3mo ago

Is this the future of Windows?

Recently Microsoft released the link 365 which is basically a thin client for Azure. You can't run anything locally nor is there any local files. It literally just connects you to a desktop elsewhere.

Do you think this is what Windows 12 might look like? I feel like this idea is not practical for average consumers. Maybe they will make something that's like Chrome OS?

50 comments

They'll make whatever sells subscriptions at this point.
Don't buy, only subscribe. From media to software and now to hardware and OS. No more license keys you can reuse, no more owning what you pay for, just live services and ever-rising subscription costs that can change at any time for any reason and neuters your ability to take legal action against them while they do it.
Silence critics, control available options, capture profit - that's the name of the game. They'll sell this to businesses as 'take your PC anywhere' like you couldn't already do that and then they have a hunk of plastic and silicon they need to pay out the nose for until they finally give it up. And they'll have to give it up because it literally can't run anything else on the available hardware. I'm sure folks will hack it apart but like, what's the point?
- Going to print that onto a card for the next time someone asks "WhY dO yoU rUn LiNUX??"
  
  Nobody actually ever asks that which is why I tell them anyway 😁👍

The future of windows is /dev/null
- Investors won't be interested in that, it sounds too complicated. How about /dev/null as a Service?
- What would be cool is if there was a company that made Linux platform that was consumer focused.
  
  Isn't that what canonical was trying to do for years now?
  
  Linux Mint, Ubuntu, even Arch are tying to make Linux easier to use for average consumers

Was it the future of Windows when they did this the last bunch of times? The Wyse Winterm came out in 1993. It was a huge failure then and every iteration of the same same thing since has also failed.
What makes this version different? Branding? The fact that some of the OS/software doesn't boot over the network? That you have to have a working Internet connection and not just a working local network and boot server (LOL)?
No business wants this. No consumer wants this. There is no "added value" in this device. It literally only runs software made by Microsoft and even then, only software that runs through Azure.
What office worker literally only needs Office 365? I mean, you can get away with a whole lot just in the browser but if you're going to do that why bother with this device? Just use ChromeOS stuff (and never be locked in to Microsoft's stuff).
- Why do you say that no business wants this? Obviously, thin clients have been a thing for decades now. This is just another thin client, nothing more.
  
  Thin clients have been failing to sell and being cursed by entire verticals, from individual contributors to top management any time they find an exception for that failure since the 1990s.
  No thin client ever saw repeat customers since dump terminals went away. But yeah, if your point is that they exist and have curstomers, that's true.
- What makes this different is the availability of bandwidth. Back in 1993 we didn't have 20 megabit connections available pretty much everywhere. Without that running a thin client was going to be painful.
  Businesses will like this because they pay less for hardware and can scale up and down a lot faster. No more will there be rooms full of defunct machines, long periods of time between upgrades. They can scale personal machines on the fly and will have much lower electricity costs.
  I've been using a cloud gaming platform for a few years now and it's really nice that upgrading my graphics card is just like resizing an EC2 instance. You need a solid internet connection and low latency to the datacenter but it works really well. It's great being able to play games with full graphics on my laptop without burning my nuts.
  However, you're right that this can all happen in a web browser. But that's an advantage for Microsoft, because they can sell the service to people on their existing hardware, lowering barrier to entry.
  These boxes will be sold as loss leaders and practically given away. Which will be great because I'm sure they're powerful enough to run pihole and maybe a few services.
  
  They have TPM and hardened physical security so I doubt it.
- You misunderstood. This simply connects you to a virtual machine running in Azure. You have a Windows desktop but it is now a cloud subscription

It is not even a thin client for Azure. It is a physical front end for one specific, Azure based VM product. It doesn't even support AVD which would have made it interesting for lab and classroom setups and given it a bit more utility.

There are two questions. Is it cheap, and can it be hacked to run Linux instead?
- It has a TPM and restricted boot so probably no Linux
  
  OK, so it is a door stopper. Thanks for the warning.
- No, it's a piece of shit and it's more expensive than mini PCs many times more capable.
- A 3rd question will be: It the power button on top or covered?
  
  bottom like apple of course

This product is not for you, individual consumer. This is for corporations who don't want the overhead of managing individual PCs and everything that can go wrong with them, instead relying on virtual workspaces and roaming user profiles.
- Microsoft is increasing pushing companies to Azure as that's where they can make bank. I wouldn't be surprised if this becomes the Microsoft norm.
  Also I wouldn't be surprised if there wasn't a consumer version if this in the works.

a weird trash can you have

Yup. SaaS with nice regular subscription revenues.

Have fun trying to flash another os when the servers shut down.
- Likely not possible thanks to "enhanced security"
  
  Yep 🤣

Everything Microsoft has been doing for years now is aligned in the direction of jamming as many subscription services down our throat as they can manage, whether we want them or not. They are not alone in this by any stretch. Cloud based hardware definitely fits neatly into the current tech zeitgeist.
- I hate the fact that TPM and other DRM is the standard now. I can't even run third party software on it.

That'd be a Chromecast TV stick, just with Azure?! How much is the hardware? I'd say this sells if it's priced right. Let's say $20 for the box plus $120 anually for a base subscription including Office 365. With optional extras like gaming that'd be on top. Plus extra storage fees and a bit of upselling, it'd be a viable business model, in my eyes.
Edit: It's $349 plus a currently unknown subscription: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/11/microsoft-builds-a-349-mini-desktop-but-only-for-accessing-windows-in-the-cloud/
- $350 gets you a pretty decent PC. That's a ridiculous price for a thin client that requires a subscription to use.
  
  It is pennies for a company or consumer who has never looked a older hardware.
- That's really steep for what you're getting, I think. As a "PC Replacement" at home I can see there being a place for this. If you don't need local compute, why not stream it. Steam Link was $50 and has the same basic concept, except for games.
  
  Yeah, I think $349 is too much. You can get a MiniPC on Amazon for like $250 and that'd include a recent (low-power) CPU, 16GB of RAM and 512GB of SSD. So way more for $100 less, and you don't even need additional cloud subscriptions.