There will be no Windows 11
-
So MS have announced that there won't be another major Windows version. Presumably, it'll all be incremental updates delivered for free via Windows updates from now on.
Of course, what they're doing here is copying Apple several years later, by stopping at version 10
-
by stopping at version 10
Microsoft exec #1: "What ideas can we steal from Apple to convert all the sheeple to our side?"
Microsoft exec #2: "I know! Let's freeze our OS version at 10!!!"
Microsoft exec #1: "Brilliant!!"
-
Meh. Expected.
I just wonder how will they make any money from Windows now. It will on depend on App Store. If you thought their lame railroading was annoying before, just wait.
-
I just wonder how will they make any money from Windows now
Same way they always have done: OEM and Enterprise licenses
-
The article says most Windows money comes from new PC sales, not upgrades, so it might not affect their bottom line much at all
-
Presumably, it'll all be incremental updates delivered for free via Windows updates from now on.
We aren't sure about that "free" part yet...
-
We'll see. MS announces a lot of stuff with new OSes that doesn't turn out to be true.
-
So, forcing users to upgrade instead of dealing with XP holdouts?
It might work. But if they use the same channel for UI updates and security patches, it's not gonna be pretty...
-
Same way they always have done: OEM and Enterprise licenses
My thought exactly. Very few consumers actually upgrade their computers from one OS version to another. Even less build their own computers and install from scratch. Licenses sold through NewEgg and Amazon are a drop in the bucket compared to what they bring in from OEMs and enterprise.
But we may be seeing a day coming where you pretty much have to distribute through the Windows store in order to get your software installed.
-
It might work. But if they use the same channel for UI updates and security patches, it's not gonna be pretty...
They can just adopt the tact that Apple has, don't give two fucks what your users think. Yeah, it won't be pretty.
-
Keep rollin' rollin' rollin' rollin' Limp Bizkit - Rollin' (Air Raid Vehicle) – 04:03
— LimpBizkitVEVO
-
And have millions of views on "How to Disable Windows Update" articles, and then people complaining how Windows is full of security holes?
Yeah, I hope they've learned their lesson on that one.
-
Anyway, it seems like a silly move and something they'll be backing out of soon. With major versioning, there's a period for people to get used to whatever UI changes they introduce (and let's face it, sooner or later they will) while still keeping the luddites up-to-date with patches until everybody moves on.
Putting Start Screen in Win8 was tough, but manageable - people could keep using Win7 for a few more years until it wasn't such a shocking change. Putting it in an auto-pushed update would make the users lose their shit.
-
With major versioning, there's a period for people to get used to whatever UI changes they introduce (and let's face it, sooner or later they will) while still keeping the luddites up-to-date with patches until everybody moves on.
Even bigger: corporate customers whose applications break on newer versions.
-
corporate customers whose applications break on newer versions
99.999% of those break because they rely on assumptions about the underlying OS instead of being written properly
-
Maybe, but when your essential LOB app stops working, the high ups don't care why it happened, just that it did. If major changes start coming down through Windows Update, you go from every few years having a new version you can test the essential software on before upgrading, to every patch Tuesday potentially taking your business out of action
-
So what?
The users don't care their grumpy cat is broken inside, as long as it's a cat and it's grumpy. If a system update makes into a friendly squirrel, they'll blame the system update, since that's the last thing they did.
-
99.999% of those break because they rely on assumptions about the underlying OS instead of being written properly
Duh. That's not the point.
-
99.999% of those break because they rely on assumptions about the underlying OS instead of being written properly
It doesn't matter one bit. You are just going to end up with situations where the Pointy Haired Boss tells them not to do Windows updates. Also, if they start pulling Win7-Win8 shit all the time, not the IT department will start having to do UAT on top of compatibility testing.
-
Right, that too. And migrating an app takes time, so they'd be out of the loop for at least few months or years.
They'll need to separate the branches, pick which updates go where and which updates can potentially break stuff, and overall turn managing Windows into a nightmare.
-
every patch Tuesday potentially taking your business out of action
This is already a possibility; even with a lot of testing, you can never be 100% sure a Windows Update won't break anything
@Polygeekery said:You are just going to end up with situations where the Pointy Haired Boss tells them not to do Windows updates
Again, I see nothing new here
-
This is already a possibility; even with a lot of testing, you can never be 100% sure a Windows Update won't break anything or fuck up Windows itself
FTFY
-
You seem to be under the mistaken impression that Windows can crash
-
Only when running on Linux hardware.
Will that joke ever get old? I think not.
-
Well, now they'll be rolling out patches as they go for regular customers, and on Patch Tuesday for businesses. Which makes much more sense than the rest of their announcement.
-
There's also the fact that Windows Updates are already on one of two channels: required and optional. So this new arrangement will have required, optional, and upgrade. Or something.
-
to every patch Tuesday potentially taking your business out of action
They're doing it wrong. IT should be controlling what patches get rolled out to the users. (Except places like this - I'm sitting in the default workgroup - no domains here. This statement is not in conflict with the first.)
-
Yeah, well, they probably have a plan to not make it pants-on-head retarded, but it's still somewhat silly. If they keep an upgrade channel, it's basically just like major versioning, only on a tighter schedule and with free OTA installs. And named "Windows 10.1","10.2",etc.
So either nothing really changes, or shit goes down.
-
I'd imagine the 10.1 to 10.2 type upgrades would work in a not too dissimilar manner to, say, moving from Ubuntu 14.10 to 15.04; Windows Update would have an 'Upgrade' button that would repoint its sources to the newer channels, and then it'd do its job like it always does.
If MS does it sensibly, that is; there's no guarantee…
-
If MS does it sensibly, that is; there's no guarantee…
There is no sensible way to make this work with companies who don't upgrade for all the reasons we've already listed. You're just multiplying the workload to keep patches up to date for the older versions, because instead of 2 or 3 older versions of Windows, pretty soon you have 12.
Or you end up with everyone screaming about how Windows is breaking their stuff and then Raymond Chen has to spend all his time blogging. A rolling release cycle is a neat idea but I just can't see it working with corporate Earth in the real world.
-
That's why LTS was invented. If you're gonna stay on a version for 2/5/10 years, pick an appropriate LTS that will be supported that long.
-
That would mean pretty much "nothing changes". Well, except for hordes of users that expect a "system update" to provide some fixes and tweaks, and not to swap out Explorer with a totally new version with trapezoid windows.
-
But if they use the same channel for UI updates and security patches, it's not gonna be pretty...
++
-
We'll see. MS announces a lot of stuff with new OSes that doesn't turn out to be true.
Exactly. Besides, what's the quote we got? "There will be no Windows 11". You know what that means? Back to names! Windows don't-call-it-11 NE for New Experience or something. Internally it's 10.1
-
It was weird seeing the WTC.
-
to every patch Tuesday potentially taking your business out of action
Slow track is exactly for that. And IIRC they're going to add a "nothing but critical/security updates" track as well.
-
Which is going to die out in a few years as people move up because they need new features. So the real question is, "how slow is slow-track"?
-
Which is going to die out in a few years as people move up because they need new features. So the real question is, "how slow is slow-track"?
Presumably the slow track will be updated over time, too, just...not as fast. So probably somethign like "you get 2 years, but eventually you're going to get upgraded".
-
-
No, 10 will be 10.0, not 6.whatever. (Unless they changed that again.)
-
-
Microsoft Windows [Version 10.0.10074] C:\Users\Steven>_
-
if they use the same channel for UI updates and security patches, it's not gonna be pretty...
But Mozilla does that!
....oh.
-
It's actually worst:
-
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!<descriptive
-
Huh. Finally. TIL.
Of course, assuming you set the program's manifest correctly.
-
I didn't touch the manifest at all, so... Probably set to the Windows default :P
-
I know. If you disable the webcam, how will I see camwhores?
-
Those first three are basicallyHow do I disable this thing that protects me?
To pull a /. and use a car analogy, it's like willingly disabling ABS, airbags, and seatbelts; utterly stupid
-
No, you ran the 'ver' command. That is properly manifested.
If you write an exe and don't add the proper manifest magic
<supportedOS Id="{8e0f7a12-bfb3-4fe8-b9a5-48fd50a15a9a}"/>
GetVersion will lie.
