Opinion: Even if You Hate the Idea, Windows Users Should Want Windows 10 S To Succeed (arstechnica.com)

Last week, Microsoft unveiled Windows 10 S, a new variant of its desktop operating system aimed largely at the education space. While time will tell how this new edition of Windows fares, if early reactions from enthusiasts are anything to go by, Windows 10 S is in for a tough ride ahead. For one, Windows 10 S only permits installation of applications from the Windows Store. If that wasn't a deal-breaker, several popular applications including Google's Chrome are missing from the Store. Amid all of this, reporter and columnist Peter Bright has an op-ed up on ArsTechnica in which he argues that despite the walled-garden offering, people should want Windows 10 S to succeed as it could make Windows better for everyone else. From his article: This [forbidding execution of any program that wasn't downloaded from the Windows Store] positions Microsoft as a gatekeeper -- although its criteria for entry within the store is for the most part not stringent, it does reserve the right to remove software that it deems undesirable -- and means that the vast majority of extant Windows software can't be used. This means that PC mainstays, from Adobe Photoshop to Valve's Steam, can't be used on Windows 10 S. [...] Some of the arguments against this are bizarre. Notably, the complaint that Microsoft has now erected a paywall -- "you have to pay $50 to run Steam!" -- is very peculiar when one considers that, in general, Windows licenses have never been free. [...] The Windows Store makes bad parts of Windows better: I'd argue, however, that Windows users should want Windows 10 S to succeed. Windows 10 S isn't for everybody, and Windows 10 S may not be for you, but if Windows 10 S succeeds, it will make Windows 10 better for everyone. The Store in Windows RT required developers to write their apps from scratch. With negligible numbers of users, developers were uninterested in doing this work. The Store in Windows 10 has Centennial. In principle, Centennial should make it easy to package existing Win32 apps and sell them through the Store, and if developers of Windows apps adopt Centennial en masse then the Store restriction shouldn't be particularly restrictive. Widespread adoption will be good for Windows users of all stripes.

Comments

M$ not eating dogfood until VS is on Store

[tepples]

"and if developers of Windows apps adopt Centennial en masse then the Store restriction shouldn't be particularly restrictive."

Let me know when Centennial is complete enough that Microsoft can put Visual Studio on Windows Store.

Re:M$ not eating dogfood until VS is on Store

[MightyYar]

Exactly - for me the acid test is how well they do with the Office port. In theory it is due in June.

Re:M$ not eating dogfood until VS is on Store

[AmiMoJo]

Even if it was perfect, why would anyone want to be locked in to having to use Microsoft's store as opposed to just getting their software from anywhere they like?

Windows 10 S is bad for freedom. If it succeeds it will just give Microsoft a tighter grip over what you can run. Maybe they don't like competition, so no Libre Office for you...

Fortunately Windows 10 S is already doomed. Why get a half baked OS when you can get a similar tablet with Android and a much larger selection of software, or just full Windows 10 that doesn't suck as much for a little more money?

Re:M$ not eating dogfood until VS is on Store

[postbigbang]

Yeah. Gated Windows apps. Microsoft glommed most of the apps it sells today. Have a nice app? Put it into the store and find its features in something Microsoft magically comes out with. These are kings of intellectual property rights and patents.

Worse, it removes choice. Yes, there are lots of downloadables that are plainly ugly and malware-ridden. Nonetheless, they're outside of Microsoft's control-- and often for the better. It's the death of shareware as we know it. It's vendor control, ala Oracle and Apple.

I have absolutely no trust of Microsoft at all. I have to deal with them, but I want nothing to do with them.

Re:M$ not eating dogfood until VS is on Store

[Oswald McWeany]

Indeed.

If we want a walled garden, there is already Apple products, which arguably are more secure. The reason Microsoft has been successful and the "default" OS for so long is that they are "open".

As crap as Microsoft are, they are open and easy for the average dumb-user to understand. If you take away open, they're just easy, and plenty of alternatives are easy.

Re: M$ not eating dogfood until VS is on Store

[tepples]

10 LET M$ = "Microsoft"

Still doing that M$ thing, eh slashdot?

Yes, Slashdot is still limiting the length of comment subjects. "M$" saves seven characters compared to "Microsoft" while recalling Microsoft's heritage as a publisher of interpreters for the BASIC programming language.

Re:M$ not eating dogfood until VS is on Store

[Rob Y.]

Yep. I don't care if Windows succeeds or not. What I do care about is whether general purpose PC hardware remains available. I assume these Windows 10s boxes are 'secure boot' only, and you can't just replace windows 10s with Linux or set up to dual boot Windows 10s and Linux. Maybe if you shell out the 50 bucks they also make it so you can disable secure boot - but still, should I have to pay a Microsoft tax just to be able to set up a dual boot?

It's hard to say whether the point of this 10s thing is to head of the Chromebook threat or to replace Windows OS revenue with Windows Store revenue - on the assumption that the days of paying for a PC operating system are numbered. But what's pretty certain is that Win32 apps are not going to be rewritten to be new-fangled Windows-only apps - and that's a good thing. Because to the extent they're rewritten, they will be rewritten as web apps that will work on any device. So it would stink if the 'best value' laptop and desktop devices became Windows only - even if they'd run Linux nicely.

Re:M$ not eating dogfood until VS is on Store

[chill]

Why get a half baked OS when you can get a similar tablet with Android and a much larger selection of software, or just full Windows 10 that doesn't suck as much for a little more money?

Two words: Microsoft Office.

This has potential as an office-drone machine, where their entire workload revolves around Outlook, Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and a web browser. Granted, they'll have to allow Chrome because Edge isn't going to be acceptable.

Add on the other big Microsoft toys -- Visio and Project -- and they may have a hit in the corporate world.

Granted, this could already be implemented with proper application whitelisting policies, but that takes real work...

Re:M$ not eating dogfood until VS is on Store

[butzwonker]

The walled garden is iOS only.

As a (former) shareware developer for MacOS, I unfortunately have to say: not really. Or, to put it in other terms, only formally but not practically. While my application is still available on my website and various shareware/download sites, distributing applications that way doesn't work in practice due to Apple's unfair advantage and the inertia and laziness of end consumers. Even if you can still de jure get applications from elsewhere, almost nobody does it.Even if you can still de jure get applications from elsewhere, almost nobody does it. De facto developers (and indirectly also the customers) are already locked in via Gatekeeper, the Apple developer network, code signing requirements, constant API changes and intentional breaking of existing code if you do not use the latest official Apple tool-chain, sandboxing, and so on.

Re:M$ not eating dogfood until VS is on Store

[Gilgaron]

But that'd... uh... damn... yeah that sounds about right.

Re:M$ not eating dogfood until VS is on Store

[chipschap]

Obviously MS wants total control, and they're going to get it.

It will matter to me at the point at which they force all PCs sold to be locked down at the bootloader level, to prevent installation of Linux or FreeBSD or some other alternative. That may fail an antitrust test, but it would takes years, even decades, to litigate that.

So, in the end, it's better for me if this new approach fails. But MS is very powerful, and even if this is the worst thing since Windows 8, they may be able to force acceptance. Even as a Linux fanboy, if I were to bet, I'd bet on MS winning this one.

I don't buy it

[TFlan91]

I don't buy it.... For Windows 10 S to "succeed", they need a high sales number. A high sales number translates to the people at the top that their product is good and people want it, which means they make more of it, and develop future products similar to it.

Windows 10 S is not good. Wanting Windows 10 S to succeed is saying that you want more of Windows 10 S type products in the future.

No. I do not want more walled gardens. No, I do not want Windows 10 S to succeed.

Re:I don't buy it

[gfxguy]

It's not a good thing, but I think it really just shifts things around. They will succeed because some people who don't know any better will live with it. Others will pay the premium (was it $50 to start?) for the unrestricted version. They win on both sides - first by locking in those who don't switch, and second by eliminating the middle man from OEM licensing they do now in order to charge consumers directly (and more than OEMs were paying, probably). I don't know where all the hate is coming from - MS never pretended to be our friends, they are a business and we have choices.

Again, though, I think they will succeed despite themselves. They continue to make consumer unfriendly decisions and yet still succeed by the leverage of their marketshare... but now people who understand the "walled garden" of 10 S might be inclined to go ChromeOS, and perhaps Fuscia might even work better for some people. But I somehow doubt any significant number of consumers will flock to alternatives over this. As usual, it depends on what software you want or need to use. If 10 S gives it to you, so be it, otherwise you pay the premium or find an alternative.

Uh, I saw this yesterday,who is pushing this?

[evolutionary]

okay, who ever the MS Employee pushing this is. Kindly back off. First, there is NO good reason we want this or anything connected to Windows 10 to succeed because it's basically an information trojan with no respect for privacy (or even pretence of it) for the end user. Second, posting this a second time looks kind of desperate. What we really want people to do is drop the trojan/boated Windows 10 and starting using ElementaryOS or Linux Mint. It's so easy to do folks, and the world at large will thank you. (as MS will have to reconsider it's abuse of the public.)

Re:Uh, I saw this yesterday,who is pushing this?

[tepples]

What we really want people to do is drop the trojan/boated Windows 10 and starting using ElementaryOS or Linux Mint. It's so easy to do folks

It's easy provided that the PC you own 1. allows customizing Secure Boot and 2. is compatible with Linux drivers.

Only PCs shipped with Windows 8 or earlier are required to allow the owner of a PC to disable or customize UEFI's Secure Boot feature. On PCs shipped with Windows 10, the PC maker can choose to make Secure Boot either open or closed. (The FSF uses the term Restricted Boot to refer to Secure Boot that the PC's owner cannot control.) I haven't tried a Windows 10 S device myself, but imagine that all such devices have Restricted Boot, just as all Windows RT tablets had Restricted Boot. Someone stuck with a device with Restricted Boot will have to buy a new PC.

And even if a PC does boot non-Microsoft operating systems, I've seen cases where one or more of WLAN, Bluetooth, audio, and suspend is broken under Linux. Someone who spends several gigabytes of monthly data transfer quota to download a Live USB distribution only to discover that Linux cannot use essential features of his PC chipset will have to buy a new PC.

Peter Bright

[Anonymous Coward]

A well-known Microsoft's shill. Just read some of his articles on Ars Technica, they sound like vulgar TV commercials.

Not really because it stifles competitive pricing

[HalAtWork]

Since you're restricted to one store it stifles competitive pricing for apps and games.

OEMs will be happy to include 10 S as it makes their devices cheaper and easier to support, it will be the defacto standard version of Windows, suddenly all casual desktop users are funneled to the Windows Store.

If MS had a store API that let other vendors hook in and provide their own storefronts this would not be a big deal, but for some reason they don't. I hear the Windows Store compared to a package repo in Linux, but it's not, you can't add third party sources.

I should what now?

[grasshoppa]

I want S to succeed so the Windows Store is more populated?

Sorry; no. I don't particularly care about that, OR Windows S. Given MS's behavior since 7, I'm more inclined to want to see it fail.

Walled Garden

[Thelasko]

Pro: Microsoft has complete control over what can be installed on your computer, so they can prevent malware.

Con: Microsoft has complete control over what can be installed on your computer, so they can bilk you for every last cent.

Apple essentially already does this. However, people tend to have a lot of trust in Apple for some reason. I'm not sure that applies to Microsoft.

Re:Walled Garden

[Penguinisto]

Actually, Apple doesn't do this at all in MacOS (it only does it in iOS). I can download (or buy a CD/DVD for) any application written for MacOS and run it, no sweat.

Fact is, I rarely even bother with the Apple App Store for the stuff on my laptop.

Re:Walled Garden

[dgaller]

It'll wind up exactly like the Google Play Store where malware is bundled with the app.

Re:Walled Garden

[tlhIngan]

Actually, Apple doesn't do this at all in MacOS (it only does it in iOS). I can download (or buy a CD/DVD for) any application written for MacOS and run it, no sweat.

Fact is, I rarely even bother with the Apple App Store for the stuff on my laptop.

Funny thing, I could swear everyone, or at least the anti-Apple folks, keep repeating that this is exactly what would happen to macOS. Of course, macOS stays pretty much open, but Microsoft now does what Apple was supposed to do...

Re:Walled Garden

[Austerity Empowers]

Apple essentially already does this.

The only app i get for OS X from the app store is XCode (and now, I guess the free numbers/pages/keynote). Otherwise I have never used it, and have no desire for it.

OP claim we should want Windows 10 S to succeed.

[aliquis]

Continues writing a lot of stuff but never say WHY.
Why would we want it to succeed? So it become less restrictive than now? Yay.. Good reason.
So idiots can use Windows with no problem? How does that help me?
Windows S is bad because a Windows store is bad because if Windows store become the de-facto or only way to buy stuff then competition dies in Windows and with that you can be sure prices will get worse.

Very limited perspective on Windows 10

[mykepredko]

The author seems to want Win 10S to succeed because it will result in better Windows Store apps, with a simple install process, which can be used by all Windows users.

Right off the bat, doesn't this place an unreasonable amount of confidence that anything coming from the app store will not be evil?

Secondly, all my problems with Windows 10 have been outside the Windows Store experience that I don't see endearing the product to the education market. I have a couple of Win10 machines with 32GBytes of eMMC; doing an update is hell as it requires an external USB thumb drive and takes multiple hours - something that can't be tolerated in a classroom environment where there are dozens of PCs. I've bitched about my problems with the Win10 Bluetooth stack and I don't see anybody in Microsoft fixing that, even as the need for BT is growing with different external devices.

Next, I feel like Microsoft is going to continually look for opportunities to monetize the platform. Office 365 revenues flat lining? Say, let's start charging all those kids using Win 10S machines, the schools are just wasting money on hot lunch programs that should be going to Microsoft.

Finally, there is the privacy issue. Win 10 seems to be designed around collecting user data and exploiting it. Is this something parents want to have happen to their children? You can say that Google and Chrome do the same thing but it doesn't seem to be a core part of their business model. I wouldn't be surprised coming home to a kid that is demanding an Windows OS'd phone because the computer at school told them how much better it is than their stupid Android or iOS phone.

I know I'll get replies from numerous AC's who feel that I'm being unreasonably harsh towards Microsoft and what they're doing with the Windows 10 S platform, which is much better than ChromeOS even though nobody's seen it before but I just don't see Microsoft having the right stuff or approach to take on the education market in way that is positive for students and not completely exploitative.

As usual Microsoft misses the point

[zerofoo]

Clearly Microsoft is chasing Google again in a half-assed way.

The draw of Chromebooks was not simply cheap laptops. Schools (like us) are drawn to the fact that the supporting cloud infrastructure is stupidly easy to manage.

Local apps don't matter. The few people in our school that need local apps get by on Mac OS or Windows. Everyone else gets a chromebook - their data and apps live in the cloud.

Even if Microsoft built a robust App Store - it wouldn't matter as that's not what draws schools to Chromebooks in the first place.

Simply no

[luvirini]

It is better for such things so tightly linked to walled gardens to fail. So I am heavily hoping that Windows 10s will fail spectacularly. (Not that it is even close to the only thing with that problem, but that is not reason cheer it.)

Actual summary of the article

[Samantha Wright]

The summary provided isn't terribly sharp; it takes out any of the justification provided in the Ars piece and relates mostly the author's opinions. Mr. Bright's actual argument is that the Windows 10 Store fills the hole of a single, consistent package manager, promising that applications will be cleanly installed, updated, and uninstalled without the diversity of mechanisms abundant currently. He doesn't offer any defense of Windows 10 S beyond that, nor of the essential problem of a locked-down ecosystem and all of the censorship-related complications, which are waved off in the first three paragraphs (along with a screenshot of the Popcorn Time installer failing to run.) I don't believe he even defends the ostensible cleanliness benefits of closed ecosystems. All of the positives that he cites would be obtainable if it were simply possible to hook into Windows Update, a notion he mentions.

Re:Actual summary of the article

[jdschulteis]

Mr. Bright's actual argument is that the Windows 10 Store fills the hole of a single, consistent package manager, promising that applications will be cleanly installed, updated, and uninstalled without the diversity of mechanisms abundant currently.

If only we could get just that, without the OS owner acting as gatekeeper and demanding a cut.

Windows failed.

[stooo]

Windows failed. Again.
https://twitter.com/taviso/sta...

Windows already locked down

[fermion]

Education is unique because you want it locked down as corporate, but teachers are not going to be as tolerant with stupidity as corporate. For instance, if a corporate employee can't get work done efficiently because she does not have access to the right software, she can make a complaint to her boss, and either the software will be upgraded or there will be a realization that more time has to be allocated. I see this all the time.

What does not happen, usually, is the expectation that the employee go off clock and do the work themselves, or buy a computer to do the work. This is what happens in education. If a teacher can't get work done on paid time, they are expected to work for free. Free work is usually a result of incompetent management. There is no overtime.

This extends to the classroom. While we all understand that the computer must be locked down, and both Windows and Mac allows administrators limit software that can installed. However limiting software that can be run is going to impose a limitation that many will find too restrictive. For instance, there are some open source programs that are used in science and computer science that can be run from USB. These do not need to be installed. They allow some flexibility so students can learn.

Very limited perspective on Windows 10 - Part Two

[mykepredko]

Sorry, as soon as I walked away, I realized there were more issues in regards to the perspective on Windows that are a problem:

Edge. Sorry, I don't think it's reasonable to have to maintain a web page for Edge and IE because Microsoft won't use Webkit/be compatible with everything else out there. Companies need to provide responsive pages for tablets and smartphones - they shouldn't need to do the same amount of work for Microsoft browsers (that aren't even fully compatible with each other).

All that crap information on Windows 10 (and 8). If ANYBODY involved with Windows 10 S has ever seen how kids work in a classroom, then they should be clearing off the time/news updates/sports updates/weather/etc. that is in the Win10 scrawl at the bottom. This is just a distractor for kids which takes their attention away from the class material - unfortunately getting rid of it will get rid of potential Microsoft revenue streams so it's not going.

So, why do we want Windows 10 S to succeed?

And the elephant in the room is...

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

The massive blind spot (or possibly rhetorical sleight-of-hand) here is the casual conflating of "The Windows Store" with "a new Windows packaging mechanism".

It's pretty easy to make a case that today's combination of mostly MSI files with some vendors still shipping in-house or legacy .exe installers isn't great; and that the ability of win32 applications to, unless very, very, carefully kept on a leash, scribble all over one another is a risk. If so; an improved installer format and some sort of application isolation(ideally not hacked on with a bunch of virtualization layers; like the "App-V" stuff designed to let enterprise users take legacy applications and isolate them whether they like it or not).

However, none of this has any relationship whatsoever with Microsoft's precious "App Store"; and their desire to be the sole gatekeeper for cryptographically blessed software and get their 30% cut. And this aspect of the deal is not something that is of plausible value to anyone who isn't Microsoft. It's unlikely that MS will be able to get rid of 'legacy' Windows entirely; because Corporate would scream; but they would love for this 'Windows S' to become the de-facto 'Home Edition', with anyone who wants to go outside the walled garden paying an upgrade fee for the privilege.

This seems like a fatal flaw in the argument. If this were just about a fight between MSI loyalists and APPX fanboys; it would be easy to make the case that the legacy tech isn't good enough. That, however, is a relatively minor part of the issue; with the 'Store' being placed front and center by Microsoft's decision to effectively link UWP/APPX with the store(yes, there is a 'sideload' switch, at least for now; but the only remotely preferred configuration involves everyone with a Microsoft account, buying software, from any vendor, through the Microsoft store.

cannot polish this turd

[mschaffer]

Seriously? Windows 10 S removes one of the most important aspects to the traditional Windows OS---running whatever you want on your own workstation. Now MS wants to become the toll-taker on the road to the walled garden. No thanks!

Fuck walled gardens.

[Mysticalfruit]

If this succeeds, we'll see a future where when you buy a PC, it'll come with an OS preinstalled that you can't uninstall or reinstall because you don't have a signed bootloader from a authorized OEM. On this OS you'll only be able to run software that's been duly blessed by the vendor. Oh you've got some cool idea for a killer app / game... gotta submit the source code to possibly a future competitor..
Any peripherals you'd like to attach have to be specify allowed.

Re:Not really because it stifles competitive prici

[HalAtWork]

On Android you can install Amazon Store, on Windows there's Steam, Origin, UPlay, GoG, on Mac there is Steam as well, these are all curated storefronts with an eye on malware.

The issue here is they cannot be added to Windows 10 S as a companion storefront even though they do as much to "lock out the malware developers and remove the need for virus scanners."

Not all opinions are equal

[Lord Kano]

and this one is stupid.

10 S should fail, it should fail and die, then the idiots who conceived and approved this monstrosity should be fired and ostracized from the IT community forever.

It's a step backwards for computing. I bailed on Apple before they built their walled garden and I'd bail on Microsoft if it looks like this is going to be the future of their OS.

LK

Re:Beggars can't be choosers

[tepples]

I bought a pretty full featured laptop last summer for $550 (including a discrete NVidia card)

But that still requires someone to have a few hundred dollars to spare at the time he gets an itch to try GNU/Linux for the first time. Compare this with sticking with your current Windows laptop for $0 (or $50 if it came with Windows 10 S). And did you get to try the display and keyboard of this $550 laptop in a showroom, or did you instead have to buy it sight unseen through a web store?

Many Chromebooks can install Linux, too.

True, Chrome OS uses Linux as its kernel. But non-web applications don't work outside developer mode, and developer mode has a habit of committing hara-kiri if anyone else turns on your Chromebook.

Even still, several variants of Linux are able to install on UEFI (particularly Ubuntu and variants).

Successful installation doesn't imply that WLAN, Bluetooth, audio, backlight brightness, and suspend will work.