|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 10 2012 @ 12:18 PM EDT |
| n/t [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 10 2012 @ 12:20 PM EDT |
If they do they will certainly kill Windows. Nice business model!
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: wood gnome on Friday, August 10 2012 @ 12:23 PM EDT |
They wouldn't dare to pull a trick like that in the EU. Over here, M$ means
monoploy (no spelling error). [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: tknarr on Friday, August 10 2012 @ 01:06 PM EDT |
If MS did that, the corporate world would scream bloody murder. Upgrades to
the OS are a big deal there. They can't just throw a new version in whenever it
comes out, it has to go through certification to insure that a) it'll run on the
hardware the company has and b) all the applications the company needs to run
officially support the new OS version. The second there's one of the big reasons
it took corporate America so long to adopt Windows 7: they had business-critical
must-run applications that were only supported on Windows XP and in some cases
simply wouldn't run on Windows 7. Put a large company in a position where if
they want to stay on Windows they have to do a large hardware purchase ahead of
the planned schedule or lose several must-run applications (or both), and they
will listen to the tech guys and start talking to Red Hat and the like
about officially-supported Wine setups. At which point MS'll back off, because
they can't afford to have the corporate world shifting away from them. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: albert on Friday, August 10 2012 @ 01:52 PM EDT |
The MS Vista debacle forced lots of users, not just corporations, to stick with
XP. Now, under the guise of 'security', they will use UEFI to force users to
upgrade. I don't think they will push their corporate users too hard. They
can't afford to lose that market; it's the core of their business. It doesn't
mean they won't try, though. I've worked for a super large multinational, and
smaller companies, and they all say the same thing: "Give me something that
WORKS!" Costs are important, but not the real issue. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 10 2012 @ 02:01 PM EDT |
that would have to be renewed yearly after that. This would help them eliminate
the copies going forward. I suspect they will get away with that approach to
anti-pirate software. The only push back that would have any influence would be
from the customer, imo. I don't believe that will happen.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
