Windows 10 Successor Codenamed 'Redstone,' Targeting 2016 Launch

Its shaping up like the Windows 10 being rushed for a summer release is really just 8.2; the one in 2016 is the real Windows 10 that might actually come with new features.
 
DPI said:
Its shaping up like the Windows 10 being rushed for a summer release is really just [strike=]8.2[/s] 6.4; the one in 2016 is the real Windows 10 that might actually come with new features.
Click to expand...
FTFY


Microsoft's dirty little secret is... YOU'RE ALL STILL RUNNING VISTA
 
Microsoft is moving towards a rapid release update process for Windows. Minor updates like Windows 8.1 are going to be common place moving forward. There's no need to 'wait' for a better OS because every year you'll be waiting for the next year.

Also, this update is supposed to be free to Windows 10 users and is not Windows 11. It's more like Windows 10.1.
 
100% chance Microsoft starts to charge a yearly subscription fee for Windows 10.
 
jrobdog said:
100% chance Microsoft starts to charge a yearly subscription fee for Windows 10.
Click to expand...
I'm actually fine with that so long as it doesn't automatically disable the version I'm currently running.
 
maw said:
I'm actually fine with that so long as it doesn't automatically disable the version I'm currently running.
Click to expand...

Same here.

If I didn't get MSDN/low cost upgrades, I'd go for a subscription of Windows/Office 365 together. Even better if you get the 5 devices plan for the whole household.
 
I hope MS starts making desktop OSs again. I think there's still a market for productivity desktop OSs, despite MS seemingly sippin' on the "desktop is dead" flavorade. Just look at all the XP and 7 holdouts!
 
pxc said:
I hope MS starts making desktop OSs again. I think there's still a market for productivity desktop OSs, despite MS seemingly sippin' on the "desktop is dead" flavorade. Just look at all the XP and 7 holdouts!
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that Microsoft understands the importance of the desktop for productivity purposes. After the debacle that was Windows RT and killing it they launched Surface 3 running an Atom for the express reason that it supports Win32 software, which ironically is a major selling point for Windows tablets.

But this isn't the 1990's or even 2010. Desktops have to evolve and become more connected and mobile and share certain attributes with tablets and phones. And some things from the golden age of the desktop just aren't as golden as they used to be. There's a lot of people that will complain about Windows Media Center. I run a couple of CableCard WMC machines and love the thing. But cord cutting is catch phrase of the day.

I think it's a tougher balancing act than either critics or supporters of Microsoft might appreciate. A product that's a widespread and mature as Windows is difficult to change without pissing someone off. And if you never make the kinds of changes that appeal beyond your core, that's a guarantee in this world with an increasing number of all kinds of connected devices that you're headed to legacy status.
 
heatlesssun said:
...you're headed to legacy status.
Click to expand...

Which is what a lot of power users want. Legacy Windows that supports newer hardware. That's not going to happen. Linux, you can still run an old kernel with a CLI. Windows? If you want the new EFI, SSD features, etc., you're upgrading to a newer version.

Things change. They can't stay behind forever. With Windows 95/98 (and even later), people were pissed off that the command line was buried. Now, I have some complaints about Windows 8/10, too. But, they aren't the same as "we need it to look just like Windows 7, but new features". That's not going to happen (although, I have given that input to MSFT guys).

Legacy Windows? Can't happen. Windows is an all-in-one OS. It's not like Linux where you can pick and choose what you want, while upgrading only certain parts to take advantage of newer hardware. New Windows 10 kernel with Windows 98 desktop manager? Sounds great, but that's not how Windows works...
 
Ur_Mom said:
Legacy Windows? Can't happen. Windows is an all-in-one OS. It's not like Linux where you can pick and choose what you want, while upgrading only certain parts to take advantage of newer hardware. New Windows 10 kernel with Windows 98 desktop manager? Sounds great, but that's not how Windows works...
Click to expand...

What if Microsoft were do all the stuff that many of the harshest Windows critics talk about, XBox games on Windows, Metro off switch, local accounts first, Aero glass, Windows 7 Start Menu, whatever one might want to add. Let's say all of that stuff was going to be in Windows 10? Would any of that sell lots more PCs or paid copies of Windows? Would people ditch smartphones and tablets or Chromebooks for any of these things? Would people be lined up in front of Microsoft Stores and would that stop them from lining up a mile to buy an Apple Watch?

I'm not saying any this stuff is bad, indeed I'd love to see XBox games come to Windows. But in the mobile first age does that really excite the general population or are they more interested in latest gadget that syncs up with their FB page?

The desktop isn't going away anytime soon and it still holds an extremely important place in computing but there's just so many other things out there now that grab so much attention in the mobile first computing world.
 
Ur_Mom said:
Which is what a lot of power users want. Legacy Windows that supports newer hardware. That's not going to happen. Linux, you can still run an old kernel with a CLI. Windows? If you want the new EFI, SSD features, etc., you're upgrading to a newer version.

Things change. They can't stay behind forever. With Windows 95/98 (and even later), people were pissed off that the command line was buried. Now, I have some complaints about Windows 8/10, too. But, they aren't the same as "we need it to look just like Windows 7, but new features". That's not going to happen (although, I have given that input to MSFT guys).

Legacy Windows? Can't happen. Windows is an all-in-one OS. It's not like Linux where you can pick and choose what you want, while upgrading only certain parts to take advantage of newer hardware. New Windows 10 kernel with Windows 98 desktop manager? Sounds great, but that's not how Windows works...
Click to expand...

so your solution is all in one OS that tries to do everything, but can't do anything correctly?

Metro is OK for tablets but for normal desktop it worst idea ever,
 
nekrosoft13 said:
so your solution is all in one OS that tries to do everything, but can't do anything correctly?

Metro is OK for tablets but for normal desktop it worst idea ever,
Click to expand...

Windows 8.1 runs all of my desktop programs correctly. They don't run anymore or less correctly in general than do on 7.
 
nekrosoft13 said:
so your solution is all in one OS that tries to do everything, but can't do anything correctly?

Metro is OK for tablets but for normal desktop it worst idea ever,
Click to expand...

No, not at all. Windows 10 (if Continuum ever comes to light) seems to correct that. With a tablet mode that automatically (if you tell it that you want it that way) enables when you undock your tablet from the dock. Or, if it's a tablet with no dock, you can go tablet mode all the time if you want. It's not mandatory, though.

Desktop? Use desktop mode and never touch tablet mode.

That was the big downside to Windows 8. It is always in tablet mode, there is no real desktop mode (some will argue this because the desktop app runs just fine and all desktop apps run just fine, but many, MANY users will disagree with that...). Microsoft themselves even admit to the mistake.
 
Ur_Mom said:
That was the big downside to Windows 8. It is always in tablet mode, there is no real desktop mode (some will argue this because the desktop app runs just fine and all desktop apps run just fine, but many, MANY users will disagree with that...). Microsoft themselves even admit to the mistake.
Click to expand...

And disagreement over this is fine. And sure there are those that couldn't deal with it for various reasons and many I agree with. But the notion that 7 is overall inherently more productive with a keyboard and mouse on the typical desktop I don't buy.
 
Since MS doesn't seem to care that it's making products unsuitable for over 3/4 of their customers, the best upgrade for Windows 7 (once's support is over) could be OS X, or Linux if you're feeling masochistic. ;)
 
heatlesssun said:
And disagreement over this is fine. And sure there are those that couldn't deal with it for various reasons and many I agree with. But the notion that 7 is overall inherently more productive with a keyboard and mouse on the typical desktop I don't buy.
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter whether or not you buy it, you're statistically meaningless (no offense) in the grand scheme of Windows userbase. Matters whether business and Enterprise buys it. And they're sticking with Windows 7 because, to them, it is more productive with a keyboard and mouse, and 99.99% of their employee PCs don't have touch hardware, nor are they interested in migrating to touch hardware since poking a screen with one finger offers no productivity gains over KB/M.

In fact they're not even putting Windows 7 migration plans on hold to "wait and see" how Windows 10 looks in its final RTM form, they've seen enough in the tech preview to see its just going to be more metro/app/online/cloud/store crap - Windows 8.2 effectively - that is of little to no benefit to business and enterprise.
 
DPI said:
Doesn't matter whether or not you buy it, you're statistically meaningless (no offense) in the grand scheme of Windows userbase. Matters whether Enterprise buys it. And they're sticking with Windows 7.
Click to expand...

Enterprises were going to stick with Windows 7 no matter what since many hadn't even completed their migrations from XP until last year when XP support ended.

Sure you can buy into FUD. Doesn't make it true. If 7 is that much more productive on the desktop to someone that 8.1, I simply doubt they understand7 or 8.1 that well. But that would be the case for the average Windows user.

DPI said:
In fact they're not even putting Windows 7 migration plans on hold to "wait and see" how Windows 10 looks in its final RTM form, they've seen enough in the tech preview to see its just going to be more metro/app/online/cloud/store crap that is of no benefit to business and enterprise.
Click to expand...

Microsoft would NEVER tell anyone to stay on XP and wait for 10. Indeed they never tell people to wait for the next version ever no matter what. Because there's ALWAYS a next version and you'd be waiting forever.
 
People who don't pirate windows would be fine with a subscription. Office 365 is far and away the best value in office suites and storage. Combine with Windows and it'll be better. Retail PCs will come with a few years license and free updates after that.

Only the MS haters rage against subscriptions.
 
MrCrispy said:
Only the MS haters rage against subscriptions.
Click to expand...

With the OS, it'd be a whole new thing. People wouldn't care much for it at all. I'm far from a MS hater, but the majority of people wouldn't go for a subscription model for their OS. What happens when it's done? When you can't pay? You do that with Windows now, and you're just running a fully functional older version with zero limitations. Even Windows 3.11.

Now, for some people, it'd be a great deal depending on price. Always up to date, maybe have Windows, Office 365, Xbox Music/Live, etc. in one package. I just don't see the majority of people going for that. Not to mention most people just buy a Dell or whatever and use it until it dies, then they upgrade to the newer OS when they buy a new computer. After the initial purchase, there is no other costs involved for them for that PC.
 
pxc said:
I hope MS starts making desktop OSs again. I think there's still a market for productivity desktop OSs, despite MS seemingly sippin' on the "desktop is dead" flavorade. Just look at all the XP and 7 holdouts!
Click to expand...

Actually that proves the opposite. If people are good with XP and 7 (I'm running only 7 on my network), then those people may never upgrade, at least for homebuilt systems. Therefore no market.
 
Microsoft's idea of rapid release cycles is calling Service Packs as 8.1 or 10.1 to mimic OSX. Hope they learned their lesson from Win 8 so that they don't have to support Windows 8 and Windows 8.1 as separate OSes lol. They totally overlooked that when they came up with this brilliant idea.
 
I think after your subscription is over, it'd still work but won't get any major updates, only critical ones.

The thing is most users never buy Windows since its part of the PC/laptop they buy. For the DIY crowd and businesses who buy a license, its cheaper to subscribe, just like it's cheaper to subscribe to office 365 vs buying retail Office 2013.

And it'll make a lot of sense for the millions who are running an older Windows because they can't afford a full retail OS upgrade.
 
MrCrispy said:
I think after your subscription is over, it'd still work but won't get any major updates, only critical ones.

The thing is most users never buy Windows since its part of the PC/laptop they buy. For the DIY crowd and businesses who buy a license, its cheaper to subscribe, just like it's cheaper to subscribe to office 365 vs buying retail Office 2013.

And it'll make a lot of sense for the millions who are running an older Windows because they can't afford a full retail OS upgrade.
Click to expand...

This is to me is more of a payment plan than true subscription model since you get to keep what you have at the end. This is certainly far more palatable than a true subscription model but it would still face a lot of blowback.
 
I think people who keep looking for an angle on how MS is going to charge for a free OS will still be waiting for the other shoe to drop 10 years from now...



It's not rocket science. They update to 10 is free. They are unifying all the windows stores (http://winsupersite.com/windows-10/single-store-experience-begins-taking-shape-windows-10 ).

They aren't going to provide a free OS only to charge down the line for that OS. Anyone paying attention knows they are shifting philosophy in order to have universal apps across all platforms of windows and banking on making their cash via the windows store.
 
By this rate Windows 12 - 14 might just be an empty box, assuming of course that they still supply boxes.
 
Last edited:
Windows 8 was and is a total market flop. Metro was just the shine on the pile of poo. And not in a good way.

As stated above, who would want a touch screen when you have a keyboard and mouse? Yeah, look a the market numbers: about 0.1% of the users.

Windows 7 works. It works well. The market agrees. It is widely adopted.

If MS wants a unified code, then W10 had better be free. Plus, it better look and act like W7.
Familiarity is productivity.
Compatibility is productivity.

Changing the interface (Metro, touchscreen optimizations, no "Home" orb, hidden search, the list goes on) was why 8 has failed.

Usage stats (rough): W7 60%; XP 15%; W8 10%. (That W8 number is about 8% W8, 2% W8.1.)

A =lot= of the W8 market penetration is due to bundling the OS with pre-built systems. That's what my wife found out when she was shopping for a laptop. She tried, God bless her, she tried. W8 is NOT a user-friendly interface if you're coming from any other desktop Windows. Now that she has a shell installed over W8.1, she no longer threatens to hurl her laptop across the room.

An aftermarket shell is ACCEPTED as the "norm" for using 8/8.1.

W10 is looking...meh.

In the final analysis, why should any W7 user migrate to W10???

If Microsoft cannot answer that question, W10 will be a fail.
 
c3k said:
As stated above, who would want a touch screen when you have a keyboard and mouse? Yeah, look a the market numbers: about 0.1% of the users.
Click to expand...

Touch and keyboards and mice aren't mutually exclusive. While Windows 8 obviously had it's issues with conventional keyboard and mouse users it seems to have done a lot better on tablets and hybrid devices like the Surface where point of the device is to use the input method and applications that work best for the usage scenario.

c3k said:
Windows 7 works. It works well. The market agrees. It is widely adopted.
Click to expand...

It does with keyboards and mice. It wouldn't work as well on a tablet or hybrid device overall as 8.x or 10.

c3k said:
If MS wants a unified code, then W10 had better be free. Plus, it better look and act like W7.
Familiarity is productivity.
Compatibility is productivity.
Click to expand...

Familiarity is familiarity. Sure where change occurs can disrupt productivitytemporarily during the time is takes the new to become familiar.

c3k said:
Usage stats (rough): W7 60%; XP 15%; W8 10%. (That W8 number is about 8% W8, 2% W8.1.)
Click to expand...

Windows 8.1 is actually at 10.55%, Windows 8 at 3.52%: http://netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=10&qpcustomd=0

c3k said:
A =lot= of the W8 market penetration is due to bundling the OS with pre-built systems.
Click to expand...

This is always the case for Windows. The vast majority of Windows copies come with the hardware and that version of Windows tends to stay on the machine never receiving an upgrade.

c3k said:
An aftermarket shell is ACCEPTED as the "norm" for using 8/8.1.
Click to expand...

While 3rd party Start Menus are popular for Windows 8 I think it is unlikely that most Windows 8 users are using a 3rd party Start Menu.
 
Formfiller said:
Some people are STILL defending Windows 8?!

Metro apps as a concept where utterly ridiculous on the desktop.

"Metro GUI" and its apps in Windows 8 had more in common with DOS than with Windows:

-Full screen paradigm
-Single task focus, with irky multitasking thrown it (DOS TSRs - metro switch)
-Every application has its own user interface
-No visible chrome
-No drag & drop between applications
-Focus on keyboard shortcuts
-Lack of start menu was answered with "just type the program name"
-Single user orientation (Using multiple accounts with metro apps was/is quirky)
Click to expand...

It's not a matter of defending Windows 8.x for me but simply pointing out it's strengths and weaknesses. I've said from the moment I used Windows 8 that it doesn't bring much to the desktop. That wasn't it's point. It was about tablets but even more so hybrids. On a device like a Surface Pro 3 Windows 8.1 is pretty damned brilliant. But I know that most people don't use Windows 8.x on a device like a Surface Pro 3 and that's obviously was a huge problem.

Microsoft bet too much on tablets and hybrids becoming the next big thing and got stung badly. I get that and so does anyone else that's honest about it. But that doesn't negate the point that when it's used in the manner for which it was designed that it is a great OS.

Formfiller said:
5. No concept of folders - installing a complex application barfed up to 20 new icons
Click to expand...

This was changed 18 months ago in 8.1. Call it defending Windows 8 but understand that those that ACTUALLY use it and have for sometime now and don't have many issues with tend to question those that are so vocally against it and obviously aren't as familiar with it as they proclaim.
 
If people have to keep touching their monitor all the time instead of using a mouse, won't the monitor get dirt etc on it eventually or quickly and become unclear?

I mean do you have to always wash your hands before using windows 8 (and other touchscreen centric versions)? what if you just came from making something in the shed for example? A mouse might get some dirt on it but you don't have to look through it.

It's not like there is going to be an auto spray wiper metro app.
 
Last edited:
MrCrispy said:
People who don't pirate windows would be fine with a subscription. Office 365 is far and away the best value in office suites and storage. Combine with Windows and it'll be better. Retail PCs will come with a few years license and free updates after that.

Only the MS haters rage against subscriptions.
Click to expand...

I would never in a million years want MS to have my credit card information on permanent basis. Nor would I like to pay bills to them all the time just to use an OS.

It's bad enough having to pay once and then be pestered with the activation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top