• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Microsoft is Introducing a $349 Mini PC That Streams Windows 11 from the Cloud

Guys, this is not a new concept. In fact it's decades old and has gone by different names over time including (but not limited to) diskless node, thin client, zero client, net client.

And this isn't specific to really cheap hardware. You could net boot an SGI Indy workstatin (entry price around $5000 thirty years ago) in diskless mode.

And like all of those devices, this one is focused on enterprise customers not consumers. Think of this $350 net PC as replacing a $1000 Dell Optiplex in a hospital. Or rather, think of $350,000 replacing $1,000,000 in hardware.

I know it's hard for a lot of TPU readers to think outside of their consumer bubble dreamworld but there are usage cases that are commercial/enterprise where having a lot of power on the desktop really isn't necessary. People at your medical clinic, bank or insurance company aren't playing Cyberpunk 2077.
Nobody is buying this glorified cellphone with a streaming OS to run an office. The performance of the N chip itself is already trash, and you wanna stream an OS through it?

This thing is gonna chug opening Edge. I'd fully expect anyone who suggested outfitting an office full of these to be terminated immediately for incompetence.
 
Exactly what I want to know. If MS wants to sell some miniPCs at cost in the hopes of making a profit from subscriptions, I'll gladly take one and put a full OS on it.
This is only going to be sold to business, not regular customers (for now).
Nobody is buying this glorified cellphone with a streaming OS to run an office. The performance of the N chip itself is already trash, and you wanna stream an OS through it?

This thing is gonna chug opening Edge. I'd fully expect anyone who suggested outfitting an office full of these to be terminated immediately for incompetence.
I believe you missed the point where this chip WON'T be opening anything. Not edge, nor any application other than the VDI streaming stuff, which is handled by a dedicated media engine (the same one found in your high end 14900k).

Incompetence is not even understanding how a product works. VDI products have already been a thing for years and many companies use it already.
 
Golden opportunity for Apple to shift some older Mac mini's for $350 and one-up this venture entirely
 
This is more of a chromebox alternative rather than a thin client.
Not true. ChromeOS can run one device with an internet connection. This bastardized version of Windows is a streaming context only. No internet connection, no Windows. Very similar to Adobe's streaming subscription garbage.

Just super size a Windows Phone for the desktop :laugh:
Dear God no!!
 
Hey yeah, if we can install a Linux os on this thing, I may just get one for that very purpose
 
Why? Get yourself a used micro HP or Dell for $200 and install Linux on that. Don't waste your time with this garbage.
Because I hate dell with every inch of my life (except their r640 servers, that gets exemption).

But I wanna do it for experimental and nothing else. I don't have money to burn but I'm also bored too.
 
Because I hate dell with every inch of my life (except their r640 servers, that gets exemption).

But I wanna do it for experimental and nothing else. I don't have money to burn but I'm also bored too.
Ok, Lenovo then. Example;
https://www.ebay.com/itm/335680871872
$117 shipped, similar specs, runs Linux like a dream.
Then there's this one;
https://www.ebay.com/itm/285908210344
$200 shipped. Also runs Linux like a dream.
You should be able to find something similar in Canada.
 
Last edited:
I do, and no, it's not. Value over time is pathetic for devices like this. Ask anyone who has bought, installed and maintained a Citrix based network. This "subscription model" version of Windows is trash and it belongs in same.

A full windows system for $30 that requires no support staff is cheaper than cheap. It‘s less than the lease price of a corporate pc.

So no, you have no idea.

VDI products have already been a thing for years and many companies use it already.

Decades, actually.
 
Might be decent for K-12, but I cant see this being logical for anything else.
 
Do you remember those Notebooks MS launched about 10-13 years ago? The same thing will happen to this. Just like how MS2024 is probably the most reviled Game launched in 2024. This is probably super cheap for them to create and Netflix showed all of these Companies that Subscription is the future.
 
I don't even understand what "streaming Windows from the cloud means". Can anyone explain?
What is this thing actually doing?
 
I don't even understand what "streaming Windows from the cloud means". Can anyone explain?
What is this thing actually doing?
Your "Windows session" is actually running in another computer in the "cloud" (so a VM hosted somewhere), and all this device does is stream the video input from there into your local device, and send back any inputs you do.

Think of GeForce Now, but with the entire operating system.
 
Your "Windows session" is actually running in another computer in the "cloud" (so a VM hosted somewhere), and all this device does is stream the video input from there into your local device, and send back any inputs you do.

Think of GeForce Now, but with the entire operating system.
This sums it up. The system in question boots from a network connection and runs everything from the internet.
 
Your "Windows session" is actually running in another computer in the "cloud" (so a VM hosted somewhere), and all this device does is stream the video input from there into your local device, and send back any inputs you do.

Think of GeForce Now, but with the entire operating system.
Why would anyone want that? That must be slow like a remote session, which is something I only do because it saves time physically getting to whatever machine I want to do something on, which is often in a different town.
Like, WTF?
 
Why would anyone want that? That must be slow like a remote session, which is something I only do because it saves time physically getting to whatever machine I want to do something on, which is often in a different town.
Like, WTF?
It's meant for companies, not mainstream users (well, at least for now).
Remote sessions are more often than not super doable, VDI solutions (which is the generic name of this solution) have already been a thing for ages, and the likes of GeForce Now show that it's doable for many people.
 
Why would anyone want that?
Right?
That must be slow like a remote session, which is something I only do because it saves time physically getting to whatever machine I want to do something on, which is often in a different town.
And that's is the usage scenario where it might make some sense. But then again, why? Why would a remote OS session ever make more sense than a local one? Those situations are few and very specific.

It's meant for companies
Still doesn't make much sense.
Remote sessions are more often than not super doable, VDI solutions (which is the generic name of this solution) have already been a thing for ages, and the likes of GeForce Now show that it's doable for many people.
Doable? Maybe. Optimal and efficient? Good grief no and for the following reason, which I have personal experience with: Single point of failure.
 
Doable? Maybe. Optimal and efficient? Good grief no and for the following reason, which I have personal experience with: Single point of failure.
I've worked deploying such solutions before, and it did work fine and was way easier to manage than regular on-prem devices.
You can see many use cases in place all over the world, here's one example with many case studies:

Optimal and efficient? Good grief no
That's just an skill issue :)
Single point of failure.
Internet connection failure is a SPOF in most businesses already, so this doesn't make that much of a difference in your risk assessment.
 
I've worked deploying such solutions before, and it did work fine and was way easier to manage than regular on-prem devices.
I've done similar work. Whether or not it works at all or can work well depends greatly on the use-case-scenario. On-site, direct access hardware is better for most business usage models.
You can see many use cases in place all over the world, here's one example with many case studies:
Oh yes, another "study" that is not double blind and not peer reviewed. :rolleyes: What shocker..
That's just an skill issue :)
No, it's platform issue.
Internet connection failure is a SPOF in most businesses already, so this doesn't make that much of a difference in your risk assessment.
Again, no. Most business' need the internet, sure, but any competent and GOOD IT admin will have a contingency plan for times when downtime happen.
 
For companies? I don't know, that makes even less sense to me. Working on a computer where the entire system is laggy as shit sounds very productive. I wouldn't want that in an environment that's supposed to generate money even if it was free.

Hell remote desktop sort of stuff is annoyingly slow even over local network, let alone over the internet, irrelevant how great the connection is.
 
For companies? I don't know, that makes even less sense to me. Working on a computer where the entire system is laggy as shit sounds very productive. I wouldn't want that in an environment that's supposed to generate money even if it was free.
Common sense, right?
 
What made sense was what the bank where I was part of the outsourced IT department back in 2010 or so did - it centralized all the data to some virtual server somewhere, so nothing was stored on the branch computers at all. They simply used the computers as terminals of sorts to connect to a desktop in a datacentre. And if the computer they were on started to act up, they gave us a call and we remotely triggered a complete reinstall from a preconfigured image.

But streaming the actual OS over the network (any network) - fuck me or what?
 
Back
Top