After Windows10, consumers won't pay for updates or upgra

Page 11 of 13 FirstFirst ... 910111213 LastLast

  1. Posts : 807
    Win10x64 v2004 latest build fast ring
       #100

    Trust_No1 said:
    the new OSX Maverick will on newer PC's, and future versions I bet will also run on PCs. So, at $200 a pop as compared to $30, I could see a lot of Windows converters.
    I am probably wasting my time, here...;)...but you do understand that Macs are PCs, too, don't you? Bootcamp is not a software emulator that allows a Mac to run Windows...it's a program that automates the partitioning and formatting of an OS X-formatted drive, and then installs Windows in a dual-boot configuration (Bootcamp users have to buy their own versions of Windows), because doing that is generally far beyond the technical acumen of most Mac customers. That's how Apple likes its customers. Windows runs *natively* on a Mac because a Mac is...a PC. It is an x86 PC, just like a Dell; just like an HP, etc. ad infinitum. Apple supplies the drivers for Windows-on-a-Mac, of course. The *only* reason that OS X cannot be installed to a non-Apple PC is because Apple deliberately ties OS X to the firmware of the PCs it sells--its Macs. The Mac has been a PC ever since Jobs moved them over to Intel CPUs (well, the Mac had been moving for years to adopt more and more x86 Intel standards before that--the cpu difference was pretty much the last one to fall.)

    If and when Apple *ever* releases a version of OS X that will run on a non-Mac PC, it surely won't cost $30. People who buy Apple-branded PCs called "Macs" generally pay a premium of hundreds to thousands of dollars more for the *same/equivalent hardware* that is available from other x86 PC companies--that's why Apple charges only $30...because you have to buy a Mac from them before it will run! (Microsoft lets you buy your computer from whomever you choose.) You think Apple is going to give up that hardware profit margin and start competing with Microsoft as a software company? I say, "Not a chance"...;)

    Why wouldn't they switch? Apple and Android own the smartphone and apps world. I said it before and I will say it again, I think Microsoft's headaches are just beginning. I have an Office subscription,but am thinking of dropping it, it isn't worth it. I certainly would not buy a Windows subscription, and if Microsoft did that, it would be about as popular as Windows 8.

    I think Windows exists today only because of the over 50's crowd, whats happens when they all die?
    Yea, the over-50 crowd is a lot smarter, then...;) Why on earth would I want to jump back to a Windows 9x-level OS again? If I jumped on the iOS/Android train...that's exactly what I'd be doing, especially in terms of hardware & software support, and talk about OS security--there's no comparison. The cell-phone device OSes are disasters waiting to happen. No, thanks--I want my computer to support a ton of hardware & software that neither OS X nor iOS nor Android support. That's really obvious to anyone who uses a computer to any degree--cell phones aren't in the same league with personal computers. And, why should they be? PCs (and Mac PCs) are an order of magnitude more powerful at computing.

    If you can get by with a cell phone then you obviously don't need a personal computer...;) It's a fairly simple, straightforward proposition. Not everyone is computer material--no shame in it, it's just the way things are. But there's also no reason to start confusing x86 personal computers with common cell phones, either!
      My Computer


  2. Posts : 17,661
    Windows 10 Pro
       #101

    Well said Walt. Mac OSX and Windows, apples and oranges, we cannot compare the revenue generation model and logics.
      My Computer


  3. Posts : 1,811
    W7 Ultimate SP1 (64 bit), LM 19.2 MATE (64 bit), W10 Home 1703 (64 bit), W10 Pro 1703 (64 bit) VM
       #102

    Fahadking07 said:
    There is already a thread similar to this Free Windows 8 to Windows 10 Upgrade Useless, PC Makers... . It will be pretty useful for knowing others opinion. According to me, They should not release for Free!!
    Obviously the companies that rely on selling new PCs, when a new version of Windows is released, are worried. :)
      My Computer


  4. Posts : 630
       #103

    waltc said:
    I am probably wasting my time, here......but you do understand that Macs are PCs, too, don't you? Bootcamp is not a software emulator that allows a Mac to run Windows...it's a program that automates the partitioning and formatting of an OS X-formatted drive, and then installs Windows in a dual-boot configuration (Bootcamp users have to buy their own versions of Windows), because doing that is generally far beyond the technical acumen of most Mac customers. That's how Apple likes its customers. Windows runs *natively* on a Mac because a Mac is...a PC. It is an x86 PC, just like a Dell; just like an HP, etc. ad infinitum. Apple supplies the drivers for Windows-on-a-Mac, of course. The *only* reason that OS X cannot be installed to a non-Apple PC is because Apple deliberately ties OS X to the firmware of the PCs it sells--its Macs. The Mac has been a PC ever since Jobs moved them over to Intel CPUs (well, the Mac had been moving for years to adopt more and more x86 Intel standards before that--the cpu difference was pretty much the last one to fall.)

    If and when Apple *ever* releases a version of OS X that will run on a non-Mac PC, it surely won't cost $30. People who buy Apple-branded PCs called "Macs" generally pay a premium of hundreds to thousands of dollars more for the *same/equivalent hardware* that is available from other x86 PC companies--that's why Apple charges only $30...because you have to buy a Mac from them before it will run! (Microsoft lets you buy your computer from whomever you choose.) You think Apple is going to give up that hardware profit margin and start competing with Microsoft as a software company? I say, "Not a chance"...



    Yea, the over-50 crowd is a lot smarter, then... Why on earth would I want to jump back to a Windows 9x-level OS again? If I jumped on the iOS/Android train...that's exactly what I'd be doing, especially in terms of hardware & software support, and talk about OS security--there's no comparison. The cell-phone device OSes are disasters waiting to happen. No, thanks--I want my computer to support a ton of hardware & software that neither OS X nor iOS nor Android support. That's really obvious to anyone who uses a computer to any degree--cell phones aren't in the same league with personal computers. And, why should they be? PCs (and Mac PCs) are an order of magnitude more powerful at computing.

    If you can get by with a cell phone then you obviously don't need a personal computer... It's a fairly simple, straightforward proposition. Not everyone is computer material--no shame in it, it's just the way things are. But there's also no reason to start confusing x86 personal computers with common cell phones, either!
    I just call it as I see it

    the first quote was in reference to someone saying that OSX was not free, and obviously it is. Also, there was a time when OSX only worked on a Mac, it wasn't until Apple switched to Intel processors that this changed how it worked.

    And I stand by my second quote, perhaps they should take an age poll of this forum.

    But they are just my opinions, and it hardly matters in the big scheme of things.
      My Computer


  5. Posts : 406
    Windows 10 21H1
       #104

    lehnerus2000 said:
    Obviously the companies that rely on selling new PCs, when a new version of Windows is released, are worried. :)
    I don't know about that. Installing a new OS is not supposed to be a task for Joe Public, right? Most people get whatever OS comes preinstalled and don't bother with anything else. Personally I have never bought a retail copy in a store and do not plan to. The price of such retail copies is irrelevant to me.
      My Computer


  6. Posts : 11,247
    Windows / Linux : Arch Linux
       #105

    Hi there

    I'm not always sure why everybody seems to think that anybody over the age of about 23 is a technical idiot and hasn't a clue about or a use for computers and so should be restricted to a tablet or smart phone.

    I know several in their 70's who not only are a lot smarter than the youngsters who spend all day looking at mobile phone screens with earphones in their ears oblivious to anything actually happening in the physical world, who also have the TIME AND MONEY to use these machines as Computers. Some of them for instance have to understand complex mathematics and have to make instant decisions when they are on their computers trading Market Futures and stocks - and the wrong decision could cost them 1000's of dollars. They have to know how to set up and use both the hardware and software. Many other people in their 70 - 80's are still running businesses or doing all sorts of Free lance work using computers etc.

    Gone are the days where at about age 60 or so - depending on your profession and Country policies people just collected a State Pension and died after a couple of years doing gardening. For some people retirement is a whole other opportunity. I'm not too far off mine and am looking forward to it immensely -- and I'm sure I can handle computers a lot better than a lot of the so called Young Technical generation.

    Cheers
    jimbo
      My Computer


  7. Posts : 19,516
    W11+W11 Developer Insider + Linux
    Thread Starter
       #106

    jimbo45 said:

    Gone are the days where at about age 60 or so - depending on your profession and Country policies people just collected a State Pension and died after a couple of years doing gardening. For some people retirement is a whole other opportunity. I'm not too far off mine and am looking forward to it immensely -- and I'm sure I can handle computers a lot better than a lot of the so called Young Technical generation.

    Cheers
    jimbo
    You are dead (excuse the pun) right there. Retiring and spending time sitting around would kill you faster, especially if you were working hard all of your life. If possible, retiring early and spending time working what you find most interesting would be a bonus to the life. Than you can spend really quality time you didn't have while working full time. All my life I worked with machines and cold steel but since retiring I made a workshop for woodworking, such a nice change. Never had time to enjoy computers, they were mostly tools for me, just machines that accomplished a job but since retiring they become something more, an machine unto itself, whole new world to discover.
    No new thing can dismay me, always will have an interest in new thing to the extent (of course) to what is affordable to me.
      My Computers


  8. Posts : 1,811
    W7 Ultimate SP1 (64 bit), LM 19.2 MATE (64 bit), W10 Home 1703 (64 bit), W10 Pro 1703 (64 bit) VM
       #107

    unifex said:
    I don't know about that. Installing a new OS is not supposed to be a task for Joe Public, right? Most people get whatever OS comes preinstalled and don't bother with anything else. Personally I have never bought a retail copy in a store and do not plan to. The price of such retail copies is irrelevant to me.
    I thought I read that it would be available from the Windows Store and you could install it like an update/SP (on the W8 series).

    I also thought that I read that MS was testing direct upgrades from W7 to W10.
      My Computer


  9. Posts : 11,247
    Windows / Linux : Arch Linux
       #108

    Hi there.

    I think they are even looking at an XP==>Windows 10 - although that might be a bit more tricky going from x-86 to x-64. Might be possible if you migrate from XP to win10 (32 bit).

    It's in Ms's interest to get people off these older Os'es as quick as possible and to make the migration as easy as possible.

    Cheers
    jimbo
      My Computer


  10. Posts : 488
    Windows 8 Pro x64
       #109

    unifex said:
    I recall that in the old days when I had an Alpha workstation at work, we had to pay for DEC Unix every year - there was no possibility to "buy" the OS. Instead you had to pay for your yearly license (i.e. subscription). ... I really hated that approach and I will certainly not subscribe to something like that at home. After all, there is nothing wrong with my Windows 7
    Not to be a stickler on it, but you never did own your copy of the OS. You purchased a license to use Windows 7 to Microsoft's terms of agreement, and the CD-ROM/DVD-ROM was granted to you to facilitate installation. That's it.

    People seem to get the idea that since they bought the installation disks, that they somehow "own" their copy of the OS. You don't - ever. All you own is the physical plastic that makes up the disc. The intangible data is Microsoft's and is granted for your use for the time Microsoft allows it. So the Unix distribution that Digital Equipment had you license every year was really the same as Windows 7.
      My Computer


 

  Related Discussions
Our Sites
Site Links
About Us
Windows 10 Forums is an independent web site and has not been authorized, sponsored, or otherwise approved by Microsoft Corporation. "Windows 10" and related materials are trademarks of Microsoft Corp.

© Designer Media Ltd
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:01.
Find Us




Windows 10 Forums