Windows 10X for Single Screens Leaks (thurrott.com) 107
Just ahead of its launch for commercial PC-like devices, an install image of Windows 10X for single screens has leaked, giving us an early peek at Microsoft's new OS. And yes, it's just like Chrome OS. From a report: Let's just get that out of the way. Microsoft has been working for years on a Chromebook competitor, but it has been largely unsuccessful. Windows 10 S, which was originally called Windows 10 Cloud, was Terry Myerson's approach, and that, of course, crashed and burned, in part because it looked identical to Windows 10 but couldn't run downloaded Windows 10 desktop applications. And now we have Windows 10X. Microsoft tried to hide its true intent with this product by pretending last year that it was aimed at a new generation of dual-display PCs, but the software giant really created 10X to compete with Chrome OS on inexpensive single-display PCs. So after failing to get its container-based Windows desktop application compatibility solution to work, Microsoft scaled back and repositioned Windows 10X as was originally intended: It will now ship only on new traditional PCs aimed at education and other commercial markets.
Single screen? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Single screen? (Score:4, Informative)
Yeah, whenever i'm forced to use a workstation with one screen, it feels a little like having to type with one arm. So many workflows are just made so much easier and manageable. For coding, I now view multiple screens as a minimum requirement, but even for a lot of my other duties involving document development and editing, spreadsheets, data analysis and business intelligence, it has reached the point where having one monitor would just have me lost in a sea of task switching. I can handle it on a phone or tablet, with the smaller real-estate and the general brain-dead nature of any office apps on these devices, but on my PC, no way.
Typing this on my Raspberry Pi 4b with two monitors.
Re: (Score:2)
Because of space limitations, I have one large 4K screen and it's almost, but not quite, as good as four 1080p displays. I have to up the zoom a bit because it's only a 27" but no program is ever "full-screen"
Re: (Score:2)
Even having 2 1080 displays for work is better than a big 4k screen. One of the best thing is how most OS's can frame windows, Two Full screen apps open, or 4 Half Screen Framed apps.
I myself am note a real fan of Windowed format, but I use the windows to mimic a frame based layout.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A single 4K screen has the workspace of 4 x 1920x1080 screens, not two.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Single screen? (Score:2)
I just use an ultrawide, and typically have two documents open side by side in a single vscode window. I actually prefer that to dual monitor because I don't have a pair of bezels in the middle.
Re:Single screen? (Score:5, Insightful)
I have four monitors now and I'd never go back to a single screen. To me, a single screen isn't a feature or a selling point.
If you were still looking for a justification for this change, that would be Microsoft charging per screen.
And yeah, they know their audience.
Enjoy.
Re: (Score:3)
Directx Gold $6.99/mo DirectX 4K $7.99/mo DirectX 8K $10.99/mo
Opengl or vulkan you need windows 10 workstation at $300 an system + $4.99/mo windows update fee after 1st year.
Re:Single screen? (Score:4, Interesting)
I have four monitors now and I'd never go back to a single screen. To me, a single screen isn't a feature or a selling point.
If you were still looking for a justification for this change, that would be Microsoft charging per screen.
And yeah, they know their audience.
Enjoy.
One of the things I've been wondering about, is why Windows updates have been free for so long. It seems like Microsoft is trying to sew up market share, and the only reason I can see for that is that they're getting an unpleasant surprise ready for us. For instance, an update that lets Microsoft decide which third-party apps run on Windows, or disable side-loading, or go on a subscription model, or charge per screen or perhaps (probably) all of these. The only question becomes, when is the other shoe going to drop?
Re: (Score:2)
One of the things I've been wondering about, is why Windows updates have been free for so long.
Updates have always been free, upgrades have not necessarily. But typically upgrades aren't something end users have paid for, that just came with their new computer. There were many programs to get people to move from previous versions of Windows to Windows 10 for free because it massively reduces Microsoft's maintenance costs if they only need to maintain one major core operating system version rather than several. Microsoft still gets paid for the OS in the same way they did before: when people buy a new
Re: (Score:2)
I understand the difference between updates and upgrades. That's a point, but I'd argue that "feature updates" would have been upgrades you pay for, in the old pricing model.
Microsoft seems to be going the Adobe route, where there's no longer major versions that you have to buy separately. Point of fact, there was 2 years between Vista and 7, three years between 7 and 8, three years between 8 and 10, and now we've had 10 for five years. If they followed their old release schedule, there would have been a
Re: (Score:2)
If they followed their old release schedule, there would have been a new version in 2018 for which we would have had to pay a lump sum. Instead, Windows 10 security, bug fix and feature releases have continued, for free.
True but how many people really shelled out for an OS upgrade? They just got it when they got a new computer. Even Windows 7/8 had a whole variety of ways over a long grace period to move to Windows 10 for free because people just don't pay for OS upgrades so getting all your customers to one unified base system that can be maintained ends up being much cheaper than having to maintain a whole bunch of different versions and you still get paid whenever somebody buys a new computer.
Adobe does that, but for a monthly fee. ($9.95 per month for both Photoshop and Lightroom, including all updates, which is admittedly a pretty good deal.)
Yes because they don't have
Re: (Score:2)
I understand what you're saying regarding Microsoft getting paid when someone buys a computer, but unless you're a gamer, anything sold in the last 3 to 5 years is going to be adequate for a very long time.
I do photography for part of my living, am a heavy user of Adobe Creative Cloud, and my current workstation was built in 2013. Oh, it was high end for the time, and the video card has been replaced twice, and I've added memory, but it's running the same Windows license it shipped with. Started with Wind
Re: (Score:2)
I do photography for part of my living, am a heavy user of Adobe Creative Cloud, and my current workstation was built in 2013.
Sure, I certainly don't flip my desktop anywhere near as much as the early 00's either. But consumers aren't really the big market for Windows licenses, it's corporations that replace their computers every 3 years (mainly for warranty reasons).
People who do email and browsing have significantly more modest needs.
They are unlikely to spend a couple hundred dollars to buy a new upgraded OS for a computer that's probably not worth much more than that anyway.
So... who are these people who are buying new computers?
It's both consumer and corporate customers. Tablets and PCs are still a strong market and laptops alone are a $100+ billion
Re: (Score:2)
security. it's partly a numbers game because of herd immunity and PR. that's why they gave free upgrades and even extended critical patch support for XP; it's just embarrassing and even dangerous to be best known as a malware platform (though it doesn't seem to bother the google play store much for some reason).
and ms basically are on a subscription model already; how many vista or even windows 7 users are there still? further, ms office is now primarily subscription-driven, so that's business users covered
Re: (Score:2)
I have four monitors now and I'd never go back to a single screen. To me, a single screen isn't a feature or a selling point.
If you were still looking for a justification for this change, that would be Microsoft charging per screen.
And yeah, they know their audience.
Enjoy.
Why are you upset that they are introducing a lower priced, and further restricted edition of Windows 10? This doesn't change the pricing on the edition you might already have chosen.
Re: Single screen? (Score:2)
FFS, this in conspiracy, it's Netbook 2.0 (or is it 3.0?):
First they offered cheap OEM licenses for spec-limited devices, battling Linux netbooks. Then they loosened the spec a bit and made OEM license free (current situation), and their next attempt looks like a version of Windows that limits display options to go after the chromebook market.
How many K-12 students are rocking multiple external displays on their school-issued chromebooks?
How many home users never attach their laptop to an additional monitor
Re: Single screen? (Score:2)
Typo:
"FFS, this is not a conspiracy..."
Re: (Score:3)
ICBR, but I don't think the point is that these machines *can't* connect to more than one screen, just that they're not the dual-screen devices [windows.com] it was originally supposed to run on.
Re: (Score:2)
Why not use one properly-sized screen instead of four too small ones?
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed, when you go Multi-display Single screen stay away.
I would argue that Windows, MacOS and Linux do even better with multi-displays.
One thing I would like to see would be having Multi-display with multi-keyboards and mice, So you can have 2 active windows at once.
I had a setup kinda like that with some VM Trickery and USB setup. And I loved it. As I had one screen for email and communication, the other screen for coding. I was doing terminal coding at the time for VMS so I had a Mac Keyboard that wen
Re: Single screen? (Score:2)
Going after chromebooks, multi-display not needed.
Re: (Score:2)
I ditched multiple discrete monitors for one 43" 4K TV. It's equivalent to four 21" 1080p monitors.
And with 8k coming up, I'm guessing they're going to restrict the OS to laptops and tablets without HDMI ports or by display resolution.
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps you are not the target market ?
Re: (Score:2)
I know right. Just the other day I sat down in the train and pulled out my 4 monitors to read a newspaper. Because I too like you feel like being surrounded by monitors when using an OS designed primarily for the cheapest shittiest Chromebook competitor money can buy!
Just kidding I actually buy a computer to run my multiple screens which also means it won't come with Windows 10X because that's not what the OS is designed for.
Re: (Score:2)
Four 4k monitors are the best.
Re: (Score:2)
For me, I prefer one HUGE screen. I don't like turning my heads and moving my eyes (near sighted too). I also use virtual desktops too. Yes, I'm old school!
Re: Single screen? (Score:2)
You are not the intended market, this is a new offering, it's not replacing any existing offering.
But hey, even though this announcement has literally nothing to do with you, now we all know you have four monitors on your desktop - that's something.
app store only = death on windows in commercial (Score:4, Informative)
app store only = death on windows in commercial settings.
Re: app store only = death on windows in commercia (Score:4, Insightful)
And M$ is way behind in the game on the 'app' front.
I bought a Windows machine because I needed to run Windows programs, not funny little apps.
I even dealt with a salesman who tried to get me to buy a Chromebook, but I was "no way".
M$ is going to lose big on this one, they are straying too far out of their lane here.
3rd times the charm? (Score:5, Funny)
Windows RT failed. Windows 10 S failed.
Maybe the 3rd time Microsoft releases a new version of Windows that can't run Windows programs will be the charm?
Re: (Score:3)
What the fuck is the point? If it's just to run the few web-capable MS apps, and basically be an Android emulator or whatever this is supposed to be, what purpose would anyone really have for such a device?
Re: (Score:3)
I can imagine a very limited selection of users for this, but anything I can think of comes back to "Why not just have your IT guy strip down windows and lock it down to a few approved applications and a web browser?" Literally the same thing and you can have more trust that MS will still be supporting it in 2 years.
Re: (Score:2)
What the fuck is the point? If it's just to run the few web-capable MS apps, and basically be an Android emulator or whatever this is supposed to be, what purpose would anyone really have for such a device?
You're not looking at the obvious.
This is the perfect way for Microsoft to create more expensive "Pro" versions of Windows. In other words, Microsoft is now looking to charge per screen. And they know how many of you rely on more than one screen.
Ain't telemetry grand?
Re: (Score:3)
At which point, the transition to Linux desktops will be complete. LibreOffice is good enough now that I'm currently working on a fairly messy Word document that Libre seems more than capable of handling. With a lot of email and scheduling now handled on smartphones and the like, and with organization having moved to a scheduling app that better fits our needs, the only thing Outlook is now used for is strictly email, and as email clients go, it really does suck. The only thing really left, if I wanted to d
Re: (Score:2)
At which point, the transition to Linux desktops will be complete.
Go ahead. You're certainly not the target audience. Business is.
...if banks can move beyond wet ink signatures or tortured Adobe variants of that, then surely government can do the same.
I fear you greatly underestimate the speed and modernization of government.
Re: (Score:2)
I manage a business with a staff of 21 people, with desktops and laptops. The migration away from MS products has been slow, and not necessarily intentional, but at each iteration another cord is cut. If we're down to just Outlook for email, Word and Excel document support, and a legacy IE web app, we're getting closer to the point where we won't need Windows at all, not for front office apps or for back office apps. If Microsoft starts making Pro and Enterprise versions of Windows more expensive, or puts m
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The point is that Chromebooks are taking over in the education market - and are poised to take over anywhere where all that's needed are web apps. Arguably, a Chromebook-priced Windows box that can run some Windows apps is 'better' than a Chromebook that can't, and I guess that's the Microsoft value proposition here. But the reason they're doing it is to prevent the (further) slide of Windows into irrelevance.
Of course, the selling point of Chromebooks isn't the ability to run local apps (I guess maybe An
Banging head against wall (Score:2)
Maybe the third hard knock will make the bad thoughts go away.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The third version of the original Windows was the magic try, after all. Well, 3.1, anyway.
Re: 3rd times the charm? (Score:2)
This is their planned netbook (now chromebook) killer.
Why do we need another version of Windows? (Score:5, Interesting)
Can't they just update Windows 10 so that it can be configured to behave like the user wants instead of having so many different versions?
Re: (Score:2)
Can't they just update Windows 10 so that it can be configured to behave like the user wants instead of having so many different versions?
Sure.
Which version of Linux would you prefer?
Re: (Score:2)
To manipulate your concept of value. Have you noticed that many offers come in threes? One is cheap and lacks features that everybody wants. One has everything but the kitchen sink and is very expensive. The only real option is the one in the middle, but by providing a choice, the manufacturer can capture the entire market and still get you to pay how much the manufacturer wants. You're not going to choose the cheap option, yet by its mere existence it turns the middle option from the low-end into the desir
Re: (Score:2)
This is for a class of devices like ChromeBooks, it's a break from the Win32 applications that currently lock users in to Windows. The licenses for these aren't something end users typically pay for, it comes with the computer.
It's not about having multiple options, Windows 10 is a complete non-starter on low-end and ARM hardware and even if it were the applications users want to run on it won't work. So they have this new version of it that leaves behind the legacy software support and expands the platform
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe you're not the user they have in mind?
Re: (Score:3)
MS said Windows 10 would be the last version of Windows [theverge.com], there won't be any more. It will just be updated just like you say.
Great. By 2030, Windows "10" will be officially known as Win10XS_GTO_Hemi_NewCoke_NG.
Build 12.
The race to the bottom (Score:1)
Re: The race to the bottom (Score:2)
If only it was limited to M$.
Can you say "industry wide"?
Re: The race to the bottom (Score:2)
They are targeting the chromebook market - which includes your derisively mentioned "play-skool" set.
This is a targeted offering for a certain class of hardware (chromebook-like laptops) targeted at a certain market (education) - they aren't replacing Win 10 Pro with this new offering.
Not news (Score:1)
All Windows versions leak :-)
Solutions in search of Problems (Score:4, Insightful)
Who is asking for this again? MS really wants to complete with ChromeOS.... Why exactly?
Re: (Score:2)
> Who is asking for this again? MS really wants to complete with ChromeOS.... Why exactly?
Desktop Windows exists to sell Office365 subscriptions and server licenses because PHB's have it on their laptop so they don't feel intimidated by their staff.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure. So just get regular ol' Windows 10 with MS Office. Is the PHB going to be suddenly be happy his Windows changed to look more like ChromeOS?
Again. Who is this for?
Re: (Score:3)
Microsoft (rightly) sees ChromeOS as an existential threat to its Windows business. If they don't compete with it soon, Windows itself will eventually be obsolete. A whole generation is growing up, many of whom have never touched a Windows machine. The entirety of their computer usage is through iPads + ChromeOS + mobile phones. When those people eventually join the business world, they're not going to have much incentive to stick with Microsoft's OS or other products.
That said, Windows itself is a smaller
Re: (Score:2)
They're just wrong about how to compete. They should play to their strengths. They have had remote device management for decades with Active Directory. Adapting Azure AD to be an MDM for locked-down computing would be way better - if they get their tooling right. The problem is that joining a domain (which is the archaic bit) is offered in Pro but not Home. And they seem to want to make it cheaper than Pro and inaccessible to Home.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I just don't get this logic. I don't know anyone in business that uses ChromeOS for work. I don't know any company that sources it. Granted, I understand it's actually a pretty powerful OS in it's own right, but not for businesses.
Apple is a threat. Arguably iOS and Android are a threat to Windows. But ChromeOS isn't. If an employee needs a computer, it's because they need a computer and ChromeOS likely isn't going to get chose over Windows or Mac for just about any employee user. Companies would be b
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I'm a civil engineer. Until Microstation is web based, I won't be migrating away from Windows. To that point, there is a LOT (like a LOT) of legacy civil engineering software used throughout the world that could be converted to being web based, but won't ever be. Just no one is going to make that investment because civil engineers are the oldest most conservative and least technical version of engineers in the engineer-verse. I'm typically just pleased that much of it still runs on Windows 10.
Re: (Score:2)
That's the case with many industries. The operating system is a tool to do a job, it makes no difference to me whatsoever if Photoshop, Blender and Maya are running on a Mac or Windows system, nor should it. Why don't I run Blender and Maya on Linux? Well because there's simply no reason to, they're no different there.
This version of Windows has the same problem, if I were already able to do all my work on a ChromeBook then what is this ChromeOS-competitor version of Windows offering?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know anyone in business that uses ChromeOS for work. I don't know any company that sources it.
Sure but that doesn't mean nobody does.
Granted, I understand it's actually a pretty powerful OS in it's own right, but not for businesses.
Why not? Unless you have applications that tie you to Windows then why does it matter?
Companies would be better off just going a head and migrating their computers to Linux before ChromeOS.
ChromeOS is Linux, and if web apps (or a variety of native and Android apps) suffice then why would you go searching for some other Linux-based system?
Re: (Score:2)
It's a huge problem growing for Microsoft.
Schools have gone all in on ChromeOS. Google has done a good job of putting an offering that's "good enough" and by default so limited that no device matters particularly, which is fantastic for schools. As such, a lot of people 13 and younger are doing their entire school work in the Google ecosystem. This means not Windows, not Office (Word, Excel, Teams, PowerPoint), and as they get older, their OS won't be trying to steer them to Azure in the way Microsoft does
Re: (Score:2)
That said, Windows itself is a smaller and smaller share of Microsoft's business each year. At some point they may just open-source the thing and wash their hands of it.
Problem being, that if you have that whole generation of people on chromebooks, they are also using google to author spreadsheets, presentations, documents, and do email. Windows Terminal yells loudly at you "hey, you can start an Azure shell... wouldn't that be cool! come on into our cloud hosting ecosystem".
Windows continues to be a strategic thing because it's the only environment that greases the wheels in favor of Microsoft's ecosystem.
Re: (Score:2)
Who is asking for this again? MS really wants to complete with ChromeOS.... Why exactly?
Because, I think, they've been trying for years (decades now?) to break into the low end market, something that's been closed to them, due to the huge clunker that Windows has become over the years.
Re: Solutions in search of Problems (Score:2)
Mindshare.
Where would Apple be if the education market choose IBM XT clones over Apple computers in the 1980s?
why? (Score:1)
Re: why? (Score:2)
I'm thinking this is the third attempt at "app only" windows, more than converting a dual single screen OS to single (from what I am reading here).
I'm going to avoid any version of Windows that has "S" or "X" or whatever in it's name. This kind of doublethink ("more letters in it's name must mean it's better!") is far from being limited to being a Microsoft 'thing' , as I have seen this being done by other companies in recent times.
This is a very good time to bone up on your research and bullshit detecting
Re: (Score:2)
Because the goal was stated wrong. What they really mean is a version of Windows that will run on cheap, commodity devices. A Chromebook, in other words. I think the "single screen" part is a misunderstanding of the goal.
On the other hand, if as someone else said, future versions of the full Windows will be priced per-screen, then "single screen" as an OS feature might make more sense. So your choices are, pay whatever premium for the standard "multi-display" version, or go with a version of Windows tha
More crippled, gimped shit (Score:5, Insightful)
Ok, here's the deal.
If I buy Windows, I expect it to run Windows *PROGRAMS*
If I buy Chromebook, I expect it to run 'apps'.
Pulling funny shit like this is just going to anger people and hurt M$ in the long run. The fast chump change they hope to get out of this just isn't worth it.
M$ needs to stop playing app-games and keep Windows as actual Windows.
Re: (Score:3)
If I buy Windows, I expect it to run Windows *PROGRAMS*
If I buy Chromebook, I expect it to run 'apps'.
"app" is just short for application. Nothing has to be dumbed down for either. Is Word an "app" or a "program"? The iPad version of Word looks nearly identical to PC.
Re: (Score:2)
"app" is just short for application. Nothing has to be dumbed down for either. Is Word an "app" or a "program"?
In fairness to OP, Windows itself distinguishes between "apps" and "programs" on their menu. And all the "apps" are complete crApp.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, I forgot that I was running Classic Shell. Possibly for that reason I'm seeing "Programs" and "Apps" submenus. And the latter does indeed consist largely of crap, things I've never even looked at: Groove Music, Money, Sports, &c.
I do realize that app(lication)s are programs though.
Re: More crippled, gimped shit (Score:2)
To me, "app" indicates something dumbed down for the masses.
"Programs"/"Applications" (longform) indicates something for getting serious work done.
Re: More crippled, gimped shit (Score:2)
My experience is that 'apps' are generally dumbed down, crippled versions of what you can find on a PC , which are called programs or applications (long form of apps). Also, 'apps' are designed around the concept that a non PC device is not a full fledged computer, but rather a gadget (contrary to the device's actual capabilities).
Technically, the terms are interchangeable, but for me at least, 'apps' and programs/applications (long form) are two different classes of computer programs.
If you use a t
Re: (Score:2)
M$ needs to stop playing app-games and keep Windows as actual Windows.
Microsoft has always been complete rubbish with naming things.
It seems only the Xbox division inadvertently escaped being "Windows Game Thing" due to expectation of failure.
But a quick look at the xbox generations and models shows they too are not immune to the naming stupid.
The worst part is a number of their products could have seen more success purely with a name differentiating it from their different products.
I see "Windows 10X" and like "Windows 10S" I assume another gimped attempt at desktop lock-in
Re: (Score:2)
OK, so enough about what you want. What about the people who would actually purchase and use a Windows tablet?
Re: (Score:2)
Listen to the 20% (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Win10 LTSB?
So, yet another attempt at Windows RT (Score:2)
Good luck with that. The problems haven't gone away: Incompatibility with Windows applications, and the fact that Chrome has had a huge head start. I guess Microsoft has to make the attempt as a line item for their shareholders, but does anyone believe it'll actually succeed?
It's too late for a different, incompatible version of "windows". There's nothing about windows itself that most people want, it's what one can do with it. To be pedantic, let me restate that: People don't generally run Windows be
education? (Score:3)
Uh, my kids have been doing home school for the past year. It took about a week before they discovered they needed multiple monitors to work well. One for their zoom/chats and one for the actual work they were doing.
fail.
Why? (Score:2)
redeeming factor (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Windows 10X is a completely different OS. You can think of Windows 10X as iPadOS compared to macOS, although you can run normal win32 applications on it, but only in a sandbox. The compatibility with hardware drivers that have custom management applications - think of printer drivers, gpu, etc. is going to be the biggest issue with this.
Windows 10X will allow Microsoft to have cloud backups that include installed applications,
Windows 10-10? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)