Ask Paul: March 22 (Premium)

Happy Friday. There are some curiously serendipitous questions in this week’s Ask Paul.

Activation with a digital license

Darekmeridian asks:

Last weekend I did a clean install of Windows 10. I followed your guide (This is how I Configure Windows 10) and got a nice clean install (Thanks for the guide btw). Made an image as a base for going forward but there was one weird thing that I was wondering about at the step where you say “Activate Windows if needed” so I went to check if it did indeed need to be activated, but already indicated “Windows is activated with a digital license linked to your Microsoft account” This step is before the step when you actually “Sign-in with your Microsoft account” So my question is how does it know I’m activated if I haven’t actually given it my MSA information yet? Or does activation not really matter anymore?

Activation does matter, but it’s much more seamless now than it used to be. Remember that what’s activated is “Windows on that particular PC” not “Windows attached to your MSA,” even though there is an association between your MSA and what is essentially a Windows product key plus a unique GUID that identifies that PC. So it activated because it matched the hardware configuration of your PC against its online database, making it valid. Yes, this means that you or someone else could then sign-in with a completely different MSA and it would just work. This would be useful if you sold the PC, for example. (I believe Microsoft has a way to transfer the license to another MSA. But that would likely involve a support phone call.)

Office 365 install and servicing

simont asks:

Office 365. Which is the better way to install it and keep it updated on a single user PC. From the Store or from the ISO/Executable?

Oddly enough, I’ve been wondering about this myself, though I thought/think of the two choices as “from the Store” and “from the Office 365 website.” So on recent new PCs and resets, I’ve been testing what a Store-based install is like and how it differs, if at all, from installing it “normally” (from the web).

And I’ve come to the conclusion that the best way to install it is via the Office 365 website. The reason is that Store-based updates don’t seem to be super-reliable, and the Store treats each app separately. So I’ve seen multiple Office desktop applications “stuck” in the Store’s Downloads queue multiple times, on different PCs.

For someone like me in particular, the web interface is also better because I often need to manage which PCs are associated with my account. So just going there for everything seems to make the most sense. (Granted, most people won’t have this issue.)

As an aside, it is possible and probably likely that the Store-based versions of the Office apps do not include 100 percent of the features in the versions you get from the web. I have never run into a problem there, personally, but others might. (I’m trying to find a description of these differences, but I’m coming up short.)

Google’s shopping list

StevenLayton asks:

I’ve started using the Google Smart Hub screen in the kitchen to create shopping lists, which I can access on my phone, when I go to the shops. How can you access your Google shopping list on the phone, without having to say out loud “Hey Google, show me my shopping list”, and look like a tool in the supermarket?

LOL.

Well. You could ask your phone the question before you walk in the store. You could also then copy the text of the question you asked and just paste it in late, avoiding talking. Or just type it in.

Or, you could just look like a tool. 🙂

Life, the universe, and everything

ryandevega asks:

What do you see as the future of personal computing in the next 3-5 years? Windows, macOS, and Linux (all legacy desktop OSs) are great for businesses, hobbyists, and gamers, but “normals” have lost their taste for managing these things given how comparatively easy it is to manage phones and tablets now. Online services are a given and will surely be a constant, if not even more prevalent moving forward.

Seeing as ChromeOS, iOS, and Android all have their strengths and weaknesses, excluding the user categories above, what recommendations do you have for regular people to get minimal computing tasks done (i.e. web browsing; basic productivity; light photo/video management)? Looking forward only, what devices would you recommend under the assumption that they already have smartphones? Interoperability is obviously a factor (e.g. Continuity; Hand Off).

This conversation used to be much easier 10 or 20 years ago, but lately so much advice on this topic is based on assumptions, ignorance, or bias. You do a pretty good job of objectively analyzing things like this which is why I’m asking. If this is too big of a topic to cover in your Ask Paul posts, please consider writing a dedicated post on this topic.

So this is indeed a big topic. I’ll look into writing up something if possible, but I do have a few quick thoughts.

PCs/Macs are legacy (even specialty) computing devices, but they don’t disappear and will always have a role as work/productivity machines. Most people will use them less than before. Some will use them not at all. I don’t see that changing in 3-5 years per se, but the nature of these devices could be changing thanks to simpler platforms like Chome OS.

Given that everyone will basically have a smartphone, the need for other device types—which include PC-type devices, tablets, smart watches, and so on—will range from user to user. But the biggest change here, I think, will be the move to folding and multiple-display mobile devices, which will allow a phone to convert into a more versatile device. That transition should easily happen in that 3-5 year time frame.

A broader and longer-term trend is what I call ubiquitous computing, which involves both voice control and the computerization of virtually “everything,” with the end game being that people will no longer need to carry devices with them for the most part. You will be able to just speak to get answers from anywhere, access your own online services and data from anywhere, and so on. That will require more than 3-5 years, but it’s already starting and there will be progress during that time frame for sure.

Here’s a really simple example. Right now, I want to play a podcast in the kitchen while I make breakfast. To do so, I get my phone, carry it to the kitchen, load up my podcast app, and then “cast” it to a smart speaker or smart display there. I could just walk into the kitchen and say something like “Hey Google, play the latest episode of this podcast” or whatever. And in the future, I will be able to do that using built-in IoT components and hidden speakers in my house or in many other places, but without any lead-in “Hey Google” bit thanks to voice recognition/identification, etc. It kind of moves from an on-device experience to a more ubiquitous experience virtually everywhere. It’s a bit like moving from a room-bound desktop PC to a laptop to a phone. Each step makes the experience more ubiquitous.

Sony and cloud gaming

sabertooth920 asks:

Do you see Sony getting in on cloud gaming?

Oh for sure. Cloud-based gaming is the future of videogames, period. Sony will have to be a big part of this.

And you could argue that they’ve already taken more concrete steps to this future than Microsoft has, since its PlayStation Now service already offers game streaming (as opposed to game downloading, like Xbox Game Pass) and it giving gamers the ability to play those PS2/PS3/PS4 titles on heterogeneous devices, albeit by using a native client (and only on PS4 and PC). It even supports Sony’s own controllers and other controllers, like the Xbox controller.

Sony opted out of E3 this year, so we can expect a big PlayStation even this year. I bet it focuses on both the PS5 and the future of PS Now. Which will need to include mobile and other device types.

Google Wifi

sabertooth920 asks:

Are you still highly satisfied with Google WiFi?

Yes, and had you asked me about this a week ago, I would have told you that I literally haven’t thought about it for months, and this would have triggered me checking up on the setup to make sure it’s all working fine. It works so well you just kind of forget about it.

But as it turns out, I have had two curious Google Wifi incidents this past week.

We have a three-node Google Wifi setup here, with one node on each floor (upstairs, downstairs, basement) of the house. The main node, which is connected by Ethernet to the Internet router, is in the living room in the downstairs of the house.

I was in the basement the other day and noticed that the node’s (blue) light was on—you can change the brightness or just turn it off from the app—so I decided to turn it off. And when I tried to do so, the app couldn’t find the node, so I ended up rebooting it by unplugging it and then plugging it back in. Weird. But whatever.

Then I was in my wife’s office upstairs yesterday and saw that the node there was pulsing an orange color. I had lookup what that meant—loss of connectivity, basically—so I tested it with the app, and it said the node was working fine. So I rebooted it and the pulsing orange light returned.

Not sure what’s up there. I turned off the light so my wife won’t be distracted by it. And checking the mesh now, the Google Wifi app tells me that each node is fine and that connectivity between them is “OK.” Which is not “Good” or “Great.”

I’m not sure what’s up, if anything: My wife and daughter say everything works fine and always has. But it is a weird coincidence of timing. And now this is on my radar.

Google’s role in game streaming

dcdevito Alpha Member #220 – 14 hours ago

Do you think Google would be better served as a partner for cloud gaming with Stadia rather than an entire gaming service/stack? Sony and Nintendo come to mind as potential partners that could benefit from Google’s infrastructure.

That is exactly what I think. And I’d add partners of all sizes to the list, from big publishers like EA and Activision to the little guys.

The more I think about this, the more I believe that this is how Stadia will end up, and that Google’s first-party efforts are mostly about proof of concept and attracting partners. There is no way a Google-branded game service makes any sense at all to gamers or the developers who target them.

Online advertising vs. web advertising

AnOldAmigaUser asks:

You have mentioned that advertising is not viable to support sites like this. Clearly, however, online advertising is huge business, and everyone seems to want to track the online actions of consumers, from tech companies to grocers and insurance companies. Is this a sustainable model? It seems to me that while the middlemen are doing fine, it is not working for content creators or consumers.

Advertising is no longer a viable source of revenue for blogs and websites. But this is a bit different from the broader market for online advertising, which favors big publishers and sites.

And online advertising is a big business. Mostly for Google. Which now takes a much bigger share of the revenues than it used to, back when this model did make sense for websites and blogs. And that tracking you mention is a business imperative: it’s what makes its ad network so useful to advertisers. By knowing more about viewers, they can present more useful ads.