Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft Needs Windows Lite

philipbohun.com

111–120 of 203 posts

Re: Microsoft Needs Windows Lite

#111
> Without Builders, you don't have software, and without software, you don't have users. This is why Microsoft needs Windows Lite.

> Windows Lite is a stripped down version of Windows. No telemetry,

Exactly. They already have telemetry, so in theory they know what they are doing (?)

Re: Microsoft Needs Windows Lite

#112

No they don't. Why should they bother? * Costs them money to make * Costs them money to maintain * Will only be used by a TINY subset of ultra-enthusiasts (no, neither HN or Reddit are majorities) * Every user on it is less telemetry and less advertisement The reality is that most users don't care, and will just use whatever seems to work fine. Finding out that 'oh yeah, feature/software X does not work on Windows Li…

[deleted]

Re: Microsoft Needs Windows Lite

#113
post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NT is a better kernel for consumer systems compared to Linux unlike first generation Edge which was a worse browser compared to Chrome.

I don't necessarily disagree, but I am curious as to why you think that? What makes NT a "better kernel for consumers". I have some opinions on that but I don't want to bias your answer.

Some architecture and some implementation details and sometimes purely economic reality:

1. NT is a hybrid kernel. Windows runs many drivers in userspace, if not in a limited kernel environment. This includes network drivers and GPU drivers. It can recover from crashes more gracefully than Linux and BSD kernels. Linux has similar drivers for specific use cases like FUSE, however, they are not as performant as NT.

2. NT has always been designed to drive a GUI-driven OS. So it has better default tunings than a vanilla Linux kernel to operate and stay reactive under memory pressure. When your system is under pressure you'd lose mouse movement on Linux, on NT this is rare. It is not impossible to do this under Linux, however, not many companies (except maybe Android manufacturers and Google/ChromeOS) actually invest in this.

3. NT provides a mostly stable API and ABI for drivers. It is not as strong as Win32 guarantees, however it retained mostly the same driver infrastructure since Vista. Many Win7 or Win8 drivers continue to work under Win11.

4. Bundled drivers for consumer systems in NT are often better quality. This could be the side effect of stable ABI. Unlike Linux, significant refactors changing big parts of the driver APIs are rare. I think this reflects in the quality of drivers like USB Host drivers. I deal with embedded Linux systems (x86, RPi), there is always some "rmmod and modprobe to fix USB" script somewhere in a deployed Linux embedded system. I have never seen anything similar in Windows Kiosk setups (TBH I have seen a lot of reinit of COM drivers but it is often manufacturer's faulty implementation).

5. There is simply more money invested to make consumer drivers work on NT. Linux is often an afterthought for many consumer device manufacturers. There is still not enough buy-in. Mainline Linux kernel team, being inferior marketshare-wise, requests more buy-in and more collaboration from device manufacturers. This works for servers since there is pressure from end customers who want to retain UNIX-like environments. Normal consumers cannot exert the same amount of pressure. Microsoft provides subsystems, APIs and ABIs to write the drivers to OEMs, often consulting the first manufacturers of a certain new device type and making compromises for them. Linux on the other hand, requires competitors to collaborate and create the subsystems and APIs. Competitor players themselves have to agree with the developers of their competitors to create a subsystem. On a capitalist economy competitors do not want to collaborate unless it significantly increases market size for everyone. Consumer electronics have very thin margins. They do not scale well with increased effort required by Linux. Only select few big tech or certain old-school consultancies send the significant system patches.

Re: Microsoft Needs Windows Lite

#115
post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

.NET is still installable as a standalone thing. In fact I probably have several versions installed on my current Windows PC. No reason Windows Lite couldn't also have .NET installed _when you need it_.

I still don't know if I am sold with that. .NET is also a runtime so how do you handle the user story? If your users are also on Windows Lite then they have to manage .NET version or you have to package .NET with whatever you build. If your users are on full Windows, wouldn't it just make sense for you to build in same environment as your Users? Especially since IT would have to manage two separate operating systems…

They already have this problem, Windows includes .NET Framework 4.x but not any modern version of .NET

Re: Microsoft Needs Windows Lite

#116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It should be installable, just via a package management system. You choose what you need. I think OP hasn't thought this through completely so he's missing this nuance in his post. That said, knowing Microsoft they WOULD release something like this but cripple it by doing something stupid like disallowing the use of virtualization technology, even as an installed package.

> It should be installable, just via a package management system I disagree. .NET is fundamental to the Windows platform. It's like having a Python runtime installed by default in some Linux distros, which makes sense for that distribution's use-case.

Windows doesn't have any modern version of .NET installed by default though, only old .NET Framework versions

Re: Microsoft Needs Windows Lite

#118
The post doesn't really define the problem this is supposed to solve for "builders". FWIW, Microsoft's official attempt at solving this problem? seems to be "Windows developer configs" -> https://github.com/microsoft/WindowsDeveloperConfig

which is described as

A WinGet Configuration (DSC) file that sets up a clean, lightweight, distraction-free developer workstation. The goal is a PC state that devs actually love using: no clutter, no noise, just the tools you need. (...)

* A PC devs actually want to use. Clean Explorer, dark theme, no pop-ups, no recommendations, no widgets. Just your code and your tools. (...)

Re: Microsoft Needs Windows Lite

#119

Why not DOS? Why not windows 3.1? Well they are too old. win32? Also too old. This is what the .NET complaint is disguising. It's not DOS->3.1->3.11->win32->.NET and so lets just go back one place. It's DOS->3.1->3.11->win32->.NET 1.0->.NET 2.0->.NET 3.0? WPF->.NET 5...->WinUI. Along the way there's COM, DCOM, ActiveX, all sorts of terrible things!

don't forget gdi+, direct2d, and pretty much every other layer built on win32 that are actively used because they're better than directly interfacing via win32

Re: Microsoft Needs Windows Lite

#120
post #92
post #5

LTSC, surprised the post doesn't mention that. No forced feature updates, no unnecessary preinstalled apps. I'm using them for years without any problems. There was only one extreme edge case where an app didn't work because it was hard coded to only work on Windows 10 Pro and couldn't do anything with the LTSC version. Yes you can't get it legally as a regular end user but MSFT also doesn't care about piracy either.…

I'm using ltsc windows 11 and yes it is much better than one of my other pcs which has pro on it. However I did use windows 10 ltsc for quite a few years until I hit a dll issue with an old game that turned out to be unresolvable as far as I could tell at the time. So much so I switched to pro (I have a work visual studio subscription so I have access to all versions of windows for free). I can't for the life of me r…

I wonder if they don’t include all the application compatibility stuff in LTSC. It would be a good way to make the version work for its intended purpose (as part of a larger appliance or industrial tool with purpose built software), while making it much less useful for ordinary purposes.
Post reply on HN