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.
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.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
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.
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
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.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
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.
Mimetics Inc. Twitter
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.
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!
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.
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
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.
Everyone just thought it was a netbook replacement. It's come a long way.
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.
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.
Table-ized A.I.
It was already released and it was called Windows RT.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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...
Yep, Microsoft made the netbook experience so miserable, that netbooks became synonymous with crap.
Chromebooks are the modern equivalent of netbooks.
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