[citation][nom]lexspecialis[/nom]This bashing for MS trying to make a profit is really ridiculous.[/citation]
No one is bashing them for making a profit. It is the method in which they plan to use bait and switch methodology in which to sell two copies of it's software. The bait is a computer with the latest software, Windows 7, the switch, oops, sorry, but you cannot have your antivirus, a messaging service, the internet AND something else running at the same time, unless you send us $199.00, which is about the entire cost of your new netbook computer.
Antivirus pretty much needed if you are internet connected. Seperate chat and internet applications are very much given, and then wanting to hit a calculator, or any other application to do anything else is going to hang up and tell you that you have hit your limit of running programs.
While I got rated down to unseen for the first post, my position still stands. This is all part of Bill Gate's original statement of eventual Microsoft sales, you will be charged per use, minute, hour, day, week, month, year. It is just a step in that direction.
Well, you got a laptop with Windows 7 installed, now pay us more money in order for you to be able to actually use the computer. The tools are all there, as Microsoft says it will specifically install every single needed peice of software to do everything, the only difference between started, home basic, premium, business and ultimate installs will be the license tied to it. Next update to Windows 7 will be a feature that allows limited duration licenses when Microsoft finds it cannot get enough upgrades at $199.00, it will start selling daily $5.00 licenses to th people who are poor enough they cannot justify a $199 upgrade, but can afford $5.00 today, then tomorrow, and the next day, and after how many days have they paid for a full product, but do not OWN said product? It may not happen as I say, but the way that Microsoft is setting things up gives a clear path down the road that I just gave.
Personally, I like Microsoft, always have. I loved windows 3.11, Windows 95, Windows XP. I also love Microsoft Office, and I am very much happy with their prices for that product for home/student users, now, but not in the past when a home user was still expected to pay $300 for a copy of it. Just because I like Microsoft does not mean I have to like every product, nor do I have to like every action they take. If they can make $50,000,000,000 in profit, great, but I say make that money on the up and up with direct sales and honest methods. Not back door hurt the poor the most methods, which is exactly who this type of setup is going to hurt the most. I can afford to buy a Microsoft Ultimate Windows 7, if I choose to, and while I also will likely buy a netbook, more people who will buy a netbook will be buying one because that is the only laptop they can afford to buy their child for schoolwork, and maybe 3 or four of them if it is a big family, and when that switch comes to their doors, they are not going to be in a position to just suck it up and make the payment needed to upgrade. I fear then, when Microsoft looks at it's profits, it will do what anyone in such a position would do that does not really care if they provide value to their customers, make a pay per play version that in the end sucks the money out of that poor families wallets month after month after month. Poor people who choose to pay per play make the mistake of short term pleasure for long term pain, but anyone who sets up the process for which it is allowed is not much better in my opinion. Maybe it will never go this route, but I see the paving stones being laid to allow it to happen.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram