"Fluffy" Windows

**Mailman653** · 10-04-2008, 00:28

Microsoft Promises New, Fluffier Version of Windows

What does that exactly mean? Does that mean that my HD would have no OS what so ever and that when I log into my computer I'm actually logging into a server located somewhere far off.
So if the server crashes or gets hacked, does my desktop become a giant paper weight until the problem gets fixed?

Pros, cons?

**Caius** · 10-04-2008, 00:44

If the server is hacked, no OS for the masses. I don't see any benefit of it.

**drone** · 10-04-2008, 01:28

Sounds like they want your PC to become a tarted-up thin-client. All your data belongs to Micro$oft, that kind of thing. While it would do wonders for preventing piracy, it would probably be the final push for a Linux takeover.

**naut** · 10-04-2008, 03:33

No! No! No! Gah!

Why?

**Lemur** · 10-04-2008, 05:29

Meanwhile, the OS that would not die gets another six months of official life.

**Mailman653** · 10-04-2008, 05:35

Why did they even invest that time and money on Vista when "fluffy" windows (or Win 7) is in the works and XP, as the article in the above post states, is still alive and apprently doing well.

**Mikeus Caesar** · 10-04-2008, 07:01

<3 XP

I don't love the idea of having my OS far away from me. What about those of us here in sunny South Ausfailia, with an internet that's barely a step above dialup? No amount of super-computing power can make up for lag.

**Husar** · 10-04-2008, 08:04

Eh, noone said that this is Windows 7 or that they will force everyone to use it. He compares it to Cellphone Operating Systems so to me it sounds more like a mobile alternative for mobile lightweight systems that doesn't need a big HDD to run and if there are many servers worldwide the failure of one wouldn't mean a whole lot.
I don't think something like that will take over the world and I wouldn't want to use it either.
I could also see it working with a few included applications only so for games etc you'll most likely still need a normal HDD-based installed OS, I can already imagine what it would be like to stream the OS, some messengers and FarCry3 over my 6MBit connection, alt-Tabbing would take half an hour, the download would run at 2 bytes per second and FarCry 3 would stop every ten minutes for two hours to download several gigabytes of textures and delete some others because due to all this new shizzlywizzle fancy remote windows they don't offer HDDs anymore.
I mean come on, that's a pretty ridiculous idea.

**Ramses II CP** · 10-04-2008, 15:08

Well, the pros are it's an easier operational model for MS; no more worries about users doing things with the OS you don't like or downloading illegal files. You never have to worry that someone will replace their copy of Windows with Linux, or will try to run an old or unvalidated copy of Windows itself. Since they physically own all the data they'll just discard anything they don't care for (Non-DRM MP3s, porn, software without a current license, etc.) with the entirely reasonable explanation that they're now also on the litigation hook for anything problematic a user might install. Hardware standardization takes the next logical step since users will increasingly be isolated from the meaningful bits of hardware, same with applications.

The cons? Well, if you're MS there are none. If you're a user... you would have to be completely out of your mind to start down this path. The Chinese government will no doubt love the idea as well (And, I hope, pirate it with astonishing efficiency once it becomes possible).