Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Windows Sandbox

techcommunity.microsoft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 328 posts

Re: Windows Sandbox

#171

Post by Schlaefer »

dman wrote: post #33
joshAg wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

why not just buy them a pro edition? I know it's more expensive, but that would also get you remote desktop, bitlocker, and group policy, which would all also be great for remote supporting your parents.

Because sometimes they buy a new computer and it is a while before I am able to visit them across the planet and install a new OS in it. Would really like a good out of the box experience.

You don't need to install a new OS, you just enter a Windows Pro license key to upgrade the version? Buy the key online, send it to your parents, tell them where to enter it, done.

Also I don't think your parents want to use that particular sandbox. There's no persistence at all: no bookmarks, no cookies, no history, no local documents, ...

Re: Windows Sandbox

#172

Post by hawski »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #90
coder543 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm pretty sure that's not the only alternative... some others include a Chromebook, an iPad, a MacBook, or even installing a Linux distro and setting it up for them such that they don't need to use the CLI to accomplish the things they want to do. But honestly, my opinion is that Windows 10 is not as fragile as earlier versions of Windows were.

> some others include a Chromebook, I.e. a web browser with a keyboard. > an iPad I.e. a content consumption tool, not a general-purpose computer. > a MacBook Fine if you can afford it. > or even installing a Linux distro and setting it up for them such that they don't need to use the CLI to accomplish the things they want to do. That's... possible, but tough. As someone who switched from Windows to Linux many years…

Most Chromebooks have Android applications now. So it's more like a browser and a tablet on steroids. Many newer ones (even cheap) have Linux support.

But of course as you said it's a game of trade offs. My father was using Windows years ago and because of constant service needs I set up Linux for him. It was easier for me to service it remotely. It was better, but far from perfect. Later on I bought him a new computer that had a Windows license, so with upgrade to Windows 10 I thought that it would be ok. My father wanted Linux back after a month or so. With newer distribution and newer computer it was much better than previously. Now it's pretty alright.

However I still think of something a bit more like ChromeOS. Then it would be quite maintaince free. Not Gallium, but a full distribution with same update model as ChromeOS.

Re: Windows Sandbox

#173

Post by eitland »

Seems like a really nice feature. I've been thinking about something like this for a while.

I see some people are really annoyed that it isn't available for the Home version and I too am somewhat annoyed but in this case it is somewhat understandable since it depends on a feature that is (somewhat more reasonable) limited to Pro versions.

The thing that annoys me more (hi MS guys, feel free to tell the relevant people about this) is how they have started to add ads to the login screen and my start menu - even in the Pro version!

I'm on KDE now so I cannot verify this since the last few months, and probably shouldn't care but given that MS has become a lot nicer in a lot of areas it really should bug developers and PR people there that PMs or bean counters (sorry to all good accountants and PMs out there) are allowed to destroy all the work you put into making people love you.

Edit: minor edits for readability, clarification

Re: Windows Sandbox

#174

Post by eertami »

neotek wrote: post #149
eertami wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Ultimately Apple's pricing means all their users are first class - hence security Yeah... Good luck running the latest version of iOS on an older iPhone. (Many are still have a 5/6 and you really don't want to update those if you value a reasonable experience and latency.)

>Yeah... Good luck running the latest version of iOS on an older iPhone. (Many are still have a 5/6 and you really don't want to update those if you value a reasonable experience and latency.) Spoken like someone who's never actually used a 5 or 6 running iOS 12.

Nope I speak from experience, we have a 6 with iOS 12.

Also have an 8, which admittedly is an ok phone if horrendously overpriced but work paid for it so I can't complain.

Re: Windows Sandbox

#175

Post by Godel_unicode »

neotek wrote: post #153
kypro wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They'd probably have to raise the price of their cheaper versions if they didn't do this. Seems like a good compromise for the consumer to me. Offset the cost of all of the fancy tech most people won't want or use to those willing to pay more and potentially use it.

Not having to risk your machine being compromised every time you run a third party executable is not fancy tech.

Try explaining how and when(!) to use this to your HR department, then tell me it's not fancy tech.

"My spreadsheet won't open" 'don't use sandbox for that' "But you said every file I downloaded" 'no, only exe'

"I opened the PDF exe, edited it, now it's gone" 'self-extracting zips from our payroll system are fine'

Re: Windows Sandbox

#176

Post by snr »

ForHackernews wrote: post #167
mosselman wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same goes for full disk encryption, it isn’t included in the cheapest edition I installed on an old laptop for my mother. Now booting with veracrypt takes 2 minutes. Needless to say I had to get her a chromebook: new laptop, easy to use, secure and for the price of one windows license. This is what will get Microsoft in the end.

Secure and inexpensive as long as you don't mind paying with your privacy. I'm worried that this is going to be the compromise we're all forced to make in the future.

Umm, that's how economics work?

Re: Windows Sandbox

#177

Post by meritt »

neotek wrote: post #147
meritt wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While your statement is reasonable, it's interesting seeing a Mac user complain about things being too expensive. Is it fundamentally worse to overcharge for software over the hardware?

You misunderstand me, it has nothing to do with Windows being "too expensive", the point is that you've paid for it and they still abuse your privacy and shove ads down your throat at every opportunity. By way of comparison, I willingly and happily pay more to use Apple hardware and software specifically because that money buys me a hell of a lot more privacy, security, and functionality than the equivalent amount of…

I am not misunderstanding you. Your entire comment was centered around a perceived unfairness regarding price:

> most expensive version of their OS.

> they charge hundreds and hundreds of dollars for.

To be clear here, I'm not defending Windows. I agree with you that what they do is not constructive for their users. I'm merely pointing out it's ironic for Mac users sit on their throne and decry Windows' practices while paying significantly more for non-upgradeable Mac hardware when if you really gave a shit about security and privacy, you'd buy reasonably priced PC hardware and install a linux distro.

Last I checked, App Store is absolutely filled with advertisements that I didn't request. Why is it so significantly worse that Microsoft happens to place theirs within Explorer? I think both are rather frustrating when you already paid for the software and/or hardware.

Re: Windows Sandbox

#178

Post by eastendguy »

Godel_unicode wrote: post #175
neotek wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not having to risk your machine being compromised every time you run a third party executable is not fancy tech.

Try explaining how and when(!) to use this to your HR department, then tell me it's not fancy tech. "My spreadsheet won't open" 'don't use sandbox for that' "But you said every file I downloaded" 'no, only exe' "I opened the PDF exe, edited it, now it's gone" 'self-extracting zips from our payroll system are fine'

So right... this is clearly a "PRO" feature. For normal users the by far better solution is still: Do not install any EXE from unknown sources. Or even better: Do not install anything new in the first place.

Re: Windows Sandbox

#179

Post by JadeNB »

krige wrote: post #165
neotek wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Charge more for enterprise features by all means, but if basic security concepts are something you feel the need to charge for, your priorities are fucked up.

It's hardly basic. It might seem so for you or - in general - people who frequent hn, but you'd have to spend a lot of time explaining why it's good to an average person running windows home.

There are a lot of basic, in the sense of foundational, things that are not basic, in the sense of easy to understand. I think "basic security feature" was meant in the former sense.

Re: Windows Sandbox

#180

Post by mcintyre1994 »

ForHackernews wrote: post #167
mosselman wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same goes for full disk encryption, it isn’t included in the cheapest edition I installed on an old laptop for my mother. Now booting with veracrypt takes 2 minutes. Needless to say I had to get her a chromebook: new laptop, easy to use, secure and for the price of one windows license. This is what will get Microsoft in the end.

Secure and inexpensive as long as you don't mind paying with your privacy. I'm worried that this is going to be the compromise we're all forced to make in the future.

That's already the Android/iOS tradeoff, and that's assuming Android is considered secure now which it wasn't last time I was using it.
Post reply on HN