Windows 10 S might alarm Valve into boosting SteamOS again

Let's face the reality - open systems are an aberration. The ONLY reason why we have an open PC platform today is because IBM totally underestimated the importance of software in general, and happily outsourced that part of their business to Microsoft, leaving their hardware platform open for them to install the software that nobody at IBM thought would ever be relevant for business.

Open systems have happened absolutely nowhere else in business history. Let that sink in for a moment! Every other system is tightly controlled by the manufacturer, because control is obviously more profitable than no control (*points at Apple for proof*). Nobody but IBM has ever made a dire mistake like this, and chances are close to 100% that it will never happen again.

So is that really so surprising that MS is trying to correct what from their perspective is a historic mistake?

If people think they aren't trying to lock down Windows for fun and profit, they need to stop smoking whatever they are smoking. I bet that this has been the hottest topic in MS board meetings for the past decade: "How can we push a closed platform to our users and hold our hand open every time somebody wants to install anything on it, like Apple does?"

Their first attempt - building a closed mobile platform to compete with Apple and Google - failed horribly. Now it must have occurred to them that they can also just lock down Windows and throw the key away. I wonder why it took them so long, really.

Now - here comes the problem (both for them and us): Locking down Windows won't do them much good all by itself. Windows is a different platform than iOS or Android, because a very large portion of installations are in enterprise environments, not consumer. Fat-cat corporations and governments will not accept having to purchase SAP and Photoshop in Windows Store. Good thing for MS is that they don't have do much except waiting for cloud services to become the norm and selling these instead. Which is what they do.
As for the consumer PC segment, it's shrinking on a daily basis. People buy mobile devices rather than PCs, and in that segment Microsoft's market share is almost non-existent. Gaming is one of the few remaining reasons for people to buy desktop machines these days, and MS cannot lock down Windows unless they control enough games retail market share allow them to make that move without upsetting users. But they don't. Valve does.

If Valve feels threatened by Microsoft, then rightfully so. Steam is the only thing that keeps them from locking down Windows and generate a lot of extra profit. Which is why I don't understand why the rumors that MS is looking to buy Valve were dismissed so quickly by us. The move makes absolutely perfect sense. It's -exactly- what MS needs to do to give Windows Store the critical mass it needs if they want Windows S to be the norm installation on consumer machines. If they can integrate Steam into Windows Store, they'd suddenly control a healthy portion of all Windows software online sales.
And yes, I know that Valve is privately owned, but hey, everybody's got a price. How many billions would they have to pile in front of Gabe until he gives in? They paid a billion for Minecraft. One game. They won't care about how many billions Gabe asks for. He will get them and an extra one or two for good measure. The guy's just human. Bioware's owners sold their company to EA, in full realization that EA would turn it into a soulless producer of uninspired games, just as they have ruined every other studio they ever bought. They sold anyway. Outrageous offers can do that.

And no, don't expect the government to pull the anti-trust card. Not with a government that habitually dismantles every regulation and consumer safeguard any large corporation disagrees with.

Quoting: julespetrikov"pre-installed on almost every sold gaming ready PC"

That's the case, they can't do that. That's bad business. That's exactly why Windows 10 S is not the choice for gaming or production, because it's not intended to run all the games and it's not commercialised as one. Same goes for ChromeOS, Android etc. It's much like how people were asking "How the hell SteamOS will replace Windows" in the early days and got the most obvious answer: It's not intended to do that. S Mode itself is not a profitable way of selling gaming ready PCs, since consumer is not always the idiot, but it's a good way of ripping off people.

There's absolutely no possible future in which Microsoft won the gaming industry by such a move. It's just plain dumb. You can't just force an incompatible OS in a market that demands a compatible OS. That won't force people to buy things from their Stores, it will force consumer away from Microsoft and Windows. To Mac and Linux, mainly.

I'm not trying to justify their point here. Just telling people: SteamOS and Windows 10 S or Windows 10 S Mode
or whatever stupid thing they could put forward has no relevance at all.

That's why S will not be a version anymore, but a mode built into any version. Ok, no one really knows what MS does, and if they will really pull that off, but it is well known they use every leverage they can find. That way they did bad buisiness as long as I can remember. Also I can remember they have a history of wanting too much at once, then row back a bit, just to try it again later.
This time they could sell S mode as a chance for end users to have more security, while leaving the possibility for "sideloading" open. Who will argue against that except for those who think this alone can cut into the future Steam marketshare. I think most of the Windows gamers will flip the switch to turn S mode off, and be happy about it. New users however won't do that so easyly. At the same time MS could argue Win32 was insecure, legacy, the old ways, while everyone is "invited" to embrace the new ways. The MS Store would be open for everyone and so forth, all in the name of security and progress. And it would be so interoperable with XBox. Maybe they present some exclusive games for Windows and XBox.. I don't know.
What I do not understand clearly: Do you think that what MS is apparently up to do is irrelevant for gaming, do you think it is not and will drive gamers away, or do you think it will just not happen?

Quoting: webcreatureThat's why S will not be a version anymore, but a mode built into any version. Ok, no one really knows what MS does, and if they will really pull that off, but it is well known they use every leverage they can find. That way they did bad buisiness as long as I can remember. Also I can remember they have a history of wanting too much at once, then row back a bit, just to try it again later.
This time they could sell S mode as a chance for end users to have more security, while leaving the possibility for "sideloading" open. Who will argue against that except for those who think this alone can cut into the future Steam marketshare. I think most of the Windows gamers will flip the switch to turn S mode off, and be happy about it. New users however won't do that so easyly. At the same time MS could argue Win32 was insecure, legacy, the old ways, while everyone is "invited" to embrace the new ways. The MS Store would be open for everyone and so forth, all in the name of security and progress. And it would be so interoperable with XBox. Maybe they present some exclusive games for Windows and XBox.. I don't know.
What I do not understand clearly: Do you think that what MS is apparently up to do is irrelevant for gaming, do you think it is not and will drive gamers away, or do you think it will just not happen?

"Ok, no one really knows what MS does, and if they will really pull that off, but it is well known they use every leverage they can find."

No, you misunderstood what I'm saying. I'm just telling you that such an act would be a very stupid business decision due to consumer factor. Unless they're hardcore Microsoft fans people would not pay for closed ecosystems. For instances, instead of paying 500 + 49$ (I don't know about the prices in US, sorry) for a fully functional lower-medium range notebook from the Vendor X, they would just buy a similar notebook from Vendor Y with FreeDOS or Windows 10 Pro for 500 total. Since majority of the third party vendors are aware that people are looking for functionality than "convenience of Microsoft Store" they will sell regular windows or not sell at all with their rigs.

The problem we're having here is that the above scenario is already a reality. Windows 10 S is not a popular choice and it will not be a popular choice in the future. That's simple as that. The only issue with this whole thing is that Microsoft is trying to rip people off by possibly making S-Mode enabled versions to be the default for "Windows as a service" in cheap rigs of notebooks, all-in-ones and especially netbooks/tablets. These devices either are not meant for gaming or are not powerful enough to game; either way they're not cost effective under many circumstances when considering the fact that there's the purpose of gaming and such devices are meant to be cheap, accessible and multi-purpose. -- Your average gamer will not buy a "PC" that doesn't support older/current titles, software and/or platforms

For the question you asked, yes such act would drive people away from Microsoft to different ecosystems or to piracy. It's quite foreseeable. Those people at Microsoft have to be a special kind of dumb to expect locking people down only to Microsoft Store, because that would be quitting the game.

-- and for that matter, I would happily not to build my stuff for Windows because they don't support my stuff to begin with. Let's see how that logic would help Microsoft in any industry. Nope.


Last edited by julespetrikov on 5 February 2018 at 7:05 pm UTC

Quoting: julespetrikov

Quoting: webcreatureThat's why S will not be a version anymore, but a mode built into any version. Ok, no one really knows what MS does, and if they will really pull that off, but it is well known they use every leverage they can find. That way they did bad buisiness as long as I can remember. Also I can remember they have a history of wanting too much at once, then row back a bit, just to try it again later.
This time they could sell S mode as a chance for end users to have more security, while leaving the possibility for "sideloading" open. Who will argue against that except for those who think this alone can cut into the future Steam marketshare. I think most of the Windows gamers will flip the switch to turn S mode off, and be happy about it. New users however won't do that so easyly. At the same time MS could argue Win32 was insecure, legacy, the old ways, while everyone is "invited" to embrace the new ways. The MS Store would be open for everyone and so forth, all in the name of security and progress. And it would be so interoperable with XBox. Maybe they present some exclusive games for Windows and XBox.. I don't know.
What I do not understand clearly: Do you think that what MS is apparently up to do is irrelevant for gaming, do you think it is not and will drive gamers away, or do you think it will just not happen?

"Ok, no one really knows what MS does, and if they will really pull that off, but it is well known they use every leverage they can find."

No, you misunderstood what I'm saying. I'm just telling you that such an act would be a very stupid business decision due to consumer factor.

Don't get me wrong, I agree a lot with what you're saying. However, this is the same Microsoft that tried to force the tiled interface on everyone and that came with a whole host of issues.

unfortunately i've noticed in my life that manipulate society is easier than it should be, i'm pessimist and i think this will be accept and most people wont even notice, those who notice will complain but do nothing to change, those who want to change already did, actually i opened this new in a hope that valve had confirmed your hipotesis, that's not the case.

Quoting: liamdaweHowever, this is the same Microsoft that tried to force the tiled interface on everyone and that came with a whole host of issues.

And they seem to have survived the backlash against those stupid decisions just fine. Sure, they made some concessions, but it's also important to keep in mind that 2-3 years ago, many well-informed, no-nonsense, serious people were putting forward very well formulated reasons as to why M$ had sentenced itself to eventual irrelevance by the unusable ui (even on servers), pissing off/almost-backstabbing OEM partners, and so on. So this is a scary thought: They are capable of making the dumbest decisions ... and then get away with it. If, in the wake of yet another idiotic M$ adventure, it's Vulkan adoption, or GOG, or whatever else that comes off as the losing party, that will be awful enough.

Quoting: wvstolzing

Quoting: liamdaweHowever, this is the same Microsoft that tried to force the tiled interface on everyone and that came with a whole host of issues.

And they seem to have survived the backlash against those stupid decisions just fine. Sure, they made some concessions, but it's also important to keep in mind that 2-3 years ago, many well-informed, no-nonsense, serious people were putting forward very well formulated reasons as to why M$ had sentenced itself to eventual irrelevance by the unusable ui (even on servers), pissing off/almost-backstabbing OEM partners, and so on. So this is a scary thought: They are capable of making the dumbest decisions ... and then get away with it. If, in the wake of yet another idiotic M$ adventure, it's Vulkan adoption, or GOG, or whatever else that comes off as the losing party, that will be awful enough.

And that really should scare people. Hence reason #99999 why I use Linux as a primary driver of everything :)

Quoting: julespetrikov

Quoting: webcreatureThat's why S will not be a version anymore, but a mode built into any version. Ok, no one really knows what MS does, and if they will really pull that off, but it is well known they use every leverage they can find. That way they did bad buisiness as long as I can remember. Also I can remember they have a history of wanting too much at once, then row back a bit, just to try it again later.
This time they could sell S mode as a chance for end users to have more security, while leaving the possibility for "sideloading" open. Who will argue against that except for those who think this alone can cut into the future Steam marketshare. I think most of the Windows gamers will flip the switch to turn S mode off, and be happy about it. New users however won't do that so easyly. At the same time MS could argue Win32 was insecure, legacy, the old ways, while everyone is "invited" to embrace the new ways. The MS Store would be open for everyone and so forth, all in the name of security and progress. And it would be so interoperable with XBox. Maybe they present some exclusive games for Windows and XBox.. I don't know.
What I do not understand clearly: Do you think that what MS is apparently up to do is irrelevant for gaming, do you think it is not and will drive gamers away, or do you think it will just not happen?

"Ok, no one really knows what MS does, and if they will really pull that off, but it is well known they use every leverage they can find."

No, you misunderstood what I'm saying. I'm just telling you that such an act would be a very stupid business decision due to consumer factor. Unless they're hardcore Microsoft fans people would not pay for closed ecosystems. For instances, instead of paying 500 + 49$ (I don't know about the prices in US, sorry) for a fully functional lower-medium range notebook from the Vendor X, they would just buy a similar notebook from Vendor Y with FreeDOS or Windows 10 Pro for 500 total. Since majority of the third party vendors are aware that people are looking for functionality than "convenience of Microsoft Store" they will sell regular windows or not sell at all with their rigs.

The problem we're having here is that the above scenario is already a reality. Windows 10 S is not a popular choice and it will not be a popular choice in the future. That's simple as that. The only issue with this whole thing is that Microsoft is trying to rip people off by possibly making S-Mode enabled versions to be the default for "Windows as a service" in cheap rigs of notebooks, all-in-ones and especially netbooks/tablets. These devices either are not meant for gaming or are not powerful enough to game; either way they're not cost effective under many circumstances when considering the fact that there's the purpose of gaming and such devices are meant to be cheap, accessible and multi-purpose. -- Your average gamer will not buy a "PC" that doesn't support older/current titles, software and/or platforms

For the question you asked, yes such act would drive people away from Microsoft to different ecosystems or to piracy. It's quite foreseeable. Those people at Microsoft have to be a special kind of dumb to expect locking people down only to Microsoft Store, because that would be quitting the game.

-- and for that matter, I would happily not to build my stuff for Windows because they don't support my stuff to begin with. Let's see how that logic would help Microsoft in any industry. Nope.

People do buy closed ecosystems, iOS and Android are proof of that. Even in the case you describe with a Windows laptop for $549 and exactly the same laptop with Linux for $500, people will buy the $549 laptop because they will see the Windows and Office badges and buy it because that's what they are familiar with. Most standard non-technical users would rather pay the $49 than learn a new OS (that they have no interest in) and buy and swap all their familiar programs to Linux versions. In that regard Microsoft has lock in.

All they need to do (and are in the process of doing) is:

- Upgrade as much of the userbase as possible to Windows 10
- Force updates upon users and get them used to it
- Add S mode as the default, include a free switch to the "legacy" version, put in big warning signs to scare users not to switch - if they include an emulator in S mode most users won't even notice
- Wait as long as it takes for a critical mass of UWP apps. MS has deep pockets they can move at snails pace if needed
- Charge for the "legacy" version, keep S version as free
- Job done, UWP is now the standard.
- End the free period for the S version.

They can invite Valve to create a UWP app, even go as far as saying they won't double-dip developers into having to make both a Store and a Steam payment. They then charge developers less and undercut Valve (they do this to competitors all the time). Eventually raise prices.

Microsoft have been trying to shift their users to UWP since before 2010, there are no indications they are about to stop. In fact the opposite.

Quoting: BlackBloodRumI believe you can make games use your system libraries and steam as well, but I can't remember how right now, but I know you can :D. But be aware some games will break.

It's probably as simple as linking to your system libraries but giving the links the same names as the stock libraries.

If y'all following the Microsoft news since Vista / Games for Windows for more than 10 years ago (I do), this S-mode locking down thing will be happen eventually. No need to comment much.

I am giving full attention on Sea of Thieves success (or failure) in many sides (sales, popularity etc). IMO, that's where MS direction going on next.

EDIT: Little bit to add

History shows that Sony will becoming "pro-consumer" if their cash cow is/was threaten. I'll never surprise if PS4 Remote Play will be on Linux (or FreeBSD) in the future.


Last edited by tonR on 5 February 2018 at 8:48 pm UTC