Microsoft Will Charge for Windows 10 Security Updates in 2025
Microsoft Will Charge for Windows 10 Security Updates in 2025
Literally most of them. All the big ones like Debian, Ubuntu, Fedora, OpenSUSE, Arch, etc. are 10+ years old and still get updates pretty much daily.
Debian had its 30th birthday back in September, actually.
You do, in fact, need to accept support to benefit from it. Those releases are the support. They are the updates.
Sometimes people or companies retire their distros (e.g. Mandriva), or just do stupid decisions that piss of their users (CentOS) and force the users to switch to a different distro. This, however, is extremely rare. Microsoft do that on a schedule.
You can use Debian Sid, for example. That way, instead of waiting for a bunch of updates to install them as one big upgrade, you, basically, always have the last version. You don't get those big upgrades at all, this way.
That's not possible with Windows. Even if you were to install every update that comes out, you wouldn't end up with a system that's somewhere between Windows 10 and Windows 11. You're forced into a major upgrade.
And that's the way Windows' patches and updates have always worked. This isn't some amazing new twist that Microsoft has thrown at us. If I'd bought Windows 10 ten years ago, I would have bought it with the full knowledge that at some point it'll no longer be updatable without it turning into Windows 11.
If this is a fundamental obstacle to you then you should never have bought Windows in the first place. It's like buying a gasoline-powered car and then exclaiming "this is bullshit!" When it comes time to fill the tank.
I've, in fact, never purchased Windows willingly.
The only few times I (technically) did were with laptops and small form factor computers which were only available with it pre-installed.
This, honestly, should not be legal.
Well, to elaborate: I never purchashed Windows willingly. I mostly pirated it.
XP was the only Windows that was worth its money. Back then there was nothing better.
Seven was, too, best for its time, but it was still meh, compared to XP.
If it was possible, I would've never stopped using it.
If Windows was more like Linux, XP would've been still supported, even if by different people (like Mandriva is living on as OpenMandriva, or Gnome 2 as MATE).
But, no, we can't have nice things. Microsoft have to force their "upgrades".
Also: Almost everyone younger than 20-25 has grown up with Window 10. There's a ton people to whom the fact that Miscosoft kill off operating systems and force new, objectively worse ones is news.
Actually, yes.
Debian has been supported since the early 90s, but admittedly that’s the only one I could name off the top of my head.
Debian releases are more similar to Service Packs on Windows.
Windows releases are entirely different products.
There are changes to the defaults, sometimes, but they're just that: changes to the defaults. If you're upgrading your existing install, they won't affect you.
For example: Debian switched to Gnome as its default DE a couple years ago. It used to be XFCE. However, if you already had a system with XFCE, if wouldn't go and replace it for you.
On Windows side, meanwhile, when Microsoft decide to change up the DE, you get the changes, whether you like it or not. Remember Windows 8? It's not like those who upgraded from Windows 7 got to keep their Aero theme and Start Menu.
I disagree that it’s more similar to service packs. Debian has dropped entire architectures at some releases, and they frequently break binary (and sometimes source) compatibility, far more frequently than service packs do. Hardware compatibility breakage is pretty common between releases too.
It’s probably true that Microsoft changes more between releases, but if you installed Debian on your 32-bit big endian MIPS hardware, you needed to switch to a different OS or buy new hardware when they drop support for Buster.