Microsoft Equipt: The Beginning Of The Next-generation Of Microsoft

Status
Not open for further replies.
G

Guest

Guest
As an avid Linux user, and also as a Microsoft "repairman", I find the idea of a subscription model apalling. It's already bad enough that Microsoft's products are sold at, in my opinion, a ridiculously high price. Now they want to charge a subscription? I have a feeling that this will not sit well with most people.

I will agree that new virtualization technologies should bring some interesting changes, but I seriously doubt that the masses will stand for a subscription system.
 
G

Guest

Guest
I think the subscription model could work if the subscription covers the cost of upgrades as well. Microsoft charged too much for the transition from XP to Vista. I think I paid around $200 for Premium Home. I am satisfied with the product, but it should have been no more than $100 (full version, not an upgrade).

Microsoft can make subscriptions work, but they have to remember that most their customers are not rich. If they don't start remembering that then most people will eventually move to Linux or the Apple OS.

 

photographer

Distinguished
Sep 26, 2006
7
0
18,510
I'm glad that you've found Vista to work for you however I can assure you that this is the exception rather than the rule. This is why companies like Dell are still offering "downgrade rights" to XP. Many state that this is comparable to XP's shakedown however I can't agree. What e saw with XP was that the hardware at the time wasn't powerful enough to support XP with all of it's debug code still intact. Remember that those were the days of 1.4~1.8GHz procs and OEM systems shipped with 128~256MB of RAM. Today we have Core2 and Phenom procs and the average video card is more powerful than the entire desktop was just 6 years ago. And still Vista is slow, has numerous compatibility issues and the users interface is a hodge-podge of questionable value. I currently run XP x64 and frankly if I could run CS3 on Linux I'd be using it tomorrow.
 

randomizer

Distinguished
[citation][nom]photographer[/nom]And still Vista is slow, has numerous compatibility issues and the users interface is a hodge-podge of questionable value.[/citation]
Luckily I never had any of those problems.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Hey photographer, my comment was not really addressed to whether Vista is good or not. I was merely addressing the article itself. As for Vista and XP, I have no problem with either one. I use Vista at home and XP at work. They both work for me. There are things that Vista does better than XP. Vista also has annoyances. It has been my experience that any computer with 2 gigs of RAM (less than $50) will run Vista just fine and I do not have any problem with game performance. Again, I believe that Microsoft charged way too much for the produce. I mean come on, the Ultimate version is $400. That is more than some laptops you can buy today.

I find it funny how some people are so polarized concerning the the two operating systems. I think the vast majority are satisfied with whichever one they have. I am not necessarily talking about the power user. I could spend all day talking about the merits of Vista, XP, Linux or OS10, but it is not going to convince anyone if their mind is made up. It is basically an opinion or what they are use to.

Linux may eventually become the status quo, but at this point in time it is not. I like Open Source software, but they could very well face the same kind of problems that Microsoft faces today. Half of what is in Open Source could considered copywrite infringment in one way or another. I think if the car was invented today, people would be sueing others for installing a steering wheel if they didn't pay royalties for it:)

You know if most of the games ran on Linux, I do think it would become the predominant operating system. I am not saying it is better than Windows, but it is a whole lot cheaper and there is a lot of free software. The Apple operating system is heralded by many as being a great operating system, but they charge a lot for their hardware.

As far as CS3, you might try Moka5. It creates virtual machines where you can run just about any of today's operating system (except for Apple).


Just my two cents.
 
G

Guest

Guest
I should amend that and say any computer made within the last year or two with 2 gigs of RAM and a descent video card. You don't need a 3D video card, but if you want the pretty interface...
 

photographer

Distinguished
Sep 26, 2006
7
0
18,510
Thanks for the tip on Moka5. I'm looking into the virtualization but I have some other challenges to resolve as well. Specifically RAID-5 on an Asus 570 Ultra driven Asus M2N-E motherboard and finding a good film/paper scanner. I think 2009 is going to be an interesting year for developments in the computer world.
 
G

Guest

Guest
I don't want cloud software. I want the faster possible running software on my local machine. I don't want my internet bandwidth eaten up my MS or any other company. What if ISPs start charging by the MB (it's already happening)? When I purchase software I then download the cracked versions because I refuse to let me computer communicate back with the mothership for activation and crap, I figure as long as I have a valid license I'm good.

We must all voice our dislike for subscription software, cloud computing, activation, DRM and the like. If MS also wants to offer a cloud version that's great, but keep the core software installable, fast, local and something you can buy and use for years without upgrading. My MS Word is just as useful today even being 5 years old.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.