Linux

John T
I reckon it's very unlikely that MS will start charging a yearly fee for Windows. That would leave them in the fairly impossible position of having the only mass market operating system that wasn't free.

They have announced that some time ago, so that probably will come.
 
As OP has correctly mentioned, they are already bound Windows to the hardware. So as a normal user you can not upgrade your PC without sending (ridiculous!) money to MS. I think "subscription" model will be accepted by most users, you can upgrade PC again, probably "home" package (several home computers) will have special price. They have big experience with Office 365, they know what they are doing.
 
Note that is not going to affect corporate market, they have (and will have) site wide licenses. Small PC building companies are happy now and will be happy with subscription. End users are forced to buy complete PCs instead of upgrades. With subscription, I guess the price of Windows 365 is going to be rather small for them, so "initial price" will be more attractive.
 
One example:
* you can buy Intel TV stick with Window 10 for 120 €
* official Windows 10 (not OEM) for upgraded/self build PC is 135,00 €
Does it make sense? But they are doing that, already now.
 
With "Spy" function I disagree. They have no reason to spy, they want to collect some info but you can switch that off. All "passwords & co" information is for sharing between YOUR devices, Google/Apple are doing that. And many people are happy (system restore without explicit backup, etc.). But again, you can switch that off.
 
With all respect to Linux (I am working with it full time), the experience for end users can not be compared with Windows 10... Linux can become "dangerous" for OS X, but MS is going its own route and till now they was always successful.
 

I'm not interested in rumours, myself. It's rumoured that there's a dinosaur at the bottom of Loch Ness. That link is a really old story, and MS refuted it ages ago.

John T
I'm not interested in rumours, myself. It's rumoured that there's a dinosaur at the bottom of Loch Ness.

...

John T
Blimey. Excellent work.

You write that about something you have not tried
 
Seriously. It is hard to find modern software which does not require online registration and subscription. For the first the explanation is "piracy" (while I can not remember a protection which was not hacked within days, in case the program is really good...), for the second it is a "quality of service, always up to date, etc.". The reality is simple: keep (legal) users under control, use as much information as possible to sell them something and have a possibility to tune the price when needed. MS could not do this now (with Windows). But they have prepared everything to make it possible in the (not so far) future. The Internet is filled with "Windows spy me" (which is not exactly true and MS is well prepared to defend) while relatively quite about the fact that users LOOSE there ENDLESS licenses when upgrading. Even CW is on board, for example with free "improvements" patch for Z3TA2 after which you need internet to register. And you compare that with dinosaur...
 
Back to Linux. That is what keep them all from pushing users too hard. Fortunately for them, Linux is just a kernel. "Big players" have not found one point of interest in the supplementary packages. In fact they are "fighting" even inside the kernel (like Google vs the reset, as I understand mostly coming from ARM haters inside radical part of free software community...)

Call me crazy... but I don't get the big deal if Microsoft moves to monthly/yearly fee (assuming it's reasonable).

• You don't own your copy of Windows (rather a license to use it)
• If you keep your OS current, you're paying each time

As long as the monthly/yearly cost isn't a significant change from what we've had... I see no practical difference.
 
There's no debating that the beauty of Linux is the ability to customize and keep things super lean.
However, that's a double-edge sword.
Windows is *super* easy to install on just about any hardware.
This broad base compatibility is what makes Windows "bloated".
If you add that same broad case compatibility to Linux, then you lose the "super lean" aspect.
Installing/configuring/maintaining a lean install of Linux is beyond most novice users.
Ever tried to configure a Hackintosh with OSX?  It can certainly be done... but it's a PITA compared to installing Win10.  

azslow3
When CW has asked "do you use Netflix?" many forum mates started to speculate about Sonar subscription. We have a "membership" now.

since being available via steam, sonar (ccc, non-steam) will now have an "early access" branch; interestingly, steam deploys/updates are always later than via ccc, and it has even been noted in that forum that this is to "iron out" any issues that became apparent during the "direct delivery" (ccc)
/fwiw
 

A)
 

Windows was beyond most people at one time, and DOS before that.

The difference is in the delivery... Apple and Microsoft recognize this, and maybe even some Linux folks do, but without the  central 'authority' to manage that delivery it all goes "wonky" - that's a tech term<G>!

I started the software engineer portion of my career on Sun workstations using their version of Unix. I later became a consultant and had to learn the HP and IBM varients. And then along came Linux and I figured in for a penny...

Early attempts at Linux system management could be confusing to downright painful, even for a dinosaur like me. Recent adventures suggest that they are really close to having it all together, if only they knew how to tell everyone about it.

Thing is, as Jim points out, the more user friendly it becomes, and the more hardware it supports, the more it loses some of the implied advantages.

I really like pretty much all the package managers, for example, but I don't want to have to be fluent in all of them. And there is hardware, and software that I do not wish to abandon, heck, there are a couple of Mac only tools I'm still considering...

Choosing a computer based on the OS makes sense for a handful of folks, choosing a computer for the hardware makes less, choosing a computer for the company (and yes, that's Apple bashing, but hey, they are really good at it) makes good sense for some.

Most of us pick the applications we want to use, and the peripherals we want to use, and then we hope that they all work with one platform!

I'd love to see all my favorite tools support Linux - not just for the  "free" OS (although that is attractive) but more for some of the research related tools that are only available on Unix. And for the ability to build a system just for music production. If you want to get an idea of what's involved in customizing a Linux distro for music production check out Planet CCRMA!
 
Yup, I'd love to see it, but I'm way too old to think there is a good business case for that... pity!

bapuIn America ABC, NBC and CBS was the last time there was room for 3 major players battling it out.
 
Microsoft and Apple simply will not allow a 3rd major (consumer) OS to emerge.

I would agree, right up to the part where it is 2016, and a lot of the rules have changed... so while neither MS nor Apple will allow a third competitor, I'm not sure they could prevent it from happening. The internet giveth, and the internet taketh away. However, the entire *nix community has been disorganized since Berkeley requested the tapes from AT&T way back in 1974. And I don't imagine that will change...

gswitzPlanet CCRMA is new to me. Have you used it?

I used it for quite a while, and once you get past that initial build it is quite easy to maintain. But then curiosity got the better of me (you'd think I'd learn?) and started auditioning some of the other solutions. Somewhere along the way I wasn't paying attention and I ended up losing my Planet CCRMA installation, or hosing it up beyond what I felt like repairing.

gswitzI've been using Ubuntu studio for a while and really like it. I don't want to have to work at the build though. I like the single install of everything.

Funny, that's what I'm using right now, but just till I get off my lazy duff and re-install Planet CCRMA. Although I must admit there aren't as many differences as once existed.

Too many good audio/music production distros is not the worst problem one can have!

My general feeling about running a Linux DAW is, basically, Ain't Nobody Got Time For That.
 
I'm something of a Linux admirer myself, and am, in fact, in the midst of planning a central controller widget for my mobile recording rig that's based on a Raspberry PI running Linux, and it's going to be great. It'll control a Behringer X32 core mixer, and also, via the GPIO, control the transport on a Fostex hard disk recorder. It's going to get set up one time, to do one thing, and it's going to do that one thing until it keels over.
 
Linux is great for making single purpose boxes like that. It's why it owns so much of the server market. Machines that fire up and run, and just do their one job.
 
But I can't help myself laughing when someone goes, "yeah, it's really easy to run a linux DAW, you just read this colossal white paper from a bunch of academics and then this package and that package, and elevated user privilege this, and jack configuration that, and so on and so forth".
 
I've got nothing against that stuff, but I really don't want to be doing that amount of tinkering. I've got stuff to do, and that stuff relates to recording and mixing, not to messing about with computer config. I run Windows with exactly zero customisations, and I run Sonar with exactly one: the playback buffer setting. And you know, when I installed Windows 10, it took under an hour, and when the computer re-started, things like active logins to forums were still working. And I didn't have to fire up a command line at any point. Microsoft doesn't get enough credit for how well they do this.
 
Linux is very clever, and Ardour is a fine program, but the overall ecosystem and overall friction of just getting the things to work make little sense for serious audio production. Too limited hardware support, too limited on plug in options, too much work to do whenever there's an update to either OS or apps.
 

This doesn't mean I don't use Sonar. I do. And I'm current. But if I'm leaving home, I'm probably going to use Linux not Windows.