Microsoft Looking For New Ways To Monetize Windows

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
This doesn't sound NEARLY as bad as I thought it would be based on the headline. I suppose if they can pull it off in a way that I'm not paying $50/month to surf youpo-the web the market could accept it.
 
This is a bad precedent for Windows. When I buy Windows, I do not want a subscription-model. I want to pay once & be done. Subscription inevitably always cost more than a perpetual-use, one-time purchase.

The only thing I hear him saying is that they want to use the new subscription model that software companies are trying to switch to (e.g. Adobe w/Creative Cloud) as a way to generate more revenue on a more-predictable pattern. The "old business model" was better for consumers; the "new business model" is a continuous blood-sucking process. Yay for new business! (/sarcasm)
 
He said a lot but in nutshell he said nothing. Microsoft has a problem he cannot answer right now and that is Windows in form of Windows 8.x and Windows Phone is a flop. Nobody knows the fate of Windows 10 yet and that is Microsoft bet right now. Microsoft created this problem by releasing abomination called Windows Phone 7/8, Windows 8.x. The market didn't ask for any of this. Solution: Re-release Windows 7. Windows 10 is just Windows 8.2 Microsoft is trying to pull in front of our eyes saying that is something else which means Windows 10 doesn't solve the problems of Windows 8.x.
 
Didn't Adobe start loosing money after switching to subscription only? I'm still using CS6 as a result. Microsoft beware of going along with a failed idea. Subscriptions are more of a MMO thing, not a OS thing.
 
The word "monetize" carries with it connotations of vampiric dishonesty; no thanks.
It's NOT "all about the money."
Click to expand...

Oh, tsk. "Monetize" isn't a dirty word. It's just the term for how companies learn to make money on their products. So much in the tech world starts out as some amazing idea--YouTube, Twitter, Amazon, Facebook, and so on--and THEN they figure out how to try and make money. If they can't make money, they'll fold, and then no one will have that Cool Thing.

MS needs to figure out this Windows problem. No one wants to pay $90 for an OS. It doesn't make sense to lock users into one license for one machine. The company is moving everything to the cloud, and now it has to figure out how to earn money off of that model.
 
As long as they continue to offer traditional (buy it once) buying with an option to completely remove the cloud portion, they'll have my business. I've never done the "software as a service" thing for home, and I never will. Beyond that... I'm not a "cloud" person, but I know others are.

Just give me (and those like me) the options. That's all I (we) ask for.
 
It is a dirty word, when it is describing a process of wringing more money out of people for products and/or services formerly included for a/the price. What's wrong with the centuries-old model of buying a product once, and you're done? Life is not about paying, and Paying, and PAYING, ad nauseum. An OS does not lend itself to a subscription model. There are no wear-out bits that need to be regularly brushed to keep it running.
If they want device homogeneity, they're looking at a time-sharing service (think 1960s-1970s mainframe era), where you use a "dumb terminal" to access the Big Iron where the work gets done, or like Citrix-based VPN arrangements of today. In these cases, it is certainly reasonable to charge for vapor-based services, but NOT for the OS running on the client systems, which can do other things besides just access services in the vapor. Force recurring OS payments, and Microsoft will drive people to Linux. Once that snowballs even a little, Windows will die wriggling, and Microsoft will be left holding an empty sack and looking silly.
 



A good reason to "fuss" over it right now is to show MS how unpopular it will be. Think about how they changed some items on the XBox One before it was released, like not locking out used games. If a public clamor didn't go up, they never would have.

There might be some people at MS who are fighting to stave off the subscription model. Public outcry gives them ammo.

Also, sometimes these little public statements are made intentionally to gauge public reaction. Well, give them a reaction to use to guide their future efforts! A lack of silence may allow some PHB to say "See, no one cares!"
 


I agree, along with in-app purchases, these are terrible ideas and no one will go for them - unless they absolutely have to. It's just more ways for them to squeeze every last dime they can out of us. :fou:
 
If the have a model that will have a home subscription I would get it. I have 5 laptops/PC's in my house and then of course 3 8.1 tablets. So 7 devices to buy windows for. Upgrading is costly across all the devices I have so a subscription for my household would be awesome!
 
"That is also the same launch window for Windows 10."

What about the Tom's Hardware article by Kevin Parrish, DECEMBER 5, 2014 1:30 PM that says Windows 10 may not arrive until Fall 2015?

Please clarify, feels like you guys aren't sure which is the real release window.
 
You know a lot of us has been around. I have been using Windows for almost 20 years now and I saw the good OS and the OS .. Yes right now I own 6 COPYS of Windows which I paid over 100 each. I like WIN 7 BUT I DID LIKE XP.. Win 8 I hated at first but when you clean it up and use a third party player for dvds and for the start menu its not all that bad. When it came out and I purchased it my GAWD was awefull .. But one of the maun reasons I keep windows is because I game a lot...Even for a old guy like me... But if they do want to charge like the others I will just cut my losses and Go to Linux ... Yep I know how to use that too something MS SHOULD KEEP IN MIND......ALOT OF FOLKS CAN AND WILL USE LINUX....just a matter of time we all will see what MS HAS ON THERE MIND FOR US....
 
Windows subscription model? Perhaps if -all- Micro$oft software (games/apps/office/development) was included, for all devices, for under $5 a month (total).

5dollars*12months*2years = $120, or roughly the price of a modern M$ OS.

Other then that, I would rather make a single transaction, and own(weird?) a product.
If that is not possible, I would jump ship in a heartbeat.
 
Plug in 1 gig of ram, free. Plug in 2 gigs of ram, charge you $5, plug in 4 gigs of ram, chage you $10 more, plug in 8 gigs of ram, charge you another $20.....

I'm sure this is what we'll see. Freemium windows here we come! Woot!
 
Im absolutely NOT paying a monthly fee for an OS, no matter how low it is. If that's the case, windows 7 is the last microsoft OS that will ever hit my computers.
 
The problem is that back in the early days of computing the operating system cost few hundred bucks and the hardware it was running on cost a few thousand bucks. Nowadays they still want to charge the same amount for the software but it is running on hardware that only cost a few hundred bucks or less. Microsoft should except a lower profit margin and make it up on volume. If they keep their present pricing structure they will lose market share to Apple, Android etc. Which is why Microsoft is looking at other ways to make money from their software such as rental and advertising. I don't see any easy way out for Microsoft, and if I held stock in Microsoft I would sell.
 
Having worked in both the retail- and repair ends of the computing world, I have to add what my customers (past and present) are telling me: people actually resent the subscription model that has been foisted onto them; they comply in most part because they see no alternatives. I can understand MS's sid of the argument too, though. They are hemorrhaging money from the Win 8 cock-up (I don't care what people say, if you have to "mod" something for it to work or function, it's broken...), and many people love to obtain illegitimate copies of OS's. Not judging either way, but that's how they see it. As always, too, there's the persistant, never-ending inflation of the monies around the world, making everything cost more. HOWEVER, I believe pjmelect had a very good point in that their pricing hasn't maintained the ratio it once did in the pricing of computers. Windows 95 was released with an MSRP of $209, whereas a computer was on average $2000. That's 10% of the price back then! Today's average price for a PC on the other hand is $400 and the Windows will run about $100. That is 25% of today's costs for a PC! YES, I am aware that there can be no true comparison due to advances, market differences, etc., but the point I think has been made. If MS doesn't clean up its act and stop trying to wring every last cent out of PC users, people will increasingly turn to either free products (Linux and Open Office) or outright black market ones.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom