|
If this Becomes the Standard many years down the Road..... I could not hold back my anger.... I am getting angry just thinking about that possibility.
Just read this piece and you will see why..
By way of example, the application posits a situation involving three "bundles" of applications and performance: office, gaming, and browsing.
"The office bundle may include word-processing and spreadsheet applications, medium graphics performance and two of three processor cores," the document reads. "The gaming bundle may include no productivity applications but may include 3D graphics support and three of three processor cores. The browsing bundle may include no productivity applications, medium graphics performance and high-speed network interface."
"Charging for the various bundles may be by bundle and by duration. For example, the office bundle may be $1.00 [68 pence] per hour, the gaming bundle may be $1.25 per hour and the browsing bundle may be $0.80 per hour. The usage charges may be abstracted to 'units/hour' to make currency conversions simpler. Alternatively, a bundle may incur a one-time charge that is operable until changed or for a fixed-usage period," the document reads.
Here is the Whole article..
Microsoft outlines vision of pay-as-you-go computing
I hope this will never become the standard for PCs... Paying as you use would be the Death of the PC..
And Microsoft has the balls in the article to state this will be good for the Consumer...Even though later on it states per-use model of computing would probably increase the cost of ownership over the PC's lifetime.
*Holding back anger.....failing*
So is that retrograde in effect?
Does this mean Mackintosh will become the Pc everyone will buy rather than end up paying a monthly fee to use Microsoft computers?
I'm hoping that this is only one of those trial balloons that the marketing arms of corporations float out to gauge reaction and quickly scrap the idea when the see how indescribably ANGRY their customer base becomes. If they did do this I can't see how they could ever be successful. Between the legitimate competition and all the hackers and pirates out there I can't see why anybody would willingly participate in the pay as you go scheme.
It's always dangerous when the corporate bean counters are in charge of product design.
Like so many failed Microsoft ideas of the past, this turd will never fly.
Linux is becoming very user friendly. Just saying.
~wry smile~ Isn't Bill rich enough already?
Linux is becoming very user friendly. Just saying.The Idea is is to have a Pay Per use for the PC.... Having Linux on it will still make it a PC.
Correct, having Linux on your computer will still make it a Personal Computer.
PC is not synonymous with Microsoft, it is a generic term for a computer that you personally own as opposed to a mainframe, server, or terminal. If your computer does not have a Microsoft product like MS Windows on it then there is no way Microsoft can try to charge you since you are not using their product.
|
Linux is becoming very user friendly. Just saying.The Idea is is to have a Pay Per use for the PC.... Having Linux on it will still make it a PC.
AS I understand it, this model will only apply in low-cost Microsoft-based hardware. There's nothing preventing you from buying a third-party clone PC and installing Linux (or ol' Win95 for that matter). You wouldn't get the Microsoft subsidy for the hardware but you wouldn't need to pay the monthly fee either. I would never pay for such a service from Microsoft but I can see how people on a very low budget might want to get a virtually free PC and pay per usage...
|
|
Linux is becoming very user friendly. Just saying.The Idea is is to have a Pay Per use for the PC.... Having Linux on it will still make it a PC.
Correct, having Linux on your computer will still make it a Personal Computer.
PC is not synonymous with Microsoft, it is a generic term for a computer that you personally own as opposed to a mainframe, server, or terminal. If your computer does not have a Microsoft product like MS Windows on it then there is no way Microsoft can try to charge you since you are not using their product.
I don't think their goal is to charge Consumers directly.. But to charge PC makers for use in Microsoft patent of the Idea.
They could never enforce this idea on the Consumer alone since they are not a PC maker..Only hope to convince the PC makers to use this idea.
|
The deal is though that design is taking a 360 and going back to the mainframe idea. and Microsoft is not on the leading edge of this, but google is. with apps like google docs and the rapant use of those services it is farcing a change in the market and I see this as Microsoft just testing the waters to see where it is headed.
|
Even if this crazy idea just happens to actually work, i believe it'll only apply for out-of-the-box PC manufacturers like Dell, HP, and the like. I don't see how it'll work if you, say, build your own computer. Personally I hope it never works in the first place, they don't need another way to have their hands in my wallet.
never will i ever use this.
If you want to see what a pay-per-use lifestyle would be like, take a look at Phillip K Dick's Ubik. Great little story. Funny, but not 'funny ha-ha', more like 'funny uh-oh'.
|
|
Even if this crazy idea just happens to actually work, i believe it'll only apply for out-of-the-box PC manufacturers like Dell, HP, and the like. I don't see how it'll work if you, say, build your own computer. Personally I hope it never works in the first place, they don't need another way to have their hands in my wallet.
Well instead of offering you Microsoft Office they put the service online and you have to log in a pay for access to the services. Cheaper up frontmore expensive for the consumer in the long run.
~wry smile~ Isn't Bill rich enough already?Since Microsoft is not a PC maker,
My guess they hope to convince the PC makers to start a Pay Per use Program, while paying Microsoft fees for using their Patent.
They already have pay as you go for PCs, its called renting. There is no way Microsoft can patent a pay as you go scheme for hardware: for their software sure, but not for the actual parts that make up your PC.
The main issue I see with this is what happens to your documents once you stop paying for the productivity bundle? Do they disappear? Do they stop working? Can I transfer them to another computer that doesn't use pay as you go?
This whole idea sounds like a really bad attempt at product differentiation and a great example of price discrimination.
So if this were implimented, does this mean I would have to pay a onging fee (hourly, daily, monthly, whatever) to use my microsoft word program, play spider solitare or chess on my computer, make my own screensaver, type of gaming information, play my i-tunes etc.? It would no longer be a....you paid for the program now you can use it, instead I essentially rent the service for a few hours a day?
|
|
Even if this crazy idea just happens to actually work, i believe it'll only apply for out-of-the-box PC manufacturers like Dell, HP, and the like. I don't see how it'll work if you, say, build your own computer. Personally I hope it never works in the first place, they don't need another way to have their hands in my wallet.Well instead of offering you Microsoft Office they put the service online and you have to log in a pay for access to the services. Cheaper up frontmore expensive for the consumer in the long run.
Oh, i see. I don't see how they could make money off it with OpenOffice and Google Docs as their competition.
|
|
Even if this crazy idea just happens to actually work, i believe it'll only apply for out-of-the-box PC manufacturers like Dell, HP, and the like. I don't see how it'll work if you, say, build your own computer. Personally I hope it never works in the first place, they don't need another way to have their hands in my wallet.Well instead of offering you Microsoft Office they put the service online and you have to log in a pay for access to the services. Cheaper up frontmore expensive for the consumer in the long run.
True.. one of the main reason I hate Pay per use... I am getting very upset with the Pay per bandwidth that is becoming popular with ISPs
but this is not what this Patent in talking about..
The idea of the patent is the Pay per use for the Hardware.. With prices based on what the Hardware can do... Office use.. Gaming use... Etc..
Since Microsoft is not a PC maker they just own the Idea behind the patent.. And would want PC makers to use this idea so they can charge the PC makers money for using their patent.
|
|
~wry smile~ Isn't Bill rich enough already?Since Microsoft is not a PC maker,
My guess they hope to convince the PC makers to start a Pay Per use Program, while paying Microsoft fees for using their Patent.
They already have pay as you go for PCs, its called renting. There is no way Microsoft can patent a pay as you go scheme for hardware: for their software sure, but not for the actual parts that make up your PC.
Actually they can.. and they did.. read the article..I am not sure how they distinguish it from renting but here you go..
U.S. patent application number 20080319910, published on Christmas Day, details Microsoft's vision of a situation where a "standard model" of PC is given away or heavily subsidized by someone in the supply chain. The end user then pays to use the computer, with charges based on both the length of usage time and the performance levels utilized, along with a "one-time charge."
Microsoft notes in the application that the end user could end up paying more for the computer, compared with the one-off cost entailed in the existing PC business model, but argues the user would benefit by having a PC with an extended "useful life."
|
Even if this crazy idea just happens to actually work, i believe it'll only apply for out-of-the-box PC manufacturers like Dell, HP, and the like. I don't see how it'll work if you, say, build your own computer. Personally I hope it never works in the first place, they don't need another way to have their hands in my wallet.Well instead of offering you Microsoft Office they put the service online and you have to log in a pay for access to the services. Cheaper up frontmore expensive for the consumer in the long run.
Except that many small businesses don't have internet from where they are using the PC, so
1. they won't be able to access the software
2. how will the company know how much time you spent on the computer?
Edit: #2 is valid from a hardware prospective
so @ 1.04 an hour.... our company's computers have to be on 24/7... thats $170 a week... and the computers we have are only $300 computers... 2 weeks at that price would pay for the entire computer
|
|
Oh, i see. I don't see how they could make money off it with OpenOffice and Google Docs as their competition.Even if this crazy idea just happens to actually work, i believe it'll only apply for out-of-the-box PC manufacturers like Dell, HP, and the like. I don't see how it'll work if you, say, build your own computer. Personally I hope it never works in the first place, they don't need another way to have their hands in my wallet.Well instead of offering you Microsoft Office they put the service online and you have to log in a pay for access to the services. Cheaper up frontmore expensive for the consumer in the long run.
Quite easily actually, they have the lionshare of the market and businesses as their main source of revenue, if the fee is modest and the product good they can have a huge source of income on a daily basis. Think W.O.W. and you have a good idea of what they are thinking in terms of gaming. They sell you a computer that is designed as a link to their "mainframe" it allows a much higher performance capability if you pay on an hourly format, especially with DOCSIS 3.0 right around the corner and unheard of speeds for Cable service, then you have access to the programs they have on their server, Microsoft's version of wow or something else similar, you have the gaming community well if not covered at least paying more into your company then before, and with the business apps big company's will pay you a nice fee daily weekly or whatever and why? Because the bare bones computer will be much cheaper and easier to produce and you get what you want and only pay for the service you are using and only when you use it.
|
|
1. they won't be able to access the software2. how will the company know how much time you spent on the computer?
1. Since this is not about Software that does not matter
2. Good question on that though.. My guess they would have something on it that would allow that..
I think more small business are connected to the internet then you think..
even if they are not using the internet for business use.
|
|
2. how will the company know how much time you spent on the computer?
2. Good question on that though.. My guess they would have something on it that would allow that..
I think more small business are connected to the internet then you think..
it depends on the business... our FLGS has a computer for signs and to make the comic order, he then puts it on a key drive and does the actual ordering from home. This way he has a back up, and doesn't have to pay 2 DSL/Cable internet fees. Many businesses around us are the same way.
also see my edit above
|
|
Most likely this is an Idea that won't fly... But just the thought of it..makes me upset..
Not to confuse with this patent since it deals with the PC and not the software.. but..
Microsoft originally was going to charge a Subscription fee for XP *Hence the original idea of having to connect the PC to the internet with XP to authorize it*, but realized early on that it would not fly so the killed that idea.
|
|
1. Since this is not about Software that does not matter
it's actually both See this better description of the model
So if this were implimented, does this mean I would have to pay a onging fee (hourly, daily, monthly, whatever) to use my microsoft word program, play spider solitare or chess on my computer, make my own screensaver, type of gaming information, play my i-tunes etc.? It would no longer be a....you paid for the program now you can use it, instead I essentially rent the service for a few hours a day?
I heard that fear when Win XP was launched. Microsoft doesn't have the same market dominance they had then (and they didn't dominate the market then). Even though 90%-ish of the computers run Windows, both Mac and Linux are growing. Rapidly. Hell, Google's got an OS out now. If Microsoft starts charging to use a PC, it'll kill them. Fast. Very Fast.
|
|
If Microsoft starts charging to use a PC, it'll kill them. Fast. Very Fast.
I very much doubt that. It all depends on the dynamics that are introduced.
1) how much does it cost both on an operational level and a start up level. Some companies and people are willing to pay more monthly to have a top of the line whatever and spend more per month then they should.2) what the other companies are doing as well, if this works you may see Google and Apple do something similar
3) Technologies that are coming out will either make this feasible and warranted or will show that this is not a very good way to do it and will can the entire idea, such as the Wall-Mart $300 computers that have gone the way of the dodo
Yea, I'd jump to linux if Microsoft did that.
i'm using xp still but yeah i would find another OS fast.
At $1/hour, the computer I use for work would cost $1920/year (assuming 4 weeks vacation). And I use mostly MS Office for my work. Home computers would be even higher, since they'd be running graphics intensive stuff (and why on earth would you when you can use your Wii for free after you purchased it). Servers, would probably be in the neighborhood of 4-5 grand.
Yea, if Microsoft actually did this, I'd buy a Mac.