News Windows 365 Generally Available, Starting at $20

[Admin]

Microsoft's Windows 365 is now generally available, putting Windows 10 or 11 on almost any device from the cloud, starting at $20.

Windows 365 Generally Available, Starting at $20 : Read more

 

[vern72]

That's nice but how are people supposed to access it without a PC with Windows on it???? Hmmmm....

 

[USAFRet]

That's nice but how are people supposed to access it without a PC with Windows on it???? Hmmmm....

You do realize that this is not for regular consumer use, correct?

Think - Call center with 200 seats.

Right there in the second paragraph:
"For now, Microsoft positions its Windows 365 for business (for organizations with up to 300 employees) and enterprise customers (for organizations with more than 300 employees), two types of the company's customers that perhaps need cloud PCs the most."

 

[coromonadalix]

LOLL just switch to nix variants with all the cyber war / fraud / theft, i'll never use any cloud based OS or data archiving / storage on cloud monthly paid

 

[kato128]

Suspect there's a copy paste error there. The specs on the base and premium listed are the same.

 

[Alvar "Miles" Udell]

$240 per year minimum for a dual core with 2GB of RAM...That's pretty meh even for basic tasks like a call center when you can buy a cheap Chromebook for $200 or Windows 10 laptop for about $300.

I fail to see how this will appeal to any organization, since after a certain point you can afford to pay an IT guy high 5 figures to keep your organization working and still come out cheaper.

 

[Giroro]

You do realize that this is not for regular consumer use, correct?

Think - Call center with 200 seats.

Right there in the second paragraph:
"For now, Microsoft positions its Windows 365 for business (for organizations with up to 300 employees) and enterprise customers (for organizations with more than 300 employees), two types of the company's customers that perhaps need cloud PCs the most."

Ok.

So how does a call center with 300 people access their 300 virtual machines without already having 300 probably-better computers? And how much bandwidth does that take?

 

[Giroro]

I would never, in any situation, go down to a rent-a-center and lease a computer on a rent-to-own plan . It is a terrible deal designed to take advantage of people who are bad at math and can't handle money.
But at least when you rent-to-own, your 3 year $3000 lease will eventually buy you an obsolete midrange laptop.

That's probably a better deal than paying "unlimited money forever" for temporary access to a machine which isn't that great, requires a constant internet connection, and you'll never be allowed to own.

 

[mikewinddale]

I fail to see how this will appeal to any organization, since after a certain point you can afford to pay an IT guy high 5 figures to keep your organization working and still come out cheaper.

Not only that, but with Microsoft cloud computing, you still need to pay an IT guy to keep the organization working. After all, you still have local computers to manage.

Let's say you have 200 employees, so you rent 200 cloud computers from Microsoft. You still need 200 local computers with Windows in order to access those cloud computers.

And let's say you try to cut costs by installing Ubuntu on those 200 local computers. That's still 200 computers that you need to hire an IT person to manage.

I suppose using the cloud computers to run the actual productivity software, and using the local computers just to run Chrome (or whatever application is used to access the cloud computer) does make central management a bit easier if your employees are all using laptops and traveling while working. So maybe this would be good for field engineers? They would be equipped with a Chromebook, and all their productivity software would be installed on the cloud? And so the IT manager could manage their productivity software even when the field engineer was out in the field? If the Chromebook broke - say, they dropped it in a sewer or off the side of an oil rig into the ocean - they could just get another Chromebook out of the storage locker and keep working as if nothing happened. So that way, there doesn't have to be an IT person on the oil rig itself. The oil rig just needs a cache of ready-provisioned, generic Chromebooks in a locker. Any serious IT work can be performed remotely, by accessing the cloud computers. But that's a very narrow and specific use-case. On the other hand, the oil rig would still need an IT person to manage the internet network connectivity, right? So at that point, we're right back where we started.

For many professions, however, it seems like it would be easier and cheaper to just store files in the cloud. E.g., use Google Docs, or use OneDrive to store all the Word documents in the cloud. That way, you only have to pay for cloud storage, not an entire virtual machine. If your computer breaks, you still have to reinstall software on the new computer, but all the files will there when you need them.

 

[mikewinddale]

Hmm, I suppose two use-cases might be significant:
(1) Work from home
(2) High security (finance, government, etc.)

By provisioning a cloud computer, security is less necessary on the physical device. E.g., if a laptop is stolen, there's no sensitive data on it. As long as the sign-in process for the virtual machine is sufficiently secure, theft of the laptop is less of a concern. And if the laptop is stolen, the user can call IT and tell them to change the sign-in credentials for the virtual machine. So let's say the user's cell phone or security key fob was stolen too, so that even two-factor authentication is compromised. All they have to do is call IT and report the loss, and the virtual machine's sign-in credentials can be changed.

And with work from home, it can make it a lot easier to hire relatively unskilled labor, e.g. call center employees. As long as the employee owns their own computer, the company can quickly hire them and provide them with sign-in credentials to access a virtual machine.

 

[Chung Leong]

I fail to see how this will appeal to any organization, since after a certain point you can afford to pay an IT guy high 5 figures to keep your organization working and still come out cheaper.

You're missing a key benefit of cloud computing because it isn't advertised. It permits much easier monitoring of employee activities. With just a click and without you knowing your manager can open a second stream to your virtual PC. That very possibility means you're less likely to slack off. It also makes it easier to outsource jobs to low-income countries. Without you knowing you could be training some dude in Pakistan to take your job.

 

[smogfactory]

It is a very interesting offering. seems many posters don't seem to understand remote desktops, Their is a very large percentages of business that provide remote desktops/VDI to staff for working from home, BYOD scenarios or simply to allow greater flexibility on the end user machine. i.e. the organisation no longer has to fully control or care about the end device as you can do whatever you want personally but when you need corporate apps you access them via the secure remote desktop, saves a lot of money in deployment and maintenance. Similar to Citrix but a pure cloud offering.

 

[jcaulley_74]

It is a very interesting offering. seems many posters don't seem to understand remote desktops, Their is a very large percentages of business that provide remote desktops/VDI to staff for working from home, BYOD scenarios or simply to allow greater flexibility on the end user machine. i.e. the organisation no longer has to fully control or care about the end device as you can do whatever you want personally but when you need corporate apps you access them via the secure remote desktop, saves a lot of money in deployment and maintenance. Similar to Citrix but a pure cloud offering.

This is the biggest advantage to this service. Users can use their own PC, IPad, tablet, Chromebook, whatever they have and the business doesn't have to worry about supporting the device.

The other use case I can see if the business wants to supply the devices is Raspberry Pi. A $30 RasPi loaded with linux, monitor an keyboard combined with this service gives a fully functional desktop for minimum cost. Additionaly, you don't really need an IT staff. Keep a hand full of SD cards preloaded with the basic install in a drawer. Whenever someone has an IT issue, pull the SD card, insert a new one and reboot. Worst case scenario, the whole Pi gets swapped out. At $30 its easy to have a few backups laying around.

 

[kyzarvs]

any personal or corporate device connected to the Internet

and

Linux compatibility is coming, yet there is no firm date.

Nit-picking aside, rebadging Terminal Server isn't that exciting? I mean that was a special release of NT4 waaay back in the day when even I was young. I have several customers using Windows Server / Remote Desktop Services now from a cloud install.

 

[USAFRet]

Ok.

So how does a call center with 300 people access their 300 virtual machines without already having 300 probably-better computers? And how much bandwidth does that take?

How?
You've heard of PXE, right? Or thin clients?
This has been a thing since...well, forever.

The only new part about this is Win 10 and 11.

 

[USAFRet]

Let's say you have 200 employees, so you rent 200 cloud computers from Microsoft. You still need 200 local computers with Windows in order to access those cloud computers.

No.
The local hardware sitting on a workers desk does NOT need Windows installed.
That's the whole point. The OS lives "out there".

 

[frogr]

2GB RAM - for any purpose -really!

Have you ever wondered why call center and customer service people often seem so slow when doing things on their computer? ( I've been to comcast several times and it takes them 3-5 minutes just to look up my current service package). I spent 20 minutes with them just to renew service with a similar package.
Perhaps the delay is trying to run Windows 365 with 1 virtual cpu and 2GB ram that is slowing things down. Accessing Windows 365 via a crappy, equally under specified local PC or chromebook probably doesn't help either. Why would anyone try to run windows w/ 2GB of ram? Why?

 

[vern72]

You do realize that this is not for regular consumer use, correct?

But there still has to be a part to boot from on the PC itself, right? It can't be entirely in the cloud.

 

[USAFRet]

But there still has to be a part to boot from on the PC itself, right? It can't be entirely in the cloud.

PXE, in the BIOS.

This is how many corporations install and/or update their systems.
It isn't an admin guy going to each PC with a DVD or USB.

Direct over the network, with the image held at a central server.
This just moves that Image to 'out there', instead of a local server.

 

[mdd1963]

Microsoft's Windows 365 is now generally available, putting Windows 10 or 11 on almost any device from the cloud, starting at $20.

Windows 365 Generally Available, Starting at $20 : Read more

Starting at '$240 per year'....

Quite a revenue stream for someone.

 

[USAFRet]

Starting at '$240 per year'....

Quite a revenue stream for someone.

And the obverse is...
Having a full OS on each desktop hardware, and letting the whole network get ransomwared by someones USB stick with "My special mp3 files"

Centralized management is not always a bad thing. Even if it costs a bit more.
Then again, it is not always a good thing...


But, paying MS for that cloud OS may not be much different than the payment for a sitewide Volume Licensing agreement.
That Volume License is a very typical concept.

 

[Alvar "Miles" Udell]

I can think of a great use for this as well when it gets more mature: Universities.

Imagine if students had their own virtual PC to run university apps, e-books, and other resources remotely on any of their devices in a secure way. For a 4 year student for 10 months that'd be $200 a year, which comes to about what you'd pay for a decent mid range laptop, and since it's already remote students could access the online free versions of Office 365 natively.

 

[kyzarvs]

I can think of a great use for this as well when it gets more mature: Universities.

It's already about 20 years old and used extensively in corporate environments - just M$ are bundling it up in their own service.

 

[Alvar "Miles" Udell]

It's already about 20 years old and used extensively in corporate environments - just M$ are bundling it up in their own service.

I know remote virtualization has been available for a long time, I'm talking about when this particular service, Windows 365, is more mature and has a proven track record, especially when it comes down to zero downtime.

 

[Giroro]

How?
You've heard of PXE, right? Or thin clients?
This has been a thing since...well, forever.

The only new part about this is Win 10 and 11.

Yes I am aware of thin clients. What I don't understand is why somebody would want to buy a thin client to access a PC that is both more expensive and possibly less powerful than the client itself.
What are the specs for an entry level thin client these days? 2C/4T, 4GB RAM, 32GB eMMC for ~$300?

Thin clients make sense to give remote access powerful hardware that you own and control. I'm not understanding the pitch to use a thin client in order to access weak hardware, which you're renting from a competitor.
What data is so important that you need to store it on a dedicated VM that can be accessible from "anywhere" but so unimportant that you do not want to secure it on your own equipment?

Is this service for people who need to be constantly be changing between burner VMs on equipment that is shifting between different locations around the world?