On 10/16/2015 10:49 PM, Vic Smith wrote:
On Fri, 16 Oct 2015 19:47:39 -0700, Don Y
wrote:

On 10/16/2015 6:12 PM, Dan Espen wrote:
Microsoft knew all along they couldn't stay the same size
selling the same old OS for new machines only.
People don't upgrade because the OS is good enough.

They've been "smart enough" to put changes in the API's
and core services to coerce developers to move forward...
which coerces end users to move forward, etc. This has
been their modus operandi for each of their products
(Office, etc.).

I've had every mainstream version of Windows except 8/8.1, and not
encountered any serious issues with any of them.

That wasn't my point. You can't, for example, support a device
that was W98 vintage on a W10 system. E.g., I was annoyed that I couldnt
run /After Dark/ on XP (beyond some token subset).

Windows 10 a pleasant surprise. I've yet to download the NVIDIA
drivers for my high end graphics card, and am playing a number of
graphics intensive games with what MS provided in the vanilla install
of Pro.
It's leaner than Win 7 by about 5gb. Important to me, since I image.
The BS about spyware is just.....BS. Just stay off the net if you
"feel" that way.

I don't let any MS machines talk to the outside except this one -- which
has essentially two applications on it: Tbird and Ffox. It takes longer
for me to dig out a USB cable and the image disk than it does to restore
the original image (made when I built the machine). I.e., nothing
"valuable" to lose (even the email can be retrieved from the servers).

MSFT is going to try to create an on-going revenue stream,
but I think they'll fail.

I suspect smart IT departments will just opt to stay with
older releases (I run XP on my workstations and there is
nothing that I need to do that I *can't* do -- efficiently!)

The disincentive for doing so is the lack of "support"
(drivers) for old OS's on new hardware.

I suspect large corporations will migrate to Windows 10.
The don't like pain.

I'm not so sure. I see companies dragging their feet more and more...
resisting the MS "imperative" to "upgrade or die". I know many
places that skipped Vista altogether!

Ultimately, they'll be a smaller company.

That's pretty obvious.

Smaller in employees, market cap, revenues?

Smaller in stature. A "has been".

I don't see them losing market share in the desktop market any time
soon. They're selling easy to use does-it-all software to the masses.
Not until somebody can cover the bases as well as MS does.

I would look to folks like Dell and HP to more aggressively
move to offering cloud services (even if they are *local* clouds)
to leverage their *individual* hardware offerings. I.e., lock
clients into using their special "appliances" (modern day X terminals)
to connect with software running on their (more expensive) servers.

All the existing infrastructure can remain in place. IT department
can do all maintenance from the "server closet". Appliances can
be inexpensive/disposable as they won't need lots of resources
(diskless). Perhaps All-in-One form factor devices without the
*bulk* of current AIO offerings.

Most business seats can probably easily be handled with a
"productivity suite", browser and mail client. Highly technical
seats ("engineering") can stick with "compatible" workstations;
perhaps even deliberately offered to exploit *old* drivers
(with more MIPS).

They may improve sales in the cell phone, tablet area, but I know
nothing about them.

MS hasn't had much notable success in the phone business. They
see the world as WindowsWindowsWindows... (something about having
a hammer and everything looks like a tack...)

Besides, I don't buy the notion that Windows 10 is "the end."
They'll have more versions to take advantage of new technology.

I think the hardware vendors may be wanting a piece of that pie.
And, can possibly pitch a centralized solution as having a much lower
TCO than what Windows has already *taught* all of these customers!

(some of the whitepapers are startling in illustrating these
differences)

For every customer (business) that goes down this road, there are
potentially thousands of MS licenses lost! And, anyone who finds
a *good* experience will be an excellent salesperson *for* this
approach: "We managed to cut our equipment budget by $XX and
have done away with N support positions!"

I do all of my software development work using this model. I sit
down at any of ~dozen machines and start typing, compiling, debugging,
etc. No need to be in any particular place to have a particular piece
of software available.

My workstations are dedicated machines -- largely because each has
very specific peripherals that are tethered to those individual
machines (scanners, motion controllers, cameras, high end sound,
video acquisition, electronic test equipment, device programmers,
etc.). These machines cost me a disproportionate amount of time
(money) to maintain and tend to see very *few* upgrades -- because
installing all that software takes *days* for each machine (assuming
it *will* run on whatever upgraded hardware/OS I put in place).