Recommended Posts

I'm quite upset to see that the possibility of Windows 7 being a subscription-based OS is becoming ever more a reality. When I buy windows, I want to be able to use it for as long as I please without spending another penny. I don't care if its Modular, more power to Windows and Microsoft in that case. I do NOT want however, to have my O.S. as a subscription to renew every year or whatever.

Your thoughts on this?

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/627423-software-as-a-service-is-stupid/
Share on other sites

I don't see anyway that Microsoft can do this now that they actually have competition. I'm sure if they didn't have that competition then there would be a good possibility of it happening and it might still happen with the business versions of Windows 7 because MS doesn't face the same amount of pressure in business as they do in the home market.

I don't see anyway that Microsoft can do this now that they actually have competition. I'm sure if they didn't have that competition then there would be a good possibility of it happening and it might still happen with the business versions of Windows 7 because MS doesn't face the same amount of pressure in business as they do in the home market.

Microsoft is mainly targeting businesses. They are testing the idea out on the day-to-day consumer, but not their primary focus.

Microsoft desperately needs to reassure its partners that it won't repeat another Vista-like development cycle. Love it or hate it, Vista's tardy arrival has damaged the company's reputation for putting out frequent, usually upgrade-worthy releases. This hurts the company in ways not obvious to end users.

Microsoft's pie-in-the-sky, dream-come-true version of the future is one in which both businesses and consumers subscribe to Microsoft products rather than buy them. As I wrote way back in 2002, this is ultimately about annualizing software revenue for Microsoft (IT shops don't mind it either, in theory). Obviously Microsoft's big focus is on subscriptions for businesses, but the company is already testing "pay as you go" consumer subscriptions in developing countries.

The whole idea seems more ideal for a business infrastructure anyways. As they state: That study found that customers who are subscribing to Microsoft's OS are getting an especially bad deal right now because the time between releases is too long, it could provide more-so as an update versus a complete software install.

As they talk about different SKU's and compare it to Linux.. I look at it like this:

You have XP and need to add features much like vista. The different SKU "packages" can be added into the install for what may be no more than an upgrade in your subscription fee (if any).

Businesses, yes. Today's consumer, no.

If you read the Ars Technica article you'll know that the subscription model was for businesses, not end users.

I did read that article, along with their related articles; It also notes a home-user possibility, as well as their related articles that they linked throughout this article mentions several times it is considered to be a home-level consumer movement as well.

i'd probably just stay with Vista as that there would be Windows ME TOO. Like hey... me too also sux so you can just skip me or switch :)

I'll see that it's not for end users also but yeah, if that was eventually to happen i'd definitely be stuck with a "old, outdated, X year old OS"

Yea, people are going to have to upgrade at some point - just like with win98 and 2000 moving to XP. I dont think that vista is a bad thing - you just have to spend some time after installing getting rid of services that you dont want/need like defender, and windows security center. As well as a few other things.

And that's the whole point people like me keep trying to make. Eventually, you will have to upgrade because Microsoft will stop issuing patches.

Like it or not, you are forced. Forced to make a decision as to what OS you want next. That hard time I have is trying to move from Windows to learn Linux. I already know the Mac, but I just can't afford one of those.

This is a great thing for the PC consumer. Once again, Microsoft has screwed up. People didn't always have the option of using Macs or linux, but now they do. IMO, Microsoft is finally starting to lose its monopoly and competitors have a chance because Microsoft is taking their customers for granted and assuming they will buy whatever they put out and say is the best available.

Obviously, their belief is becoming less true everyday.

I agree with the sentiments of everybody else - if they make Windows a subscription, I'm jumping ship to Linux.

The article is probably really about a new version of Microsoft's Software Assurance (which is an optional subscription plan for volume licensing customers) though, so I don't think ATM there's anything to worry about.

I would support a "Windows Core" package sold at retail and the rest be sold separately via online. Being able to install just what you want to use and not have things forced on you would be a nice change of pace and would put a stop to all the antitrust issues surrounding MS. Its too good to happen though and if it did, Ballmer and MS marketing would ruin it...

The subscription thing being talked about here plain sucks though.

I am confused, what does the subject ("Software as a service") have to do with the first sentence of the post, "subscription based OS."

Further, Microsoft already offers subscriptions for Enterprise customers as part of the Software Assurance program. That is nothing new, and has been extremely successful. Why would you complain about that?

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • These features described above are good, but far from what developers like me was eager to get. And that main feature that developers will love it`s the ability to connect to LOCAL AI models running on Ollama. So if you have a beefy spec machine you can now use your own model 100% local inside Visual Studio 2026 18.7.0
    • Microsoft Teams is getting a controversial location tracking feature that users may hate by Usama Jawad Image generated with Microsoft Copilot Earlier this year, Microsoft planned to roll out a controversial location tracking feature in Teams, but following customer feedback, it decided to delay its release. The bad news is that the company has decided to launch it later this year, but it's based on roughly the same design that was shared earlier, which means that many users still have good reason to worry. Basically, Microsoft Places and Teams have received workplace check-ins via Wi-Fi. The idea is that if an employee arrives at the office and connects to their enterprise network, their profile status indicator will show them as being present in the office. For example, if you arrive at work, open Teams on your PC, and connect to the "Studio B" company Wi-Fi network, your Teams profile will indicate that you are present in "Studio B", as shown below: Microsoft says that this feature is basically a replacement for physical workplace check-in peripherals, it reduces the need to manually update your status, and it also enables co-workers to know that you're at work so that they can coordinate in-person meetings with you. IT admins can enable this workplace check-in capability at a tenant level, and users have the ability to control whether they want to enable it or not. Of course, all of that sounds great on paper, but naturally, many Teams customers may still have concerns, as they did before. This is because it enables your reporting manager and other members of the organization to track if you are at the office, when you arrive at the office, and where you are right now. This could be problematic for people who work in what they consider to be flexible work environments or hybrid setups, and this kind of location tracking could be considered an invasion of privacy. Microsoft has tried to alleviate some of these concerns by letting users know that they can manually set their location easily, which essentially overrides workplace check-in if they feel uncomfortable with it. However, that doesn't really solve the problem because your organization could enforce a workplace policy that mandates that this feature remains enabled. The Redmond tech giant has also assured users that this capability does not store historical data and is only a real-time indicator of location. Finally, it only generates a signal when you connect to a corporate network, which means that if you are working from home and connect your PC to your personal Wi-Fi, it won't broadcast your location to your employer; you will simply be shown as "Remote". Microsoft has encouraged IT admins to prepare for this change and begin informing users so they know what to expect once it begins rolling out later this year.
    • Wow, Microsoft IS cooking lately... This only shows that they COULD improve, they just chose not to for whatever reasons. That obsession with AI was destroying them from the inside out.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Very Popular
      AndrewSteel earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Veteran
      Taliseian went up a rank
      Veteran
    • One Month Later
      Clizby earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      Timaximus earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Timaximus earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      511
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      162
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      157
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      83
    5. 5
      ATLien_0
      80
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!