PSST! New PCs with Windows 7 preinstalled are out there – and will be into 2015, at least It seems businesses will be able to order new PCs with Windows 7 preinstalled, rather than Windows 8, for a bit longer than we previously thought – although we don't yet know for just how long. According to an update to Microsoft's lifecycle policy first spotted by Redmond-watcher Mary Jo Foley on Friday, the date when OEMs …
You can't make your customers change their business practices just because it suits you. My clients are moving to a four year hardware refresh and some 5. Modern hardware spends most of it's time waiting for the user to do something, hence virtualisation on the server to make better use of hardware. I doubt even MS can waste all the CPU cyles and IOPS with new versions of a client OS that hasn't done anything inovative in years. Who upgrades the OS on their OEM desktops, rather than waiting until they buy new hardware?
"I doubt even MS can waste all the CPU cyles and IOPS with new versions of a client OS that hasn't done anything inovative in years"
Um... yeah sure. If you like. Because Windows 8/8.1 is so similar to XP in capability. Must have missed that because there are quite a few things XP can't do either at all, easily, well or fast.
This is strikingly similar to the Office 2013 versus Libreoffice debate. The common claim by Libreoffice haters is that it is "10 years behind." I'm willing to accept that at it's face. Sure, the tickbox list has gotten longer...but I don't know of a feature that makes me upgrade. So far as I can tell, both Office 2003 and Libreoffice serve all my needs.
So I ask this to anyone willing to answer, because I honestly don't have an answer to these questions. Thus why I don't see a benefit to upgrading, whereas I do see downsides.
1) As a journalist, I rely on my Office suite for my livelihood. What feature emerged between Office 2003 and Office 2013 that that justifies an upgrade and forcing myself to learn an interface I despise?
2) If you have listed a feature or features above, are these features that I cannot get from either Libreoffice or Dropbox?
3) Can you please list features needed by the generic office staff of my clients which were introduced between Office 2003 and Office 2013 that justify the upgrade expense and adopting a UI they hate?
4) If you have listed a feature or features for 3, are these features that I cannot get from either Libreoffice or Dropbox?
5) What features were introduced between Windows 7 and Windows 8 that justify the upgrade expense and adopting a UI I hate?
6) If you have listed a feature or features for 5, are these features that I cannot get from either Libreoffice or Dropbox?
Thanks in advance, and have a great day.
Would bet that the EOL date changed after the release of 8.1, up till then MS probably thought they could salvage Windows 8 and turn perception around. As things stand it's distinctly possible that 8 may never surpass 7 in terms of install base and a lot of people will jump 8 altogether.
They obviously learnt nothing from Vista pretty shocking that two out of the last three releases have flopped big style.
As has been said many times here and elsewhere they really need to try listening to feedback from users/customers rather than insisting they know best.
For the most American businesses, the customer is merely an impedance, an obstacle, without rights, to their wallet and if they could pass laws to be rid of the customer and just take the customers' entire paycheck, they would.
Come to think of it, in some cases, they already have.
It's called free market capitalism and it always means free to eff you up the arse without consequence.
"Article fails to mention service packs"
Quite. It seems a somewhat misleading article, in that respect. is it likely there many XP installations around that haven't updated to SP3? If they're on SP3, they've still got standard "support" for another few weeks, aren't they? And then they've got "give us your wallet" custom support after that (give us your wallet even though MS already have to have funded the production of patches because they've told their XP Embedded customers that they've got another couple of years)?
Agree, Windows 7 "End of Extended Support" is currently scheduled to be January 14, 2020. When I expect we will be repeating all the hand wringing etc. that we're currently going through over XP's end of Extended Support in April 2014, with Windows 7 and complaining how rubbish windows 10 or 11 is in comparison.
I suspect that MS are actually sticking firm to XP's end of extended support but due to customer push back and poor sales of Win8 are being flexible with Windows 7. As I suspect they are keen just to get the revenues from users upgrading, as effectively once someone upgrades, they aren't likely to change again for another 5 or so years. Which gives time to sort out Windows development and deliver a compelling upgrade.
This contrasts with MS's position over Win98, where they didn't really have a credible replacement OS and so extended it's life by a few years to encourage users to stay with MS rather than look at alternatives, whilst MS completed XP-SP2 (remember W2K wasn't regarded as a home/gaming OS).
This post has been deleted by its author
Windows XP started in 2001, was still officially supported nearly a decade later, & had paid for support still available nearly 5 years after that.
Windows 7 has been out what, 2 years? and you're claiming support ends next year?
Fek that. You owe users of Windows 7 at least the same stability, dedication to support, & gratitude.
If Windows 7's nearly *FIFTY PERCENT* market share isn't proof that you need to support it, then what the hell brand of crack are you snorting off each others' bums, because it's left you so far out there that you've bid goodbye to the entire Milky Way Galaxy.
XP has ~30%, 7 has ~50%, and 8 barely broke the double digit threshold earlier.
XP has been going strong for over a decade, 7 needs to go for at LEAST that long, and 8 needs to be shot in the head like the UI abboration that it is.
Stop fekking with your customers, or we'll give you The Finger and head for greener pastures, like Apple, Android, Chrome, Linux, or even something MORE slap-in-the-face-inducing like *BeOs*.
Now pull your heads from your arse & rejoin the rest of the Real World, ok?
Your customers have spoken, they want Windows 7.
They do NOT want Windows 8.
You can polish that sucker until it outshines the sun, it's still a toxic lump of shite.
dear Shadow Systems, M$ here, now you just listen up.
All you is udders to be squeezed dry and don't you forget it. We produce you consume and hand us the folding stuff in return, and if excel is broken, you pay us and if word is broken you pay us and if mssql is broken you definitely pay us hell yes you do and if each of your staff waste hundreds of hours a year on our semi-working software then fek you we don't care your problem fek you twice and no returns.
Outlook broken? Fek you.
Our new online email shite is down? Fek you.
Access still an barely documented crippled embarrassment? Fek you again.
New Windows 8 broken? Fek you biiig.
Ribbon? Me fek you long time.
Read our lips -->we rock -->you just wallet on legs. Fek you. We got market share.
"Read that using Leo Wong (futurama) as a voice."
It was either that or:
"Me order. Me Master! Me run Bartertown! That's why you live in shit!"
Isn't it obvious? Nokia launch a low-end handset running Android just before being absorbed into the collective. Microsoft, being their usual clueless selves regarding what their customers really want (as clearly demonstrated in this article), don't see the glaring danger until it's far too late. Of course these handsets will be a runaway success, far outstripping the pathetic sales of the "official" Windows Mobile line until it gets to the point where, as in this PC OS story, they have built their own nightmare scenario where they must decide which line to kill - the one they spent billions marketing but just won't sell, or the one the customer wants.
That's awful. :(
I can only imagine what our poor front desk staff's lives would be like trying to use the POS system from an iPad. Or trying to make marketing documents of any sort on a 10" screen. Or accounting! Egads! Excel and middleware and databases, oh my! All on a screen hadly bigger than your own eye.
You must work with a bunch of young, optically fit folks. Does such a move count as discrimination against those with glasses? "Job requirements: 20/20 vision or better. Rational: 2hip4U".
I suspect, ultimately, that the improvements to 8.1, plus refinements, will be good enough to keep the Windows franchise going. If not, then there's always the prospect of Windows 8.x with a legacy front end.
Then again, I'm going to have me first tinker with 8.1 over the weekend, so there may be a sweary response, from me, to my own response to this article.
It would be pretty ridiculous to say "quit selling this Oct 31 2014, and no support after Jan 13 2015". Especially now that they will allow selling PCs with W7 Professional after after that date.
Microsoft obviously plans to add a few years to Windows 7, but want to wait until the last minute hoping to scare people towards Windows 8 for as long as possible. Sad that they must use fear to try to push that turdball on people.
The whole reason they held back W7SP2 that was in internal testing but never released was because they didn't want to restart the clock for another five years of support on Windows 7. They're going to end up doing it anyway, except now it is going to be with a bazillion updates. Maybe they'll produce a service pack but call it something else (a "roll up", perhaps) to avoid that five year commitment.
With the extending of the retail sales period for Win7, it would seem appropriate that MS release either SP" or a roll-up. However, I suspect that due to advances in the internet they won't, but will periodically ship revised gold disks to OEM's.
I can understand the basis for Metro (sorry, the interface formerly known as Metro), as one code set for all PCs, Tablets and phones - and that's a good thing. But it's so overly restrictive, it makes it useless to me. Microsoft is where it is today *BECAUSE* they opened up the software development market to anyone and everyone.
Yes, yes, I understand it has some upsides, like the lesser likelyhood for malware to get in, but that doesn't make up for it. "I" as a single person, release a bunch of code not only out of my bedroom, but also for work, that I would not be able to if it weren't for either cheap or free compilers. I do not have to pay for the "right" to release code. I don't have to jump though hoops *just* to get my code into distribution. I do not have my code vetted by one person who's moral righteousness (see iPhone news aggregation app that was blocked by Apple, because one of the news stories it passed through was outside their porn policy). Then, not only me, but the *millions* of my peers who do the same thing.
Most of all, it was that exact 'freeness' that made Microsoft who they are today. I hope they don't forget that.
This rapid cadence thing seems like a good money making scam.
Ultimately customers just need an operating system that allows them to get on & do what they actually want to do on the computer. However now that much of what everyone does on a computer is online based, people simply can't risk running an OS that isn't getting security support (which may or may not be different from these deadline that are being discussed in the article - it's not clear to me).
This makes it pretty much essential to upgrade unless the machine is not connected to the net, regardless of if it is perfectly capable of performing the functions required.
Are there any consumer rights that are violated by being basically forced to upgrade?
Will we see ever shrinking support periods for future MS OS?
As I'm an older gentleman & time flies as your wrinkle, it already feels like the versions are flying past faster than I can keep up. I only moved to Win 7 six months ago and even that turned out to be a mixed bag. While it is faster & deals with multi-screens better, several of my workflows are longer & fiddlier and generally more annoying than they were under XP and I don't need to buy Win 8 to know that that would be even worse - and ugly with it.
It seems to me they haven't come close to finishing developing W8 yet.
@janimal
As a skunkworks project, why not try one of the Enterprise Linux distributions? E.G. CentOS, or Scientific Linux? EL6 has application updates to 2017ish and security updates to 2020. Depending on the graphics card you need to drive your multiple screens, there will be some research to do. Depending on the content of your workflows, it may take some time to locate alternative applications in the Linux world. Noone is going to move your cheese however.
...as it won't be easy, for sure. For starter he must do a 180 on that utterly idiotic, pointless and obstructionist new GUI, make it optional, easy to turn off and put the old Start Menu back especially in Windows Server. Second he has to figure out what's next...
...I'd say they should make the DESKTOP version FREE of charge IF you are willing to sign up for its Azure-integrated, cloud-enabled version - this means you agree that they could pull a Google and start mining your (anonym) data in return...
...of course if you do NOT want to provide access to your (anonym) data or you need OFFLINE use etc (eg corporate deployments) then you should buy the OS, flat-out, like you do today except it should be $50 OR LESS and should not require more than a phone call to activate...
...and finally I'd also consider a stripped-down, lightweight free version, works both online and offline, for low-end laptops, netbooks, tablets and other mobility devices, that only comes with the new GUI etc - a point where Windows Phone, Windows ReTarded and Windows finally made into one product instead of the current mess.
In short, no Pro vs non-Pro plus 3 more versions and other lunatic ideas - one full-featured desktop version, free w/ cloud-based usage data mining or paid w/o any usage info or cloud requirement and another lightweight version for all mobility devices (x86 or ARM.)
Yes, Satya, you can call me if you want to hear more about this very simple yet powerful product line... :P
It's starting to look like Windows 9 "Threshold" will sort out your first paragraph.
I quite like the rest of your post, except for the data mining.
If you could buy a $50/year "Windows 365" and pay extra for added value stuff like, oh, I dunno, SQL Server Management Studio or whatever, plus a reduction on Office 365 prices, that would probably fly pretty well and leave MS in the business of selling software rather than selling you to advertisers. Some form of USP and differentiation from Google is required, I think.
When I first skimmed over the headline I thought this was going to be a story about PCs shipping with an update of the Spectrum classic in which the protagonist robot had to fend of pesky caterpillars and other assorted plant-munching critters using aerosols of various pesticides.
Disappointing.
Although on a slightly more on topic connection - I think Pssst was recently released as a low-cost game to run under windows 8 - with the proceeds being donated to charity.
Seeing the classic Ultimate titles again is *almost* worth using 8.1 for.... armed with Classic Shell of course!
Okay, 'tards, I've listened to you moaning so here is my piece.
If you thought that what you paid for XP back in the early 2000's covered both your share of its development and over a decade of future support, you were smoking something.
Granted that you have been handing money over to Microsoft every time you bought new hardware, which means that you have continued to fund ongoing support, but to expect it to continue to support that old stuff (which, as I recall, everyone moaned about at the time), plus the three new versions they have produced since then is not realistic.
Granted that Vista and 8 didn't meet your needs but 7 was just fine so why didn't you move?
Well, maybe because you bought applications from vendors and didn't seek a compliance agreement with them so that when the underlying platform changed, they were committed to enhance their application.
Maybe they did produce updated versions but you chose not to migrate to them. Is that Microsoft's fault? I think not.
Maybe you developed some code yourself 10 years ago and never thought about the need to maintain it when the environment changed. Oh dear!
Maybe you just spent the money on application integration, virtualisation, big data and other stuff the consultants sold you.
We know in the industry that commercial vendors only support a limited number of back releases - and that's primarily because you don't pay them enough to keep all those old releases going. Microsoft is no different. It's a monopoly, which I am opposed to, but its behaviour is about what you would expect from a commercial vendor - it has bills to pay, employees to compensate and taxes to pay - - and the owners of the business rightly demand a return.
Unhappy? Go to Linux. Use open source software and, here's the thing - support it yourself. Even paid for Linux support is unlikely to support every release in perpetuity.
There </rant>
"Even paid for Linux support is unlikely to support every release in perpetuity."
Probably true.
But the option is there, if the participants want it and can find agreeable commercial terms.
Not so with the Redmond option. It's their way, or the highway. Or so MS seem to think.
I think Redmond are in for a surprise in the next few years, as they discover that their formerly loyal Ceritified Microsoft Dependent ecosystem has increasingly realised which side their bread is buttered (probably not the cloudy, microsoft-preferred one).
Some of this is that its fun to bash MS, some is the irritation of MS tying apps to kernels and then charging for both separately, as if they were independent and some is over the abhorrence which is the W8 GUI.
It is really unfortunate that after 13 years or whatever, MS haven't actually produced an OS which quickly wins converts from XP.
Here's my take on TIFKAM: there's too much context switching for my brain - do I move the mouse to the left or right, muscle-memory says left (no big deal) but if I go right I get very little idea of what functions hide beneath the couple of items presented. If I go to the home screen, visually, it completely takes me out of what I was doing. My brain screams that I only wanted notepad to hold some scratch data from a document I'm working on, I'm not actually quitting my previous task. Why did what I was working on have to disappear? It worse for linux users who are used to the highly functional lancelot launcher. KDE users are rather smug with the vast variety of search options which don't need such a horribly clunky interface as tiles or worse, live-tiles.
Perhaps it because I a bit long in the tooth, but if someone is trying to get me to buy something I expect them to sell it to me. You know the carrot, oooh buy this because it will do this; quicker, better, less errors etc. All I am getting is "move to Windows 8 because XP is being pulled". Great incentive! So just what is better about the latest offering? Do tell, don't be shy.
You want Ubuntu. The guy next to you wants Suse/Debian/FC/Red Flag/Kubuntu/Xubuntu/Mint Debian/Mint Cinnamon/Mint MATE. Multiply the options for those who want/don't want Codecs/non-free software and free/proprietary display drivers. Multiply with the FS options. Linux users in general are picky with their OS and wish to configure it according to their tastes.
Dell did offer computers with Linux some time in the last decade, but that flopped. Remember?
"But I guess OEMs do what Microsoft wants."
You're mistaken. Dell offers Ubuntu preloaded. HP offers SuSe (and even FreeDOS) preloaded. Smaller OEMs offer Linux as well. Not to mention Chromebooks.
Ubuntu is a good solution.
See, the average user knows not-a-damn-thing about how their PC actually works and vehemently does not care. All they want to know is "Where is the program I need to do my work and does it look a feel like close to what I've been using for the last X years?"
Yes?
Done.
Ubuntu running Gnome is that OS.
Only hopeless shut-in geeks care deeply about what flavor of Linux they use. And yes, I deliberately stereotyped.
"there is nothing there about Ubuntu."
What do you think would happen to Dell's discounts and marketing support from MS if there was?
There's a reason PC advertisers have frequently said "[BigName PC Shop] recommends MS Windows [latest_version]" on their advertisements and websites.
When the default OS vendor is paying maybe half the shop's advertising costs, why would a PC shop change the habits of a lifetime, even if there was a better product on the market (that doesn't pay half their advertising costs).
I personally love Windows 8... I like 8.1 a little less since they made the start screen more moron friendly (people hooked on Windows 7). I think Microsoft has developed a truly amazing new system and for the smarter people, it's insanely fast and efficient. I even have been seeing many people switch back because of it.
That said, I was talking with some friend who are upset about the official death of Windows XP because of issues related to their inability to move. Applications were written which were millions of lines of code by consultant firms and are too big to rewrite and are not able to be recompiled (not sure why). There are applications which shipped with dongles for anti-piracy which can't be installed on anything newer than Windows XP as well. Some people might say "stupid asses shouldn't have bought software which uses dongles", the alternative of course was not being able to do the job.
I don't see any good technical reasons that someone needs Windows 7 instead of 8. I haven't found any applications which ran on 7 but not 8, but there may be a few.
Oh... Since when has HP ever been shy about shipping 10 times as many products as a sane company could actually support? Look at their network in line now... Wow!!! Even their top networking guys don't have a clue about even what OS is running on their equipment.
There are quite a few applications that don't run under 8, as several compatibility layers are gone.
There are far more that do not officially support 8, although they might actually run. Businesses can't take the risk that they will find an issue and be told "Sorry, but we don't support that application under Windows 8"
Finally, the completely new interface means retraining every single one of your users, having all of them take a productivity hit while they learn it, and your internal Helpdesk being overwhelmed by calls/external Helpdesk charging you a lot more for increased call volume.
So Windows 8 carried a large risk and high cost, yet with little to no benefit.
As a standalone or home user you could very well like or even love it, but that doesn't make it a sane choice for business.
" Applications were written ... by consultant firms and are too big to rewrite and are not able to be recompiled (not sure why). ... dongles for anti-piracy which can't be installed on anything newer than Windows XP as well."
Oh dear
"Some people might say "stupid asses shouldn't have bought software which uses dongles", the alternative of course was not being able to do the job."
The alternative was for the main board to sack the IT director and get one with a clue. Or keep the existing IT director and force feed the department a clue, about the value of owning (and having control over) what you'll be paying a fortune for, because it's essential to the business. It's not even as though the concept of "vendor lock in" is radical and new.
It doesn't really matter what Microsoft wants. As stated elsewhere, business customers don't rush into new OS or new PC deployments. Windows 7 is what they all want and if PC manufacturer's stop selling Windows 7 PC's in February of 2015, business customers will just wait it out until they see a significant change from the disaster that is Windows 8. No matter how much the handful of geeks that like Windows 8 think everyone should jump on board, that's just not going to happen. Microsoft blew it with Windows 8 and businesses aren't going to be pressed into buying Windows 8, no matter what Microsoft does.
All I see are "win8 downgraded to win7" - so no PROPER win 7 licence on the box!!! and the install is already activated, using an OEM licence , so if you have a company image that has to be loaded (all the software, tweaks, etc, etc that would normally take *hours* per PC!), then a call to MS is needed... :(
Home users are not safe either.. what if win7 crashes and burns a few years later??? with a licence on the box, no problem... :)
Surely if the Enterprises are upgrading to Windows 7 now then when Windows 9 is released they will be two generations behind rather than three. Vista seems to have dropped out of the generational count. I suppose you may be including Windows 8.1, but that would seem odd.
Microsoft seem to alternate decent versions of Windows.
- 3.0 was OK but lacking.
+ 3.1 was much more successful.
- Win95 was quite successful but widely regarded as a resource hog at the time. In particular, it had no Internet email or web client included. This is probably the shakiest negative.
+ Win98 was more successful and for the first time included a web browser.
- Windows ME was widely scorned and generally ignored.
+ Windows XP was generally well regarded and was (and is) widely used.
- Vista was loathed (primarily as a resouce hog, although there were ways to rectify this)
+ Windows 7 was well received and is in wide deployment.
- Windows 8 was hated. For once this was not due to efficiency issues, but due to the radical changes to interface design.
...........To keep an operating system that is actually USEABLE (unlike the APPALLING Windows 8).
As I pointed out when Win8 first appeared, enterprises will not install something which requires such a large amount of user training with the associated COST.
Microsoft need to go back to the drawing board QUICKLY and produce something useable in the enterprise.
Micro$oft keep taking away the good/useful stuff (e.g. TechNet) or else Borking it beyond all repair (e.g. Win8 with the UI formerly known as Metro). Add to that the massive price increases to MSDN, more strange interface mangling (colorless dev environments anyone, or the useless ribbon which I guess is there to choke anyone trying to get any reasonable amount of work done).
That type of (product/development?) decision-making reminds me of the PHB who wanted a database in Mauve because he heard it was faster.....
Seems like they want to be a boutique that no one will visit....sad...
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
