I don't like what MS is doing, either. That's why I picked out that one sentence I replied to. It was the only part I wanted to comment on.

That's true that a lot of other industries have a similar problem. I say similar and not the same because of one thing that's unique to the software industry: it doesn't wear out. You could still run the same software you ran 20 years ago, provided the hardware still works. Speaking strictly of the software and not the hardware, there is absolutely no reason to replace it besides getting new features or bug fixes. So unless they keep coming out with new hooks to get people to upgrade, there's no reason to. If they released Windows 99 that was identical to the last semicolon to Windows 98 (and admitted to it), I doubt many people would buy it just to get the next year's version.

The trouble with adding new features all the time is that software is getting so bloated and most people probably don't use half the features already there. But they have to do something if they want to keep selling. What, I honestly don't know. Stability would be nice, but it seems like a lot of people aren't interested in buying a product that has no new features but is more stable.

I'm not saying that MS is the poor victim here and that the stuff they're pulling doesn't stink. But, I can at least see the problem and why they need to do something different than they have been doing all along.

Michelle

>Same disclaimer for me (as anyone can tell)
>
>Well car makers, refrigerator makers etc ad nauseum all have the same problem, yet that find ways to get along.
>
>Do you think that maybe MS has lost its capability for innovation that has served it so well until now? Do you think that people just might buy upgrades - as they used to - if there was real value in doing so? I think they would.
>Do you think that maybe MS should get used to a little lesser cash-flow, in line with virtually all other companies on the planet? Maybe just do so while they find their innovative capabilities once again? You know, the capabilities that made their products so attractive and "needed" inthe first place.
>
>You know, Doug D. started all this on the basis of my "I don't know. ...maybe it is greed" statement.
>The fact is, I don't know, but I do smell a rat - something that is in the best interests of MS while decidedly not in the best interest of its customers.
>Furthermore, we don't really have the proper outline of how they intend to do this. But I will say that I cannot fathom how they could improve the situation (of software distribution/payment) over today's model with a subscription service.
>
>Cheers
>JimN
>