5 ms·

I wonder if tying this to the windows store is a good move. The reception thus far hasn't been extremely encouraging.

by deelowe 10y ago

sddfd 10y ago
I think the windows store just did not fit the usage patterns: People were used to download stuff right off the net, or use platforms like Valve's Steam. On a chromebook-style laptop, expectations might be different. I personally don't like the walled-garden aspect of app-stores, but I like that there is someone who can effectively respond if malware is reported. Sometimes malware is even proactively removed. For non-power-users this is definitely an advantage. I hope in a few years I can just tell my parent to only install software from the app store, and they will be fine. Additionally, they don't have to do anything to stay up-to-date. Even for power users there is a (theoretical) advantage, which is explicit dependency management. Once you know that all your software is distributed through one channel, libraries and versions can effectively be shared. This is what happens in the Free Software version of app stores: All major distros have them, and without them dependency management would be impossible. So what is the potential gain here? In some version of the future, we might hope that apps don't include hard-copy versions of the libraries they are using, but just tell the app-store which versions they like to use. Security updates can then be pushed by the app-store vendor vs the app vendor.
- 52-6F-62 10y ago
  > For non-power-users this is definitely an advantage. I hope in a few years I can just tell my parent to only install software from the app store, and they are fine. Additionally, they don't have to do anything to stay up-to-date. I think this is often so easily overlooked for the technologically inclined. ------ It's also not a situation that will likely dissipate. For instance, if in 100 years we're all (I dream) boarding starships, do the engineers really expect the average passenger or crew to understand the intricate workings of the entire vessel? Is this true for airplanes now? Computers are essentially a vehicle for knowledge. If it's not where one is at one moment, it is where one can arrive. Not everyone who drives a car is an automotive engineer, kinetics or physics expert, or even a mechanic. Most people just want or need to get in and drive. Demanding more of somebody who's true goal is to become an expert in a subject that doesn't involve technical engineering is frankly just stupid. This is one of the things I liked about Steve Jobs, in that he believed this. Of course, that developed into the walled-garden approach but I think that's something else altogether. It's far more beneficial for the world to have easy access to knowledge than to wish everybody saw computers and other technology the way people like us who spend time on tech forums do. TL;DR - I agree! But I also think there's much more to be said about that.
- digi_owl 10y ago
  If the store had launched with vetted Win32 programs from day 1 it may have gained some traction. But right now all i can see in there are UWP "apps", and those are usually very limited in capabilities vs their Win32 equivalent. For example, if i want to use a UWP file manager, i have to go through the Win32 file picker to allow the UWP file manager to access anything but the sub-folders of my user's home folder.
- intoverflow2 10y ago
  >I think the windows store just did not fit the usage patterns: People were used to download stuff right off the net, or use platforms like Valve's Steam. I don't think I'll ever understand the weird logic of most Windows users where DRM Online Store A is the best thing ever and a selling point of the platform and DRM Online Store B is an abomination that should never exist.
pawadu 10y ago
Maybe not a fun decision but I think it is needed. Consider this not very uncommon scenario: 1. You just bought a laptop, time to install some software 2. Open Edge, search for "spotify", "vlc" maybe even "office". 3. Congratulation, you now have a bing search full of adware and possibly malware. For average Joe it is impossible to not get infected at this stage.
- nmeofthestate 10y ago
  In my experience this is absolutely true and it blows my mind about Bing. Ads for malware linked with commonly searched-for apps. It's a disgrace.
- MichaelGG 10y ago
  For quite a white the Store was similar, with fake paid apps. Search for Netflix and get many $10 apps that did nothing or wrapped a handful of video files. Netflix had to contact MS several times to get them to permanently remove it. Disney, HBO, and others all had the same issue. Even right now, a search for Game of Thrones has the first result of a $2.99 app that promises the first season. Published by "ViWi Corp" that has broken HTTP links _in the store_ (that is the privacy policy etc don't link). Same publisher has tons of other crap apps. The Windows Store is a joke.
steego 10y ago
You raise a good question. I own a Chromebook precisely because it's limited in the software it can run. Other people own it because it's simple to own and use. Restricting to the Windows Store is a good move for security, but I'm not sure the different groups of customers will take away the same message. Some people will see it as a move to water it down or take away features while others will see it as a positive step toward improved security. I'm not envious of the tightrope Microsoft has to walk to set the right expectations from their customers. If they're smart, they're going to make simplicity and enhanced security the key features. If they're not so smart, they'll be emphasizing the "one windows" message they were pushing a few years back. Then again, I've been wrong before.
- ManFromUranus 10y ago
  I agree with your take, many will not see improved security as a benefit but will instead resent the limited functionality. This is nothing more than a rebranded Windows RT which already failed in the market with the Surface RT. IMO this laptop will also fail, regardless of whatever hardware they pair it with
  - WorldMaker 10y ago
    I have friends that very much love their Windows RT devices as quick, secure browser-first tablets (and were disappointed by a lack of an upgrade to Windows 10). Windows S has the benefit that you can upgrade to "real" Windows 10 Pro if you decide you are tired of the limited functionality.
    - ManFromUranus 10y ago
      Oh that's pretty interesting, I didn't know that. So I guess it kind of comes with real windows after all (in a roundabout way)
      - WorldMaker 10y ago
        It's definitely interesting. Where everyone expected a new ARM SKU, Microsoft delivered a new x86 SKU, with an easy upgrade path. Through the lens of Windows 10 S as an "educational" SKU, it's particularly interesting in that idea that you could start the device locked down with S and eventually (plus $50 one time charge) "graduate" the device to "real" Windows 10 as the people themselves age into device ownership or out of locked down education environments or the devices get repurposed for different parts of a learning environment, etc. (This seems to be a clear case where Microsoft is trying to separate itself from the iOS/Chromebook pack. For now you can't graduate and turn an iOS device into a macOS device. With a lot of work you might be able to graduate a Chromebook to Linux or Windows, but certainly not the ease of a $50 purchase from the Windows Store, or a free button click with an existing education site license for Windows 10 Pro.) (Meanwhile, some of us are still hoping for that next ARM SKU, too.)
snarfy 10y ago
It looks like $49.99 unties it.
- oceanswave 10y ago
  Is this the first instance of an in-OS purchase we've seen, or have there been others?
  - WesleyLivesay 10y ago
    Its just a license for the Pro version of Win10 that it upgrades itself to.
  - callalex 10y ago
    There was that time that Apple charged a few bucks to enable 802.11n on MacBooks after the standard was ratified supposedly for accounting reasons. https://arstechnica.com/apple/2007/01/6679/ https://arstechnica.com/apple/2007/01/6679/
  - vel0city 10y ago
    Windows has had the option to upgrade editions from within the OS for many years, without requiring an OS reinstall. The first version I recall having it was Windows Vista, but it may have existed with Windows XP as well. Within a few minutes and a reboot you could go from having the Basic version of Windows Vista to Ultimate.
protomyth 10y ago
Pretty much kills us from buying it. I would love to, but grants and high education in general have a lot of custom software that won't be put in the store. Damn shame too.
jsz0 10y ago
> The reception thus far hasn't been extremely encouraging. It can't be any worse than downloading random exe files off the web. Most people are scared to install software on their computers at this point.

I wonder if tying this to the windows store is a good move. The reception thus far hasn't been extremely encouraging.

by deelowe 10y ago

I wonder if tying this to the windows store is a good move. The reception thus far hasn't been extremely encouraging.

sddfd 10y ago

I think the windows store just did not fit the usage patterns: People were used to download stuff right off the net, or use platforms like Valve's Steam. On a chromebook-style laptop, expectations might be different. I personally don't like the walled-garden aspect of app-stores, but I like that there is someone who can effectively respond if malware is reported. Sometimes malware is even proactively removed. For non-power-users this is definitely an advantage. I hope in a few years I can just tell my parent to only install software from the app store, and they will be fine. Additionally, they don't have to do anything to stay up-to-date. Even for power users there is a (theoretical) advantage, which is explicit dependency management. Once you know that all your software is distributed through one channel, libraries and versions can effectively be shared. This is what happens in the Free Software version of app stores: All major distros have them, and without them dependency management would be impossible. So what is the potential gain here? In some version of the future, we might hope that apps don't include hard-copy versions of the libraries they are using, but just tell the app-store which versions they like to use. Security updates can then be pushed by the app-store vendor vs the app vendor.

52-6F-62 10y ago
> For non-power-users this is definitely an advantage. I hope in a few years I can just tell my parent to only install software from the app store, and they are fine. Additionally, they don't have to do anything to stay up-to-date. I think this is often so easily overlooked for the technologically inclined. ------ It's also not a situation that will likely dissipate. For instance, if in 100 years we're all (I dream) boarding starships, do the engineers really expect the average passenger or crew to understand the intricate workings of the entire vessel? Is this true for airplanes now? Computers are essentially a vehicle for knowledge. If it's not where one is at one moment, it is where one can arrive. Not everyone who drives a car is an automotive engineer, kinetics or physics expert, or even a mechanic. Most people just want or need to get in and drive. Demanding more of somebody who's true goal is to become an expert in a subject that doesn't involve technical engineering is frankly just stupid. This is one of the things I liked about Steve Jobs, in that he believed this. Of course, that developed into the walled-garden approach but I think that's something else altogether. It's far more beneficial for the world to have easy access to knowledge than to wish everybody saw computers and other technology the way people like us who spend time on tech forums do. TL;DR - I agree! But I also think there's much more to be said about that.
digi_owl 10y ago
If the store had launched with vetted Win32 programs from day 1 it may have gained some traction. But right now all i can see in there are UWP "apps", and those are usually very limited in capabilities vs their Win32 equivalent. For example, if i want to use a UWP file manager, i have to go through the Win32 file picker to allow the UWP file manager to access anything but the sub-folders of my user's home folder.
intoverflow2 10y ago
>I think the windows store just did not fit the usage patterns: People were used to download stuff right off the net, or use platforms like Valve's Steam. I don't think I'll ever understand the weird logic of most Windows users where DRM Online Store A is the best thing ever and a selling point of the platform and DRM Online Store B is an abomination that should never exist.

pawadu 10y ago

Maybe not a fun decision but I think it is needed. Consider this not very uncommon scenario: 1. You just bought a laptop, time to install some software 2. Open Edge, search for "spotify", "vlc" maybe even "office". 3. Congratulation, you now have a bing search full of adware and possibly malware. For average Joe it is impossible to not get infected at this stage.

nmeofthestate 10y ago
In my experience this is absolutely true and it blows my mind about Bing. Ads for malware linked with commonly searched-for apps. It's a disgrace.
MichaelGG 10y ago
For quite a white the Store was similar, with fake paid apps. Search for Netflix and get many $10 apps that did nothing or wrapped a handful of video files. Netflix had to contact MS several times to get them to permanently remove it. Disney, HBO, and others all had the same issue. Even right now, a search for Game of Thrones has the first result of a $2.99 app that promises the first season. Published by "ViWi Corp" that has broken HTTP links _in the store_ (that is the privacy policy etc don't link). Same publisher has tons of other crap apps. The Windows Store is a joke.

steego 10y ago

You raise a good question. I own a Chromebook precisely because it's limited in the software it can run. Other people own it because it's simple to own and use. Restricting to the Windows Store is a good move for security, but I'm not sure the different groups of customers will take away the same message. Some people will see it as a move to water it down or take away features while others will see it as a positive step toward improved security. I'm not envious of the tightrope Microsoft has to walk to set the right expectations from their customers. If they're smart, they're going to make simplicity and enhanced security the key features. If they're not so smart, they'll be emphasizing the "one windows" message they were pushing a few years back. Then again, I've been wrong before.

ManFromUranus 10y ago
I agree with your take, many will not see improved security as a benefit but will instead resent the limited functionality. This is nothing more than a rebranded Windows RT which already failed in the market with the Surface RT. IMO this laptop will also fail, regardless of whatever hardware they pair it with
- WorldMaker 10y ago
  I have friends that very much love their Windows RT devices as quick, secure browser-first tablets (and were disappointed by a lack of an upgrade to Windows 10). Windows S has the benefit that you can upgrade to "real" Windows 10 Pro if you decide you are tired of the limited functionality.
  - ManFromUranus 10y ago
    Oh that's pretty interesting, I didn't know that. So I guess it kind of comes with real windows after all (in a roundabout way)
    - WorldMaker 10y ago
      It's definitely interesting. Where everyone expected a new ARM SKU, Microsoft delivered a new x86 SKU, with an easy upgrade path. Through the lens of Windows 10 S as an "educational" SKU, it's particularly interesting in that idea that you could start the device locked down with S and eventually (plus $50 one time charge) "graduate" the device to "real" Windows 10 as the people themselves age into device ownership or out of locked down education environments or the devices get repurposed for different parts of a learning environment, etc. (This seems to be a clear case where Microsoft is trying to separate itself from the iOS/Chromebook pack. For now you can't graduate and turn an iOS device into a macOS device. With a lot of work you might be able to graduate a Chromebook to Linux or Windows, but certainly not the ease of a $50 purchase from the Windows Store, or a free button click with an existing education site license for Windows 10 Pro.) (Meanwhile, some of us are still hoping for that next ARM SKU, too.)

snarfy 10y ago

It looks like $49.99 unties it.

oceanswave 10y ago
Is this the first instance of an in-OS purchase we've seen, or have there been others?
- WesleyLivesay 10y ago
  Its just a license for the Pro version of Win10 that it upgrades itself to.
- callalex 10y ago
  There was that time that Apple charged a few bucks to enable 802.11n on MacBooks after the standard was ratified supposedly for accounting reasons. https://arstechnica.com/apple/2007/01/6679/ https://arstechnica.com/apple/2007/01/6679/
- vel0city 10y ago
  Windows has had the option to upgrade editions from within the OS for many years, without requiring an OS reinstall. The first version I recall having it was Windows Vista, but it may have existed with Windows XP as well. Within a few minutes and a reboot you could go from having the Basic version of Windows Vista to Ultimate.

protomyth 10y ago

Pretty much kills us from buying it. I would love to, but grants and high education in general have a lot of custom software that won't be put in the store. Damn shame too.

jsz0 10y ago

> The reception thus far hasn't been extremely encouraging. It can't be any worse than downloading random exe files off the web. Most people are scared to install software on their computers at this point.