Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft is Working On a New Iteration of Windows To Take On ChromeOS, Report Says (petri.com)

Petri's Brad Sams writes: For more than a year, we have been hearing about Windows Core OS and how it is a modern version of Windows. As Microsoft continues to build out the platform, it's time to take a look at what the secret project actually includes and how the company is positioning the platform. In Microsoft's feverish attempts to shove out insider builds at an impressive rate, the company doesn't always do a great job at scrubbing the finer details from the builds. Because of this, and some help from a couple insiders, I have been able to piece together what Lite is and where it's headed.

Microsoft is working on a new version of Windows that may not actually be Windows. It's currently called Lite, based on documentation found in the latest build, and I can confirm that this version of the OS is targeting Chromebooks. In fact, there are markings all over the latest release of the insider builds and SDK that help us understand where this OS is headed. If you have heard this before, it should sound a lot like Windows 10 S and RT; Windows 10 Lite only runs PWAs and UWP apps and strips out everything else. This is finally a truly a lightweight version of Windows that isn't only in the name. This is not a version of the OS that will run in the enterprise or even small business environments and I don't think you will be able to 'buy' the OS either; OEM only may be the way forward.

97 of 161 comments (clear)

  1. That didn't take long by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

    Wasn't it just in the last one or two years we heard Microsoft saying that Windows 10 was it - there basically wasn't going to be any new releases of Windows going forward, only iterative improvements on the existing product?

    --
    #DeleteChrome
    1. Re:That didn't take long by Bobfrankly1 · · Score: 1

      But it IS Windows 10. The name is "Windows 10 Lite". See? It's right there in the name!

      :eyeroll:

    2. Re:That didn't take long by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 5, Funny

      But it IS Windows 10. The name is "Windows 10 Lite". See? It's right there in the name!

      I think a great name for this would be "Windows Pane".

      --
      Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
    3. Re:That didn't take long by tripleevenfall · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's just M$ doing their usual song and dance - showing up late to the party to do a poor imitation of the innovators in a space, and being soundly rejected by consumers.

    4. Re:That didn't take long by Hylandr · · Score: 1

      Nailed it.

      --
      ~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
    5. Re:That didn't take long by LinuxIsGarbage · · Score: 1

      This is just looks like a revival of the failed Windows 10 S in a new form. No one wanted that and no one will want this version of it either.

      You mean a revival of the failed Windows RT?

      Windows CE?

      Win32 app compatibility is the only reason people continue to use Windows. People use it in spite of Microsoft, not because of them.

    6. Re:That didn't take long by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1
      You nailed it about what they do.

      You are also correct about being rejected by consumers.

      But, goal of Microsoft is not these consumers. It is to retain its grip on corporate IT. Their ChromeOS clone will have ActiveDirectory authentication built in. And it will be pitched to corporations.

      And it might not do any better. But it will give the appearance of doing something etc till the stock options vest and the current crop of mismanagers to retire or cash out.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    7. Re:That didn't take long by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

      ActiveDirectory and Outlook built in. ChromeOS will be flattened out on the roadway in the corporate market.

    8. Re:That didn't take long by Bobfrankly1 · · Score: 1

      The woosh is real.

    9. Re:That didn't take long by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Nope, target at the school environment, get them addicted whilst they are young and get them used to handing over all their information to M$. Free of very low cost for schools, but hand over all students and their parents information and you can bet slime in ads, in a very short time, more and more ads.

      M$ does not give one shite about the negative reaction to their mass invasion of privacy, nor their ability to force software installs on you computer or the ability to delete content on your computer at will. They are truly disgusting corporate filth and should be barred from school environments, hell the corrupt douche bags tried to corrupt international standards.

      They will be targeting school children specifically, make no mistake on that. Schools that sell out the right to privacy of their students, should be challenged.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    10. Re:That didn't take long by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

      Privacy train has left the station ages ago. No body seems to give a damn. People casually take a picture and post and share everything, from what they eat to what they crap.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    11. Re:That didn't take long by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

      Cheap windows laptop that corporate can deploy for about $60 and insure that it doesn't get infested with the employees' x86 software. I think it could be a winning product.

  2. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  3. I thought they already did this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It was called Windows ARM or something.

    And it failed miserably.

    1. Re:I thought they already did this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I had an HP Jornada mini-laptop that had Windows CE embedded on a PROM. Startup was about 8 seconds. Internet was from an 802.11b CF card.

    2. Re:I thought they already did this... by Bobfrankly1 · · Score: 1

      It was called Windows ARM or something.

      Maybe read the linked article...

      And it failed miserably.

      Yup.

    3. Re:I thought they already did this... by Lonewolf666 · · Score: 1

      Yep. It was Windows RT. And the reason it failed is because it was confused with Windows. It couldn't run normal 32 bit Windows apps.

      I think the reason was not just confusion:
      If 32 bit Windows apps don't run, then Microsoft is throwing away its probably greatest advantage, the lots of compatible software in the wild.
      Without that, they will at best be able to match the existing app stores of Google and Apple. And latecomers without some serious advantage don't get far.

      --
      C - the footgun of programming languages
    4. Re:I thought they already did this... by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

      I once ran Windows NT 4.0 on a PowerPC box. I'm probably one of a hundred who ever ran something that arcane. There were zero third party apps for it. It was a curiosity, but the box was better for running NetBSD.

    5. Re:I thought they already did this... by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

      The only Power computer I have at present is an RS/6000 deskside box (with no graphics card, alas) that runs AIX. It's a Power 1 system, with microchannel cards. The Power 1 chipset resides on one of the microchannel cards. It boots up with a serial console. The serial console sits dead silent for about five minutes when you power it up before anything shows up indicating the box is alive.

  4. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  5. It adds up by Bobfrankly1 · · Score: 1

    This likely explains some of the motivation behind the news earlier today about Edge being replaced by a Chromium based Browser, and the MS contributions to the Chromium project.

  6. 2019 the year of the Microsoft Browser desktop by BringsApples · · Score: 5, Interesting

    First they replace Edge with Chromium. Then they replace the OS with a browser-based system.

    I wonder if Microsoft is just going to survive off of it's cloud-based azure? They're doing LOTS of new work in that project.

    --
    Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
    1. Re:2019 the year of the Microsoft Browser desktop by Hadlock · · Score: 1

      I think Azure revenue is supposed to supplement or replace major revenue streams like consumer OS and consumer office software, yes.
       
      Microsoft is being pretty aggressive with Azure, right now it goes 1. AWS, 2. Azure... then way behind in 3rd place is GCE/GCP, and way, way behind that is everyone else.
       
      For 20 years microsoft has been trying to get customers to subscribe to windows, and nobody has bought in to that idea. Finally with Azure, Microsoft gets their monthly customer subscription revenue, except instead of milking consumers dry, they're milking their enterprise customers that they're already deeply in bed with.

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    2. Re:2019 the year of the Microsoft Browser desktop by BringsApples · · Score: 1

      Azure is the best approach that Microsoft's had yet, regarding the Microsoft business model that's based on monopoly. It appears to me that they're focusing on Azure as the actual OS, and they're focusing on the PC market as a dummy-terminal market, where the only way for the browser-based PCs to "connect" to the "OS" where they can use Word, Excel, etc... Of course for a monthly fee. Fees on each "component". Fees for data. Fees for fees...

      Maybe 2019 will finally be the year of the Linux desktop. Maybe 2019 will be the year of no desktop.

      --
      Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
    3. Re:2019 the year of the Microsoft Browser desktop by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      I wonder if Microsoft is just going to survive off of it's cloud-based azure? They're doing LOTS of new work in that project.

      Their recent market cap is certainly not due to the roaring success of the Windows 10 October release. Based on their most recently quarterly report Azure is bringing in as much revenue and even more profit than the cash-cow of Office / Productivity apps and just shy of the OEM racket they got going with Windows.

  7. Re:Ah yes, the perpetual follower by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Microsoft always skating to where the puck was, never where it's going. No one who chooses to use Windows wants a dumbed-down ChromeOS clone. If they want ChromeOS they'll use the real thing not the shoddy imitation that's called Windows that isn't really Windows.

    Yes, they're making the same mistake as Windows Phone. Instead of innovating something new, they're trying to imitate the competition long after the market is established and already saturated.

    Too late for this MS. Think of something new- innovate instead.

    --
    "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  8. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  9. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  10. Re:Ah yes, the perpetual follower by jellomizer · · Score: 1

    I am reminded of the NetBook fad a decade ago. Cheap Low End laptops used mostly for low end users. Microsoft didn't have too much luck in that field, as most Netbook users gravitated towards Linux.

    I don't see Chromebooks (which are Netbooks under a different name) getting big in MS territory. If you want windows, chances are you will be wanting to do some gaming, and you need more horse power.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  11. Re:Bad business move by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Exactly. And this is what most of the open source folks still don't get. If I can't run MS Office and my specialty software on my computer then I don't care that the OS and application stack are open source.

  12. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  13. Google Focused on the Chrome NOT the OS by mykepredko · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't think Microsoft understands that ChromeOS is successful because it primarily brings the World Wide Web to the user via a small platform via the Chrome browser. Most of the user requirements are fulfilled using various web pages/services not through the software bundled into the OS.

    ChromeOS is successful because of the browser integration, not because it's a new OS and I think that's where Microsoft is getting hung up.

    If Microsoft really wanted to compete, it should be getting the smallest, tightest OS they have that can still run networking, create a full featured HTML5/WebKit compliant browser (which they should have done YEARS ago) and let users log in using their Microsoft accounts. Develop the user base, understand what customers want in terms of apps (ie Office) without charging for the privilege of helping Microsoft figure out what customers want and develop a product plan based on this.

    Otherwise, it's going to be a molasses slow experience on systems that ChromeOS zips along with.

    1. Re:Google Focused on the Chrome NOT the OS by omnichad · · Score: 1

      create a full featured HTML5/WebKit compliant browser (which they should have done YEARS ago)

      They're doing that right now.

      ChromeOS is successful, but it still falls short of a good web-centric OS. Treating multiple open processes as simply "tabs" makes it really hard to get around. If specific web apps could get their own icon on the taskbar (and could still have subtabs), a Windows derivation has a good chance at being more usable. Task-switching is painful when everything is a tab in a monolithic window.

    2. Re:Google Focused on the Chrome NOT the OS by anoob7000 · · Score: 1

      People run Microsoft Windows because it supports the application they want to run and not just the browser. The reason ChromeOS hasn't taken over the business or home market is due to lack of application support including legacy stuff.

      If Microsoft strips all the legacy stuff and bits from Windows to get a mean and lean operating system, you have a completely new product with no applications.

    3. Re:Google Focused on the Chrome NOT the OS by Gilgaron · · Score: 2

      Well, it would presumably support Office365 and all its webapps. Perhaps that might not be super useful for a general purpose PC, but for a light duty workstation it could do well.

    4. Re:Google Focused on the Chrome NOT the OS by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      If Microsoft really wanted to compete, it should be getting the smallest, tightest OS they have that can still run networking

      Yep. Windows 10 is a solid foundation for it. It will only require 8GB of HDD space and they'll achieve this by shipping Windows along with it's app like the 3D printing app, but by removing useless things like the registry editor and the control panel.

      Remember this is a company that produced Windows 10 IoT Core for use on IoT devices and it only requires 768MB of RAM and 3GB of HDD space as an absolute minimum for the OS.

    5. Re:Google Focused on the Chrome NOT the OS by swillden · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, it would presumably support Office365 and all its webapps. Perhaps that might not be super useful for a general purpose PC, but for a light duty workstation it could do well.

      Given their move to a Chromium-based browser, it could potentially also run all of the Chrome web apps. Throw in an Android container, and you'd have something equivalent to ChromeOS, except that I presume it would run the MS webapps "natively" (right now, to run Office365 on a Chromebook you have to use the Office365 Android app in the Android container, or so I read). If the set of Universal Windows Platform apps grows to be something useful, those would provide another advantage over Chromebooks.

      And, honestly, Lite probably doesn't need to actually be better than ChromeOS. If it's only as good then it may provide a way to stop the bleeding, and that's probably enough. Microsoft still has the dominant PC OS. That dominance is at risk because of the success of ChromeOS in education, which may create a generation of users who are accustomed to something else. Or maybe not; after all, Apple tried that strategy in the past and failed. But if Microsoft can get an MS-branded equivalent into the markets currently being served by Chromebooks it may be possible to mitigate the risk they pose.

      Though it's not really evidence of anything, I'm quite certain that it would be far, far easier to convince my dad to use a Microsoft browser OS than to use Chrome OS. It wouldn't surprise me if there were a bunch of other people out there who really only need an enhanced browser and would be happy to try one from Microsoft but won't stray outside of the MS fold.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    6. Re:Google Focused on the Chrome NOT the OS by gtall · · Score: 2

      Damn, now I'll have to expand the RAM and get an HDD for my Smart Doorbell. Frankly, I think it will look a bit goofy with that stuff hanging off the doorbell, but if that's what it takes to run MS, then sign me up!

    7. Re:Google Focused on the Chrome NOT the OS by johnnys · · Score: 2

      The ONLY reason to run Windows is Windows applications. Once you remove the ability to run Windows apps from Windows, no-one will buy it because it is not what they need. They can get the same functionality from any free Linux. Any reasonable Linux distribution will provide useful analogues to Windows apps that will provide "good enough" functionality for the vast majority of users.

      --
      Sometimes the "writing on the wall" is blood spatter...
    8. Re:Google Focused on the Chrome NOT the OS by LinuxIsGarbage · · Score: 1

      I can't tell if you're joking or not. A bare install of Windows XP can be easily pared down to run in 1.2GB Hard drive (less if you need fewer features), and run in 256MB RAM without touching page file. The useful features in Windows 10 isn't actually appreciably better.

      This is also going to ignore that you can get a variety of useful Linux distros to run in that footprint or less.

    9. Re:Google Focused on the Chrome NOT the OS by Bobfrankly1 · · Score: 2

      Treating multiple open processes as simply "tabs" makes it really hard to get around.

      My workplace has about 30k chromebooks in use, and the "tabs" is a source of complaint for some web apps because Chrome will suspend those tabs (regardless of settings) and require a fresh login to re-connect the setting. Cookies don't work for everything, esp high-security stuff.

    10. Re:Google Focused on the Chrome NOT the OS by aybiss · · Score: 1

      Oh is that all? :-D

      I seem to remember being able to do a bunch of stuff with no hard drive and 64K of memory.

      Pretty sure that's all my fridge needs.

      --
      It's OK Bender, there's no such thing as 2.
    11. Re:Google Focused on the Chrome NOT the OS by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Being facetious. That isn't the same as joking. Windows XP is not a viable platform for an internet connected device. MS actually sell a version of Windows designed for ultra low powered IoT devices in mind. It's called Windows 10 IoT Core. 768MB of RAM, and 3GB HDD space are the actual minimum requirements.

      This is also going to ignore that you can get a variety of useful Linux distros to run in that footprint or less.

      Of course you can get it from other vendors. That isn't the point. Or rather ... that is *exactly* my point.

  14. Looking at Windows 10 by IWantMoreSpamPlease · · Score: 2

    Since it's all that is for sale right now...
    I wonder how much smaller it would be if you dump any backward compat with 32bit and lower (in other words, runs only on 64bit) dumped all the spyware/telemetery and associated programs needing that, ditched "apps" and the associated store, dropped down to one rendering engine (see previous article on Edge going bye bye) how much smaller and/or faster, you'd be able to make it?

    Long time ago there was a thing called 98Lite, which was basically a stripped down version of windows 98 that ran pretty darned well on even very modest hardware.

    I'd like to see something like that again...

    --
    So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds.
    1. Re:Looking at Windows 10 by IWantMoreSpamPlease · · Score: 2

      I love Linux. Specifically Ubuntu 14.04LTS. They got it right with that. But there are some things it just won't do (primarily stuff at work) so at work, I deal with Win10, 8.1, 7, XP (offline), NT 4.0 (also offline) and DOS (err...) where needed. Wish I could fit Ubuntu into the mix, but alas....I cannot.

      --
      So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds.
  15. Re:Ah yes, the perpetual follower by chispito · · Score: 3, Informative

    I am reminded of the NetBook fad a decade ago. Cheap Low End laptops used mostly for low end users. Microsoft didn't have too much luck in that field, as most Netbook users gravitated towards Linux.

    I recall the original eee PC running Linux, but I think over the life of the fad, most netbooks were sold running some form of Windows XP.

    --
    The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
  16. Re:If they're re-branding Chromium as Edge.. by jfdavis668 · · Score: 1

    Because it's one louder.

  17. Re:we've been here before... by jfdavis668 · · Score: 1

    Did they make Bob for Windows ME?

  18. For the love of God... by pablo_max · · Score: 2

    When will they learn? They keep trying to make these Windows lite OS versions. What happens? It confuses the hell out of everyone because they think they are buying Windows and can run their Windows programs, but instead its some crap version which cannot do anything.
    At that point, why in the hell would anyone buy it? Why not get an iPad or Android device where one can actually buy apps?
    But yet, they just keep trying and trying.
    Stick to "real" Windows MS.

  19. Re:Ah yes, the perpetual follower by Lonewolf666 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Microsoft reacted to the NetBook fad by releasing a dirt cheap version of XP, limited to screen resolutions and memory sizes typically found in a netbook.
    Microsoft might not have earned much with that, but they successfully beat back the threat of a major Linux invasion in that market.

    --
    C - the footgun of programming languages
  20. Re:Bad business move by darkain · · Score: 1

    Microsoft already announced at a previous conference that they've actively been working on a x86 binary compatibility layer for ARM https://docs.microsoft.com/en-...

  21. windows RT 2 = epyc fail by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    windows RT 2 = epic fail

  22. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  23. worse than mac os! by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    Let's see
                                                                                            Win light Mac os

    limited range of hardware Very Likely Yes
    backwards compatible Very limited Yes
    Store lock in ---------------- Yes NO
    Supports TB / pci-e cards Maybe Yes
    enterprise tools Seams to be NO Yes

    1. Re:worse than mac os! by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

      What I would like, though, is for Microsoft to come up with a scheme where it is installable on Chromebooks. Some sort of 'crack' that makes it possible to write over ChromeOS.

  24. Re:Bad business move by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Those "retards" represent most of the business world. Way back when I applied for a research job with a large pharma company. They asked how proficient I was in RHEL because, they said, their division only used Linux desktops. I asked, what did everybody else in that company use. They said Windows, because the entire industry used Windows for business.

  25. W00t, the year of the linux desktop has arrived. by Shaitan · · Score: 1

    It's about damn time.

  26. and isp's will cap and fast lane the shit out user by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    and isp's will cap and fast lane the shit out users.

  27. Remember when people laughed at ChromeOS? by jfdavis668 · · Score: 2

    Everyone just thought it was a netbook replacement. It's come a long way.

    1. Re:Remember when people laughed at ChromeOS? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      With extra ads?

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  28. Re:Ah yes, the perpetual follower by LostMyAccount · · Score: 1

    use confusing naming schemes and licensing tiers

    This IS the business model. So MANY distinctions-without-a-difference editions of the same thing, each with its own crazy math licensing rules and costs.

    Everybody ends up buying up to avoid getting too little and winds up buying more than they actually wanted. It's weaponized information asymmetry.

  29. Yes, rinse and repeat by Flexagon · · Score: 2

    So did I (the Jupiter version, 640x480 display), and I thought it was almost ideal for taking to meetings, if not for full desktop work. Just the basics, near instant wake-up, and an almost real keyboard (tab and ~/` misplaced). It's too bad that prohibitive licensing schemes and internal fighting pretty much killed WinCE. Looks like we're about to repeat the cycle.

  30. What? by hawguy · · Score: 1

    it should sound a lot like Windows 10 S and RT; Windows 10 Lite only runs PWAs and UWP app

    What?

  31. Re:Easy, roll back to W7 by fizzer06 · · Score: 1
    That would be great if MS could un-fuck W7.

    Their so-called "security" updates caused so many problems, I jumped to Linux. W10? Fuggedaboudit.

  32. + license compliance audits that flag linux system by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    + license compliance audits that flag Linux systems due complex / hidden rules.

  33. Pull the fruit lever [re:Bad business move] by Tablizer · · Score: 2

    Indeed! Compatibility with Windows/x86-based software is pretty much the ONLY reason people still buy Windows and put up with M$'s shit-show. M$ cannot compete on raw merit alone. It's not in their DNA anymore. X-Box was their last non-compatibility-based hit.

    Here is what M$ should do: create a new "GUI browser" standard to compete with the HTML stack. But, make it desktop-friendly and focus on CRUD and "productivity" mouse-based applications that don't want to live with the wasted screen space and limited UI widgets of Bootstrap-like frameworks. Build in standard widgets like data grids, tree browsers (File Explorer-like), combo boxes, MDI nested windows, etc. No more dependence on flaky JavaScript libraries for common GUI idioms.

    Make an open-source GUI browser and allow forks to live so people don't fear M$ compatibility games. It's not guaranteed to work, but it would disrupt the browser market, giving MS a chance at a second life because M$ would be ahead of the curve for this new standard. If the current deck is not favoring you, then reshuffle it. There's a big need for better network-based productivity GUI's. HTML-based standards suck bigly for those, requiring too much code to fake it.

    That's how you Make MS Great Again, Mr. Nadella.

    1. Re:Pull the fruit lever [re:Bad business move] by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Why would it cost billions?

  34. Re:So obsolete by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    No fingers? What, you have a Goatse-based interface or something?

  35. Microsoft producing a small OS by thegarbz · · Score: 1

    Windows 10 IoT Core, an OS that was designed to run as the base for IoT devices. Minimum system requirements 768MB of RAM, 400MHz 3GB disk space, and a TPM chip.

    I'm going to grab my popcorn. This should be good.

  36. Semi-seriously here... by SlideWRX · · Score: 1

    How is this different from Win10 Mobile, with Continuum? If they would update Edge on my phone, I would literally have this right now. Technically, some PWAs work; just not all the support is there in Edge Mobile. Otherwise, it only downloads apps fro the store; i.e. UWP. Some poor sods are still putting out security updates for W10M, so there is obviously a W10M 'team' with a manager. Maybe they just changed their name to Lite, to throw everyone into a tizzy.

  37. Windows RT by GoJays · · Score: 2

    It was already released and it was called Windows RT.

  38. FAT patents by tepples · · Score: 1

    license compliance audits that flag Linux systems due complex / hidden rules.

    Might those rules include, say, VFAT patents (before they expired) and exFAT patents (since then)?

    1. Re:FAT patents by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

      and fully licensing each core in a VM cluster to be able to run windows VM in them Even if it's mostly Linux based VM's.

  39. Windows phone 2.0 by GrumpySteen · · Score: 1

    Now larger, heavier and less useful than any other smart phone on the market!

  40. Re:Ah yes, the perpetual follower by Streetlight · · Score: 1

    You're correct. They're following the the same path taken by Windows Phone, or whatever it was called. Same for RT and 10 S. They need to spend money making sure that semi annual updates of Windows 10 do not brick PCs.

    --
    In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. George Orwell
  41. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  42. Solar is fusion by tepples · · Score: 1

    We already have a production fusion plant. We just need to scale up the antennas to receive the power that it is transmitting.

  43. Re:Ah yes, the perpetual follower by squiggleslash · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The joke is they're going to where ChromeOS is thought to be, not where it is now. It was originally a "secure" OS that you couldn't install software on that wasn't NaCl or HTML5. Now you can install Android apps and can - albeit this is not production ready in my opinion - install arbitrary GNU/Linux applications (yeah, sudo apt-get install libreoffice works, add your own repos, compile your own applications, etc.)

    (What it is good at right now, perhaps better at than Windows, is web development. Install VSCode and Atom in your Penguin container, and then install whatever web stacks you want in custom containers running whatever LXD compatible operating system you want. So all of a sudden there's interest in high end Chromebooks.)

    So Windows is going to be locked down, while Chromebooks look, within the next year or two, to become general purpose computers you can do whatever you want with.

    And I'd make a guess that Locked Down Windows will still be less secure than ChromeOS. Because the amount of work needed to add the level of sandboxing and integrity checking needed to make Windows as secure is going to be very, very, high.

    (The other question though is "What's the point?" Who is going to want to use locked down Windows? Nobody uses it because they like Edge, or because they're easy to administer, we all use it because of the extensive software base and the implications that has in terms of everyone being able to swap files with one another. Without the ability to install arbitrary software, Windows becomes a difficult to maintain unreliable unstable insecure operating system with quirks everyone hates.)

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  44. Re:Ah yes, the perpetual follower by LinuxIsGarbage · · Score: 2

    I am reminded of the NetBook fad a decade ago. Cheap Low End laptops used mostly for low end users. Microsoft didn't have too much luck in that field, as most Netbook users gravitated towards Linux.

    The first models, like the EeePC 701 included truly awful Linux distributions, and a manual that was mostly instructions on how to install Windows XP. I believe Linux Netbooks had an incredibly high return rate. Your best bet was to either install Windows XP on them, or another distribution (like EeeBuntu). I don't know why the Linux models didn't just ship with Ubuntu instead of an ugly bastard step-child of an operating system.

    I believe including Linux was an act to pressure Microsoft to release low cost Windows licences. For the majority of the Netbook life, products were roughly: Windows XP Home or Windows 7 Starter, 1.6Ghz Atom or equivalent, 1GB RAM, 160GB Hard drive.

    While the processor wasn't good for Crysis, it was adequate for surfing the net, watching movies, using office, remote desktop / SSH, etc. The hard drive was adequate for offloading photos from a digital camera while traveling. At the time they were good as low cost, fairly compact computing devices for simple tasks. They showed the untapped potential for such devices, which eventually morphed into Tablets and better smartphones.

    Contrary to popular belief, Windows 7 Starter does not use any less resources than Home Premium or Professional, they just decontented the operating system as a means of differentiation at such a low cost.

    The RAM could usually be upgraded to 2GB, and the hard drive could be easily upgraded to a larger one if you wanted to bring a larger one (like 1TB) if you wanted more storage.

  45. Re:Ah yes, the perpetual follower by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

    They're out performing Apple in the market. Something to think about.

    --
    Life is not for the lazy.
  46. Will is be free (as in beer)? by Zaiff+Urgulbunger · · Score: 2

    It needs to be free (as in beer at least) otherwise why bother. I can't understand how they can charge for Windows now. Charging for support I get, but otherwise... nope.

  47. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  48. Re:Ah yes, the perpetual follower by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

    I have my mom's old Netbook, and I upgraded it to 2gb of memory and a 500g hard drive. It's still anemic, but it's useful for a few things.

  49. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  50. Re:Windows Linux by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

    The irony will be that it will run on the NT kernel, so the only part of 'Linux' that won't be present is the actual Linux kernel.

  51. Microsoft is tied to Win32 Enterprise Apps by xack · · Score: 1

    Any Microsoft OS that fails to run them will not succeed. Microsoft has to stop making "Chromy" OSes and focus on their enterprise needs.

  52. Re:Ah yes, the perpetual follower by LinuxIsGarbage · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The big thing that makes computers anemic is the web. Load a modern browser up and it's taking 500MB RAM.

    Then there's the webpages. Content hasn't changed, but they've become bloated. From a recent post of mine:

    If you're reading a news article (for example), requirements haven't really changed since print. You want some text, and a few images. Text is very bandwidth efficient, and the pictures you usually only glance at are 2.5"x1.5" and don't need to be super high res. Even if you have an 8k phone, you're scrolling by. Click to load a larger picture.

    But webpages include bundled custom fonts you don't care about, 93 tracking JavaScript plugins for social media sites and ads, 15 JavaScript frameworks where a fraction of the framework is used, 16k resolution stock images, and videos that you don't care about that start playing.

  53. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  54. No, they broke all that. by Grog6 · · Score: 1

    WinXX-x64 balready broke compatibility with old code; everyone with legacy code is stuck on WinXP32, or in some cases win7-x32.

    That ship sailed, and is now sinking.

    --
    Truth isn't Truth - Guliani
  55. Re:Ah yes, the perpetual follower by zilym · · Score: 2

    So true regarding web bloat. The web needs a serious reboot. It wouldn't be that hard to write a new web browser that dumps all the bloat. The problem is getting all the web sites people want to visit to adopt this lightweight browser's reduced feature set. Even if you could do that, feature creep will eventually bring you right back to where we are today because people always want more...

  56. Aimed at the K-12 market by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Choromebook has eaten everyone's lunch in the K-12 market. Apple is now a non-player, as is Windows. The benefits of Chromebooks are they work, they have all the apps needed, they are secure, and Google manages updates and security fixes, and cost of entry is almost nothing. The cost benefits are just too great. Windows plan in the long run is to compete in the K-12 market. Too late and won't be done as well as Google.

  57. Re:Ah yes, the perpetual follower by aybiss · · Score: 1

    Yep I still totally use my Zune...

    --
    It's OK Bender, there's no such thing as 2.
  58. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  59. Re:Ah yes, the perpetual follower by Teckla · · Score: 2

    Yep, Microsoft made the netbook experience so miserable, that netbooks became synonymous with crap.

    Chromebooks are the modern equivalent of netbooks.

  60. Re: And addendum to other posters' point by wierd_w · · Score: 1

    I dont know what you are complaining about AC. A chromebook *IS* a real computing device. Just one with some rather unusual hardware inside it.

    My celes is just fine, considering it is the apex of

    1) cheap (celes costs 250$.)
    2) ultra portable (1/2 inch thick when closed, weighs a little over 1lb)
    3) Fully unlockable (Full UEFI firmware from MrChromebox supported)
    4) absurd battery life (8hrs, ACTIVE USE.)
    5) reasonably powerful (recent models have 4gb RAM, but I have an old 2gb version. Same CPU though. Intel N3050: dual core x86-64 @ 1.6ghz)

    and all you have to do is remove a tiny screw inside to totally overwrite the firmware with the coreboot UEFI firmware-- It's totally a modern netbook after that. Just needs a little prodding.

  61. Re:Ah yes, the perpetual follower by Lonewolf666 · · Score: 2

    I think it was more about the price point. Netbooks were aimed at a market where a "regular" Windows Home license would have hurt competitiveness quite a bit due to its price.
    So the makers of early netbooks went "hey, lets use Linux to cut the cost". Cue Microsoft making an even more crippled version of Windows XP and selling it cheap enough for the netbook market. User inertia did the rest.

    --
    C - the footgun of programming languages
  62. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion