SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Microsoft has announced a new version of Windows called Windows 10 S. It only runs apps from the Windows Store, and is positioned between Windows 10 Home and Windows 10 Pro, both of which can run third party applications. Microsoft also announced a new line of Surface laptops running the OS. The laptops have been described as competing with either Google's Chromebooks or Apple's MacBook Air, and aimed at students:
Windows 10 S is Windows 10 with its wings slightly clipped: it can only run apps from the Windows Store, disabling compatibility with the enormous breadth of Windows programs out there, which in the educational context translates to better security, consistent performance, focus for students, and improved battery life. It's cheaper and less versatile than Windows 10 Pro, which is exactly what schools are looking for (and the thing that's had them gravitating toward Google's Chrome OS in recent times).
[...] Immediately upon its introduction, Windows 10 S spans a price range from $189 to $2,199 (for the top Surface Laptop spec). So is this a straightforward and affordable solution for mass educational deployment? Or is it a super streamlined operating system for powering extremely desirable and long-lasting laptops? Yes. Microsoft's answer to both of those things is yes. It's not impossible to achieve both goals with the same software, of course, but it is difficult to position the OS in people's minds.
[...] The Windows on ARM effort is going to be rekindled by the end of this year, and Windows 10 S is the likeliest candidate to be the OS of choice for those new computers, in which case the significance of the S label will once again be complicated. Come the holidays, buying a Windows 10 S PC could mean getting either an Intel or an ARM machine, it could mean cheap and cheerful or it could be a premium portable.
Also at the Washington Post, Engadget, Laptop Mag, and Business Insider.
As well as BGR, Mashable, The Independent, PC World, Tech Radar, ZDNet, Ars Technica, Fossbytes, TechCrunch #1, TechCrunch #2, Venture Beat, and The Street.
What do you think the 'S' stands for?
Previously: Ask Soylent: Ramifications of Removing Windows Store from Enterprise Installs?
Microsoft Adds Store App-Only Restriction as Option in Windows 10
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 04 2017, @06:02AM
I'm not sure why some people try to make everything partisan. No, Microsoft's first 'warning' for this behavior was in 1994 and they full steam ahead screwing customers in spite of said warning right smack in the middle of Clinton's term.
Just wait til the day you begin to understand that democrat and republican are one and the same, playing good cop - bad cop. You know that thing almost all of the 'mainstream media' refused to talk about, the TPP? That was going to be the biggest corporate handout that would have come at great expense to the US worker and consumer protection (it was going to amp up our already insane copyright/patent/trademark laws exponentially, legally prohibit signatories from providing certain information on food labels, and so much more), undermine our national sovereignty for the sake of opaque 'corporate tribunals' which could overrule democratic law, and more. That was what Obama was trying his hardest to get passed before he left office. Do you know why companies are now paying Obama $400k for a talk, or $200k for a talk from his wife? It's not because they actually think they're worth anywhere near this. It's quid quo pro. The president panders and peddles corporate agenda, gets out and is paid out in absurd speaking fees.
He'll receive hundreds of millions in 'clean' money from these speaking engagements. This is a relatively new phenomena. The first president to start going crazy with profiteering off 'speaking' was Ford. [fortune.com] He was also lambasted for profiting off what is supposed to a public service. Now we don't even think twice at presidents exploiting their presidency for hundreds of millions. Certainly the promise of hundreds of millions of dollars of completely clean money could never corrupt a person though. To find a president not sold out to corporate interests you'd need to go back many decades.