Let’s laugh at this Forbes article on why ‘you shouldn’t upgrade’ to Windows 10

Oh, Forbes contributors. Is there any opinion too silly for you to have? Forbes contributor Gordon Kelly has written a piece in which he explicitly argues that “you shouldn’t upgrade” to Windows 10 because he’s worried that Microsoft is trying to pull a sneaky trick over on its user base.

DON’T MISS: The most ironic Google job opening ever

Why is Kelly so suspicious of Microsoft’s intentions? He gives us two major reasons.

First, he’s concerned that even though Microsoft says Windows 10 will be free “over the lifetime of the device,” he notes that “Microsoft’s own internal slides reference ‘two to four years’ and that these numbers are determined by ‘customer type’ (another undefined phrase).”

Microsoft tells us that the phrase “two to four years” used in relation to the lifetime of a device was part of a statement that was “shared on the investor relations website” and was “not related to servicing policies for Windows in any way. Rather, it provides accounting details for how we’ll recognize revenue.” Microsoft also says that it will share more details on its Windows 10 servicing policy soon.

While it’s never good to take any company at its word, we 100% believe Microsoft is being straight with us here, for one simple reason: It would make no sense whatsoever for the company to pull a bait and switch like that.

Microsoft no longer has a monopoly on software platforms and it wants to win users’ hearts and minds with Windows 10. If it starts charging you for Windows 10 all of a sudden just two years after you install it, it’s going to lose a lot of customers. Why would it even think of doing such a thing with Apple and Google lurking around to pounce on disaffected Windows users?

Kelly’s second major gripe is that Windows 10 is going to install software updates automatically. As someone who’s used Android for years, this seems like a strange criticism — speaking personally, I actually want to have the latest software as soon as I can. iOS users feel much the same way, which is why so many of them rush out to get the latest version of iOS as soon as it releases.

Kelly, however, is not convinced.

“Why would anyone reject Windows updates?” he asks rhetorically. “Because some launch with bugs, others create incompatibilities with existing software and recently updates even installed adware (like the Windows 10 upgrade adverts Windows 7 and Windows 8 users are receiving). With no way to stop any update, Windows 10 Home users become guinea pigs for business users.”

Bugs, of course, are part of every new piece of software — just ask iOS and Android users. And as any Android developer will tell you, it’s best to have as many machines upgraded to the newest version of a platform as possible to avoid fragmentation. In fact, assuming Microsoft maintains even minimal relationships with developers, we’re going to imagine that developers will be ready to have their apps good to go for new versions of Windows 10 on the day that it launches.

“Delivering Windows 10 as a service means we can offer ongoing security updates, new features and capabilities,” Microsoft explains. “We’d like to make sure people can get access to the latest Windows 10 updates as soon as they are available.”

Or, of course, this could be all part of a grand plot on Microsoft’s part to lure people in with free Windows 10 and then shaft them over so completely that it will send them running off to Macs and Chromebooks. Anything’s possible, of course, but we give Microsoft a little bit more credit than that.

SMH

Why do you all believe this would happen? As the article pointed out, Microsoft would be doing itself a great disservice with a business model like this. It’s NOT going to happen!

What I will tell you, Microsoft, like Google and Apple, are going to start charging for operating system components. They want to deploy a stripped down operating system with a browser and a file system. Add-ons like movie players, music players, games, etc. will cost money to tack on to the OS. This is already in play with the “stores” such as iTunes, Google Play, and the Microsoft Store. There are free apps, but there are a much larger number of pay-to-play apps. They’re going the microtransaction route by charging small amounts of money for games like Minecraft or Angry Birds. There will still be larger gaming houses such as EA, UbiSoft, Bethesda, and Blizzard, but they’ll be pushed to offer their services in-app much like Steam does now.

And then there’s the usual automation apps such as Microsoft Office and online storage such as Dropbox or OneDrive that will cost money.

So no, Minn, the operating system environment will NEVER go pay-to-play, but the components that jack on to the operating system will cost money through the use of microtransation-based stores, which you’re already seeing on most mobile platforms.

I gotta say that I absolutely disagree with the author about this. Microsoft will do what they will because they can.

They realized a long time ago that with the power the average PC now has, there is no reason whatsoever for a 3 or 4 year upgrade cycle. Businesses are no longer doing that and fewer and fewer home users except those who like to hang out on the bleeding edge of the power curve do. Other than the cash cow of Office (which I hope they are finally putting a stake through with their yearly subscription costs, it has long been the steady revenue stream of upgrades and new computers, which pretty much all come pre-installed with windows that has kept them in high cotton for so long.

Many of the folks who still replace their PCs relatively frequently do so because they aren't technically savvy enough to understand that it is not normal for a computer to "slow down" over time, as has pretty much always been the case with windows. Each update, and upgrade and other action adds more and more cruft to a system that is never really removed because of the way they handle updates. The software abortion that is the registry is never optimized for efficiency, so it just keeps accumulating cruft.

I've seen users that were astounded at the difference a fresh install of the OS makes to their computer that has slowly been dying over the years. I don't know if it is all just windows, or the seemingly inevitable malware that really destroys the usefulness of many windows based PCs, but it really does seem to be something that is as inevitable as the dawn.

Now, let's look forward a few years. It's 2025, and Microsoft has been on the 'subscription' basis for the OS for years. As everything is cumulative, you never really 'start fresh' with your system. You'll have your I9 processor with 32 to 64 cores and a TB of RAM, but it your computer still runs your word-processor about the same as it did in the year 2000. i.e., with barely acceptable responsiveness. Most folks will never wonder why that is, and will upgrade their "slow old computer" because it is such a dog. While I'm quite sure that's gonna be good for the economy, (at least what's left of it after obama) but I don't think that it will be quite so good for the consumer.

I'm sure I'll be happily chugging along with Fedora 45 or whatever, and I'll still be dealing with spam from the billions of MS-Windows zombies being spewed on the net. On the bright side, we'll finally be getting serious about implementing IPv6!

Thank YOU!

This is just crazy. Some of the BS people say here is almost slander.

Windows 10 will be free to Windows 7 and Windows 8.1 user for one year. THAT means if you have Windows 7 or Windows 8.1 on your computer, you can upgrade to Windows 10 for free, and the offer is good for a year—NOT the software—the offer.

That means, for example, that after a year goes by, and you still have Windows 8.1, and now you decide you want Windows 10, you will have to pay for it.

However, if you already took the offer and upgraded your Windows 7 computer to Windows 10, you are good FOREVER with Windows 10—just as you were for every other Windows OS you bought.

Now, will Windows 10 stay forever? No. Hackers will continue to learn new exploits, new hardware will evolve and be available, and operating systems will be written to adjust to this.

How you will get THOSE operating system updates and WHAT they will be called we do not know. Microsoft will use a new distribution called Windows as a Service. The changes to the operating system will not be rolled up together and put in a new version, but rather, will be sent out piecemeal, as they write them. I imagine they will charge something for these updates.

But if you don’t pay, I imagine you won’t get them.

Just like some people I know who are still running Windows NT 4.0 or Windows 98 because that’s just fine with them and they don’t want to spend any more money on software.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.