@figuerres: The whole UWP concept falls very flat if phones aren't supported, and that pretty much means they have to stay in the phone hardware business no matter how small a market they have.
@codedj: You're mistaken. The iOS bridge required recompilation, the Android bridge did not. If you wanted to take advantage of Win10 specific features you'd have to do some code modification and recompilation, but many applications ran with no modification at all. There's YouTube videos of this bridge in action.
Microsoft already had a Unix subsystem (SFU) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Services_for_UNIX). That was abandoned quite some time ago. I doubt they'd bring it back.
There were some good ideas in your list, just not many that count as "wow" and none likely to be the rumored change. Though I have no clue what that change could be. They built up too much expectation with that... not sure what could live up to the hype now.
- Open source Edge, make it available on Mac and Linux, sync bookmarks across all
- Android apps running on Windows? wasn't there a rumor last year about this?
- Visual Studio on Mac? I know VSCode, Xamarin Studio are available on the Mac but it's not as feature rich as VS.
- Complete the Windows 10 story - all MS applications are UWP (especially File Explorer) instead of a mix of Win32+UWP. This will lead to consistent UI. Nicer transitions/animations.
- SSH on Windows - they have been working on it right?
1. Interesting idea, and may happen, but this isn't likely the rumored change coming. Not Windows 10 specific enough.
2. That bridge was cancelled, and it was only ever for mobile, not big boy Win10.
3. Also may happen, but not Win10 specific at all, so not the rumored change.
4. I'm sure there will be news along these lines, but this is obviously not what the rumor was about.
5. Doubtful. And this would blow no one's mind. Not the rumored change.
6. Definitely happening (you're supposed to be able to d/l a working version now, even though it's still under development). I doubt this is the rumored change either, though. Not enough people would care about this, and since we have SSH clients and servers from third parties, it's not really a wow thing even for those that care.
When GWX first came out and there was the big uproar, I thought people were majorly over reacting. Now, when the OS is being downloaded without permission, hotfixes contain patches that bring it back, it's been made a recommended update, etc.? Well, Microsoft has more than crossed a line here. They deserve any and all criticism they receive, and I can't blame some people for giving up on them and going elsewhere. Very much not well thought out, despite the many man hours I'm sure they spent discussing this internally.
the tech is cool and this is funny, but I fear these types of bots are going to spell the end of the 'real' internet. at best, genuine discourse in various online communities will be drowned in noise... product placement and name drops tempered with sassy qwips, not to mention the potential of abusing product review sites. at worst, the tech can be scaled up to dictate overall internet sentiment on social issues and pending legislation. when a bot's comment history is indistinguishable from a sassy millennial, it'll be impossible to filter the noise out.
asimov should have added a 4th law...
1) a robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2) a robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3) a robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Laws.
4) a robot must identify itself as a robot when interacting with or communicating to any human.
We lived through Beer, we can survive chat bots. :)
That's reality for any company. When you're behind you constantly try to improve and get ahead. When you're the leader, you're only concerned with maintaining that position. You become less focused on getting ahead and more focused on keeping your competitors from catching up.
@davewill: The related searches panel gives you a good idea of how Bing was interpreting this. The first search is for "Download most recent browser". I'll give @IPowerPanda a point here, because Google did a better job even if the query's wording is questionable. Doesn't sway me, though, as I've seen this play out in reverse as well. Ambiguous searches can go either way.
@fanbaby: The actual search results are nearly identical. Yes, it's nice that Google provides you the answer outside of the search results, and for some queries that means Google wins. When I first switched to Bing it was for a similar reason. The searches were nearly identical, but for shopping queries that's all you got from Google, while Bing gave you lots of direct information, like price comparisons. For the extras, I'm really not sure who's winning right now, but for the actual search results, I declared a tie years ago, and I've not seen any examples that disprove my conclusion.
Every time someone has claimed Google to be better they've failed, like this time, to give an example search. The search results between the two are about 90% identical, in my experience. Once in a while one will have better results than the other, but it's rare. If anyone believes otherwise, I invite them to offer evidence. Please.