The Ad-Supported Operating System 330
An anonymous reader writes "The appearance of an ad-supported operating system is probably not that far off. This article takes a look at some of the finer points behind an OS which is financed with ad views, and more specifically the logic behind a free version of Windows which could make this a reality. There are a few issues which must be resolved first, but with Microsoft refining Windows Live and shifting some of their focus to advertising, many of the pieces seem to be falling into place."
Never in a million years (Score:5, Insightful)
Good Idea but not practical and too annoying (Score:5, Insightful)
Ad-OS is already here (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:I can't wait (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem with an ad-supported operating system is that people expect the computer to work. And when they sit down to do their taxes, balance the check book or write an email they do not want to be hindered with ads about the latest tax, accounting software or email client that is available. Sure, this model may have some people who will do it. Heck, the reason I watch so little TV is because of the ads (and yes I know about Tivo), and the last thing that I want is to be attacked with ads while using the computer; I use the computer when I want to be entertained as is, why would I voluntarily invite it on to my computer? This is just the realization of ad folks that people are starting to spend inordinate amounts of time on the computer and they want to encrouch on where people are spending time. AOL is switching to an ad context, and they are going to offer free service. I think that many people would happily pay for an operating system just to avoid the ads.
Besides how much do you want to bet that an ad-supported OS would make the malware guys overly happy? Think about it. If a malware guy could take over the ad-subsystem on Windows, then the user might not even know it. So instead of getting reputable ads they start getting penis enhancment products and the like.
Re:Never in a million years (Score:5, Insightful)
That would depend on the features of the OS. Linux is free, but I paid for Windows. Why? Several apps I use are available on Windows but not Linux. Therefore, Windows (sadly) has value to me.
This isn't a rebuttal, though. You're right. They've got to answer the 'why bother' question. I probably wouldn't ahve bothered replying except for the "never in a million years" bit in your post.
Re:Ad vs Subscription, but... (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm not sure why you don't understand, it's not like there are plenty of other services out there that stop showing ads when they hit a certain point. The 'exact value' thing is bunk, anyway. If there were an ad-supported OS, part of the income would be re-invested into improving the OS. You see ads in perpetuity, they update the OS in perpetuity. I'm a little surprised that somebody with a GMail account doesn't get this.
Dumbest Article I have ever read (Score:5, Insightful)
This article is touting the ad-supported OS like it will have a million entrants, but who are the players that can go for this? Only 3 realistically, Microsoft, Mac OS X, and a company with their own branded Linux.
An ad supported linux will never take off. The good and free versions are just too numerous and the other trillion reasons that won't work. It will never fly on Mac OS X, that is just too contrary to contemplate. But Microsoft...... why would they want an ad free OS?
Right now, they make a set amount from each sale. An ad supported OS will not only lower that intake, it will not have long term gains from all the people who will patch their OS to fix it from the "crippled" version to the good version. Total loss for MS.
This seems to be just somebody's hair brained scheme to "compete" with google, but how does it compete with Google? It doesn't. Google, if they ever release an OS (I doubt), will supply it over the net while MS here just pushes a reduced cost version off store shelves.
Furthermore, the article states:
Um, no. Home Users already indirectly pay for Microsoft when they purchase a computer. No win for Microsoft there, either in marketshare or revenue. It would not be ideal for internet cafes, as people pay cafes (at least in Europe) to use those computers, so bludgeoning them to death is neither in the interest of the Cafe owner who sells time (and doesn't get any revenue from said ads anyway) nor their customers. In libraries, again, I have to ask why?
I chalk all this nonsense to a slow newsday. I swear, this is the dumbest fad that is making every idiots eyes light up as if this is the best thing since sliced bread. The advertising market is already saturated, people are becoming resistant to advertising in general, and the pie is only so big.
Re:Good Idea but not practical and too annoying (Score:1, Insightful)
Public Terminals (Score:5, Insightful)
The thing is, all the major software makers are desperate to find some sort of subscription or rental model so they can get a guaranteed revenue stream without having to stay on the product improvement treadmill. Improving software is HARD - Vista is a crystal clear example of how hard - which makes it expensive. If a software house can persuade customers to keep giving them money without improving the product, they're on a win.
That's why they're tying software to hardware with product activation and pushing DRM or other methods of artificially obsoleting their products. Almost all of Microsoft's OS sales are with new PCs but even then, your ordinary punter, after paying for the OS for the Nth time, is starting to ask "how many times do I have to pay for this crap? It's barely changed in the past five years, but I still have to fork out the same $$ as I did the first time." Expect to see more of this sort revenue model as software becomes more complex.
What's really needed, of course, is a new way of writing and maintaining software. The programs we use today are essentially bespoke, hand-built items, much the way cars were at the start of the 20th century. The primitive fabrication methods are masked because computer software can be duplicated infinitely without additional cost, but it's still an industry ripe for a new enry Ford to invent the digital equivalent of a production line.
Re:Never in a million years (Score:5, Insightful)
The article didn't consider that many people don't buy Windows - they have it pre-installed. Now, I suppose that hardware manufacturers could sell their computers with an ad-supported Windows for a lower price. And maybe it would catch on, but I doubt it. If the average computer still has something like 1024x768, even if the ads would be text only, they would take screen space. Now, I'm sure most people have no problem of ads taking some of the screen space, but when you start to have ads from the OS, ads from the browser, ads from the IM application etc. there will be a limit. People just have enough.
This idea has also some serious privacy and security implications [slashdot.org]. Will the average user care? Probably not. But if he knows that the operating system was free, he might go on and try out Linux. He won't consider losing money, if he never paid anything for it in the beginning.
Anyway, this ad-biz is getting ridiculous. What's next? Ad-supported games? Oh wait... [slashdot.org]
PS. I downloaded my Windows XP professional ISO for free from Microsoft. What do you mean you can't get legal Windows for free?
Isn't this what Google is becoming? (Score:5, Insightful)
Trying to plug an advertising-driven model into traditional "operating systems" is like trying to glue a Mini-ATX motherboard into a Palm PDA. Some things just don't translate. We have learned to accept Google's ads, because they sit inoccuously in parts of the screen that would be blank otherwise. How can Windows even attempt this?
I don't think Microsoft and Google are competing on the same terms any more, if they ever were. While Microsoft are still selling products that were defined twenty years ago and hit their peak a decade ago, Google is busy reinventing the online world, following its own designs and writing the rules.
Let me give you an example... Office applications. On the one hand, Microsoft is wondering how to provide online access (advertising supported, metered, whatever) to Office. Now, Google are thinking, "in five years' time, people won't want to write documents this way any longer" and they're thinking of how to use the web to create documents, presentations, totally bypassing the Office metaphor (which is ancient, dating to before the days of the IBM PC). The very first microcomputers, running CP/M, ran office applications (WordStar, CalcStar, etc.)
I used to write many documents using Word, then I switched to OpenOffice a few years ago. Today, I edit my documents as text, post them to Wikis, and use text-to-PDF and text-to-HTML conversion tools to produce deliverable output. I don't open OpenOffice any more unless someone sends me a document. The only exception is spreadsheets. I've not yet seen a new online abstraction that replaces spreadsheets, though calculations would be a natural feature to add to wiki systems.
Google gets this, I think.
Re:Never in a million years (Score:5, Insightful)
In essence, so long as they don't actually get in the way then I'm happy with them. As soon as they make a noise, stop me accessing my PC immediately, or sit on top of windows I'm using, then I'd get irritated by them. The key to Google's ad success is that they're easy to ignore. Well, consciously ignore at least, we all still read them even if we don't realise it.
Re:Never in a million years (Score:3, Insightful)
Linux is free, and ad-free.
It's also free [gnu.org], an important distinction. :) It doesn't matter if it's free as in zero-cost, as long as it's free as in the-freedom-to-copy-it-to-your-friends.
Ads are not free! (Score:2, Insightful)
Ads cost brain cells, time, bandwidth, screen space, cache space, mouse clicks. They accelerate carpal tunnel and dimish visual acuity. They undermine asthetics and camoflage the point of the enviroment they are in. This is the same sell as television is free because of the ads. Cable, sattelite, whatever, costs you monthly just so you can watch "free" television rather then "pay" television. WTF? I doubt free windows will come with a free ISP connection. I don't want ads on my screen, piling up in my mailbox, filling my answering machine or blocking the view to the lake. Ads, no matter what or where they are cost you something directly, everytime! A "free" version of windows will most certainly not be free.
Re:Public Terminals (Score:3, Insightful)
You are missing something: Programs are DESIGNS. This is an important point. This is a VERY important point.
Programming is like the DESIGN of the T-Ford, which was never automated. The PRODUCTION of programs has already been automated - it's the compilation and duplication I get when I do "make && make install".
Eivind.
Re:s/windows/google/g (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Never in a million years (Score:3, Insightful)
By that I mean the same people who make life decisions based on television advertising, worry about characters in soap opera's as if they were real people, and think a family outing to macdonalds is a treat (I'm not joking, I know people like that).
In short, the very poorly informed people who have no proper understanding of the consequences will jump at this.
Will that be enough people to allow this to succeed? I don't know about that. All it has to do is break even and the likes of microsoft will keep it going, claiming huge success.
I wouldn't ever have such a system, but I'll probably be forced to use one at some point to send email.
Re:Never in a million years (Score:2, Insightful)
This is getting a bit offtopic, but you know. For me, it is completely free. I live in Finland and we have no tuition fees here. Just apply to any government registered school and don't pay any cent for it. Plus, we get student financial aid from the government about 250 euros per month (320 dollars), which we don't need to pay back. Also, students get financial aid to pay their rent (200 euros per month = 255 dollars, no need to pay back either), as well very beneficial loans backed by the government. If Finnish citizens go abroad as exchange students, the government will pay all tuition fees abroad also.
Of course, all of this is paid by the taxpayers. And I don't currently pay any tax. But someday I will. And honestly, I have no problem that after a couple of years I will pay someone's else's education, because someone already did the same for me. This system has it's flaws, but I think it still might be one of the best on the planet. You can be completely broke and still get to the best schools, if you are smart enough.
Re:Never in a million years (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Never in a million years (Score:3, Insightful)
MSN Messenger is a good example of the ad-supported Windows "problem". Linux users don't use it (they use GAIM or Kopete or some other Linux-friendly messenger.) so they don't get the ads that come with it.
But, MSN Messenger has features that other, Linux-friendly IM clients don't have: webcam support out of the box, audio conversations, games...
The same can be said about the Windows-Linux situation in general. Linux users get a free operating system, with no ads, but they don't get the Windows-only programs that have been developed. A lot of companies have programs made for them that will only function in Windows, so they can't afford to use Linux: their programs wouldn't work. Sure, Linux has wine, but can anyone really say that they can get all windows programs to work perfectly under wine?
Back slightly more on topic, I can see the use of a free Windows. That way, a lot of Linux users who have a dual boot system for Windows games won't have to pay for a/use a pirated copy of Windows, but they can still use Windows legally, and free of charge. This is actually a good thing from Microsoft. As long as they don't force the ads down your throat, I can see the advantages of this.
A free Windows certainly wouldn't bother me; I won't be seeing any ads when I use Windows for the only reason I do use it: games, games and more games. :)
Two Words: (Score:3, Insightful)
Advertisement-riddled Windows (Score:3, Insightful)
Seriously... does anybody think this idea is good? At all?
Re:Never in a million years (Score:5, Insightful)
If crashes, malware, and remote pwnership can't make people switch to a real OS, why should advertising?
I think if Vista came with a USB-controlled cat-o-nine-tails, and you had to take five lashes every morning before you could log in, most people would probably put up with it.
Clippy! (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Never in a million years (Score:3, Insightful)
The two issues are inextricably linked, however. If you get accepted to Ivy League X school based on your grades etc. but can't afford to pay for whatever reason, it's the same as not having been accepted. These students count on financial aid from the institution (and to a lesser degree, other scholarships) to be able to actually make use of the privilege they've earned.
When I applied to college (about 15 years ago now, sheesh) I was accepted at several schools that I could not afford to attend. I was ineligible for financial aid because somehow my parents' income was too high to qualify, but too low to be able to pay outright. Sure, I could have taken out student loans, but unlike the common perception, not everyone can get those. I attended an in-state public university (but even that was close to $10k/year back then, when you figured in room and board. On a related note, our illustrious Republican governor likes to tout his "full tuition" scholarship program for students who score highly on our state standardized testing. What he fails to mention is that out of the ~$15k or so in-state students will pay at one of our state universities, about 3k is tuition, the rest is "fees". The fees are retained by the university, while the tuition is given to the state which then decides how much (if any) they're going to get back in the budget.)
Even with the cultural advantages I've been lucky enough to enjoy (white, middle-class, male, went to a high school without metal detectors, etc) people look down on my degree because it came from "that safety school." (Which, I might add, just recently went to "open enrollment", which is a polite way of saying "if you have a pulse and a high school diploma you're accepted." Thanks guys. I suppose I can use my diploma to patch my drywall now.) Take away those advantages and it's another obstacle to someone looking to pull themselves out of poverty, and we all pay the price for people being unable to lift themselves out of poverty (public assistance, uncompensated medical care, other social problems).
However, this being the United Corporate States of America, any politician who suggests that we use substantial (as opposed to "lip service" level) public money to help the financially challenged (read: minorities, the poor, immigrants, etc) go to college, quickly finds him/herself voted out of office. Helping bright students acheive will have benefits in the long run, but nobody cares about the long run, they care that their taxes don't go up half a percentage point. Public funding of higher education is a loser in this country, and nobody wants to be associated with a loser.
Re:Never in a million years (Score:4, Insightful)
As much as I dislike Windows, it is a real OS -- I wish people would stop with this tripe. Sure, it's deficient and suffers from all of the things you mention. But, there are loads of things for which Linux doesn't have any software to do certain things. And, I don't mean some broken POS 0.11 version of something open source. I mean functioning, supported, commercial software which I can actually use -- like my tax software for example.
Eventually, I decided I needed two machines -- one running XP, and one running my beloved FreeBSD. Because there are just certain things you can only do with a Windows machine. And, quite honestly, my XP box is exceptionally well behaved compared to older versions of Windows. Put it behind a firewall and don't install stupid things on it, and pwnership is a moot point.
*laugh* And, some people might actually prefer it that way, who knows.
At this point, you can guarantee Vista will sell, because of Microsoft's dominance in the market segment. And they will continue to dominate for the forseeable future because it is the only platform most people know, and the only one which many software titles are available on. Apple is pulling some people away, but for many people, Linux (or FreeBSD or whatever) is simply not a viable operating system for what they need to do -- from their perspective, those aren't real operating systems.
Cheers
Re:Never in a million years (Score:2, Insightful)
Also, by your logic there should probably be no state funded education at all in the US (If funding higher education beyond a certain arbitary point is 'socialist' so is all state education funding). Sounds like you'd rather live in a 3rd world shit-heap country with no state services at all apart from possibly a big fat military. I hope you get your wish.
NB Only posting as AC because slashdot bans signons from entire blocks of perfectly good IP addresses due to supposed 'abuse'.
Re:Never in a million years (Score:3, Insightful)
This might not be a bad thing! (Score:3, Insightful)
I've had a simple rule since I bootstrapped myself onto OSS, namely: I don't run win32 OSes unless somebody else is paying for them. This works for me actually.
For personal computing, it means access to win32 if needed for some reason. A recent example for me was having to perform an upgrade on my ReplayTV. The better tools are win32 ones. I've no problem booting the OS, doing the task, then back to my OSS environment. Running an AD supported version would not have impacted me one bit. I don't need commercial apps for anything these days, so it's just about running win32 programs that do very specific things that may not be so easy in OSS land.
Where work related tasks are concerned, I'm still very much tied to the win32 system. However, that's on somebody elses dime. Fine by me.
I say bring it on.
You know what's gonna happen though. There will be an AD for the OS, then another AD for the application, and another for the browser.... Might have to get a pretty high pixel density monitor for it all!
Re:Never in a million years (Score:3, Insightful)
[rant mode]Then again.. I keep wondering why everybody thinks computers are so hard these days. I was friggin 12 years old when I coded small games in C64 Assembly, 10 years old when I mastered MS DOS, 6 when I wrote my first program in C64 BASIC. Whole offices managed to be productive with the likes of WordPerfect 5. Why are computers all of a sudden thought to be so hard to use? As far as I can tell things have only gotten easier and easier as time goes by. Bare bones Debian reminds me a lot of my MS DOS days, only Debian's a whole lot more powerful. If a 12 year-old can grasp Assembly, any office clerk should be able to grasp the way Linux should be operated.. [/rant mode]