The only way for this to happen and still be viable for Microsoft is to
charge for non-security related updates. Looking at it another way, MS can't
support an infrastructure without revenues and if their primary focus is
simply an ongoing process of updating of an existing OS, they can't make any
Having said that, there might be a way for your suggestion to work, but I'm
not a programmer so what I suggest may not be feasible from a programming
Here goes...Microsoft can simply charge for updates not related to security.
For instance, Windows Media Player, Windows Movie Maker, Windows Defender,
etc. could all be "for purchase" add-ons. Any cosmetic updates could be
released and sold as a package similar to say, Windowblinds. They could call
the program: Windows A La Carte. Then you'd only need one OS core and allow
customers to have the ability to selectively build their own custom OS. You
could have server modules, home entertainment modules, office productivity
This may or may not entail MS scrapping the Windows project as it is today
and code a new OS from scratch that allows for the aforementioned (and also
core level) change capabilities, as well as allow MS a more modular OS
platform for future development. Again, I'm not a programmer so I don't know
the possibilities. I do however know that MS cannot maintain viablity
without some sort of revenue stream. In fact, for the same reasons we hate
MS -- they have too much $$$ and control -- are the same reasons we love
them -- free add-ons, copius updates and ubiquity.
"Casey K." <Casey K.@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> When Microsoft comes out with a new OS, they usually seem to split into a
> large group that works on the next OS and a slightly smaller one that
> security and compatibility issues and things for their old OS.
> But people don't just use an OS simply for security only. We use
> applications daily for education or business, like Office, but we also
> relaxing sometimes by just playing around with things like Movie Maker or
> using Microsoft's other more "leisurely" applications.
> But these applications aren't updated like the security is. Yes, we do
> better security, but we would also like updates that give us more features
> for these apps. (ie. new transitions for Movie Maker, better features in
> Paint, etc.) So what I'm saying is that maybe Microsoft shouldn't focus so
> much on making their new OS better, but more on making their OLD OS
> All of these security updates really don't give us any new things to do on
> or Vista, it just gives us a sense of security (which we can't even see
> difference, since it works behind the scenes). Anyone agree?
> This post is a suggestion for Microsoft, and Microsoft responds to the
> suggestions with the most votes. To vote for this suggestion, click the "I
> Agree" button in the message pane. If you do not see the button, follow
> link to open the suggestion in the Microsoft Web-based Newsreader and then
> click "I Agree" in the message pane.