Windows 10

I look forward to drunk hologram texting.

TheGameguru wrote:

I look forward to drunk hologram texting.

I look forward to reading about your drunk hologram texting

Thin_J wrote:

Free? Cool. Especially since I rather like Windows 8 anyway.

But then I haven't been a start menu user for years and years now. I liked Win 8 better when there was no start button at all. And the other complaints typically leveled at it are a non issue in my eyes.

So getting 10 for free is pretty much pure bonus for me.

Yeah, this gets me to put Windows 10 on my iMac. I might also pick up a Surface Pro sooner than later.

For gaming, this really is the upgrade from Smartglass I was hoping for. I do game from my Xbox One, and I already use my phone to message over XBL and look at clips. Merging these even more in a big win.

I wonder if the free upgrade will push more developers to support DirectX 12 sooner, since the install base should be pretty solid. If it actually delivers what they claim it will, that could be a very good thing.

Chaz wrote:

I wonder if the free upgrade will push more developers to support DirectX 12 sooner, since the install base should be pretty solid. If it actually delivers what they claim it will, that could be a very good thing.

Last I heard it sounded like some of the DX 11.2 GPUs out there would be able to support DX12's new features, so that will probably help drive DX12 adoption by developers as well.

Again, I'd wait for the other shoe to drop. Apple can give away OS X because they sell hardware at very high margins, and Linux can be free because the incremental cost of adding your own thing is tiny, and the system as a whole has a lot of value. It's the 'stone soup' flavor of OS development. A lot of people volunteer their time to make that system better.

But Microsoft doesn't sell hardware, (edit: well, they sell XBoxes, and Surfaces, but they lose money on both), and not very many people volunteer to work on Windows, so not charging for their primary product has me very worried.

Usually, with "free services", that means you're the product.

What I was reading about DX12 is that it'll be kind of like Mantle... it's not adding so much as taking things away, and improving efficiency. Removing features and optimizing code paths should be possible on almost any current GPU, I would expect.

fangblackbone wrote:
But Microsoft doesn't sell hardware

Um... ?

Well, I already clarified that, but just to be sure: they lose oodles of money on most of their hardware. They might someday make a profit on both XBoxes and Surfaces, but right now, OS money funds the hardware, not the other way around. (and game royalties on XBox software, but that's not profitable yet, either. The One is doing well enough that it'll probably end up a net winner, but I'm not sure the 360 ever made it into the black.)

Developers have this thing about being paid regularly.

Malor wrote:
fangblackbone wrote:
But Microsoft doesn't sell hardware

Um... ?

Well, I already clarified that, but just to be sure: they lose oodles of money on most of their hardware. They might someday make a profit on both XBoxes and Surfaces, but right now, OS money funds the hardware, not the other way around.

Developers have this thing about being paid regularly.

First, isn't Windows 10 free to upgrade form Windows 8. It's not just free, right?

And to clarify, this announcement probably sold me a Surface Pro, and maybe a computer with windows !0 on it. Hopefully I can just put Windows 10 on my iMac. And part of this is because I have an Xbox One and want to use these features in a cohesive ecosystem.

And you know that they are using their software to sell hardware now, which is much more like Apple. They just aren't selling PCs... yet.

Malor wrote:

Again, I'd wait for the other shoe to drop. Apple can give away OS X because they sell hardware at very high margins, and Linux can be free because the incremental cost of adding your own thing is tiny, and the system as a whole has a lot of value. It's the 'stone soup' flavor of OS development. A lot of people volunteer their time to make that system better.

But Microsoft doesn't sell hardware, (edit: well, they sell XBoxes, and Surfaces, but they lose money on both), and not very many people volunteer to work on Windows, so not charging for their primary product has me very worried.

Usually, with "free services", that means you're the product.

Microsoft has lots of products.. not sure how "losing money on Xbox and Surface" has anything to do with being incapable of not charging for Windows 10. Last I checked while Microsoft doesnt enjoy the kind of money printing Apple does they still are one of the more profitable companies in the world.

Is Windows their primary product? Nope its 3rd.

TheGameguru wrote:
Malor wrote:

Again, I'd wait for the other shoe to drop. Apple can give away OS X because they sell hardware at very high margins, and Linux can be free because the incremental cost of adding your own thing is tiny, and the system as a whole has a lot of value. It's the 'stone soup' flavor of OS development. A lot of people volunteer their time to make that system better.

But Microsoft doesn't sell hardware, (edit: well, they sell XBoxes, and Surfaces, but they lose money on both), and not very many people volunteer to work on Windows, so not charging for their primary product has me very worried.

Usually, with "free services", that means you're the product.

Microsoft has lots of products.. not sure how "losing money on Xbox and Surface" has anything to do with being incapable of not charging for Windows 10. Last I checked while Microsoft doesnt enjoy the kind of money printing Apple does they still are one of the more profitable companies in the world.

Is Windows their primary product? Nope its 3rd.

I also wonder how much the OEM Consumer license is part of the Windows pie. They will still be charging OEM Manufacturers and business for licenses, which has to be their primary profit vector.

TheGameguru wrote:
Malor wrote:

Again, I'd wait for the other shoe to drop. Apple can give away OS X because they sell hardware at very high margins, and Linux can be free because the incremental cost of adding your own thing is tiny, and the system as a whole has a lot of value. It's the 'stone soup' flavor of OS development. A lot of people volunteer their time to make that system better.

But Microsoft doesn't sell hardware, (edit: well, they sell XBoxes, and Surfaces, but they lose money on both), and not very many people volunteer to work on Windows, so not charging for their primary product has me very worried.

Usually, with "free services", that means you're the product.

Microsoft has lots of products.. not sure how "losing money on Xbox and Surface" has anything to do with being incapable of not charging for Windows 10. Last I checked while Microsoft doesnt enjoy the kind of money printing Apple does they still are one of the more profitable companies in the world.

Is Windows their primary product? Nope its 3rd.

Yeah, I think Dynamics AX is their biggest single product revenue driver by a pretty wide margin. I'm not sure giving away Windows 10 for one year to personal customers is that big a deal financially.

NM

(Malor stealth edit)

I am actually pumped about this. Cost is a big factor in my enthusiasm for any new version of Windows. The other of course is the inevitable driver/compatibility issues.

Kamakazi010654 wrote:
TheGameguru wrote:
Malor wrote:

Again, I'd wait for the other shoe to drop. Apple can give away OS X because they sell hardware at very high margins, and Linux can be free because the incremental cost of adding your own thing is tiny, and the system as a whole has a lot of value. It's the 'stone soup' flavor of OS development. A lot of people volunteer their time to make that system better.

But Microsoft doesn't sell hardware, (edit: well, they sell XBoxes, and Surfaces, but they lose money on both), and not very many people volunteer to work on Windows, so not charging for their primary product has me very worried.

Usually, with "free services", that means you're the product.

Microsoft has lots of products.. not sure how "losing money on Xbox and Surface" has anything to do with being incapable of not charging for Windows 10. Last I checked while Microsoft doesnt enjoy the kind of money printing Apple does they still are one of the more profitable companies in the world.

Is Windows their primary product? Nope its 3rd.

I also wonder how much the OEM Consumer license is part of the Windows pie. They will still be charging OEM Manufacturers and business for licenses, which has to be their primary profit vector.

Businesses more so. Win 8 OEM licenses seem to top out at $25, so I can't imagine W10 licenses going for more than that.

Malor wrote:

so not charging for their primary product has me very worried.

I think there's a point that could be made about Office being their primary product these days, but that's another product they've transitioned to a subscription model. There's also been signs over the years they've been trying to figure out how to make subscriptions for Windows work. Doesn't necessarily mean this will have a subscription model to fund further development, but the fact they're saying "for the first year" is enough to give me pause before signing on the dotted line. Yes, Apple now gives away OSX but they also didn't also attach an expiration date on the offer.

EDIT: Is this hologaphic stuff the new IllumiRoom?

To me, it looks like the free for a year thing is entirely to incentivise (sp?) people to move their existing machines away from Windows 7. It's purely for existing devices and only good for the "life of the device" (and not a setup for a subscription or weird OS DLC scheme). They're still going to make their money on new devices/installs, which has always taken time to begin saturating the market. This way, while they wait for that base to percolate, they get people moving onto Windows 10 immediately so they can 1) tell the world that their adoption rate is through the roof and 2) get a lot of people to upgrade that otherwise wouldn't and hopefully (if you're Microsoft) sing it's praises to the non-believers. In the meantime, they'll keep soaking Office 365 users for $100 a year and XBL subscribers for $60 (sadly, I'm both). I would be shocked if there weren't a room full of bean counters and market analysts at Microsoft telling management that they'll make more money this way than trying (and failing) to get people to upgrade for $50-$100 a pop.

I'm sure there are other angles, but I really don't think Microsoft has the pull to be wickedly deceitful/nefarious these days. They're trying to stay relevant to a generation that's jim dandy with iOS or Android for everything.

Edit: And while I was writing, a bunch of people beat me to essentially the same point.

With the premium that Apple charges on any hardware with their logo and OS on it, I'd have a hard time agreeing that they're giving away anything. And they charge for yearly point release updates to OS x, right?

Chaz wrote:

With the premium that Apple charges on any hardware with their logo and OS on it, I'd have a hard time agreeing that they're giving away anything. And they charge for yearly point release updates to OS x, right?

Not anymore.. last couple have been free.

Chaz wrote:

And they charge for yearly point release updates to OS x, right?

Not for the last couple of big releases.

Progress! I haven't been following, since I don't own an OSx device personally. I do know they missed an opportunity by not calling the Mavericks follow-up version Goose.

Malor wrote:

Again, I'd wait for the other shoe to drop.

Usually, with "free services", that means you're the product.

+1

I skipped Vista and Win 8, so I was planning to eventually upgrade my Win 7 to Win 910, but I'm definitely in "wait and see" mode after today's annoucements. Since the free part is apparently only going to be for the first year, I hope that means Win 10 is a bonafide product, rather than a service, and that MS just wants to jump start the adoption rate.

MeatMan wrote:

I hope that means Win 10 is a bonafide product, rather than a service, and that MS just wants to jump start the adoption rate.

That's probably the best non-cynical view. With Win8 adoption being incredibly slow*, MS really needs to do something to encourage people to move off 7.

* Win8.1 market share is still less than WinXP, although not by much.

Would not be shocked to see two separate versions of Windows 10.. one that is part of a subscription service (perhaps even with Office 365) and then another that lags behind in feature set that is free (They referenced repeatedly some "insider" program that would see the new features)

I like Office 365.. I moved my personal email accounts to them some time ago and get essentially more Office 2013 installs than I know what to do with.. which resolved the old issue of having to buy licenses for my laptops, desktops and my family... so in that aspect it's been great.

ubrakto wrote:

Edit: And while I was writing, a bunch of people beat me to essentially the same point.

I like your properly worded sentences with correct punctuation and grammar.

Didn't watch the stream. I really dislike windows as an OS. The only good thing are the non MS programs I have.
But, as a gamer, I am stuck with this p.o.s.

As on how free Windows X will be :

Turner didn't say what specifically Microsoft intended to do, revealing only that the plans will be revealed "through the course of summer and spring." However, he did give an indication of one thought that the company had: "finding new ways to monetize the lifetime of that customer on those [zero cost Windows license] devices."

The minute they start pulling sh*t like subscribing every year so I can us Windows OS...I am gone. I will take loss of games I can't play at that time.

shoptroll wrote:
MeatMan wrote:

I hope that means Win 10 is a bonafide product, rather than a service, and that MS just wants to jump start the adoption rate.

That's probably the best non-cynical view. With Win8 adoption being incredibly slow*, MS really needs to do something to encourage people to move off 7.

* Win8.1 market share is still less than WinXP, although not by much.

A few months back, Win7 was actually gaining market share against 8... I think this was even after the release of 8.1.

Once I sat down with a Mac zealot who railed against Microsoft every chance he could get.. I said let's sit down at this Windows PC and you show me exactly what is so terrible about this OS.. He just sorta sat there for a while and didn't say anything then finally said

"It's just so unstable! it crashes all the time"

That was it. I felt very let down almost like when Zack did that thing and Slater didn't do that other thing.

Really, if they can solve the upgrade problem I won't really care. With my Mac, I start the OS install, the machine reboots, and I'm back to work in minutes with basically everything just as it was with the previous version (it doesn't retain certain unix-level configs because of incompatibilities with version upgrades, but that's it). With Windows, traditionally, upgrading means wiping and starting from scratch, trying to remember all of the drivers I need, reinstalling apps, etc. It's a multi-day nightmare. If Windows X fixes this then I'm on board. But I only use my PC for gaming anyway, so all I actually want is some platform that runs Steam, Origin, and whatever else and gets out of my way. They can do whatever they want with the UI or release frequency so long as it doesn't prevent me from doing this as easily as possible.

Sparhawk wrote:

Didn't watch the stream. I really dislike windows as an OS. The only good thing are the non MS programs I have.
But, as a gamer, I am stuck with this p.o.s.

As on how free Windows X will be :

Turner didn't say what specifically Microsoft intended to do, revealing only that the plans will be revealed "through the course of summer and spring." However, he did give an indication of one thought that the company had: "finding new ways to monetize the lifetime of that customer on those [zero cost Windows license] devices."

The minute they start pulling sh*t like subscribing every year so I can us Windows OS...I am gone. I will take loss of games I can't play at that time.

Monetizing customers on "zero cost Windows license" devices means finding ways to get people to pay for things other than the OS. I haven't yet seen any indication that Microsoft will try to get people to subscribe to its OS. They want to get you to subscribe to their SaaS like Office 365, OneDrive, etc.

I don't double post.