More bloatware, more bugs, more crashes.
Aw come on! Just because it's what they always do doesn't mean.... oh wait.
Linux or Unix-like kernel would be nice: yes it's a big undertaking but quite a bit of Azure already runs on Linux and with so many of the moving pieces being pushed to web apps and cloud stuff anyway, they could do it.
Highly unlikely but at least for devs and Windows Server they should consider it.
It would be nice but it won't happen. One of the most important aspects of the PC landscape has always been backwards-compatibility. If they used a Linux kernel, then they'd have to code an emulator for older software. I don't think that it would be a big deal to make an emulator (hell, the PS/2 emulator makes your x86 CPU emulate an IBM Power CPU), but it would eat CPU resources like there's no tomorrow. Then people would have to buy all new software for it and other than giant corporations, who has that kind of money to just throw around these days?
"economic opportunity"?
that sounds ominous, probably means you cant just buy a license outright, some subscription BS, tiers, oh their gonna announce some f***ery alright.
Even if they do, we still have Windows 10 and I
might have a hacked version of Windows 7 Ultimate x64 somewhere. I also
might have working Ryzen drivers for said theoretical Windows 7....
"one of the most significant updates" Uh Oh
Yeah, you might want to test it on an older PC first. You know, just to be safe....
"one of the most significant updates" Uh Oh
Yeah, that word "significant" is rather frightening.
As good as Linux kernel is, its still tech from the 70's and I would personally prefer something newer.
Well, to be honest, Windows still uses the MS-DOS kernel and that's from 1981 so it wouldn't be much different. This is why hard drives have to start with drive C, because A and B are
still reserved for floppy drives only.
They are going to make us pay for updates.
I would be ecstatic if that were true because it would mean that they wouldn't be able to
force the updates upon us anymore.
Windows 10 runs pretty damn well and doesn't crash as much or have nearly as many issues as 7 or XP did. I work in IT and have been in desktop support for a decade before I moved off to being a sysadmin. So this is speaking from a lot of experience.
XP had issues? I mean, if you had the
home version of XP it was awful but I remember XP Pro being rock solid starting with SP2. I still lament the fact that XP x64 was abandoned.
If they go to a subscription model, people will end up paying Microsoft $100 or so a year, turning those $800 Windows laptops into $1,300 laptops when you factor in the software.
Which orifice did you pull those numbers out of? Windows 10 was free for most and cost me about $37CAD For Windows 10 Pro with MS-Office. Even the most expensive retail version only has a one-time cost of $245CAD. If Windows tried what you've managed to dream up, it would FAIL because no user or business would adopt it.
We could be seeing Windows’ final days.
Meanwhile... back on Earth... Apple has a "v
ery threatening" 15% share of the computer market and is still so overpriced that enthusiasts use its name as a punchline for both computers and phones. Apple is used mostly by people who aren't tech-savvy but need a computer for professional or educational purposes and are willing to get fleeced because they aren't interested in knowing more about tech. It's like people who drive BMWs, except for a tiny minority, they're as ignorant about cars as MacBook owners are about computers.
I'm looking forward to this (crazy as that sounds).
You're right. It sounds pretty damn crazy!
Too bad that isn't true... honestly, if you don't get vaccinated, you shouldn't be allowed into any public places...
Ain't that the truth!!!











Anti-vaxxers share the bottom rung of the IQ ladder with flat-earthers.