[lrpublic]

Yes, not unlike Apple and Microsoft but for business users of Google suite, this makes the need to sign up to any Microsoft cloud services less of a necessity.

It seems the direction Google, Apple and Microsoft are all heading in is to own authentication and control access to our computers both at work and home.

Third party authentication technology has been around on Windows in one form or another for decades, but this is interesting because it's cloud based authentication that doesn't rely on corporate infrastructure.

It would be really nice if Google releasing this is a catalyst for an Open Source project doing something similar.

Chromebooks, Windows S (and RT before it), notarization of apps on MacOs could be helpful in an Enterprise environment to prevent malware, this is at the expense of freedom of choice.

I worry that the PC era is ending and we're drifting towards a future market more like consoles and mainframes where you never really own the platform that you paid for.

[tsimionescu]

> Chromebooks, Windows S (and RT before it), notarization of apps on MacOs could be helpful in an Enterprise environment to prevent malware, this is at the expense of freedom of choice.

I think the opposite is true: these are useful in a home environment, for the vast majority of non IT expert users. In the enterprise, there have always been other mechanisms for preventing malware, mainly in the forum of not giving users full admin rights on company laptops, PCs etc.

Even as a software engineer, I don't always feel fully knowledgeable on how to run a secure system. I can absolutely assure you that my grandma is not qualified to act as a sysadmin on her own PC. So while I dislike the idea of not having the option of taking full control of your system, I nevertheless think that the vast majority of users are better off not using that option. And when I say vast majority, I don't think it's like 80%,but much closer to 99.9%, including most programmers and enterprise users.

[flower-giraffe]

I disagree, we don’t have opposing views.

I totally agree with you that the secure by default / sandboxes for application approach is useful for consumers and developers too.

My point is that when this is wrapped up with a closed software distribution platform (Windows Store / App Store) or with a Surveillance Capitalism business model that relies on monetisation of user data there is a problem for the consumer.

The PC accidentally contributed to breaking the control IBM had over the market.

Antitrust investigations into IBM and later Microsoft are also key to the freedom we’ve had. The worry is that we’ve forgotten how bad it was and we’re potentially headed for a cartel like control of our computers.