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

Microsoft Needs Windows Lite

philipbohun.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 203 posts

Re: Microsoft Needs Windows Lite

#121

Post by TiredOfLife »

martin_a wrote: post #47
haunter wrote: 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.…

Do these versions get regular updates or are they expected to run on air-gapped machines so nobody really has to take care of them?

They get only security fixes. So if there is some system component that is buggy under some circumstances it stays that way. Part of native windows development is constant workarounds around old buggy dlls

Re: Microsoft Needs Windows Lite

#122

Post by TiredOfLife »

chris_money202 wrote: post #6

OP says Windows needs builders to make applications and that is what Windows Lite would enable (or expand) but then says Windows Lite shouldn't include .NET one of the primary frameworks to build applications on Windows.

And recent installs of 11 already have the old .net framework as an optional feature install.

Re: Microsoft Needs Windows Lite

#123

Post by wjnc »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #69
haunter wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that's also kind of the point too: Windows Lite exists but MSFT is "gatkeeping" it to enterprise users only. Probably because they are paying for it.

Not even enterprise customers are allowed to use LTSC. Only hardware OEMs. It's asinine. They could charge $1000+ for LTSC licenses, but my data and digital sovereignty is apparently worth even more to them.

Economically, you would probably be the only customer (stated willingness to pay can differ from market outcome ;) paying that amount. Your stated willingness to pay has little relation to the true value of our data and digital sovereignty to Microsoft.

A funny estimate is possible though. MSFT 2750 G$ market cap and 550 M business users. That’s 5 k$ per user. Grossly misrepresenting everything (AI bubble, other cashflows, …) but it is a ‘directionally right’.

Re: Microsoft Needs Windows Lite

#124

Post by bitwize »

Microsoft is in a pickle.

Linux and open source have made "selling operating systems" nearly as preposterous as it was back in the mainframe era when they were getting started. So it's gotten very hard to generate revenue directly from Windows. Not even Apple is in the business of selling an OS—they sell hardware, and the OS comes as part of the package. Microsoft has kept good will amongst OEMs by keeping Windows license prices for hardware manufacturers low to nonexistent—were they to actually try making money through the OEM channel by charging a more reasonable price per license, the OEMs would find a way to jump ship to Linux (perhaps ChromeOS). This has already happened during the "netbook era" until Microsoft intervened with Windows 7 Starter Edition.

The pivot for Windows has thus been to find ways for Windows to generate revenue indirectly—by funneling users into other Microsoft products and services, particularly cloud and AI in 2026. But this approach is creating the exact user-hostility problems people are complaining about. Without the ability to generate revenue directly, nor the ability to generate revenue indirectly through cloud services, Windows becomes a cost center rather than a profit center.

So no, I don't see them going the Windows Lite route at all. If they cut out the fat, they cut off Windows's revenue stream and its reason for existing in the first place.

Re: Microsoft Needs Windows Lite

#125

Post by VitalKoshalew »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #69
haunter wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that's also kind of the point too: Windows Lite exists but MSFT is "gatkeeping" it to enterprise users only. Probably because they are paying for it.

Not even enterprise customers are allowed to use LTSC. Only hardware OEMs. It's asinine. They could charge $1000+ for LTSC licenses, but my data and digital sovereignty is apparently worth even more to them.

That's incorrect. Windows LTSC rights are included into Windows Enterprise E3 subscription as well as a VL (EA, MPSA etc.) perpetual license. [1]

1. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/whats-new/windows-...

Re: Microsoft Needs Windows Lite

#126

Post by ramon156 »

Night_Thastus wrote: post #102

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…

I agree with your reasons but not with "the majority doesn't care". Sure they do. The internet is filled with Windows hate, and Reddit isn't as small as you remember it to be.

The majority has no other option. Linux is too much trouble to learn and Mac requires a new device. What else are you supposed to do?

Re: Microsoft Needs Windows Lite

#127

Post by hyperman1 »

haunter wrote: 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.…

In the EU, anyone can legally get a second hand LTSC license. See e.g.

https://en.windowsnoticias.com/Where-to-get-cheap-and-offici...

Re: Microsoft Needs Windows Lite

#128

Post by lenkite »

Night_Thastus wrote: post #102

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…

With over 1 billion monthly active users, reddit is not a minority and is a significant fraction of internet users. Btw, people complain about Windows bloat on Whatsapp too. Now, that IS a majority of internet users.

Re: Microsoft Needs Windows Lite

#129

Post by xigoi »

okanat wrote: post #113
tombert wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.…

> 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.

This would not be the case in the hypothetical situation where Windows becomes a Linux distro.

Re: Microsoft Needs Windows Lite

#130

Post by vitorgrs »

contextfree wrote: post #116
delta_p_delta_x wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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

old UWP .NET it's also installed by default... It Appx package system, and it was/is delivered on the store
Post reply on HN