Windows 8 release date leaked

mathwat said:
But if you want Dx11 you'll have to upgrade, same with windows8 most probable be Dx12 and if you want that you'll have to upgrade again.;)
Click to expand...

But vista has dx11. XP didn't have dx10 because its ancient but modern operating systems like vista and 7 will probably get dx12.

Surely microsoft developing windows more is a good thing? You don't have to buy it.
 
Seems like the first step towards the subscription model they've been parroting on about for years.

Ofc I think people may be quite a bit less resistant to the idea if they keep increasing the pain of anti-piracy (for legitimate users) until a simple log in attached to your subscription account seems like heaven in comparison.
 
Why are people getting up in arms about this?

Microsoft usually release a new OS every 2 years it has been this way for god knows how long, The only reason they had a huge gap between XP & Vista is because of SP2 as csmager has already stated.
 
If they do the introductory pricing like they did with Windows 7, bring it on I say. £45 every now and again isn't going to break the bank. A lot of people wouldn't think twice about dropping that on a game they play for a few months.

And, as people have said, you don't have to upgrade with that frequency. The Windows releases are supported over a number of years and are actually very good value for money.
 
theheyes said:
If they do the introductory pricing like they did with Windows 7, bring it on I say. £45 every now and again isn't going to break the bank. A lot of people wouldn't think twice about dropping that on a game they play for a few months.
Click to expand...

Exactly people buy £40 games which they use for a couple of hours for a month. yet you use an OS constantly for years.

Also as new technology and new ways of using it accelerates you need new OSes to keep up with the hardware. Also due to other OS they need to keep up.
 
Phil2008 said:
I dont see the point MS releasing a OS every 1-2 years, cos it wont be much of a upgrade surely? Its all about money once again:mad:
Click to expand...

But I cpuld say that about ppl changing their systems yearly, whats the point, but ppl do it:eek: I like to get full use out of my systems/upgades before I change them.:D
 
So hopefully that means around the end of the year for Beta testing?:p

The 2 year cycle is a good amount of time IMO, enough to get some decent new features in there but not too much for the OS to become stale (XP this majorly!). As for Microsoft doing it to make loads of money, yes, however the people upgrading from other versions of windows is pretty rare in the "real world". The vast majority of licences (probably 95%) are bought attached to a new PC or for business use, neither of which really give any extra to MS.

People on this forum that actually upgrade their own PC's with new OS's are in the minority and probably don't make microsoft much money in the scheme of things.

The real question is, what new features will be in it?

panda_uk said:
I think with OS X gaining a momentum windows can't afford to go backwards, it has to be on par or even better os x now.
Click to expand...

I don't think Microsoft have any problem with OSX gaining too much ground (maybe up to around 15% at it's peak) unless Apple release it to other system builders, which will never happen. They do need to worry about Chrome OS I think, especially for cheaper home systems.
 
ConceptBoz said:
If they were to lower the price or make it so every 2 eyars a new os but only every 4/6 is a "must have" upgrade so say.
Click to expand...

Not sure I really understand what you are saying there but Windows 7 is actually pretty damn cheap for what it does. £30 for students, £50 for pre-orders, around £80 now?

Bearing in mind the amount people spend on hardware over a 2 year period I think Windows offers exceptional value especially when you compare it to the cost of Windows in the past. Take Win2k which was pretty much a must-have upgrade, the cheapest edition of that was Pro which cost a fortune, £200 or something like that.

If Windows 8 does come out next year with pricing similar to W7 then I'll certainly be in the market for it. Works out quite nicely as I'll probably be due a reformat or maybe even an upgrade by then.
 
Mammalian said:
anyone else feel like ms seem cater more for the lower end user then the higher end?
Click to expand...

Which is absolutely how it should be from a business perspective. Mass market appeal is how they can make their money, don't forget that the vast majority of PCs and Laptops sold come with Windows pre-installed, so you need to cater for these 'lower end users'. Selling licenses to OEMs must make them a fortune and they would be crazy to focus on anything else.

Plus one could argue that they have different products for the "higher end" users i.e. Windows Server 2008/2012. Windows 7, and presumably 8, is very much a 'Consumer' OS.
 
HangTime said:
Which is absolutely how it should be from a business perspective. Mass market appeal is how they can make their money, don't forget that the vast majority of PCs and Laptops sold come with Windows pre-installed, so you need to cater for these 'lower end users'. Selling licenses to OEMs must make them a fortune and they would be crazy to focus on anything else.

Plus one could argue that they have different products for the "higher end" users i.e. Windows Server 2008/2012. Windows 7, and presumably 8, is very much a 'Consumer' OS.
Click to expand...

meh. imo they should focus on making it more advanced so the higher end users like it and recommend it as the one to go with for to the lower end users. i'm not saying it isn't good for higher end, just feel like a few of the more "advanced" features are still missing, presumbly because they're spending so much time on making it simple and more secure. i feel firefox is more advanced then ie and will always recommend that browser to anyone.

one of the issues with new windows is people say why should i bother? if the higher end users see no reason to bother this'll be all the talk and the lower end users will do as they're told. thats how i felt it was with vista, i don't know anyone who bought vista simply because they were told it's no good from the higher end users.
 
Mammalian said:
i pray so much that windows 8 has proper multi monitor support. i bloody hate how bad it is.

anyone else feel like ms seem cater more for the lower end user then the higher end?
Click to expand...

What particular issues are you having with multi-monitors? I don't have any 2+ monitor setups, but I do have to deal with projectors all the time and find the process has improved a lot from XP to Vista and from Vista to W7.
 
Mammalian said:
meh. imo they should focus on making it more advanced so the higher end users like it and recommend it as the one to go with for to the lower end users. i'm not saying it isn't good for higher end, just feel like a few of the more "advanced" features are still missing, presumbly because they're spending so much time on making it simple and more secure. i feel firefox is more advanced then ie and will always recommend that browser to anyone.

one of the issues with new windows is people say why should i bother? if the higher end users see no reason to bother this'll be all the talk and the lower end users will do as they're told. thats how i felt it was with vista, i don't know anyone who bought vista simply because they were told it's no good from the higher end users.
Click to expand...
I guess by 'higher end user' you mean someone whose level of cluelessness is marginally above the norm then :p
 
randal24 said:
Why do we need Windows 8? What revolutionary architecture change is going to prompt another release of Windows?

Why can't MS just get it right again like they did with XP, extended the support and development cycle to create a stable and well established OS?
Click to expand...

Because a new OS every few years a) means Windows isn't left behind for ages like it was with XP, and b) earns them far more money.
 
Because a new OS every few years a) means Windows isn't left behind for ages like it was with XP, and b) earns them far more money.
Click to expand...


Why send out free updates, when you can release an new Operating System, and get paid for it.
 
TheVoice said:
Because a new OS every few years a) means Windows isn't left behind for ages like it was with XP, and b) earns them far more money.
Click to expand...

Why does it earn them far more money? The vast majority of sales are done through either pre installed computers or businesses, neither of which will change that much even if MS sold a new version everyfew months. Most people don't buy a new PC because it has a new operating system and most people don't upgrade their OS either, they get a new one when they buy a new PC, businesses will mostly not deal with upgrades anyway and only upgrade when they need to, most having volume licencing agreements and MSDN subscriptions so won't pay ny difference anyway.

The only benefit directly to do with money MS do get is the few percent that do actually upgrade their OS, which TBH is a tiny part of their cash flow. The reason they do upgrade however is to provide the latest OS for sale against their competition (Apple and Linux).

A perfect example is XP, with the massive gap between its release and the release of Vista, Apple took advantage of that and released about 4 new versions of their OS steaming ahead of windows. MS have now caught up with Vista and certainly W7 and now Apple sales are dropping/slowing again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom