Technology
This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.
Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.
Rules:
1: All Lemmy rules apply
2: Do not post low effort posts
3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff
4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.
5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)
6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist
7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed
view the rest of the comments
I don't see a problem with this business model. They're doing work maintaining software they don't want to maintain, so charging for it makes sense. It's surprising to me that Windows doesn't already charge a yearly subscription fee for OS upgrades.
Many people aren't going to pay the annual fee and will keep using Windows 10 without the security patches anyhow, so obviously this will weaken a lot of people's security, but, well... Microsoft needs to make money. And it's not like they need to worry about their customers defecting to another operating system. You can't just download and install macOS on an old Dell machine. If they're going to buy a new computer, it makes sense to get a less expensive one than what Apple's offering, ergo they'll get a new Windows 11 computer.
And if they wanted to and could use Linux...well, they'd already be using it. Overall, I'm completely nonplussed about this announcement. If you weren't going to pay Microsoft money, nothing has changed. If you need a longer support period, you now have an easy option. And hey, there's always the chance Microsoft will backtrack and provide free updates anyway. Especially given the lack of details on pricing, it seems like they're sounding out the idea rather than fully committed to deploying it.
Normally I would retort "But we paid money for it - so they need to support it". However I got my Win10 license by upgrading an XP machine to 7, then to 10. So I guess I didn't pay for it. My other Win10 machine was originally an OEM Win7 license.
But whatever. When they rugpull Win10 I will just complete move to Linux. The only thing holding me back is some industrial software that I use for work and they're in the process of multi-platform support.
For how long? 15 years? 20? 30? Should they still be supporting Windows 95?
Windows has the longest support period of any commercial operating system. iOS's longest support period for a phone was 8 years, Android is now 8 years for the new PIxel, macOS supports computers for anywhere between 5-10 years, averaging about 7, and Windows 10 will support computers for 10 years. Previous Windows operating systems have supported computers for even longer, but 10 years is still longer than anybody else. I've paid for a few Windows 10 licenses in my time, and I don't think I'll ever pay for another one. I don't use it enough to care about the limitations of unlicensed Windows.
Mind you, we wouldn't even need to be having this conversation if Windows was free software and some other organization took on the duty of maintaining it. That would be a lot less work for Microsoft and keep Windows 10 users happy. While I'm at it, I'd also like a pony.
I'd love to do that. I already use Linux for most of my work, but Adobe not being there means I need to fall back to macOS or Windows for some projects. While Photoshop is coming to the web (someday), After Effects and inDesign are unlikely to ever end up there. I can hope, but I'll likely be stuck on one of these other operating systems for a long time to come, I suspect.
Maybe Wine will some day support Adobe's terrible DRM...and maybe hell will freeze over, too.