XPost: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general   
   From: G6JPG-255@255soft.uk   
      
   In message ,   
   james@nospam.com writes:   
   []   
   >You said "You must have more than one cash cow generating revenue   
   >at a time."   
   >   
   >So if that is true, why does MS only offer one operating system?   
      
   Because previous ones weren't making _enough_ money. Since MS are in   
   enough of a monopoly position that they _can_ dictate what is sold with   
   _new_ computers, their accounting is based around that; as Paul said,   
   it's a good idea to have a second string, so I _presume_ they're working   
   on that (though I have no idea what it might be): but W7 is _not_ it.   
   Since no _new_ W7s (or 8s) are being sold (by MS anyway), it is a _cost_   
   to them - support costs.   
   >   
   >I know that I am not the only person who dont like Windows 10 or even   
   >Windows 8. Actually, I am elderly and almost all elderly people I know,   
   >who use computers, dont want Windows 10. In fact almost all of these   
   >people are still using XP, or Windows 7.   
      
   That's it: _still using_. So not _buying_. So not really of _interest_   
   to MS.   
   >   
   >Windows 10 appeals to the young crowd, the same kids who can never have   
   >enough buttons on their smartphones, or even a radio of food processor.   
   >We grew up with simple things. A radio had 2 knobs, volume and tuning.   
   >Appliances had an on and off switch and maybe a few speeds. Heck, my   
   [saw]   
   >features.   
      
   Yes, but this "young crowd" do actually buy things (in this case,   
   computers). You (and I) don't, or at least not enough to have much   
   impact.   
   >   
   >Unless MS is deaf and refused to listen to their users, I know they have   
      
   They listen to their _customers_, to some extent; _users_ less so. And   
   _new_ customers don't really know what they want: they may hear oldies   
   like us explain what's wrong with 10, but are likely to dismiss it as   
   just moaning oldies. So they buy what's offered.   
      
   >heard people, especially older people complaining about all the bloat in   
   >Windows 8 and 10. I dont want it, my generation dont (for the most part)   
   >want it.   
      
   But wouldn't pay for anything anyway, at least in enough quantity to be   
   of any interest.   
      
   > I'm sticking with XP, and may try Windows 7 at some point, but   
      
   (7's not bad: it can, especially with Classic Shell or the other one, be   
   made to look enough like XP for most purposes. And 7 is now more or less   
   in the position XP was not too long ago.)   
      
   >if the day comes when I cant use those, I will probably quit using   
   >computers.   
      
   (a) I've been hearing that sort of threat for many years - it isn't   
   really on: the world has evolved to the point that you'd be at   
   considerable inconvenience if you did. (Things that catered for the   
   non-computerate, such as banks and shops, have withered.) (b) even if   
   you did, you represent a tiny part of the _buying_ (as opposed to   
   _using_) public.   
   >   
   >If MS really cared and wanted more revenue, they would offer two or more   
   >OSs.  Why is that so hard for them to comprehend?   
      
   _You_ aren't comprehending that the users of the older OSs don't   
   actually represent much _revenue_.   
   >   
   >Heck, I dont use linux, but I did give it a fair try. Linux is just the   
   >opposite, there are TOO MANY choices....   
   >   
   >MS needs to get off their high horse and realize that their latest OS is   
   >not suitable for everyone.   
   But it's suitable for _enough_ of those who actually _buy_ computers   
   that they're not _that_ worried.   
   > It's NOT their greatest thing. In fact if I   
   >was to give MS 1 to 10 gold stars for each of their operating systems   
   >since the beginning of Windows, I'd only give then a HIGH rating for XP   
   >and also Windows98se. Anything before Win98 was pretty lousy, anything   
   >after XP seems to go down in my opinion..... I think MS reached their   
   >peak in perfection from 1998 to 2001.   
   >   
   I agree with you. But we don't spend enough to be significant. Be   
   honest, would you spend a lot on a new W7 (or XP) computer if you found   
   one?   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   5   
   --   
   J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf   
      
   "The wish of the lazy to allow unsupervised access [to the internet] to their   
   children should not reduce all adults browsing to the level of suitability for   
   a   
   five-year-old." Yaman Akdeniz, quoted in Inter//face (The Times, 1999-2-10):   
   p12   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)