3 ms·

Crazy prediction- they announce Windows 9 here. My thinking? 1) In order to compete with iOS, OSX and Android, Windows has to move to a yearly release schedul

Crazy prediction- they announce Windows 9 here. My thinking? 1) In order to compete with iOS, OSX and Android, Windows has to move to a yearly release schedule. 2) Rather than sell boxed copies of Windows for $119 every 3 years, why not sell an upgrade from the previous version for $40 every one year? 3) Only supporting upgrades from the previous version would push a steeper upgrade curve, which allows developers to target the newer features (as it is now, Windows developers have to wait eons to leverage new features). 4) Windows Phone team was able to do it. Normally I'd say that Microsoft is too slow to adapt, but the Windows Phone team was able to do it, so I won't count out the Windows 8 team. So, why announce Windows 9 at Build? The current $40 Win8 upgrade (from XP, Vista, Win7) expires January 31st. My guess is that Microsoft wants to get everyone on board to Windows 8 then do upgrades only from Win8 to Win9. To do this, they need to announce Win 9 before the upgrade to Win 8 expires- tell everyone to upgrade ASAP or they'll have to pay full price for Win9. It's just a hunch though. If not Build, then CES. But my understanding is that they're not participating in CES anymore.

aik 14y ago
Odd. 1. As a developer I feel that would be a disincentive for me to start developing for Win8 when Win9 is in the pipeline just a few months away. Which one do I actually develop for? 2. Win8 is unproven. I couldn't imagine Win9 would be in a stable enough conceptual stage for it to make sense for them to announce it. They haven't even received wide consumer feedback on Win8 yet and so many things are still up in the air with the OEMs it seems. If anything it could be Win8.5 -- some cool new additions but 90% of the foundation is the same.
- randomfool 14y ago
  An 8 SP1 release is definitely a strong possibility (but not as fun to theorize!). I'd say that the largest hole in my theory is that Microsoft has fairly high support standards- something like supporting the OS for 10 years after release. If they release a new version every year then that makes patching and support an absolute nightmare. Service Packs since they are free do not (AFAIK) extend the support life of the product. I disagree with the developer aspect- you target what customers have, but keep an eye on what's coming up. Same thing goes for iOS and OSX developers. As it is now with the Windows ecosystem, it takes eons after the OS is released to actually have enough traction to make sense targeting it.
rkwz 14y ago
>Rather than sell boxed copies of Windows for $119 every 3 years, why not sell an upgrade from the previous version for $40 every one year? But would people actually upgrade? I think for the general population the current OS is "good enough", why would they pay $40 to break something that works perfectly? (Non-techies _hate_ updates) >In order to compete with iOS, OSX and Android, Windows has to move to a yearly release schedule. Maybe they'll just update the "metro" portions every year? Just the UI while keeping everything underneath the same?
- randomfool 14y ago
  >But would people actually upgrade? Yeah, that's the question. Only supporting upgrades from the previous version puts the pressure on- want Win9 but don't care about Win8? Well, if you upgrade to Win8 for $40 then Win9 is another $40 upgrade. Otherwise it's gonna be $120 to go straight to Win9. Also- the $40 number is just based on the current Win8 upgrade price.
- Argorak 14y ago
  I am not sure whether non-techies hate updates. What they hate are _update pains_. And those are larger when you update your software every few years and not all 300 days. The biggest problem for Microsoft is that they serve the business market as well, where every update has to be checked for compatibility, but that can be solved by long term service releases. I am not sure whether the parent is right, but I wouldn't rule it out.
xradionut 14y ago
They don't have to announce any new products. If you look at the current Microsoft ecosystem, there are a huge number of product releases happening now; Windows 8, Server 2012, VS 2012, Powershell 3.0, etc... If you are in a Windows development shop or corp, there's an insane amount of new material to evaluate this year. Very little sleep for some over the next several months.
podperson 14y ago
The windows phone team would be more impressive if they supported existing models.

aik 14y ago

Odd. 1. As a developer I feel that would be a disincentive for me to start developing for Win8 when Win9 is in the pipeline just a few months away. Which one do I actually develop for? 2. Win8 is unproven. I couldn't imagine Win9 would be in a stable enough conceptual stage for it to make sense for them to announce it. They haven't even received wide consumer feedback on Win8 yet and so many things are still up in the air with the OEMs it seems. If anything it could be Win8.5 -- some cool new additions but 90% of the foundation is the same.

randomfool 14y ago
An 8 SP1 release is definitely a strong possibility (but not as fun to theorize!). I'd say that the largest hole in my theory is that Microsoft has fairly high support standards- something like supporting the OS for 10 years after release. If they release a new version every year then that makes patching and support an absolute nightmare. Service Packs since they are free do not (AFAIK) extend the support life of the product. I disagree with the developer aspect- you target what customers have, but keep an eye on what's coming up. Same thing goes for iOS and OSX developers. As it is now with the Windows ecosystem, it takes eons after the OS is released to actually have enough traction to make sense targeting it.

rkwz 14y ago

>Rather than sell boxed copies of Windows for $119 every 3 years, why not sell an upgrade from the previous version for $40 every one year? But would people actually upgrade? I think for the general population the current OS is "good enough", why would they pay $40 to break something that works perfectly? (Non-techies _hate_ updates) >In order to compete with iOS, OSX and Android, Windows has to move to a yearly release schedule. Maybe they'll just update the "metro" portions every year? Just the UI while keeping everything underneath the same?

randomfool 14y ago
>But would people actually upgrade? Yeah, that's the question. Only supporting upgrades from the previous version puts the pressure on- want Win9 but don't care about Win8? Well, if you upgrade to Win8 for $40 then Win9 is another $40 upgrade. Otherwise it's gonna be $120 to go straight to Win9. Also- the $40 number is just based on the current Win8 upgrade price.
Argorak 14y ago
I am not sure whether non-techies hate updates. What they hate are _update pains_. And those are larger when you update your software every few years and not all 300 days. The biggest problem for Microsoft is that they serve the business market as well, where every update has to be checked for compatibility, but that can be solved by long term service releases. I am not sure whether the parent is right, but I wouldn't rule it out.

xradionut 14y ago

They don't have to announce any new products. If you look at the current Microsoft ecosystem, there are a huge number of product releases happening now; Windows 8, Server 2012, VS 2012, Powershell 3.0, etc... If you are in a Windows development shop or corp, there's an insane amount of new material to evaluate this year. Very little sleep for some over the next several months.

podperson 14y ago

The windows phone team would be more impressive if they supported existing models.