Recently, Microsoft's move to transfer a large number of native Windows system functions to web pages has triggered many controversies surrounding technical paths and user experience. Is this a convenience brought by technological progress, or is it an experience compromise based on commercial considerations?
The logic behind function migration
The core idea of this Microsoft adjustment involving basic functions such as notification center and file preview is to use the Web technology stack to build the interface, which is similar to the Edge browser running web pages. From Microsoft's perspective, this can greatly simplify the development process.
Function updates can be pushed as quickly as updating web pages, and users do not need to download complete system patches. At the same time, this set of interfaces can theoretically adapt to various devices more easily, paving the way for future cross-platform integration.
Critical Perspective of Brandon Eyck
Brandon Ike, the founder of the Brave browser, clearly pointed out the problem. He was not denying Web technology. The WebOS project he carried out in the past proved that he was deeply aware of the potential of Web UI. His criticism of Microsoft lay in the way it was implemented.
Ike feels that Microsoft pays too much attention to speed and directly applies common web page templates without in-depth optimization for system interaction. This results in the new interface becoming sluggish in response, animations being stuck, and a clear gap with the carefully polished native program experience.
Controversy over business model change
There is a view that Microsoft wants to strengthen control and limit users to its cloud services. However, Ike said that web applications based on open standards are actually more free than the closed App store model. The real problem lies in the transformation of business models.
Traditional software used to be a one-time buyout, but now many services have shifted to a subscription system. The core function of the system has become an "entry" that requires continuous networking and indirect payment to obtain the best experience. Software has transformed from its original product into a service.
Industry following trends and development dilemmas
Similar exploration is also carried out in Apple's macOS and Google's ChromeOS. However, as a leader in desktop systems, Windows' shift has had a far-reaching impact. When the preview pane of its file manager becomes a web page, the lag becomes noticeable.
The developer ecology has been affected accordingly. Although Web technology has lowered the threshold for multi-platform development, problems in application performance and resource consumption are more prominent. Many developers choose to follow due to market pressure, not based on technical superiority.
The direct cost of user experience
The most direct feeling of ordinary users is that the system fluency decreases. To click on the setting item, you have to wait for the web page to load, and the memory usage increases significantly. The accumulation of these subtle lags greatly damages the operating efficiency and user experience.
From a business perspective, Microsoft may have saved development and maintenance costs, but in fact that cost has been transferred to users, who are borne by users with longer waiting times and higher hardware configuration requirements.
Technical compromises and future worries
Ike emphasized that this is fundamentally a question of priorities. Between "quickly launching features" and "polishing the ultimate experience", Microsoft is significantly leaning towards the former. This has established an example for the entire industry of "valuing efficiency and despising experience".
From a long-term perspective, if mainstream platforms all tend to use common web technologies for rapid iteration, then the number of native applications that are deeply optimized for specific platforms may show an increasing trend. This will ultimately limit the upper limit of software experience, thereby forming a trend of technical mediocrity.
Faced with the trend of more and more "web-based" system functions, do you think this is an inevitable development direction that cannot be avoided in the future, or is it a collective compromise made by manufacturers on user experience driven by commercial interests? You are welcome to share your own opinions in the comment area. If you feel that this article can inspire you, please also like and support it.
