2 ms·
Or force you (the consumer) to upgrade to newer versions with hostile terms of service and/or applications. It works both ways.
by r9295 3y ago
Or force you (the consumer) to upgrade to newer versions with hostile terms of service and/or applications. It works both ways.
- seeknotfind 3y agoThis is a really negative take. They could also add hostile terms of service at other times or do hostile things. It's about cost and marketing. Windows N+1 will share a majority of code with Windows N. Microsoft would now have to maintain two copies of the code N and N+1. This is added cost. Alternatively Windows could do continuous releases, but this is less fun to market, and users might not like big changes happening many times a year instead of all at once, etc. There are also compatibility challenges for this since behaviors are tagged to such specific versions.
- ebiester 3y agoIt's amazing how nobody complains about this with any other operating system -- at least since Leopard/Snow Leopard (IIRC - that was the one that had major compatibility EOL). The problem isn't the EOL. The problem is that the newer versions of Windows are user-hostile and the alternatives are being retired.
- Guvante 3y agoI was able to disable the annoying programs pretty easily and don't know of any licensing changes. Or is this hypothetical?