On second thought, I will:
The only reason why Microsoft is shortening the cycle of paying Windows updates now, is because they can now and couldn't before for legal reasons: the fact that they've always forced manufacturers to deliver their PC's with Windows preinstalled, is a package deal, which is most part of the world is forbidden under anti-trust laws. For instance: according to European Law, once a supplier has an 30%+ market share, he cannot make valid vertical agreements (cutthroat exclusivity agreements, the kind Microsft likes best). So Microsoft has escaped that legislation by arguing that the lifecycle of the OS is longer than that of the PC itself, and for now they've been left alone thanks to some very expensive political lobbying and probably a lot of all-expenses-payed business trips and escorts, but when they would have shortened the life cycle of their products to less than the obvious lifecycle of the PC, it would obviously be in breach of anti-trust laws, and manufacturers would not want to play ball anymore.
So now that Microsoft announces the shorter lifecycles, you can bet your ass that it's only because they don't have 30% market share anymore on PC's with preloaded Windows OS, just like they have already announced that the support for Windows Phone 8 will end in 2014, which is shorter than the lifecycle of the hardware product locked down with this OS, something they can because Windows Phone 8 doesn't have 30% market share.
Look, everyone saw this coming as soon as they brought out secure boot, you could just smell the stink of corruption as soon as Microsoft opened its beak about it.First secure boot, then force everyone into buying more and more of the same crappy product because they are locked down...
Secure boot is just another one in a long list of Microsoft screwups: major PC manufactures that under contract with Microsoft have to implement secure boot have actually disabled it in a way that ensures the systems will work for their business product range. On top of that, the secure boot feature is actually a security risk with Windows, because it's implemented in the most stupid way, so that malware can actually pass unnoticed into the system, whereas the implementation by GNU/Linux is much more sensible, a second layer of control is added that makes secure boot a true security feature.
Other major Microsoft screwups include:
- not going open source on security features... nobody in their right mind trusts Microsoft anymore, they have said that they wiretap Skype and sell the recordings to paying government intelligence services, they are constantly flexing their muscles and threatening people, like with their own DRM on top of existing Steam DRM that they require under Windows 8, showing that they can take your games away from you even if you've bought them fair and square from Valve and they have nothing to do with it. In those circumstances, who believes that Microsoft is concerned with security for its customers, when they clearly demonstrate that practically every new software product they've brought out in the last 5 years is some kind of malware itself...
- not being able to implement its own Skype software in Windows. Yes good people, Skype works perfectly and with a lot of features in GNU/Linux and Android, but half of the features just aren't there in Windows, and it works pretty crappy in Windows in comparison to linux based operating systems. Has noone ever wondered why Video Skyping with screen sharing and chatting and instant messaging all together works perfectly on a 600 MHz ARM device with 384 MB of RAM and Android 2.3 Gingerbread, but you get a message that the computer is too slow to work Skype as soon as you start video on netbooks loaded with Windows that are basically more than 20 times faster than the ARM-device, while when you install GNU/Linux on that same netbook, again all the Skype features work perfectly and simultaneously.
- Since Windows 7, hardware compatibility of Windows OS has dropped enormously, in Windows 8, it seems like there is hardly any hardware compatible with it, and when it's recognised at all by the system, it usually only works partly or not at all.
- Since Windows XP, Microsoft has not at all worked on the things that matter in the GUI... yes, you've read it right... they've only tweaked with frame colours and stupid interface detours, but they've not improved on the things that matter: their codecs are shit, music sounds like coming from a cardboard box speaker compared to the same mp3 played on a Mac or GNU/Linux machine, their DRM blocks things that shouldn't be blocked, Windows inhibits the performance of the hardware the users pay good money for, Windows actually runs slower on a full featured i7-3770k desktop than Fedora 18 on a Core2Duo T6600 laptop. Have you seen any improvement at all in the way Windows renders the fonts on screen? Nope... while in bleeding edge GNU/Linux distros now, fonts look like print, without any jagged edges the human eye can discern, with far more natural colours, and far more useful real estate on the screen. Some essential modern features, like one key/click system-wide search and go features, the likes of Gnome search (for which you don't even have to click, moving your mouse to the screen corner of your choice suffices) or Unity HUD on GNU/Linux or Google Search on Android 4.1, just don't work on Windows.
- I run Windows 7 because I want to play Windows games and use Lightroom 3.6 (which also runs on Mac so it could for sure run natively on GNU/Linux too, but Adobe also has its head up it's ass and refuses to release it for GNU/Linux, they prefer a competitor taking over their market position), I have no other programs that I use on Windows (except firefox with noscript, ghostery, adblockplus, stealth and https everywhere like everyone else), except for a bunch of programs that I need just to keep Windows running: Malwarebytes, ZoneAlarm, Nod32, DrWeb, CCleaner/Defragger, Ghost, etc, which means that I actually have more programs on my windows install to keep windows running and protect me from windows, than I have actual useful programs. All other programs I use (and I use a lot of programs in comparison to most users) are running on my linux boxes, just because THEY ARE MUCH BETTER, they look better, work faster, are more secure, easier to use, smaller, don't contain malware, and are compatible with everything and then some... in short... they make my life easier and actually help me to make money instead of just costing money. Windows is still based on Windows NT, which is nothing more than the OS/2 Warp they bought in the 90's from IBM and gave a rebranding and technical screwover, it's hopelessly dated tech that's been repackaged and pimped so many times that it's disgusting.