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.

Comments

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

2019 the year of the Microsoft Browser desktop

[BringsApples]

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.

Re:Ah yes, the perpetual follower

[Oswald McWeany]

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.

Re:That didn't take long

[XxtraLarGe]

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".

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Google Focused on the Chrome NOT the OS

[mykepredko]

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.

Re:Google Focused on the Chrome NOT the OS

[swillden]

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.

Re:Ah yes, the perpetual follower

[chispito]

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.

Re:Ah yes, the perpetual follower

[Lonewolf666]

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.

Re:That didn't take long

[tripleevenfall]

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.

Re:Ah yes, the perpetual follower

[squiggleslash]

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.)

Re:Ah yes, the perpetual follower

[LinuxIsGarbage]

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.