Ask Paul: October 11 (Premium)

Happy Friday! This was a little later than I’d hoped, but it’s still just in time to kick off the weekend.

Dyslexia is incredibly common

madthinus asks:

Do you find it curious that Microsoft issue a blog post on 30 September 2019 in which it basically refer to Dona’s old role? Only to announce the change days later in an official Windows blog post. I find it all odd. What is going on here?

That’s just a communications thing; obviously, that change didn’t happen all that suddenly and there was a timing mistake there.

But I am bothered by the “I have a disability” thing. I love Dona, but seriously. Dyslexia is incredibly common, and is nothing like being deaf, blind, or otherwise truly handicapped, and it most certainly doesn’t warrant a post like that. This is a weird form of self-promotion that I have a huge problem with, given that I have a mother who is blind and a son who is deaf. There are no words for how gross this to me.

Removable storage on Surface

harmjr asks:

Removable hard drive not coming to Surface Pro 7 but is on Pro X. Your thoughts and do you think it will make it on Surface Pro 8?

Surface Pro X is the new Surface Pro design, while Surface Pro 7 is, I believe, literally identical to previous versions. So, yeah. I do think that Microsoft eventually goes with the new design on the Intel products, and that removable storage happens at that point. (Also would be surprised if future Surface PCs didn’t have other removable/serviceable components, like RAM.)

Chrome vs. Windows

AnOldAmigaUser asks:

HP and other manufacturers are pushing Chromebooks for the enterprise … to reduce the cost of IT support and maintenance, since maintaining Windows PCs is difficult, and harder now with two updates per year, though Enterprises can keep that number more manageable. If Windows 10X is Windows Lite, or an “expression” of Windows Lite, do you know if it will be as easy to support and maintain as a Chromebook, or at least in the same ballpark? Do they have an even simpler “expression” in the wings?

I believe this is the lightest expression—and ugh to that term—of the Windows codebase for PCs. And we’ve heard from sources that Windows 10X (or something just like it) will come to more traditional form factors like laptops in a future release. As far as managing/supporting any version of Windows in the enterprise, Microsoft pretty much already has something in place with Intune (part of Microsoft 365) and the built-in MDM capabilities in Windows. This gives businesses a choice between traditional management and mobile device management, as with phones, tablets, and Chromebooks.

The issue is more serious in education, because of cost constraints and the lack of IT support. In that kind of environment, Chrome OS remains a lot simpler. (And probably less expensive, but I’m not sure about that.)

Alternatively, since they are OK with marketing an Android device since it will keep users running Microsoft software, do you think they may work with Google or manufacturers, like HP, to market Microsoft software and services on top of Chromebooks for the enterprise and education?

Given that I was expecting Windows 10X (which was Windows Lite/Lite OS) to be more like Chrome OS than Windows, I’m waiting now for some clarity from Microsoft on their plans for Chrome OS. I know that you can obtain the web app versions of the Office applications from the Chrome Web Store now, for example, but these are just websites, not true applications with offline support, etc. So the first step would be to make their web offerings more sophisticated.

Microsoft does seem openly platform-agnostic. I don’t see them shipping Chrome OS, since it overlaps with Windows. (Android makes sense on phones since Microsoft doesn’t have a platform there.) But working with other companies to bundle Microsoft products and services on their devices? Sure.

It seems to me that the lack of an easy to deploy and maintain thin client, is a more existential threat to Microsoft than the decline of Windows as an OS.

It’s certainly been problematic in education. And I’ve long felt that enterprises/businesses would embrace something simpler and less expensive. But we’ve been dealing with the thin-client threat since the late 1990s, when Sun and Oracle began pushing this notion. So far, nothing has pushed Windows off the PC form factor.

No 1903 on Surface Book 2

Cdorf asks:

What’s going on with SB2 and the dGPU issue. I honestly find it embarrassing that its their own product and we still have nothing but a little blurb on the 1903 release notes. They are about to release 1909/19H2 and so far I haven’t seen anything where it is fixed in that. I’ve left my SB2 on 1809 as a result.

This was just fixed today, thankfully.

Mixed messages on 20H1

will asks:

Now that the Oct event has come and gone, we did not get anything said about 20H1. Is this the process going forward for Windows releases now: Just announce a feature when a new build ships and keep doing that? Do you expect any changes with Insiders now that Dona is moving into a different role?

We’ve already seen one major change: A blog post announcing that development of a Windows 10 version was complete. That’s something they never did under Dona. But remember that the Insider Program is just marketing, and that they don’t decide what to announce or when, and they have nothing to do with engineering. So I’m thinking the real changes are happening upstream. And that Dona moving on is just part of that.

As for 20H1 specifically, I do keep waiting for that big drop—some huge amount of functional or at least architectural changes—to happen. Now that we know about Windows 10X, that can happen, at least on the architectural/API side.

Shared folder access

kevinbouwman asks:

I purchased a new Lenovo P73 laptop last week. It came with Window 10 pro 1903. I use Office 365 Business Premium for my very small business. I set it up to use my Office 365 credentials so I could move between desktop, laptop, and Surface Pro more easily. I have since discovered that this can make it nearly impossible to access shared folders on my peer-to-peer office LAN. All I find online (after 30 hours of diligent searching and reading) is that other people have the same problem and everyone is stumbling around in the dark trying to figure out a solution. It feels like I am working with Windows for Workgroups 3.11 again. I know Microsoft is a poor communicator, but really? How can such a thing not get address better? Any suggestions?

I’m not aware of the exact issue you’re describing, but I do have a suggestion. It’s something that has fixed shared folder access on my own home network when the normal method (navigate to the share, type in your credentials when asked) doesn’t work: Use Credential Manager to create a new Windows credential for each of the shares. This is an old-school and probably deprecated Control Panel, so the easiest way to find it is to use Start search and type cred. Once it opens, select Windows Credentials and then “Add a Windows credential.” Then, enter the share name (\\nas\documents or whatever) and then a username and password. Then, try it again.

Office and default email app

Simard57 asks:

Will Microsoft ever update office apps so the send to respects the default mail app choice? It uses outlook even when I have a different mail client as my default… it is windows own windows 10 mail app.

No.

Kidding. Well, kind of. There are so many little issues in the traditional Office applications that I feel will never be fixed.

x64 apps on ARM

ChristopherCollins asks:

Would you consider a premium article about why WoA will not emulate x64? At one point I read something somewhere about Intel not allowing them to do so (may be false), x64 is an AMD innovation anyway. I’d love to know if it’s a hardware or licensing issue. I think it would make an interesting Premium article, plus I know you can get the truth about it.

Microsoft has explained this. It’s a technical issue.

On a 64-bit Intel-based PC today, 32-bit (and 16-bit) Windows applications basically run in emulation using the Windows on Windows (WOW) abstraction layer. (Remember “thunking” from the early days of 32-bit?) So, when Microsoft ported Windows 10 to ARM, they used this same architecture to let that platform run 32-bit Windows applications. But there is one major difference: On x64 systems, the emulation layer is literally implemented in hardware. On ARM, it’s done in software and that, plus the inherent differences between ARM and x86-style chipsets, explains the performance problems of running emulated desktop applications.

Emulating x64 on ARM isn’t impossible, it’s just problematic, and would require a ton of work in both software and hardware. There’s no such thing as WOW64 emulation since 64-bit is native on x64 and always will be (there will never be a 128-bit version of Windows). And then the ARM architecture itself would need to be modified/evolved to accommodate the CPU registers needed for this emulation; right now, there are only enough registers to handle x86/32-bit.

And that may partially explain Microsoft’s sudden entry into ARM chipset design. Maybe its SH series of chips will evolve to make this happen. I was told “never say never” when I asked about x64 emulation at the October event. Previously, the answer was literally “never.”

Regardless, the biggest problems right now are games and high-end graphics/engineering applications, which were obviously not a target for the slow initial ARM-based PCs, and drivers. But as the performance of ARM (for Windows) improves, users will obviously want to run 64-bit apps and maybe even games. So Microsoft has clearly been thinking about tackling this problem, if not actually working on it. And if it does implement a WOW64 subsystem for its own specialized ARM chips, it could solve all the compatibility issues at once. That would be amazing. And it’s certainly possible.

Surface Qs

MartinusV2 asks:

How strange will it be to answer a phone call from a Surface Duo since you will have to open it as Brad mentioned it? One screen on you side and the other on your face? 🙂

I guess we’re going to find out. But in Microsoft’s defense, making/taking traditional phone calls probably will be one of the less common use cases.

Since the new Surface laptop / Pro still doesn’t have Thunderbolt 3, is it because Microsoft is waiting for USB4?

It would seem so. But as I wrote earlier, USB-C probably solves most of the needs, especially on the portable Surface PCs. All you lose is throughput (20 Gbps vs. 40) and the ability to add a second 4K/60 Hz external display.

What do you think about Google Stadia Latency solution? Seem from some game devs it’s ridiculous. And what about all those AAA games delayed to next year? Will that impact the game service?

I will admit that I laughed out loud when I first heard about the latency solution. We’ll see, though: Google often offers non-traditional solutions to problems, so maybe they’ll pull it off. I am definitely interested in testing it next month and seeing what it’s really like.

I had heard about the next Doom game being delayed, but that impacts all platforms. The bigger issue, maybe, is that cloud-based gaming is going to be a tough sell for the types of games (mostly shooters) that most hardcore gamers prefer. Actually game selection and latency are maybe hand-in-hand there.

I don’t see Google being successful in gaming. I don’t wish them ill. But there are going to be too many services, and they just don’t seem to be in a good place.

Why Surface Duo?

JustMe asks:

What do you think Microsoft’s “real” plan is for the Duo? Given the difficulties that have been discussed using the Duo as a phone in its current state, could this just be a platform for Microsoft to develop its Android chops before releasing a “real” phone, or do you believe there will be significant changes to the device to make it more phone-like or phone-palatable? Could this potentially not be a phone at all, but more of an “Androidbook”?

At its heart, the real mission of Surface is to create/formalize new form factors. They did it at least once with Surface Pro. And they’ve been working on this dual-screen thing for years. I’m guessing that the recent push to folding/dual-screen phones inspired them to announce earlier than they’d normally like. And that the appeal of this form factor is that it gives them some bragging rights: It lets them claim to have a family of dual-screen devices, and thus to be a leader in making this form factor happen.

I always figured they would release a normal Android phone. But now I’m thinking they will not, because they can partner with others (like Samsung, see below) to get their software and services on more traditional phone designs.

Microsoft’s Samsung partnership

Lewk asks:

Do you have any new thoughts on Microsoft’s partnership with Samsung and the Galaxy Note 10? Now that Microsoft has announced their own android hardware. Are there any deeper meanings behind their new relationship?

I don’t think this impacts the Samsung partnership. Getting its software on some of the most popular Android handsets is obviously a win for Microsoft. But it’s a win for Samsung, too, given its desire to replace as many Google apps and services on its devices as possible: Microsoft has viable replacements for Google’s productivity offerings, and those would be difficult or expensive for Samsung to do itself.

I personally have a line of thinking that parallels Microsoft’s new approach with Edge. By using Chromium as a base for the new Edge, they’re holding Google accountable for all code changes and submissions to Chromium. By openly adding to Chromium in the light, anything Google doesn’t green-light will be seen by all and can have negative impacts on Google. And at worst, if Microsoft wishes to advance chromium without the co-operation of Google, they can fork it and continue the work without them. Possibly even bringing web developers with them if they’re adding what web developers want to chromium, where Google isn’t (e.g. Google’s proposed changes to the webRequest API and changing it to a limited declarativeNetRequest API).

I suspect you are right. Microsoft knew that it was risky to choose Chromium in the sense that it might need to someday fork the code to get what it wanted into the platform. But Google will always look like the bad guy if that day ever does come. And the timing is good, with all the antitrust scrutiny around Google right now. They will play nice, I bet.

Could Microsoft’s partnership with Samsung be similar? With Samsung a new major player with foldable android hardware, could Microsoft be working with Samsung on the software associated with folding devices? By creating common API’s that target specific functions of folding devices that developers can target. These API’s would match their Windows 10X counterparts so that developers can write their apps once and not change too much code to target both OS’s.

It’s possible, for sure. But I believe that those APIs are in Android and are Google’s responsibility, and Google has said that Samsung and other smartphone makers lobbied for folding screen support to be added to Android 10 because they were ready to ship devices.

That said, Samsung almost certainly did its own work as well, and it did of course make the Continuum-like DeX environment without Google’s help. It would be interesting if Duo also offered a dockable full-screen experience.

Also, a two-screen device like Duo is relatively unsophisticated compared to a folding display-based device like Galaxy Fold. So Samsung may not see Microsoft as much of a competitor at this point.