Microsoft Will Update Its Windows OS Every Year

CommanderFrank

CommanderFrank

Cat Can't Scratch It
Joined
May 9, 2000
Messages
75,399
Microsoft may be changing the dynamics on the frequency of updating new operating systems if a report to Bloomberg is true. Microsoft will reportedly begin yearly OS updates in 2013.

If true, the rumors that Microsoft will change the way it updates its OS could mean that the firm is admitting that it isn't the force it once was, now that it has stiff competition from other major players in the market.
Click to expand...
 
I'm not sure how I feel about this since TechNet actually takes the pain away from this process. Anyone w/o it or MSDN will be dealing with sharp headaches due to the yearly bomb dive.
 
Not sure how good of an idea this is. Apple and Google already do yearly updates so yearly updates are probably needed to compete in the tablet space. The big issue is support length. If they are still going to support Windows for 10+ years, doing yearly updates meaning supporting 10+ different versions of Windows. This will be difficult for both Microsoft and other developers. Depreciating long term support would annoy a lot of business customers.
 
What it likely means is that we'll have only minor revisions every year, instead of a "game changing" ground up new OS on the regular business cycle.

Basically, windows is going to be like Firefox... what, aren't they up to like seventeen or something by now? LOL!
 
Ummm.. new OS every year? So will there still be backlash against the WinXP works fine, why should I switch, or Win7 works fine people?
 
I'm guessing the thinking is that people liked the win8 $15 upgrade deal, they jsut didn't like the massive changes. SO what is better than rolling up service packs into an annual release, calling a new OS, and charging $15 for it. Heck, if you make it so that you have to buy all the interim releases too, it means that guy who only upgrades to every other MS OS release will STILL have to pay for the release he skipped.

Mostly I think they just looked at Apple's test paper and copied the answer.
 
siliconnerd said:
Not sure how good of an idea this is. Apple and Google already do yearly updates so yearly updates are probably needed to compete in the tablet space. The big issue is support length. If they are still going to support Windows for 10+ years, doing yearly updates meaning supporting 10+ different versions of Windows. This will be difficult for both Microsoft and other developers. Depreciating long term support would annoy a lot of business customers.
Click to expand...

This could be mitigated if some parts of the core OS are kept the same between versions. The driver model in Vista, 7 and 8 is an example, where drivers written for Vista work all the way up to 8. If these are propagated to other core OS parts, it can be manageable.
 
If I had a touchscreen computer, I'd get Windows 8. But I don't.

It would be awesome if Windows "9" could capitalize on a Kinect-like interface with the PC. Then I would not require a touchscreen display to use the OS to its full potential.
 
I'm hoping it's more of a "New Service Pack" every year instead of a new full release.
 
Read AS:

Microsoft to start charging for Service Packs.
 
raz-0 said:
I'm guessing the thinking is that people liked the win8 $15 upgrade deal, they jsut didn't like the massive changes. SO what is better than rolling up service packs into an annual release, calling a new OS, and charging $15 for it. Heck, if you make it so that you have to buy all the interim releases too, it means that guy who only upgrades to every other MS OS release will STILL have to pay for the release he skipped.

Mostly I think they just looked at Apple's test paper and copied the answer.
Click to expand...

No, Apple adds considerable new features with it's releases and charges a moderate price for the new version.

They still update between releases.

Nice try :)
 
If they create a separate Enterprise and Consumer version this could be a good thing ... Enterprise won't be too anxious to do yearly updates (even if they are free; especially if they are paid) so an Enterprise release that updates every 3 years (with annual service packs) and a consumer version that updated yearly would be nice (as long as they keep the incremental upgrade pricing low) :)
 
TechLarry said:
Read AS:

Microsoft to start charging for Service Packs.
Click to expand...

No, service packs have never added much in the way of new features and service packs are typically just updates rolled into a package, that's not going to change.

There's really nothing shocking here, it's pretty obvious that Microsoft was planning a lot of incremental updates to Windows 8, they've been saying this indirectly for well over a year now.

It's going to be a bit tricky for them because of the enterprise space but at the same time enterprises trail for years on updates anyway.
 
Well they still need to do patch tuesdays, and service packs are fine, but if they expect people to upgrade/install their revised OS every year, that ain't gonna go over very well, esp if they want $$$ for it.
 
Monkey God said:
Well they still need to do patch tuesdays, and service packs are fine, but if they expect people to upgrade/install their revised OS every year, that ain't gonna go over very well, esp if they want $$$ for it.
Click to expand...

Just wait ... maybe Windows 9 will add a start menu for only $20 :p
 
kbrickley said:
Just wait ... maybe Windows 9 will add a start menu for only $20 :p
Click to expand...

lol


I'd actually pay for that one.

Hell, I'd even throw in an extra $20 if they got rid of the fugly ribbon UI so I didn't need 3rd party tweaks to do it.
 
heatlesssun said:
No, service packs have never added much in the way of new features and service packs are typically just updates rolled into a package, that's not going to change.

There's really nothing shocking here, it's pretty obvious that Microsoft was planning a lot of incremental updates to Windows 8, they've been saying this indirectly for well over a year now.

It's going to be a bit tricky for them because of the enterprise space but at the same time enterprises trail for years on updates anyway.
Click to expand...

...You're kidding, right? XP Service Pack 2 added a lot of new features and dramatically changed how wireless connectivity worked. It also made a good 25 to 50% of Toshibas to just stop working.
 
TechLarry said:
No, Apple adds considerable new features with it's releases and charges a moderate price for the new version.

They still update between releases.

Nice try :)
Click to expand...

Like what? Do you count bugs as features? Or changing scrolling direction to mimic an iPad? Oh! I got it! How about that feature that would dump user settings randomly and for no reason? I loved that one.
 
I guess this would come down to what they're considering an update. In the grand scheme of things, I wouldn't mind a $20-$30 update that would provide changes akin to Vista to Win7. I just have no desire to totally re-install my OS or pay a small fortune for updates every year.
 
One thing I hope MS release new SP2 for Windows 7 would be nice.:cool:

Add DirectX 11.1 :rolleyes:
Add some features from Win 8 into Win 7. :p
 
siliconnerd said:
Not sure how good of an idea this is. Apple and Google already do yearly updates so yearly updates are probably needed to compete in the tablet space. The big issue is support length. If they are still going to support Windows for 10+ years, doing yearly updates meaning supporting 10+ different versions of Windows. This will be difficult for both Microsoft and other developers. Depreciating long term support would annoy a lot of business customers.
Click to expand...

Several teams: one to support and update current version and the other to develop the next version and another to support older versions. Over the next few years, expire support for versions a couple generations old. Microsoft's been doing that since 1981, so I'm sure they can handle this.
 
Steelgrave said:
Makes me wonder if the server OS's will do the same thing.:(
Click to expand...

Probably not. Windows for consumers need to be on the bleeding edge often to compete with iOS and Android, particularly Windows RT and Windows 8 Phone. I'm sure Microsoft learned the hard way with Windows Phone 6 that it's not a good idea to allow your phone and tablet software to stagnate while iOS and Android advances.
 
Azhar said:
Several teams: one to support and update current version and the other to develop the next version and another to support older versions. Over the next few years, expire support for versions a couple generations old. Microsoft's been doing that since 1981, so I'm sure they can handle this.
Click to expand...

Yes they have been doing this with 2-3 different OS's to support. Now we could be talking 10 different OS's. Unless they do as suggested earlier by making core sections extremely similar between releases this could and probably will turn into a major headache.
 
bbenz33 said:
Yes they have been doing this with 2-3 different OS's to support. Now we could be talking 10 different OS's. Unless they do as suggested earlier by making core sections extremely similar between releases this could and probably will turn into a major headache.
Click to expand...

iOS has no problem releasing new versions every year. Every third or so generation will leave older hardware behind.

Android on the other hand has troubles with this because there's simply too many phones and the manufacturers are too intent on customizing Android that it takes awhile to release, and when it does, a newer phone comes out.

If Microsoft keeps their phones close to their chest, like Apple does - such as sticking with Nokia Lumia, then I don't foresee any issue with frequent updates.
 
Azhar said:
iOS has no problem releasing new versions every year. Every third or so generation will leave older hardware behind.

Android on the other hand has troubles with this because there's simply too many phones and the manufacturers are too intent on customizing Android that it takes awhile to release, and when it does, a newer phone comes out.

If Microsoft keeps their phones close to their chest, like Apple does - such as sticking with Nokia Lumia, then I don't foresee any issue with frequent updates.
Click to expand...

iOS doesn't charge for software updates.
 
It seems, to me, Microsoft is going to follow the Linux-based distros way of updating their operating system. To many Linux-based distro users here, many distributions are updated every six months to one year. Some offer long-term support (LTS) like Ubuntu does. Microsoft may be following a similar path.

It's possible we get minor or major revisions every year. The only difference between updating something like Linux Mint or Ubuntu when a new revision number pops up for free, we'll probably be paying $15 to $30 for a new Windows OS a year from now. Windows 9 may be out by the end of 2013 or first quarter 2014.

Or, we may see something like Service Pack 1 six months after the initial release, then six months later a pay-for-upgrade after that to a new version.

Kind of like...
  • Windows 8 - October 2012
  • Windows 8 Service Pack 1 - March 2013 (Free)
  • Windows 9 - October 2013 ($15 to $30 upgrade)
  • Windows 9 SP1 - March 2014 (Free)
  • ... and so on.
 
This is bad news. Let me explain why.

First, going to a yearly update means that MS no longer needs to sell software. We will no longer own Windows. Its going to be a subscription based product that we A: cant resell and B: cant transfer. This has been happening in the industry for YEARS. Im a 3D artist and they do this with 3D Studio's Max and Maya. You cant BUY 3DS Max, you only "lease" it from Autodesk. The law states that if your leasing software, you must have a significant update AT LEAST every year. Thats why 3DS Max versions show year. 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 and so on. You CANT resell your copy of 3DS Max since its not your copy. Your only leasing it. With yearly updates, Microsoft can now LEASE software, and not sell it. Im sure MS will have a small yearly subscription for the updates.

Second, again as seen with 3D Studio's Max, 1 year of dev time does NOT allow for any significant or meaningful updates. Before a release, the code must be locked down months before launch to validate and test the software. That means the dev's have very little time between each release to do any actual work. Since 3DS Max 7 (the start of the lease program) there have been very few significant changes to the core program. The only changes are typically plugins other dev's have made, and they incorporate into 3DS. I know of bugs in Max that are 10 years old that still havent been fixed since the dev team are always behind the yearly release ball, not making any headway.

So, to recap, non-transferable license, you dont own your software, subscription fees for updates, and no significant changes. Thats the possible future for Windows. Scared yet? You should be.
 
ballistic90 said:
...You're kidding, right? XP Service Pack 2 added a lot of new features and dramatically changed how wireless connectivity worked. It also made a good 25 to 50% of Toshibas to just stop working.
Click to expand...

True, but XP SP2 is an exception. There's been no service pack since in the 8 years since XP SP2 was released like it.
 
Gibbage said:
Second, again as seen with 3D Studio's Max, 1 year of dev time does NOT allow for any significant or meaningful updates. Before a release, the code must be locked down months before launch to validate and test the software. That means the dev's have very little time between each release to do any actual work.
Click to expand...

This is what I'm worried about. I am sure they will have some working ahead a version and then have clean up, but there will be a lot of things that will be 3-5 months of work then a feature freeze. That's not really a lot of time to get some major work done. Maybe some of the major features (new file system) would be a multiple year effort, but a lot of things will be sacrificed for time constraints.
 
am i the only one that reads this as.....

we will release service packs as new OS and charge them for it now.
 
Gibbage said:
First, going to a yearly update means that MS no longer needs to sell software. We will no longer own Windows. Its going to be a subscription based product that we A: cant resell and B: cant transfer.
Click to expand...
No.
 
Gibbage said:
This is bad news. Let me explain why.

First, going to a yearly update means that MS no longer needs to sell software. We will no longer own Windows. Its going to be a subscription based product that we A: cant resell and B: cant transfer. This has been happening in the industry for YEARS. Im a 3D artist and they do this with 3D Studio's Max and Maya. You cant BUY 3DS Max, you only "lease" it from Autodesk. The law states that if your leasing software, you must have a significant update AT LEAST every year. Thats why 3DS Max versions show year. 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 and so on. You CANT resell your copy of 3DS Max since its not your copy. Your only leasing it. With yearly updates, Microsoft can now LEASE software, and not sell it. Im sure MS will have a small yearly subscription for the updates.

Second, again as seen with 3D Studio's Max, 1 year of dev time does NOT allow for any significant or meaningful updates. Before a release, the code must be locked down months before launch to validate and test the software. That means the dev's have very little time between each release to do any actual work. Since 3DS Max 7 (the start of the lease program) there have been very few significant changes to the core program. The only changes are typically plugins other dev's have made, and they incorporate into 3DS. I know of bugs in Max that are 10 years old that still havent been fixed since the dev team are always behind the yearly release ball, not making any headway.

So, to recap, non-transferable license, you dont own your software, subscription fees for updates, and no significant changes. Thats the possible future for Windows. Scared yet? You should be.
Click to expand...

Read the Windows EULA, you don't own it as it is.

As for being scared, ehh not really. Only thing left at home that's windows is my gaming machine. And since I play games less and less, this isn't even a thought anymore. It's not like people "have" to upgrade anyway. I generally don't until SP1 on windows, .3 on OSX, or around 4 months on whatever Linux distro. And even then if the software I'm using doesn't run on it, I wait.

I can see where some 3rd party software vendors hate this model though.
 
I'll believe this when I see it. I do believe W8 will be very short-lived however. MS will realize they lost 90% of the Enterprise to a W8 upgrade and fix it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top