Business Insider Windows 10 Article

[OwenDL]

Windows 10 Preview: Why It Matters - Business Insider.

Any thoughts on that article?

I can't really agree with the title, because I see no reason whatsoever to migrate to another OS if W10 doesn't exceed the expectations. That being said I think that what we've seen so far from the Tech preview and other leaks/info is more than enough to prove W10 to be a step up from W8 when it first came out, so it's probably unlikely that it'll be a failure.

 

[hotphil]

If they can nail the common look and feel with common apps across screen sizes, they'll be on the right path with a sellable USP. Whether companies bite, who knows.

 

[raycpl]

If W10 doesn't take off... So what? It's not as if the windows users would suddenly switch to apple or android. Maybe for mobile, then again WP percentages cant go lower than what it is now. And definitely not for desktops.

 

[hotphil]

I wouldn't be so sure about desktops. The hardware-OS-application layererd stack isn't going to survive forever. If companies can deliver apps to thin/zero-client machines direct from a hardware-independent hypervisor, that's a powerful reason to not buy Windows desktop/server licences.

 

[tiziano27]

Windows 10 is great on PCs. It will start a big upgrade cycle in the PC market.

 

[hotphil]

It might shift a few boxes in the consumer market. But will businesses (which is where the $ are) fancy taking the plunge? That remains to be seen. Although with the number that held-off because of Windows 8 and mainstream Windows 7 support now gone, some will feel boxed into a corner. Any CIO/CTO worth his title will be exploring alternatives.

 

[tiziano27]

The revenue from the consumer licenses was $4 billion the last quarter, it's a huge business.
Windows 10 will also help with the services. Bing and OneDrive integrated in the OS. Music, movies and Skype pre-installed. MS gets 30% of the apps sold through the app store. And of course universal apps would help with the app gap in mobile.
Windows 10 should be a free upgrade for Windows 7, a nagging dialog box should coerce the users to upgrade.

 

[gMaesterUK]

Windows 10 should be a free upgrade for Windows 7, a nagging dialog box should coerce the users to upgrade.

I seriously doubt MS will give licences away for free, if anything they'll offer promotions for upgrades, if I remember correctly I got an upgrade from Win7 to Win8 for way under ?50! Which is a significant saving on the full price.

Any CIO/CTO worth his title will be exploring alternatives.

Yes I agree they'll explore, but they'll come back to the same conclusion that Windows is actually cheaper in the long run... I remember back in the noughties all these governments making huge moves over to Open Source, only to move back to Windows after a couple years as the unforeseen costs were too high.
But I agree Win10 has to be a success for MS else even businesses will turn against them. Maybe that's why MS have been pushing the open beta so much to get as much feedback and hopefully buzz as possible.

G.

 

[nessinhaw]

I seriously doubt MS will give licences away for free, if anything they'll offer promotions for upgrades, if I remember correctly I got an upgrade from Win7 to Win8 for way under ?50! Which is a significant saving on the full price.

G.

nope! it will be completely free...within the FIRST year! now if all Win 7 versions will be eligible, that's another matter!

so that means for one year from Win 10 final launch, users who have ORIGINAL (ofc) Win 7, 8 or 8.1 will receive a free upgrade!

at least from what is understandable, it will be truly free and might be a good strategy to have people adopt Win 10!

 

[gMaesterUK]

nope! it will be completely free...within the FIRST year! now if all Win 7 versions will be eligible, that's another matter!

I know, I was shocked at first, however when I stepped back and thought about it, it does make sense on so many levels. For the enterprise with deep Azure integration, MS can sell more add-on services just for one example. For the consumer market, probably a OneDrive subscription or Office365 or even a Xbox Music sub.

A good move from MS, and with the other announcements I can honestly say I was grinning like a Cheshire Cat yesterday evening (started 5pm GMT).

Have been doing the rounds of the tech sites, and I wasn't shocked on the number of anti-MS comments out there.

I'm just hopping new developers do look at the Universal apps for Windows as a good thing and port many if not all of their apps to the combined App Store.

G.

 

[dkediger]

I wouldn't be so sure about desktops. The hardware-OS-application layererd stack isn't going to survive forever. If companies can deliver apps to thin/zero-client machines direct from a hardware-independent hypervisor, that's a powerful reason to not buy Windows desktop/server licences.

Yes I agree they'll explore, but they'll come back to the same conclusion that Windows is actually cheaper in the long run... I remember back in the noughties all these governments making huge moves over to Open Source, only to move back to Windows after a couple years as the unforeseen costs were too high.

Those licenses will still be needed no matter where, or who, they are in the stack. Some vendor/provider is going to be sure they are paid for those resources.

I don't see the virtual desktop scaling to offer any total cost advantage to orgs with fewer than thousands of machines for at least another product cycle or two. The desktop client hardware isn't any less expensive than a PC, the server room costs to go from a traditional network client to virtual are still astronomical, and cloud virtual is in its awkward teenage years. Actually, cloud virtual is something I hope develops to become cost efficient for smaller environments - I have 300 devices across 5 locations. Local internet bandwidth can also be a limiting factor for a not insignificant portion of the country (US at least).

Many of us in the mid/small enterprise segment are still digesting initial forays into virtual or cloud/off-premises services. My Exchange server is no more - killed off for Google Apps (initially) and O365 now. Most of my servers have been virtualized - but there is still iron on site running the hypervisors and SAN. Since we really only need print/authentication/security services in my environment, I want to consolidate and kill those servers as soon as I can and throw that money over to - my desktops, or endpoints if you will. Maybe more specifically, the experience at the endpoint. I'm really pretty excited to see how Microsoft's new phrase "Mobility of the Experience" comes together. For our sales floors - my org is an auto dealership group - I'm exploring the vision of nuking our desktops - even the desks - for a pool of SP3's (or whatever) with a combination of open and semi-private seating areas, tables, and stand up desks to provide places for phones and charging points. And I'm the IT guy bringing out this transformation.

Essentially, its not that I want to trade one set of costs in a traditional desktop for another set of costs in virtual client infrastructure and hope to be more cost efficient in the process. In the end, that's just so much busy work justifying ITs existence. I really want to enable that experience mobility - and that is what I will look to invest in - no matter who the provider.