When Microsoft announced Windows 10 S, it was immediately clear that this SKU didn’t fit well into Microsoft’s lineup. It was pitched as a complete product and that it could also be upgraded (for free) to a full version of Windows but based on documents I was able to view, Microsoft is changing course with Redstone 4 to make the idea of S fit better into the company’s portfolio of Windows 10.
Microsoft pitches Windows 10 S as being streamlined for security/performance and while this isn’t new information, what we do have is a better understanding of how often users switch away from S.
Sign up for our new free newsletter to get three time-saving tips each Friday — and get free copies of Paul Thurrott's Windows 11 and Windows 10 Field Guides (normally $9.99) as a special welcome gift!
"*" indicates required fields
On third-party devices, Microsoft says that 60% of users remain on Windows 10 S which is a lot higher than I thought it would be but when users do switch, it’s almost immediately. The company says 60% of those who switch, do so within 24hrs of having the device but if they don’t switch in the first seven days, 83% remain running in S mode.
Keep in mind that these stats are for low-end PCs as the only high-end device running the OS is the Surface Laptop which was excluded from the data.
Going forward, Windows 10 S will no longer be a SKU offered by Microsoft. Instead, what they will be doing is offering S mode for all iterations of Windows 10 and frankly, this is a much better approach to the configurations.
For Home and Education SKUs, you will be able to upgrade from Home S, to Home for free but Pro users going from Pro S to Pro will be charged $49. On the commercial side, Pro S is only available with Core, Value, Entry, and Small Tablet (if this doesn’t make sense, check out my other post here) with Core+ and Workstations being left out of the offering.
Here is the odd part about this change, Microsoft says that there will be AV/Security apps in S mode. Does this mean that traditional AV software from third-party companies will run in S mode? If so, doesn’t this break the entire premise of what S mode is supposed to be and undercuts the performance aspect of the mode? I suspect that Microsoft will clarify these changes to us in the near future but for now, Windows 10 S Mode appears to break the original announcement.
This type of an S-mode only Windows world has been speculated since last fall at Ignite when Microsoft announced an S-mode for frontline workers. Now, after viewing the internal roadmap for Redstone 4 and beyond, it’s official that S-Mode for all SKUs of Windows 10 is the path forward.
skane2600
<p>Microsoft's idea that going from Windows 10 Home to Windows 10 S is an upgrade is a whole new kind of delusional.</p>
skane2600
<blockquote><a href="#242720"><em>In reply to jimchamplin:</em></a></blockquote><p>You're right, my mistake.</p><p><br></p><p>But IMO shipping something called "Windows Home" that has reduced capabilities out-of-the-box relative to what Home has had since it was first introduced is a very bad strategy.</p><p><br></p><p>It just indicates that Microsoft has learned nothing from the Windows 8 debacle.</p><p><br></p><p><br></p>
skane2600
<blockquote><a href="#242739"><em>In reply to jimchamplin:</em></a></blockquote><p>Is this an actual description of how it works or speculation? A "well-designed message" doesn't sound like a fact.</p>
skane2600
<blockquote><a href="#242945"><em>In reply to jimchamplin:</em></a></blockquote><p>Your experience is with Windows 10 S not Windows S mode right? I assume the option you describe is to update from Windows 10 S to Windows 10 Pro while the S mode version would be, for example Windows 10 Home S mode to Windows 10 Home full. </p>
skane2600
<blockquote><a href="#242724"><em>In reply to yaddamaster:</em></a></blockquote><p>Isn't it true that some Chromebooks can run Android apps and some can't? That sounds like variants to me.</p>
skane2600
<p>It doesn't seem all that surprising that the majority of people who bought a PC with a particular OS pre-installed are still using that same OS nine months later. The big story is that 40% didn't which is unprecedented. </p><p><br></p><p>Of course the number of people who ever had Windows 10 S is tiny.</p>
Bats
<p>This is all because the Windows ecoystem is so so sooooooooooooo BAD!</p><p><br></p><p>Windows 10 S , the way I see it, is Microsoft's version of Chrome OS. Chrome OS is extremely limited, in terms of using 3rd party tools. However, the strength of Chrome OS is easily accessibility to Google's vast and excellent ecosystem of tools that everybody loves and needs. I have said this a million times…..Chrome Browser, Gmail, Youtube, G-Drive (and Apps), Maps, Google Play….it's all there! In addition to Web Apps that work so well with Chrome that regular, business, and teachers/students all use. Even printing is amazing if you go out an buy a Google Cloud Printer. Chrome OS is just easy to simple to use and best of all…….easy to MAINTAIN!!!</p><p><br></p><p>I can see what Microsoft was trying to do. They were trying to be like Chrome OS. All the bloggers and (fake) journalists can read all the internal MEMOS or MSFT Press Releases and interpret what they want, but I believe this was Microsoft was trying to do. Let's not forget, Windows 10 S was announced during a Microsoft's .EDU event last year. They're intention was to go up against Chrome. They even made strides to have MS Edge be comparable to Chrome Browser. The big difference between the two OS's is that one had a vast ecosystem behind it and promoted Web Apps, and the other had a bad ecosystem and tried to promote UWP. </p><p><br></p><p>This article made me laugh. Sixty percent switched to Windows 10 Pro within 24 hours? LOL. AFter obtaining their Windows 10 S computer they said "OH $#!t " what the heck did I buy? LOL…this stuff is hilarious!</p><p><br></p><p>It's funny, but I know Paul wanted to use Windows 10 S but the ability to download Chrome was a problem for him. That's the one thing I could not understand and I explicitly commented after all his Windows 10 S rants, …..just use 10 Pro and behave that's it Windows 10 S. That's all. LOL…now they have this "S" Mode? Isn't that exactly that? *shakes head*</p>
seapea
<blockquote><a href="#242879"><em>In reply to Pbike908:</em></a></blockquote><p>minus4? really? what was posted in the post that was deserving of being marked as bad?</p><p><br></p>
skane2600
<p>Unless Microsoft doesn't offer OEMs any "clean" versions of Windows 10 they can ship with their PCs, I can't imagine why many would choose S-mode versions. For the vast majority of users S-mode is a disadvantage. Having S-mode as the default kind of sounds like "Start Screen 2.0". Maybe they could fix it in Windows 10 S mode 10.1 like they kind of, sort of, fixed Windows 8 with 8.1.</p>
skane2600
<blockquote><a href="#242868"><em>In reply to RobertJasiek:</em></a></blockquote><p>"During the decade, Microsoft lost huge percentages of market share to iOS and Chromebooks (simple GUIs and one OS version only) and Android (cheap hardware)." </p><p><br></p><p>Simple UIs and limited capabilities go hand-in-hand just as cheap hardware does with reduced performance. </p>
skane2600
<blockquote><a href="#242874"><em>In reply to warren:</em></a></blockquote><p>I agree. Perhaps you meant this as a reply to Robert.</p>
skane2600
<blockquote><a href="#242938"><em>In reply to RobertJasiek:</em></a></blockquote><p>"Uhm, but didn't Windows lose marketshare to phones very big indeed? "</p><p><br></p><p>Your implicit assumption is that PCs and smartphones are direct competitors. It's a common belief, but it hasn't been proven. </p><p><br></p><p>What you can say is that in recent years PC sales have declined and smartphone sales have increased (although not in the very recent past), but looking at graphs of sales of the two over time suggests the correlation is weak. Of course correlation isn't necessarily causation in any case.</p>
skane2600
<blockquote><a href="#242977"><em>In reply to RobertJasiek:</em></a></blockquote><p>"In the long term, all computing categories are mutually competitve."</p><p><br></p><p>You mean pacemakers will compete with smartphones some day? </p><p><br></p><p>From a technological point of view, smartphones could have replaced PCs a decade ago. Technology isn't the problem, it's ergonomics. A small device is always going to be less useful for office work than a desktop machine. </p>
skane2600
<blockquote><a href="#243093"><em>In reply to Ugur:</em></a></blockquote><p>It isn't even easy for developers to turn their own Win32 program into a UWP app. </p>
skane2600
<blockquote><a href="#242884"><em>In reply to Ugur:</em></a></blockquote><p>For the most part you can get this effect using standard Windows 10. Want to be extra secure? Then use UWP apps exclusively. Want to do something that requires more control or for legacy purposes, use Win32 apps. I don't see the value in the ability to enable the 1-5 desktop applications you want to use as opposed to just not installing desktop applications 6-?. Of course it's a myth that an UWP app is inherently more secure than a Win32 application inherently is. </p><p><br></p><p>If you really need the "save us from ourselves" approach you can use a Chromebook or Windows 10 S.</p>
skane2600
<blockquote><a href="#242964"><em>In reply to hrlngrv:</em></a></blockquote><p>A program that doesn't have any vulnerabilities is no less secure outside a sandbox than it would be within one. </p>
skane2600
<blockquote><a href="#243050"><em>In reply to hrlngrv:</em></a></blockquote><p>"Not many software titles with no vulnerabilities."</p><p><br></p><p>Really, based on what evidence? Keep in mind there's a whole universe of possible software bugs that have nothing to do with vulnerabilities. It's quite possible for imperfect software to be secure. Of course, even the widely-held belief that no sophisticated software can be bug-free is still an unproven claim.</p>
Stooks
<blockquote><a href="#242884"><em>In reply to Ugur:</em></a></blockquote><p>The problem is consumers get lost in this constant change of skew/licensing. </p><p><br></p><p>If a new computer comes with Windows 10 Home S mode in the future and they try to install their copy of Quicken 2016, or whatever and it does not work because their new computer is in S mode until they "upgrade" it, they WILL NOT be happy.</p><p><br></p><p>MacOS, one version, free upgrades, NO BS.</p>
seapea
<p>So, will a user be able to flip in and out of S Mode?</p>
Stooks
<p>Windows RT, Windows 10 S or S mode and Windows 10 ARM. All will or have failed. All confuse the snot out consumers. None of them have or will last long.</p><p><br></p><p>Microsoft has been told by so many people that their constant changing of product names, skews and licensing has always been a total cluster F but they keep doing it. How many versions of Windows 10 are there now? Don't tell me because I honestly do not care.</p><p><br></p><p>It is like they are trying to kill the product we know as Windows.</p>
skane2600
<blockquote><a href="#243395"><em>In reply to ghostrider:</em></a></blockquote><p>If it turns out there's both a Pro and Pro S, the latter isn't likely to sell well. If all that is offered is an upgradable Pro S, imagine how annoying it would be to pay twice to get the functionality that should be fundamental to a Windows product (particularly a Pro version). In that case Microsoft would be smarter just to raise the price of Pro S by $50 and make the upgrade free.</p><p><br></p><p>This reminds me of MS's remedy for the poor reception of Windows 8. They brought back a Start Menu but couldn't resist putting live tiles in it. In this case the reception of Windows 10 S PCs was poor but they want to bring it back from the dead in a different way. Sometimes failed ideas just need to be abandoned even if you have to eat some crow.</p>