Windows 8. Lets all use some common sense.

Because either way, they were still sold. A sale is a sale.

Order_66 said,

Absolutely, it really boggles the mind how quick fanboys are to ignoring reality.

Once again Dot, microsoft sales figures have ZERO relation to actual retail sales.
Why are you having so much difficulty understanding this fact?

Give it a rest. You're wrong and deep down you know that, but bashing Dot makes you feel better eh?

Dot Matrix said,

Because either way, they were still sold. A sale is a sale.

So Ford releases the 2014 Pinto. To make sales look good, the CEO buys 300,000 units in the first week and gives it away to employees. Hey, but a sale is a sale right? Dude, your more naive than I thought.

JHBrown said,
So Ford releases the 2014 Pinto. To make sales look good, the CEO buys 300,000 units in the first week and gives it away to employees. Hey, but a sale is a sale right? Dude, your more naive than I thought.

^This

JHBrown said,
So Ford releases the 2014 Pinto. To make sales look good, the CEO buys 300,000 units in the first week and gives it away to employees. Hey, but a sale is a sale right? Dude, your more naive than I thought.

But of course Ballmer didn't buy 100 million licenses, Dell, Hp Lenovo and others did. In good accounting principles Microsoft reports these as sales. I just believe that naive does apply to you instead of to the one you responded to. You couldn't really make this stuff up even if your life depended on it !

Dot Matrix said,

Because either way, they were still sold. A sale is a sale.

Yes and not: I sell to the store 100 units of our product; if the customers do not buy them I will not get another order. Regardless of the product you sell having customers buying them is fundamental.

Fritzly said,

Yes and not: I sell to the store 100 units of our product; if the customers do not buy them I will not get another order. Regardless of the product you sell having customers buying them is fundamental.

This sales are, in sales terms, 'continuous flow', basically sales to keep the stores full. Which means customers are buying.

JHBrown said,
So Ford releases the 2014 Pinto. To make sales look good, the CEO buys 300,000 units in the first week and gives it away to employees. Hey, but a sale is a sale right? Dude, your more naive than I thought.

Oh dear oh dear, you're pretty naive if you think business accounting and reporting works like that.

techbeck said,
Hopefully there will still have a standalone package to deploy over the network or manual installs if needed.

Knowing Microsoft, I'm sure they will.

This is completely in line with what was expected.
Good that it is officially confirmed though

I still find it strange that it will come through the store instead of Windows Update

spudtrooper said,
I find it awesome it will come through store instead of windows update. Easier visibility to consumers.

Sure, but don't most moms and pops have updates set to automatic so it would be installed straight away. Now they have to go to the store. Some people are dead set against the store and only have a local account so they can't get into the store.

For me it makes no difference, I just thought that all updates for windows came through Windows Update

Stoffel said,
This is completely in line with what was expected.
Good that it is officially confirmed though

I still find it strange that it will come through the store instead of Windows Update

I agree. I expected it to come through Windows Update as well...

Who knows what form it could take. It could be presented as an update through the Windows Store, as in it will be one of the numbered updates that appear in the lower right corner of the Live Tile. We'll have to wait and see what they have planned for delivering it.

Stoffel said,

Some people are dead set against the store and only have a local account so they can't get into the store.

You can update through the Store even if you don't have a Microsoft account.

M_Lyons10 said,

I agree. I expected it to come through Windows Update as well...


Keep in mind that we are talking about the preview here; I would expect the RTM to be available on both.

M_Lyons10 said,

I agree. I expected it to come through Windows Update as well...

Windows Update only works if the version number is identical.

The internal version number of Windows 8 was 6.2. But the internal version number of Windows 8.1 is 6.3.

Hence, this is every bit as much of an OS upgrade as Vista to 7 (6.0 to 6.1), or 7 to 8 (6.1 to 6.2). They're probably supplying it as a self-installing .EXE, with an option for an .ISO.

There is another reason why it SHOULD come through the Store as opposed to WU - so it can be skipped. There is software that is so poorly written that updates to Windows can hose it - the only other Windows 8 PC I have ever seen (traditional notebook) had to revert back to Windows 7 due to a niche product from Oracle being 8-unready. And that is just a single example.

Yay, another false rumor smashed about it costing money for existing windows 8 customers. Distribution through the store is also win win!

spudtrooper said,
Yay, another false rumor smashed about it costing money for existing windows 8 customers. Distribution through the store is also win win!

Haha indeed. It was pretty obvious that it would be free but there are always those willing to bash anything for the sake of bashing.

ingramator said,

Haha indeed. It was pretty obvious that it would be free but there are always those willing to bash anything for the sake of bashing.

Absolutely. It amazes me the ridiculous rumors that take root... You'd think more people would have more sense...

ingramator said,

Haha indeed. It was pretty obvious that it would be free but there are always those willing to bash anything for the sake of bashing.

I don't think they do it for the bashing alone. I think they genuinly believe it can help destroy Microsoft.

M_Lyons10 said,

Absolutely. It amazes me the ridiculous rumors that take root... You'd think more people would have more sense...

I generally agree, but in all fairness, what reason could Microsoft have had for not announcing this up front? In the absence of information, rumors grow like weeds. This is one rumor that never should have been allowed to start.

From an outsider's perspective, it makes them look like they hadn't decided until just now whether or not it would be a free update. While that may not be the case, it just shines even more light on this problem they seem to be having with visibility. They can keep secrets--there are a lot of benefits to secrets--but it's not a universal thing.

This is the company that clammed up and started to sweat if asked about Blue just a few months ago, refusing to acknowledge it was even a thing (even though _we all knew already_). After announcing it, they went right back to clamming up about the cost (even though _we all knew already_).

Seriously, guys. The world will not end. Talk.

spudtrooper said,
Yay, another false rumor smashed about it costing money for existing windows 8 customers. Distribution through the store is also win win!

And why the possibility of an upgrade having a cost would be " a false rumor smashed"?
We will get 8.1 for free but be reassured that if MS will switch to a strategy of yearly "features updates" the next ones will have a cost; and I would add rightly so.

Fritzly said,

And why the possibility of an upgrade having a cost would be " a false rumor smashed"?
We will get 8.1 for free but be reassured that if MS will switch to a strategy of yearly "features updates" the next ones will have a cost; and I would add rightly so.


If updates come regularly enough and are significant enough, it wouldn't be a bad model for a 'Windows 365' type of product.

Some people balk, panic, scream, and start fires at the thought of a subscription OS model, but meh. I don't care. And it could potentially reduce the long-term cost of ownership.

Joshie said,

If updates come regularly enough and are significant enough, it wouldn't be a bad model for a 'Windows 365' type of product.

Some people balk, panic, scream, and start fires at the thought of a subscription OS model, but meh. I don't care. And it could potentially reduce the long-term cost of ownership.

I am not so sure that the same model of the Office 365 could be applied to OS sales: you stop pay Office and you cannot use any longer that specific suite of apps; it might be because you bought a new computer and you moved Office to it or decided to get something else etc.
Applying the same model to the OS would mean that if you stop paying the machine stop working and become useless. A lot of people have older PCs that they use for backup or other secondary tasks without necessarily upgrading the OS. Best example is myself: I bought a total of five licenses for W8 during the promotion but I would have bought two, might be three, at the regular price.

Fritzly said,

I am not so sure that the same model of the Office 365 could be applied to OS sales: you stop pay Office and you cannot use any longer that specific suite of apps; it might be because you bought a new computer and you moved Office to it or decided to get something else etc.
Applying the same model to the OS would mean that if you stop paying the machine stop working and become useless. A lot of people have older PCs that they use for backup or other secondary tasks without necessarily upgrading the OS. Best example is myself: I bought a total of five licenses for W8 during the promotion but I would have bought two, might be three, at the regular price.

You're looking at it from a classic PC model, while the market seems to be moving toward 'devices and services'.

Think of it this way: you're a Windows subscriber. Now you want to buy some new devices, and upon first boot, you log in and are ready to go with your license. Arguably, OEMs would no longer have to include the cost of a Windows license with a computer any more, even though they'd be able to sell computers with Windows installed, because the cost of the license is offloaded to what the consumer is already paying for.

Joshie said,

You're looking at it from a classic PC model, while the market seems to be moving toward 'devices and services'.

Think of it this way: you're a Windows subscriber. Now you want to buy some new devices, and upon first boot, you log in and are ready to go with your license. Arguably, OEMs would no longer have to include the cost of a Windows license with a computer any more, even though they'd be able to sell computers with Windows installed, because the cost of the license is offloaded to what the consumer is already paying for.

Personally I do not think I would ever subscribe: besides the issue of an old computer on which I can use my previous OS subscriptions have a huge issue: you are not in control of the costs; two years after you sign in the company decides to increase the subscription cost; what are you going to do? You "march or die".
I am sure that there are many people who will embrace an OS subscription model but I, at least in the foreseeable future, will not.

spudtrooper said,
Yay, another false rumor smashed about it costing money for existing windows 8 customers. Distribution through the store is also win win!

They'd never charge for a service pack.

(inb4 the "it's a full update, not a service pack crowd). It is a service pack.

tsupersonic said,
Good, but I want an official written source from Microsoft.

Oi vey, Tami is *THE* lead of Windows. Microsoft would be sued into oblivion if they lie to their investors, you really can't any more official than this.

Well there is no official announcement yet, but the Verge and several other website are reporting it, and as Spud said, Tami saying it basically makes it official.

spudtrooper said,

Oi vey, Tami is *THE* lead of Windows. Microsoft would be sued into oblivion if they lie to their investors, you really can't any more official than this.

Jeez man calm down. Not everyone has heard of this person...When I read this news article, it was two sentences, but it looks like Bsams has updated it to include more information.

Dutchie64 said,
@tsupersonic:

A little Google'ing makes the world go round.... ;-)

Not to mention it states in the article: "Microsoft's Tami Reller."

briangw said,

Not to mention it states in the article: "Microsoft's Tami Reller."

Sure, it says Microsoft, but it doesn't say what she does at Microsoft. For all I know, it could be just a regular programmer - it could've at least mentioned what she does in this Neowin news article (not the source). Not everyone knows all the little players in the Windows/Mac/Android world, most people know the big names (Gates, Ballmer, Jobs, Cook, etc.)

tsupersonic said,
Sure, it says Microsoft, but it doesn't say what she does at Microsoft. For all I know, it could be just a regular programmer - it could've at least mentioned what she does in this Neowin news article (not the source). Not everyone knows all the little players in the Windows/Mac/Android world, most people know the big names (Gates, Ballmer, Jobs, Cook, etc.)

It also says at the bottom of the article "Source: Microsoft", not "Source: A Microsoft Employee". Even the title implies that Microsoft is the one making the statement by putting "Microsoft:" followed by a statement.

tsupersonic said,
Sure, it says Microsoft, but it doesn't say what she does at Microsoft. For all I know, it could be just a regular programmer - it could've at least mentioned what she does in this Neowin news article (not the source). Not everyone knows all the little players in the Windows/Mac/Android world, most people know the big names (Gates, Ballmer, Jobs, Cook, etc.)

As Dutchie64 said, Google is your friend. I knew she was in this division though from an earlier post on Neowin about her being one of two people taking over the Windows division from an executive standpoint.

Pluto is a Planet said,

It also says at the bottom of the article "Source: Microsoft", not "Source: A Microsoft Employee". Even the title implies that Microsoft is the one making the statement by putting "Microsoft:" followed by a statement.

It says that now. When this news article initially started, Brad Sams had like two sentences (the source wasn't included). People like these aren't well known like I said, it should be included in the article. I'd be willing to bet not many on Neowin would know who Tami Reller even is. Yes, google is there, but when it's a lesser known figure, it should be started in the article what the person's position is.

Man this is why I hate posting in the news comments - there are just so many trolls and fanboys, and it destroys the site's appearance.

spudtrooper said,

Oi vey, Tami is *THE* lead of Windows. Microsoft would be sued into oblivion if they lie to their investors, you really can't any more official than this.

Actually she's the CFO of the Windows division, but close enough.

tsupersonic said,
Sure, it says Microsoft, but it doesn't say what she does at Microsoft. For all I know, it could be just a regular programmer - it could've at least mentioned what she does in this Neowin news article (not the source). Not everyone knows all the little players in the Windows/Mac/Android world, most people know the big names (Gates, Ballmer, Jobs, Cook, etc.)
People's reading and comprehension skills arent always on the same page. They see words, but dont really know how they apply.

tsupersonic said,
I'd be willing to bet not many on Neowin would know who Tami Reller even is.

Depends on who you ask. There was a news article a week or two ago talking about her and another lady being promoted through the Windows division.

And no, not a fan boy or troll, just someone who is observant. Honestly, I could care less and I'm not trying to belittle you or whatnot. I saw the source posted after it was apparently posted by Brad; but if something big like this were posted, I tend to see if it exists somewhere on a MS page and sure enough, I saw the blog post too.

tsupersonic said,

Man this is why I hate posting in the news comments - there are just so many trolls and fanboys, and it destroys the site's appearance.

Sorry you feel that way about me, I posted within hours of your comment and didn't realize the article would've changed that much in that time. And that's kinda what I was thinking about you when you posted... Discrediting the entire article because it's not official when everything seems to point to Microsoft making the statement in the first place.