Yes, yes I know, ALL software is free to pirates, but that isn’t exactly newsworthy is it? Terry Myerson, Windows’ chief at Microsoft told Reuters in an interview this morning in efforts to break in to the pirate heavy Chinese market, Microsoft is allowing free Windows 10 upgrades to people without legitimate versions of Windows 7 and 8.
Myerson claims that their effort is to show the users pirating Windows the value of Windows 10 in hopes that they will buy a legitimate license later down the road or a device with Windows 10 pre-installed. Microsoft obviously does not understand how these things work…. or do they?
I would be remiss in saying that I believe Microsoft actually expects the people who have already pirated Windows to purchase it in the future just because they like it.
With the integration of Cortana into Windows 10 as both a personal assistant much like Siri, Google Now, or well Cortana on Phones, and a means for navigating your desktop it is clear that Microsoft like many other companies can make money in other ways. If you haven’t guessed it already, Microsoft is likely going to be making its money by selling your data to advertising companies.
If you use Facebook this shouldn’t be something for you to really get upset about as Facebook makes nearly all of its revenue from selling your data. That is why most adds are often very catered to your interests.
Now keep in mind that this is wild speculation and could be totally false, but one can’t help but wonder what Microsoft has planned for the future.
Matt Followell is another contributing author here at DSOGaming. A long time fan of PC Gaming and a huge supporter of the open source and homebrew movement. You’ll see him interacting with the community from time to time going by the user-name of Radapples.
Contact: Email
you what? are you stupid?…. sometimes dumb comments like this make me just want to give up
well they want everyone on windows 10 so thats there beef not yours. My next upgrade ill buy the normal license becuase i dont like upgrading windows usually causes more problems than its worth
yesterday’s pirates are today’s customers, thats a rule taken from the vavle’s book on “success for dummies”
praise our lord and saviour gaben.
Windows 10 is so ugly. Hopefully that changes before launch or I don’t see myself upgrading until dx12 becomes popular. Other than dx12 I really don’t see why someone would upgrade. Just like windows 7 to 8.1
Well, I don’t think it will be free like people think. It will be a ‘free upgrade’, but that doesn’t mean all features will be turned on, or that there won’t be a timed limit to how much one can use it, or it’ll have incessant ads popping up trying to sell you products or begging you to upgrade to a ‘legitimate’ version of Windows. After all, with Windows 7 (and 8?) anyone can install it ‘for free’, but it gets hobbled unless you enter your activation code. Expect some kind of limited functionality until you make a purchase.
“But Microsoft makes money” is not a lucid response to what I wrote. Also, how on Earth were you seemingly offended by my statement?
Yeah, i also thought that was an odd response lol.
Please keep your comments here civil. We don’t censor peoples opinions at DSOG because we want to promote discussion, but we don’t tolerate flaming.
Windows is just too expensive. Maybe if it was like $20 it wouldn’t be so bad. An OS should be small and unobtrusive and simply be the window to our files an apps – it shouldn’t need a team of 80,000 people (or whatever) to manage. Windows has just become so bloated and expensive it takes an army of people just to manage the security holes.
The biggest problem with Windows is that it’s the same windows from back in the 80’s, just BIGGER. It needs to be completely re-written to be smaller and faster and simpler, perhaps make it modular; allow users to decide what modules they want.
The first thing I do when I install Windows is remove Internet Explorer – why am I paying for that if I don’t use it? How many other features is Windows packed with that I will never, ever use? A LOT. Strip all that shit out! Sell it individually – this would not only bring the cost down for the OS, but it would allow Microsoft to know what people are using most so that they can then innovate and improve the experience in those areas! It’s capitalism! Capitalism and competition is what gives us innovation. We’ve been stuck with the same Windows experience for so long simply because Microsoft doesn’t ‘practice’ competition.
They should be more like Apple and Valve – Make the OS small but have a store where developers can compete, then take a percentage of the sales. Apple’s been doing this with CRAZY success since 2007 (or whenever the App Store opened) and Microsoft still hasn’t caught up! They’ve had 8 years! At this pace it’ll be another couple of decades before we get a truly new Windows.
Removing useless features? I did that to my Windows 7 disk image. I landed up with a footprint of only 3.48GB. Installing VBC++ and .NET framework and the other shit for games brings it up to 5.42GB. I’d say its much better than 16GB only in the Windows folder. When windows offers the ‘smaller’ version I’ll upgrade from Windows 7.
Oh and a side effect, Removing parental control causes some Ubisoft games to not work :O Its pretty annoying, so I just installed the full version of that same windows on a parallel disk.
This is a BIG move from M$. It’s more like a sorry we messed up windows 8… But hey I will not complain about it one freaking BIT!
Not really. Its more like they want as many people using Windows 10 as possible so that they can make money from targeted advertising, as well as digital goods on their XBOX live platform that is built into Windows 10.
Microsoft didnt get where they are today by being nice to people.
That and they want people to use DX12 and not make a switch to linux for gaming and what not
Possibly, the way I see it though; DX12 is just a reason (the only reason as far as i am concerned) for PC gamers to switch from Win7 to Win10. Like DX10 for Vista when they wanted people on GFWL.
They are afraid of steam os lol 🙂
Microsoft will try to get legitimate versions of its software onto machines of the hundreds of millions of Windows users in China. Recent studies show that three-quarters of all PC software is not properly licensed there. Terry Myerson, who runs Microsoft’s operating systems unit, announced the plan at the WinHEC technology conference in Shenzhen, China.
Millions of user… you know… Microsoft apps. $$$$$$$$$$$$$
Yeah, this could be a response to SteamOS, but I’m not sure Steam OS and Windows are even competing. The competition will be between XBox and Steam OS.
The only real competition Windows has is Apple’s OSX.
Apple OSX? After 20 years Mac still stuck on 5% of computer users around the world.
Sure, but it’s still the only competition out there 🙂
It is closer to about 10% now. Microsoft has been slacking in their quality control and a lot of people are fed up with it and have moved to OS X. This is a good thing because it pushed Microsoft to do better.
Is that why people are buying Macs? Are you sure? I would have said that the iPhone and iPad were responsible – I think people want a consistent digital lifestyle/ experience across all their devices.
Also, the App Store requires developers to develop through Xcode on an Apple PC. With millions of App Store developers out there now, it’s no wonder sales have increased! Gotta go where the money is…
Mhmmm, a company I work for (Not DSOG) has even considered migrating to Macs because they already have all the software we need, but with a higher reliability in regards to long term longevity.
I advised against it as it is an unnecessary expense and the macs won’t play nice with a lot of our servers.
A friend of mine is an attorney and he switched all the PCs in his practice to Macs after a laptop launched a Windows update in the middle of his presentation. Windows updates can be disabled for things like that, but he was swayed regardless because it nearly lost him the suit.
Closer to 7%
I don’t see how could OS X have better quality.
Windows is just too expensive. Maybe if it was like $20 it wouldn’t
be so bad. An OS should be small and unobtrusive and simply be the
window to our files an apps.
The first thing I do when I installWindows is remove Internet Explorer – why am I paying for that if I
don’t use it? How many other features is Windows packed with that I
will never, ever use? A LOT. Strip all that stuff out! Sell it
individually – this would not only bring the cost down for the OS, but
it would allow Microsoft to know what people are using most so that they
can then innovate and improve the experience in those areas! It’s simple
capitalism. Capitalism and competition is what gives us innovation.
We’ve been stuck with the same Windows experience for so long simply
because Microsoft doesn’t ‘practice’ competition.
They should be
more like Apple and Valve – Make the OS small but have a store where
developers can compete, then take a percentage of the sales. Apple’s
been doing this with CRAZY success since 2007 (or whenever the App Store
opened) and Microsoft still hasn’t caught up! They’ve had 8 years! At
this pace it’ll be another couple of decades before we get a truly new
Windows.
(sorry for the weird format)
“Windows is just too expensive. Maybe if it was like $20 it wouldn’t
be so bad. An OS should be small and unobtrusive and simply be the
window to our files an apps.”
Considering a game is 60$, I don’t see how an operating system can retail for 20.
“They should be more like Apple and Valve – Make the OS small but have a store where developers can compete, then take a percentage of the sales.”
Microsoft already has the Windows Store starting from Win8 and above.
“Considering a game is 60$, I don’t see how an operating system can retail for 20.”
Some operating systems are free. And with a 75% pirate rate among some nations, dropping the price could net more sales and make them more profit. Also, once you have those new customers you can expose them to the app store.
Maybe it costs a lot to rent out servers, but with distributed computing an OS maker can just distribute in through a Bittorrent-type system.
“Microsoft already has the Windows Store starting from Win8 and above.”
Yeah, they’re definitely moving in the right direction with that, but it’s still no where NEAR as successful as Apple’s App Store. You’d think that a giant company like Microsoft could afford a think-tank where they break down exactly what makes Apple’s stores (App Store, iTunes, etc.) so successful and emulate that. Like I said – they’ve had 8 years to study it! I can’t tell if Microsoft is stupid or just really, really stubborn! Or maybe they have been trying but they just can’t break through? It just seems like there’s no good reason for why they’re not grasping what must be done. Maybe they just need smarter employees? Maybe there’s a poisonous culture at Microsoft that is counter-productive? Dunno.
“Some operating systems are free.”
Some games are free as well, but aren’t popular like the paid ones. So that doesn’t invalidate anything. You’re paying for software as a service these days, as opposed to a boxed product.
” And with a 75% pirate rate among some nations, dropping the price could net more sales and make them more profit.”
Dropping yes, but by how much exactly? Would you pay 20$ initially and then pay as you go along, or would you pay a lump sum and be done with it?
“but it’s still no where NEAR as successful as Apple’s App Store.”
Microsoft is still figuring out the “app” thing I suppose. Probably because MS is very much a traditional company. Apple too was the same at least till it released the iPhone.
“Some games are free as well, but aren’t popular like the paid ones. So
that doesn’t invalidate anything. You’re paying for software as a
service these days, as opposed to a boxed product.”
Popular, or profitable? Free games are massively popular on the App Store. I can’t say whether they’re profitable. But that’s all beside the point because an operating system is not a game. When you design a game you design it for a specific audience, and a game is a highly specific program that is designed to maximize fun and time wasting. An operating system is designed to be general-purpose; used by everyone.
Personally I think the OS should be as invisible as possible – it should merely gives us an easily organizable system for our personal files, as well as an elegant and customizable way to visualize such data. That’s it. Everything else should be third-party in a highly competitive ecosystem.
“Dropping yes, but by how much exactly? Would you pay 20$ initially and
then pay as you go along, or would you pay a lump sum and be done with
it?”
Microsoft needs to strip down Windows so that it’s tiny, then control an ecosystem in which 3rd party developers compete to bring you the best products and services, then Microsoft takes a cut. Maybe that’s what they’re doing, it’s just taking a long time.
“Popular, or profitable? Free games are massively popular on the App Store.”
— But the people playing those free games aren’t really the hardcore type. They’re a different demographic altogether.
“Personally I think the OS should be as invisible as possible – it should
merely gives us an easily organizable system for our personal files, as
well as an elegant and customizable way to visualize such data.”
— Correct; however being invisible doesn’t come from having less features. The OS has way too many roles in computing; I’m merely contrasting the difference in terms of pricing when it comes to an OS and something simpler like a premium game.
“Microsoft needs to strip down Windows so that it’s tiny, then control an ecosystem in which 3rd party developers compete to bring you the best products and services”
— That’s a very thin line to walk on. Because an OS has to cater to multiple audiences, so finding a middle ground is very hard. Perhaps eventually.
Your points are fine, but I think you’re losing sight of the bigger picture: People aren’t inclined to spend hundreds of dollars on an operating system, as evidenced by the massive pirating of Windows.
So, there’s a problem. I offered a solution. If you have another solution I’d like to hear it.
Well I don’t make the OS so I can’t offer a solution! However, I think MS is going towards the software-as-a-service route that I mentioned before. They’re offering cheaper options, with additional subscription features. Kinda like a F2P for Windows. That’s why I asked you before… would you rather pay a lump sum upfront, or pay 20$ initially and then pay as you go along? But just 20$ in total probably would be cutting it too short as far as commercial software is concerned. Especially more so since MS doesn’t bundle in the hardware like Apple does (thank goodness for that!).
I think you and I simply don’t agree on how much an operating system is really worth. MS has a monopoly. I’m not sure you’re really grasping how that affects Microsoft’s Windows pricing scheme.
Higher prices are just one of the effects of a monopoly. Decreased innovation and slower evolution/ revolution are another.
Microsoft likely won’t drop their prices to $20 because they have a monopoly. Their CEO’s are fat and rich and happy as the money just keeps rolling in.
Dropping the price on the OS and changing their business model is incredibly risky, but it would reap a ton of reward if they do it right, as evidenced by how Apple and Valve operates. They have so much to lose they simply can’t take risks – they’re paralyzed by their own monopoly money-machine.
Of course, the only thing that can truly make MS drop their prices is competition, of which they have none. Apple is more of a hardware company than software, and between Apple and MS they could squeeze any other competitor out of the market.
So now I’m back to my original point: Windows is too expensive.
I never said Windows wasn’t expensive; I said that if we were to assume a commercial game costs 60$, in no way would a commercial OS cost 20. Mainly because software is generally priced based on LOC (lines of code). Though I’m not sure how Windows does it.
I already told you the game/ OS comparison doesn’t hold water.
Whatever the criteria, even if they sold the OS based on ‘features’, that’s why I said strip it down.
I feel like you’re just arguing with me simply to argue with me. You’re conceding no points, your counter-points are only partially relevant, and you’re not offering solutions.
I’d say we should just agree to disagree, but you’re not even disagreeing with me. You’re going to need to declare your opinions more clearly if you want to continue this conversation.
I’m not arguing with you. I’m simply stating how things are. In fact, I’m enjoying this discussion as well as your input, but of course you’re free not to respond should you find this tedious.
The game and OS comparison does hold water as far as pricing schemes are concerned, but don’t when the comparison is in terms of “popularity”.
You’re saying the OS needs to be stripped down… but you’re not clear on “how” that is to happen. What features should be omitted to reduce the price without crippling functionality? What effect will that have on consumers and the enterprise? Thing is, you’re probably approaching my points from a layman’s perspective, while I’m stating them from a software engineer’s perspective. That’s probably one of the dilemmas in selling software… the customer always wants a cheaper price, while the developers want to monetize their efforts as much as they can.
You’re arguing with me because you’re not conceding any of my points, so it seems like you want me to say something that you want to hear but I don’t know what that is, naturally. So, either you understand what I’m saying and disagree or agree (which you’re not doing), or you don’t understand and you’re trawling my mind looking for something to agree or disagree with in which you have authority. Which one is it?
“You’re saying the OS needs to be stripped down… but you’re not clear
on “how” that is to happen. What features should be omitted to reduce
the price without crippling functionality?”
Is that what you want, a technical discussion? You’re the engineer, you tell me how to strip Windows down. I’m a designer and business man – as such I study how people use things and I look for ways to maximize sales. We tell engineers what needs to be done and they make it happen.
Hey, sorry if I’m impatient with you. You’re clearly a smart fellow and it’s nothing personal. I just feel like we’re running around the same points over and over to no clear end. I suppose the end comes when we understand each other, but it’s possible that won’t happen, lol. 🙂
No worries there, just that these sorts of animated discussions really enthuse me. For now we can chalk it down to a difference in perspective as always. 🙂
The thing is Microsoft has tried to emulate a lot of the things that has made Apple successful. Take the Zune for example. I have owned an iPod Classic and a Zune Gen 3 and honestly the Zune was vastly superior to the iPod classic, but Apple had already been in the game for awhile and had been doing what they did well. Why buy this new product when you have a brand that you already trust? Not to mention a huge library in iTunes.
The same goes for the app store. I probable used the Windows 8 app store maybe 3 times and never was it a paid or even an advertised app.
It is human nature to avoid change so unless 2 companies break into a market at the same time there will rarely be any competition unless the original company is just terrible.
I had an iPod gen 3 and a Zune, and I preferred the Zune, as well. I walked in the city a lot and the Zune allowed me to hit the button through my pocket. Apple designed their product so you’d need to take it out of your pocket to change songs (thus allowing people to see the product in your hand – instant advertising!).
Where the Zune went wrong was with the software. Superficially, Apple’s iTunes was utilitarian and offered a simple interface. Zune was like purple and pink and had a ‘stylized’ format that made finding and listening to music a lesson in cryptography.
And then of course there’s the fact that iTunes music could only work on an Apple product. That really should have been against the law as anti-competitive behavior. Companies shouldn’t be allowed to arbitrarily create their own file formats simply to corner the market.
From reading the comments here NOTHING will make people here happy all they like to do is follow the common fallacious arguments.
Enlighten us, guru. Many people came here always claiming that everyone else with wrong, but no one of those tell us why.
For one thing every single thing Microsoft has done has been good for everyone. Giving 10 free to pirates and they still get put down i mean really.
12 has been proven already to be good by benchmarks.
I don’t think anyone here is putting down Microsoft. One person called Win 10 ugly, but that’s a fine opinion to have – I agree with him.
Other than that we’re mainly talking about the business model and what it means for something to be ‘free’.
Yes much like how Google’s services are “free”
You come here accusing people of complaining, then all you do is complain.
Yeah and I’ll never stop can’t let trolls come in and put down free stuff, makes me wonder if their all upset since windows is now free like Linux. I actually heard people say they want 10 to be crap to help sell steam os and linux.
Who is ‘putting down’ free stuff? And why shouldn’t they? Are you saying we should all just accept something simply because it’s free? A virus is free, too – doesn’t mean I want to contract it.
The thing is though 10 is actually not a pos. I can find many many things wrong with many distro’s of linux and the users will say its my fault well i’ll say the same thing when 10 comes out.
I’m not saying Windows is bad. I like Windows. I’m certainly not switching to OSX any time soon. I’m merely pointing out that because something is ‘free’ that doesn’t automatically make it beyond scrutiny.
DX12 should be nice. I’m hoping that Windows 10 will be to Windows 8 what Windows 7 was to Vista.
Same here and the message wasn’t really towards people who think like you anyways. Was at the common Microsoft hater for no good reason beyond wearing tin foil hats.
I see. But really I don’t think you’ll find many Windows haters here – we’re Windows gamers 🙂
I don’t know what you’re trying to say. If you want to be a part of the conversation then you shouldn’t be sarcastic.
Simple point is Microsoft wants to be more like google and it seems like all I hear is people with tin foil hats claiming bizzare things.
The problem is you’re too general. Pick a point, then come up with a counterpoint. Focus, don’t just lash out at everyone. If you think someone is wrong then speak to that point.
So, will there be any way I can just purchase DX12 by itself? I’m going to turn literally everything else in the OS off anyway.
Unfortunately no, it is a bundled with the OS kind of deal.
it’s a trap or really a good move by MS, i don’t know but i wont give up on win7, i will install both and then i buy a cheap, one system install only version of win10 if it goes on sale
So i and my foor ninjas and henchmen we will pirate it anyway because we are the foot!!
I and my henchmen Tiger claw rocksteady bebop Chrs and Xever will pirate it because we are the foot ninjas a ninja crime organization!!!
Wait, I can’t believe I hadn’t picked up on this: what happened to Windows 9?
7 8 9
ate* 🙂
Here’s an update on the story:
“The news seemed a little strange at the time, considering Microsoft’s
previous stance on piracy, so it’s not hugely surprising to discover
that it was too good to be true.
Microsoft has clarified that people who are running a pirated copy of
Windows will be able to upgrade to Windows 10 relatively easily.
However, their Windows license will remain invalid after the upgrade
process is complete, meaning they won’t really be getting a “free”
upgrade to Windows 10.”
http://www.techspot.com/news/60112-pirates-upgrading-windows-10-wont-get-free-valid.html