[Huzzbutt]

Quote:

Summary: A new Microsoft job posting verifies that Windows Blue will include user experience improvements, not just under-the-covers interface tweaks. Bonus: There's a reference to 'Windows Phone Blue' on Microsoft's job site, too.

Source: http://www.zdnet.com/microsoft-job-postings-confirm-more-about-windows-and-windows-phone-blue-7000011399/

Previous related thread in the rumors section: http://www.overclock.net/t/1332250/verge-windows-blue-is-microsofts-future-low-cost-os-with-yearly-updates

So I'm guessing it will cost 100$ a year, add an office suite 365 to that and the cost of running a workstation for three years will double without even turning it on or getting an internet connection.

 

[smitty5569]

If they're going to charge for yearly updates they better get rid of the old model of releasing a new OS every 4 years. There's no way I'm going to pay for 100-200 dollars for their retail OS then pay for yearly service packs.

If they got rid of the retail OS and charged 25-50 dollars for the yearly update so it's the same price over 4 years then this I could see this as a good thing, waiting 4 years to improve your OS in this day and age is way too long.

 

[Lettuceman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by smitty5569

If they're going to charge for yearly updates they better get rid of the old model of releasing a new OS every 4 years. There's no way I'm going to pay for 100-200 dollars for their retail OS then pay for yearly service packs.

If they got rid of the retail OS and charged 25-50 dollars for the yearly update so it's the same price over 4 years then this I could see this as a good thing, waiting 4 years to improve your OS in this day and age is way too long.

I think they are going the way of Apple, so substantial updates at a lower price, but a new os isn't released so often.

 

[Liranan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by smitty5569

If they're going to charge for yearly updates they better get rid of the old model of releasing a new OS every 4 years. There's no way I'm going to pay for 100-200 dollars for their retail OS then pay for yearly service packs.

If they got rid of the retail OS and charged 25-50 dollars for the yearly update so it's the same price over 4 years then this I could see this as a good thing, waiting 4 years to improve your OS in this day and age is way too long.

Do you have any idea how long it takes to develop either soft- or hardware?

 

[Liranan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lettuceman

I think they are going the way of Apple, so substantial updates at a lower price, but a new os isn't released so often.

The same upgrade schedule or even slower than that of Windows but at the same cost doesn't look appealing to me, especially as many of the updates Apple release are security updates they should have released months prior to this paid patch and the updates aren't even spectacular at times but minor iterations.

 

[l1o2l]

Whelp, looks like Windows 8 is the last Microsoft OS I'm going to buy. (Don't even use Windows 8, still using Windows 7).

 

[abdidas]

If microsoft start charging monthly then I would have to move linux or something. No way am going to subscribe to an operation system. Total hogwash!

Windows phones updates should be for free as well, No big OS updates please, do it like android and keep updating bit by bit.

Also don't pull a idiotic move again like you did with the wp7.5 devices by blocking windows phone 8 updates.

Maybe the OS backwards compatible and apps backwards compatible.

 

[Dyson Poindexter]

Microsoft seems to really be floundering here. To most, Windows is a commodity, just the thing you use so you can run your programs. They're not in a position to try and milk customers.

Worse yet, I can't think of a single mainstream program that requires anything newer than XP, much less 7. When faced with limited advancements AND a recurring payment, most consumers will stick with these versions.