Windows 10 S, the Microsoft Store-only version of Windows, is going away, but not really.
Currently, Windows 10 S is a unique edition of Windows 10. It’s based on Windows 10 Pro; Windows 10 Pro has various facilities that enable system administrators to restrict which software can be run, and Windows 10 S is essentially a preconfigured version of those facilities. In addition to locking out arbitrary downloaded programs, it also prevents the use of certain built-in Windows features such as the command-line, PowerShell, and Windows Subsystem for Linux.
For those who can’t abide by the constraints that S imposes, you can upgrade 10 S to the full 10 Pro. This upgrade is a one-shot deal: there’s no way of re-enabling the S limitations after upgrading to Pro. It’s also a paid upgrade: while Microsoft offered it as a free upgrade for a limited time for its Surface Laptop, the regular price is $49.
Nothing much actually seems to be changing; it just turns Windows 10 S from a version into a mode. Pretty much a distinction without a difference. My biggest issue here is that you can’t go from regular Windows 10 back to Windows 10 S if you ever had a reason to do so (e.g. if Windows were ever to be usable with just Metro apps in the future and you want the additional security Windows 10 S provides). Seems like an odd restriction.
https://www.thurrott.com/windows/windows-10/151582/exclusive-windows…
Remember when windows 10s was only going to be applied to chromebook competitors? Turns out the mission creep theory wasn’t so far fetched. Now it’s creeping into even more mainstream markets and OEMs will be required to enable it by default. This is happening faster than I imagined.
And what’s the deal with forcing pro versions to be locked down unless they pay more? Of all the user classifications, it makes the least sense for pro users to be stuck on windows-S and denied the right to run 3rd party software, switch browsers, switch search engine, etc… I’m sorry, but there’s no defending this based on customers needs, this is all about microsoft trying to charge money for (what used to be) basic computer freedoms.
Don’t spread FUD!
OEMs will not be required to enable it by default, they will be tempted by Microsoft to enable S mode by making S mode free/cheap
I think it is ridiculous that you cannot go back from “Full” to “S mode”. This makes S mode just as much a mode as boiling an egg is (and I prefer my eggs hard-boiled!)
I expected S mode to be a different pay-model, where the initial cost would be about 25 Euro lower with the expectation that MS would earn back that difference from store purchases.
Many people would be happy to continue to run in S mode and those that would need “Full mode” would have to pay more than currently again earning Microsoft more money.
This current S mode idea means that I will still stick with my previous advice.
* Install Windows
* Add several non-store-apps that you really need
* Go to Settings, Apps, Apps & features, change “Installing apps” to “Allow apps from the Store only”
* Add store-apps for everying you want
* When you find out that you need another non-store-app, just change the setting back to “Allow apps from anywhere” temporarily”
The above idea is equivalent to making yourself a regular user instead of an admin. Of course you could just leave that setting on “Warn me before installing apps from outside the Store” which is equivalent to using UAC/sudo
I realise that S mode is about more than just installing non-store-apps, but that part is the only part that I think benefits users. Well, that and the lower future prices but we will have to see about that
avgalen,
It only benefits users if they aren’t interested in 3rd party software, otherwise it’s an impediment. Keep in mind that s-mode blocks other consumer friendly stores like steam.
Edited 2018-02-07 07:14 UTC
This definition also means that if 1 liter of milk is 1 Euro, 2 liter of milk should be 2 Euro to avoid being called bribery. I wouldn’t buy the bigger packaging in most situations, but if the price would be lowered to 1.5 and I would buy now I have apparently been bribed
Edited 2018-02-07 09:55 UTC
Wonderful. Too bad it’ll be too late by then.
It is going to be a long time from now when that will happen. Almost all products that Microsoft sells still require “Full Mode”. If their own products don’t require full mode anymore we might have actually reached a point where “S mode” has all the benefits and none of the negatives and should be the only mode.
Let me put it this way:
The moment I can run the entirety of Visual Studio (including compiling/debugging/android emulators/etc) from S Mode there might not be a reason for full mode to exist anymore
avgalen,
Your example is subject to the GPL, which explicitly gives owners and 3rd parties the right to take everything and modify it to their hearts content.
Honestly if windows 10 s was offered under the same conditions as this hypothetical example, then there wouldn’t be anywhere near the controversy over owner rights because any deficiencies could be rectified by the community.
Edited 2018-02-07 18:35 UTC
If I buy a cheaper cable plan I get less/different channels. I shouldn’t buy a cheap 5 GB internet plan if I want to binge-watch 4K Netflix.
Every products has built in limitations in the way you are allowed to use it and it is the seller that gets to set these limitations. If you don’t like these limitations, don’t buy the product. The manufacturer isn’t required to produce a product that you like or want to buy. Nobody* can force Microsoft, or Google, or Apple, or RedHat, or Ubuntu to allow 3rd party stores, browsers, search engines, etc.
So you have to be more precise about what you own. If you buy a computer with a license for Windows 10 Home S (for 500) instead of a computer with a license for Windows 10 Home (for 525) you shouldn’t expect the same rights. The computer is the same, but the software is different.
You and I agree that we should have the right to install another OS on that computer. But there isn’t an obligation for anyone to make that other OS. So if there isn’t another OS available to run on that computer we are just out of luck**
Of course we got used to having all these possibilities in Windows so we consider them as a right, but they aren’t rights that automatically transfer to other products like 10 S, or iProducts, or ChromeBooks. I have purchased Windows 10 “for the lifetime of the device”, which will be anywhere between 5 and 10 years under normal circumstances. During that time I should expect that I can sideload (3rd party store), install Chrome and configure Edge to use google.com just like I can now. I should also expect Visual Studio 2017 to run on it. But it is up to Microsoft to decide that they will only offer Visual Studio 2020 in an Azure virtual and it will be up to me to use that product or not.
Long story short: If you want to have the right to install 3rd party stores, don’t buy a machine with Windows 10 S. If enough people ignore Windows 10 S it will either be adjusted to suite more people or cancelled entirely (like Windows RT). And if the opposite happens and Windows 10 S suits most people they might cancel the current “full mode” or make it “developer only” or “more expensive” which would suck for the remaining people (like you and me) that would either have to swallow that pill, remain on the older version or switch to another product that does suite our purpose.
I would personally love for Windows to become Open Source, GPL-ed and completely moddable by the community but that isn’t going to happen as long as it is worth more to Microsoft to keep it closed source. And as I said above, nobody can force them to make or sell I product that you want to buy
* I am purposefully ignoring monopoly laws in this discussion.
** I am purposefully ignoring the option to build your own OS
avgalen,
You keep using examples that don’t fit the topic at hand. I’m talking about property ownership and an owner’s right to install what they want on their own computers because they’re supposed to be the owners. Not microsoft, not apple, not google, nor anybody else should be telling owner what they can do on their computers. If owners no longer have a right to decide how to use their own machines and they have to get permission from a corporation to do something on their own machines, then the whole concept of ownership is seriously broken.
We should not allow corporations to usurp our rights like this. It should have been stopped when apple did it, now all the big tech companies are getting in on the act. Technology that we “own” with restricted ownership rights is creeping further and further into computer territory. Every time the topic comes up, the vendor locking and control increases ever so subtly and people like you try to make a case that it doesn’t matter, but over time the erosion of rights becomes significant. You say you’ll stand up against corporate abuse when it starts effecting you, but as darknexus stated “Too bad it’ll be too late by then.”
The property that you own is the computer, not the insides of the software. You can buy computers with a full mode of Windows and you can buy computers with a “S mode” of Windows that has a lower price, more security but also a more restricted right. Nobody forces you to buy an S mode computer and nobody is removing full mode Windows so there is no erosion at all. Instead there is more choice and if that choice is good for people that are not like you and me that means it will be a viable product.
Again, nobody is preventing you from installing Linux on a computer with S mode. The manufacturer cannot force you to buy a computer with Windows that only runs Edge, but you also cannot force the manufacturer to make a machine that can run Chrome. If you want a machine that runs Chrome, buy a machine that can run Chrome. If you want to binge-watch 4K Netflix, buy an internetplan that allows you to do that. If you want to watch TV-Serie-X on Netflix but they don’t offer that TV-Serie, Netflix has no responsibility to offer you a different way to watch TV-Serie-X. It is up to you to find out if the product that you buy fits your needs.
You claim that the availability of Windows S has eroded your rights. I say that you never had the right you claim to have and that nothing has changed for you. You can still buy that same computer, put full mode on it, put 7 on it, put Linux on it…so how have your rights been eroded?
On the other hand, in 2018 I can buy a really great tinkerbox like the Raspberry Pi for peanuts, put a touchscreen on it, install many completely free OS-ses on it and I will basically get a guaranteed good result. If I compare that to the past where such hardware was much more expensive, more difficult to come by and had far less software support I see no problem at all.
Don’t look at Windows S when you want to tinker with the OS, that OS was specifically made NOT to tinker with it. Full mode is still available and alternatives are better than ever.
avgalen,
We don’t need to stand up for anything now, just like we didn’t need to stand up when RT became available. Just don’t buy a product that doesn’t fit your needs.
*Purposefully ignoring Wine and other Office Suites
avgalen,
As is mine, that’s why I keep focusing on the importance of owner rights and combating coercive practices that hurt competition.
Great, please keep doing so. But this article is about extra options that won’t impact your rights and only seem to offer benefits (lower price, a simpler and thus more secure system) for those that can live with the limitations.
If somebody makes a RedHat clone tomorrow that can only be configured to always accept all Alpha updates from all channels I wouldn’t see a use for that personally but there is no reason for me to combat that distro. Maybe there is a group of cutting edge developers/testers that would love such a distro.
If that distro becomes very popular it would be because people like using it. If that distro dies out because nobody uses it anymore that is possible as well. And if all other distro’s suddenly stop being available and only this one is left, well there isn’t much I could do about that. Apparently my needs are not worth the distro-makers time. I could still continue to use the current distro I have running and there is no obligation for anyone to keep making an OS the way I like it.
The problem for most people is that instead of the the peoples wishes shaping the market the market will shape the peoples wishes. This is how industry has worked for a long time and why harmful things as smoking became popular.
You have the right of it but give a bad, and I mean really bad, example. Smoking in one form or another has been popular long before modern industry and the market forces that came with it. The best example I can think of off the top of my head is the media industry. I’ll gladly stand in a room full of smokers before I subject myself to that brain-killing stuff they come out with.
Smoking used to be done only by men and was promoted for women using propaganda which told them smoking was a feminist thing to do. Then it caught on for women. I was referring to that specifically.
Diamonds have a similar story.
Marketing is a powerful tool that shapes our society and reforms our wishes to align with the needs of manufacturers, often at our own disadvantage.
You haven’t said the last time if this blocks auto-updaters integrated with non-store-apps…
(most notably, browsers)
“Upgrading” to Pro is, Errr, Unwise. You should be able to come back. But only as a clean Reinstall
You should be a Windows “Pro” to take this route, or be able to stake time from a “Pro”.
Resources Expensive. See no reason other than Market not fully understanding the “S” deal, before commiting the buy. Looks transitory.
Cheap and Pro doesn’t go along. The NON-TECHNICAL Issue has to be resolved, to keep the bulk of the low market competing with Android/Chrome.
Edited 2018-02-07 05:13 UTC
and the pig is still there.
I can’t help but think that MS is playing the part of Nero while Rome (i.e. the PC Marketplace) burns around him.
Proudly windows free for 18months!
Come back in a few years and we may be marginally impressed
I won’t be impressed at all. Not counting booting newly bought laptops into Windows shortly before replacing Windows with Linux, I think I have been Windows free for >2 years now. And the sole reason it is not much longer is due to the fact that I used to use Windows at my work.
Linux works fine for me. Downgrading and upgrading is completely free for me and there are no forced policy restrictions. It is nice to actually own my own computer.
I’ve been a fan of Linux since I got Slackware 1.1 on Floppy Disc free with a computer mag a long time ago. I’ve also been a Unix user since around 1986.
I’m Windows free because I’m exactly that. I’ve ditched Windows for good and TBH, good riddance to it although writing software for it provided a pretty decent living for me for the last 20 years.
Windows 10 was the final straw that broke the camels back for me. I’ll never go back to it.
Dont worry. It wont be long until you wont need to be able to enable Windows S. When it becomes the normal version and you have to pay an extra subscription to install software outside of the app store and access the command line, etc..
😀
Well, It is a very good idea, actually -Computers falling back to the free version on caducating the high maintenance, loosely controlled, desktop version.
[Your “Pro” profile going into hibernation].
Still usable junk, give it to poor, or pay renewal -which should go logarithmically lower, as you become senior client, by the way.
A caducated machine have already paid original duty. Should allow UEFI install of Open Software, for poor, for students.
Edited 2018-02-07 16:13 UTC