Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Current Events' started by amg99, Dec 29, 2008.
Earlier News: via CNET
Update: via Electronista
Strange concept if you ask me...Are some people that poor that we must pay-per-use our computers? At least Microsoft has some sort of vision.
I didn't read the whole thing, but looks like MS seeking a new way to generate revenue streams from users use patterns. WTF!
They will be poor after they pay MS every time they have to use their computer...
Wow, I would have probably spent 5 cents reading that article under the new model. No thanks Microsoft.
I fail to see how this model would account for hardware obsolescence. Would the PC have to be taken back to a supplier-authorized service center to get a better video card and/or more physical memory? This would be a pain for some users, especially serious gamers who continually strive for the best video performance for the newest games.
That, and what about all those Windows Updates? Does a reboot required by a MS-originated security patch have a cost?
I echo BornAgainMac's sentiments. No thanks.
I think Microsoft should spend more energy on trying to fix the nightmare that is Vista instead of dreaming up new schemes to screw people over.
Being that one of my primary uses for the computer is to kill time, paying per time used really wouldn't work out for me...I'm not about to pay money for all the time I spend doodling around reading news and IM'ing people, feeling that I could save money by not, for example, bothering to finish reading a New York Times article.
Does MS really expect people to pony up a per-minute use fee to play solitaire on Windows?
I see things like this advertised on TV all the time. All you need is a valid checking account and $29.95 a week or somesuch for a sufficient length of time that you end up paying about $1500 for a machine that probably costs $500 at best.
Anyhow, good to see Microsoft has finally sunk so low as to try to get a handle on the rent-to-own market demographic.
Others are looking at this as well.
Imagine being able to use expensive vertical software packages while only paying a user/rental fee instead of purchasing the actual application for much more.
Of course from Microsoft's perspective, I am sure that it is more of another way to generate a revenue stream.
I mean seriously, how many folks really need upgrade to the latest such as Office 2007 and Vista when Office 2003 and Windows XP are sufficient. This way Microsoft can continue to get revenue.
Isn't that the truth.
PCs are almost commodities these days.