I'm pretty sure Windows got their priorities straight: telemetry, advertisement are the priority and they're executing their strategy very well.
Your priority as a user are different, but, sorry to say, your voice doesn't count. The year-end revenue and KPI is what counts, because you and 99% of other companies will still be buying and using PCs with Windows preinstalled and paying Microsoft for licences. You say so yourself, you're disappointed with the direction Windows is taking, but you still use it [for very legitimate reasons].
Why should Microsoft sell Windows for $199, when they can earn $199 + $x/month/user from ads and create more value for its shareholders?
I would pay extra to buy a "Signature Edition" (kind of like they had with PCs) of Windows that has none of the ads and whatever other "value-add" pieces are integrated in it. One would say - I want LTSC accessible for customers like myself, without the kneecapped ability to run latest Windows software.
They make more off you if you have a regular licence and they can sell your data. You wanting to pay extra not to be spied upon is irrelevant, you have no choice in the matter.
Very simply, the money lost because some people have left Windows for greener pastures is being offset by the increased revenue.
There must be some amount of money that someone could pay to make it worth it to Microsoft to not show ads or sell data. The problem is, I doubt many people would actually pay that amount.
There was an interesting interview on the Windows Weekly podcast with Chris Capossela (CMO of consumer at Microsoft) a little ways back I believe where the hosts asked Chris why there is no ability to do just this - I believe the answer was that Microsoft views these features as valuable to the user, so why would they think that a user would want to turn them off?
I wonder, do marketing types actually believe that kind of nonsense? Could it actually be true for them, personally, that they feel they get some benefit from intrusive communication? That would be such a different experience of the world that it's difficult to wrap my head around.
And yet... I was once griping about one or another of the many tricky ways excessively-clever web designers abuse javascript to impose their concept of a "user experience" on me when I would deeply prefer they simply left well enough alone, and my listener replied - "but what if I want the experience they're offering"? - Well, that thought had never occurred to me.
.. because the minute your monopoly power crumbles, you will be met with resentment and abandonment, including by the "investors" who were with you minutes ago.. the ecosystem has dealt with hostile insider moves, high profile technology theft, and constant attack vectors already.. more in store here
Your priority as a user are different, but, sorry to say, your voice doesn't count. The year-end revenue and KPI is what counts, because you and 99% of other companies will still be buying and using PCs with Windows preinstalled and paying Microsoft for licences. You say so yourself, you're disappointed with the direction Windows is taking, but you still use it [for very legitimate reasons].
Why should Microsoft sell Windows for $199, when they can earn $199 + $x/month/user from ads and create more value for its shareholders?