Reply to post: >Am I the only person who sees this as desperation?

>Am I the only person who sees this as desperation?

Nope, you're not the only one.

They've messed up and ended up without the monoculture they so badly need. Not only is the world not all Windows, but not even Windows users are all running a platform which is easily targetable by devs. They broke stuff between versions to force application upgrades, without contemplating what would happen if their strong-arm tactics were ignored. Now they have ended up with multiple incompatible Windows operating systems because they didn't actually give their users a particularly good reason to upgrade except "to stay current."

NT4->XP and XP->W7 were reasonably compelling. A better GUI and better memory capabilities. Do you really need a new OS to implement powershell? Do you really need a new OS to implement an additional GUI which is optional? Don't even get the linux chaps involved here. I run SuSE 32bit in 1.5G RAM and SuSE 64bit with 32G RAM. MythTV, VLC, Mozilla and the OS all work without a problem. No application breakages there.

I know MS wants to earn money, but powershell should really be a base item and a new GUI should not be a cost option. Why? W10 is licensed per device. Change your device, you buy new license. All those non-touchscreen business installs out there don't need it. All the new W10 tablets/phones (stop laughing) will have it pre-licensed. Unless you're a desktop user who bought a stand-alone touchscreen (anyone?) you don't need it. MS admit as such by making W8 (touchscreen OS) upgrades to W10 free. The upshot is, there's still not a great deal which MS can argue makes it worthwhile *for the user* to upgrade from W7->W10. Its great for MS, nice for Devs, but for the user - not so much.