>>717668282The only way they could do anti-piracy measures is by enforcing the MS Store only, and they realized that would be death (and another round of antitrust suits). It would require every application to be signed by developers, and it would prevent you from compiling your own programs in Visual Studio, as you'd have to get them signed to run. Patches would be delayed until signatures could be obtained. That doesn't even count the whole fake Pluton image meme that linux fats post all the time, where they claim a movie was prevented from playing because it was a pirated copy.
It's more trouble than it's worth. It doesn't benefit MS, and only harms them. MS wants you to run Windows. They give it away for free now. Locking it down with draconian shit like that not only will get them back in court defending themselves, but it'll cause a major drop in their install base.