The future of Windows may be changing, as Microsoft could move to a subscription-based model. Aaron Birch investigates...
Despite many years of competition and various large-scale bouts of user dissatisfaction, Windows remains the most popular and commonly used OS in the world. Linux may have its place in the hearts of many, and there’s a definite movement for those wishing to abstain from Microsoft’s products, but the Redmond OS still reigns supreme. At least, it does for now, but with some possible major changes on the horizon, could Windows’ success take a turn for the worst?
It’s been rumoured and talked about for months now that Windows 10 will be the last OS of its kind, with various reports leaking out online. More recently, Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella, who is heavily focused on the future of cloud computing, made it clear he’s looking into a more service-based business. So it’s looking increasingly likely that Windows 10 will not only be the last numbered Windows release, with future iterations all simply going by the name Windows, sans number, but that it may embrace a subscription model.
This has been confirmed further thanks to Microsoft employee Jerry Nixon’s comments at the company’s Ignite conference. Here he said, “Right now we’re releasing Windows 10, and because Windows 10 is the last version of Windows, we’re all still working on Windows 10.”
Many have taken this as rather solid proof that Windows will no longer be the OS it is today and that a subscription and cloud-based operating system is in the near future for PC users.
What could this mean for users? How will this change affect the current functionality and availability of Windows?
Windows 10
Currently, most up-to-date PC users are making use of Windows 8.1 – that is, those who haven’t already upgraded from the popular Windows 7. Microsoft’s next update has skipped Windows 9 and will be heading directly to Windows 10. This version of Windows is going to be offered as a free upgrade to users of Windows 7 and upward (including Windows Phone 8.1) for free for the first year of the OS’s release. This is good news for those who want to stay up to date and run the latest version of Windows, as it means there’s no extra cost involved in the upgrade. Microsoft has even said that it plans to upgrade every applicable copy of Windows, even if it’s not, how shall we say, entirely legal. Clearly, something is afoot at Microsoft, something big, and it depends on users all being on the same page. What better way to ensure this than to give everyone a free copy of the latest version of Windows?
Of course, that’s just mere speculation, but it’s not unwarranted to be wary of such ulterior motives. Microsoft hasn’t been the most generous company in the world when it comes to its OS in the past, and its software, OS or otherwise, usually commands high prices or at least adds to the price of an OEM PC deal. Now it’s giving a whole OS away for free (or an upgrade, if you want to be specific), you have to wonder.
Microsoft representatives have been reported online as stating that Windows 10 will be the last numbered version of Windows, and the delivery plan for the operating system is set to change. Instead of Microsoft’s usual commitment of releasing a new OS every three years (give or take), more frequent updates will be applied in a service-based approach. Think game and mobile phone OS updates if you want an easy analogy. This would mean that the internet and cloud server will come into play more heavily than ever before, with a much greater demand for online functionality. Windows would need to be online to receive the latest updates, and new versions would also be delivered via this method.
This is a model that’s served all manner of companies and service providers well, such as office applications, security tools, games and Windows’ own updates. However, for an entire OS to be delivered this way, it raises some very important questions, ones that the general PC using public are understandably concerned by.
Online Required
Ever since its inception, Windows has always strived to be the total package, including all the relevant and most useful technology of the time. Microsoft has always wanted the OS to be everything to everyone, and this can be seen in the product’s evolution. This evolution has enhanced and improved the system, often at the expense of other companies and technologies (we still remember you, Netscape), leading us right up to Windows 8.1 and soon Windows 10.
One thing that has always been the same about Windows is its local, fully functional installation. Although Windows relies on an internet connection for a lot of features, more so with more recent releases, as well as various hotfixes and updates, the system has also been standalone. It can run perfectly well, albeit without some features, on a PC not connected to the internet. What’s more, if you have an installation disc, it’s much easier to recover a system or reinstall from scratch. At the very least, a PC or laptop can be equipped with a recovery partition containing Windows and software, which can be reverted to at any time should the need arise.
Should Windows move away from this and towards a cloud-based service, which is believed, this may no longer be possible, and the OS and its functionality will instead rely on an online connection and the cloud. This would facilitate the need for an online connection for a PC running Windows and possibly an always online one, although there’s nothing pointing to this at the moment.
As we said, this isn’t a new approach for many software providers, and many large-scale companies have already used this method of software delivery. Adobe is one such company to take this route, with its Creative Cloud suite of programs, moving its previously stand-alone titles like InDesign, Photoshop, Dreamweaver, Illustrator and others to a service-based system. Instead of a single, one-off payment, customers pay a monthly subscription for the programs, which includes the software and updates, as well as full support.
Microsoft has also dabbled in this area, specifically with Office, in its Office 365 incarnation. Unlike previous versions of the productivity suite, Office 365 doesn’t come on a disc as it has before, but is a cloud-based, subscription service. Various packages are available, such as Home and Personal, and these command monthly fees.
Given that Microsoft has already moved one of its major products into the online, subscription sphere, Windows’ future as another such service isn’t difficult to imagine, even more so when you consider the various options open to Microsoft in terms of different packages and subscription deals, such as Home, Professional, Student and so on. It would also help cut down on piracy, as it’s generally harder for people to find and use online-specific software illegally, and unlike other such programs, you can hardly block Windows from going online with a firewall, as it’s the actual OS of your PC. Sure, there’ll always be ways found to bypass any security, even this delivery solution, but it does put Microsoft in a much better position in terms of control over its product.
Power Corrupts...
The problem with this level of control comes with power, the kind that a company can hold over its users. This is a situation that’s already affected Adobe and its relationship with its own customers. Having removed the traditional, stand-alone Creative Suite from the market, replacing it with the subscription-only Creative Cloud, Adobe quickly upset a lot of people, so much so that a petition on Change.org was started in 2013 and signed by around 13,000 people. Many were outraged at the change in pricing, seeing the software as a rental, rather than a viable purchase. The move was called a blatant moneygrab, and it was feared that with no other real options, Adobe could hike prices up and generally control the market. The costs involved for users who don’t upgrade to the latest product as regularly as others has also been questioned.
Microsoft’s Office 365 success is harder to quantify. In the past, Microsoft hasn’t been all that open in terms of sales figures and service take-up, but it has often insisted the online office suite has strong momentum and has been on track to be one of its biggest products. Even so, with such apparent success, Office hasn’t deterred competing packages, and there are plenty of alternative suites out there. The thing is, Windows doesn’t have the same amount of competition. While it’s easy to uninstall an office suite and move to another, doing so with an operating system isn’t quite so straightforward.
There’s also the real, legitimate fear of not actually owning the software in question, and this is something that’s actually been big news over in the gaming world recently, and it only highlights the potential problems users could face.
Konami, a big name in the gaming industry, released a mysterious title called P.T. for the PlayStation 4. P.T. (short for Playable Teaser), was a horror-themed title that was revealed, on completion, to be a new Silent Hill game, which was in development. However, following all sorts of problems at Konami, the new Silent Hill game has been cancelled, and Konami has taken many steps to remove P.T. from existence, to the point the game has been removed from Sony’s PlayStation Network servers.
How does this relate to Windows, you may ask. Well, it’s all down to digitalonly products. The whole P.T. issue has highlighted the fragility of software that’s only distributed digitally and controlled by a company. Should that company, in this case Konami, wish to do so, it can remove a whole program from the market, effectively erasing it from existence. Now, this isn’t something we see Microsoft doing with Windows, of course, but it still begs the question: what if?
Imagine if Microsoft had already taken this route with Windows 7 or even XP. Those people who clung, and still do, to their favourite OS could be forced to upgrade if Microsoft stopped the corresponding cloud service. After all, that software rests on Microsoft’s servers, and you’re just renting it; you don’t actually own the program. Microsoft could legally remove it, making it unavailable to you, and you’d have no choice but to upgrade. Simply not owning a physical disc or even a copy on a recovery drive could mean users in future will have very limited options when it comes to upgrading, instead being forced to move on, whether they like it or not.
This also calls into question Microsoft’s near monopoly on the OS market. Although there are alternatives such as Linux, which we mentioned earlier, it’s not as though Windows PC users can easily call another software provider for a better quote, should they dislike the pricing of the package or find the software unsuitable. If you use Windows on a PC, you’re pretty much stuck, so Microsoft knows it has a huge user base under its thumb, which only makes the subscription-based route more worrying.
Will It Work?
Should Microsoft go ahead with a possible subscription service for Windows, with a yearly charge required for users to ‘rent’ a licence and receive the latest updates, will it be a move that will work? Will Windows remain to be a successful operating system and continue to dominate the market? Or will users finally be pushed too far and turn to alternatives? No one can know for sure, of course, but we can make some educated guesses using past examples.
The big question here is money and if Microsoft really will begin to charge monthly or yearly fees. Simply moving the OS to a cloud-based service doesn’t mean it’ll be a subscription service; it could still be a one-off payment as it is now. But that raises the question of whether people will pay for it.
Well, they certainly won’t want to, even if a lower monthly price means the OS is more affordable in the short term, and as long as older version of Windows still work, many won’t. Just as so many PC users already stick stubbornly to their favourite versions of Windows, even as far back as Windows 98 and prior in some cases, so too will people remain on the standard Windows 10 or even 8.1 if they so wish.
Microsoft will be well aware of this, of course, and further steps to entice new users will be taken, such as those already taken to force users to upgrade to Windows 8, like discontinuing support for Windows XP. If a user is technically proficient and able to support their own PC and older OS, they’ll likely continue to do so and stick with an older OS. Taken as a percentage of the whole Windows market, however, this is a relatively small portion, so Microsoft knows it has a lot of customers who would have no choice but to upgrade to the new service.
Power users who require the latest updates for compatibility, such as gamers, would also be in a sticky situation. Plenty can be done to make games run on older hardware, but often new releases need the latest DirectX and other systemspecific functions, so not upgrading would be an issue here too. Games are often the first to make use of new OS technology, not just leaps in hardware.
Moving to another OS for this hobby isn’t really an option either. Games often take a long time to be released for other operating system like Linux, if at all, so those with such pastimes will be left with few options.
Those who don’t game but who still want to be up to date and wish to use new software will have no choice either, especially given the possible subscription nature of OS updates. This software includes security.
We all know that as good as Windows may be, it’s also the target of many attacks, and security holes are constantly being found and patched. In a subscription environment, it would mean you’d have to pay to stay up to date, and if you don’t, you may be running an unsecured system. This is, of course, the case for those who choose to run older versions of the OS, like XP, but at least they have the full OS, owned and operated by themselves. Here you wouldn’t even have that, as the OS wouldn’t technically belong to you. There’s something to be said for the desire people have for actually owning something, be it for a sense of actual, physical property for their money or the security of having a copy on hand regardless of their connectivity status.
In future, Windows may not offer this possibility and will also come with a lack of choice. It could make for an oppressed Windows community and one that, even more so than today, uses the software begrudgingly, owing to a lack of viable options.
A fact we can’t ignore is the likes of Android and iOS offering free updates and whole upgrades for free. Mobile phone users would kick up a storm if they had to pay for such upgrades (which is kind of the case with some phone upgrades), so an online OS charging for the same would be a hard pill for some to swallow.
A possible silver lining is the fact people have claimed that the OS will be shaped by user feedback more than before. This could potentially make the OS a lot more flexible and more geared towards actual change and evolution based on its user base, instead of the vision of a room of software designers who can often take too much pride in their work, resulting in a lack of change.
There’s no denying this could be a good thing, but with such overall control of the market and many past examples of Microsoft not listening or responding to customer feedback (such as Windows 8), this may not be the case. On the contrary, with an online-only subscription model and software that can be altered and even discontinued at any time, Microsoft would be able to dictate the design of the OS even more than ever before.
This could even come into play in terms of contracts and agreements. Just as with many services we pay for these days, such as mobile phones, cable TV and internet, Microsoft could slap minimum contract terms on the OS, meaning you’d be tied into a subscription for the length of the contract. This would mean you’d be stuck with an OS or at least the cost of the subscription, even if you don’t want to use it. Should a change be implemented that you don’t like or want, you’d be stuck with it.
On The Flip Side
Okay, so we have an idea about how bad it could get, but what about the good? Microsoft may not be the evil, scheming company many see it as. A move to a cloud-based service could actually be a good thing for many.
For one, having just a single OS, without the occasional need to upgrade to a whole new system could be much more convenient. As Windows will no longer be numbered or released in traditional, major versions, the one copy of Windows you run will always be the same, only updated on a regular basis, with new features added as and when they’re available. This would also make the system more secure in some ways, and if there is a subscription service, updates would be a higher priority, as they’d be paid for, instead of being free roll-outs, as they are now.
The upheaval new versions of Windows can cause, such as software or driver compatibility problems, could be eradicated, as the OS will stay essentially the same, evolving in a more fluid and constant manner. This could be a major benefit for software and hardware developers.
It’s also important to note that not everyone believes a cloud-based Windows would even be subscription-based. Microsoft has denied this before, and even now it’s still not entirely clear what this future may be. If there’s no charge, other than a one-off licence, a lot of the possible problems people have wouldn’t be all that important.
The XP Effect
Although a cloud-based Windows, one that doesn’t push out major versions every couple of years, could be good in some ways, it also comes with many downsides, chief of these being possible added costs and subscriptions and the lack of control the customer has. It’s clear from the feedback you can see online that the move would not be popular with the public, but how many big changes that Microsoft has made in the last few years have been?
From Microsoft’s point of view, it also has to contend with the user mindset of older is often better. As we said earlier, there are many users, even today, who use older versions of Windows and don’t mind doing so, even if they’re not secure and won’t run the very latest software. Faced with the possibility of a subscription and no physical disc, this would surely have little effect but to galvanise this resolve.
Windows 8 proved that big changes are really not welcomed by a large portion of PC users, and as big as we may have considered Windows 8’s changes to be, they pale in comparison to the differences that would come with a cloud OS, not to mention the requirement for an internet connection. No matter what Microsoft thinks, there are still plenty of people without a reliable internet connection or any form of connection whatsoever, and in these cases, a cloud version of Windows is simply not an option, meaning Microsoft would lose customers by default.
Until Microsoft officially outlines any possible plans for future version of Windows, in clear black and white, there’s going to be more and more speculation. This kind of speculation rarely leads to people considering good things, hence the overwhelming concern people have over the future of Windows. Until then, we’ll have to see how Windows 10 performs.