Sunday, May 9th 2021

Windows 10X, Microsoft's Ambitious Chrome OS Competitor, Reportedly Cancelled

Windows 10X, an ambitious lightweight PC operating system under development at Microsoft, which was being designed to compete with Google's Chrome OS, has reportedly been shelved. The OS was designed for pretty much the same class of hardware as Chrome OS—entry-level with lightweight specs, with just enough muscle for web-browsing, and web-based applications that leverage cloud storage. The company even bet big on Chromium, the web rendering engine powering Chrome, over to its Edge browser. A new report by Petri states that Windows 10X will not launch in 2021, and that the project is shelved.

The reason behind Microsoft's decision is anyone's guess. Pulling off a second, purpose-built client-segment PC OS entails developing a hardware ecosystem, like Google did with Chrome OS. Secondly, Microsoft has flirted with lightweight versions of its PC operating systems more than once in the past, be it Windows RT or Windows 7 Basic; both of which met with limited success. Thirdly, Chrome OS itself isn't being shown outpacing Windows 10 as it probably was in 2019. The COVID-19 pandemic has reinvigorated the PC landscape, with much of the skilled workforce connecting from home.
Sources: Petri, The Verge
Add your own comment

19 Comments on Windows 10X, Microsoft's Ambitious Chrome OS Competitor, Reportedly Cancelled

#3
DeathtoGnomes
m$ should stop wasting money copying stuff, building win 10x was a waste of resources for them. If you cant do it right, dont bother trying.
Posted on Reply
#4
cyberloner
no vision at all mr microsoft..........
Posted on Reply
#5
watzupken
The number of times MS tried creating a light version of their OS just shows the lack of focus. Based on my observations, every time they try to revitalise ARM based systems to run on Windows, they will suddenly create a "new" Windows OS specially for it, only to kill it in a year or 2. It is easy for me to say, but the truth is, if they really want a future with ARM processors, they need to put in resources/ effort to get it done. To me, the existing Windows may look nicer with better features, but under the hood, its very resource intensive.
Posted on Reply
#6
lexluthermiester
DeathtoGnomes
m$ should stop wasting money copying stuff, building win 10x was a waste of resources for them. If you cant do it right, dont bother trying.
Agreed! What they would do if they were VERY smart(not holding breath waiting for that one), is roll back to Windows 7 and refine from there. Windows 7 is easily Microsoft's finest work. Windows 10 is utter crap by comparison.
Posted on Reply
#7
FreedomEclipse
~Technological Technocrat~
Well, They cancelled Windows 10 Mobile so i guess them pulling the plug on this makes sense too. I mean imagine if windows 10X ever made it onto the mobile platform. amirite?
Posted on Reply
#8
TheinsanegamerN
biffzinker
Apparently Windows 10X lacked support for the Win32 APIs.

“Add to the fact that at launch, the OS was said to lack support for traditional Win32 apps, which again might have worked against the offering.”

www.neowin.net/news/windows-10x-reportedly-delayed-indefinitely-focus-to-shift-to-windows-10/
How does MS keep fucking up this hard? Developers and consumers WANT win32 compatibility, they DONT want all the garbage MS has been hoisting onto windows since 8 came out.
Posted on Reply
#9
TheTechGuy1337
I'm not against a mobile windows OS, but the better idea would be to give the OS to actual cell phone manufacturers. Here is our mobile OS. Please use it however you want. Build a community first. Open source that thing.
Posted on Reply
#10
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
Most of the Chromebooks these days will run Windows 10 just fine, the processors might be a little slow but for basic tasks(like school work) they would run it just fine.
TheinsanegamerN
How does MS keep fucking up this hard? Developers and consumers WANT win32 compatibility, they DONT want all the garbage MS has been hoisting onto windows since 8 came out.
Remember, this was supposed to be an alternative to ChromeOS. Win32 compatibility didn't really matter in that scenario.
Posted on Reply
#11
lexluthermiester
newtekie1
Remember, this was supposed to be an alternative to ChromeOS. Win32 compatibility didn't really matter in that scenario.
And that's what made it a non-runner. ChromeOS didn't take off as a serious platform until Android App support was added in with solid compatibility. Windows10X was limited to the MSStore and then only certain apps. Microsoft has little to offer with it.
Posted on Reply
#12
Octavean
newtekie1
Most of the Chromebooks these days will run Windows 10 just fine, the processors might be a little slow but for basic tasks(like school work) they would run it just fine.


Remember, this was supposed to be an alternative to ChromeOS. Win32 compatibility didn't really matter in that scenario.
I totally agree with this sentiment.

Part of the reason WindowsRT failed was because people simply aren’t accepting of Windows without strict backward compatibilit. These expectations have been built upon iterations upon iterations of Windows 16bit to 32bit to 64bit. No one wanted to hear about the very real technical limitations switching to ARM from x86 / x64, they just wanted access to the full library of Windows applications since the dawn of time.

That type of thinking was just unrealistic especially on day 1 and on the anemic hardware Windows RT launched on. Some kind of emulation wouldn’t have gone too far amiss but it likely would have been disappointing overall.

Microsoft needs ARM far more then ARM needs Microsoft. Apple can do it, presumabl, but this is a good deal later, they are running their own custom design silicon which is more powerful and the hardware cost a good deal more. Also, and this is key, Apple customers are far more accepting of being cut off from backward compatibilit.
Posted on Reply
#13
micropage7
and they want to start it again like when phones using android then they release windows for phone and killed Nokia
now they try to start it with win 10 x
Posted on Reply
#14
Octavean
The thing of it is that Microsoft is the type of company that can throw money at anything it wants without it having to be profitable,....at least right away. This allows them to start something, usually picking a fight with a more established competitor. Win lose or draw, Microsoft might just drop it down the line.

An example of winning, Microsoft Media Center, which was arguably the best PC DVR / Media Center software in it’s time.

An example of losing, those are numerous. Zune, Windows Phone you name it.

So they dip a toe in to test the waters and eventually get bored and walk away,..... while not good, it’s also not Google dropping services left and right, forcing customers to go scrambling for alternative and attempting to reclaim their data from the cloud,....
Posted on Reply
#15
Logoffon
There's no such thing as "Windows 7 Basic". Windows 7 Home Basic does exists though.
Posted on Reply
#16
DeathtoGnomes
lexluthermiester
Agreed! What they would do if they were VERY smart(not holding breath waiting for that one), is roll back to Windows 7 and refine from there. Windows 7 is easily Microsoft's finest work. Windows 10 is utter crap by comparison.
I'd like to think Microsoft has 2 kinds of smarts, one kind is selfish that benefits only m$, and the other kind, that everyone flocked to, left with Bill Gates.
Posted on Reply
#17
stimpy88
They just can't make a new OS anymore. Every time they try, it takes years, then eventually gets canned.

Remember that Windows 10 is STILL heavily based on Vista, Microsoft best selling OS, and it's performance drops with each new servicepack.

MS has lost their way, way worse than Intel has.
Posted on Reply
#18
Caring1
Logoffon
There's no such thing as "Windows 7 Basic". Windows 7 Home Basic does exists though.
There is a slimmed down edition used on Netbooks called Windows 7 Starter.
Posted on Reply
#19
lexluthermiester
Caring1
There is a slimmed down edition used on Netbooks called Windows 7 Starter.
Yeah, but that had a few unacceptable limitations, not really a viable option if we're being honest...
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment