Windows 10 will soon let you block desktop apps from installing.

[Guest]

So PowerShell Execution Policy for Apps

[TetraSky]

As long as it is not by default and/or can be disabled, I'm fine with it.

Otherwise I would totally be reverting back to Windows 7 or just switching to Linux with PlayOnLinux/Wine.

[Misanthrope]

1 hour ago, Drak3 said:

It's opt-in, and extremely likely to stay that way.

Trust me it won't stay that way. At some point they'll try to force everyone into Windows Store so they can make a bunch of cash and yes it won't be pretty but that never stopped them before.

[Drak3]

Just now, Misanthrope said:

Trust me it won't stay that way. At some point they'll try to force everyone into Windows Store so they can make a bunch of cash and yes it won't be pretty but that never stopped them before.

Microsoft removing the biggest draw to their platform is absolute corporate suicide. Especially when their competitors are still allowing users to install programs from third party sources after having similar app store setups for years, including Apple's OSX.

 

Microsoft knows that Windows Store will never be successful enough to validate the removal of third party installation, be it UWP or Win32, on consumer or prosumer level. The best they can do is offer the option to enable system administrators the option to enable it.

[Misanthrope]

14 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Microsoft removing the biggest draw to their platform is absolute corporate suicide.

Biggest draw to their platform it's still corporate usage though and it's not that hard to get an average office rig ready and move the required apps to the Windows store. In fact for the most part, any app that an office user needs its quickly moving to cloud based anyways

[79wjd]

2 hours ago, Centurius said:

This is only acceptable if it's opt-in, which I am sure it won't be.

I don't have a problem with it being opt-out so long as it's easy to opt-out. The average consumer is a moron who this will protect.

[PlayStation 2]

[compares a computer to the size of glasses because that makes sense :^)]

Meh, just make it easy to enable, or disable if it'll be turned on by default.

[SansVarnic]

4 hours ago, zMeul said:

children under a certain age cannot make correct decisions and it's up to the parents/teachers to supervise them

 

I forgot the test / study name

a group of children is shown two glasses (one slim and tall / the other fat and small) both filled with the same amount of water - when asked if any of the glasses has same amount of water or which glass has more water, the children will always answer that the tallest glass has more water

 

le: Piaget's Theory of Conservation

 

 

A child's power of observation vs perception and or understanding are very different at that age.

So yes the point that children cannot make sound decisions and need/require a parental guidance is essential. Any parent can attest to this [at least a parent worth their salt]. The fact that a study was required/needed to prove this is astounding to me but some people just cant understand such simple concepts *shakes head* I think some of those people probably still need parental guidance lol ...

[zMeul]

2 hours ago, SansVarnic said:

A child's power of observation vs perception and or understanding are very different at that age.

So yes the point that children cannot make sound decisions and need/require a parental guidance is essential. Any parent can attest to this [at least a parent worth their salt]. The fact that a study was required/needed to prove this is astounding to me but some people just cant understand such simple concepts *shakes head* I think some of those people probably still need parental guidance lol ...

parent needing parental guidance after the fact?! they need to be returned to sender

[suicidalfranco]

and this forum called Tim paranoid, tinfoil hatter and crazy 

[LAwLz]

Slippery slope.

Starts as an opt-in feature that is just there for the consumer benefits. After people have gotten used to it they change it to opt-out. After people have gotten used to that they make it mandatory.

 

Just look at what T-Mobile is doing with BingeOn.

Start as opt-in ( I think, they might have skipped this step).

Then it's opt-out

and now you actually have to pay to disable it.

 

 

This is pretty safe for now, but I would not be surprised if Microsoft's long-term goal (as in, maybe 10 years) would be to completely move over to an iOS approach (as in, they are the gatekeepers to all programs you can install on your computer, and the gate is the windows store).

[Maslofski]

this'd be a good option to limit old people's self destructive download abilities

[Doobeedoo]

So it's like modern UAC for say novice users I guess.

[SpaceGhostC2C]

11 hours ago, Drak3 said:

It's opt-in, and extremely likely to stay that way. Microsoft would be inspiring a mass exodus to Windows 7, Linux, and Android if they ever removed the opt-in aspect.

I follow you up to Android: Android has the same feature as opt-out, why would it be a better alternative?

As long as it remains an option, fine by me, although it's hard not to see this as part of the unstoppable "androidization" of PCs than Windows 10 aims at. It saddens me no to have a successor to Windows 7, only PC ports of mobile OSs, full with everything I hate about them :-\

 

10 hours ago, Shakaza said:

First off, it's "Parenting 101." 

Parental controls have existed forever, this adds zero to it. In fact, the user account system (which Windows always had) is a vastly superior way to keep your children's PC usage under control than an option yo limit non-MS market programs from installing across the board. It's not like everything in the MS market will be desirable for your kids according to you, and there are many ways beyond installing programs in which your children may use a PC in a way you don't want.

Admin account for parents, user accounts with tailored restrictions for kids. Old as Windows. This particular option adds zero in that regard.

 

2 hours ago, LAwLz said:

This is pretty safe for now, but I would not be surprised if Microsoft's long-term goal (as in, maybe 10 years) would be to completely move over to an iOS approach (as in, they are the gatekeepers to all programs you can install on your computer, and the gate is the windows store).

I never understood how we moved from bundling Internet Explorer with Windows being a huge anti-competitive scandal to uninstallable Skype, apps that re-install themselves and gate-keeping being perfectly fine for regulators across the globe. 

[Drak3]

1 minute ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

I follow you up to Android: Android has the same feature as opt-out, why would it be a better alternative?

As long as it remains an option, fine by me, although it's hard not to see this as part of the unstoppable "androidization" of PCs than Windows 10 aims at. It saddens me no to have a successor to Windows 7, only PC ports of mobile OSs, full with everything I hate about them :-\

Misanthrope's not so thought out claim is that they'll remove the opt in/opt out part of this. Which would be corporate suicide when nearly every other OS, including Android with some knowledge of developer settings, supports installation programs/apps via third party sources.

Only platforms that don't, that I can think of, are consoles and iOS. Consoles don't really do much, and every application they want is already either on the online store or on a disc. Same sort of goes for iOS, it was developed ground up to only install applications from first party sources, with the benefit of third party sources not being increased software selection, it's the ability to easily pirate apps.

[Hawx]

This is likely an offshoot of the Windows 10 Cloud featureset. They took the forced restrictions in Cloud and made an option in the other versions.

 

Maybe the option will just be greyed out in Cloud. 

[HarryNyquist]

I'd bet a lot of their money comes from their Server CALs and Volume Licensing to businesses, universities, etc. I know for a fact that a lot of those places do not have other options for certain softwares besides Win32 and manual install. Hell, Visual Studio doesn't operate through UWP, and people use that on a daily basis.

 

Locking this option, or even making it opt-out, would be utter suicide. They may be dumb with some of their choices in W10, but I really don't think they're willing to sacrifice billions in revenue from CALs and Enterprise Volume Licensing.