E-Mail:
Get our new Windows 7 eBook (PDF) for $7 with 70+ Tips. Download Now!

Would You Subscribe To Windows?

  • No Related Post

I think we’ve all worn ourselves out with talking about Vista. You might think that it’s now time for all of us to take break from talking about Windows and focus on items of higher and more relevant importance, but sure enough, just as one thing wears out, another takes its place. Whether good or bad, Microsoft doesn’t want us to stop talking about Windows, and even though many of us are just now getting used to Vista, Microsoft is already generating discussion about the next release of Windows, which has a working title of Windows 7. Whatever the final name of the OS ends up being is anyone’s guess right now, but no matter what the name is, we’re likely to see some interesting and controversial changes in this next version of Windows.

It’s an established fact that Microsoft plans to keep offering big new versions of Windows over exclusively offering smaller updates, but the way in which you gain access to these newer versions is quickly becoming an issue of change within Microsoft. As of right now, the Windows purchase and usage process has pretty much stayed the same. You purchase a copy of Windows, install it on your computer, and then use it for as long as you’d like.

Certain service packs may be released for your version of the OS that you can install for free, but when it comes to an entirely new version of Windows, you’ll have to pay to upgrade. We’re used to this, and it mostly feels right, but instead of solely carrying on with this method for Windows 7, Microsoft is also interested in offering Windows as a subscription service.

I (along with a lot of other people) have mixed feelings about this, but not surprisingly, I view it as a mostly negative thing. On the beneficial side of things, I can see some end-users responding favorably to this move in the sense that they can more than likely avoid paying a larger up front fee and know that they’ll receive the latest and greatest under their subscription arrangement. In the end, this illusion of the benefits of a subscription model will likely end up being revealed as a smoke and mirrors trick.

I don’t know about you, but I don’t subscribe to any software at this point in time. There are plenty of Web services that charge a subscription fee, but when it comes to my desktop, I more or less “own” that experience, and certainly have not trodden down the path of renting my desktop. Unless it’s just right, Microsoft will have to drag me kicking and screaming into this subscription arrangement.

In addition, with the recent Vista development delays fresh in mind, the amount that you end up paying for a subscription to Windows could possibly end up costing you more money over just purchasing a copy all at once. If Windows development ran like a well-oiled machine, then that would be one thing, but since it hasn’t in the past, I wouldn’t be so eager to subscribe to their development process.

Finally, a lot of people are using Windows right now simply because they have it on their computer. If their usage of Windows expired at the end of some sort of a subscription, then you can count on the fact that they’d be more inclined to examine other operating system options rather than signing on to another usage period of a desktop experience that they may not even be pleased with. Also, if Windows technically expires, then what happens to all of the data? Will the computer just become a useless box unless Linux or an older version of Windows is installed on it, or will the installed version just continue to run as is? As you can see, a lot of questions still have to be answered, and we won’t fully know what to expect until that final version of Windows 7 is released.

Besides Windows, the likelihood does exist that other Microsoft products (such as Microsoft Office) will soon be available to the masses by subscription as well. This is some dangerous ground to be treading on, and while I don’t fully reject the idea of application subscriptions, I do feel like operating system subscriptions are a leap backwards instead of forwards.

This article has been republished with the kind permission of our friends at OSWeekly.com. For more computer news, go give ‘em a look or Subscribe to OSWeekly.com’s RSS Feed!

Related Articles @ OSWeekly.com

[tags]windows, vista, service subscription[/tags]

9 Comments

Subscriptions? Microsoft seems to have run it’s course with operating systems. Win98SE was mostly stable, XP much more stable (perhaps fewer memory leaks) with enhanced security and finally Vista with modest security improvements but a healthy dose of media security, not welcomed by those who could care less about media.

The vast majority of users want to process documents, do some calculations, manage small databases, do email, research and communicate. All of these are performed well under Win98SE if rebooted regularly. The movement to XP was required because some software (that users desired) was no longer usable without an upgrade. It’s not clear if Vista is enough change to offer those benefits.

So future OS as a subscription? Not unless there is a ‘killer application’ to make that worthwhile and I can’t find one. I know Microsoft needs revenue to prosper, but I’m not clear about such a revenue stream. I’m not selling Microsoft short, but they are no longer in a growth market.

Would I subscribe to Windows? Easy answer, “NO”!

Mac is looking better all the time.

I think the problem with the current arrangement is that the only time MS (or pretty much any other software vendor) gets to charge any money for their software is when they invent a “new version” of something that they can sell.

With a subscription model, there would no longer be this requirement to base software upgrades around the need to produce “new versions” of software in order to generate revenue. There would be more incentive to provide a continuous stream of upgrades to existing versions.

This is not strictly a Microsoft issue. It applies to pretty much every PC software vendor. In the mainframe world, pretty much all software has always been sold on a subscription basis. Those of us who have experience working with mainframes know how much better the model works in the long run.

Rick

This sounds like MS’s attempt to stay ahead of Google and others with their network-based software (I assume that’s what it is). Actually software companies are moving toward a subscription style arrangement (A/V software especially). It’s just that you’re paying for the whole year’s worth of service up front instead of monthly,etc. The functionality aspect is worth noting since it’s a whole OS and not just an application. All of the software that has ‘expired’ for me has remained functional. They just can’t be updated. If the program were to be uninstalled usually the settings or files remained in place.

On the other hand this could create more security concerns since MS would have more financial information stored in their servers than ever before. You also could have some real profiling, etc. occuring since MS would now have a point of contact to link to the user’s usage.

Would I subscribe to MS NO why because the OS is a blight on my system. I am a MAC guy (ok stop the moaning). But I do run MS XP on my mac in a virtual environment. That is pain enough. I have installed Vista on a few systems for friends, and it is a painful experience. Just my 2 cents worth.

I thought Windows was already a subscription service. You pay 200 bucks for it initially then your software gets registered direct with MS. Change more than three devices in the computer and you have to resubscribe - unless you’re lucky for another 200 bucks.

Why you guys are putting up with this is beyond me.

Subscribe to windows? What sign on for a never ending bill from Bill G?
Who are we kidding? I am tired of the beta testing OS’s.
I have an old drive for games that I occasionally use for windows and my favorite drive with Linux on it. Linux does most of what I want for free.
Why pay for an OS any more?

It looks like the marketplace is finally going to accomplish what all of the anti-trust litigation couldn’t.

Microsoft is the “McDonalds” of computer software. They are now at the top of their game, and the only place for them to go is “downhill”.

What Do You Think?

 

Posted Recently

43 queries / 0.520 seconds.