> Just get Windows 10 right Satya. It's an operating system FFS, not rocket science.
No, no it isn't an OS.
It is a set of application libraries. An OS provides an interface between applications and software. An OS provides an abstraction of the hardware so that applications don't need to be programmed for each hardware instance. Windows does this, but for MS, it is mostly user-space application libraries which allow MS to drive version upgrades.
Saying Windows is an OS, is like saying the purpose of commercial TV is to show dramas, comedies and documentaries. It isn't. The purpose of TV is to make profit, which it does by selling advertising and/or subscriptions. The programmes are just the vehicle.
Exchange Server needs Powershell does it? But, doesn't MS write powershell? Powershell is a shell, not the OS, if Exchange needs it, why doesn't the company include it? The OS does things like memory allocation, CPU scheduling etc, I'd be surprised if Exchange needs a specific CPU scheduler or memory allocation mechanism. So if Exchange needs powershell, MS has bundled half the application into the OS and half into the Exchange license and charges you for both. Then it runs an alternating upgrade program between the "OS" part of the application and the licensed part of the application, upgrading half the app at a time; forcing applications to expire because the "OS" has been upgraded.
Its Friday - I shouldn't rant so much....
The subs will pull in more than the previous licensing model would. I'm not so sure it will pull in as much as the previous licensing model has done, in the past though. The reason being that software has matured, like hardware. People are quite happy with Office 2010 and probably wouldn't bother upgrading if left to their own devices. Subs get around that problem. The question then becomes, how many (companies) will jump ship from Office altogether? The answer is, "not many" in the short term. The danger for MS is that if people do jump from Office, they have almost certainly gone, not to Symphony or Corel or Groupwise, but to open-source, which is likely to spread through the organisation's infrastructure. Even if the customer is paying for open-source support, it is likely to open up a world of options and skunkworks projects that MS doesn't want. Unlike other commercial offerings, FLOSS software can be rolled out in parallel with MS, without the license cost barrier that makes companies nervous about switching commercial providers.
If I were a large organisation, I'd be throwing money at some selected FLOSS projects, asking for specific features which I feel I need. More integration between LibreOffice and Sharepoint perhaps, some simple rsync-explorer/dolphin/file manager integration; simple version control integration with automated version increments and a purge facility. It would be nice to see some larger consumer companies take on open source responsibilities rather than just wait around for things to happen.