Windows 10 Cloud edition may be a thing... Windows RT 2.0?

[GoodBytes]

Based on leaks from Windows 10 latest insider builds, it indicates that Windows 10 Cloud edition is a SKU edition that is in the work.

In addition, ZDNet’s Mary Jo Foley reports that it seems that this edition of Windows can't run Win32 software. It can only run Universal Apps.

 

 

So it looks like Windows RT so far. But the target market is different. It seems that Microsoft goal is to make an edition of Windows for limited IT resources, like schools to compete against Chromebook which is growing for that exact reason. Being able to run only Universal Apps, especially if side-loading is disabled by default (meaning only Windows Store apps), it will blocks malware and viruses. One can guess that it can also support the Enterprise feature of Windows 10 where a custom Windows Store can be done, where the school can pick content that is available for download. It doesn't seem to be targeted to the low cost system market on the consumer side (but low-cost systems for schools). However, it seems that Windows 10 ARM will take over that, where it features x86 emulator to run Win32 programs.

 

Quote

While Windows RT largely failed at going mainstream, and Windows 8.1 with Bing was never widely used, the software giant is experimenting with another low-cost version of its popular Windows operating system: Windows 10 Cloud.

References to the new variant have started appearing in recent Windows 10 test builds, and ZDNet’s Mary Jo Foley reports that Windows 10 Cloud will be another simplified version of Windows designed to run Microsoft’s Universal apps from the Windows Store. Such a simple version of Windows 10 is clearly designed to take on alternatives like Chrome OS

 

Microsoft is not talking about this edition of Windows at the moment. We don't know when and if it will be really released.

Quote

Microsoft isn’t discussing this new Windows 10 Cloud OS publicly, but the naming doesn’t mean it’s literally powered by the cloud or streamed to a device.

 

Source: http://www.theverge.com/2017/1/31/14450780/microsoft-windows-10-cloud

[Guest Kloaked]

That's pretty cool. I used Google cloud services (Docs, etc) while in school since one of my class partners and I could work on stuff simultaneously and outside of class and see what we were working on without having to drop our other scheduled stuff to meet up. If they would include Word and other essential stuff in this, they could be onto something since some schools have no idea that Google's cloud services exist.

[Doobeedoo]

Well that would be very interesting counter to Chromebook though more OS SKUs and weren't they going for more unified OS anyway.

[GoodBytes]

15 minutes ago, Kloaked said:

That's pretty cool. I used Google cloud services (Docs, etc) while in school since one of my class partners and I could work on stuff simultaneously and outside of class and see what we were working on without having to drop our other scheduled stuff to meet up. If they would include Word and other essential stuff in this, they could be onto something since some schools have no idea that Google's cloud services exist.

You can already do all this with Office both offline and online versions.

[Guest Kloaked]

Just now, GoodBytes said:

You can already do all this with Office both offline and online versions.

Yeah I figured as much, but our school machines were still running on Windows 7 and didn't have 365 yet. The Google apps worked in Chrome so it made it easier. I just exported it to whatever version of Word we had and made edits where I needed to since sometimes the formatting would bug out and mess up stuff.

[GoodBytes]

4 minutes ago, Doobeedoo said:

Well that would be very interesting counter to Chromebook though more OS SKUs and weren't they going for more unified OS anyway.

Unified in the sense that a big part (but not all) of the source code is the same between editions. Microsoft calls it "OneCore". So, XBox One, Windows 10 Mobile, Windows 10 Home/Pro/Enterprise, and the Server edition, IoT edition, AR/VR and I guess now the coming up: ARM and Cloud, all features the same. Meaning, if they change something it affects all platforms.

[handymanshandle]

Is it going to only be available to OEMs because if they're making it so consumers can get licenses, people who might not know better may buy it thinking they're getting a mostly functioning version of Windows with more features removed but still in general able to use regular Windows programs when in reality they can only use UWP apps.

[Doobeedoo]

10 minutes ago, GoodBytes said:

Unified in the sense that a big part (but not all) of the source code is the same between editions. Microsoft calls it "OneCore". So, XBox One, Windows 10 Mobile, Windows 10 Home/Pro/Enterprise, and the Server edition, IoT edition, AR/VR and I guess now the coming up: ARM and Cloud, all features the same. Meaning, if they change something it affects all platforms.

Yeah I guess so, I though this would be something different.

[YamiYukiSenpai]

This would be good for older hardware that couldn't handle Windows 7 (at least, I hope).

[LAwLz]

This might be the worst idea I've heard all year.

Have Microsoft just given up on making good products?

 

UWP sucks ass. It is unusable. ChromeOS is getting Android apps so this new Windows OS would be even worse in terms of functionality than ChromeOS...

[Sniperfox47]

25 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

This might be the worst idea I've heard all year.

Have Microsoft just given up on making good products?

 

UWP sucks ass. It is unusable. ChromeOS is getting Android apps so this new Windows OS would be even worse in terms of functionality than ChromeOS...

It's not meant for consumer users. Schools and enterprise Chromebooks are suggested to disable Android apps specifically for security and control.

 

How does UWP suck? Modern API I would have totally agreed with you, but UWP is pretty robust. Is it awful for games? Sure. It's it awful for stability on home/pro systems? Sure. I don't know that it's that bad overall though.

 

It's a build intended for light deployments of the basic Windows platform, so it would be roughly on par with ChromeOS without Android apps.

[LAwLz]

7 minutes ago, Sniperfox47 said:

It's not meant for consumer users. Schools and enterprise Chromebooks are suggested to disable Android apps specifically for security and control.

 

How does UWP suck? Modern API I would have totally agreed with you, but UWP is pretty robust. Is it awful for games? Sure. It's it awful for stability on home/pro systems? Sure. I don't know that it's that bad overall though.

 

It's a build intended for light deployments of the basic Windows platform, so it would be roughly on par with ChromeOS without Android apps.

I don't know what you mean by "modern API" since there isn't anything called that. By "modern API" do you perhaps refer to Windows UWP?

 

If you by "robust" mean the actual definition of the word then no, it's not robust. It is not rich, or well built, or healthy. It's an "ecosystem" that is on life support. It does not integrate well into any existing corporate enviourment if it's the only thing you're going to use (which apparently is the whole deal with this new OS).

 

Even if we assume that it will take off for something like thin clients, why would anyone choose this over ChromeOS, which had the first move advantage and has already established itself as the standard for this type of environment?

You won't make customers choose your platform by offering the same thing as your competitor (or in the case of ChromeOS with Android apps enabled, this Windows version offers even less). You need to be better than your competitors, and right now UWP-only Windows

 

If this is just a version of Windows that only runs UWP, then this is doomed to fail. A massive waste of money from Microsoft.

[Sniperfox47]

2 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

I don't know what you mean by "modern API" since there isn't anything called that. By "modern API" do you perhaps refer to Windows UWP?

 

If you by "robust" mean the actual definition of the word then no, it's not robust. It is not rich, or well built, or healthy. It's an "ecosystem" that is on life support. It does not integrate well into any existing corporate enviourment if it's the only thing you're going to use (which apparently is the whole deal with this new OS).

 

Even if we assume that it will take off for something like thin clients, why would anyone choose this over ChromeOS, which had the first move advantage and has already established itself as the standard for this type of environment?

You won't make customers choose your platform by offering the same thing as your competitor (or in the case of ChromeOS with Android apps enabled, this Windows version offers even less). You need to be better than your competitors, and right now UWP-only Windows

 

If this is just a version of Windows that only runs UWP, then this is doomed to fail. A massive waste of money from Microsoft.

By modern API I mean the RT API as in the Windows Runtime API for Windows 8.x apps without the newer additions to the Windows 10 UWP API ecosystem.

 

Umm as for it's robustness I think you have missed a lot of the development that's gone on with it over the past couple years. I know at least a few smaller companies that have been slowly transitioning over to it from ActiveX/IE based ecosystems for their upgrade from Windows XP/7 to Windows 10. I also know a number of learning application developers who are building for it.

 

It's not a massive waste of money at all since it would basically be onecore, onecore UAP, and the graphics subsystem, all building blocks that they already have. It would be a minimal investment for them at most. That's the whole benefit to Onecore and OnecoreUAP.

 

If they offer the "Windows Subsystem for Linux" on Windows 10 Cloud it would make for an even better education tool.

[GoodBytes]

1 minute ago, Kloaked said:

Yeah I figured as much, but our school machines were still running on Windows 7 and didn't have 365 yet. The Google apps worked in Chrome so it made it easier. I just exported it to whatever version of Word we had and made edits where I needed to since sometimes the formatting would bug out and mess up stuff.

Well if you, and your friend has a Microsoft account (Live, Hotmail, Outlook, etc.), you have access to Office online via OneDrive, and you can have multiple users. Works with any web browsers

[Guest Kloaked]

2 minutes ago, GoodBytes said:

Well if you, and your friend has a Microsoft account (Live, Hotmail, Outlook, etc.), you have access to Office online via OneDrive, and you can have multiple users. Works with any web browsers

Would have been nice to know a year and a half ago.

[Sniperfox47]

16 minutes ago, Kloaked said:

Would have been nice to know a year and a half ago.

Microsoft keeps office online pretty hush hush in the background. I assume because they want to push paid copies of office, but it does them a disservice on the education side of things.

[LAwLz]

3 hours ago, Sniperfox47 said:

Umm as for it's robustness I think you have missed a lot of the development that's gone on with it over the past couple years. I know at least a few smaller companies that have been slowly transitioning over to it from ActiveX/IE based ecosystems for their upgrade from Windows XP/7 to Windows 10. I also know a number of learning application developers who are building for it.

And have these small companies completely abandoned Win32 and only run UWP?

Because that is what this OS seems to be.

I work with a lot of companies, and not a single one exclusively uses UWP. Hell, I can't even think of one that relies on UWP for anything. Even the ones that have migrated to Windows 10 still uses Win32 for everything.

 

3 hours ago, Sniperfox47 said:

It's not a massive waste of money at all since it would basically be onecore, onecore UAP, and the graphics subsystem, all building blocks that they already have. It would be a minimal investment for them at most. That's the whole benefit to Onecore and OnecoreUAP.

Yeah sure. Watch it burn in a few years.

Also, you are underestimating the cost of doing something like this. It's not just to strip things from Win10 and ship it. There is education (to the potential customers), support, working with hardware makers to create devices, and a wide variety of other expenses you have to account for. Customer education is expensive as hell, and since there is already an OS for this (ChromeOS) Microsoft will need a lot of it.

[Sniperfox47]

1 minute ago, LAwLz said:

And have these small companies completely abandoned Win32 and only run UWP?

Because that is what this OS seems to be.

I work with a lot of companies, and not a single one exclusively uses UWP. Hell, I can't even think of one that relies on UWP for anything. Even the ones that have migrated to Windows 10 still uses Win32 for everything.

I know a number of businesses that rely on absolutely 0 Win32 code other than Internet Explorer, Active X, and *shudders* java web applets. While UWP definitely isn't a drop in replacement, it's far faster to build front ends to replace these for UWP than raw Win32 even with .net C#

[LAwLz]

14 minutes ago, Sniperfox47 said:

I know a number of businesses that rely on absolutely 0 Win32 code other than Internet Explorer, Active X, and *shudders* java web applets. While UWP definitely isn't a drop in replacement, it's far faster to build front ends to replace these for UWP than raw Win32 even with .net C#

So 0 Win32 code, if you don't count all the Win32 code they use.

Thanks for proving my point.

 

Yes it might be fast to develop (some) things in, but because of the extreme limitations and the lack of backwards compatibility with essentially all of the current systems and environments it just doesn't work. Besides, companies don't want to spend time and money replacing something which they think works well enough. They won't throw out all their current computers, and redevelop all of their current programs just for fun. And supporting two systems at once is very costy so they don't want that either.

 

UWP is shite, and a version of Windows which can only run UWP programs will be garbage too.

 

You can say that things will be different things time. That it won't be another WinRT, but let me tell you. People were saying the exact same things you are saying right now back when WinRT existed. Wanna know what happened with WinRT? Even Microsoft got tired of supporting that steaming pile of garbage and killed it. It doesn't matter that UWP is a slightly more polished turd than WinRT's APIs were, because all of the problems and friction is still there.

 

 

Now, feel free to save this thread and come back to me in 5 years. If this new version of Windows (assuming this version of Windows is UWP-only of course) has gained a considerable amount of marketshare (not like Windows Mobile which can't even break the 1% barrier) then feel free to come back to this thread and say "Hey everyone, LAwLz was wrong about Windows 10 Cloud!". But until then, I will assume this is a horrible idea which will not go anywhere, and will cost Microsoft quite a lot of money they could have spent on more important things. Like improving the regular version of Windows.

[Sniperfox47]

2 hours ago, LAwLz said:

So 0 Win32 code, if you don't count all the Win32 code they use.

Thanks for proving my point.

 

Yes it might be fast to develop (some) things in, but because of the extreme limitations and the lack of backwards compatibility with essentially all of the current systems and environments it just doesn't work. Besides, companies don't want to spend time and money replacing something which they think works well enough. They won't throw out all their current computers, and redevelop all of their current programs just for fun. And supporting two systems at once is very costy so they don't want that either.

...my point there was "they use no Win32 code and the Win32 apps they have as dependencies are no longer viable in a modern Windows 10 ecosystem anyways, so they'll have to rebuild one way or another when they're forced to do enterprise rollouts of Windows 10"...

 

HTML and ActiveX are *not* Win32. Java is *not* Win32. The businesses I'm refering to have 0 Win32 code of their own. They just have a dependency on a Win32 program, namely IE.

 

I'm pretty sure we can all agree that while IE has a strong history in corporate environments, it's not a viable platform for continued development, if only out of security concerns. ActiveX is waaaaaaaaaaaaaay too easy to exploit and internet explorer creates way too big of an attack surface.

 

The future for corporate webapps is HTML5 which Edge supports, and UWP apps can be combined with an HTML5 base and used in a relatively timely and cost effective manner to develop replacement front ends for what would have traditionally been done in java webapplets.

[LAwLz]

16 minutes ago, Sniperfox47 said:

HTML and ActiveX are *not* Win32. Java is *not* Win32. The businesses I'm refering to have 0 Win32 code of their own. They just have a dependency on a Win32 program, namely IE.

OK fine, the things you mentioned are not Win32, but they wouldn't run on a WinRT-like version of Windows 10 either. So you can be pedantic and say that "that's not Win32!" if you want, but it doesn't invalidate my arguments.

 

16 minutes ago, Sniperfox47 said:

The future for corporate webapps is HTML5 which Edge supports, and UWP apps can be combined with an HTML5 base and used in a relatively timely and cost effective manner to develop replacement front ends for what would have traditionally been done in java webapplets.

Sure, for brand new webapps you would be fine with a UWP-only Windows. The problem is that:

1) That is only a small segment of the market.

2) ChromeOS, which is already a well established platform also supports it.

 

Again, you can't win over marketshare if you come in late, and don't offer anything that's a lot better than your competitors.

[YamiYukiSenpai]

9 hours ago, LAwLz said:

This might be the worst idea I've heard all year.

Have Microsoft just given up on making good products?

 

UWP sucks ass. It is unusable. ChromeOS is getting Android apps so this new Windows OS would be even worse in terms of functionality than ChromeOS...

UWP, in general, doesn't suck.  Some are horrible (i.e. Facebook & Instagram), but there are others that are great.   I use some of them on a daily basis (i.e. Readit, Tweet It!, Grover Podcast).

 

With the Windows 10 cloud, it might entice developers to develop more UWP software AND force Microsoft to keep dishing out improvements for UWP.

 

I, for one, hope that this succeeds.

[GoodBytes]

Tim Sweeny from Epic (picture bellow) is at again with his conspiracy theory. Despite the fact that we know NOTHING officially about Windows 10 Cloud edition. He calls it, as he called Windows RT and the Store, Steam killer, and will lock everyone out of WIn32 programs and outside games, allowing only UWP apps and games.

 

 

In Twitter he says:

Quote

Windows 10 Crush Steam Edition
Looks like Microsoft was waiting till after the election to see if they could get away with their lockdown.

...

Microsoft is a monopoly with a large majority of PC OS market share, and is barred from forced "tying" by antitrust law.

 

ArsTechnica says:

Quote

Sweeney is convinced that Microsoft wants to exercise total control over the Windows platform and destroy Valve's Steam. Last year, Sweeney attacked the Universal Windows Platform API. He claimed (incorrectly) that third-party stores such as Steam would be unable to sell and distribute UWP games, leaving them at a disadvantage relative to Microsoft's own store. He followed this statement with the claim that Microsoft would systematically modify Windows so as to make Steam work worse and worse, such that gamers grow tired of it and switch to the Windows Store.

A version of Windows 10 that can only use software from the Windows Store, as Windows 10 Cloud is believed to be, would certainly be bad news for Steam. Steam can't be found in the Windows Store, and, due to the way it works, it's unlikely that it ever will be.

 

Also, he says on twitter to a reply:

 

I guess he forgot that ChromeOS is also locked to use Google Store. And worst, the education sector has Android app disabled. So you don't even have that.

 

Sources:

https://www.neowin.net/news/tim-sweeney-is-at-it-again-calling-windows-10-cloud-crush-steam-edition

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/01/tim-sweeney-unhappy-about-windows-10-cloud-rumors-calls-os-crush-steam-edition/

 

[YamiYukiSenpai]

15 minutes ago, GoodBytes said:

-snip-

It's easy to forget that you can sideload UWP, too.

[AlTech]

12 minutes ago, gabrielcarvfer said:

The UWP thing, even with Centennial, it is not doing what it was supposed to do: deliver most Windows programs to as many users as possible. 

Where are Microsoft programs (real Office, Microsoft MPI, Mathematics, Microsoft Garage stuff...), other browsers (Firefox, Spark, Opera, Chrome, Chromium, ...), developer tools (msys2, CodeBlocks, Visual Studio, Jetbrains IDE's, Netbeans, Sublime, Notepad++, Git, Mercurial, SVN, ...), music programs (Spotify, iTunes, ...), office tools (LibreOffice, OpenOffice, WPS, Open365, ...), file sync stuff (Resilio Sync, Dropbox, Google Drive, OwnCloud, Mega, ...)? None of them are in Store.

Most of the programs you listed are too heavily developed in Win32 to expect a reasonably quick port to UWP if they ever get a port at all.