this post was submitted on 30 Oct 2023
620 points (93.2% liked)
Technology
58061 readers
31 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
OS-as-a-service needs to be made illegal, ffs
It makes some sense for business & enterprise stuff, but not for household/consumer computers & devices. That's just rent-seeking and forced obsolescence. There is no good reason a home computer from the past fifteen years should have security patches withheld because the manufacturers want people to throw them away and buy and brand new ones.
I kind of get it, but I feel like even in a b2b context you shouldn't be allowed to charge a subscription for something as low level as the OS.
Now if Microsoft wants to offer paid support subscriptions for business customers (they might already do, I didn't look) that I would be fine with.
Of course, businesses would just pivot in the other direction and speed up the release cycle to every year or two, making smaller and smaller improvements. No system will be perfect. I just hope we get to a better solution than "constant vigilance" eventually, whatever it looks like.
Could you imagine having to pay apple a monthly fee just because you use iOS on their phone?
Or pay Google every month to use android?
Except that you can keep upgrading windows or just install linux and be up to date with the security patches for like 10+ years, your phone runs out of support in like 5-6 years in the best case and then good luck using these banking apps securely.
I would be fine if windows required you to purchase a new OS every 5-6 years. Paying monthly/yearly is bull shit though.
I agree, subscriptions are stupid. But for now I am still using my windows 7 key on windows 11 so they were more than reasonable up until now.
I could see them adding windows as part of Microsoft 365 package they sell to businesses. Companies always had a different policy when it comes to software, that's where most of the software companies make most of their money. It's why piracy was allowed for so long, consumers get used to the software through the pirated version, then they demand it at work which can't use pirated software obviously.
Apple is still releasing security updates for the iPhone 6s… that’s over 8 years of phone updates. https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201222
Sure, but in that case you pay for the OS through the overly inflated price of the device that brings mediocre warranty and pathetic options for repair. It's a tradeoff.
Xbox Live and Playstation Plus: backing slowly out of the room
Paying for a service or product is never going to be illegal. It being an inferior product that the public is made aware of is the only way this shit is gonna change if ever.
What about other products-as-a-service? And on what grounds? I think it's unwise to use/rely on these services, but I'm not sure how they should be regulated. At a minimum your data should be freely exported in bulk on request.
So what do you propose? You buy windows xp and you deserve free maintenance updates while windows 55 is out?
Me when I demand corporations pay people fairly for their work 🤬 Me when I demand free labour in 2045 because I paid 100€ in 2015 😗
Do you understand what software as a service is?
Not wanting software as a service is also not proposing anything like your strawman.
Honestly, please explain.
I know SaaS, but I don't see how that is relevant to Windows 10 and its maintenance. The OS works without requiring an Internet connection, so it's not relying on cloud computing for much of its functionality.
Ending support for an OS is also totally normal, many FOSS OSes do it too. Whether you paid for it initially or not honestly makes little difference, at the end of the day someone else has to expend their own time to fix something for you - some might do so for free, while others want to be paid.
It's relevant to Win11. Win11 is supposed to be going SaaS. So if you want to stay on Windows but don't want your OS to be SaaS....
Edit:
Having said that, it looks like this may not be as much of a lock as I thought. So maybe I'm talking out of my butt.
I'm simultaneously embarrassed by that if so, but also kinda happy that my days of running Windows are so far behind me that I've stopped subconsciously paying attention to MS news enough to be wrong about something like that.
Not wanting software as a service while asking for updates longer than 10 years 🤭
Oh it's you. Hadn't noticed or wouldn't have replied. In that case though, your argument is with the petition, not with the person you replied to. Win11 is to go SaaS so resisting that upgrade makes complete sense.
Anyhow, goodbye now!
Complaining about paying for service while demanding > 10 years of updates is the same issue
Not relevant
Yes updates longer than 10 years without treating os as service and refusing paying is not relevant
Why? Because you're too lazy to try replacements?