Windows EdgeBook - Microsoft rumored to challenge Chromebooks with an extremely lite version of Windows

[poochyena]

3 hours ago, GoodBytes said:

Cost.

but tablets cost the same as chromebooks

 

3 hours ago, GoodBytes said:

Also, the restrictive OS allows easy IT deployment, as there is not much to setup, as you can't do much.

Is there really much to set up on a tablet?

 

3 hours ago, GoodBytes said:

Yes. But those are pretty crappy.. I mean 720p screen, some with shitty displays or not great touch experience, weak specs... I mean it is fine

right, it is fine. Its a tablet.

[vorticalbox]

12 hours ago, jagdtigger said:

Windows Phone - Fail

Windows 8(.1) - Fail

Windows RT - Fail

Windows 10 - Fail

Windows 10 S - Fail

 

 

Yeah, Lite Version definitely wont suck.... /s

Hopefully we can just throw linux on it and get a cheap functioning laptop without have to mess about with developer mpde like on Chromebook 

[LAwLz]

4 hours ago, williamcll said:

would it beat windows 10 LTSC?

Depends on what you mean by "beat".

Sounds to me like this will be like Chromebooks. Basically a stripped down OS (even more so than Windows 10S) which runs primarily just a web browser (Edge). So if all you do is browse the web then chances are this will be better for you. However, for anyone who wants to run something else it will probably not work.

 

If Ubuntu is like Windows 10 LTSC, then this is ChromeOS.

It's designed for two different audiences.

 

 

Personally I think this will have a really hard time competing against ChromeBooks. I mean, what can Microsoft possibly offer which beats Chromebooks? Even if they strip out all the Windows stuff, base it on some lightweight GNU/Linux distro and port over their essential Office programs, it will still just be a less flexible and worse version of a Chromebook (which has access to Chrome and all Android apps, including things like Office).

 

 

At the end of the day, the only thing I see Windows have over competing products is a wide variety of third party software. All these attempts by Microsoft to create a new version of Windows (Windows Mobile, Windows RT, Windows 10S, etc) all dump compatibility with x86 and as a result they end up being terrible garbage that nobody wants to use.

I don't see this playing out any different. You can't make a worse product than your competitor and think it will sell.

[GoldenLag]

7 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Even if they strip out all the Windows stuff, base it on some lightweight GNU/Linux distro and port over their essential Office programs, it will still just be a less flexible and worse version of a Chromebook (which has access to Chrome and all Android apps, including things like Office).

in the end  it comes down to how locked down a "windows lite" would be. if it can run .exe files that are new and doesnt require legacy, then we might have a winner. "windows lite" can drop a lot of shit from the OS while still offering a lot

[LAwLz]

2 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

in the end  it comes down to how locked down a "windows lite" would be. if it can run .exe files that are new and doesnt require legacy, then we might have a winner. "windows lite" can drop a lot of shit from the OS while still offering a lot

That's what Windows 10S is, and it's terrible.

[mr moose]

38 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

That's what Windows 10S is, and it's terrible.

I believe 10S is the same size as 10.  it just has it's apps locked to the store.

 

I bought one the other day, the first thing I did when I got it home was upgrade it to 10. It did not download anything, it only took a few seconds and didn't even need a restart.  I wouldn't bee surprised if all they do is remove the store lock and the S from the product name.

[mrchow19910319]

15 hours ago, GoodBytes said:

Yes. When looking at tablets you really have 2 choices: Windows (too expensive for where Chromebook is attacking) and Apple.

 

Very few manufactures are making modern Android tablets. Users were not interested in the experience that Android delivered. The OS did not and still doesn't scale properly. We do know from rumors (if they are believed) that Google is working in merging Android and ChromeOS, and essentially kill off Android so that ChromeOS is the OS for phones, tablets and laptops.

isnt chrome OS just linux with a better frontend skin on it? 

 

If one day google replaced android with chrome OS, do you think that it will run smoother on cellphones?? 

[mrchow19910319]

5 hours ago, vorticalbox said:

Hopefully we can just throw linux on it and get a cheap functioning laptop without have to mess about with developer mpde like on Chromebook 

chromebook trying to stop you from installing linux on it

 

apple's recent version of macOS straight up deleted the "linux bootcamp" function.

 

I'd say dont get your hope too high.  

[Sauron]

10 hours ago, GoodBytes said:

Cost. And, "no viruses", 'cause no/low potential valuable data from user and weak market share.

That also goes for a brick though. It kind of sounds like they'd be removing everything that makes Windows worth considering, at which point... why not just run ChromeOS or a regular Linux distribution? At least those have a good selection of ARM binaries.

 

As for the idea in general, honestly if I had 200$ to spend on a laptop I would never buy new - I can see chromebooks being useful for schools, which buy them in bulk and can't buy used,  but that's about it. Why should they move over to a gimped "windows" version?

[vorticalbox]

2 hours ago, mrchow19910319 said:

chromebook trying to stop you from installing linux on it

 

apple's recent version of macOS straight up deleted the "linux bootcamp" function.

 

I'd say dont get your hope too high.  

They don't stop you, you just need to disable os verification and enable boot from usb.

[PlayStation 2]

Just because Windows XP and Windows 7 Starter worked a decade ago doesn't mean it'll work now. We're in a whole 'nother league of laptops in general, where even the shitty $200 Windows laptops are vastly superior to the netbooks of yesteryear.

[rcmaehl]

19 minutes ago, handymanshandle said:

Windows 7 Starter

I'd rather not remember this Win 7 Flavor. Thanks.

[Doobeedoo]

So they can bring Win32 support via protected containers, that would be good and more versatile for Lite version. Still looks better than ChromeOS tho. 

[jagdtigger]

On 3/4/2019 at 8:45 PM, GoodBytes said:

So your solution is to not try?

Nope, but :mposing unneceserry limitations on programs aint gonna solve it either......

[jagdtigger]

On 3/4/2019 at 11:15 PM, Arika S said:

I had no idea Microsoft was actually out of business.

The only thing keeping them afloat is the fact that they have  a monopol on the pc market......

[GoodBytes]

18 minutes ago, jagdtigger said:

Nope, but :mposing unneceserry limitations on programs aint gonna solve it either......

Well where do you draw the line?

You can say, Well programs should have the right to write in memory space of other programs. You may say now, Oh don't be silly GoodBytes, that is too far, that is needed... but that is simply because you are used to it. If you could, then probably you would use many tweak software that modify other software to your liking. It is as bad as cutting support for extensions in web browsers.

[Arika]

18 minutes ago, jagdtigger said:

The only thing keeping them afloat is the fact that they have  a monopol on the pc market......

I monopoly though knowledge maybe. Linux still exists, a large amount of people might not know about it, and may not trust it because it's an "unknown" to them, but it still technically a competitor to windows. computer and laptop manufactures load windows because it's the OS people know, if they loaded Linux people owuld not buy them for the above reasons. people gravitated toward chromebooks because they already know about Google, Android and Chrome so they were more "trusting" (as contradictory as that work might be when talking about Google)

 

don't get me wrong, i wish Linux was more well know and widely used and supported, then it might actually be a viable option for me if all the software and games I play were available on native Linux 

[Trik'Stari]

If Windows wants to make any head way against Chromebooks, they need to offer better licensing practices than Google does. I've seen plenty of times where licenses were "burned" because of a simple mistake that could easily be undone, but won't be because Google don't care.

 

Also, have systems where the OS doesn't just suddenly refuse to see or use the battery that was installed. I've seen this thousands of times on Chromebooks. They just suddenly don't like that battery anymore, and will work fine with any other battery; whilst the battery that was installed readily works in any other Chromebook, and passes the battery test built into Chrome OS. Pop it back into the original Chromebook it came out of, and it still doesn't show up and the unit powers off if the charger is removed.

 

Beyond that it's a sales issue. Just do their best to get school systems to pick this up over Chrome OS. Remind them that Chrome OS largely only exists in the academic environment, and that Windows and MS Office are still dominant in today's business world.

 

Maybe I'm just biased because I work on Chromebooks and find them to be absolutely worthless junk. Cheaply made, extremely limited functionality, and honestly not much real world use in my opinion.

 

Maybe it's because I also hate the idea of any device that is 100% useless (as a "computer") without an internet connection.

[vorticalbox]

3 hours ago, Trik'Stari said:

If Windows wants to make any head way against Chromebooks, they need to offer better licensing practices than Google does. I've seen plenty of times where licenses were "burned" because of a simple mistake that could easily be undone, but won't be because Google don't care.

 

Also, have systems where the OS doesn't just suddenly refuse to see or use the battery that was installed. I've seen this thousands of times on Chromebooks. They just suddenly don't like that battery anymore, and will work fine with any other battery; whilst the battery that was installed readily works in any other Chromebook, and passes the battery test built into Chrome OS. Pop it back into the original Chromebook it came out of, and it still doesn't show up and the unit powers off if the charger is removed.

 

Beyond that it's a sales issue. Just do their best to get school systems to pick this up over Chrome OS. Remind them that Chrome OS largely only exists in the academic environment, and that Windows and MS Office are still dominant in today's business world.

 

Maybe I'm just biased because I work on Chromebooks and find them to be absolutely worthless junk. Cheaply made, extremely limited functionality, and honestly not much real world use in my opinion.

 

Maybe it's because I also hate the idea of any device that is 100% useless (as a "computer") without an internet connection.

Chromebook are started to get better with offline web apps and the newer versions supporting linux applications and android.

 

Actually a web dev dream righr there with the ability it test all desktop "not edge and safari" and all android browsers on a single device.

[LAwLz]

6 hours ago, Trik'Stari said:

Also, have systems where the OS doesn't just suddenly refuse to see or use the battery that was installed. I've seen this thousands of times on Chromebooks. They just suddenly don't like that battery anymore, and will work fine with any other battery; whilst the battery that was installed readily works in any other Chromebook, and passes the battery test built into Chrome OS. Pop it back into the original Chromebook it came out of, and it still doesn't show up and the unit powers off if the charger is removed. 

Are you sure that's a ChromeOS issue and not an issue with the device itself?

One customer I work with has a ton of Dell laptops, and it's not uncommon that they have issues with verifying batteries or chargers. But that's controlled at a BIOS level rather than the OS level.

 

6 hours ago, Trik'Stari said:

Beyond that it's a sales issue. Just do their best to get school systems to pick this up over Chrome OS. Remind them that Chrome OS largely only exists in the academic environment, and that Windows and MS Office are still dominant in today's business world.

You can run Office Online or the Android version of Office on Chromebooks.

But I think Google's goal is actually to get people to use Google Docs, which if you ask me isn't quite as good as MS Office.

But to be perfectly honest, for the things most students use Office for, Google Docs covers their needs completely. I'd be surprised if more than 1% of Office users actually use more than 5% of the features in it. For example in Word most people just write, change some typeface settings, and do things like set headers and index. In Excel most people just use some standard formulas and make graphs. And so on.

 

 

With the ability to run Android apps I think Chromebooks went from being really bad, to actually being quite decent computers if you got simpler needs.

[NeuesTestament]

I honestly don’t see much chances for such a venture. What makes Windows good is it’s flexibility and vast catalogue of Software. So a dumped down version would at least have to support a lot of the software 

[rcmaehl]

14 hours ago, jagdtigger said:

Nope, but :mposing unneceserry limitations on programs aint gonna solve it either......

Worked for DOS through at least Windows 2000. 640 kB was all you really needed.

[jagdtigger]

17 hours ago, Arika S said:

I monopoly though knowledge maybe.

Monopoly through a long history of illegal and anti competitive practices.....

[jagdtigger]

17 hours ago, GoodBytes said:

Well where do you draw the line?

You can say, Well programs should have the right to write in memory space of other programs. You may say now, Oh don't be silly GoodBytes, that is too far, that is needed... but that is simply because you are used to it. If you could, then probably you would use many tweak software that modify other software to your liking. It is as bad as cutting support for extensions in web browsers.

All i say is  locking apps into obscured closed source containers while locking out competition(DX and edge only for crapware apps) wont do any good for security....

[Arika]

3 hours ago, jagdtigger said:

Monopoly through a long history of illegal and anti competitive practices.....

And everything that people report about HOW it is/was a monopoly by bundling software within Windows is currently being done by Apple, yet somehow what they do is different? 

 

And from what I can find, they only refer to Netscape (which was a browser, not as OS) as is being a competitor which is the basis for the argument of a monopoly, unless there's other things that none of the sources actually put in there?