To MS I read a article today about Win9 being "Free" as it's competing with free OS's... Click here to view graph: The article if I'm reading it right is saying OEM's to compete paying $40 per license fee is too much, they need to reduce that figure to enable them to compete with other offerings on the market... The price being dropped to a point it could be "FREE". Thing about this for a moment, if the price was reduced to free.... People would have more money to spend in your "Store" ... funny thing about people if you give them the base product for free (The OS) they feel better about giving you money on other things.... willingly. The are also less likely to pirate your other offerings. Make the product EASY to INSTALL and EASY to obtain install media and the like the additional revenue would offset the OEM licensing fees and expand the customer base. What a concept, provide the OS for free... make money off everything else... Windows 9, price and Microsoft's Innovator's Dilemma Summary: Microsoft will soon be talking Windows 9--partially to put Windows 8 in the rear view mirror--but the real action may be revolve around pricing. Should Windows be free? http://www.zdnet.com/windows-9-price-and-microsofts-innovators-dilemma-7000025053/ ~Snip~ The details around Windows 9---code named "Threshold"---are beginning to emerge, but the real action will go well beyond features and whether Microsoft can put Windows 8 in the rear view mirror. Microsoft's real challenge with Windows will be navigating a classic innovator's dilemma and how it can thread a needle between preserving a cash cow and ultimately give Windows away to hardware makers. Give Windows away for free?!? What?!? How?!? That place is where Microsoft is going to have to go if it wants to preserve its Windows ecosystem and market share. And how Microsoft navigate that business model change is going to be telling. The folks in Redmond may laugh off the idea of giving Windows away for free to original equipment manufacturers, but the writing is on the wall. Consider: Apple doesn't charge for its Mac OS anymore. Google Chromebooks have become more popular. PC makers are now adding Android desktop systems because they can customize and probably get better margins. Price will be king in the PC market and Android and Chromebooks could be counterweight to Microsoft. Mobile operating systems are driving computing. Windows 8 was a black eye for Microsoft and it's going to be a challenge to come back from a Vista-ish flop twice. The PC market is being splintered into multiple operating systems. When I consider those moving parts, it's not that surprising that Microsoft is having trouble naming a new CEO. It's going to suck to be the new CEO. For starters, Microsoft isn't that screwed up so a new leader can't be a hero. Think John Chen at BlackBerry. Chen has little downside. If he turns around BlackBerry he's a legend. If BlackBerry fails Chen carries none of the blame. ~snip~ Over the medium to longer term, we believe Microsoft will be forced to follow Apple and Google and give away the OS, especially in the consumer market, and use services like Bing, Skype, Office 365, etc. as its primary monetization engine. That said, we expect Enterprises to continue to pay for support via various enterprise agreements. REST OF STORY HERE: http://www.zdnet.com/windows-9-price-and-microsofts-innovators-dilemma-7000025053/ .
For all the money MS has taken from people since Win95, they should BEG people to take their offering. Service packs have become a way of life and, I am sure that if GM or Ford or any of the other car manufacturers were to release a beta car or maybe leave a few things off, they would be hounded into the ground. Instead of worrying SO much about bottom line and being the First, Best or whatever at providing an OS, they should be concentrating on making sure the OS that they charge heaps for and their other programmes as well, should be as close to getting it right as can be humanly possible.
Nothing is actually free, we are talking about US monopolists. All they want is money. And windows preinstalled licenses are as 'free' as Android. A real 'free' OS is for instance Ubuntu. Products from a US monopolist cannot be 'free'.
Ubuntu 12.04 Beats Windows, Mac In GCHQ Security Report. http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2014/01/ubuntu-12-04-secure-os-uk-government-gchq Source : http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk
A free windows is the wet dream of every cheapstake, thats not going to happen period, MS business it to sell software and operating systems, not giving them away for free, keep arguing or bi7ching everything you want in every forum available, but it will never be free, its like asking Coca-Cola to make their products free, not really going to happen ever.
Give the OS for free and get money through the store? Bad and dead idea as long as they keep the desktop. We have desktop programs for everything, we can also write our own. No sane person would spend money in the store to get crappy metro apps. And if they happen to drop the desktop because of this, they're already dead. It would be a bigger fail than 8 itself.
Free is a good idea. People shouldn't be forced to pay money for the privilege of being spied upon by the NSA. Microsoft can just receive payment directly from the NSA since that is who they serve.
I have been told by my old friend and MS wise guy, that MS is going to adopt the Dunkin Donut Coffee purchase philosophy - buy 9 and the 10th one is free. To get your MS 10th OS Free card, write to Canoey % MS OSs, 22 Sugar Lane, Milky Way. I happen to know Paul Desmond has already gotten his card. Yen has been turned down, poor attitude towards the whole $$s thing.
Yen, It's not just "US Monopolists" that only care about the bottom line. It's not just US companies or persons that live within the US which are "evil". If you have a business you have bills to pay, stockholders to keep happy and employees you have to consider. While it may go against the subject of this thread in Windows 9 possibly going free... If they were to do so the decision to do so would be based upon "How they would profit" in the long term. As you state, nothing is free. If it's a "state" concern, the "state" has their own concerns. EG: They want xyz to happen in exchange for providing equipment /personal /materials. Any way you slice it the building xyz identity occupies costs "money", the water, the electricity, the contents of the building aren't magically paid for by money off a "money tree" which makes $100 bills/pounds, etc. Getting people to produce a product is going to cost you. Either in money or BULLETS. (Yes bullets)... by force, or threat of force. "States"=Governments, Countries. While there are cultural differences and there are exceptions in which people do stuff for free, people around the world generally do things /exchange their time for: 1: Food 2: Sex 3: Money to buy food and SEX... the sex part either directly or indirectly is going to cost you. (Families, kids aren't cheap to feed.) 4: Shelter If the state (Government/Country) provides any of these things they want something in return. .
If they were to go a a FREE OS model...(On the consumer side) there would be NO need for loaders, activation servers, etc. You just download a copy of the OS, click install... Instead of spending millions, upon millions of dollars on keeping people from sourcing the OS without paying... the focus would be on producing /procuring high quality apps. Oh, side benefit of going "free" would be we all could focus our time on more productive things. Think of all the time and grief that has been wasted over the years for measly $40 Think of all the countless time and grief of having to deal with activation issues. Think about how quick that $40 could be made up if you have quality apps priced to sell. Click, Click, Click, Add to cart, add more to cart, add a bunch of things to the cart... This going on 24/7 365 days a year. Reduce the price and your volume and profits go up, compared to charging insane amounts of money for something once produced cost pennies to distribute digitally. .
People willingly gave their money to Microsoft in exchange for a Windows license, Microsoft never forced anyone to buy their product. As for worrying about the bottom line, Microsoft has investors and shareholders to answer to. They have no choice but to worry about the bottom line.
Apple stuff costs a bomb and people still buy. Why? Because they're GOOD, that's why. M$ isn't gonna make their OS free. They may reduce the price, or make it free only in single licenses, but it will never be free. The best they can do is to make the UI more appealing to everyone, not just a class of users. If their stuff is good enough, people will buy it no matter what the price. (conditions apply)
Things have changed... This article can be already applied to Windows 8, selling the os for $60 ($15 under some conditions) for a few months then rise the price is basically the same as offering it for free then pretend like it's out of stock (then offer 8.1 freely for 8 users).. I don't think Windows 9 will be offered for free as this will damage Windows reputation (if any), but similar hoax will be performed.. Linux OS's has finally evolved maturely enough for desktop users and are a great alternative, Microsoft isn't the only player anymore (never was for a big user base).. I'm not sure why but using pirated Microsoft software doesn't cause me any "pang of conscience"...
OEM's will pocket the money, they will NOT pass it along to consumers...Now I still agree it should be free, so I can install it on my own PC