
Microsoft hints at new modern Windows OS with ‘invisible’ background updates - Tomte
https://www.theverge.com/2019/5/29/18643857/microsoft-windows-lite-modern-operating-system-computex-2019-hints
======
pssflops
The worst of both worlds. You wake up the next day after automatic updates are
pushed to your machine and your harddisk has been wiped clean and the first
news article you find is that Microsoft is rolling back the update for anyone
that hasn't received it yet because they don't have a QA department for this
kind of thing any more.

------
naasking
I can't believe restarts are still a thing. We knew how to build OSes that can
avoid this over 30 years ago. Many people claim that the Windows NT kernel is
a pseudo microkernel, so it's probably all the user land cruft that's
accumulated over the years. Hopefully they can clean that up and achieve true
always-on functionality.

~~~
kevin_b_er
Its regularly astounding how few windows updates don't require a restart when
most of my linux ones never do. The two filesystems act quite differently for
locks, I know, but it is still a pain on windows.

I don't know how they'll get magic transparent updates when their model is to
always require restarts.

~~~
UI_at_80x24
>I don't know how they'll get magic transparent updates when their model is to
always require restarts.

When the only thing stored locally is $HOME and everything runs on clusters on
MS servers you will never know when the 'back end' reboots. The 'Future' is
the same as the past but with updates.

You are (your smartphone) and will be running a dumb-terminal. Instead of one
computer you are now using a very-large-cluster of servers. Each time you
boot-up 'Your instance' may be a unique VM that gets spun-up in micro-seconds.
When it's time for an update the patches can get all pushed out to the VM's
and when you reconnect (i.e. wake from sleep-mode) you are now connected to an
'updated' VM with all the hard work happening on the backend.

This very of the future is really fucking COOL, and terrifying. It also pretty
damn doable.

------
vorpalhex
Given Microsofts track record with buggy windows updates, 'invisible
background updates' is the last thing I want from them...

~~~
kawsper
And they will probably A/B test them as well, and roll them out in different
paces, so you'd no clue what you're running and what changed.

~~~
naikrovek
It is unbelievable how many people here complain about needing reboots on
Windows AND who go on to complain about a rumor that maybe reboots won't be
needed in the future on some unknown OS made by Microsoft.

I guess some folks just want to complain.

~~~
Cytobit
The complaints are mainly about not being able to choose when and if updates
are applied.

~~~
naikrovek
If the complaint is that "I am not told when my computer will reboot" then
that isn't really valid anymore. There are lots of notifications and dialogs
that let users know about pending reboots days in advance.

If the complaint is that "I can't skip arbitrary patches at will" then yeah
that's not possible, nor should it be if you're aware of security concerns AT
ALL.

Windows users have a long history of not willingly patching against
vulnerabilities that are actively being used by attackers in the wild, and for
very odd reasons. Those reasons can include complete ignorance of the
vulnerability or the patch which fixes it, fear of a wide array of conspiracy
theories (I've heard all of these that I care to hear in 1,000 lifetimes),
fear of post-patch performance problems, fear of home-grown automation
breaking, and a bazillion other reasons, nearly all of which are complete
nonsense in practice.

I was very happy when Microsoft announced that they would force updates on
most users, because my own experience and Microsoft's telemetry both agreed
that if given an option, users simply will not patch their systems.

------
nailer
Vox blogspam. This is the original URL:

[https://blogs.microsoft.com/blog/2019/05/28/enabling-
innovat...](https://blogs.microsoft.com/blog/2019/05/28/enabling-innovation-
and-opportunity-on-the-intelligent-edge/)

------
vikramkr
If this is just windows done better that's interesting, if this is another
chromium style stripped down OS I'm not sure how to feel about that - as long
as it wouldn't impact main windows that's fine but gaming is a pretty
important use case for windows, and hopefully a stripped down OS without
strong support for computers that can do things like run more demanding
software locally wouldn't become their flagship. For other use cases, thisbis
definitely instep forward, chromebooks are great for people not familiar with
technology who just want something that works, and not needing to fiddle
around with updates will be a boon.

~~~
fredley
"Thin" OSs like ChromeOS, that basically provide web browsing in a safe,
lightweight environment are great for some users who literally just want to
browse the web and read email.

There's an interesting avenue for Microsoft to provide a ChromeOS-like
experience, but with built in O365. This would cover the use cases of easily
95%+ of computer users (web+email+office).

That just leaves (simplifying a little) gamers, specialists (e.g.
video+graphics editing), legacy enterprise app users and developers who need
anything more.

~~~
inlined
>>This would cover the use cases of easily 95%+ of computer users
(web+email+office).

I suspect if that were the case then Windows RT wouldn’t have been canned. I’m
wondering what’s different now that makes this idea better. Marketing?

~~~
thrower123
As somebody who had one of those Windows RT Surfaces, and still drags it to
meetings when I forget my real laptop at home, I think they were just too
early, as Microsoft often is. Office 365 was in a much less usable state three
or four years ago when they rolled out RT, and it coincided with the Windows 8
UI debacle. It didn't help that the machines themselves were really quite
wimpy, and a lot of the work that has made cross-platform apps more viable in
the ensuing years hadn't been done yet, so there was a dearth of software that
you could actually use on them.

~~~
WorldMaker
I think so much of it was also Microsoft realizing they need a really good
answer for "why doesn't Win32 work on _this_ Windows?" They may have thought
they could do a transition like with the jump from Win16 to Win32 in the Win32
to (proto-) UWP jump in Windows 8, but they partly forgot how long they
supported back compat for Win16 applications and they partly forgot that
Win32's lifetime was more than triple Win16's and that means a lot more apps
that people care about possibly losing.

It took a concerted push in Windows 10 to remove most of the "seams" between
UWP and Win32 (to the point where now you can even have UWP Islands inside of
Win32 apps). We're also seeing years later the fruits of labor to better
emulate Win32 on ARM in the latest Windows 10 on ARM builds.

Though now with Chromebooks gaining popularity they are in danger of being too
late again even though now they have an answer to "Can this Windows run Win32
applications, too?" because Chromebook and the increased market shares of iOS
and Android have left an increasing number of people wondering what they need
Win32 applications for. (The rumors that Microsoft might not even brand
whatever this "Modern OS" project is as "Windows" and it may not even refer to
current Windows on ARM efforts seems to maybe imply that Microsoft really is
too late back to this market that they tried to enter earlier.)

------
maxxxxx
My company runs a medical device on windows. We have to control configuration
tightly. Windows 10 is already out of control but they seem to be hell bent on
making it worse. Time to jump ship I always tell management but the MS reps
are very good at selling to execs.

~~~
delfinom
Your company should be using Windows 10 Enterprise that gives you full control
including update management? In fact, you should be using WSUS to control
updates regardless if its Windows 10 Enterprise or even Pro.

~~~
ThrowawayR2
Their company should be using Windows 10 IoT (the successor to Windows
Embedded), which allows a lot more things to be turned off than the desktop or
even server Windows editions.

~~~
maxxxxx
Doesn’t that support only UWP store apps?

~~~
ThrowawayR2
That's Windows IoT Core. Windows IoT Enterprise supports regular apps as well.

~~~
maxxxxx
Would be nice if it were easier to get that info. Our MS reps never mentioned
this.

~~~
ThrowawayR2
[https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/iot-core/windows-
io...](https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/iot-core/windows-iot)

------
norswap
I hope it won't have two different and overlaping control panels this time.

~~~
ubercow13
Or 5+ types of context menu [0]

[0] [https://i.imgur.com/rHRD1Xa.png](https://i.imgur.com/rHRD1Xa.png)

~~~
swah
I still miss Windows when working on Linux though..

------
Silhouette
Maybe it's just the presentation, but to me this reads like a big push to dumb
down what's left of personal computing to the level of tiny mobile apps and
simplistic web/cloud software. There's a great irony that just as everyone
finally has seriously powerful computing hardware sitting in their pocket, the
industry seems to be moving away from powerful creative software and
programming tools that could make use of it.

If we're destined to become mindless, media-fed automatons, I at least want my
self-driving flying car in return.

~~~
delfinom
It's a marketing piece full of fluff. No different than people making flying
cars of the future back in the 70s.

------
RenRav
If you just gave users some actual control over updates it wouldn't be as big
of a pain.

~~~
duxup
I feel like I have a lot of control over it. Am I missing something?

~~~
woodrowbarlow
on windows 10 home edition?

try installing security updates only. try denying a specific update. try
freezing you installation at a specific build number. try running a machine
unattended for a month without it rebooting. and next time you update, check
your settings. chances are good that something, somewhere, got silently reset
to defaults.

the only option for personal windows 10 installations (i.e. non-enterprise) is
to blacklist the windows update service. and with each update, you have to
find a new way of blacklisting the service. the settings allow for some
changes -- you can defer certain types of updates for up to one month -- but
eventually microsoft _will_ push new updates to your device and they _will_,
if needed, reboot your PC.

~~~
duxup
I can delay updates for a while but if we're talking about a 'home' OS...
updates should happen eventually. There are good security reasons for that.

~~~
vageli
> I can delay updates for a while but if we're talking about a 'home' OS...
> updates should happen eventually. There are good security reasons for that.

You can delay them for a while. Is that the control you alluded to in the
above comment? That doesn't sound like much control over anything, if anything
it's just a temporary delay of the inevitable.

~~~
tbirrell
The best solution I've found so far is setting your internet as a metered
connection, then telling windows not to update over a metered connection. The
OS complains every time you boot up, but thats a small price to pay for
control over when an update is installed.

~~~
thrower123
I've resorted to using a third-party tool that periodically updates the Active
Hours setting, so that Windows will never decide that my desktop has been idle
long enough for it to be okay to install updates, reboot, and dump all the
stuff that I have open. That way I can apply updates when it is convenient,
and cuts down considerably on the swearing when I come in on a Monday morning.

------
sandworm101
A "new modern Windows OS"??

s// I thought new versions of windows were a thing of the past. Aren't we now
just all supposed to be on "windows" with everything forward of today being an
update rather than a new OS? We aren't supposed to talk of any sort of "new
modern windows OS". This should be described as a potential future update, not
a new OS, because there will never be a new 'version' of windows. //s

------
floki999
Microsoft has zero respect for its users. Windows is now a layered cake of
CPU-hogging crap.

~~~
nathanaldensr
This is just incorrect. Windows as an OS is amazingly stable considering how
many devices it supports and how backward-compatible it is. Windows as an
_ecosystem_ less-so, but I mainly fault crappy drivers written by budget
commodity hardware manufacturers like Realtek and Conexant. Windows is not a
"CPU hog" either; install Windows fresh with only the manufacturers' drivers
installed and you'll be running at 0% of CPU unless a background task like
Windows Update is running.

~~~
0815test
Linux as an OS is a lot more backwards-compatible than Windows (including
having _better_ backwards-compatibility support for Windows software, via
Wine, than Windows itself!), and runs usably on a wider range of (x86-like)
hardware. It tends to fail altogether only on low-quality hardware that, even
on Windows, is only ever supported via the crappy OEM drivers you mention.

...Also, nice trick statement at the end - Windows Update is _always_ running!

~~~
SmellyGeekBoy
I'm a fellow Linux user and... Well, please don't do this.

------
xaduha
All I know is that I'm staying on LTSB for as long as possible.

------
tracker1
Didn't they already do this with RT?

------
plg
sounds like they want something new to compete with ChromeOS

------
steve1977
Can MS make the ugly Windows 10 UI invisible as well with those updates? If
so, I'd be interested.

------
mfatica
Can they make all the other shitty "features" invisible? Like the abhorrent
start menu and all the other "modern" crap they've added? I want my Windows XP
style UI back without 100,000 processes running fuck-knows-what in the
background

~~~
thrower123
Classic Shell is still invaluable. It gives you a start menu where you can
actually search for things that are in the start menu, and it will find them,
which is a huge improvement on the default experience.

