Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft To Introduce a New Feature In Windows 10 Which Will Allow Users To Block Installation of Desktop Apps (mspoweruser.com)

Microsoft is planning to introduce a new feature to Windows 10 that will allow a user to prevent installation of desktop apps. The latest Windows Insider build comes with an option that allows users to enable app installations only from the Windows Store. From a report on MSPowerUser: Once enabled, users will see a warning whenever they try to install a Win32 app -- they will get a dialog saying apps from the Windows Store helps to keep their PC "safe and reliable." This feature is obviously disabled by default, but users can enable it really easily if they want.

32 of 307 comments (clear)

  1. Misread the headline... by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 2, Funny

    At first, I misread the headline as "Windows 10 now allows you to block back-door installation"...

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
  2. "...disabled by default." by willoughby · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yeah... 'till the next update.

    1. Re:"...disabled by default." by Lendrick · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Disabled by default, then enabled by default, then mandatory, then not able to be worked around. Give it time.

    2. Re:"...disabled by default." by Howitzer86 · · Score: 2

      Windows dies when that happens.

    3. Re:"...disabled by default." by mrchaotica · · Score: 4, Insightful

      We can hope, but I'm not counting on it. I think it's just as likely that by the time that happens, having the computer locked down so that only OS maker-"approved" apps can run might be mandated by law because "only hackers would run un-'approved' software" or some other such BS.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    4. Re:"...disabled by default." by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This feature is on by default on the Mac. It's one of the first things I turn off when I set up my account on a new Mac, but it is great for everyone else in my life. My folks & in-laws have Macs, so I'm their defacto support guy. I administer their computers, and they can't install any software except from the Mac App Store. My mom wanted to install a solitaire game from some dubious website, and this prevented it from being installed. I found her a legit solitaire game on the App store for free. As a CIS teacher & hobbyist programmer though, it can be a pain in the neck, since a lot of open source software, such as GIMP aren't already available.

      --
      Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
    5. Re:"...disabled by default." by Keith+Russell · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The exact same thing was said when Apple introduced Gatekeeper in mac OS Mountain Lion four years ago. The default when Mountain Lion* shipped was to allow apps from the App Store or signed apps from other sources, and it's still the default today. The blanket option to allow all apps and go unprotected is now hidden, but it can be re-enabled from the command line. And you can still override Gatekeeper for individual apps from at least three different interfaces (attempt to launch the app, then open the App Store prefpane; right-click the app in Finder; use spctl from the command line). As far as I'm concerned, that's all as it should be. It's still possible for a user to selectively bypass Gatekeeper, but it's harder to do so accidentally or globally.

      (*: The back-port to Lion allowed all apps by default as a concession to users of old hardware that were left behind when Mountain Lion dropped support for 32-bit EFI.)

      That's no guarantee that Microsoft will be as wise as Apple has been. Instead of code signing, Microsoft is encouraging developers to wrap Win32 apps in UWP containers so they can be published from the Windows Store, so probably not as wise. Closed-source OS developers aren't idiots, though. Apple and Microsoft both know that the "default walled garden on desktop" button is wired to the self-destruct system.

      --
      This sig intentionally left blank.
  3. Its about taxes by NotInHere · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Microsoft sells this as important step against bloatware/malware, but this coudn't be further from the truth. Windows 10 desktops come preloaded with bloatware, and often it re-installs itself after you have removed it. The real motivation for microsoft to do this is because the model of making a limited app store and then taxing every app a big amount (30% usually) has been very successful on the mobile market and they want this for windows too.

    1. Re:Its about taxes by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 2

      Nobody wants the store model, even on OS X where it arguably works better because of no pre-installed malware. The right thing, is a) to never let users run as admin, b) tar and feather apps that do not properly work without admin. Astroturf slashdot with developers who still haven't gotten the message, rather than try to convince us MS isn't evil anymore, which we'll never believe anyway.

      There's no reason for 99% of apps out there to actually need administrator privileges, but for some reason, many still do not work properly without it...probably because the devs always run in admin and don't test with anything else (or don't test at all, which seems to be the case sometimes).

  4. ...disabled by default... until it's not by Raistlin77 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This feature is obviously disabled by default, but users can enable it really easily if they want.

    Until it's not. It's only a matter of time before Microsoft sets this by default to try and force users to buy apps from the Windows store.

    1. Re:...disabled by default... until it's not by Junta · · Score: 2

      No, it's about safety and security of course.

      Nothing at all to do with controlling distribution over the platform and taking a cut of all the revenue of every company publishing software on their platform.

      It actually might not have been too bad, if they only had the repository system be extensible like yum and apt, which would allow competing application distribution platforms. But that would be too much for the user and not enough for Microsoft.

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
  5. a "feature" you say... by nimbius · · Score: 5, Insightful

    so heres how to use it in the latest release:

    users: another screen, another popup, another warning. mash enter until the bad square goes bye bye.

    Sysadmins/developers: crinkle nose, furrow brow, open mouth slightly, and quietly under your breath mutter "what the hell" while roaming around the popup to determine if theres a means to disable this garbage in the future. become concerned your app isnt in the store...did it need to be in the store? what was the process for that and why isnt the standup aware? how long has microsoft had its own app store?? people cant possibly use this right? disable the feature, push it as disabled in all GPO's. release your app in iOS and android instead. receive six user bugs in the next 5 years for windows 35 millenium chrome hyper walnut marmalade edition not running this code because your tertiary support agreement uploads werent made exclusive to the hyper microsoft money choo choo store. close as cant-fix/wont-fix and go make another cup of tea.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
    1. Re:a "feature" you say... by Sarten-X · · Score: 2

      Competent admins: Use proper tools to push applications across the domain, and leave the feature enabled so there's yet another hurdle between the malware-pushing support-call scammers and admin-level access to the system.

      Unfortunately, it's no longer a safe assumption that even "sysadmins/developers" actually make an effective barrier against attacks. They get scammed just like everybody else, and are just as susceptible to a well-crafted phishing site or an urgent call from the CEO's new assistant.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
  6. If I want to keep PC safe and reliable... by QuietLagoon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'd disable the egregious data harvesting that Microsoft is doing. That's a bigger concern to me than desktop apps.

  7. The writing is on the wall. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Microsoft has already expressed a desire to kill Steam
    I'm sure they aren't happy about "losing revenue" to Google Play or iTunes either
    How long before some future update changes the default to enabled on all Windows systems?

  8. Microsoft want a piece of the pie by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Microsoft look enviously at Apple, who get to control and profit from their walled garden. Then they glance over at Android, and see Google has their play store (which, whereas it may not be a walled garden, has a fence around). Fire users most certainly have their own walled garden courtesy of Amazon.

    Apple and Google are both benefiting from these "almost monopolies" they run controlling their users, skimming a bit off the top from everyone. No doubt, Microsoft sees that these are profitable ventures and they want the same control over what runs on Microsoft Windows. It's a little harder to do because there is a lot of legacy applications, and neither consumer, nor software producers want to give a little bit of each purchase to Microsoft. Microsoft are going to continue baby-stepping towards that goal though because they want the money, and their competitors are already doing that.

    It will be a sad day when you have no option but to buy from the Microsoft store, but that day is coming.

    --
    "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    1. Re:Microsoft want a piece of the pie by ausekilis · · Score: 2

      Isn't this exactly what Gaben said a couple years ago, which sparked the creation of SteamOS and SteamMachines?

  9. Re:The good old days by MrLint · · Score: 3, Funny

    The point of failure of often at layer 8.

  10. I want the opposite controls by acoustix · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I want the ability to block the Windows Store from the users. Windows took that ability away from IT in Windows 10 Pro. Thanks, Microsoft.

    --
    "A plan fiendishly clever in its intricacies"- Homer Simpson
    1. Re:I want the opposite controls by AvitarX · · Score: 2

      Shouldn't you use the hosts file?

      I'm pretty sure I read that here.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
  11. Remember Tim Sweeney? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Looks like he called it.

  12. You mean the Windows Malware Store? by nucrash · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Wasn't there are article about how the majority, I believe has high as 75% of the Windows Store apps were considered malware?
    https://www.howtogeek.com/1949...

    I mean, sure they probably have improved their content since the days of this, but let us not forget how they let this slip not to long ago.

    --
    Place something witty here
  13. Re: Done with Windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    No, you will continue to use it as the sheep you are

  14. Found the LUDDITE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Modern app appers ONLY app apps, so this setting makes Appdows 10 even appier by lockout out LUDDITE software!

    Apps!

  15. Re:M$ not eating own dogfood: no Visual Studio RT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You'll need a special license from the government - administered by Microsoft - to run dev tools and debuggers. See Stallman's essay from 20 years ago.

  16. Project Boil The Frogs by HalAtWork · · Score: 2

    Project "Boil The Frogs" is picking up pace I see!

  17. Re:There used to be... by bruce_the_loon · · Score: 2

    Still there, called AppLocker and can be set to lock down whatever you want. Whitelist, blacklist etc.

    --
    Trying to become famous by taking photos. Visit my homepage please.
  18. Apple by fyngyrz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Apple's been boiling its frogs (sorry, I mean, customers) longer, and has moved from the ability to install any app you want, to the ability to install any app you want IF you set up preferences to allow it, to an inability to set up preferences to allow it, but if you try, a button appears (which you have to go into preferences to find) that may allow it (doesn't alway appear)...

    They're one or two steps away from "app store only."

    The frogs.... sorry, the customers... just one step from boiling now.

    Interesting to see Microsoft begin to turn up the heat.

    I guess pretty much everyone's a frog now.

    Customer. I meant customer.

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    1. Re:Apple by Guspaz · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Apple lets you install any signed app that didn't come from the app store, and bypassing the signed-app requirement simply requires you to hold down the "control" button the first time you launch it. The Mac app store has been kind of dying off.

    2. Re:Apple by Desler · · Score: 2

      You do realize that people like you have been claiming Macs would be app-store only just a year or two from now for 5 years right?

    3. Re:Apple by fyngyrz · · Score: 4, Informative

      Allow me to demonstrate under the latest macOS (10.12 / Sierra):

      1) Go get the screensaver bundle.
      2) Open the .dmg
      3) Now, from the drawer with all the screen savers, drag out Pipes.saver to your desktop. It's perfectly safe. Double-click it to install it.

      Here's what happens:

      First, you get a dialog that says "can't install pipes screensaver" from preferences (preferences is what is normally started when you go to install a screen saver.)

      Then, from the Apple menu or the prefs icon, you go to preferences / security, and there is no button. Just as I described. Pipes.saver is not installed. And prefs will not install it no matter how many times you try this. You can verify this is the case by going to Preferences, and then Desktop & Screen Saver, and looking at the list of available savers. Pipes.saver is not there.

      Okay, so that's the OS install behavior as it stands today.

      Now, take the Pipes.saver file, and drag it using Finder into ~/Library/Screen Savers

      Now again, open preferences / Desktop & Screen Saver, and look at the list. There it is. If you choose it, it runs just fine.

      This concludes our demo of macOS Sierra refusing to install working software from non-appstore vendors.

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  19. Steam by lokedhs · · Score: 2
    Now take a moment to think about what this feature, once it's enabled by default, will mean for Steam.

    Microsoft has wanted a share of those game sales for a long time.

    Games are the only reason Windows even exists in my household.