Slashdot Mirror
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.
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.
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.)
"Imagination is more important than knowledge" - Einstein
A well-known Microsoft's shill. Just read some of his articles on Ars Technica, they sound like vulgar TV commercials.
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.
Twinstiq, game news
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.
One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
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.
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.
Mimetics Inc. Twitter
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".
.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).
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
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.
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
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano