back to article Microsoft totters from time machine clutching Windows 10 Workstation

It looks like the 1990s are back in fashion: Microsoft is, it seems, preparing another flavor of Windows 10 – the tentatively named Windows 10 Pro for Workstations. We can't help but be reminded of the Windows NT Workstation era in the early 1990s – the branding Microsoft used to distance Windows for beefy work PCs from …

  1. Steelted

    The Golden Age of Window$ has begun...

    1. Planty Bronze badge
      Megaphone

      Desperation

      I bet this one still comes with the horrible metro UI and store of shite and candy crush...

      A true workstation windows10 would come with a windows7 / Windows NT shell and he strpped of all the bullshit that everyone hates about windows 10. I still can't decide if Microsoft know what everyone's hates, and just refuse to remove it, or if they are simply just clueless.

      A windows7 built on window 10 core is what everyone really wants. It's almost available in the form of win10 LTSB + classic shell. But of course not available unless you are the select few..

      1. Def Silver badge

        Re: Desperation

        A windows7 built on window 10 core is what every dinosaur really wants.

        FTFY

        1. Dave K Silver badge

          Re: Desperation

          If I'm a dinosaur for wanting an OS with a clean, coherent, consistent and friendly UI then so be it.

          Windows 10 has decent technical underpinnings, but the UI is an unfocussed mess (some bits Metro, some bits classic, two different control/settings panels, designed to be mobile friendly - despite the collapse of Windows on phones, etc). Bin all of that and give me a clean and consistent desktop UI that's designed for a desktop PC please.

          1. Def Silver badge

            Re: Desperation

            If I'm a dinosaur for wanting an OS with a clean, coherent, consistent and friendly UI then so be it.

            But that's not what you originally wrote. You originally said you wanted Windows 7 (shell, but I assumed you meant UI) on top of Windows 10.

            Most applications that I run on a day to day basis look pretty consistent on Windows 10. There are some annoyances (really really old - pre manifest/visual themes - applications) look really really old still, and Visual Studio (and I guess other .Net apps) insists on implementing its own window UI, which I don't like.

            And yes, the control panel stuff still needs work, but I don't use that every day, so am willing to mostly overlook it.

            On the whole though, I find the Windows 10 UI to be a huge improvement over the fake 3D UI of earlier Windows. (I liked them at the time - except XP - but they look horribly dated now.) And on mobile it's a refreshing new look when compared to iOS and Android.

            As for Windows Mobile being dead, I don't think that's true at all. I am eagerly awaiting the new phones to be announced. Hopefully later this year.

            My biggest concern about Windows 10 is the imminent arrival of Fluid Design on top of the existing UI paradigms that are still hanging on. But I will reserve judgement until that really arrives.

            1. Missing Semicolon Silver badge

              Re: Desperation

              "I am eagerly awaiting the new phones to be announced. Hopefully later this year."

              Hello Kevin! ICMFP!

            2. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Desperation

              "Visual Studio (and I guess other .Net apps) insists on implementing its own window U"

              I'm extremely happy that the VS team refused to dumb down it's UI to Win10 norms and gave us a good copy of the familiar, information dense interface we're used to - even though they had to implement it the hard way by rendering it from scratch. Even happier they listened to dev feedback and let us theme away most of the idiotic Win10 touches. I like being able to see where each UI element starts and ends instead of an ocean of white space and guesswork.

              1. Def Silver badge

                Re: Desperation

                I'm extremely happy that the VS team refused to dumb down it's UI to Win10 norms

                I was referring to the actual window frame, where the minimise, maximise, and close buttons are in slightly different places which makes minimising successive windows really annoying when VS is one of those windows.

            3. Planty Bronze badge
              FAIL

              Re: Desperation

              "As for Windows Mobile being dead, I don't think that's true at all."

              LOL.

            4. JimC Silver badge

              Re:a refreshing new look

              By and large, though, your average corporate user doesn't want a refreshing new look. They just want it to work every minute of all day and every day in exactly the same way yesterday, today and tomorrow so they can get on with their jobs and not worry about the damn IT delivery.

            5. bombastic bob Silver badge
              Linux

              Re: Desperation

              "I find the Windows 10 UI to be a huge improvement over the fake 3D UI of earlier Windows"

              of COURSE you do! You refer to those of us who *HATE* "the Metro" 2D FLATSO FLUGLY as "dinosaurs".

              Here are some synonyms for you (I know you meant them, right?):

              a) refuse to change

              b) sticks in the mud

              c) won't get on the bandwagon

              d) old fuddy-duddy

              e) NOT a millenial

              that last part is the most important.

              If you like 2D FLATSO, you should be able to choose it. Those of us who *HATE* it should be able to choose the OLD interface. Most of us who still have to use windows already DO that, by using 7 (or earlier).

              Keep in mind, it was the 3D Skeuomorphic interface that SOLD WINDOWS 3.0 TO THE WORLD. That's where it started. It improved with '95, and went upwards from there. Back then Micro-shaft "got it" and delivered what CUSTOMERS wanted, and not SHOVING UP/INTO OUR ORIFICES what *THEY* want us to have.

              In the survey results I've seen, people prefer 3D skeuomorphic to 2D FLATSO by 2:1.

              The only reason Win-10-nic has THIS many users at the moment is that MICROSHAFT HAS MADE SURE WE HAVE NO OTHER CHOICE. Except, Linux. Or Mac.

          2. handleoclast Silver badge
            Linux

            Re: Desperation

            You think Windows 10 is bad? Gnome 3 is worse. The Gnome guys sucked heavily on the Sinofski teat and produced a design meant for phone/tablet users who have only one finger. Provided they didn't actually want to do anything. When I first used Gnome 3 I yearned to be using Win 10 instead (even though I passionately hate everything Microsoft does).

            People suggest Cinnamon as an alternative to Gnome 3. It's not as bad, but it still sucks. Big time. I still yearned for Win 10, but not quite as much.

            Mate, supposedly slower than Cinnamon, is actually usable. Most of Gnome 2 is there. With Mate I can (and do) sneer at Win 10.

            If you're stuck with Win 10, you have my third-deepest sympathy. Second deepest is for people stuck with Gnome 3. Deepest is for the poor idiots still using Win 8.

            1. Updraft102 Silver badge

              Re: Desperation

              I'm "still" using Windows 8.1, though it's only been about two or three months now since I migrated from 7. It takes some aftermarket programs to get it usable, but even 7 needs most of those same programs to be its best, so there's not much difference there.

              I'm a traditionalist when it comes to UI, and to me, the archetype of an ideal UI is Windows 2000. I strive to make my UI look and feel as much like that as possible. This whole "one UI to rule them all" has been one of the dumbest trends to hit computing to date, and I applaud Mark Shuttleworth for realizing this. GNOME and Microsoft, we're waiting.

              So with all that said, I use Windows 8.1 and am pretty satisfied with it. Windows 10 isn't even in the running... it's so far from being usable that it may as well not even exist to me. A lot of that doesn't have anything to do with UI, but even if the spying, the forced updates, the unwanted installations and uninstallations of various things, the ads, the changes of user settings with every major update, the permanent beta status of the rapid update cycle, and all that other stuff was stripped from 10, it would still be crap.

              Windows 8.1 as I have it is very close to Windows 7. I'm using the same theme I was in 7; I just had to port it to 8. There's no ribbon, no apps (removed, not merely hidden), no tiles, no charms... just Win32 desktop, with only a few widely scattered Metro-styled intrusions. The Windows login screen is Metro looking, and so is the "these programs are preventing the PC from shutting down" dialog. The "How do you want to open this file" dialog is in that hideous style too. The task switcher (alt-tab) has a vaguely Metro look to it, but it's just a plain background with text on it, as is the Ctrl-Alt-Del menu. That's about it, though.

              The Settings app is essentially gone (it's still there, but it's locked out), as the Win 8.1 control panel is still fully functional (with only a very few exceptions, for which I use other tools... like the inability of the Control Panel "Users" applet to create Windows accounts. I just use the Computer Management snapin of the MMC instead).

              I have to wonder at those people who say that 10 is like Windows 7-- it only bears the most passing similarity. Windows 7 doesn't have that hideously flat UI with vast seas of retina-burning white (just a theme, but it's a really bad one), those tiles in the start menu, the ribbon, a Settings app, or any other apps for that matter. Windows 7 doesn't have "folders on this PC" in the content pane of Windows Explorer, and it doesn't have the jarring discontinuity between Win32 and UWP-themed bits of the OS.

              All of the few remaining Metro bits that still exist in my Windows 8.1 are also in 10, but 10 adds a lot more of them, and that gets worse with every new update. Microsoft's intent is for all of the Control Panel to end up in the Settings app eventually, and that means a lot of system dialogs are going to be UWP ugly, with nothing you can do about it.

              Windows 7 has a coherent UI that's clearly meant for desktop PCs, through and through. Windows 10 is a poorly-executed mess that is half Win32 and half phone, and unlike Windows 8, you can't easily wall off the phone bits and live in the Win32 portion. MS has moved too many essential things into the phone part; it can't be avoided. You can kill the ribbon, replace the start menu, apply a better theme, and other assorted stuff like that, but you will still be stuck with a large portion of the system dialogs that are in that ugly, inappropriate phone UI style.

              I also don't know how Cinnamon still sucks "big time" from the perspective of one who thinks the "one UI to rule them all" idea is stupid (as I do, and as you appear to). I've tried a lot of DEs, including MATE, and Cinnamon is the one I like the best. I've had to learn to edit Cinnamon and GNOME themes to get it just how I want, but the same's true of Windows (from Vista on), and doing it in Linux has been a far easier task.

              Linux Mint 18.1 Cinnamon has a very traditional UI, and Mint's "X" project is working on removing the stupid UI (hamburger menus, for example) from as many GNOME programs as possible and replacing it with desktop-PC style traditional menu bars and pulldowns (rather than simply maintaining much older pre-GNOME 3 versions of these programs that never had the touch crap in the first place).

              1. Pirate Dave
                Pirate

                Re: Desperation

                "I'm a traditionalist when it comes to UI, and to me, the archetype of an ideal UI is Windows 2000."

                Agreed. It was (compared to the current crop) highly utilitarian in its design, without the needless eye-candy that started with XP. There were some problems, but I still think it was better than anything since. IIRC, in Server2003, they gave us that annoying empty pane on the left in the Services panel, AND they twiddled the "Choose Principal" applet when assigning file permissions to require a couple of extra clicks to get it to give the list of all the available accounts. Niggling annoyances, sure. But still annoyances, and for what real purpose? Then they started really screwing with things in 2008, and by 2012, it's sometimes difficult to get things done quickly unless you create a lot of shortcuts on the desktop. But at least I CAN get things done on my Server 2012 desktop - I feel lost when I have to use Win 8.x or 10. That shit just ain't right.

                It's a shame MS is such a "my way or the highway" company. If they could have kept the original 2000 interface, worked out the few kinks it had, and let us still use it with their newer versions of the OS, that would have been awesome. I mean, fuck, they're the largest software company in the world, with billions of dollars in the bank - couldn't they keep 5 or 10 programmers on staff just to keep that interface going? They could even refer to it as "Old People's Interface", so the yoof and the hipsters will never get confused and wind up staring at it's spartan utilitarianism. And the rest of us could just get shit done. But no, that wouldn't play well with their marketing thrust to always look like they are trying to be bleeding edge and pushing the back of the envelope.

                Sorry, time for my meds again before I get all stirred up and start jabbering about Novell needlessly letting Netware die.

              2. handleoclast Silver badge

                Re: Desperation

                I tried CentOS 7.3 versions of Gnome 3, Cinnamon and Mint. Which may have subtle differences to those you have on Mint 18.1.

                Gnome 3 I hated instantly. First thing I tried was customizing the taskbar stuff with right-click, only to find it doesn't do anything (because they want you to have a phone interface on a PC and you can't right-click on a phone). Spent a while clicking around trying to find out how to tweak things without right-clicking and nearly drove myself mad with frustration because I couldn't find how to do it.

                Spent a while on a usable desktop on another computer googling how to make Gnome 3 usable, without much luck. When I went back to G3, the screen lock had kicked in. No keyboard key, or mouse movement, or click would unlock it. By accident I found the "swipe up to unlock" thingy. Accident because the theme makes it nigh-on invisible to my old eyes when running it on an old laptop. Why in hell do you need to swipe up on a desktop? In case I put the whole thing, keyboard and mouse in my pocket so I don't accidentally pocket dial? This is fucking madness.

                So that was it as far as G3 went. Nuked it from orbit. Put Cinnamon on. Possibly I wasn't in the right frame of mind to judge it fairly, given that I was still seething from my G3 experience. Something about it (I don't even remember what) annoyed me because it was too much like G3 and not enough like G2, so I gave up on it.

                Tried Mate. Which was close enough to G2 to feel very, very good. A "stopped banging head against brick wall" moment. Even better after adding Mozo, EOM, Caja and a few other bits. I'd take 2000, XP, Win 8, Win 10 or even Win 98 over Gnome 3. Win 10 (uncustomized) is crap, but that's tolerable because I expected it to be crap. G3 is crap and that stings because G2 was so good (in my subjective opinion) that I expected G3 to be much better than it is.

                I do understand that these matters are very subjective. It's very much what you're used to. But it is absolute fucking madness to take an interface for a touch-screen phone with limited screen area and put it on a desktop. Doesn't matter if Microsoft do it, KDE do it, or Gnome do it. If they want the UI to run on desktops and tablets then it should be bimodal. Hamburgers on tablets and menu bars on desktops. Some arcane maze to navigate with one finger in order to customize settings on a tablet, right-click to do the same thing on a desktop. Yes, that means knowledge of one isn't instantly transferable to the other, and it's a lot more work for the programmers, but it means using either is as good as it can be instead of being as crap as the most restrictive of the two.

                Maybe if I'd waited longer before trying Cinnamon I'd have liked it. Maybe not. Maybe I'll give it another try some time. Maybe not. What is nice about this is I have a choice. Not just of those three desktop environments, but also KDE, Xfce, LXDE, et al (if I choose to install them). Not only that, unlike your Win 10 customizations, I can switch to a different one every time I login (you can't switch between customized and uncustomized Win 10 on the same machine). So if I ever feel like giving Cinnamon another try it's just a couple of clicks next time I log in. I suspect if Microsoft had given you a way of choosing 2000, XP, Win 7, Win 8 or Win 10 at login you'd be a far happier bunny, and so would many others.

                But even without those choices, a phone interface on a desktop is fucking insane. There are no justifications or even mitigations. It's just fucking insane. It's like having bicycle seats in a car. It's like having a bicycle handlebar to steer a car. It's like having a car engine in your shoes (no wheels, just the engine doing nothing). Insane.

                1. Updraft102 Silver badge

                  Re: Desperation

                  " But it is absolute fucking madness to take an interface for a touch-screen phone with limited screen area and put it on a desktop."

                  That's the bottom line, and I wish I could upvote it more than once for this bit alone. Phones and PCs have different interfaces because they have different needs.

                  PCs can have much greater information and active UI element density not only because of the larger screen, but because of the greater precision of a mouse. A mouse has a two-stage point and select, so that you know exactly where the arrow is pointed when you hit the button. Not so with tapping... as the finger gets close, your view of the target is obscured, and no further feedback guiding the finger is possible. When it touches the screen, it covers a huge number of pixels (thousands of them on a 1080p phone), and it is up to the device's algorithm to decide which one was the hotspot. Which one? You won't know 'till you tap.

                  A mouse offers hover effects that aren't possible in touch devices (though they may be at some point, subject to the same lack of precision as the tap itself... and for that to make any difference, the OS and the app would have to be written to make use of it, which won't happen if the majority of devices don't have it). And of course, there's the right-click or modified click (CTRL-click, etc) too.

                  To get away with not having hover, right-click, modified click, or 2-stage point and click, a lot of compromises have to be made, and even more so if the screen is small (as it is in mobiles, relative to desktops and standard laptops). These compromises are pretty serious, and apps that attempt to deliver the full feature list that is normal and expected on a PC program will typically confuse and irritate phone users, as it is an unintuitive mess of options to wade through, requiring considerable drilling before reaching the option desired. Most apps, thus, won't have the full complement of features; they will be pared down to make it less confusing. Even so, it will be harder to use and less intuitive than a PC with a traditional menu bar and a reasonable amount of onscreen "chrome."

                  While these compromises are necessary for mobiles, they're not on PCs, so the idea that one UI can ever be appropriate for a PC is just inane. Look at the various system dialogs in Windows 10 that use the UWP style... huge, comically oversized controls, very low density of information or UI options, with vast areas of wasted space. This has NO place on a PC! Neither do those phone apps that Microsoft thinks people are eager to run on their desktops, as they will suffer from the same issue. Of course, it is possible in theory to write two complete and excellent UIs for the app, one for each usage type, but if Microsoft itself won't even do that for the OS hosting the app, I doubt any app is going to either. To do it right, the app running on the desktop should be using the Win32 common controls, as those are designed and intended for the desktop environment, but that's not what UWP is about.

                  The best way of doing this would be the way Apple has done it... a PC-only OS on the PC (Mac) and a mobile-only OS on the tablet/phone (iOS), but with both designed to seamlessly connect to one another and share the same data. One is touch oriented, one is not... one is x86, one is ARM. It's a nice, clean delineation between them. Both device types get an OS that is written without compromises to accommodate other devices.

                  The outlier in this would be the 2 in 1 that can be a tablet or a "laptop." If the keyboard unit includes a full featured pointing device, a lot of the benefit of a real laptop can be realized (precision that allows for smaller UI elements, 2 stage pointing, hover effects, control clicks, etc), but only if the software is written for it... and even with 10, it isn't when it's in the UWP mode.

                  This use case strikes me more of a "gee whiz, will you look at that" kind of technology demo more than a practical thing. A tablet with a display large enough to be a credible laptop when docked is not much more portable than an ultrabook with the same display type. In any case, it's not and will never be the dominant configuration of PCs or mobiles (tablets and phones both), and to have this niche of a use case form the basis of the OS that everyone uses on all PCs and mobiles is just a ridiculous idea.

            2. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Desperation

              "Gnome 3 is worse."

              I've gone back to KDE.. its a beast, runs slower. but at least its consistent..

            3. jelabarre59 Silver badge
              Joke

              Re: Desperation

              You think Windows 10 is bad? Gnome 3 is worse. The Gnome guys sucked heavily on the Sinofski teat and produced a design meant for phone/tablet users who have only one finger. Provided they didn't actually want to do anything.

              You mean you haven't seen the design preview of Gnome4? https://flic.kr/p/cJ2zB1

          3. bombastic bob Silver badge
            Devil

            Re: Desperation

            "Bin all of that and give me a clean and consistent desktop UI that's designed for a desktop PC please."

            and without the 2D FLATSO FLUGLY.

        2. Timmy B Silver badge

          Re: Desperation

          "A windows7 built on window 10 core is what every dinosaur really wants."

          I remember when 7 came out and everybody moaned that it wasn't XP and when XP came out and everyone moaned it wasn't 2000. People for some reason simply don't like change. If you ask them to quantify why they actually don't like 10 most have never used it and those that have will usually come up with something like "WELL Micro$$haft shouldn't CHANGE anything without ASKING ME"

          We have an office with dozens of people using 10 day to day and I have a home with three of us using it and it is the most stable, best performing and easiest to use version of windows yet according to the vast majority of them.

          1. Updraft102 Silver badge

            Re: Desperation

            "People for some reason simply don't like change."

            People don't like change for the sake of change when what they have is working. That's the problem here! Microsoft keeps changing things that work, things that don't need to be changed, things that people don't WANT changed. Maybe if they listened to what the customers want instead of trying to tell them what they want they would not have to force people to take the product, even when it's free.

            " If you ask them to quantify why they actually don't like 10 most have never used it"

            Utter nonsense. People who have never used it don't have a dog in the hunt. Why would they even care? To be concerned enough to HATE 10 requires someone to have used it. You can't appreciate what a turd it is without experiencing it first. Fans of Apple or Linux will criticize Windows in general, but when you see specific attacks on Windows 10, you're nearly always talking about Windows users (or former Windows users who are angry that MS forced them to leave Windows). It's clear that MS intends to force us all into 10, and we'd rather have something as good as what we're supposed to be giving up, thankyouverymuch.

            "and those that have will usually come up with something like "WELL Micro$$haft shouldn't CHANGE anything without ASKING ME"

            Utter nonsense, part 2. We've had a TON of people here and in other discussion areas describe what is wrong with 10. Not ONCE have I seen a message like the one you say people "usually" come up with. Look at Bombastic Bob's post... while his rundown is written bombastically, it's still quite clear as to what he dislikes about 10, and it's not that MS CHANGED things without ASKING HIM. I've written enough on the topic to be a small book if it were ever put together, and so have many, many others.

            This idea that people who criticize 10 have never used it is often cited by people widely regarded as probable MS astroturfers. I've never seen anyone else try to sell such an obvious whopper.

          2. guyr

            Re: Desperation

            Timmy B: " If you ask them to quantify why they actually don't like 10 most have never used it and those that have will usually come up with something"

            If you ask questions the correct way, you'll get meaningful replies. My dislike of Windows 10 is simple to quantify. I'm a software developer and a desktop user since 1980 (yes, pre-Windows). I need a clean and consistent desktop that stays out of my way as much as possible to allow me to work. In the Windows evolution, everything from 95 onto NT 4, 2000, XP and Win 7 fit that bill. Windows 10 put in a bunch of stuff that was of no use to me as a desktop user; I've got an expensive graphics card, 2 large monitors, a keyboard and a mouse, so why force me to use a flat interface intended for small touchcreens?

            If they would have a single toggle called "desktop mode" that stuck with the 3D interface optimized for keyboard and mouse, and hid all that touchscreen stuff, I would have been happy.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Single Toggle Telemetry Switch = "OFF".

        I'd buy it if it had a single toggle Telemetry Switch which you could set to "OFF", at which point you can then enable exactly the features you want "ON". What's so fcuking difficult about that?

        You'd probably get more data out of me than you do now, as I relentlessly turn everything OFF, in every nook and cranny of Windows 10 to be on the safe side. Biggest bugbear - hidden switches, several menus deep (and they are getting worse, not better). There absolutely no consistency in Windows 10 to where you need to toggle off switches to "minimise your Privacy" options. There should be an "off" switch (especially in Europe).

        Google Privacy Checkup is equally as frustrating, It takes 34 clicks/scroll clicks (to make hidden options visible) to switch off Google's Ad tracking/accept terms. And they expect us to think they are 'honest' with our data? Clearing your browser cookies, you're back to square one.

      3. jelabarre59 Silver badge

        Re: Desperation

        A windows7 built on window 10 core is what everyone really wants.

        Actually I'd prefer a MSWin2000 shell on top of MSWn10 core. Don't even want that puffy/shiny look they had in XP/Vista/7.

        Would be so much better off if we could do full shell-replacements the way we did with MSWin 3.x (Remember Norton Desktop for Windows?). In later MSWin versions there were the various hack-y attempts at replacement shells that were darned impossible to configure right, especially if you wanted them to be non-fugly.

        Maybe port Cinnamon Desktop as a MSWin replacement shell?

    2. bombastic bob Silver badge
      Devil

      "The Golden Age of Window$ has begun..."

      I was thinking "Iron Pyrite" but ok.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        I was thinking "Iron Pyrite" but ok.

        Yes the brimstone odour that is M$

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Yet another version?

    I thought MS claimed that Win10 would be the last version? If that's the case then WTF is it with Education, Enterprise, Home, Pro, S, Mobile, & now WorkStation? If THAT is their idea of one OS, they've got more split personalities than a five headed psychotic.

    1. joed

      Re: Yet another version?

      And don't forget about LTSB and China variants.

      Curious if this "real" workstation sku will let user completely disable telemetry (though with all those cores standing by I can just see one of them provisioned just for "customer experience improvement" thread).

      1. LDS Silver badge

        Re: Yet another version?

        Maybe, at least most of it - this just looks a server version rebadged and retuned for desktop use. And I guess people who use this kind of software wouldn't like their files be sent to Microsoft if an application crashes.

        1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

          Re: Yet another version?

          "And I guess people who use this kind of software wouldn't like their files be sent to Microsoft if an application crashes."

          And what do their likes count for compared with those of Microsoft?

      2. billse10

        Re: Yet another version?

        going back just a short while, one place I was at used NT Workstation because of C2 security. (No-one ever read the bit that said "if you unplug it", but still). Will this be a system where the worker controls what it does? So, as you say, easy to disable telemetry, autoupdates, etc?

    2. PNGuinn
      WTF?

      Re: Yet another version? @ac

      Windows WTF.

      That's a REALLY good name!

      You really need to TM that and bill them for the idea quick.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Yet another version?

      Forced Updates. We were told it was all to reduce the complexity of Windows Update. Total bullshit.

    4. handleoclast Silver badge

      Re: Yet another version?

      Windows 10 is all one version. All the variants are merely tweaks to registry keys. Standard Microsoft tactic. The difference between "home," "professional," and "server" is a load of dosh and a few different registry values.

      Or did you really think that "2 connections only IIS for home use" and "unlimited connections IIS for server use" were completely different code?

      1. GrumpyOldMan

        Re: Yet another version?

        I seem to remember that in W2000 the limit was in the TCP connections - only 2 for Pro and 10 for Server, unless you bought CAL$.

    5. Updraft102 Silver badge

      Re: Yet another version?

      Apparently, all that means is that instead of having the name "Windows" followed by the version name or number, it will be called "Windows 10" and then the version name or number.

    6. Timmy B Silver badge

      Re: Yet another version?

      RE: "I thought MS claimed that Win10 would be the last version? "

      Ok - if Ford bought out a car - say the Mondeo and said it was the last model of car they would ever make. But you could buy say Mondeo with a range of trims, engines and colours. Would they all be Mondeos? Yes. If they never made any other models are they right? Yes. Would a Mondeo GT be as much a Mondeo as a GTR or GTS ? (I have no idea if those letters are right) Yes. They are all Mondeos all suited to different uses and budgets.

      Makes perfect sense to me. Or should all Linux users use one distribution or all use Red Hat Enterprise? Choice is good isn't it?

  3. Tcat

    MAYBE (thanks MSFT) I sent a correction...

    NO. NT 4 had the 1st version of NTFS (.sys) which blew up regular and often.

    NT4 did a Read Only of HPFS which was the standard all the way through NT 3.5.1

    V1 (NTFS 4) blew balls. It did however give me fab vacation $$ as a consultant.

    1. MacroRodent Silver badge

      History correction

      NO. NT 4 had the 1st version of NTFS (.sys) which blew up regular and often.

      Actually, Windows NT 3.1 already had NTFS, it was one of the headline "New Technology" features. The consumer Windows 3.1 (no NT) used FAT, because it still ran on top of MS-DOS, which at that time didn't even support long file names.

      1. Dan 55 Silver badge

        Re: History correction

        IIRC MS back ported long filenames to 3.11, you had to install a patch.

        They also back ported much of the Win32 API, again with another patch.

        Them were the days they didn't take customers for granted, they at least had to do a little bit of work to push customers further down the treadmill.

        1. Mage Silver badge
          Joke

          Re: MS back ported long filenames to 3.11, you had to install a patch.

          It was called Windows 95, it had no USB (that was a later Win95b). :D

          Seriously, if you had on WFWG 3.11: VFW, Win32s, MS 32bit TCP/IP, 32bit disk driver, etc, the only big difference was extra APIs to run Office95, Explorer Shell and the insecure really stupid ideas of Autorun and hiding file extensions.

          1. LDS Silver badge

            Re: MS back ported long filenames to 3.11, you had to install a patch.

            Windows 95 had preemptive multitasking, async I/O and and better process isolation (not at the NT level, though) which 3.x never had. Without real multithreading, even TCP/IP support was not that great.

            Win32s was a subset mostly for GUI stuff, and was still limited to the 16MB limit of 3.x (95 wasn't, although many back them had less memory). 95 also introduced DirectX.

            1. patrickstar

              Re: MS back ported long filenames to 3.11, you had to install a patch.

              3.1x actually had preemptive multitasking and (somewhat) proper isolation, technically speaking. This is what "enhanced mode" was (as opposed to "standard mode").

              It's just that all 16 bit applications ran in the same 'process'.

              With 32-bit file access enabled 3.11WFG it even bypassed DOS for all disk I/O. The step from there to 95 really wasn't great. Atleast, arguably the difference was bigger between 3.1 and 3.11 than 3.11 and 95.

              But you're right about Win32s - it wasn't the full Win32 API.

    2. jake Silver badge

      Near quarter century old musings ...

      NTFS first shipped with NT 3.1 ... mid 1993. NTFS was quite stable (for me!) in every version of NT that I used it with, right from the git-go. NT had read/write access to HPFS starting with NT 3.1, and could even be installed on an HPFS partition (remember, NT was supposed to be a version of OS/2. Also remember that MS also wrote HPFS, not IBM). Microsoft depreciated the use of HPFS starting with NT 4.0. Both NTFS and HPFS (and every other serious FS that I am aware of) can be marked read-only. The biggest problem with HPFS is that it wasn't a journaling FS. The other major issue was that NTFS and HPFS used the same partition type (07); some badly written disk utilities didn't differentiate between the two, causing all kinds of screwups when well meaning, if ignorant, users ran the wrong tools on the wrong partitions ...

      1. CaptainCorrection
        Headmaster

        depreciated

        Greetings. You mean 'deprecated'. Thank you!

      2. Zakhar

        Re: Near quarter century old musings ...

        Yes, and they are finally acknowledging they use an outdated FS!

        When you use HFS+ (Mac) or ext4 (Linux), you don't need to do any benchmark to feel the difference.

        And obviously, all those nice features of modern FS like snapshots are missing.

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Oh come on Microsoft. If you go on like this you'll end up with as many versions, and sub versions, as Linux and all its variants. Is that really what you want? Is that really what anyone wants?

    1. hplasm Silver badge
      Devil

      Linux and all its variants.

      Is that really what you want? Is that really what anyone wants?

      Anyone with any experience of Win10 would...

      1. Mage Silver badge

        Re: Linux and all its variants.

        No, any Linux distro has only "versions" for CPU type. The actual OS is the same.

        Since Vista, MS has been ripping people off by artificially inventing versions.

        Though it sort of started with NT4.0; Workstation, Server in 1996, adding Enterprise Server in 1998.

        Then Terminal server late 1998 and Embedded in early 1999.

        It supported PPC, MIPS, x86 (32 bit), Alpha. There was a version for 64bit Alpha. Those are CPU versions, so don't count.

        AFAIK, NT3.1: Only one version. NT3.5 and NT3.51 (Workstation and Server, the only differences was default settings and number of clients that could connect, 10 for workstation). The NT3.51 was due MS trying to force Win3.x users to upgrade to Win95 by artificially making Office 95 use some new APIs not in NT3.5

        I think Win 4.x (before Win95) was Chinese version of Win3.x

        Then with XP they didn't release a server version till 2003, called Windows Server 2003.

        XP had Workstation, Tablet and Embedded versions at least.

        Then with Vista they started the EVIL "home" vs "pro" workstations.

        1. WallMeerkat Bronze badge

          Re: Linux and all its variants.

          Interestingly 3.51 also runs Office 97.

          That's why Office 97 drew its own Win95 style controls.

          So you can get a fairly usable office suite, albeit with clippy, running on a system that looks like Windows 3.1 :)

          (Or 95 with "NewShell", but then you might as well go the whole hog with NT4)

          Windows 3.1 apps actually ran on a subsystem, Windows on Windows (WOW). A similar system is still used to run 32 bit apps on 64 bit OSs.

        2. WallMeerkat Bronze badge

          Re: Linux and all its variants.

          Oh and Windows 3.2 was the Chinese Windows 3.1.

        3. Sandtitz Silver badge
          FAIL

          Re: Linux and all its variants.

          "No, any Linux distro has only "versions" for CPU type. The actual OS is the same."

          Not that simple. RHEL has similarly crippled their "single user products" to 1 or 2 CPU sockets and limited memory access. Evil?

          "Then with Vista they started the EVIL "home" vs "pro" workstations."

          XP introduced Home and Pro versions, not Vista.

  5. FozzyBear Silver badge
    Alert

    Next thing you know IBM will be dusting off OS/2 Warp

    1. AMBxx Silver badge

      Novell Netware 3.11 for me please.

      I still miss proper file versioning - the move from a proper File Server OS to Windows NT 4.0 was a shock.

    2. jake Silver badge

      For a current OS/2 Warp(ish), see:

      ArcaOS

      ElReg has written an article on the subject.

    3. PNGuinn
      Joke

      "Next thing you know IBM will be dusting off OS/2 Warp"

      The're probably thinking about it. They need to try to make some dosh somewhere.

      'They'll probably call it OS/2 Pedestrian in keeping with current company travel policy.

    4. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Joke icon missing?

      https://forums.theregister.co.uk/forum/1/2017/05/19/new_version_of_os_2_arca_os_5/

      OS/2 warp IS back out and it is quite possible that this is the reason for the release of workstation.

      Remember OS/2 runs windows code natively and who are you going to trust with your business, M$ who screwed over everybody they ever worked with or IBM.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Joke icon missing?

        Remember OS/2 runs windows code natively and who are you going to trust with your business, M$ who screwed over everybody they ever worked with or IBM.

        Not much of a choice. The only thing you could say is while MS are smarmy assholes, they're at least *COMPETENT* assholes (for the most part). Haven't been able to say that about IBM for 20 or so years now.

  6. inmypjs Silver badge

    4 Processors Chips which could be 88 cores, 6TB of RAM...

    and Windows 10 will still think it is a fucking phone.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: 4 Processors Chips which could be 88 cores, 6TB of RAM...

      "and Windows 10 will still think it is a fucking phone."

      Bing!

      1. Alistair Silver badge
        Coat

        Re: 4 Processors Chips which could be 88 cores, 6TB of RAM...

        @AC:

        "and Windows 10 will still think it is a fucking phone."

        Bing!

        Dear god no. DuckDuckGo.

    2. Def Silver badge

      Re: 4 Processors Chips which could be 88 cores, 6TB of RAM...

      One day not too long from now your phone will have 88 cores and 6TB of RAM, and Windows will pretty much work the same way it does today.

      Whether you like Windows (10) or not is largely irrelevant. Microsoft have a long term plan which will allow you to run the same software on any device regardless of its size. Something I don't see Apple or Google doing any time soon.

      1. fruitoftheloon
        Stop

        @Def: Re: 4 Processors Chips which could be 88 cores, 6TB of RAM...

        Def,

        you do realise that there are a number of reasons WHY MS (and not Google/Apple) are determined that the victims (sorry, customers) should be able to run an app on their desktop or their phone...

        They think there is a substantial benefit to their 'customers'.

        I think they are even more deluded than usual - and that is saying something...

        Cheers,

        Jay

        1. Updraft102 Silver badge

          Re: @Def: 4 Processors Chips which could be 88 cores, 6TB of RAM...

          They CLAIM there is a substantial benefit to their customers. I don't know that any of them actually believe it. They believe it has an actual benefit to themselves, though, we can be sure of that.

      2. Aladdin Sane Silver badge

        Re: 4 Processors Chips which could be 88 cores, 6TB of RAM...

        But will it run Crysis?

        1. hplasm Silver badge
          Meh

          Re: 4 Processors Chips which could be 88 cores, 6TB of RAM...

          But will it run Windows- ie more than one fullscreen...

          1. AMBxx Silver badge

            Re: 4 Processors Chips which could be 88 cores, 6TB of RAM...

            But will it run Windows- ie more than one fullscreen...

            That's already in the mix. Not sure if the Insiders have it yet, but it's here shortly. You just need to connect your phone to a bigger screen.

            1. Def Silver badge

              Re: 4 Processors Chips which could be 88 cores, 6TB of RAM...

              That's already in the mix. Not sure if the Insiders have it yet, but it's here shortly. You just need to connect your phone to a bigger screen.

              That'll be this then.

      3. hplasm Silver badge
        Gimp

        Re: 4 Processors Chips which could be 88 cores, 6TB of RAM...

        "Microsoft have a long term plan..."

        And there goes any remaining credibility to the rest of your post.

      4. billium
        Facepalm

        Re: 4 Processors Chips which could be 88 cores, 6TB of RAM...

        "One day not too long from now your phone will have 88 cores and 6TB of RAM, and Windows will pretty much work the same way it does today."

        The users will still be complaining it is soooooo slow.

      5. inmypjs Silver badge

        Re: 4 Processors Chips which could be 88 cores, 6TB of RAM...

        "Microsoft have a long term plan"

        Well that is a lol to start with. Microsoft had a plan to get into the mobile OS business by abusing their captive desktop OS users. They made the next version of their OS look like a fucking phone based on the assumption that desktop customers would then all want to rush out and buy phones that look like their desktop.

        We all know how well that worked out. Continuum (or whatever it is called) was an after thought and more or less pointless.

        Apple and Google are not doing what Microsoft are trying to do because:

        a) they are already in the mobile OS business

        b) they are not that stupid

        c) they are not that desperate

      6. bombastic bob Silver badge
        Devil

        Re: 4 Processors Chips which could be 88 cores, 6TB of RAM...

        "Whether you like Windows (10) or not is largely irrelevant."

        hah hah hah hah that's a good one.

        How is micro-shaft going to FORCE ME to use Win-10-nic? "Micro-shaft Uber Alles" or something?

        /me sticking with Linux/FreeBSD with Mate desktop, Android or iOS phones/slabs, and the occasional Mac. When the rest of the world 'gets it', they'll join US.

    3. Ken Hagan Gold badge

      Re: 4 Processors Chips which could be 88 cores, 6TB of RAM...

      "and Windows 10 will still think it is a fucking phone"

      As will almost every web-site on the planet because they all use an idiotic JS library that searches the user-agent string for the letters "arm" rather than, oh I don't know, actually asking how big the screen is.

      1. Charles 9 Silver badge

        Re: 4 Processors Chips which could be 88 cores, 6TB of RAM...

        Because, thanks to malware, that query's going to start LYING from now on. Got any better way to figure out the screen size without giving yourself away?

        1. IT Poser

          Re: "Got any better way to figure out the screen size without giving yourself away?"

          Give users the option to select if they are using a phone or a machine designed to do real work?

  7. Christian Berger Silver badge

    That's probably 10 years to late

    Much of the workstation market directly moved from proprietary unixes to Linux or MacOSX. The areas that went to Windows typically don't need much power, so you'd typically still run them on 10 year old computers. At one company I was working at, we still had a CAD package called "Protel 98". It's still being developed under the name "Altium Designer"... but seriously you don't need a powerful computer for it.

    In any case, those are all just cut down versions of the same operating system.

    1. LDS Silver badge

      Re: That's probably 10 years to late

      Because many software packages for workstation are expensive proprietary ones, they have little reasons to move to Linux, also because they need certified hardware/software solutions too. For example, nVidia offers optimized drivers for many packages, for Windows.

      While in the imaging industry you'll see macOS, in other sectors it's still proprietary Unixes and Windows.

      If you like CAD, give a look to Dassault Systemes ones, they are a bit more powerful, and require quite powerful systems given what you design with them... they run on Windows and IBM System P.

      1. Kristian Walsh Silver badge

        Re: That's probably 10 years to late

        Very little workstation-class software runs on macOS anymore, because Apple stopped making workstation-class hardware nearly a decade ago. (People forget that before the "dustbin" Mac Pro was left to wither, the previous Mac Pro tower was also left in semi-abandonment by Apple for a couple of years).

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: That's probably 10 years to late

      "Much of the workstation market directly moved from proprietary unixes to Linux or MacOSX"

      I would say maybe 10% go to Linux - for some development and or front office uses. Never ever seen anyone go to MacOSX instead of a workstation, lol. The vast majority of course go to Windows.

      "The areas that went to Windows typically don't need much power"

      Areas that use Windows as a workstation in my experience (banks, trading floors, utilities, telcos, finance houses, etc.) typically have 2 x 16 Core Xeons and 64GB - 256GB of RAM. So boxes around the £4K-£5K each mark. There would be a big market for 4 CPU boxes too for Windows. At the moment you have to connect remotely to a server running a server OS for that type of use, and there are many situations where people want one under a desk!

  8. simonlb

    Is the UI fixed yet?

    Until they fix the tragically ruined user interface they can get lost.

  9. Novex

    And...

    ...I bet it still comes with phone home telemetry that can't be fully switched off, and forced updates that override privacy settings and replace useful features with useless ones.

    1. Piro

      Re: And...

      What do you think the >4 socket support and 6TB RAM is for?

    2. Dan 55 Silver badge

      Re: And...

      If there is method in their naming madness, it should include telemetry like Windows 10 Pro.

      If there isn't then it won't and it'll be on a parity with Enterprise.

  10. emullinsabq
    WTF?

    great ideas at the top

    let's make a bunch of different versions of the OS to handle different cpu configurations, even though the minute changes (if any exist at all) will have no measurable impact on performance.

    meanwhile, let's make sure there is only a single GUI, designed for phones where we have less than half a percent market share.

    1. Refugee from Windows

      Re: great ideas at the top

      How about giving the users a degree of control over it then? Will we just get the usual dumbing down?

      File systems - how about if you want to us ext4 or something other than they want to tie you into?

      Desktop configurations - no tiles as an option?

      An ability not to be gradually forced towards just using the Windows Store?

      Telemetry - a "completely off" option?

      I am sure others can think of more.

      1. Nolveys Silver badge

        Re: great ideas at the top

        @Refugee

        I am sure others can think of more.

        You should also ask for a pony.

        1. James O'Shea Silver badge

          Re: great ideas at the top

          "You could ask for a pony"

          When Vlad did that, MS charged him so much that he couldn't afford shirts. https://www.dropbox.com/s/uexx5zqathu4qef/_61983585_getty_putin_horse.jpg?dl=0

          There are way too many mosquitos and other biting flies around here, I'm NOT chancing having to be shirtless.

      2. P. Lee Silver badge

        Re: great ideas at the top

        >Desktop configurations - no tiles as an option?

        Haha! Have you seen what happens to tiles when your proxy requires authentication *before* it allows access to the internet?

        1. arctic_haze Silver badge

          Re: great ideas at the top

          >Haha! Have you seen what happens to tiles when your proxy requires authentication *before* it allows access to the internet?<

          I've never used Windows 10 but let me guess. They all turn into the "not available"? They all turn into the authenticate screen?

      3. patrickstar

        Re: great ideas at the top

        If you want to use ext4, just install a driver for it. Eg. https://www.paragon-software.com/home/extfs-windows/

  11. JimmyPage Silver badge
    Windows

    New paradigm ?

    Given how cloud computing can deliver a virtual desktop via RDP down an ADSL line, the only real need for local computing grunt is where latency is a problem and/or the loss of functionality due to a loss of connectivity would be problematic.

    So a subset of a subset.

    We *should* start to see a divergence between an OS intended for cloud-delivery, and an OS intended to manage a local machine.

    Now I'm not (yet) sure what this will mean in the marketplace, but stories like this need to be read against that background.

    1. Korev Silver badge

      Re: New paradigm ?

      Or if you care about your data's locality? Or if you have too much data to get into $CLOUD in a timely manner.

    2. LDS Silver badge

      Re: New paradigm ?

      When you have several large screens connected, and some specific hardware connected, you start to see how using a remote desktop may be an issue. You'll also want dedicated computer resources, not shared with someone else.

      Workstation are usually used for high-end CAD, 3D modelling, video processing, simulations, etc.

      Take video processing, for example. It means you have to download several hundred GBs from your cameras, and then process them. Even a dedicated 1Gb network connection may be slow. You also want your video editing consoles to work with, and your expensive reference and grading monitors.

      There are some tasks you design/code on a workstation, then send to a server farm or HPC computer for the full computations.

  12. Milton Silver badge

    Addition or subtraction?

    The cynical thought lurking in my mind on reading this (other than, of course, "Win7 is the last Windows I'll ever use") is that it would be vastly easier for MS to produce one version of Windows OS, capable of dealing with *all* the hardware specs listed in the article, with users allowed to choose the GUI skin they prefer from among, say, "Win 7 which lets me do actual work" to "horrible phone-like nonsense getting in my way". Users would choose whether they used "advanced" or even server-like features, and in the meantime MS would be required to write, maintain and support just one single core of code.

    Of course, that won't happen because just like car manufacturers before them, MS introduce as much superficial and often meaningless distinction as possible to different "versions" to try to squeeze every bit of the market for whatever juice it contains.

    One also wonders whether, again like car manufacturers, lots of features are actually there in the basic versions but simply crippled.

    Either way, for me it is moot. The spyware telemetry is an absolute no-no, and the Win8+ interfaces are materially worse than Win7. When support for 7 dries up, or possibly sooner, I'll be off to Linux. Been using it for server stuff for years and will regret the loss of only a single W7-only application, for which a satisfactory *ix substitute exists. I fail to see why I should let myself or my data become a cash-cow hostage to MS, especially when superior free alternatives exist.

    Funny how history turns in such bizarre circles. When I was 20, the idea of buying an OS would have seemed faintly ridiculous. MS made it a Thing: and yet here we are 40 years later, when no one making a virgin, rational choice of hardware and OS would, in fact, pay money ... for a mediocre, conspicuously insecure one, that spies on you, lies to you and tries to trap you.

  13. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    OpenVMS on x86

    I can't wait for VMS on x86. That'll be me sorted!

    https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/10/13/openvms_moves_slowly_towards_x86/

  14. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Another version of Windows I won't be using

    So glad I'm not a Microsoft customer or user.

  15. HmmmYes Silver badge

    AFAIC MS should have stopped at WS2008R2 and just tweaked outs and sods and supported new drivers.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      AFAIC MS should have stopped.

      1. HmmmYes Silver badge

        No. If MS want a few billion dollars worth of free advise - Go after IBM's business.

        But the wont, you know, clouds, AI, and all that. Whne there's billions of business $$$ for the taking.

        In more detail:

        Drop the current block drier for disks. Repalce it with FreebSDs disk block serivce, put in ZFS - get a license from oraclce so they wont sue you. Then port Dtrace to MS.

        Drop PowerShell. Its shit, it just is.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          "Go after IBM's business."

          Good idea. IBM have been slowly circling the pan ever since they tried to pretend Microsoft don't exist and have been focusing on crud like Limux @ Munich.

          "put in ZFS "

          You can do that if you want to. Windows is fully modular. However, the vast majority of ZFS functionality is already built into Windows.

          "Drop PowerShell. Its shit, it just is."

          LOL I smell a clueless person who doesn't even know Powershell. Shit when compared to what exactly? Powershell is far more powerful, secure and flexible that say any *Nix shell I have ever used. There is a long long list of advantages and very few disadvantages.

          1. HmmmYes Silver badge

            There needs to be a 'Go to' company for business. IBM used to be it. MS *could* get that business - but it needs to sort itself out.

            By design, Windows is modular. In reality, there's no kernel space third party file systems. Ditto for TCP/IP stacks and the like. MS put up barriers/hide API/dont make the code modular.

            For any core component - network, filesystem - then its either supplied by MS or not at all.

            There is nothing close to ZFS in any of WS file systems, not close.

            PowerShell is nightmare. It offers a lot of functionality but ....

            its slow, making it hard to use as a command shell.

            We are at coming up to version 6 in less than 10 years. Each version are some features added. I get a script. works on one version. Need to run it on an older server, fails. So do I maintain several versions of a script, or do I update Powerhsell? OK, go for updatign Powerhsell - oh, its comes bundled with 500M of .Net. Fuckit.

            Let me know when its finished and I can use it for interactive shelling without having to wait several seconds.

        2. LDS Silver badge

          You would have little benefits from ZFS on a workstation. It requires at least four disks for Z2, and a lot of RAM to work (well, with 6TB maybe you have some for it too). Running ZFS on a couple of SSD disks doesn't give you any real benefit. Your data will be backed up on another system (if you're not a fool).

          ZFS is an excellent storage file system for file servers and other uses.

          Windows has already excellent debugging tools - you don't really need DTrace (which would very hard to port given the big differences), learn to use WinDbg, for example, instead.

          Also, most Windows IDEs have great debuggers with remote debugging capabilities, far less need to mess with command line debuggers.

          PS: install a spell checker in your browser.... it's not difficult.

          1. HmmmYes Silver badge

            If you are comparing dtrace to Windbg or an IDE then you've not really used Dtrace.

            You dont need a debug build. You can do onto a production system and start debugging the whole system - kernel, system libraries and application.

            1. LDS Silver badge

              I routinely use DTrace on Linux. Just, I don't miss it on Windows.

              Of course, you never really used WinDbg. and other tools You don't need a debug build either, and you can debug a production system.

              A checked (debug) build of Windows is compiled to ease debugging. For example, it has full stack frames, and many debugging compiler switch activated and optimizations disabled.

              You don't need it - it just make debugging easier, catching more errors itself and raising assertions, and easing to pinpoint nasty things which may be due to optimizations or the like. Checked builds are useful especially when writing drivers - they will identify more issues earlier - even when you're not using a debugger.

              If you expect the same toolset on Windows, and refuse to learn what are the right tools just because they're different, well, it's your applications that will have lower quality - but don't blame Windows for that.

  16. Michael H.F. Wilkinson Silver badge

    Ah, that brings back memories ...

    of installing NT 4.0 on the home computer so the missus couldn't throw away all those little files that cluttered the home directory of the Win 3.1 system she managed to prang thoroughly by removing things like config.sys, autoexec.bat, etc. Oh well, live and learn. Luckily I was (and am still) pretty obsessive (or paranoid) when it comes to making back-ups, and recovery disks, so I got it sorted pretty quickly. I didn't want to foist Linux on her, so got NT 4 instead (and installed Linux for my own use as well). I must say NT 4 (and later Win 2000) worked much better than the '95, '98, and ME (shudder) alternatives at the time

  17. Zippy's Sausage Factory
    Windows

    Let me guess...

    "For Workstations" = "can run stuff not in the Windows store"

    "For Advanced PCs" = "won't bomb out with a licence restriction if the PC has more than 2 cores or 8GB of memory"

    everyone else = "guess what - Windows store only now, hahaha"

  18. PNGuinn
    Mushroom

    Microsoft hasn't quite decided on the final name for those last two:

    Windows Nein v3.1.

    Windows Nein v3.11 for workgroups.

    Hey, ms the consultancy fee of £5 for the names is in the post.

    2 for 1 offer this week only.

    ps A couple of buckets of krill for my singing whale would be appreciated. You can stuff the josticks (sideways).

    use this to light 'em >>

  19. Neil 44
    Facepalm

    AMD Operton?

    Just out of curiosity, what's an AMD Operton ???

    Did you mean AMD Opteron?

  20. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Windows Ten Future?

  21. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    The only difference will be the price

    Oh, and the license key.

  22. J J Carter Silver badge
    Facepalm

    Err...

    Anyone remember when El Reg had credible journalists, instead of copying stuff from Windows Central?

  23. Primus Secundus Tertius Silver badge

    Micro megajargon

    What do you mean, Microjunk Windoze?

    Let me offer you Makrotuff Slipperyware.

  24. nilfs2
    Windows

    They will keep doing as they please...

    ...because one fuck up after another, sheep keep following them and buying their crap. If you buy Microsoft products and then complain that they suck, it is your fault, you have no right to complain.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: They will keep doing as they please...

      Weird thing is, on this forum, most people who complain Microsoft products suck, haven't actually bought (I mean genuinely paid for with their own money) a microsoft product in years...

  25. viscount

    No idea on the product, but the "Workstation" brand sounds like a genuinely good idea and will bring back some fond memories of NT for the old timers.

  26. ecofeco Silver badge

    When your punters will buy anything..

    .. .you sell them everything you can.

    What's not logical about fleecing well heeled morons?

  27. Luiz Abdala
    Windows

    And up to this day...

    I can´t move the boot volume from one hard drive to the next without 3rd party products on my home Win10... not without formatting the whole thing... or buying a new license. (I want help for that, btw.)

    Or have something like I heard from ZFS, where you just add the drives to a volume and the thing sorts itself out, adding speed and safety in its internal form of RAID array... not dealing with motherboard drives, BIOS, controller cards, whatever, the new drive just have to be present in the system...

  28. IGnatius T Foobar

    Windows Desktop 2016

    Server 2016 seems to make a quite nice workstation. It looks exactly like Windows 10 but it doesn't have that saucy tart Cortana always in your face.

  29. pmartin66

    I just love Windows 10. Sure, I had to google a few things. Once set up, it is super fast and reliable as hell. It can even recover from hard restarts or whatever. You crybabies suck so hard at learning anything new. UNIX is OLD!! You want to live with it, fine, but don't be a whiny arse about it.

  30. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    But does it run shitty Chinese malware? I'm not interested if it doesn't. I like my Windows to be Windows - flakey, easy to hack and dysfunctional UI. Please say it won't change. Please.

  31. Unicornpiss Silver badge
    Meh

    But..

    ..will it blend?

  32. athame

    Performance & Lies

    win 95/win 98/winNT/milennium/win2000/vista/xp/win 7/win 8/win 8.1/win 10/ win ad infinitum .........

    "It IS faster!"

    Gates

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019