New versions of Windows 11 will be released once per year

Digital Life said:

How much you want to bet that in 6 months after Win 11 is released they change their mind and start releasing major updates every 6 months, They changed their mind about Win 10 will last forever now it's going EOL in 4 years.

Click to expand...

I did a few searches about Windows 10 being the last OS and from what I found that statement was never a official statement from MS. IMHO I would rather see the name of the OS change to make it easier for the average user to know what version of Windows they are using. Using build numbers and names like 21H1 or 21H2 is to confusing for the average user. I also think that by changing the name of the OS it helps get the average user excited enough to want to upgrade. As for MS's decision to make a cutoff line for older systems, I'm all for it. Although I'm not sure about their decision of where the cutoff line should be. We need to move forward with both hardware and software. I also feel that due to the economy and the pandemic they should extend support for Windows 10 a few more years past October 2025.

John Pombrio said:

Since Win11 security features are aimed directly at corporate and government systems, a once-a-year upgrade makes sense. Too many hacked systems were due to the lack of installing updates. Making it an annual chore for admin along with security updates pushed to the users means that it is more likely to be done.

Click to expand...

Windows 11 being aimed toward corporate and government systems is great. The problem is that the cost to upgrade is so expensive that most of them are still running Windows 7 or even older OS's.

cereberus said:

So instead of bug being detected 6 months, it now takes a year to fix it. I am all against it.

Click to expand...

I'm sure there will be bug fixes released between new major builds.

Winuser said:

I'm sure there will be bug fixes released between new major builds.

Click to expand...

And I'm sure there will also be some bugs that will grow long white beards, just as has happened in 10 and other Windows editions.

Lol yeah. It's Microsoft, after all.

Bugs that are long in the tooth (and in the beard) are always going to be present.

The same MS that said there would not be another operating system after Win 10, Windows as a service they called it i think. Take anything they say with a big pinch of salt.

JohnMarchant said:

The same MS that said there would not be another operating system after Win 10, Windows as a service they called it i think. Take anything they say with a big pinch of salt.

Click to expand...

I think you might be confusing Windows as a Service (WaaS) with Software as a Service (SaaS) - that is easily done. SaaS was the original idea that is about putting the Operating System in the Cloud infrastructure. WaaS appears a less ambitious specialisation of SaaS, and is happening in Windows 10 and 11. WaaS is all about a new Operating System updated every year or so. SaaS could still happen to Windows, eventually.

iko22 said:

I think you might be confusing Windows as a Service (WaaS) with Software as a Service (SaaS) - that is easily done. SaaS was the original idea that is about putting the Operating System in the Cloud infrastructure. WaaS appears a less ambitious specialisation of SaaS, and is happening in Windows 10 and 11. WaaS is all about a new Operating System updated every year or so. SaaS could still happen to Windows, eventually.

Click to expand...

The entire point of the PC Revolution was to do away with that model, aka the 'mainframe/terminal' model. The idea was to own your own computer and software, and have control over it. Now they're trying to take it back to the 'cloud' (ack!). The Mother of All Regressions. All the better to monetize you! It is depressing that people think it's some new shiny innovation. People who don't remember history etc. etc. etc.

iko22 said:

I think you might be confusing Windows as a Service (WaaS) with Software as a Service (SaaS) - that is easily done. SaaS was the original idea that is about putting the Operating System in the Cloud infrastructure. WaaS appears a less ambitious specialisation of SaaS, and is happening in Windows 10 and 11. WaaS is all about a new Operating System updated every year or so. SaaS could still happen to Windows, eventually.

Click to expand...

Well whatever it is i ain't buying it, oh sorry thats right im not anyway, wow i've found a plus for Windows 11.

JohnMarchant said:

The same MS that said there would not be another operating system after Win 10, Windows as a service they called it i think. Take anything they say with a big pinch of salt.

Click to expand...

I keep reading reading post about MS saying Windows 10 was the last OS released. All of my searches show that it was said by one MS employee and not a official statement from MS.

sgage said:

The entire point of the PC Revolution was to do away with that model, aka the 'mainframe/terminal' model. The idea was to own your own computer and software, and have control over it. Now they're trying to take it back to the 'cloud' (ack!). The Mother of All Regressions. All the better to monetize you! It is depressing that people think it's some new shiny innovation. People who don't remember history etc. etc. etc.

Click to expand...

One never owns the OS or the software. We can only get the rights to use it.

Winuser said:

I keep reading reading post about MS saying Windows 10 was the last OS released. All of my searches show that it was said by one MS employee and not a official statement from MS.

Click to expand...

I was said by one MS employee, once, in one press conference. But no, to the perpetually outraged, it was a Solemn Vow for Eternity. And it won't matter how many times anyone debunks it. Everyone 'knows' MS promised that Win10 was the last Windows. This is the age we live in. Awash in 'information', bereft of knowing.

Winuser said:

One never owns the OS or the software. We can only get the rights to use it.

Click to expand...

Not always, but often the case. But you know what I meant.

Winuser said:

One never owns the OS or the software. We can only get the rights to use it.

Click to expand...

That's of course perfectly correct, but still irrelevant for the discussion.

A PC is not a dumb terminal. A terminal is useless without the connection to the mainframe. A PC works perfectly fine without internet. Yes, internet is important and there are many services that don't function without it, but nevertheless internet access is not the main purpose of a PC. Perhaps there are people, maybe lots of people, who mainly use their computers to access the internet and use the corresponding services. These people don't really need a computer and their needs can be satisfied by a terminal, which in modern practice is "cloud computing". Other people, including myself, actually need a computer and not a "gateway to the internet". In that case the concept of "cloud OS" makes no sense whatsoever - I should be able to move files between my drives without any network connection and that's what the OS is for. If that works, then I have a local OS, not a cloud OS.

On my PC I decide which software to install, which software to run, etc. That's what people mean when they say "we own our software". Technically you are correct, but the legal meaning of "ownership" is quite different from the colloquial use. It's rather similar to games and movies. If I buy a disk (with a game or a movie), I own that disk. I can do anything I want with this disk, I can even sell it. That satisfies the colloquial "ownership" idea and since the point of the disk is the movie (or the game, or software, whatever content), people make no distinction and say "I own that movie". Of course, by buying the disk you don't gain any property rights to the content, you never "own the movie", but apart from the lawyers and studios, the point is moot. The only real consequence of that is that you cannot make copies of that movie and sell them or otherwise distribute. That's piracy and that's illegal. But that's not what we are talking about here.

Setting the piracy issue aside, I am not interested in using terminals and I am not interested in subscription software. I want to buy a product which works and I want to be able to use it until I change my mind without having to pay anything else for it. I don't believe anybody will be able to convince me to do otherwise.

Given a very loose schedule W10 was on, once or twice a year, really doesn't matter. First couple of years it was more or less at specified time (although Spring and Fall each last 3 months), later on it was "When we feel like it". Pushing a large and significant update just because of some arbitrary date just doesn't make sense.
I'd rather have CU and Quality updates as they are ready and tested in Insider builds and emergency updates when occasion demands.
When ready just bring on Windows 12 and that's it.

sgage said:

I was said by one MS employee, once, in one press conference. But no, to the perpetually outraged, it was a Solemn Vow for Eternity. And it won't matter how many times anyone debunks it. Everyone 'knows' MS promised that Win10 was the last Windows. This is the age we live in. Awash in 'information', bereft of knowing.

Click to expand...

so what?
did you reallly took MS's word for that or did you truly believe that Win10 was the "last" Windows?

I didn't think so, deep down inside.

it's like this old saying from a line from Darth Vader, "I am altering the deal..."

erpster4 said:

so what?
did you reallly took MS's word for that or did you truly believe that Win10 was the "last" Windows?

I didn't think so, deep down inside.

it's like this old saying from a line from Darth Vader, "I am altering the deal..."

Click to expand...

I for one thought that it was a official statement form MS. After I did a few searches I found it was a statement from one employee and not a official statement from MS. I also thought it was a stupid idea to never change the name of the OS. IMHO a new OS should have a new name.

sgage said:

The entire point of the PC Revolution was to do away with that model, aka the 'mainframe/terminal' model. The idea was to own your own computer and software, and have control over it. Now they're trying to take it back to the 'cloud' (ack!). The Mother of All Regressions. All the better to monetize you! It is depressing that people think it's some new shiny innovation. People who don't remember history etc. etc. etc.

Click to expand...

Mainframes and terminals were connected by cabling and the terminals just connected to a local central processing resource within a computing facility or campus. So it is locally centralized.
With SaaS, you load software from the cloud to PCs that have their own processing resources - so it is distributed software and decentralized processing.
Big difference between what PC's do now and SaaS. Now, you download and install software and do updates to it when available while with SaaS you download software in real-time, on demand, and some of the computing might not be done locally.

Now where is the data stored? That depends on the application. I am wary of storing my data on the cloud where it is more of a target for ransom or hacking attacks. I just got notice from a cancer center where I was treated about 17 years ago that they had a data breach and personal information such as SSN, DOB, medical and treatment history, etc. was exposed. 17 years ago! Digital footprints can have a long life!

It reminds me of when I first started building PCs.
Two so far.
I thought that I would use all the best stuff with good specs, and that would future proof it.
Not true !
My machines are well over the spec that I use, and are still going to do what I need for a number of years to come.
They are about 5 years old already.

With W10, Microsoft seem have gone into a similar thought mode, thinking that they could allow for everything, and just update.

About to be repeated with W11 ?

Trouble is, in the Computer world everything is moving so fast nobody can keep up.
Not even Microsoft.

geneo said:

Mainframes and terminals were connected by cabling and the terminals just connected to a local central processing resource within a computing facility or campus. So it is locally centralized.
With SaaS, you load software from the cloud to PCs that have their own processing resources - so it is distributed software and decentralized processing.
Big difference between what PC's do now and SaaS. Now, you download and install software and do updates to it when available while with SaaS you download software in real-time, on demand, and some of the computing might not be done locally.

Click to expand...

For me it's the same thing. I don't care whether the connection to the server is local cabling or internet and whether the server is in the basement or on another continent. The point is, sever the connection and the terminal is useless. That's not what I need, whatever the reasoning of those who are in favor of that model. I reiterate, I need a computer that is fully functioning without any network connection. Internet is a useful feature, but it's not the reason to have a computer in my home. If that were the case, a netbook or an iPad would suffice.