Microsoft are smart enough to not piss off every giant corporation and destroy their entire business overnight, so you can count on it never being forced by them.
They certainly wouldn’t roll it out overnight but they’ve had their long term targets on OS as a service since Windows 8 and these things tend to come bundled.
Nah, they know their limits. They will keep trying to make an optional locked down OS for regular users a thing, but there will always be a fully “unlocked” version available due to legacy software and the entire worlds reliance on it.
While microsoft also plays in the quarter to quarter economic BS they still have long term planning.
It’s precisely because they have a monopoly on enterprise class software that they could pull this off. That’s why the shift in euro-gov agencies to linux is such a big deal.
MS already has updates as a “free” service and windows insider which requires a paid azure sub which means they already use the threat of “security risks” to force companies to subscribe to azure, which is in effect equivalent to a sub to the OS.
I’m suggesting that they’re going to do what they’ve said they want to do. Just maybe on the longer term or in a novel way.
The biggest motivation they have to keep individual licenses OTP is it gets people used to the ecosystem (customer capture) and they’re massively profiting on all of yourthat data.
Making their OS subscription based is not what we’re talking about though. We’re talking about it becoming locked down and only running signed and approved software like Android is going to do.
That fundamentally breaks windows for most of the corporate world. Literally would break the world as we know it lol.
This kind of stuff never happens overnight. It happens slowly, incrementally, and the people are never mad enough at too much sudden change to be motivated enough to do anything. People should feel good about the imposition of boundaries, and it helps that for the average user, the boundaries often result in a better user experience.
I don’t think you guys understand that forcing windows to only run approved by Microsoft software would literally break the world as we know it. Microsoft know this. There’s no way around it.
Last time I used windows in a big corpo settings, there were so many things pudding off both us Devs but also IT.
Switch out a bad RAM stick? Spend an hour with IT.
Use a software? Spend an hour (or days) with IT
Compile your own software? Believe it or not, spend large amounts of time with IT
Like the compiler on a windows PC can’t work without different windows protection systems gets in the way, repeatedly. And then your executable, or some .d’ll just get wiped off the disk 😐🤷🏼♀️
I don’t think they do it intentionally, but big corpos don’t give a shit about their workers conditions, so if they were to enforce things (with backdoors ofc, so that if needed you can deactivate things, remember the unique installation code for windows like 95 or 98?) the grunts will just have to eat it up. And they would probably not have a much harder time, everything is already locked down hardware wise so they are used to all that jazz.
None of your examples at the start I’d that comment make sense or are true.
Also you’re talking about corporate policies for businesses that use windows, not windows itself. Management of devices is one of the biggest reasons why windows is the only real option for big corporations.
pissing off customers never stopped them for decades different versions of office programs ran side by side with no issues. they auto uninstall other versions of office automatically while stopping the install with a big pop up about compatibility issues.
this impacts all businesses using old versions of access programs alongside more new versions of office with newer installers. along with a byzantine licensing model with bizarre “incompatibilities” between the same year versions in different licensing channels, yeah tell me how microsoft won’t piss off corpo and government clients.
they seem to specialize in pissing off corpo and gov clients.
Microsoft are smart enough to not piss off every giant corporation and destroy their entire business overnight, so you can count on it never being forced by them.
They certainly wouldn’t roll it out overnight but they’ve had their long term targets on OS as a service since Windows 8 and these things tend to come bundled.
Nah, they know their limits. They will keep trying to make an optional locked down OS for regular users a thing, but there will always be a fully “unlocked” version available due to legacy software and the entire worlds reliance on it.
While microsoft also plays in the quarter to quarter economic BS they still have long term planning.
It’s precisely because they have a monopoly on enterprise class software that they could pull this off. That’s why the shift in euro-gov agencies to linux is such a big deal.
MS already has updates as a “free” service and windows insider which requires a paid azure sub which means they already use the threat of “security risks” to force companies to subscribe to azure, which is in effect equivalent to a sub to the OS.
I’m suggesting that they’re going to do what they’ve said they want to do. Just maybe on the longer term or in a novel way.
The biggest motivation they have to keep individual licenses OTP is it gets people used to the ecosystem (customer capture) and they’re massively profiting on all of
yourthat data.Making their OS subscription based is not what we’re talking about though. We’re talking about it becoming locked down and only running signed and approved software like Android is going to do.
That fundamentally breaks windows for most of the corporate world. Literally would break the world as we know it lol.
This kind of stuff never happens overnight. It happens slowly, incrementally, and the people are never mad enough at too much sudden change to be motivated enough to do anything. People should feel good about the imposition of boundaries, and it helps that for the average user, the boundaries often result in a better user experience.
I don’t think you guys understand that forcing windows to only run approved by Microsoft software would literally break the world as we know it. Microsoft know this. There’s no way around it.
Last time I used windows in a big corpo settings, there were so many things pudding off both us Devs but also IT.
Switch out a bad RAM stick? Spend an hour with IT.
Use a software? Spend an hour (or days) with IT
Compile your own software? Believe it or not, spend large amounts of time with IT
Like the compiler on a windows PC can’t work without different windows protection systems gets in the way, repeatedly. And then your executable, or some .d’ll just get wiped off the disk 😐🤷🏼♀️
I don’t think they do it intentionally, but big corpos don’t give a shit about their workers conditions, so if they were to enforce things (with backdoors ofc, so that if needed you can deactivate things, remember the unique installation code for windows like 95 or 98?) the grunts will just have to eat it up. And they would probably not have a much harder time, everything is already locked down hardware wise so they are used to all that jazz.
None of your examples at the start I’d that comment make sense or are true.
Also you’re talking about corporate policies for businesses that use windows, not windows itself. Management of devices is one of the biggest reasons why windows is the only real option for big corporations.
Oh I’m very absolutely talking about windows itself, it’s the reason you have go through so many loops to do the tiniest thing.
My point: Microsoft is already doing what you’re supposing they never will.
BTW your first phrase doesn’t make any sense?
pissing off customers never stopped them for decades different versions of office programs ran side by side with no issues. they auto uninstall other versions of office automatically while stopping the install with a big pop up about compatibility issues.
this impacts all businesses using old versions of access programs alongside more new versions of office with newer installers. along with a byzantine licensing model with bizarre “incompatibilities” between the same year versions in different licensing channels, yeah tell me how microsoft won’t piss off corpo and government clients.
they seem to specialize in pissing off corpo and gov clients.
Sounds like the businesses you’re talking about have incompetent IT staff.