The next time you buy a computer with Windows 12 you could find yourself tied into a subscription

[Redaktion]

There used to be a time when a single payment would get you full access to Windows for the lifetime of that version. However, in recent times hardware and software all seem to require a subscription. While there might be some legitimacy for subscription models, some providers have taken this a step too far. Can Microsoft justify a Windows 12 subscription?

https://www.notebookcheck.net/The-next-time-you-buy-a-computer-with-Windows-12-you-could-find-yourself-tied-into-a-subscription.794926.0.html

[Adl]

This was quite a well written article, very well written indeed. I've never commented on any articles here but this one, even though simple, but got my attention with how well the story played out. Good read, good opening, and good understanding of what can unfold if we were to go down such a path of accepting subscriptions for things we never even asked for. That must be why tech companies are trying to sell us highly connected and intelligent lol refrigerators, so that they can use this excuse of such software needing maintenance a therefore they expect us to pay for such a service of which there was never a need of one to begin with but instead it was designed that way by these companies to make it be so.

[kek]

The moment Microsoft does such a move, is the moment lots of folks will go to either Linux or MacOS.

Dell got a lot of backslash over their "Support subscription" hidden fees. I'm pretty sure Microsoft will get some if they try to pull this on consumers. There's a reason even antivirus program nowadays are seen as rubbish, especially McAfee

[George]

Ok, I get it. Electronics that are connected to the internet can never be secure, least of all any 'Microsoft' product because of the relentless hacking that their products get.

OEM's can often times go overboard with their 'updates'. Take my LG TV for example. While for its 1st few years I merely used it OTA (over the air) and it had no exposure to ether LAN or WAN, the dedicated 'Netflix' and 'Prime' buttons on the remote were attractive and I plugged in a Ethernet cable to the local LAN.
While this enabled both mentioned 'Netflix' and 'Prime' buttons to function, it also unleashed a series of LG TV updates that would soon be flashing ALL SORTS OF OTHER STREAMING services that might be available FOR A PRICE!!
Gee, oh fun LG had turned my TV into its own ADVERTISING medium without even asking me. Shortly there after I blocked LG domains at my Firewall and their popups were no longer.
(I've added a 'FireTV' dongle to my receiver and can unplug my TV from the LAN)

Then there is Microsoft. While they never have seemed to figure out how to make a secure product, they are constantly changing the UI around and adding back 'features' that the user removed. Yuck. My Microsoft products get very little and very restricted use behind TWO firewalls. (and their domains are blocked at BOTH firewalls!)

Maybe instead of a 'subscription' they had a 'onetime use' service fee to repair one of their systems when/if it ever gets compromised rather then a constant ongoing thing?

Then of course if your data is actually stored elsewhere then EVERY WINBOX has a 'restore function' that can reset it back to when you first bought it and your up and running again. :) (of course you'd be missing all your customizations)

A few of my WINBOX's really have NO VALUABLE DATA at all as they are 'game machines' and are only used for playing Steam games. (ok, sure the Steam client needs to 'ping' the Steam servers however they all are 'offline' games running behind 1-2 hardware firewalls so what exactly is being patched here?)

Lets face it this whole 'security' thing is getting out of hand. Perfectly capable 32bit electronics is now OBS because nothing 'new' is being developed for it.

Granted the iPhones and Android phones of the world go OBS every xx years as the OEM's stop offering updates for them. Planned obsolescence seems to be the business plan of choice. Unless of course the whole world goes subscription.

There are many products from Doorbells to Baby monitors that are sold in the hopes that the users ALSO BUY into their online 'cloud access', which I never enable or sign up for. :)

[RobertJasiek]

Microsoft. While they never have seemed to figure out how to make a secure product [...]
this whole 'security' thing is getting out of hand.

Hardwares, microcodes, typical operating systems and internet protocols have failed to be designed with mathematically guaranteed security from the lowest level up. Instead, design has been to work somehow and only then security gaps have been found, exploited and partly patched. To establish permanent security (except for hardware failure and physical manipulation), everything would have to be fundamentally redesigned starting from proved semantics and prohibiting computationally undecidable algorithms (see the halting problem) at least for inter-computer communication.

Adding unnecessary complexity to an operating system by, e.g., constantly changing GUIs, adds extra security gaps, which OS manufacturers could limit by not doing so. They can do less so for constantly changing hardwares requiring new drivers.

First of all, the entire computer industry is at fault for not starting from security by design. Secondly, every OS manufacturer makes the mistake of adding unnecessary complexity within the OS. In this respect, it is also Microsoft's (or every other OS manufacturer's) fault.

Planned obsolescence seems to be the business plan of choice. Unless of course the whole world goes subscription.

right

[Hotz]

The moment Microsoft does such a move, is the moment lots of folks will go to either Linux or MacOS.

Sometimes I wished for such a radical step from Microsoft. Because then a huge amount of people would have to switch Operating Systems, and as a consequence make a specific Linux distro stand out more than others - and not only "more", but "much more". Which is exactly what is needed for a Linux breakthrough. As it is now, no distribution really stands out enough for people to make a choice where they feel "safe" with.

Realistically though people who are overwhelmed with the huge amount of Linux distros now, would also be overwhelmed when Microsoft would take that radical step. However since Microsoft has recently made an article on how to install Linux Ubuntu, it is most likely that most people would then switch then to Ubuntu. Which might not be the best Linux choice, but better than nothing, and better than throwing people into the wilderness.

[Silver Fang]

IfS really does this, I'll switch to Linux Ubuntu.

[NikoB]

All Linux and Windows distributions by default are deliberate holes with a bunch of bookmarks designed to steal all your data.

There is no, never has been and never will be safe software in the world, much less hardware (do you even know what Intel ME/AMD PSP is?), because you, the people, are the target of companies and government machines - your data, your wallet, your life, your time, your work.

You can only take care of safety on your own, having critical thinking, a fairly good education and the broadest possible outlook, realizing all possible risks and carefully minimizing some of them and coming to terms with the rest, which we cannot control (like the fact that we are all mortal and we are all We live without knowing what will happen in the next minute around us and with us). It's just that we are ready to put up with some risks all our lives from birth to death, while we struggle with others with varying success. Life is an endless struggle with risks. And the more complex an individual's interaction with the world, the higher the immediate risks.

Most simply float along the current indicated to them from birth, in the hope that it will not carry them to a deadly waterfall and they will have time to live their lives calmly and measuredly.

If society is stupid and blind at the social level, the scoundrels gradually gain the upper hand. The history of mankind has proven this many times.

So there is no point in shedding crocodile tears when society itself has led to the current situation.

[William]

Subscriptions are all BS.  Companies saw the money to be made in ransomware and decided to get in on the business. There is no difference between ransomware and subscriptions except subscriptions are more overt.  They are a sign of a mature business that has run out of ideas to compel the purchase of the the next version of their product with its own new set of bugs (features) and vulnerabilities to be exploited by hackers.  Software is already exuberantly priced and now the companies selling the software want the users to pay for screwups in their software.  Software companies should pay for their screwups and not see their failures as a revenue stream, but as a loss on their bottom line as an incentive not to sell buggy software or software with vulnerabilities and not to expect their customers to pay an ongoing fee to pay for the software companies incompetence.  Ditto for requiring new hardware/PC to run the software.  In the beginning, software companies sold new software.  Next, new software was licensed such that the purchaser was not allowed to sell.  Consequently, if the PC was sold, technically the OS had to be removed to comply with the license agreement.  Why cannot Micron license their memory chips to Dell who then licenses their laptops to users.  Dell should then receive a royalty from the software developer to allow the software to be installed.  The companies that make equipment used to make the chips should receive a royalty for each chip.  Software already cost more than the PC it is installed on.  Why should software beta testers have to buy a PC pay a subscription to beta test to discover the bugs and vulnerabilities?  THIS IS CRAZY! Again as I started, what is the difference between ransomware and subscriptions except that ransomware is free and subscriptions are not.

[Laurent Lacôte]

All Linux and Windows distributions by default are deliberate holes with a bunch of bookmarks designed to steal all your data.


You can only take care of safety on your own, having critical thinking, a fairly good education and the broadest possible outlook, realizing all possible risks and carefully minimizing some of them and coming to terms with the rest, which we cannot control (like the fact that we are all mortal and we are all We live without knowing what will happen in the next minute around us and with us). It's just that we are ready to put up with some risks all our lives from birth to death, while we struggle with others with varying success. Life is an endless struggle with risks. And the more complex an individual's interaction with the world, the higher the immediate risks.

While I agree on the second part, although it's kinda extremist, the bolded part is plain troll, and it saddens me to see both coming from the same person.

[NikoB]

While I agree on the second part, although it's kinda extremist, the bolded part is plain troll, and it saddens me to see both coming from the same person.

You are simply, like most, too primitive inside to understand the scale of my thinking, experience and understanding of what we actually have to deal with on the planet.

Software companies should pay for their screwups and not see their failures as a revenue stream, but as a loss on their bottom line as an incentive not to sell buggy software or software with vulnerabilities and not to expect their customers to pay an ongoing fee to pay for the software companies incompetence.

They don't owe you anything unless you can force them to do so. Collective efforts at the societal level. The world is ruled by force. Knowledge and intelligence are also manifestations of this power.

[Flint Dickerson]

Looks like I'll be teaching a lot of people how to use Linux if that happens.

[NikoB]

Looks like I'll be teaching a lot of people how to use Linux if that happens.

I bet you won't. The majority will easily come to terms with their fate, just as they easily came to terms with totalitarian and illegal laws in the era of the "Covid" scam.

[SalvadorF]

Yeah, this is false information. Microsoft said it would be for business use and not standard users a while back. Microsoft knows it's numbers would plummet overnight and macOS would most likely become the top operating system overnight. No one cares about Linux, it's just as vulnerable as Windows and MacOS. If it was truly popular, it would have a higher user rate instead of less than a few percent. 

[Hotz]

Yeah, this is false information. Microsoft said it would be for business use and not standard users a while back. Microsoft knows it's numbers would plummet overnight

Yeah. And I think Microsoft would rather release something like a bare-minimum-Windows for the masses, than saying "It's over. If you don't like subscription, go to Linux or Mac".

And that bare-minimum-Windows might still be better than finding your path through the Linux jungle...