Windows 8

Frenzied Wombat

Potato del Grande
14,730
31,802
Whenever someone asks me why we went with SCCM "instead of" WSUS, I tell it like this:

Picture the average pizza delivery guy. He has a Ford Fiesta or something, and he drives around with one pizza at a time, delivering it the way everyone expects he would. Everything is working fine, deliveries are on time, the pizza's always hot like it should be, and everyone generally gets what they ordered. Or, at least, whatever went into the car with the delivery guy, anyway (back end issues aren't his fault).

All of a sudden, this one place starts ordering pizza, but not a single pizza at a time. They want 1000 pizzas at a time, and they want all of the pizzas to be different. But in the end, the pizzas are still all made of the same stuff, so the same delivery guy is forced to abandon his Fiesta, and he now delivers the pizzas in a Mack truck. Same pizzas, same ingredients, but 1000 of them at a time, and this is where the fun starts. Because it's just one guy loading all the pizzas into the truck, they're cold when he finally arrives, he has no idea where anything is in the truck, and it's anyone's guess as to who gets which pizza, whether they got what they wanted, whether all the pizza made it in to the truck in the first place or whether that really even is pizza in the box in the first place, because the delivery guy is so swamped dealing with the sheer volume of it all that he's forgotten what he was doing really well in the Fiesta in the first place.

That, my friends, is SCCM. Fuck that entire product as a patching mechanism. It manages to take WSUS and make it so overly complicated that you lose sight of the trees, and hopefully, you get what you want from the forest. Eventually.
Haha, this is spot on. We tried to integrated our WSUS server with SCCM and it basically morphed into a horrendous 8-headed hydra of endless bugs and weird behavior.

WSUS is the way to go all the way, with some 3rd party patching mechanism (we use Lumension) to deal with Adobe/Java patching.
 

Lenas

Trump's Staff
7,488
2,226
Nadella seems more interested with making Microsoft's footprint even larger and getting them back in the public's good graces. Universal applications and free updates seem like the right way to go about it.
 

The Ancient_sl

shitlord
7,386
16
Yeah I understand that, but they aren't gonna to make money on Surface Pro and Xbone sales. OS licensing is their bread and butter, no?

Edit: Actually with a little bit of research MS Office is now their bread and butter.
 

Frenzied Wombat

Potato del Grande
14,730
31,802
Yeah I understand that, but they aren't gonna to make money on Surface Pro and Xbone sales. OS licensing is their bread and butter, no?

Edit: Actually with a little bit of research MS Office is now their bread and butter.
Microsoft's bread and butter these days is Office at the consumer level, and server products at the corporate level. "Software Assurance" is actually their cash cow, which is pretty much rammed down your throat if you're at the SMB level or above.
 

a_skeleton_03

<Banned>
29,948
29,762
That free upgrade is for the first year also and I think there won't be a Windows 11 very soon. We only have 10 because they screwed up on 8.
 

Mist

Eeyore Enthusiast
<Gold Donor>
30,481
22,343
Yeah I understand that, but they aren't gonna to make money on Surface Pro and Xbone sales. OS licensing is their bread and butter, no?

Edit: Actually with a little bit of research MS Office is now their bread and butter.
Exchange server and shit like that is their real bread and butter.

Surface revenues have been great from what I've been reading.
 

The Ancient_sl

shitlord
7,386
16
Exchange server and shit like that is their real bread and butter.

Surface revenues have been great from what I've been reading.
Like I said, I did some research and MS Office is their bread and butter. This is obviously both Consumer and Commerical Licenses. I'd imagine the popularity of cloud based computing means that their Server division is on the rise. It doesn't matter how great Surface's sell or XBones, those revenue streams are drops in the bucket.
 

brekk

Dancing Dino Superstar
<Bronze Donator>
2,191
1,746
No catch, they're playing catch up to Apple's cohesive OS platform. They don't want another XP debacle, supporting software that's 12 years old.
 

Mist

Eeyore Enthusiast
<Gold Donor>
30,481
22,343
Whats the catch? We all know how much these slimy MF'ers like money...
They've been making OS upgrades cheap for early adopters if you knew where to look for many years now. They're just making them free this time.

I think they realize how much supporting legacy OSes costs them in the long run.
 

a_skeleton_03

<Banned>
29,948
29,762
They've been making OS upgrades cheap for early adopters if you knew where to look for many years now. They're just making them free this time.

I think they realize how much supporting legacy OSes costs them in the long run.
Not the issue at all. They can release Windows 10 for $1000 a license tonight and then tomorrow announce EOL for Windows 8 is on Valentines Day and there is nothing we can do about it. Supporting a "legacy" OS is a courtesy.
 

Mist

Eeyore Enthusiast
<Gold Donor>
30,481
22,343
Clearly you don't understand the economic concept of cost.

For instance, opportunity cost: They can leave developers supporting old OSes or they can put them on new projects making new things to sell you.
 

a_skeleton_03

<Banned>
29,948
29,762
Clearly you don't understand the economic concept of cost.

For instance, opportunity cost: They can leave developers supporting old OSes or they can put them on new projects making new things to sell you.
It costs more to have developers do Windows 10 rather than sit back and let Windows 8 coast ....

DEVELOPERS don't support old software.
 

Mist

Eeyore Enthusiast
<Gold Donor>
30,481
22,343
It costs more to have developers do Windows 10 rather than sit back and let Windows 8 coast ....

DEVELOPERS don't support old software.
Every patch needs to bedevelopedby someone, tested by someone, etc.

It actually costs a lot, in a lot of different ways, to support multiple older operating systems.

If they can get as many people and organizations as possible onto the new platform, as quickly as possible, they can start selling them NEW services that are designed for the new platform as soon as possible.

Microsoft knows they need to get people excited about Windows as a platform again, and the way to do that is to get everyone running the latest and greatest so they can deliver new services meant for that platform.
 

a_skeleton_03

<Banned>
29,948
29,762
You don't need patches for something you marked and announced as EOL ...

There are a million good reasons for MS doing this Windows 10 and doing it the way they are doing it and as a free upgrade (for a year) but legacy OS support is not one of them.
 

Mist

Eeyore Enthusiast
<Gold Donor>
30,481
22,343
Like I said 'cost' has a lot of possible definitions in economic terms.

Not being able to sell your clients on new services because they're still on the old platform is a 'cost' of them still being on the old platform.
 

radditsu

Silver Knight of the Realm
4,676
826
I am full time surface 3 now. I am going to load 10 on my old desktop the next time I have a chance. I usually never bother with betas...but i may make an exception.