How long before Windows becomes a subscription service? (lemmy.one)

submitted 11 months ago by Octospider@lemmy.one to c/casualconversation@lemmy.world

31 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Everything is turning into disgusting subscription services. Most recently I saw home printers that required a monthly subscription service in order to print.

So, how long before Windows is a subscription? They have already brought ads into Windows.

Yes, I think I'll sign up for the...hm, the "Casual Gamer" tier, which allows 2 hours per week of gaming. Although I could always watch an ad to unlock 30 more minutes.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] krellor@kbin.social 7 points 11 months ago

All the way back to Windows NT Microsoft sold extended support for business customers while security updates stopped to the home customer. For the past several major releases Microsoft has a five year mainstream release, 5 year extended support, and then a paid extended period for business. That was the same for Windows 7 as far as I can tell. Honestly, it seems like selling individual esu's is giving the individual more options. I mean, I don't get it personally. But if I had some reason to absolutely stay on Windows 10, I would appreciate the option to pay for security updates for years 11, 12, 13+ of the OS.

That being said, I'm not sure who these people are that both love Windows 10 to the point of staying with it past regular support, loath Windows 11, and don't want to give Linux a try. Like, barring weird technical requirements, that's a Venn diagram that I just can't square.

And I'm aware of the shenanigans Windows 11 pulls, but also know the savvy or opinionated user can disable most anything undesirable that makes it different from Windows 10. It's a bit clicky, but you can disable or hide most things. And if it's the principle of the thing... Get thee to a nixery!

[-] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

This is all pretty valid, but the reality is that the TPM 2.0 requirement is literally entirely arbitrary, at least when it comes to consumer-level Windows.

I understand the ease of just making both business and consumer versions have the same requirement, because the enhanced security literally won't matter for the average consumer.

So in effect they lost years of use of their hardware because of an arbitrary limitation. There's plenty of consumer hardware that otherwise meets the Windows 11 specs but only lacks the TPM 2.0 chip.

I only wish more people would consider Linux as an alternative.

[-] Nollij@sopuli.xyz 5 points 11 months ago

It's to set up a baseline feature set. Just like you can build an Android app and be confident there will be a touchscreen, motion controls, and GPS, Microsoft is trying to do the same for Windows. Otherwise, windows software will be limited to the lowest common denominator.

That said, the use cases for requiring TPM 2.0 are not encouraging. The biggest use case (aside from full disk encryption, like BitLocker) is anti-piracy tools like Denuvo.

[-] krellor@kbin.social 4 points 11 months ago

The TPM requirement, I agree seemed a bit much without enough warning to the hardware industry. It's all the more puzzling because it is trivial to install with the TPM requirement disabled.

That being said, I've done tech support forever ago, and I still help my in-laws with technology, and I get it. Microsoft is pushing improvements for people who otherwise wouldn't do anything for their security or even continuity of operations. Windows hello, for all my gripes with it, gives people a password reset and recovery option for their OS.

But to your point again, I think the TPM requirement should have been phased in more slowly.

Have a great night!