I like all the comments ready to take a fisting in the ass from Microsoft just to keep Windows 10.
If you raised a fucking stink instead of taking this shitty deal, they may be forced to keep supporting it for free anyway like they did with Windows 7.
They’ve really got you guys cowed into paying for the convenience of getting fucked, don’t they?
This is a company with a market cap of $3.04 trillion and you guys are just gonna bend over and take it for $30 bucks? Wew lad. They don’t need your fucking thirty dollars, and you fucking know it. It’s a god damned shakedown.
Microsoft: Wouldn’t it be a shame if your computer was somehow insecure and got hacked?
Sounds like a Mafioso showing up for protection money to me.
EDIT: There’s still about 700 million Windows 10 PC’s still on the market. If every single existing Windows 10 machine paid for this service, Microsoft would make $21 billion dollars next year off this alone. It’s a shakedown, do the fucking math. (700,000,000 x $30 = $21,000,000,000) Even if only half do it, it’s still a cool $10.5 billion.
EDIT II: This also normalizes the practice of paying for security updates for consumers. You really want to take us down that path where every security update is paid?
Microsoft: heh heh heh, looks like you’ll be paying me $30 for that windows 10 installation.
Me: Bitch, I’m on Windows 7, and keep ignoring the OS bitching at me to turn the firewall on!
What an idiotic perspective. Microsoft has supported W10 for literally 12 years at the cutoff date. Show me another software product that receives TWELVE YEARS worth of free support. 30 bucks is fair enough. For enterprises this is play money, if you are a private, you could upgrade fucking 7 keys. Which means, you didn’t need to pay a fucking cent to MS since 2007. No one has ever matched this kinda support. Ten percent of this is considered fucking generous.
And herre is a thought for you. The reason why windows is full of adware and spyware is precisely because of dickheads, who won’t pay 30 fucking dollars EVERY TWENTY YEARS. This is your fault.
Remember when Microsoft said Windows 10 would be the last version of Windows?
Hmm, but did they say the last version of Windows, or the last version of Windows you’re going to buy? And if it’s the latter, is the upgrade to Windows 11 free? If yes, then technically it’s still correct.
I just wish I could buy a copy of windows 11 that didn’t have any telemetry or AI.
IoT LTSC or just plain LTSC https://massgrave.dev/windows_ltsc_links
Remember when Billiam Gates said nobody would ever need more than 640kb of RAM?
I mean, that was back when if you wanted a home computer, you were building it yourself from parts from Radio Shack. Not exactly the same thing. I’m not certain that even Apple had the Apple 1 out at that point. I know they hadn’t made the Mac 128k, and weren’t going to for several years.
I haven’t ever met anyone that thought Bill Gates was prescient, just a lucky businessman.
I 'member.
Twas Dickity 14 or so, and I plan to make good on Microsofts words.
They never actually said this. Some MS Engineer did and the press ran with it.
And even that engineer only said “last” to mean “latest”, which is obvious from context, but why let that get in the way of clickbaity articles.
That’s the stupidest way to say that. Of course when it’s released it will be the latest release.
Considering that when people paid $100 for that OS they were told that it would be the “last Windows to be released”, shouldn’t there be a class action lawsuit?
They weren’t told that, that was an off-hand comment by an employee (not even a spokesperson) that the media took and ran with. Source:
Right now we’re releasing Windows 10, and because Windows 10 is the last version of Windows, we’re all still working on Windows 10.
I think they meant “latest” not “last.”
For what it’s worth
“Recent comments at Ignite about Windows 10 are reflective of the way Windows will be delivered as a service bringing new innovations and updates in an ongoing manner, with continuous value for our consumer and business customers,” says a Microsoft spokesperson in a statement to The Verge. “We aren’t speaking to future branding at this time, but customers can be confident Windows 10 will remain up-to-date and power a variety of devices from PCs to phones to Surface Hub to HoloLens and Xbox. We look forward to a long future of Windows innovations.”
https://www.theverge.com/2015/5/7/8568473/windows-10-last-version-of-windows
Windows will be delivered as a service
Which is largely true, there have been a number of “service packs” that were released as regular updates throughout the Windows 10 lifespan. So it definitely seems they want people to not think about the specific Windows version they’re on. From that article:
Microsoft could opt for Windows 11 or Windows 12 in future, but if people upgrade to Windows 10 and the regular updates do the trick then everyone will just settle for just “Windows” without even worrying about the version number.
Windows 7, for example, had one major service pack, with a few isolated updates, whereas Windows 10 had a major update about every 6 months, and each one of those checkpoints was supported for about a year and a half. The final update was at the end of 2022, and it’s support runs 3 years.
So yeah, I think they met what they said, but the messaging wasn’t particularly clear how long that support would be provided for.
“Enrolled PCs will continue to receive Critical and Important security updates for Windows 10; however, new features, bug fixes, and technical support will no longer be available from Microsoft,” explains Yusuf Mehdi, executive vice president and consumer chief marketing officer at Microsoft.
Don’t threaten me with a good time.
Anyone who’s had to open a Microsoft support ticket can assure you technical support is already not available from Microsoft.
$30 to not have to deal with Windows 11 for another year feels like the deal of the century.
I love how they’re like ‘but you won’t get new features!’. They may have still not figured out that nobody cares about ‘new features’ being stuffed into the OS, but I guess you can’t have everything.
I just want all windows games to run on linux with equivalent performance and without anticheat hurdles. After that happens i’m done with windows.
Honestly, i’m really not that far off as-is. Steam Deck already runs most of my library, it’s just the games that don’t work with a controller that are a problem.
Linux will get multiplayer game support from those straggler game companies when people show the userbase is there. They will always follow the money. So if you stay with Windows the devs won’t support Linux. So saying “I’ll move to Linux once they support it”, will ensure they will never support it.
My suggestion is to dual-boot for now and keep putting pressure on the game devs to support Linux. It’s important to dual boot and run as many games on Linux as possible for now to show in the steam metrics that more people are leaving Windows.
I just want all windows games to run on linux with equivalent performance and without anticheat hurdles. After that happens i’m done with windows.
That’s one strategy. Mine is to just say “fuck it” until the devs and studios make their games more playable on Linux. I can deal with not playing some games to make that happen. That’s not for everyone though.
Switching to a better non-mainstream alternative to anything always brings some compatibility pains until enough are doing it to where the tide shifts. I accept this.
As do I buddy, as do I.
But unfortunately, we only get “most” games running on Linux w/ similar if not equivalent performance. Unfortunately, game devs for some reason refuse to support Linux w/ their anti-cheat implementations (even if the anti-cheat solution works fine on Linux), so getting to 100% is going to take some time and a lot of people shifting to Linux despite not every game working perfectly. Most do though.
Consider that Microsoft will have supported Windows 10 for 10 years as of next year, I will say it had a good run. Considering the longest support cycle for an OS I can find that is even remotely usable as a daily is Slackware 14.1, at 9 years, and support ended for that almost a year ago.
I mean, the HDR support and multi window snapping, as well as remembering window positions on multiple displays.
Counterpoint, if you have two monitors with different DPI scaling, window dimensions get butchered when moving between them
I have never found HDR to be helpful. Every time I turn it on it seems to think what I want was not better colors, but for all my colors to be extremely washed out on every screen.
feels like the deal of the century.
For Microsoft, sure. If they capture all Windows 10 machines, they’re in for a $21 billion payday. If they get half of them, $10 billion. A quarter, $5 billion. An eighth, $2.5 billion.
Your $30 in aggregate is only a deal for Microsoft. They’ll ask for another $30 a year after that and now you’ve normalized paying for security updates.
No it doesn’t. We have any number of free and open source operating systems to choose from that are already more secure. The number of people in a situation where they absolutely need to run Windows specifically is small.
Someone has to pay for that work. Either volunteers are donating their time, corporations “donate” work of their employees or hire it out because use of the project generates profits for them and they recognize not everyone can be a parasite (The FOSS model)
The other alternative is users paying directly.
If you want to use a closed source os, then pay for updates or you will be monetized on other ways. (In the case of MS that would be ads or the OS is just an incidental product used to drive sales of software or cloud computing)
