First Screenshots of Windows Cloud Leak

Microsoft is working on a new iteration of Windows called Windows Cloud and while details around this OS are still light, screenshots from the OS have leaked and confirm that the platform will only run UWP applications. The shots are from an early build of the platform, so many things can still change, but to little surprise, it looks nearly identical to Windows 10.

As noted above, the one major constraint of this version of Windows is that it will only run UWP applications and in the screenshot at the top of this post, you can see what happens when you try to run a win32 application. Microsoft is pitching this limitation as a security feature which will likely be their marketing message when this OS is announced.

One thing worth pointing out is that if you convert an app to the Windows Store with Centennial which repackages Win32 applications, as Windows Blog Italia notes, they will run on Windows Cloud. This means that even though you cant run older apps natively, it will not require all that much work to allow them to run on Windows Cloud.

[Update] I got my hands on a build of Windows Cloud and it currently does not support Centennial apps, although this could change in a future release.

And of course, that’s the point. Microsoft wants to make it easy to bring legacy apps into the Windows Store to help bolster their marketplace and this will also give the company greater control over the app to improve security.

It’s not known yet when Microsoft will announce Windows Cloud but seeing as the OS is now out in the wild, this hopefully means an announcement is coming soon. Until then, we will keep poking around to see if there are any other big features or limitations with Windows Cloud to help paint a better picture about how Microsoft plans to position this OS.

It could be, seeing as they are releasing Windows on ARM devices later this year, that the company is going to use this limited iteration of Windows 10 to drive those machines. If this sounds familiar, that’s because this is how Microsoft positioned Windows RT several years ago. But, what may be different this time around, is that Windows Cloud may run on Intel-based chips too.

Seeing as Microsoft has enabled win32 apps to run on ARM and to then release an OS that doesn’t support those apps on those devices, does seem a bit odd. I suspect there is more to the story here but only time will tell about what part of the picture we are missing.

Tagged with

Share post

Conversation 24 comments

  • 2428

    Premium Member
    03 February, 2017 - 3:00 pm

    <p>OMG, stop the presses, it looks just like Windows 10</p>

  • 548

    Premium Member
    03 February, 2017 - 3:01 pm

    <p>I do hope there’s more to the story. &nbsp;Because right now, "Doesn’t run win32 apps" equates (in the mind at least) to Windows RT…which equates to "completely useless".</p>

    • 2944

      Premium Member
      03 February, 2017 - 3:20 pm

      <blockquote><em><a href="#40910">In reply to </a><a href="../../../users/MarkH">MarkH</a><a href="#40910">:</a></em></blockquote>
      <p>Look like you can run Centennial packaged applications. That makes it a lot more useful IMO.</p>

    • 2149

      03 February, 2017 - 4:40 pm

      <blockquote><em><a href="#40910">In reply to </a><a href="../../../users/MarkH">MarkH</a><a href="#40910">:</a></em></blockquote>
      <p>I agree. I think&nbsp;it’s ok&nbsp;if it doesn’t run win32 apps, but it&nbsp;needs to look different too somehow. It must be immediately obvious that this is Windows "Lite".</p>

  • 5485

    03 February, 2017 - 3:01 pm

    <p>If the licensing is actually free, its only natural that the Windows&nbsp;Store only apps will be the policy. I guess MS is planing to get payed with Windows Store sales in these devices in the consumer scenario and through selling the management tools in the corporate and education markets.</p>
    <p>The question is … will consumers and corporations get into this or not? How much cheaper will be these devices? One&nbsp;hundred bucks less than current devices with Windows Home? Where is the functional advantage when compared with the competition … iPad Pro, ChromeBooks and Windows 10 devices?&nbsp;</p>
    <p>PS: I’m a great proponent of App Store services for many many reasons including security. The advantages outweighs the disadvantages, but if the Apps are not there …</p>
    <p>Apple could do the App Store only devices because there was nothing there comparable to iPhone and than the iPad. Google quickly followed the lead and got the middle to low range and its not competing with the high end. MS came up with a bad solution Windows RT / Surface just showing that it did not get it at all from a design point of view and too them to long to figure it out.</p>
    <p>My impression is that its just too late. Either MS manages to convince developers to build apps and sell them through the store for Windows 10 … Windows 10 Cloud will not do it. One way to do it is to enable tablet mode only for UWP apps … ops forgot they tried that before.</p>
    <p>They need to come up with a robust system. The iPad Pro does not make any noise or stutters with feature rich apps and still has a long battery life. On the other hand equivalente features within Windows applications&nbsp;running&nbsp;in the Surface line … it starts&nbsp;huffing and puffing (fan noise) and battery life reduces dramatically. Not to mention the regular updates …</p>

  • 1321

    03 February, 2017 - 3:03 pm

    <p>So… will Google UWP package Chrome and will Apple UWP package iTunes? (If technically possible)</p>

    • 5234

      03 February, 2017 - 4:01 pm

      <blockquote><em><a href="#40913">In reply to </a><a href="../../../users/nightmare99">nightmare99</a><a href="#40913">:</a></em></blockquote>
      <p>iTunes needs drivers and services to install. &nbsp;I’m testing out the enterprise version of Chrome to see if it works with the current version of DesktopAppConverter. &nbsp;The enterprise version is available via <a href=""></a>&nbsp;. &nbsp;It is already coded for silent installation.</p>
      <p>I’ll let you know how it goes.</p>

      • 1321

        03 February, 2017 - 4:40 pm

        <blockquote><em><a href="#40932">In reply to </a><a href="../../../users/Waethorn">Waethorn</a><a href="#40932">:</a></em></blockquote>

  • 187

    03 February, 2017 - 3:13 pm

    <p>Screams Education sector and the need for a simpler system to compete against ChromeOS.</p>

  • 120

    Premium Member
    03 February, 2017 - 3:18 pm

    <p>I wonder if the "future&nbsp;product release" mentioned in that Surface firmware release a couple of weeks ago was pointing towards compatibility with this product…</p>

  • 217

    03 February, 2017 - 3:24 pm

    <p>The only way this makes inroads into education is if it can run chrome. Plus, it will be interesting to see how much control is available in Settings, and whether or tools will be built in (regedit, disk mgmt, etc). If they are then I think this is pointless.</p>

  • 5530

    03 February, 2017 - 3:29 pm

    <p>This seems stupid and really arbitrary especially if this SKU is going to run on Intel. Even more mind-blowing is the fact that we’ve seen this before with Windows RT but apparently they haven’t learnt anything from it. If it’s going to look like Windows 10, it needs to actually do what people do on Windows 10.</p>

    • 2039

      03 February, 2017 - 3:38 pm

      <blockquote><em><a href="#40922">In reply to </a><a href="../../../users/FalseAgent">FalseAgent</a><a href="#40922">:</a></em></blockquote>
      <p>The main flaw of RT was marketing, not the product itself. There are tons of people who don’t know how to handle their PC properly and closed OS is an advantage for them, not a con. With Slack, Photoshop, Evernote, Office being in the Store the list of must-have apps / programs is not that big and I’m sure we’ll here of more partners at this year’s Build</p>

      • 5530

        03 February, 2017 - 4:11 pm

        <blockquote><em><a href="#40923">In reply to </a><a href="../../../users/Vidua">Vidua</a><a href="#40923">:</a></em></blockquote>
        <p>"The main flaw of RT was marketing, not the product itself"</p>
        <p>you have got to be shitting me.</p>

      • 5530

        03 February, 2017 - 4:20 pm

        <blockquote><em><a href="#40923">In reply to </a><a href="../../../users/Vidua">Vidua</a><a href="#40923">:</a></em></blockquote>
        <p>At least in the case of Windows RT it was a technical reason. Limiting Windows 10 cloud in this fashion is just arbitrary and stupid.&nbsp;This thing is almost certainly going to run on Intel. Anything that actively inhibits x86/64 apps on a x86/64 Windows SKU is a dumb af idea. Period. I don’t think there any room for budging here. It’s not going to push people to UWP, it’s going to push people to jump off a cliff.</p>

  • 5234

    03 February, 2017 - 3:39 pm

    <p>If they make a porting kit for this so that ARM chip makers can make it run on low-cost dev boards like the ODroid-C2 or some future RPi kit with 2GB+ of RAM, then this would be a killer platform.</p>
    <p>It won’t happen though, because they won’t make the kernel portable enough (or open-source it) so that hardware makers can make the necessary modifications or drivers.</p>

  • 5234

    03 February, 2017 - 3:41 pm

    <p>"Seeing as Microsoft has enabled win32 apps to run on ARM and to then release an OS that doesn&rsquo;t support those apps on those devices, does seem a bit odd. I suspect there is more to the story here but only time will tell about what part of the picture we are missing."</p>
    <p>I could see them possibly supporting UWP-wrapped Win32 apps on ARM exclusively for Windows 10 on ARM as well as this SKU.</p>
    <p>In fact, I would bet money that the Windows 10 on ARM version that finally&nbsp;ships, and Windows 10 Cloud on ARM will be the same SKU in the end.</p>

  • 5664

    Premium Member
    03 February, 2017 - 4:08 pm

    <p>I’m disappointed that it doesn’t yet have the Cloud Shell. I’d like to have a look at that.</p>

  • 556

    Premium Member
    03 February, 2017 - 7:45 pm

    <p>Wow, this is a surprise to me. So… Now we have windows 10, windows 10 mobile, windows 10 ARM, and windows cloud. Microsoft is really looking to confuse people. Hopefully UWP apps work on all with out developers rewriting or repacking. Is this their anwer to a Chromebook? I would think the ARM version that can run it all might be a better fit.</p>

  • 4288

    04 February, 2017 - 8:41 am

    <p>Brad, getting Win32 apps to run on ARM and then locking down these devices to store only still works in the context of it enables ARM devices to run centennialised applications. Without the Win32&gt;ARM emulation, an ARM-based PC could only run proper UWP apps that where the app manifest says it can run on ARM.</p>
    <p>Now these Cloudbooks will be able to run any Store app not just a subset i.e. it will be able to run the Windows Store version of Photoshop Elements. If you can get Google Chrome via the store and the UWP Office fleshed out a little more, these could make great consumer laptops.</p>

  • 2532

    06 February, 2017 - 5:42 pm

    <p>You know they will throw win32 apps under the bus and call them insecure, full of malware and viruses. Which will of course upset all the thousands and thousands of win32 app developer who will never never, ever develop a UWP app. Even if their livelihood depended on it. It will take another 15 to 20 years for win32 apps to stop being the majority of the applications that are used today. Just like windows XP is still being used today by millions and millions of people.</p>


Stay up to date with the latest tech news from!

"*" indicates required fields

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Thurrott © 2023 BWW Media Group