Should Microsoft make Windows Home paid (monthly or annual subscription)?

[enaph]

Exactly, Personal, not Home plan which is 99€ a year.

I was just wondering how is he paying 100 a year for OneDrive while Office 365 Personal costs 69.

 

[plat]

Microsoft doesn't care about pirated copies of Windows, at least on home users.

Microsoft is more worried about companies activating pirated copies in bulk, since it's their main market. They also said multiple times, their focus is on APPs and Services, not Windows.

Right, I said this about MS's shifting focus already in the last sentence of my post. Whatever MS is doing now regarding pirating seems to be satisfactory for them. If they want to do more, they'll do more. I was actually responding to someone else's stand that MS should be more aggressively cracking down on pirating--not here, in the other thread.

 

[Aggravatorx]

omg I would not pay a penny unless the get rid of ads and fix all there errors you know comodo is not alone microsoft has there share also
of bugs then when all is fixed perhaps

 

[Chuck57]

Microsoft is not stupid enough to turn Windows into a subcription service, not exclusively at least (even Microsoft Office is sold at retail as one time purchase, no subcription is forced).

Can't see why you stuck on Microsoft Office 2016, when Microsoft supplies Office 2019 as a one time purchase as well, right at the bottom of the page, Compare All Microsoft Office Products | Microsoft Office

Exactly, Personal, not Home plan which is 99€ a year.
Would be illegal for Microsoft to supply the same plan with different prices around Europe.

I've stayed with it because it's paid for. Prior to 2016, I had 2003. I only upgraded because the people I deal with all want DOCX for some reason, and 2003 was giving me some problems on Win 10

 

[Divine_Barakah]

If MS is considering subscriptions for Windows, a solution is to offer one version as subscription and load it with their latest and greatest innovations. A lesser version, maybe the current Windows 10 1909 would remain free, but not get all the fancy glitter and baubles.

Will they ever leave us alone? No they will screw us with buggy updates and nag us to upgrade because 1909 is no longer supported. OEMS will stop releasing drivers that support this build. Dude they've got the power, so they can do whatever they like.

 

[ForgottenSeer 55474]

I would be OK with a monthly fee, within reason.

 

[Lenny_Fox]

Manjaro perpetual updates, no distro re-install hassle like Ubuntu, Mint and many other Linus distro's, time for simplicty

Time to move at the table desk (top) and Manjaro! (Manjaro - FREE OPERATING SYSTEM FOR EVERYONE) to enjoy the simplicity

 

[Chuck57]

But they don't have the power. They've convinced some people they do, and those are the ones who obediently go along with them. There are alternatives, and MS is very much aware of them. Forcing someone to not only upgrade but to begin paying a monthly fee borders on extortion. I think it would be one step too far for MS.

 

[Local Host]

I've stayed with it because it's paid for. Prior to 2016, I had 2003. I only upgraded because the people I deal with all want DOCX for some reason, and 2003 was giving me some problems on Windows 10

That make sense, there's no reason to waste over 200€ everytime there's a new Office version if everything is working fine.

But they don't have the power. They've convinced some people they do, and those are the ones who obediently go along with them. There are alternatives, and MS is very much aware of them. Forcing someone to not only upgrade but to begin paying a monthly fee borders on extortion. I think it would be one step too far for MS.

Even though I agree, there's not exactly alternative to Windows, due to Linux being extremely fragmented.

 

[Chuck57]

My problem with Linux is, it ain't click and go like Windows. I don't want to have to jump through a bunch of damned hoops to do something I can do on Windows with the click of a mouse. Also, some of the software I use at least weekly isn't available with Linux.

If Windows was to go to subscription, and they chose not to have a maybe crippled or older free version available, I reckon I'd be gritting my teeth and moving to some version of Linux and making do as best I could. Or, taking a closer look at Chrome. Apple is an option, except for the cost of their equipment.

 

[Fuzzy_Bunny]

My problem with Linux is, it ain't click and go like Windows. I don't want to have to jump through a bunch of damned hoops to do something I can do on Windows with the click of a mouse. Also, some of the software I use at least weekly isn't available with Linux.

Can you explain this? I do stuff in linux ten times faster than in windows

 

[South Park]

In a real sense, the free Defender users are already paying Microsoft by serving as the test bed and honeypot for new malware detections. If that's not good enough for M$, I'd probably install one of the light Ubuntus like Xubuntu and call it a day. With rent, food, and exorbitant transportation costs, I can't afford any more fees.

 

[ForgottenSeer 72227]

Interesting discussion.

I see both sides to this, but i feel like MS would be shooting themselves in the foot if they go subscription, at least with home users anyways. Like others have said, if they do go this route, the price has to be reasonable. They will have to have different tiers to choose from. For me they will also have to step up their game and not release constant updates that seem to get pulled because something breaks. I've been very lucky in that regard, but I know a lot of people haven't been. I mean if you are going to start charging a subscription there will be expectations that you have a quality product, as well as removing all non-essential apps and useless ad's.

Can you explain this? I do stuff in linux ten times faster than in windows

Agreed!

Since moving over to Linux recently I have enjoyed my experience with it way more than Windows. Workflow is far superior, performance is also far superior. Most major Linux distros come pretty much with everything one needs in most cases and apps can be added pretty easily. I think long ago Linux use to have some major hoops, but now a days (with the exception of some instances) most major hoops are gone. If you stick with a popular distros (Ubuntu, PopOS, Mint, Manjaro, Fedora, etc...) most have pretty good communities that are quite helpful, some are better than others though (community wise).

I for one won't be going back to Windows anytime soon, I'll just run it in a VM for the very odd thing I will need it for.

 

[F 4 E]

No way would I pay for a subscription to MS. Given that we have to cope with their monthly Win Update cock ups, I reckon it should be a once only fee.

 

[blacksheep]

I would rather pay for big updates only and that's it. I hope then new big Windows version comes we can update it as painfree as any Mac.

 

[dinosaur07]

Microsoft should be free given the fact that is already paid with our data collected from us.

 

[Stopspying]

Adobe went over to the subscription model with their Creative Suite, a lot of people I know were happy with CS2 for what they needed it for and stayed with it. Its not secure by any means, Adobe runs Microsoft close for bugs and holes, but used offline its OK, as long as you don't need lots of new bells and whistles. The costs per software as shown in the attachment are huge compared to what is being suggested here as reasonable costs for an OS. Adobe must be getting adequate income from their model or I think they'd have changed it again by now.

Sure, comparing an OS with software is not a direct comparison, Creative Cloud (as CS became) and Windows are both widely used though. If Microsoft went over to subscription for Win 10 Home they'd need to get their pricing spot on IMO. What might seem reasonable in South Sudan is very different to how it would probably be seen in South Korea, for example. If this led to more pirated versions of the OS then that means there are more entry points for botnets etc

Personally I'm not a fan of the subscription model, I can find and do use adequate alternative software for Linux for most things I do at home.

 

[Fuzzy_Bunny]

People pay for Adobe because they use software for professional work.
If MS make Windows with their professional software, i don't mind subscription model, because people would make money with it.
I won't pay monthly so i can watch movies and browse internet.

 

[Ink]

For the Home consumer, it's a dumb idea.

Windows 10 users should be allowed continue to receive free Feature updates, just as macOS, iOS, Android, ChromeOS users do.

The End User should not have to pay a subscription for the base product.

Additional product and services like Microsoft 365 for Consumers (aka Office 365), Xbox Game Pass are acceptable as a subscription, should the user choose to subscribe.

 

[Bryan320]

Simple: Hell no..... it has never been and never should be a sub service...