Re:Microsoft wants to move Windows fully to the cloud
by andsoitis on Tuesday June 27, 2023 @04:31PM
(#36498238)
> “Windows 365 to enable a full Windows operating system streamed from the cloud to any device.”
Streamed: issue is latency of course. To feel like you're directly manipulating something, you need sub-100ms end-to-end latency.
Any device: great UI depends on form factor of the device. This is one, though not the only reason, why WindowsCE sucked - they tried to squish the Windows/Start Menu paradigm onto a different form factor for which it was originally designed. iOS and Touch ate them up.
Re:Microsoft wants to move Windows fully to the cloud
by thesuperbigfrog on Tuesday June 27, 2023 @04:52PM
(#36498464)
The internal presentation states: "Move Windows 11 increasingly to the cloud: Build on Windows 365 to enable a full Windows operating system streamed from the cloud to any device. Use the power of the cloud and client to enable improved AI-powered services and full roaming of people’s digital experience."
Why would consumers (non-business users) want to stream Windows from the cloud?
Wouldn't it make more sense to stream the data or offer a website or client application that uses cloud APIs to interact with the application running on a server?
Streaming a desktop operating system seems like a form factor mismatch. If I have a smartphone or tablet, I want a native application or mobile website that will work well with that form factor. If I am on a laptop or desktop, I have a local operating system, so why would I want to stream Windows from the cloud?
What operating system does "any device" run where it makes sense to stream Windows 11 to it?
Re:Microsoft wants to move Windows fully to the cloud
by weikju on Thursday June 29, 2023 @03:58AM
(#36517665)
> Why would consumers (non-business users) want to stream Windows from the cloud?
Because they will take abuse as long as there's no other option that they can (1) afford (2) use without hurting their ability to game/facebook/whatsapp/talk with chatgpt.
Let me extrapolate some more:
Furthermore, with MS investing heavily into GPT-ifying everything, you can bet they're seeing a future where computers are more voice- and/or text-driven input devices to powerful GPT services in the cloud where they control everything and can "keep the user safe" (and keep the govt "safe" as well with surveillance).
People will lap it up because it's very sci-fi-esque, and the uptake/popularity of ChatGPT shows one thing: people WANT (something like) this, they don't want buttons, windows, terminals, browsers, mice/trackpads/etc. They just want to get on with their lives, and the computer to do things for them to allow them to play/talk/navigate/work/etc.
If MS offers them that, the non-monetary costs won't matter (until it's too late).
If it becomes a dystopia, well, let's just be happy that all of this house of cards is insecure and fragile, otherwise we're @#$@#$.
Streamed: issue is latency of course. To feel like you're directly manipulating something, you need sub-100ms end-to-end latency.
Any device: great UI depends on form factor of the device. This is one, though not the only reason, why WindowsCE sucked - they tried to squish the Windows/Start Menu paradigm onto a different form factor for which it was originally designed. iOS and Touch ate them up.
Why would consumers (non-business users) want to stream Windows from the cloud?
Wouldn't it make more sense to stream the data or offer a website or client application that uses cloud APIs to interact with the application running on a server?
Streaming a desktop operating system seems like a form factor mismatch. If I have a smartphone or tablet, I want a native application or mobile website that will work well with that form factor. If I am on a laptop or desktop, I have a local operating system, so why would I want to stream Windows from the cloud?
What operating system does "any device" run where it makes sense to stream Windows 11 to it?
Because they will take abuse as long as there's no other option that they can (1) afford (2) use without hurting their ability to game/facebook/whatsapp/talk with chatgpt.
Let me extrapolate some more:
Furthermore, with MS investing heavily into GPT-ifying everything, you can bet they're seeing a future where computers are more voice- and/or text-driven input devices to powerful GPT services in the cloud where they control everything and can "keep the user safe" (and keep the govt "safe" as well with surveillance).
People will lap it up because it's very sci-fi-esque, and the uptake/popularity of ChatGPT shows one thing: people WANT (something like) this, they don't want buttons, windows, terminals, browsers, mice/trackpads/etc. They just want to get on with their lives, and the computer to do things for them to allow them to play/talk/navigate/work/etc.
If MS offers them that, the non-monetary costs won't matter (until it's too late).
If it becomes a dystopia, well, let's just be happy that all of this house of cards is insecure and fragile, otherwise we're @#$@#$.