Does windows 10s go far enough for the consumer market?

6

Listening to Paul and brads discussions around chromebooks and the future of computing I had a thought that perhaps windows 10s doesn’t go far enough for the consumer market. But I don’t think it’s the apps that Microsoft should lock down – I do think that chrome and other verified apps should be allowed, this post isn’t about that.

I Think the areas of windows that should be locked down and potentially removed are the 90% of windows features that consumers don’t need.

For example just today I noticed my microphone on my surface pro had stopped working,it turned out to be a driver issue as a result of an update. In the end I had to download a surface tool to fix the issue and I thought to my self why? This never happens on an iPad and I assume chromebooks? I want a stable operating system especially on the OS manufactures own hardware. And that’s the thing that once you go to a simpler system you’ll never come back to windows. its the same argument for console gaming over of gaming, I don’t want to tinker or have the opportunity to mess things up, I just want to use the device as a tool. That’s what chromebook is.

Microsoft could make make a super stripped down version of windows, same shell single driver options that they verify.its crazy that on surface there are multiple driver options for audio, why? and why should I deal with it? There are computing options out there now where I wouldn’t encounter these issues- Microsoft has to match this and windows 10 pro will never be able to without gutting the system.

They can still offer windows 10 pro for those who need it. I think this is the only way they can compete with chromebooks.unfortunately because of my work I need windows pro and will be stuck with it for at least a decade but if I could I’d switch.

Comments (6)

6 responses to “Does windows 10s go far enough for the consumer market?”

  1. skane2600

    Even when MS produces its own PCs, it still has to consider the entire Windows ecosystem when it makes changes to the OS. Apple has never had to deal with that issue since they make 100% of the HW that runs their OS's. Apple's "simple" solution is just to stop supporting their older devices and forcing users to buy new devices if they want to keep up. Which approach is better is a matter of personal opinion.


    As far as a stripped-down version of Windows is concerned, they'd be better off just creating a brand new simpler, less capable OS (a la iPad) and not call it Windows. The lesson MS apparently didn't learn with RT (considering 10S) is that using the name Windows brings with it certain expectations and they ignore those expectations at their peril.


    • Chris_Kez

      In reply to skane2600:

      I agree they would have been better off making a new, "less capable" (less complex) OS with a different name, but I think they rightly realized that the likelihood of gaining wide adoption was too small. I also think they're probably stuck with "legacy" Windows whether they like it or not. They're probably destined to muddle through with a Windows 10-like compromise.

    • hrlngrv

      In reply to skane2600:

      MSFT's problem may be that a new OS not called Windows could undermine Windows brand value. A catch-22 if there ever was one.

  2. hrlngrv

    . . . I do think that chrome and other verified apps should be allowed . . .

    How? That is, how would any software outside the Windows Store be verified? Checksums? Originating uri? 4th party repositories? Something else? The precise mechanism matters. I understand you want to avoid falling into that rabbit hole, but it can't be casually waved away.

    Is there any public data confirming that Chrome OS updates are always painless for all devices? I've never had any problems with mine (a now ancient HP Pavilion Chromebook with a (THANK GOD!) nonstandard keyboard), but that doesn't mean much. OTOH, it may be the case that Chrome OS's basic design: in default mode, user can only see and manipulate what's in their ~/Downloads directory, Google Drive or in removable media, only apps can alter files in the rest of their ~ (home) directory, and only the system can alter anything outside ~ on the internal drive. How much work would it take MSFT to lock down Windows to that degree? Can an OS be as simple and robust as Chrome OS appears to be without being that locked down?

    As for security, https://www.laptopmag.com/articles/windows-10-s-hacked . Any comparable vulnerabilities for Chrome OS?

  3. rameshthanikodi

    The first thing Microsoft should do to compete with ChromeOS is to fix Windows Update. I don't care what it takes. Just do it, get rid of restarts, and get rid of long installation/download times. Chrome OS's updating puts windows to shame.


    Fixing WU alone will go a long way. But the second step will be to fix Edge. I don't care what it takes, people will like it even if they just copied Chrome because that's all people are whining about. Add Google account support, add web app support, put an actual extension store instead of mixing it up with all the other stuff in the Windows Store. Thus far they've added features like e-book reading which I think few care for. Edge also still continues to consume more memory than Chrome while barely matching the performance. It has fallen behind.


    These two alone will go a long way to make Windows 10s viable. But to make it truly viable, Microsoft must embrace Win32 apps in the store and allow Win32 apps to extend themselves by using new UWP features. Stop treating Win32 like a stepchild of Windows.


    You are also right to bring up driver issues - I think Microsoft should let OEMs distribute all their drivers via Windows Update or let OEMs build a tool to push their own updates for their own products via WU. The combined process should remove the driver conflicts we see between Microsoft and OEMs.


    And finally, as usual, get rid of feature creep and bloat.

    • MutualCore

      In reply to FalseAgent:

      Centennial allows any Win32 app to be packaged up as a 'Store' app and be extended with UWP features. Microsoft has talked extensively about this, featured it at BUILD 2017. iTunes is coming to the Windows Store this fall. It's happening, just not as fast as you want.

Leave a Reply