Let's Kill the OS Upgrade Disc

Life Would Be Easier if We Paid for Ongoing OS Upgrades the Way We Pay for Other Digital Assets - By Subscription

(CNET)  I love upgrades. But I hate upgrade discs and upgrade pricing. Let's find a way to do away with both, or at least make the upgrade transaction a bit cleaner.

Operating System Upgrades

The reason I'm writing this column won't be a surprise to anyone one who follows technology: Windows 7. I bought the upgrade disc (on the pre-order special price). When it arrived, I started the upgrade process for my Vista desktop. Knowing that the disc was licensed only to upgrade an existing Windows installation, I pressed the big button for a "Custom" installation and the disc set up my computer more-or-less cleanly with Windows 7. What I really wanted to do was re-format my hard drive and start from a blank slate on my computer, but I was afraid to do that since I thought the disc would see that as a non-upgrade install and not work.

Eventually, I did it anyway, thanks in part to the confidence I got from other users who had found ways to install an upgrade disc to a fresh PC. I re-installed Windows 7 on the computer and asked the installer to format the disc first. It did; it installed Windows 7; and two days later I nervously entered my license key for Windows to authorize itself - which it did, no problems. I didn't have to resort to any hacks. Hats off to Microsoft for doing what it should have.

But my fear about the upgrade did cause me some nerves, and is also the reason I did the "custom" or semi-clean upgrade in the first place, which turned out to be a waste of valuable time.

I'm also peeved that I had to pay for this upgrade. Wasn't running Vista for two years payment enough? That OS was patched and upgraded numerous times while I was running it, at no cost to me. Windows 7, while a better experience, is still clearly Vista with problems fixed and an improved interface. I don't feel I should have to pay for it again.

Then there's OS X Snow Leopard, another upgrade I paid for. Sure, it was only $29, but what did I get? Nothing that's made a tangible difference in my Mac experience. My Macbook runs very well now. It ran very well before I did the upgrade, too. There are nice new features, but they're incremental.

How many times can operating system vendors charge users for offering the same fundamental benefit on the hardware that they already own?

Here's what I propose: No more OS upgrade pricing. Vendors, make your money for each new machine that runs your OS, either up front when the OS is installed on the machine (easy for Apple, which makes 99.99 percent of the machines that run the Apple OS), or by letting customers subscribe to operating system upgrades as an ongoing service. The OS subscription model is probably a better bet for business customers on the Windows side. On OS X, it could be part of Apple Care. When users retire a machine, they can end the subscription and get a pro-rated portion of their money back.

So much of what you pay for with an OS is ongoing maintenance and security updates anyway. I don't see how a reasonable subscription fee would be a stopper for reasonable users, assuming the total cost for the subscription was about the same as the cost for buying the operating system license outright.

It's time to recognize that the Webware, or software-as-a-service model, can work for installed software, especially now that we've become accustomed to paying subscription fees for almost every digital asset we use (Web apps, mobile phones, cable TV boxes, multiplayer games). We need ongoing vendor support for an OS anyway, so why not level out the expense?

Sure, OS makers don't get the big revenue spike when they ship a major new version. But they do get a predictable revenue stream, and as machines age and people replace them, and as new machines are built and bought, they can still make enough money. And market forces would (I would hope) keep prices competitive.

If we end up paying more for our OSes, I will be first in line to tar and feather myself.

Application Upgrades

There's another form of upgrade that I find vexing: the major app upgrade. I'm looking at Microsoft again here, with its Office upgrades, but also at Adobe and many other software vendors that offer upgrades at retail for existing users of their products.

These upgrade prices are often so low in comparison to new-user prices that they encourage users to find workarounds, legal and not, to get the deals. One co-worker, for example, once acquired Photoshop by buying an upgrade version online, and a leftover, older version at a local computer store, just so he could install the older version and upgrade it. Legal? Sure. Ridiculous? That, too. With new-user pricing for major apps being so high, it's no wonder that people will go to lengths to get the cheaper upgrade path . . . and then be stuck with having to install two apps to do the job of one.

Here's a better idea: Sell software at a reasonable price. And take the upgrades off the shelves. Instead, offer upgrades to apps exclusively from within the apps themselves, to current users of the apps, and deliver the code over the Net. Users might pay the same for major software upgrades, but the upgrade discs won't be floating around telling new users that they're being taking for a ride when they want to buy the app for the first time. Hopefully this could help vendors actually lower prices and get their apps in the hands of more customers.

I was surprised to hear from a Microsoft exec that the issue with in-place full version upgrades is more technical than economic. Chris Bryant, director of Office Product Management, told me that building an upgrade path into an app requires a clear vision of the future of the app so the upgrade framework will work (which doesn't quite explain how major service pack upgrades are possible). The reason I expected to hear - that retailers wouldn't benefit from the upgrades - he said didn't necessarily hold, since Microsoft has methods to track who sold an installation of the software first, and can credit that seller for revenues from in-place upgrades.

These are just a few ideas, and I'm aware they're far from perfect solutions. But upgrade discs cause consumers confusion. There are ways to give users and companies the same benefits in cleaner packages.

[curtis41]

Yes, Linux is a good alternative, free, and getting very easy to install and use. CentOS is available free for business use and is only about a month behind the Red Hat version. I personally got very tired of beta testing Windows commercial releases, that ran slower and slower with each release. My sense is it past time to consider MAC for graphics, Linux for home and business, and Windows for Solitaire.

[barbaram99]

I am running Vista, I will not down load IE8. Nope. Vista uses IE7. I use the boxes to type a word in. I went to Vista as MS Anna. I use the Speaking Clock. It is not part of the OS. Vista uses MS Anna. XP uses MS Sam. I have no plans to move to Win 7. Iam told it is faster than Vista. xp is good if ye can stand Sam. I am a legally blind person in my 50s.

[rafterman1]

Subscriptions are only useful when you are doing it several times a year, or even once a year. But patches are free and full upgrades to OS's happen what, once every 4-5 years? A subscription is pointless for the consumer and only benefits the OS developer.

[ToolMangler1]

I agree Raft (Hi Howahya?)
I don't want subscriptions, they can leave you without an OS if you don't renew them every (whatever). Keep making upgrades available (and optional) when they are truly needed. Vista wasn't needed, Win 7 Is needed.
Every time a "New OS" hits the market, bigger (not better) computer Processors and RAM are required to run them. I want to see a slide back from Massive to minimal, Win XP Pro the newer versions are the best I have seen from Microsoft. People keep touting "Mac" as being virus free, (not so) but if Microsoft were to dissapear and Mac was king, The Hackers would riddle it just like they did with Microsoft.

[gman1951]

Sorry folks; I hate to burst everyones bubble but I don't think Win7 is any better that Vista! In fact, I put it in the same category as Millenium!!! I just got the full install dvd last weekend {Win 7 Pro 64 bit} and spent the better part of the day getting it set up, which went well but then behold, you have to use it day after day! The biggest problem is internet explorer freezing up when you try to close it. Also on some web sites you can click on a link and it does not do any thing. Another problem I have is they got rid of "Search" in all of the window panes bummer; I use to use that a lot. This and a few small glitches I have found, I wish I would have stayed with XP Pro. Thant was flawless as long as I used it for 6 + years. The only problem I had with it was when I installed IE8 {which is part of Win7].
Good luck Micrsoft! I used to be a computer builder/reseller and was a Microsoft system builder but I am really glad I am out of the headache track now!

[ToolMangler1]

I guess that experiences differ with the installation.
I am running XP Pro (IE 8) on 5 Machines right now with no problems. I gutted each install to the Items I would be accessing the most and ripped out all bloatware the first day.
I am running Vista Premium SP2 on two Laptops (also gutted and trimmed) and they are running 'kinda ok' with (IE 7). I have Win 7 Pro right now (not installed yet) because I am waiting for my 'free' upgrade copys (win 7 home premium) to arrive from HP. Once it is here I will upgrade the laptops to 7 premium then upgrade 7 Pro over that.. Then I will see if 7 is as Good as Microsoft says it is..
(wish me luck)

[thesevenveils]

Wait there is a better solution already available. FREE OPERATING SYSTEM SOFTWARE. That's right, Sun Solaris and Linux operating systems are both free. And so are their upgrades. And their innovations are what both Apple and Microsoft Mimic. While 64 bit operating systems for both Apple and Microsoft are relatively new, Both Solaris and Linux have had 64 bit operating systems for better than a decade.

If the great circus owner Barnum were still alive, he'd switch over to selling operating systems. "There is a sucker born every minute".

[ToolMangler1]

The learning curve for the two is much higher than PC (or even Mac)and they are not "Bug Free" either.
Business software is mostly Microsoft based and will remain that way for the near future.

[rf35]

I hate subscriptions. It's like I bought the software and now I have to continue to cough up money every month for the privilege of actually using it?!? That's why I go with prepaid cell phone service...why pay for time I might not use. Especially given the amount of time I spend away from home. It's bad enough that I have to pay for things like the phone, satellite TV, and home Internet that I'm not using for 6 months out of the year, but there's no way around that because the business models are already too solidly established. Maybe if I eventually get into a career or position that allows me to stay home more often, subscriptions wouldn't seem like such a waste. For now, I'll buy what I need and just pay for it once, thank you very much.

[SusanStoHelit]

Win 7 is simply a final fix to Vista - they shouldn't have charged for it. Wouldn't having an OS they can sell, that people aren't hiding from, be enough for them? It's an insult that they charge us for the upgrade, to fix their crappy OS.

[us_1776]

I got off the Microsoft merry-go-round back in 2002. Went to Mac laptops and Linux servers. And every upgrade has been much easier, especially with Linux. The package manager just takes care of it all and presto you're on the new version. And while my cohorts have been cursing at the windows machines we've had nothing but smooth sailing. Best business decision we ever made.

[rwstutler]

Maybe I'm too old at 51, but I do not like, do not use, will not use and can not reccomend the use of subscription services. They are a predatory business model, designed to take money from suckers for providing (virtually) no service at all to most of their subscribers. If I want a tool, I buy it, I don't rent it - same with software.

[us_1776]

Spoken like a true dinosaur. Subscriptions are ten times more convenient and cost less.

[askagain]

I, too, see no sense in subscriptions. To me it is like buying or leasing an automobile. Leasing, in my case, would be a poor choice for a number of factors such as the mileage I drive and the restrictions placed on leasing. Ongoing charges simply enhance the corporate profits on an ongoing basis. Perhaps being a dinosaur has its advantages.

[ToolMangler1]

This dinosaur has been working with electronics since before there were computers, (abacus and adding machines not included). Purchasing something makes it mine, subscibing to it does not. My first computers were "radioshack" breadboards and I was free to make any changes I wanted to.

[jbeckett5]

You could also go to openoffice.org, where the upgrade prices are...uh...much more reasonable. If you haven't seen anything useful come through the pipe in the last four years, you'll be happy.