Micro$oft proposes this, and reflexively I oppose it because of that sponsorship, if nothing else.

A few observations here:

I have two computers, one connected on line and one permanently offline. This scheme by Micro$oft would require a computer to be connected to the web, which I don't intend to do.

This scheme (and I use the term advisedly) is clearly intended to put Micro$oft in the driver's seat, since they would, as the sponsor, patentee, initial provider of software, and licensor of the system, be able (as well as eager) to design and provide it so as to make themselves the default provider. Just as with DOS and Windoze, they can be relied on to design things to make access and use of the system awkward, expensive, and even prohibitive to other software providers and/or manufacturers.

Dave Oesterreich