Microsoft Looking For New Ways To Monetize Windows

[falchard]

I disagree with the subscription based service for only 1 reason. I cannot quote Steve Balmer's original Windows commercial every time there is a new version of Windows.

 

[The3monitors]

Howsabout every time you turn the computer on and login you have to put your credit card information in and pay $100 per hour for the service (hey their servers running on their own software arent free you know). So you pay 150 for the serial than 100 for each hour. Makes sense to return computing back to the days where only the wealthy can hack into governments/and movie studios. Since they own them.

 

[bak0n]

If this becomes the end of pay once Windows systems, I will be going to Linux and / or Mac OS (for the first time ever). I have 11 PC's and there is no way I will ever pay an annual subscription on 11 systems.

 

[Kintaroo]

Would like subscription if costs 1€/month

 

[iam2thecrowe]

just keep making more OS's like XP, with solid hardware support, versatile and easy to configure for businesses (where most of your money comes from). Stop trying to change things so much that's where they wen't wrong.

 

[apache_lives]

I'm not saying i agree with this move if true, but the average joe prefers paying much less "up front" for a subscription rather then a lot of money to "own" a product - just like Microsoft Office 365 vs Office Professional 2013 - most clients opted for the cheaper 365.

Most people are tight a$$es, so as much as we all hate this move, it will happen, it will get complaints, it will make Microsoft a lot of money, the system will work, it will happen, whether you see this as good or bad is up to you, just wait for it.

And dont tell me the whole ill switch to Linux thing bla bla whatever iv heard that a million times through out the years its getting old

 

[bigpinkdragon286]

Switching to Mac OS is hardly a cost effective alternative to anything Microsoft is planning.

I for one am curious what's being considered for inclusion in a possible free version of Windows 10.

 

[Alsone]

Make a Windows version people actually want instead of all this tile / pared down feature / charm bar etc mobile hybrid crap and it will sell!

Desktop users want to see a traditional Windows back a la Win 7, not another nerfed Hybrid in the form of Windows 10. Windows was popular because it worked and was logical. No hovering toolbars and hidden menus, no restricted file access / restricted access to properties or advanced admin features, no switching between desktops and tiles, no tiles!

If they think that a Cloud model will bring in more money then think again. The reason many left Adobe products was Adobe Cloud. Myself included and I'm very much not alone. I used to buy Photoshop and Premier. Now I use an old version of Photoshop Elements (non cloud) and Vegas Pro.

Windows shifting to the Cloud = shift to Mac for many.

..and the recent outage of Azure / Office 365 Cloud should have been enough to turn most businesses off: http://www.computing.co.uk/ctg/news/2382347/microsoft-azure-suffers-huge-outage-affecting-websites-and-office-365#

At least if something goes wrong with IT in house, it's fixable quickly and easily. With Cloud services, you're without service for however long it takes be that hours or days with no control over it whatsoever and no option of workarounds.

MS have really lost their way since Bill Gates left and are digging themselves an ever deepening hole with many of their user base, through not listening properly and trying to impose their vision of what the future should be rather than what their users really want it to be, in my opinion.

I personally don't see any future for MS at this rate. Take a good business, head in a direction many of your users don't want, change to a finance package many won't accept and ......

 

[Alein]

Gee All the fuss over what. Seeing windows is your OS and they give it support for upwards of 10 years. So if you pay 200-300 that's not much considering the OS is out living the computer itself. People are whining and complaining about that but have no issues paying 30-60 for a game that has alot shorter life and let's not forget the bugs these games have and in most cases take along time to be fixed. People need to get over themselves if your not happy with MS then go Apple or Linux and see the support you have or how closed a OS can be.

 

[Jake Hall]

Behold "The Death of Microsoft"

 

[scolaner]

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.

Actually, I think you're completely wrong to say that an OS doesn't work as a subscription model. All those service packs and updates? That all works via subscription quite well. Further, there ARE "wear-out bits", and quite a few of them, just not in the same way that hardware wears out.

Further, Windows was never part of the included price of a PC. It was added ON to the price of hardware. That's why MS is struggling with these pricing models--if you can get a reasonably-functioning laptop for $200, it's a tough pill to swallow if the cost of the OS bumps the total to $280 or whatever.

That's not to say I think the subscription model a good idea necessarily. And MS has a lot of work to do to figure out what a subscription model will actually look like, how much it would cost, etc...that's no small feat. (Making an OS that average users don't hate would help, in any case.)

I do feel you on the buy-it-once, own-it-forever thing. I'm wistful for those days, but I fear they're gone. The cloud is the future. We have to deal with that. I also don't necessarily disagree with your point about some things running in the "vapor" and other things running locally, but...for a lot of users, they don't need much running locally. That's teh allure of Chromebooks.

But if I can bring two of your points together, in a different way than you intended. People ARE moving toward Linux (kinda) by gravitating towards Chromebooks. That's a free OS. I know that's not exactly what you were getting at, but it does very much reinforce your point about MS losing users, actually.

 

[dualfist]

Cloud computing for the most part outside of metro areas is not a viable option as internet speeds are so slow it makes it near impossible to backup easily. I seen want a Chromebook can do to a home network in a rural setting with a download speed of 5 Mbps and uploads of 0.56 Mbps. The Chromebook brings the network to a crawl as it starts to do uploading to save pictures etc.

 

[scolaner]

Cloud computing for the most part outside of metro areas is not a viable option as internet speeds are so slow it makes it near impossible to backup easily. I seen want a Chromebook can do to a home network in a rural setting with a download speed of 5 Mbps and uploads of 0.56 Mbps. The Chromebook brings the network to a crawl as it starts to do uploading to save pictures etc.

Not disagreeing with your point, but you're talking about an Internet access problem, not an OS pricing problem.

The government was supposed to be addressing that. Presidential mandate, as I recall. But that involved the old FCC if I'm not mistaken. Sigh...miss those guys...

 

[Alec Mowat]

Not a fan of the subscription model. Even at $20 a year. It basically means we need to replace Windows 10 in 5 years, or continuing to pay becomes more expensive than the OS is worth.

 

[faster23rd]

From the perspective of someone from a developing country, the prospect of a free, bare bones Windows 10 is potentially positive. If MS goes ahead with such a scheme, it could potentially cut a huge chunk of pirated and stolen licenses while giving folks here a legitimate OS that they can game, work, and consume content on.

However, a subscription based model would be detrimental for Windows' expansion here. A lot of people I know, even more so the non-techie ones, are reluctant to hand cash for software. I expect even less, myself included, to regularly fork out money for a product whose unique selling point is cloud integration in a country with DISMAL INTERNET CONNECTIVITY.

But maybe M$ knows that and would trudge on regardless since we're not a vital market.

 

[Onus]

Another place this leads is an "always online" requirement. That is mindless, for two reasons. As the previous posters state, internet access is not always fast and/or reliable enough for this. Second, and the one that matters most to me, is that PC = Personal Computer. If I have to have it online all the time, then it is no longer a personal computer, but is a terminal into someone else's system; without that it's just a useless (and expensive) lump of metal and plastic.

 

[lordfakie]

Okay... this news just exchanged my enthusiasm for windows 10 into fear and worry.

 

[FengLiao]

Society at large is mentally I'll and want, not to control, but to be controlled. We will mature eventually if we survive this stage of development.

 

[w8gaming]

subscription model eh? do it like netflix such as free unlimited movie streaming while having the OS at the same time. then it probably can work.

 

[ubercake]

I hope they don't make any huge mistakes like with the launch of Win8.

 

[ohim]

I bought my Win 8.1 licence because it`s one time... make me pay a stupid subscription and be sure i`ll probably pirate future win versions or switch to other OS/platform

 

[shiitaki]

Microsoft is a modern company, and they have to 'grow' their profits every quarter, every year. That is not sustainable, amazing how business is run against reality.

The whole Windows paradigm is based on lock-in. Who in this forum chose to use Windows? I'm being serious, who CHOSE Windows? And I'm sure there is going to be the unusual case among you who claims he did, but you didn't. It's what came on your computer, or it's your only choice when you were standing in the operating system isle at BestBuy.

Why does Windows have issues and not take care of the end user, because that's not their customer! HP, Dell, Compaq, etc, are Microsoft's customers. The only competition is other version of Windows, very enviable place to be.

Having to be online is genius for reducing piracy, and tying the user to a cloud account gives the legitimate user a reason, and gives pirates second thoughts. Who want's to share their files with the world? A computer is almost worthless without a internet connection anyway. FCC, that makes internet a necessity btw!

I'll be paying forever for my spiffy iMac, but I have the option to run Windows or OS X on my computer. But I'm not paying for Microsoft's crap anymore, selling copies of software on the promise that all of those promises from Windows 95 will finally be fulfilled isn't enough anymore. And yes, Windows 10 appears to be what 95 was supposed to be. Reliable, fast, pleasant to use. That libraries thing from 7 is atrocious!

It is amazing to me that with 7 billion people on the planet, we have so little choice! Windows 10 will sell, because it's not the disaster that 8 is, and what else is HP and Dell going to put on computers? This fact does not get the coverage it should. Seriously, the only competition for Win8 was Win7!

So please, go on about Windows! Because you are going to be using anyway! I'm sorry you think you have a choice! Are you really going to buy an Apple?

 

[ohim]

Microsoft is a modern company, and they have to 'grow' their profits every quarter, every year. That is not sustainable, amazing how business is run against reality.

The whole Windows paradigm is based on lock-in. Who in this forum chose to use Windows? I'm being serious, who CHOSE Windows? And I'm sure there is going to be the unusual case among you who claims he did, but you didn't. It's what came on your computer, or it's your only choice when you were standing in the operating system isle at BestBuy.

Why does Windows have issues and not take care of the end user, because that's not their customer! HP, Dell, Compaq, etc, are Microsoft's customers. The only competition is other version of Windows, very enviable place to be.

Having to be online is genius for reducing piracy, and tying the user to a cloud account gives the legitimate user a reason, and gives pirates second thoughts. Who want's to share their files with the world? A computer is almost worthless without a internet connection anyway. FCC, that makes internet a necessity btw!

I'll be paying forever for my spiffy iMac, but I have the option to run Windows or OS X on my computer. But I'm not paying for Microsoft's crap anymore, selling copies of software on the promise that all of those promises from Windows 95 will finally be fulfilled isn't enough anymore. And yes, Windows 10 appears to be what 95 was supposed to be. Reliable, fast, pleasant to use. That libraries thing from 7 is atrocious!

It is amazing to me that with 7 billion people on the planet, we have so little choice! Windows 10 will sell, because it's not the disaster that 8 is, and what else is HP and Dell going to put on computers? This fact does not get the coverage it should. Seriously, the only competition for Win8 was Win7!

So please, go on about Windows! Because you are going to be using anyway! I'm sorry you think you have a choice! Are you really going to buy an Apple?

What are you smoking to make a statement about Win 10 is what Win 95 supposed to be ?

As for your first question, i chose Windows , tried Linux and is not ready for consumers , mac OS might be a viable choice if MS goes the subscription way.

I don`t buy Dell/ HP or other manufacturer, i`m smart enough to build my own PC.

Having to be online does not block piracy , there are plenty of programs out there with "you must be online to use" and they are still pirated.

You are pleased with your iMac to use 2 Os on it... i`m pleased with Mac OS being cheap, i`m not pleased to pay a logo on my PC and thus make it overpriced like hell.

Windows is still the king because Linux isn`t that user friendly to be a real threath to windows, and there are way too many distros of Linux ... that`s the bad part, MacOs would be a competitor if a Mac wouldn`t cost like crazy.

My PC costs at least 1000 more euros to be made if it was a Mac ... sorry but i don`t want to pay for an apple logo 1000 euros.

 

[erendofe]

Microsoft is treading a slippery slope. a subscription of a micro purchase model for accessories and add-on features and accessories ---- doable. subscription for the actual core OS function ----BAD IDEA!

 

[DRosencraft]

Laying the blame on 8 is extremely short-sighted, as since Vista Microsoft has been talking about seeking new ways to monetize Windows. It has been an increasingly lower margin product for them, and for years it's been their goal to find ways to make more money off of it.

Monetizing a product is not a bad thing. You can take an idealist stance, or you can look at reality. Ideally, software would be free and upgraded with all the features we want with a litany of options to fit every need. The reality, however, is that the resulting program would be a bloated beast, and would rely on a whole host of people working for no money.

The question would have to be about how monetizing the product is done. It is monetized now - you pay money to receive the product. They're talking about changing the way in which the product is monetized. That could be changing price, adding versions at different price-points, and yes, possibly subscription models.

I don't like the subscription model, or what is likely going to be an always-online element. I don't care how ubiquitous they "think" the internet is, there are still many times the internet goes down, or places where you just don't have the bandwidth to support constant streaming of data over a connection like that from multiple sources.

If they want to go the subscription route, I suggest they do it like they have with Office. They have the subscription model - Office365 - and they still have the ability to go and buy the regular Office. Let the people who like subscriptions or always-online get what they want, and let the rest stick to the older model that works well for them.