I don’t know if it’s just me that find it highly interesting that they choose to run Windows for these kind of things? Anyone able to elaborate the reasons for this? Surely this just costs them so much extra having to buy licenses for each of these screens…?

Please do correct me or clarify this for me 🌻

    • rdyoung@lemmy.worldEnglish
      13·
      3 months ago

      This right here. Many years ago when a foodlion near me rolled out self check outs I happened to discover a way to crash the self check app and access windows running underneath.

    • Sunny' 🌻OPEnglish
      8·
      3 months ago

      Was never aware such existed, thanks for pointing it out!

  • Fake4000@lemmy.worldEnglish
    251·
    3 months ago

    That’s not the case. Usually governments and public organisations go throw a volume licensing agreements that sees them taking more than just windows. It would usually include things like windows, office, a bunch of enterprise applications, as well as support on top of it all.

    Microsoft usually relies on those agreements to push software that might not be needed.

    Another reason could be the video display management system they used to remotely control these screens. The software might only run on windows.

  • lemmyreader@lemmy.mlEnglish
    181·
    3 months ago

    This seems rather harmless. In the past people have been posting photos of Windows running on ATM cash machines 🫣

  • Cloudless ☼@lemmy.cafeEnglish
    10·
    3 months ago

    If they only have a support team for Windows, then it makes sense to use Windows only for all their devices. If they deploy a different OS, then they need to either hire a new support team, or train the existing team for the new OS. Either way would be more expensive than the licensing fees.

  • FBJimmy@lemmus.orgEnglish
    3·
    3 months ago

    At Kuala Lumpa International Airport half the signs were like this near our gate a couple weeks ago…

  • slazer2au@lemmy.worldEnglish
    3·
    3 months ago

    Worked for 2 digital advertising companies and the cost of Volume License windows is nothing compared to the cost of the rest of the hardware.

    We were paying AU$700 for a Lenovo PC and another AU$800 on a screen while the volume key for windows was less AU$100.

    Why save AU$100 per pc when I have to spend several thousand more per year paying some to run a remote Linux box rather than a windows one.

  • Oisteink@feddit.nlEnglish
    63·
    3 months ago

    Linux is not always the answer, and free to install isn’t always cheap.

  • ryathal@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    2·
    3 months ago

    Linux isn’t free at the enterprise level. You aren’t just downloading a Linux flavor and slapping it on everything. There’s going to be a support contract to cover if something weird happens an expert is on site to help fix it within 24hrs. There’s going to be guarantees that if software does x it will work even with future os updates. Replacement hardware will be available and compatible as well.

  • Miaou@jlai.luEnglish
    65·
    3 months ago

    The intern who did it didn’t know better and it’s cheaper to spend hundred of thousands on Microsoft rather than project past the next few years since whoever is in charge will be gone by then.

    Welcome to the work world, where inefficiency is only problematic when it shows up on an Excel sheet.