• nous@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    21 hours ago

    The problem is - users pay for Windows only once

    That is not in the slightest true. They pay once per computer. And people go through multiple computers in their lifetime. So it is not at all tied to birthrate.

    Very few people buy licenses directly. Most people buy it pre-installed with an OEM license that is tied to that computer.

    • WanderingThoughts@europe.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      20 hours ago

      And so we get to the TPM 2.0 thing that would force people to buy a new computer, and caused many to look for alternative.

    • pelya@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      21 hours ago

      Well yes, but you still do not pay each year, this means MICROS~1 is losing profits (in their eyes, and compared to Adobe).

      OEM licenses are also bad, because MICROS~1 is selling each copy of Windows for a significant discount, not for $199.99 retail price. And users can even transfer non-OEM licenses to another PC (oh horror!)

    • acosmichippo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      21 hours ago

      I think their point still stands. People “buy” windows when they need a new computer, so the the rate at which windows is sold probably hasn’t changed much. If anything it’s probably slower due to more durable modern hardware like SSDs.