If Microsoft does, I am not using Windows 12, I am going to Ubuntu. I won't even pirate it. I refuse to pay a subscription for an OS, that should be pay once and be done paying.
Sure
But don't expect to get any updates to what you paid for - after all, updates are no longer the same OS
Nobody else could, because it would require Microsoft to agree to something that's against their interests.
LSW, if you will.
> what do you consider is a correct price to pay in advance for all future changes ?
You don't. Outside of security updates, which should never be charged for, you pay for the software as it exists when you buy it. When future changes come around, you buy the upgrade (if you want it).
It's the tried-and-true method of charging for this stuff.
Why shouldn't you be charged for for security updates?
The critical difference is that amortization decreases your cost per unit time with use. More use, better value.
Subscriptions do not work that way. Having to pay $50/year for a 5 year old laptop doesn't excite.
This isn't even necessarily in the vendor's control. For example, Google Chrome just stopped loading TLS encrypted sites on my partner's MacBook this past week and displays a lovely pink banner over every tab saying the OS is no longer supported.
Companies are not held to any standards for support and the amount of support they give varies based on the product. Apple has provided decades of support for some products but considerably less for others because they shared an architecture or platform that was eventually dropped. Google is notorious for just dropped support for products on a whim.
And subscriptions won't fix this problem.
So yes, we exist too.
But, no complaints, linux windows all of it work flawlessly.
Most of my machines are that old or older.
> If you do, let's get serious you're already looking to upgrade in the near future, no?
No. I only look to upgrade if the system stop working or if it can no longer perform as I need it to.