Windows 10 Editions Compared

[Ashbringer]

A for profit company has to monetize their products one way or another or have a loss leader. OS X is monetized through hardware and technically can't be bought or obtained for use beyond Apple hardware so it's a loss leader in a way.

Mac OS X is free and not free. Free so long as you own Apple hardware, much like iOS. Just the subsequent updates are really free. It's to keep Mac stuck with Apple which is a totally different problem that Apple is creating for themselves.

But Windows doesn't need to monetize. People will use Windows cause since 1995 that's all everyone has been using, and all the software in the world has been made for. To further break your product apart is causing fragmentation and just pissing people off.

One of the issues for desktop Linux over the years has been difficulty in monetizing it.

Besides Android, Mac, iOS, which also don't monetize beyond the app store. But Microsoft makes a lot of money through the sales of Windows and they don't want to stop that. But they probably have no choice, eventually.

Except this isn't the truth. If desktop Linux truly provided the same level of hardware and software support as desktop Windows while still being free to consumers, we wouldn't be having this conversation. There'd be no at cost Windows to talk about because it would be done.

Just the software is the issue, as Linux lacks third party software. Steam might fix that as well as interest in foreign countries, but yes lack of software is Linux's only issue.

BTW, someone is working on running Mac software on Linux which should be easier to do compared to running Windows applications on Linux with Wine.

Actually the very reason I stopped bothering with Linux after a decade of using it was all the pointless flavors. It's more fragmented and convoluted than Windows ever was.

Not really. Windows seperates features you can't get without doing something illegal, while Linux just separates based on UI and preinstalled software. The difference between Ubuntu and MythBuntu is that MythBuntu comes preinstalled with MythTV, but you can still install MythTV on Ubuntu. The only real difference between Ubuntu and Mint is Cinnamon UI which you can install on Ubuntu.

Vista had DX10 while XP didn't. Win10 has DX12 and neither Win8 or Win7 will. In linux you're not limited to features of the OS. That's like if Ubuntu said you have to buy the Ubuntu Penguin edition to get OpenGL 4.0. NO! Nobody does that shit besides Microsoft Windows. That's real fragmentation. To complain about Linux fragmentation is like getting a free box of cereal and the raisins are missing but if you connect the box to the internet you can download free raisins anyway. Where in the Windows cereal box you have to upgrade to Windows cereal 10 and then you can have raisins, except that now you might not like Windows 10 cause it doesn't work with your old spoon or maybe you hate how the box looks now. You can't change any of this because Windows cereal 10 is one size box fits all, given that you didn't buy the cereal home 10. Cereal Pro 10 comes with marshmallows so now you have to buy another box of cereal.

There will always be a special place in my heart for what linux could of been. Unfortunately it never will be due to the tireless stupidity of its fan base.

Agree with fan base being assholes but that's not the people to worry about. Remember Valve joined on the Linux wagon and they're determined to make it work. I can tell a lot of people here haven't used linux in years, or ever depending on who's speaking because Ubuntu 15.04 or Mint 17.2 is very different from Linux of 2012 or older.

 

[heatlesssun]

Not that it's a bad thing if you're in the Linux world, but for the average user, they want to say "I want Windows" and get the same Windows that everyone else has. They want to be able to do the same things as their neighbor using the same technique.

I'm not sure how much conscious thought is given by the average consumer about Windows specifically. When people buy a PC they generally think of budget first and then what they want in terms of features. They may actually want or need Windows for a reason but since the vast majority of desktops and laptops that aren't Macs in a store run Windows, Windows is just a given. Of course there are Chromebooks and people that are really on a budget do get drawn to them but then sometimes aren't necessarily aware that they didn't buy a Windows machine.

 

[heatlesssun]

Mac OS X is free and not free. Free so long as you own Apple hardware, much like iOS. Just the subsequent updates are really free. It's to keep Mac stuck with Apple which is a totally different problem that Apple is creating for themselves.

Apple sells hardware and it's been an exceptionally profitable business model for them. Licensing OS X to 3rd parties on low cost hardware really doesn't make sense for them with their current level of success.

But Windows doesn't need to monetize. People will use Windows cause since 1995 that's all everyone has been using, and all the software in the world has been made for. To further break your product apart is causing fragmentation and just pissing people off.

It has to be monetized somehow unless Microsoft wants to make Windows a loss leader. But not every copy has to make money, which is how the current model is working. A significant number of copies of Windows are now free to OEMs for tablets and other low cost devices. And even these machines will get free upgrades to Windows 10.

Besides Android, Mac, iOS, which also don't monetize beyond the app store. But Microsoft makes a lot of money through the sales of Windows and they don't want to stop that. But they probably have no choice, eventually.

Certainly licensing costs on in the low end consumer space aren't sustainable and that's already changed a lot with Windows 8.x. Some people will get Windows for free and some will pay and that's probably how it will work for the foreseeable future.

Just the software is the issue, as Linux lacks third party software. Steam might fix that as well as interest in foreign countries, but yes lack of software is Linux's only issue.

But that's a HUGE issue and almost impossible to fix without market share. Just ask Windows Phone or I guess isn't now Windows Mobile again.

You can't change any of this because Windows cereal 10 is one size box fits all, given that you didn't buy the cereal home 10. Cereal Pro 10 comes with marshmallows so now you have to buy another box of cereal.

Again, very few people buy Windows. With the free upgrades for a year there will even fewer buying Windows than normal with a new Windows release.

 

[CreepyUncleGoogle]

I'm not sure how much conscious thought is given by the average consumer about Windows specifically. When people buy a PC they generally think of budget first and then what they want in terms of features. They may actually want or need Windows for a reason but since the vast majority of desktops and laptops that aren't Macs in a store run Windows, Windows is just a given. Of course there are Chromebooks and people that are really on a budget do get drawn to them but then sometimes aren't necessarily aware that they didn't buy a Windows machine.

When Windows 8 first came out, I was around a lot of people I'd consider not technical and pretty much average consumers. They had a lot to say about the new OS and I even overheard them talking about it among one another. I don't think it was just a Win8 thing-y either because I can remember like a long time ago when I was a much younger CreepyNephewGoogle that people had conversations about Vista and 7 too.

That's not to say that stuff like prices matter too or that other considerations are ignored or anything. They're important too, but I think that there's sorta a misconception that people who aren't tech euthanizes aren't aware of or concerned about those things. Most of my friends who don't get all excited and gooey for nerd stuff and are pretty much average consumers still are aware of these things. I think that the not knowing at all is something more isolated to older generations of people who are in their twilight years of like 45+ or so. Those grandparent types didn't have a lot of exposure to computers in daily life so they're confused by terms like WYSIWYG. There aren't as many around that fit the stereotype and pronounce cache like it's a French word.

 

[Unknown-One]

Vista had DX10 while XP didn't. Win10 has DX12 and neither Win8 or Win7 will. In linux you're not limited to features of the OS. That's like if Ubuntu said you have to buy the Ubuntu Penguin edition to get OpenGL 4.0. NO! Nobody does that shit besides Microsoft Windows. That's real fragmentation.

Requiring a newer OS version in order to gain access to a newer APIs is something common to Windows, Linux, and OSX.

 

[DPI]

Requiring a newer OS version in order to gain access to a newer APIs is something common to Windows, Linux, and OSX.

Microsoft has a track record of artificially restricting DirectX in order to push Windows sales. Don't try to lump linux in with that bullshit practice.

This is why Vulkan needs to keep Direct3D to the curb.

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

I can tell a lot of people here haven't used linux in years, or ever depending on who's speaking because Ubuntu 15.04 or Mint 17.2 is very different from Linux of 2012 or older.

Yeah, a lot of comments on here about Linux are out of ignorance.

Side note, I run Mint on my desktop, and hadnt even noticed 17.2 was out

 

[Ashbringer]

Apple sells hardware and it's been an exceptionally profitable business model for them. Licensing OS X to 3rd parties on low cost hardware really doesn't make sense for them with their current level of success.

Their success is based on the success of the iPod. People who've never owned an Apple computer were then considering buying. With the success of iphone and iPad, Apple products are in a closed loop. Apple is now the Nike shoes or Sony of yesterday. Mac isn't much different than Linux. Worst hardware support due to obvious reasons, and limited software. There are more games from Steam on Linux than through Apple. Apple computers sell because iPhones and iPads sell.

But not every copy has to make money, which is how the current model is working.

How does Windows not make them money? The only reason to fragment the market is because it makes them more money, at least in the short term.

A significant number of copies of Windows are now free to OEMs for tablets and other low cost devices. And even these machines will get free upgrades to Windows 10.

That is because of Android, the other linux meat. Not because Microsoft is generous.

But that's a HUGE issue and almost impossible to fix without market share. Just ask Windows Phone or I guess isn't now Windows Mobile again.

Windows Mobile was before iPhone and Android. Remember Windows CE? Why did it take Microsoft so long to release a mobile phone product when they already had them?

But the difference between Windows Phone and Linux desktop is that Linux is free and powerful. Windows Phone wasn't free until recently, and it has nothing. This is Microsoft so things like Halo would have sold Windows Phones. Linux is also the only alternative to Windows right now, unlike Windows Phone with iOS and Android. So something has to rise up and compete against Windows on the desktop, and it certainly won't be Mac OS X.

Again, very few people buy Windows. With the free upgrades for a year there will even fewer buying Windows than normal with a new Windows release.

Those same people won't upgrade either. If they accidentally do then expect a lot of complaints.

Requiring a newer OS version in order to gain access to a newer APIs is something common to Windows, Linux, and OSX.

Don't know about Mac OS X and the Metal API, but on Linux... nope. For example lets say I want DX9 for Linux? I just hop over to Oibaf PPA and install through his repository. BAM! I now have DX9 on Linux. Or maybe I want Vulkan on my Linux setup, well than download Oibaf's other PPA and install the latest Mesa drivers. Given that Vulkan is available that's one of the first places you'll get the API. And Vulkan is DX12 equivalent, if not better.

Even on Windows 7/8 when Vulkan is released you'll just download a driver update and get Vulkan API support. No need to upgrade an entire OS. Apple may require you to have OS X 10.11 to get Metal. But it's kinda different for Apple cause updates are free and nothing much changes with each update. Nothing like removing a start menu. Also you really can't buy OS X anymore. I think 10.8 is the latest version you can buy and from there you just wait hours to upgrade. Which came first the OS or the computer? With Apple it's both. But I don't have much regard for Apple products either. Seriously, stop buying Apple products. What's the matter with you people.

 

[Unknown-One]

Don't know about Mac OS X and the Metal API, but on Linux... nope. For example lets say I want DX9 for Linux? I just hop over to Oibaf PPA and install through his repository. BAM! I now have DX9 on Linux.

What are you on about? It's exactly the same on Linux...

Like I said, you need to be running a new-enough version of Linux to actually support that. Go back far enough and there's a compatibility break, just like any OS thats been around a while.

 

[Ashbringer]

What are you on about? It's exactly the same on Linux...

Like I said, you need to be running a new-enough version of Linux to actually support that. Go back far enough and there's a compatibility break, just like any OS thats been around a while.

Nobody makes a guideline that says you need Ubuntu 14.04 for an API. What you need are libraries and without them you couldn't run OpenGL 4.5 or whatever. It can be done but it's simpler to upgrade to a newer OS. That and Ubuntu has quicker End of Life's which means if you want regular updates you have to upgrade. Arch Linux is just constantly up to date so that's a little different.

But using a new version of Ubuntu or whatever doesn't carry the same problems as Windows. You upgrade Ubuntu and you get updates and nothing more. You upgrade Windows and you could lose the start menu, some hardware might not have working drivers, or software just isn't compatible. But updates to Linux are more like service packs than a totally new OS.

I have an old MPEG2 capture card and Logitech webcam that doesn't work on Vista and up. Works perfectly fine but not in a new version of Windows. On Linux Mint 17.2 they work perfectly.

 

[Deleted whining member 223597]

You complain about windows update/upgrade but you have to upgrade Linux more often (based on your post). Wait what? I've been using windows 8.1 for almost a year now and going back to windows 7 makes me cringe at times. Once you get used to 8.1 you can't really go back. There are a bunch of things that make everyday use much easier/quicker. The only real complaint I have is that the metro garbage is even there on a desktop, but I boot right into the regular desktop so I never see it anyways.

 

[Unknown-One]

Nobody makes a guideline that says you need Ubuntu 14.04 for an API. What you need are libraries and without them you couldn't run OpenGL 4.5 or whatever.

But, just like any other OS, if you get a version of Ubuntu that's too old, it won't support the newer API.

 

[Unknown-One]

I'm going to keep beating this one single point into your head until you get it: All operating systems will eventually break compatibility with older software/drivers/devices.

Running a version of Linux that's too old will hinder you from running the latest API's, just as running a version of Windows or OSX that's too old will hinder you from running the latest API's.

 

[auntjemima]

The "you guys haven't tried Linux in ages! I can tell!" argument is so weak. For the better part of 10 years its been exactly as documented in this thread. Its been terrible. Do you really think after 10 years of being terrible that I'm going to just randomly download it again and install it to see what its all about?

10 years of eating shit and I'm pretty unlikely to voluntarily try it again to see if I might like it. Psst, I won't.

 

['47 Knucklehead]

Good old Windows 10 Pro here I come.

 

[heatlesssun]

How does Windows not make them money? The only reason to fragment the market is because it makes them more money, at least in the short term.

Desktop versions of Windows have come in business and consumer class versions for about 2 decades now. Cheap and free consumer Windows while licensing to businesses and higher end hardware is still a sustainable model. It's not unlike the way Linux works with businesses buying support contracts from Linux distributors.

That is because of Android, the other linux meat. Not because Microsoft is generous.

For profit companies don't do things out of generosity. Yes, pressure from cheap Android tablets and Chromebooks did force the issue in the low end consumer space, I don't think anyone is denying that.

Windows Mobile was before iPhone and Android. Remember Windows CE? Why did it take Microsoft so long to release a mobile phone product when they already had them?

But the difference between Windows Phone and Linux desktop is that Linux is free and powerful.

Desktop Linux has been free and powerful for many years now. Clearly that's not been enough for Linux to gain much on the desktop.

Those same people won't upgrade either. If they accidentally do then expect a lot of complaints.

If free is so wonderful for Linux then it should be even more wonderful for Windows in terms of gaining market share. Consumer Windows upgrades have never been a big business for Microsoft but it's hard to imagine that Windows 10 won't set an upgrade record on existing hardware for Windows.

 

[heatlesssun]

The "you guys haven't tried Linux in ages! I can tell!" argument is so weak. For the better part of 10 years its been exactly as documented in this thread. Its been terrible. Do you really think after 10 years of being terrible that I'm going to just randomly download it again and install it to see what its all about?

10 years of eating shit and I'm pretty unlikely to voluntarily try it again to see if I might like it. Psst, I won't.

And that's the thing, how long have we been having pretty much the same exact conversation about desktop Linux? Without market share it's not going to get enough 3rd party support and without 3rd party support it's not going to get market share. It's that simply and we've years of the proof.

Linux is a perfectly viable desktop OS and had been for years. That's not the problem.

 

[Ashbringer]

You complain about windows update/upgrade but you have to upgrade Linux more often (based on your post). Wait what? I've been using windows 8.1 for almost a year now and going back to windows 7 makes me cringe at times. Once you get used to 8.1 you can't really go back. There are a bunch of things that make everyday use much easier/quicker. The only real complaint I have is that the metro garbage is even there on a desktop, but I boot right into the regular desktop so I never see it anyways.

If you want updates than yes you have to upgrade unless you use Arch Linux then you're always upgrading. Different distros different rules. Debian has 5 year periods before end of life.

But this is Linux and not Windows. Things work differently. If Ubuntu 12.04 is not longer supported it doesn't mean you can't update it, that includes newer API's. Ubuntu updates through a repository, and you can replace that repository with anything. So long as someone takes the time to compile them, you can continue to update them.

A newer version of a Linux desktop OS is just newer kernel, repositories, and libraries. Other than some minor UI tweaks, it's the same thing but faster and more stable. Btw you're one of the few who enjoys Windows 8.

But, just like any other OS, if you get a version of Ubuntu that's too old, it won't support the newer API.

Unless someone makes an update for the OS. Remember this is open source, so there's nothing stopping people except wasting their time. For example 12.04 LTS is not longer getting any updates from Ubuntu, but you can still upgrade the Mesa drivers to the latest thanks to Pali's PPA. So long as Pali keeps updating his builds, you'll get the latest API's like Vulkan and Gallium Nine. It was from the time of this post 2 hours 40 minutes ago.

This is not Windows XP. If enough people still use it someone will make updates for it. That's open source.

 

[Unknown-One]

Unless someone makes an update for the OS.

And, just like Windows and OSX, the developer has to determine weather or not it's worth their time to update.

You can't run those brand-new API's on ancient versions of Linux for EXACTLY the same reason you can't run DirectX 10 on Windows XP: It's so old that the maintainers consider it pointless.

You can try spinning this however you want, it's not going to help. Users (not hypothetical developers, users) are forced to upgrade if they want the latest-and-greatest features on Linux, just like Windows and OSX.

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

You can't run those brand-new API's on ancient versions of Linux for EXACTLY the same reason you can't run DirectX 10 on Windows XP: It's so old that the maintainers consider it pointless.

This IS true, but, with the decentralized approach linux takes, dependencies are often updated/upgraded as part of the repository package manager update system. This a given install of a Linux distribution tends to be able to run the latest code for quite a long time, and if your distribution has a dependency that isn't up to snuff for what you want to run, there's usually a PPA for that, allowing you to easily upgrade that dependency to a later version.

Also, having old incompatible OS installs kicking around is a lot less of a problem when your OS is free, and can be upgraded to the latest revision using a simple button press in your update manager, followed by a reboot. (I did this just last night, moving from Mint Cinnamon 17.1 to 17.2)

Some distributions even use rolling releases. In other words, they update every single component of the OS piecemeal, so there is no such thing as an old version of the distribution, or a version at all for that matter. As long as you install your updates you have the latest version, always.

It's not like you spent $130 on Windows Vista, and want to keep it as long as possible in order to get your moneys worth.