I didn’t expect to be writing about the next version of Windows again so soon, but a handful of viewers watching the Ignite Keynote yesterday noticed an updated version of the Windows UI that was shown in a brief cutaway, which had a floating taskbar along the bottom, system icons in the top right, a floating search box in the top middle, and the weather in the top left.
[…]Back when I first began hearing about the Next Valley release, I was also shown preliminary design ideas that were being explored internally. Microsoft is still in the prototyping stages for Next Valley, but my sources tell me that the UI briefly shown off at Ignite yesterday is representative of the design goals that Microsoft is hoping to achieve with the next version of Windows.
Microsoft is clearly drawing a lot of inspiration from GNOME and macOS here, and it sure does look nice. However, as with everything Windows, it will most likely just end up as yet another thin veneer atop the countless UI designs from Windows 3.x all the way up to now Windows 11 that you can encounter in Windows to this day.
Another layer for this cursed cake.
Looks like a new theme and likely a set of new hardware limitations. The usual. To i guess justify the price tag of “new” Windows. If Microsoft could move Windows to their computer and charge monthly subscription. I do imagine that would be a dream scenario for them.
Geck,
You mean this?
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-365/all-pricing?pricing-tab=2
My wife’s work is actually rolling this out currently (government). Enterprise prices start at $336/yr for an extremely sub-par machine, compared to average. To get a virtual machine with mid-range specs they’re charging closer to $1000/yr.
Now I’m curious which package they’re provisioning for employees, but assuming it’s the “2 vCPU, 8 GB RAM, 128 GB disk”, an office with 400 computers * $500/yr = $200k/yr. I guess maybe they intend to lay off members IT staff to pay for it, but someone still needs to manage the local hardware.
One company I work with went all in on the VM desktop for every employee. It was hosted at microsoft, although I don’t think it was called windows 365. They were forced to canceled it due to lag & poor performance compared with local computers. It wasn’t just a little bad, it incurred severe productivity loss. To be fair, they had lots of devs running software builds & database jobs all day long during the same working hours, so their workflows weren’t particularly suited for resource consolidation (RAM, CPU, disk).
So I’m often skeptical of the benefits, it could actually work better for “normal workers” who’s computers sit idle more and have a much low duty cycle. There’s still the risk of common failure modes bringing everyone’s computers down simultaneously. Oh well, there are pros and cons.
That is the idea yes. To run Windows on their computer and you have to pay monthly to get access. Still currently you need a capable operating system on the client side too. I do wonder if Microsoft will intentionally start to limit Windows in the future. To be no more than some kiosk mode for access to Windows on their computer. That is is you have a valid subscription. Considering the prices they likely could afford to subsidize the client hardware. But you really can’t blame them for it. As long as people are prepared to use that. Obviously there is a lot of abuse involved from the Microsoft side. Still it’s not like people don’t have a choice. And majority of people can’t wait to get to there. Said that such transitions are not necessarily going to b successful. Products such as Windows and Office is what Microsoft was known for. There is no guarantee such transition will end up being successful. No mater how big of a company you are. Such transitions due tend to not succeed most of the time. We’ll see.
Geck,
Microsoft (along with other monopolists) do tend to be able to exploit their monopoly power to succeed in other markets. However if they’re sabotaging one successful product to promote another, that’s particularly risky. Of course many software applications have successfully switched to SaaS, outlook is an example. And there are examples of applications that have been successfully switched to the rental business model, like Adobe suite (despite many customers feeling it was hostile).
I agree. MS could clearly cause mass migrations to something new, but that something could easily end up pushing their own customers to rival operating systems and services if they aren’t careful. Google and amazon are both well positioned to quickly intercept massive numbers of defectors assuming they brought a competing desktop service to market. They both have the infrastructure and expertise already in place.
Assuming the 3 years old kids running Google will have the attention span to bring such an attempt to fruition.
I don’t think any sane person or business will jump to Google’s ship, without seeing that product not killed in the first 5 years first.
What will likely happen is Microsoft will force more and more for people to need access in terms of monthly subscription to their services. All range of plans from ad based to “business”. Likely artificially limiting the importance of Windows and Office as offline apps. And for a while they will likely be successful at it. But when this becomes the norm i do imagine that troubles will start to emerge. That is fierce competition will start to emerge. Similar to what we now see with Netflix.
Geck,
Monthly subscription actually makes sense for software, and ironically, they might have even learned it from open source software vendors.
You have your employee payroll running every month, so do the hardware and office costs. But releasing a new OS every 3-5 years, and hoping to recoup costs, and being able to invest for the next product is risky. (Many otherwise successful game studios have gone bankrupt for a single miss in the past).
So they would prefer the obvious dependable consistent income over random big paychecks.
sukru,
Well, that’s one opinion. But we shouldn’t dismiss some of the real cons that come with renting software…starting with the fact that someone else who doesn’t have your interests in mind has control. You loose the privilege of making our own decisions, like deciding whether and when to upgrade… you’ll have to do it on their terms, not yours. You don’t like a version? Tough, you’re going to pay for it anyways and maybe they’ll allow you to keep running the old version for a little while, but they will decide the timeframe that’s good for them. You want to continue using your old software indefinitely because it just works for you (like I’ve done with ms-office in the past), well too bad. They want to increase your rates for the same old service/software, tough luck. You still have to keep paying the bills for the same functionality. Another problem with many services tends to be unwanted bundling, ads, etc.
While some people may be fine with giving up control and paying every month, I am not one of them! Whether it’s phones, computers, seat warmers, whatever, I’d rather buy it once and be done with it and not have to pay more over the life of a device on top the stress of monthly bills for every software installation. If I gift my kids an old computer, I shudder at the prospect of it coming with an obligation of having to pay monthly bills in order to actually use it. And worse yet, SaaS is killing computer history. Old desktops like amiga and legacy versions of windows can continue to work thanks to old hardware and emulation, but in a future where SaaS is the norm and online dependencies are hard coded, it will effectively wipe out computer history. Modern software will become a black hole for future generations.
So for me personally, I wouldn’t want this to become the norm.
Alfman,
True, this argument is only for the seller side, and the buyer may or may not have benefits in this model.
Yet, the same basic choice has always been the case with many industries.
Do you lease a vehicle? Or buy one?
Do you rent DVDs? Or buy them? (Now subscribe to HBO Max? etc)
Do you rent a house? Or own your home?
Anyway, I agree, there should be an option to purchase, and forcing a subscription-only model is not ideal for a healthy software market.
Indeed.
Generally ownership is the better financial move long term. Renters typically end up paying more without accumulating ownership wealth in the process. But for many home ownership is out of reach, ironically in part because the rental companies themselves are outbidding would-be homeowners. We are in a home affordability crisis even for the educated & employed. This leaves swaths of society systemically dependent on renting and not necessarily by choice.
I’m in that boat myself. In order to buy something I can afford, I’d likely have to move where property is more affordable, but then everything in my life gets upended. Oh well, this is getting off topic.
I agree.
Alfman,
I would respectfully disagree with that generalization. The lease or buy calculation depends a lot of factors. If one was strictly better than the other, almost all large companies with good set of accountants, would not lease any of their vehicle fleets, computers, or even the buildings they reside in.
Buying a physical thing makes sense for something you need to hold on for the long term. For example, I have a Bluray of Lord of the Rings trilogy, but consume most other “once and done” content on digital. (And yes I know a digital “purchase” is just another term for an indeterminate lease, it can be broken).
sukru,
Well, think about it this way: if we assume ownership is not financially beneficial, then rental companies themselves wouldn’t have a business model. The viability of their business model intrinsically depends on rent not only covering but also exceeding the *full* costs of ownership.
Yes, long term is what I’m talking about. Renting can make more sense and might be the only reasonable option for short term commitments. People and companies can rent a catering hall/chairs/tables/etc despite exorbitant markup because they’ll only use it once or rarely. On the other hand I know people who buy their own jumping castles for their kids because buying is cheaper than renting long term and the fact that buying is in their budget. Ability and willingness to commit are definitely factors, especially when the price tag is too high to be affordable.
Yea, a lot of people don’t have a long term use for media. It’s once and done. If you had a lot of friends to swap with then buying movies/games would still make a lot of sense. Although now days the sneaker-net is dead and streaming is king.
Most large businesses already pay a ton for 5 year warranties, or straight up lease their machines. They won’t baulk at those prices.
dark2,
Maybe or maybe not, but they’re still going to have hardware costs anyways so windows as a service is not a 100% cost substitution, it will add more costs.
Another thing I’ve noticed is that, even in cases where businesses are entitled to upgrade every single windows release through volume licensing, I’ve never once encountered a company that was interested in deploying every version. Windows/office changes are often detrimental for enterprise efficiency. It’s not merely an indifference, but an aversion to productivity loss. Many put it off as long as they can, so much so that some companies pay for extended support so they don’t have to change.
If your company always wants the latest and greatest, then a monthly windows 365 subscription might make sense, but if you’re not that kind of company and you intend to abstain from updating versions of windows for years, then it kind of seems like a lot of money for minimal benefit IMHO.
Like I said though it probably depends on whether the service enables a company to do with a smaller IT department. Every IT employee that can be made redundant will save lots of money.
Another reason to be glad I’m a KDE user. Why is everyone so obsessed with this aesthetic?
Because they like it? I don’t know what kind of answer you’re expecting.
Because it looks like mac, and mac is cool right? Right? I paid so much for this machine, tell me it’s cool. I need to be cool. Really.
Haha yes. Tell me I need one. I really should have one. Don’t answer that I’m going to get one. Too late, I’ve got one. What have I done…
Now.. When is MacOS going to look like Windows? They already have live iles sort of.
Wasting one tenth of screen height with idly sitting taskbar. OK… I hope my win7 machines will not decide to die on me anytime soon.
I can’t make a screenshot of my current setup as I’m using XFCE right now, but what’s wrong with Windows 10, which has kinda the same taskbar as Windows 7?
What’s wrong with 7? If it works, don’t fix it.
cevvalkoala,
While I tend to agree with this sentiment as well, alas for me there’s a lot of software that has stopped supporting under windows 7 🙁 I first started noticing this with updated dot net software, because microsoft blocked their new runtimes from installing on windows 7. Gradually the set of software that wouldn’t run got worse with time.
I know some people are content running older software, which is fine. For others though it’s no longer viable to run the older software required by windows 7. Then there’s windows 10 introducing antifeatures, like when it forced an update when I was about to go on a flight. Why are windows updates damned slow?! In any case I had no choice but to force shutdown mid-update that microsoft didn’t have permission to start in the first place. It was a business laptop and I was sweating a bit that the OS would be botched for my trip…microsoft deserve a big FU for crap like that!
A good operating system needs to serve the user first and foremost. IMHO windows gets worse every time microsoft forgets this.
Alfman,
Windows used to be the big money maker for Microsoft. Today, they don’t even get a top headline in their financials.
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/Investor/earnings/FY-2022-Q1/segment-revenues
It is grouped under More Personal Computing along with Surface devices and Xbox/PC gaming and entertainment.
I could make a similar argument for Mac OS, though. Even since iPads became a content production device, the attention to detail on “post-cat” Mac OS releases was no longer as good.
https://www.apple.com/newsroom/pdfs/FY22_Q3_Consolidated_Financial_Statements.pdf
Here’s the excerpt from your link…
Yeah, it does not pull in as much revenue as other top categories. Although it’s unclear to me whether “server products and cloud services” includes server licensing for windows? Either way though we’d need to dig deeper to find out how profitable these categories are. Windows, likely has lower marginal costs than “cloud services” and it could be more profitable per every dollar of revenue. I am curious about the details, but I wouldn’t dismiss windows any more than I would dismiss xbox, even though they make less revenue than office and server products. They’re still significant properties to microsoft IMHO.
Also, how in the world is “linkedin” making microsoft more revenue than search and news advertising and nearly as much as gaming? I didn’t realize linkedin was such a cash cow.
re: linkedin.
They are actually a quite good company (and a good catch by Microsoft).
They have several different premium subscriptions for those who seek work, or for recruiters, for companies, etc.
https://www.linkedin.com/help/linkedin/answer/a545596/difference-between-free-linkedin-and-premium-linkedin-accounts?lang=en
They also have “learning” (previously lynda.com):
https://www.linkedin.com/learning/subscription/products/individuals
And this thing, I have no idea about:
https://business.linkedin.com/sales-solutions/compare-plans
So, overall a solid business.
Alfman,
Sure, that wasn’t in question, but I kind of doubt many people would put linkedin business operations on the same scale as xbox if they were to guess. Maybe it’s just me, oh well.
Floating taskbar? Didn’t KDE Plasma get that like a year ago?
A cake which allows to run ~95% of software from as far as 1995.
Show me another such OS, please.
That is a fair point. I’m guessing that Thom is making the point that running software from that era is such a limited use case that it doesn’t warrant the baggage it brings. We can only speak for our own use cases though of course.
I think Thom was moaning about the different UI design version that are present in the retail Windows alone. It is different from the ability of running very old apps on modern Windows.
Artem S. Tashkinov,
I’ve experienced a lot of windows software breakages within that time span, but I can’t say I was paying enough attention to put a number on it. I wonder if anyone has methodically tried to do this with several popular titles just to see how well they work today, it would make an interesting article.
It depends what we’re talking about. A lot of the basic application APIs have remained stable on both linux and windows. For posix applications your odds are pretty high they’ll still work. Even graphic apps using xlib or static libraries will likely still run under X today and even xwayland. On both windows and linux it’s usually the intermediary dependencies where we run into problems like DLL hell, active-X hell, deprecated frameworks, broken drivers, etc. It’s not as much about which OS you use so much as which dependencies you use.
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/framework/install/run-net-framework-1-1-apps
So they got into Windows 3.11-era style with Metro “to save perf and thus battery” to return back to Windows Vista/7-era with translucency to copycat what “looks cool” ?
Hopefully a floating taskbar will fix the way it currently glitches when swiping between virtual desktops.
It’s sad that they’re basically allowed to only deploy crippled UIs since the perfect paradigm already exists on Mac OS. There’s no need to force the taskbar to be full-width but they have to do it because they don’t want to copy Mac OS “too much”.
Also it’s extremely peculiar that Microsoft cannot find any other way to develop their UI / UX except for copying a 20-year-old design.
There has never been a single platform without inconsistent app design, and there never will be.
The real issue is that all this stuff will still be Windows underneath. So as nice a static image looks, things will still blink in and out of existence, get lost and unclickable off the side of the screen, suffer fits and stutters, and all the glorious nonsense we all loathe about Windows, but think has to be that way, because we’ve never used better systems (most Linux distros these days, and macOS – or iPadOS, or even Android).
Microsoft can make pretty screenshots all they want, but they can’t fix their technology (note: I don’t mean it can’t be fixed, I mean Microsoft can’t fix it.)