Over the years I have noticed a lot about “the future of Windows”. Back in 2012 it was clear. Thick client gone and instead we would have Windows RT with Universal Windows Applications from the store that would run on PCs, tablets, and phones.
It didn’t quite turn out like that. The next stage was Windows 10. The last version of Windows. This came with updates twice a year, several different maintenance cycles, and update options. A thing that has dwindled into a series of partially finished interface changes including both a settings app, a control panel and several remaining MMC components. Added to this are features that appear one year and disappear the next year.
Then the future of Windows was Windows 10 S. High performance and safe. Store applications only. People who had the misfortune of having Windows 10 S “on by default” quickly “upgraded” to Windows 10 when they found there was nothing they wanted in the Windows Store. This morphed into Windows 10 in S Mode. Which was still Windows 10 S but with an on/off switch.
Next, we have the return of a 2012 favourite. Windows 10 on ARM. More accurately Windows 10 on Qualcomm. It looks like Windows 10 but isn’t really something for the mainstream. The usage case seems a convoluted explanation of long battery life, thin design, and no fans.
Then we have Windows 10 X. It’s “killer feature” was dual screen devices only. Except that now it’s for any screen. It’s called Windows but may not look like Windows. It may run Windows applications, or it may not. It could run applications in an emulation or VM.
Then we have Windows Cloud. A subscription Windows that is in addition to some client that allows you to run some kind of virtual PC in Azure which will then allow you to use Windows programs that you can’t use if you have a PC with Windows on it.
I use Windows every day, at home, at work and in other places. Most users never think about “the future of Windows”. They have a vague idea it should run any app that says it needs Windows. The emphasis from Microsoft seems to make things that use the Windows name that may not run the applications people expect to be able to run with the performance they expect.
Windows 10 doesn’t seem the last version of Windows. I still don’t know what the future of Windows is. The most worrying thing is I don’t believe Microsoft do either.
jumpingjackflash5
<p>Unfortunately yes they do not seem to know. And it is a shame because in Windows 10 there are still some good parts and functions, and it is still good choice for a PC. But Microsoft does not care about Windows much nowadays. If they release desktop version of Ofiice for Linux the same way as they did with Edge, then Windows can start to finally disapper or remain for "special use only". They can still save, support and expand Windows if they want to, however. I wish that they do not abandon their once great operating system. </p><p><br></p>
dftf
<blockquote><em><a href="#591528">In reply to hrlngrv:</a></em></blockquote><p><em>Windows RT: </em>agree. If an everyday-person gets a machine with "Windows RT", as it "just looks the same as any-other Windows device I've been on" they expect it to do the same things. Whereas on say macOS, or a Linux distro or Android or iOS people expect it to be different to Windows as it clearly looks different. (You could go way-back to the days of Windows Mobile and before that Pocket PC and again see how-limiting they were, despite UI-wise trying to make them replicate the desktop Windows-of-the-day).</p><p><br></p><p><em>Control Panel and Settings</em>: I really do not see either what takes them so-long to move stuff over, especially stuff only added into Control Panel in recent-years, like "Credential Manager" which is just a list of stored usernames and passwords with import/export ability. Surely not too-hard to move-over? Sure, due to old drivers things like the old "Keyboard" and "Mouse" applets can never fully go; but there is no-reason why the old dialog-boxes cannot be launched from inside <em>Settings</em> via a link. Then at-least their icons can disappear from <em>Control Panel</em>.</p><p><br></p><p><em>Microsoft Store</em>: I've posted on the forum here before with a list of example software I use, and only around 30-40% of it exists inside the <em>Store </em>last time I checked. And even then, a handful are only in there as unofficial, fan-made packages, which I'm not sure I'd want to trust. As I've said before, I fail to see why Microsoft doesn't just let companies add the .MSI versions of their installers into the <em>Store</em>: it would be a quick way to fill it up.</p><p><br></p><p><em>Make Windows users pay each year to use Windows: </em>kinda difficult when they gave Windows 10 away for free to suddenly then start charging for it later. It has never been advertised as a "free trial". Even now, if you use the Media Creation Tool on a Windows 7 or 8.1 computer and choose the "Upgrade this PC now" option it'll still give you a fully-activated Windows 10 digital-licence at the end (assuming your Windows 7 or 8.1 device is current activated beforehand). And if you check the competition, again, that would be difficult: you don't pay an ongoing fee to use macOS, most Linux distros (some do require a paid "support fee"), Android or iOS. Enterprise customers will pay each-year, but that's because they get support as part of the deal. Maybe if Microsoft actually offered proper support more home-users and small-businesses would pay — anything would be better than the "Microsoft Answers" site, where random people just try to help, or Windows 10's "Feedback Hub" app where most issues just get ignored.</p>
dftf
<p>Unless tablets and mobiles really do take-over in the future (I'd suggest when most devices offer a "Continuum" mode, like Windows Phone had, where they switch to a desktop-UI when you link them to a big-screen), then for the foreseeable I think Windows will always have a place. It's not like alternatives don't already exist: most "everyday" Linux distros, like Ubuntu and Mint, would likely be fine for many average users. macOS is a viable alternative, though more-expensive to obtain the machines to use it on, of course. And yes, Android and iOS with support for external Bluetooth keyboards and mice (though this doesn't always work as-well as on Windows as some apps don't support a desktop-style experience very-well).</p><p><br></p><p>Focusing my thoughts on Windows specifically:</p><p><br></p><p>I think "Windows on ARM" will eventually be successful (not being able to use 64-bit "classic apps" on it right-now is one of the biggest issues, given some apps no-longer ship 32-bit versions).</p><p><br></p><p>I think more-clarity is needed around Windows 10 being "supported for the lifetime of a device" — I've never been sure how "lifetime" is defined. It would be good to have a clearer idea about which CPUs, chipsets and so-on will end when.</p><p><br></p><p>For all the people who predict "eventually Windows will just become a UI running on-top of Linux" I'd say this is unlikely. It's so-different code-wise that app-compatibility would be a nightmare. I mean, good-luck trying to run many Windows 9x apps on 64-bit versions of Windows thesedays — and it's a straight no-no for any 16-bit apps. If "old Windows" doesn't currently run under "new Windows" is it realistic to expect "old Windows" to run under "Linux Windows"? (I also have to add I do find it odd that when it comes to a new Xbox console, there is always talk about which old Xbox 360 or OG Xbox games will be made to run on the new console; yet with Windows, no-one ever seems to mind that old DOS games or Windows 9x apps won't run).</p><p><br></p><p>As a follow-on from the previous point: when oh when will Microsoft finally ditch the 32-bit versions of Windows? Sure, OEMs can no-longer preinstall 32-bit Windows 10 as-from Version 2004, and Windows Server has been 64-bit only since 2008 R2 (I think?) but otherwise all the current Windows 10 SKUs are still available in 32-bit versions. At the very least, some sort of transition plan should be made: left to me, I'd suggest making Enterprise, Education and LTSC the only ones available in 32-bit, and move Home, Pro and "Pro for Workstations" to 64-bit only. (That last one is especially daft: "Pro for Workstations" was deliberately created for users who need more power than regular Pro can offer: up-to 4 physical CPUs, not 2; up to 6TB of RAM and you can install on the successor file-system to NTFS. So why bother to release it in 32-bit? Does that not entirely defeat the entire point?)</p>
dftf
<p>So here's some thoughts on how Microsoft could change the SKU line-up:</p><p><br></p><p>32-bit only — two new SKUs:</p><ul><li>Windows 10 for Legacy Home PCs</li><li>Windows 10 for Legacy Pro PCs</li></ul><p><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Certain features from the 64-bit versions should not be available to ease development and testing.</span></p><p>For example: no Cortana, no Xbox Game Bar (or many of the other Xbox apps); apps that rely on the GPU (3D Builder, Print 3D, Mixed Reality, 3D Viewer, etc.); limit on the highest DirectX version supported (possibly DirectX 10, as that seems to fully also include DirectX 9), no support for authentication methods like "Windows Hello"; don't allow install on a machine clearly capable of running 64-bit Windows (so fail install on say: devices with more-than 4GB of physical RAM; ones which use UEFI, not BIOS; ones with drive-connection methods newer than SATA; or where the CPU ID matches a blocklist; or where any USB generation above USB 2.0 is detected, etc.). Probably more I could think of but essentially — let people have a Windows 10 that will run-better on older PCs, but don't include features they are clearly not capable of running to reduce development pressures. (Though unlike the LTSC version, I'd still include the Windows Store app).</p><p><br></p><p>32-bit and 64-bit offered:</p><ul><li>Windows 10 LTSC (enterprise customers should transition 32-bit installs to this SKU; SMBs and Home users should consider one of the two new editions above)</li></ul><p><br></p><p>64-bit only:</p><ul><li>Windows 10 Home</li><li>Windows 10 Pro</li><li>Windows 10 Education</li><li>Windows 10 Enterprise</li><li>Windows 10 on ARM</li></ul><p><br></p><p>Thoughts?</p>