- Thread View
- Flat View
1. ...
Linux User 147560 - 04/09/08
LOL... get too greedy and lose your focus. This is the eventual outcome, and Like IBM, Microsoft will have to pare down, rethink and take some serious blows. I don't think Microsoft will go away (too bad...) but they are sure going to get a lot smaller.
I have to be honest here, while I would hope for a complete down fall the reality is I see Microsoft dropping from 90% of the desktop to more like 60-70% as Linux and Mac will make up the difference.
Microsoft will suffer losses but the truth is (and that's barring some major miracle) they will still be the dominate player in the desktop arena. Just not as big or strong as they used to be. And this is good for US the consumer. 
1.1. Smaller MS = Better competition
Mikael_z - 04/12/08
Yes indeed, luckily monopolies don't last forever and the
market will become a nicer place for the alternatives. Good
for the consumer in other words.
I could not care less though what MS will do as long as they
don't break a bunch of laws again, kill a competitor, and so
forth.
ZDNet's focus on ONE company is unhealthy.
2. of course windoze will colapse
Linux Geek - 04/09/08
but not under its own weight - OSX is doing just fine by suckering people to upgrade everything every other year, M$ could try the same trick.
It will be Linux that will deliver the fatal blow!
2.1. hahahah
jamesrayg - 04/09/08
linux has had less than 1 percent of the market for 10 years and it's going to deliver the final blow the MS! LOL good one!
2.1.1. Coke thought that ... then came Pepsie
The Smoking Man - 04/09/08
The only thing keeping me from running Linux on this machine is that I need this laptop to do lectures and ATI refuses to co-operate with the people at Linux when it comes to the drivers on their Radeon X1300.
When this changes or I upgrade to a machine that does have a video card that works, I and hundreds like me will leave the sinking ship.
M$ tenuous grip is currently held by companies loyal to M$ NOT making their info available.
My 3 other machines are already Functioning on Linux Ubuntu.
For the last 24 years I have waited for M$ to deliver on the promise of a functional machine. Each change that I have PAID for ... each upgrade ... has sadly missed the mark.
2.1.1.1. It's all going towards Unix anyway
TheBishop - 04/10/08
A few years ago (1998) I looked at my boss and said, "You know, the NT kernal looks so much like Unix, it won't be long until it is." Was this predicting the end of M$? Hardly.
Is Unix going to take over? Well, I would have to say that it would be through no effort of their own. I do think it will be a natural and VERY gradual process of its own.
As much as we'd all like to see M$ get its come-uppence, the fact is, they are and will be around for many more years as the industry leader as well as steering the industry in directions that only benefit them.
But, you know what they say about "Opinions."
2.1.1.1.1. NT Kernel = UNIX
philpenn - 04/10/08
The NT kernel resembles UNIX so much largely because of legacy support for POSIX. This was originally required for a large portion of the government business MS wanted to get into in the 80's. Since MS never removes stuff from the monolith, only adds, it is there to this day.
2.1.2. Really... You make a great argument!
bryhawks - 04/10/08
You are the reason people still use M$... Read your comment. You haven't yet grasped your language. Linux my friend is where it is at. Take a look at Google, Yahoo, and so on... Linux and open source projects make the world go 'round, not M$. We have made great strides in the server and desktop arena, hell in all arenas for that matter and these days it's easier and faster to install Linux than it is to install XP. Why is it so hard to get you folks to realize that you pay M$ to sing their praises(by the by, good marketing scam M$)? It's always amazed me how they duped you into paying for the license and then get you for that fee to tell people how great they are. Shouldn't they pay you for your bad english skills 
2.1.3. 1 percent of what market?
Chad_z - 04/11/08
You don't know what you're talking about. 1 percent of the desktop market, that's a little short today but close enough. But you're not seeing the big picture...probably hard to get that view over a cubicle wall.
You have to look at everywhere an operating systems are used. Servers and embedded systems come to mind and Linux is making huge inroads to those markets.
Point of sale systems, Linux growth is double digits year over year.
Now get back to work before the boss comes by and catches you loafing.
2.2. The OS will fade in importance...
Al_Fresco - 04/11/08
...as technology becomes more productized. Owners of PSx or any other game console (ditto for set-tops) don't know or care what OS it is running. Such will also be the case when you can buy an product that runs a suite of productivity apps. Gigabytes, megahertz etc. will also become irrelevant when products run their apps at the speed of thought you simply don't care how or what.
2.3. Another freetard in deep denial
Duke E. Love - 04/11/08
To quote the Fake Steve
http://fakesteve.blogspot.com/2007/07/freetards-in-deep-denial.html
"Freetards, face facts. You've lost. You've had sixteen years to try and build a desktop operating system, and you still can't get your shite together. Nobody wants your software. It's not Microsoft's fault. It's yours. Because trust me, if you truly developed a kick-ass OS with tens of thousands of drivers and easy installation and reliable performance, you'd be winning. But you're not. Firefox caught on, right? Why? Because it rocked."
3. RE: Gartner: Windows collapsing under its own weight; Radical change needed
none none - 04/09/08
So what does Microsoft need to do?
For starters, Windows should create versions for specific uses.
Hmmm. Sounds a lot like the role all the Linux distros have. I thought that was supposed to be a liability. How many times has the Linux community been told by Windows users that too much choice is a bad thing?
Go figure.
4. Cue the Linux fanfare....
JT82 - 04/09/08
The fanbois have arrived...
Although I would agree MS will come down a few notches if they don't clean up their act. All it will take is most likely Balmer to leave and the ship will right itself.
4.1. Very true, why o why has Steve Balmer been at Microsoft so long???
DonnieBoy - 04/09/08
They need to put somebody professional in the position.
5. OLPC?
rpmyers1 - 04/09/08
"The one software project that takes this approach is the One Laptop Per Child project."
Umm,. no. SELinux does. That's MAC.
5.2. I'm sorry, but.....
cheesyone - 04/10/08
SELinux is NOT MAC, though it certainly may be on your MAC. SELinux was developed by the NSA - before - Apple switched over to their BSD rooted OS.
6. RE: Gartner: Windows collapsing under its own weight; Radical change needed
jparrott@... - 04/09/08
The biggest problem I see is Msoft diversified too much and is trying to compete on every new level of tech that pops up. They lost their focus and instead of making their OS better, made it sloppier.
Perhaps redoubling their efforts on the OS front, maybe closing the failing Zune/search/live crap down.
6.1. It was really Microsft's only option to create more lock-in. They need
DonnieBoy - 04/09/08
every last little bit of lock-in right now to keep the levee walls from collapsing.
6.1.1. Can IMAGINE a MODULAR Windows???
swbobcat - 04/09/08
Why it might actually run on a PC !!!!!
It is absolutely INSANE to have to buy a computer to run an OS.
If M$ were to cut the integration of world+dog to the kernel why innovation at M$ might actually take place.
As long as Steve "Monkey Boy" Ballmer is there NOTHING will ever change . Instead of beating the competition with superior products, M$ relies on lock-in to trashy software to make money. Until things radically change at M$, all that will come out of M$ is BIGGER, MORE BLOATED, MORE RESTRICTIVE, and MORE EXPENSIVE JUNKWARE .
6.1.1.1. You have no clue
jamesrayg - 04/09/08
Seriously, no matter what people are going to really be locked in to one OS, and there's no evidence anyone makes better OS' for the average consumer than MS, everyday all day you ignorant trolls spam forums with 'MS is doomed' tripe, and 10 years later they still make record amounts of money and ship record amounts of OS copies, including Vista.
6.1.1.1.1. "everyday all day you ignorant trolls spam forums "
Ole Man - 04/09/08
Might surprise you when you discover that those "ignorant trolls" are smarter than you "learned shills".
The only way anyone will be "better off" with Microsoft in ten years is they won't have much money to worry about. Microsoft will have taken it all.
For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? Mark 8:36
That, coming from one who spoke the universe into existence. Think you're smarter then Him?
6.1.1.1.2. I guess in your case, Ignorance is bliss ...
The Smoking Man - 04/09/08
M$ ships more copies of Vista because when they come up with a new OS, they recall all the other copies of their previous OS and replace them with OEM versions.
HOWEVER, you will note that M$ had to back-pedal on this one because Vista simply didn't work as advertised and they were forced to rescind the recall until they had it in a functional state. They also extended the support time of XP to 2010.
And again, there is the Class action lawsuit against M$ for approving machines as 'Vista Ready' prior to the release of the OS and then finding out that the OS would barely load and in some cases became non-functional when loaded.
The way you write, it sounds like you are a fanboy.
I assure you, like all the other tools in my drawer, I have no preconceived notions about a screwdriver but if it breaks or does not do what it is supposed to, I criticise it.
Microsoft has repeatedly created screwdrivers for about 25 years and then corrected their problems by sending out a hammer if you have problems with it.
They are called patches.
You're probably familiar with them.
6.1.1.1.2.1. Re: by sending out a hammer. . . And then the HANDLE is missing. (nt)
hkommedal - 04/09/08
nt
6.1.1.1.2.1.1. Missing handle? That's what the pliers are for. Only $79.99 from Microsoft.
fr0thy2 - 04/09/08
.
6.1.1.1.2.1.2. Oh ! I missed that. Does it FEATURE 2 handles, or
hkommedal - 04/10/08
is the other optional at another $67.99 ?
6.1.1.1.3. Of course, you wouldn't realise
fr0thy2 - 04/09/08
that more and more people are using Linux distro's.
The reason MS are so desperate to buy Yahoo is because they know their little game is up ...
6.1.1.1.3.1. I think they are likely to have quite a few years left.
hkommedal - 04/10/08
They are NOT likely to disappear any day soon.
Hopefully they will sharpen up a fair bit when some more competition comes along, but that is not coming too fast.
However, I believe that a drops in MS' market share of just a few % is likely to give the message that the customer needs to come first, not second.
6.2. MS doesn't have a choice
Yagotta B. Kidding - 04/09/08
The biggest problem I see is Msoft diversified too much and is trying to compete on every new level of tech that pops up. They lost their focus and instead of making their OS better, made it sloppier.
They can't focus, because that would leave room for a potential competitor to grow. It's like crabgrass: you have to clear it everywhere or it'll just grow so thick in the area that you don't clear that it can flood your lawn.
6.2.1. MS got it wrong from day 1
TigerLilly0556 - 04/09/08
I was on one of the beta testing teams back in the early 80's when most PCs couldn't run multiple window (just 2). We recorded and sent MS the error that at first was unintelligble, then became the infamouse UAE of 3.0 & 3.1, then became "user friendly" error (hahaha), and is now in XP and Vista the blue screen of death. MS has never REALY written all of the Windows code so that original problem still exists and has spread. After nearly 25 yrs I'm learning Linux as I have no desire to feed Bill Gates or anyone at MS anymore.
6.2.1.1. "After nearly 25 yrs I'm learning Linux"
fr0thy2 - 04/09/08
Good for you Tiger Lilly
I found Linux to be the most enjoyable computing experience by far, with installing and acceptance testing big fat and fast corporate networks in second place ....
7. Funny, say Gartner collasping under its own
Boot_Agnostic - 04/09/08
but hey, Apple was dead years ago by some as well. Oops, it's alive. Yes, change was necessary. Hopefully MS and Gartner will get their necessary fixes.
7.1. Re: Funny
The Smoking Man - 04/09/08
I think it a little humorous that we have the company started by a man who doubted the 640K memory barrier and our need for going beyond this limit is now producing a bloat-ware O/S that won't run on the average consumer machine.
What do 90% of the users in this world need?
Why have we a world full of VW requirements and have to be satisfied by a Rolls Royce with it's equivalent pricing?
Why, when countries, corporations and users threaten to abandon ship does Microsoft swoop in with a dose of free heroin to feed the addiction?
Sorry to have mixed some metaphors but I have been around for a while and remember the day when you chose your computer and then looked for an efficient O/S.
This tail wagging the dog effort of finding a machine that will run your O/S just seems absurd. Choose an engine and then find a car to put it in???
Even Microsoft was surprised at the eventual size of the overhead of Vista. Remember all the signs on the new computers 'Vista Ready' and the resulting class action lawsuit?
7.1.1. Couldn't be more wrong,
jamesrayg - 04/09/08
could you? It was IBM's fault that MS-DOS had a 640k barrier because IBM chose a 16-bit processor for their IBM PC computer, MS complained but if they wanted the contract (and therefore to stay in business) they had to agree to it. People bash MS for the 640k thing and fawn over IBM for it's linux/apple work, even though it was IBM that really caused the problem, it's pathetic how ignorant 'old time computer users' are.
And Windows is not bloated, it is an OS for the masses and many need and use the feature in Vista, just because a few people don't need some of the features doesn't make it bloatware, that's really stupid to think an OS should only have what you want and everything else is bloat. I'd guess you're still in high school.
And windows is what runs almost everything so of course most people are going to use windows and buy a computer that runs it. If not windows, then it'd be some other huge company that everyone got their OS from, might as well be MS, Vista beats OS X and Linux in everything except subjective looks, mac users say the mac looks better but many people think it doesn't, however it does run most programs that most people want, have a sandboxed browser, etc.
7.1.1.1. High School???
The Smoking Man - 04/09/08
Actually sonny, I am a 51 year old man who had spent an entire career working with this piece of crap.
If you pretend to know about computers, as you obviously do, you might just be aware of who it was that actually stated that users would never require more than 640K.
It was a man you might have heard of ... William Gates III. You can just call him Bill.
In addition, it was the initial association of 5 years that gave Gates his leg up with getting the IBM PC and consequently his OS which was distributed freely.
IBM's monopolistic practices (For which they were convicted) made sure that IBM PC's and consequently Mr. Gates product were the only thing connected to IBM mainframes using their terminal emulator.
Gates, at any time could have written an OS that would have run on the 32 bit Atari for example. It was his choice.
Gates could have abandoned the platform however he CHOSE to work with the 8088 processor because of the Monopoly he had already been a party to building.
7.1.1.2. Re: Vista beats OS X and Linux in everything. . .
hkommedal - 04/09/08
My router, and every other small router I have come across, seems to be running some sort of a *nix.
It is certainly NOT Windows, as it has to be able to run 24/7 year after year without reboots and BSODs.
Have you by any chance seen a small router that runs Windows of any description ?
7.1.1.2.1. Did they ...
The Smoking Man - 04/09/08
Finally get hotmail running on a windows server or does it run on Linux still???
I am too bored to check.
7.1.1.3. "Vista beats OS X and Linux in everything" - How little you know
fr0thy2 - 04/10/08
"And Windows is not bloated" Right-ho. LOL.
IBM invented CTRL-ALT-DEL, Microsoft made it famous.
7.1.1.4. RE: Couldn't be more wrong,
Axsimulate - 04/10/08
Your right IBM chose the 8088. Which in fact was a neutered 8086. The 8088 was a 16 bit CPU, but it could address 8 bits of memory which meant that it could only address 64K and up to 1MB of Virtual Memory. If you look at the way computers access memory, you will see that 640K was impossible number to hit. Where did 640K come from? Answer: Paging. It had 10 banks of 64K for paging equaling 640K. Who made the decision to limit how many banks?
IBM engineers originally wanted to use the Motorola 68000 cpu which was a 16/32 bit cpu. It's pinouts were similar to a 16 bit cpu, however it could run 32 bit code. Conclusion: IBM wanted the PC to be less powerful on purpose. The WinTel that you talk so highly of, started it's life as a purposely inferior computer.
"And Windows is not bloated"
To take your words and flip them around, it's pathetic how ignorant 'NuBee computer users' are.
7.1.1.4.1. The 8088 had 20 address bits
plyler_b@... - 04/11/08
The 8088 had a 20 bit address bus, that could be addressed with a segment:offset pair. The offset was 16 bits, so it could address 64K/segment. In Microsoft C, these were addressed as either FAR pointers or HUGE pointers. The 8088 was chosen as it was cheaper than the 68000. It used 8085 peripherals that were well known to the designers. The 8088 didn't use virtual memory. It could only address 1 meg of physical memory. And it didn't use paging. The 8088 also had an 8 bit data bus, vs. the 16 bit data bus of the 8086.
Yes, the 68000 was much better architecturally than the 8088/8086. And the National 32032 was even better.
7.1.1.4.2. some are just not old enough
llval@... - 04/13/08
to have seen it live.
the 68000 not only COULD run 32bit code,
it had a complete 32bit architecture, just the
address lines were reduced to 24 bits (until the 68020)
- still making an amiga 1000 possible in 1985 that used
tricky gfx modi (hold-and-modify, extra-halfbright)
to render 640x256 pics in 4096 colors. 3 years later
the graphic adventure 'universe' in 256 colors was
released and the amiga handled 64bit filesystems
even before the 'problem' had caused any impact.
there was no year 2000 problem either, just btw.
7.1.1.5. Vista ???
pkrdk - 04/14/08
"Vista beats OS X and Linux in everything except subjective looks"
Well the preloaded Vista beat the living daylights out of my daughters new dual-core 1GB PC in a way that was inferiour in speed (and functions) to her old 256K MB XP PC. Vista brings back memories of Windows ME.
We put linux on it, and it flies. Can't do games, but anyway games are better using a game comsole. Just like a real screwdriver is better than a swiss armyknife.
7.1.2. It's your opinion to have
Boot_Agnostic - 04/10/08
to support as you see fit, as any consumer could have chosen and seen fit to create the future. It's funny how people envision the past as if they were not a fluid part of it, solution or problem wise, one vote one voice but collectively, to speak metaphorically and commercially. Oh well, an apple a day keeps the ...
8. RE: Gartner: Windows collapsing under its own weight; Radical change needed
Loverock Davidson - 04/09/08
Since Gartner is always wrong and anti-MS I won't believe anything on this report. Microsoft has been in business for 30 years, I think they know how to retain customers. Microsoft has already addressed every issue in this report. With each new version of Windows it resolves a lot of what this report is talking about. Someone at Gartner just wanted to make up FUD to get paid.
8.1. That's odd...
zkiwi - 04/09/08
I seem to remember people claiming Gartner was a Microsoft stooge a while back. What changed? :P
8.1.1. Just a stooge
Hemlock Stones - 04/09/08
Yea, unfortunately I don't believe much of anything they say.
8.1.2. The inertia changed ...
fr0thy2 - 04/10/08
... mind you, they correctly predicted lots of layoffs this year (about 4 years ago) and consolidation etc (MS - Yahoo etc)
I don't remember them predicting that the knowledgeable IT folk would take over the roost again though, I guess they think that companies will always be short sighted and have cheap salaried Windows only kids doing their IT, and be happy leaking money on a crummy OS etc ...
8.1.2.1. Spoken like a true flipper of hamburgers...
socialism=nowhere - 04/11/08
Any IT person can pickup any OS and work with it...based on your comments...it shows you have NO idea what a professional IT shop in the enterprise looks or works like. If you do then you are sleeping at your desk. I'm assuming you just drop the fish'n'chips.
That's why the crap coming out of India should be worried about talk because they lack "real" IT thinking. Just robotic insertions. So from that perspective I would agree. But I really don't think you have real-world clue on anything - from your Mums basement.
8.1.2.1.1. Only a "a true flipper of hamburgers..."
Ole Man - 04/12/08
Would know that.
Does making personal attacks make you
feel like a big man? Do you think it
makes Microsoft software more
appealing? Why do you suppose
Microsoft is hiring all those people
who produce "the crap coming out of
India"? Where is this "real-world"
that you live in? I want to avoid it
at all costs.
8.2. RE: Windows 7 chatter having a significant negative effect on Vista
X41 - 04/10/08
IF it comes from Microsoft and uses the word windows it will stink. Probably because they keep pulling it out of Steve Ballmer's Arse!!!
8.3. who is not a bit anti ms at least
llval@... - 04/13/08
hardly qualifies as considerable contact for me.
I'd even tend to derogate the backbone of such ppl.
9. And, that is the advantage for Linux. You can mix / match / take with you /
DonnieBoy - 04/09/08
WHATEVER WORKS BEST. Includes OS, open source applications, etc. No license hassles for the corporation, no big corporation with their hand out everything you want to load something on another computer. No worries about license violations, etc.
And, add to that the modular nature of Linux where is works all the way from a wrist watch all the way up to the biggest and baddest super computers.
9.1. EVEN No_Ax is learning
fr0thy2 - 04/09/08
and who knows, maybe one day, even Bullmer, Rupert and Penelope will too
9.2. Something's been lacking for a long time.
joe.smetona@... - 04/09/08
I've been playing with Windows since the 4/8 Mhz turbo XP computers with DOS. It's because of the extreme generosity of thousands of people all over the world, donating their time and skill that we have OSS. You boot the disk and presto, all the drivers are found and connected. You plug in the RJ-45 network connector and you're on the internet. And there is OpenOffice, already installed. It finds your printer and the test page prints fine. No Product Keys or Activation or WGA or DRM or Drivers to search down. Why can't the big corporate giant MS accomplish that? Everyone says those viruses are coming, but after 4 years, I'm still waiting for the first one. It's big money gone wild with MS. The truth is they can't do what OSS does with all their billions and their competing against people doing it for free.
9.3. Another HUGE advantage for Linux is...
cheesyone - 04/10/08
the Live CDs & DVDs, as with a little know-how you can make a bootable CD or DVD that incorporates your entire OS & applications. Or you can put on a USB stick. Then you can just slip your disk into any computer and fire it up to use YOUR desktop, YOUR word-processor, Your what-ever app. Great!
9.4. But there is one thing they don't have..
socialism=nowhere - 04/11/08
marketing. The people that don't know are the ones that need to know, JohnQ public. And guess what - they don't care. I know that stings the 10 or so people in here, but they don't. Of course Marking hasn't it hasn't helped the Mac to great strides but it is working in small steps. And when you MS attacking Mac in the childish way Mac does then you will see your getting somewhere with MS. But until this - Apple looks well like they are jealous - like a poor political candidate. And acticles like this:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,336810,00.html?sPage=fnc/scitech/personaltechnology
don't help your cause.
Until it is so unfragmented - how m
any 30/40 distros? Linux will be a hobby, or a poor goverement software. It suffers from image, but the problem is the people that are touting it suffer from the same image...now that is reality.
9.4.1. Marketing
lordshipmayhem - 04/11/08
Except that there are a number of Very Big companies supporting Linux. You may have heard of a few:
- IBM
- Novell (SuSE)
- Red Hat
- Mandriva (OK, that's French, but still it has American operations!)
- Oracle
- Google
It's not just a hobby system any more. It's just that M$ has a very experienced, 400-pound gorilla of a marketing department.
By the way, there are over 400 distributions, some like Yellow Dog extremely specialized.
9.4.1.1. Distros
btljooz - 04/16/08
Yes, there are many "Distros" to pick from.
BUT, they all have EXACTLY the same Core Kernel. They simply have different GUIs/or none and different software packeges contained WITH that Core Kernel and whatever GUI is included.
You can take a very small distro like Damn Small Linux, use Synaptic and build your own system only with what you want/need and leave the rest out. Can you do that with Windoze or Mac? 
10. My solution to Windows....
nucrash - 04/09/08
Honestly, they need a competitor. They need to spin off a version of their OS, make sure they have the same core and run the same applications, and form a Windows 'Standard' and then Create a Microsoft Windows vs Competing Windows. License out the entire OS code to some one else and let them in on the piece of the pie.
Bring in some one who would want to take the OS, gut how it works but be able to run all of the Applications. I know this sounds like a crazy concept and a leash that Microsoft refuses to give up, but when you deal with a product that doesn't break down over time and you try to sell glazed gold as an upgrade to gold, you might need to reconsider your options.
10.1. Interestingly enough ...
mwagner@... - 04/09/08
... this is exactly what we would have had had IBM not broken off their relationship with Microsoft over Windows all those decades ago!
The original NT kernel was to be the basis for both Windows NT and a competing OS/3 product from IBM. Same kernel, different GUI, binary compatibility. IBM wished not to compete with Microsoft on those terms so they broke off the relationship.
I certainly agree that Microsoft needs some real competition in the commodity desktop market. In fact, had Judge Jackson ruling ordering a break-up of Microsoft into and OS unit and an Applications unit gone forward, Microsoft applications might be ported to UNIX, Linux, BeOS (a fledging OS in the late 90's) MacOSX (I mean REALLY ported, not just 'kind of' compatible), and maybe some others.
Bill Gates would probably be richer (the sum of the parts worth more than the whole) and Microsoft would have been put into a position to have to innovate to keep up with the competition. Competition is good for everyone, including Microsoft!
Sooner or later Microsoft will stumble and, if they are not prepared, they will fall. But, in order for this to happen, competitors will have to decide to play on Microsoft field with Microsoft's rules.
Today, Linux vendors are not hungry enough to seek commodity profit margins and Apple is saddled with too much investment in hardware production.
10.1.1. "play on Microsoft field with Microsoft's rules"
Ole Man - 04/09/08
Are you trying to say Microsoft owns all the fields and gets to set all the rules?
No wonder you're hooked on Microsoft!
Good boy! Now sit!... roll over.... beg... play dead..... No! no! no! How many times must we tell you? No chasing cars........
10.1.1.1. Chasing cars ...
The Smoking Man - 04/09/08
however will be available in Vista SP2 because M$ heard there was a little company in San Antonio offering this application and it seemed popular.
Chasing cars will be available free to all who want it however when the company in San Antonio goes out of business, it will be a premium feature added to the Pursuit Suite available in the download for a fee section.
Good boy ... Here's your cookie.
10.1.2. More like Apple
The_Quietman - 04/09/08
Apple was once in a position similar is the one MS is in now (Before IBM got into PCs). MS in fact supported Apple (remember MS Basic?). Big blue is who gave MS the edge with MS DOS and then Windows. Yes there was a lot of competition and the competing O/S back then was CP/M which ran on any 8080/Z80/8085 CPU or CP/M-86 for the 8086/8088 CPUs. MS will eventually move to a position similar to where apple is today but a break from a major name trusted by business is required to get it going. If IBM or hp came out with an O/S that ran MS apps it would probably do the trick.
10.1.3. Stumble & Fall - whose rules?
lordshipmayhem - 04/12/08
"Sooner or later Microsoft will stumble and, if they are not prepared, they will fall. But, in order for this to happen, competitors will have to decide to play on Microsoft field with Microsoft's rules."
The field used to be owned by Microsoft, but we're playing on a new field, one where Microsoft no longer can count on making the rules. It is this paradigm change that has led to Microsoft's stumble and potential fall - they don't yet understand that they're not the ones making the rules any more.
11. Man, I have been saying this for 5 years.
No_Ax_to_Grind - 04/09/08
I have said for years that Microsoft's efforts to support legacy is killing them. I do NOT want to run DOS apps, I don't give a hoot about the old serial ports, on and on and on.
I honestly do not understand why people want to invest and install a new OS to replace a perfectly functioning system that is running their legacy stuff. It makes no sense in any way.
At some point, Microsoft needs to step up and dump the legacy support and be honest with users and tell them straight up the newest version of Windows is NOT going to run legacy and they should NOT buy it. Of course that means they may lose a few sales but its still the right way to move FORWARD.
11.1. Agree 100%
Stuka - 04/09/08
There is zero reason to (try to) support old legacy hardware and applications. They could make the OS so much cleaner if they just drew a line, and said anything made before x date using x protocals will not work. The OS would use fewer resources, have fewer holes, and all together run better. They cannot ever please everybody, so why not just please the majority which live in this decade?
11.2. No_Ax is learning ....
fr0thy2 - 04/09/08
and slowly trying to blend in with FOSS
11.2.1. FOSS, sorry just doesn't meet my clients needs
No_Ax_to_Grind - 04/09/08
And unless it IMPROVES significantly it will never be installed in any of my clients facilities.
Don't take that the wrong way, I truely wish it were a viable alternative, but its not at this point.
11.2.1.1. Sorry to hear that...
storm14k - 04/09/08
....for your clients. I guess they are bigger than the big boys that run FOSS or made the mistake of locking themselves into Windows upfront. My how they must hate it now.
11.2.1.1.1. I am quite sure that he knows his own clients better
hkommedal - 04/09/08
than any outsider does; they (or me) may not even know WHO his clients are.
11.2.1.1.2. Nice excuse for FOSS's shortcommings
GuidingLight - 04/10/08
I guess they are bigger than the big boys that run FOSS or made the mistake of locking themselves into Windows upfront. My how they must hate it now
So since many of the big boys run Microsoft software as FOSS does not do what they need it to do for them, it actually means they choose Microsoft because they are locked into it.
Nice way to hide the fact that given a choice, many find FOSS is not a viable alternative.
11.2.1.1.3. Tell me about YOUR clients
No_Ax_to_Grind - 04/11/08
Oh wait, students and wage slaves don't have clients.
11.2.1.2. Erm?
zkiwi - 04/09/08
You have clients? You know their needs?
Forgive me, but I tend to the belief that you think needs are confined to Win Server, SQL server, Exchange server and whatever else they offer rather than an actual need.
11.2.1.3. FOSS Crapware
thungurknifur - 04/11/08
Yeah, whoever would run such crap as Apache or MySql???
11.3. And the ABMers will have a field day!
ye - 04/09/08
"At some point, Microsoft needs to step up and dump the legacy support and be honest with users and tell them straight up the newest version of Windows is NOT going to run legacy and they should NOT buy it."
They're already whining how Vista doesn't support all of their existing HW/SW. Just imagine the whining that would result if the intentionally pulled out legacy support.
They're damned if the do and damned if they don't.
11.3.1. Not so much... At least for me.
James Quinn - 04/09/08
There have always been since MS and Apple two schools of
thought legacy and move forward full steam ahead. Now
both have their downsides. I've heard often enough a
PC/Windows fan claim that Apple "dumps" her users.
Going for OS9 to OSX was painful for many. However I just
might have been the right approach. On the other hand
I've heard again from PC Folk the crowing about legacy and
how sweet having that is for them. So ABMers at least
some might strike back with taunts I suppose but it's not
like they haven't heard similar from the other side either
now is it? Me on the other hand I'll just be happy that the
war is over and we all finally agree on a path.
Pagan jim
11.3.1.1. Linux Runs New and Old
cyberscan - 04/09/08
Linux still has legacy hardware support,
and it also runs without the bloat
contained in Windows.
11.3.1.1.1. I think you will find that part of the reason for that is that
hkommedal - 04/09/08
Linux makes extensive use of modules. Modules are not loaded if the device is not there.
11.3.1.1.2. correction, linux runs old
rtk - 04/09/08
not so good with the new stuff.
11.3.1.1.2.1. It runs all MY new stuff just fine.
hkommedal - 04/09/08
Any USB device; plug it in and it works. Any NEW printer or scanner I have; plug it in and it will find the driver. Any network connection; it just works. Any VERY old printer; works just fine too. (I have some old impact printers for multi-layer forms.)
Kameras that is NOT on the supported list. They just work.
Trouble finding the right driver; NO.
Does it slow the system down ? No, because it only loads the needed modules WHEN required.
Is that what you mean with not so good on new stuff ?
What it is NOT good at is running Windows based GAMES.
11.3.1.1.2.1.1. granted.
rtk - 04/09/08
I was referring mostly to video cards, particularly from ATI.
11.3.1.1.2.1.2. About my ATI card from 2007.
hkommedal - 04/09/08
It runs just fine on SusE 10(boxed from Novell) and OpenSuSE10.3 with the ATI-driver that ATI delivered (via a Novell-SuSE).
Anything else ?
11.3.1.1.2.2. Resistance from the industry ...
The Smoking Man - 04/09/08
Many people in the Linux camp have approached ATI and asked them to open up about their video cards but, for some reason, they are being resistant to this idea.
While it is possible to get the video cards functional, it is impossible to get them working at a premium or professional level.
The Lenovo Thinkpad R60 I am using right now has a Radeon x1300 and it is impossible to get the dual head working in anything but 'clone' mode.
Why??? Not because of the lack of developers but because of the lack of co-operation from the manufacturer.
Go over to the Ubuntu forums and take a look at the extensive documentation there about the resistance of this company to surrender anything to the development community.
Linux runs NEW better than Microsoft in most cases and at greater speeds.
It takes a co-operative hardware industry to make it work however.
11.3.1.1.2.2.1. That's Linux' problem.
frgough - 04/10/08
Why should ATI have to open up their video specs? Just let
them make a binary driver and install the d@mn thing.
The problem is NOT ATI, the problem is Linux zealots who
do asinine things like throw up Tainted Kernel warnings if
someone installs a binary driver.
11.3.1.1.2.2.2. Interesting theory from frgough.
odubtaig - 04/10/08
Why should ATI have to open up their video specs? Just let them make a binary driver and install the d@mn thing.
Nothing stopping them, nVidia can manage it. They're just too lazy. Not the first time they've promised to 'open up' their cards, thrown out a few crumbs then blamed the community for not performing miracles.
The problem is NOT ATI, the problem is Linux zealots who do asinine things like throw up Tainted Kernel warnings if someone installs a binary driver.
Warnings? Can't say I've seen any recently. You must be going on second-hand information from a few years back as opposed to actual experience.
nVidia won't open up their cards, but they do provide working drivers which can be drstributed with distros as and when. ATI, however, expect the community to do all the donkey work but won't give anyone any clues, the last 'opening up' of their cards was, as usual, lacking.
But then, given their drivers for Windows over the last decade, what can anyone expect?
frgough, shooting the messenger since 1996.
11.3.1.1.2.2.3. ATI, however, expect the community to do all the donkey work
Ole Man - 04/10/08
Five'll getcha ten it's money being passed under the table from u-no-who.
Nothing personal, it's just business as usual. As long as the share-holders are happy, who cares? Customers? What customers? They are "users", and their voices mean nothing, don'tcha know?
11.3.1.1.2.2.4. One problem with your statement...
socialism=nowhere - 04/11/08
"Linux runs NEW better than Microsoft in most cases and at greater speeds."
I dual boot Ubuntu and Vista Ult. I have clocked both during boot and execution and Ubuntu is only about 2 seconds faster..consistently. And I am a newbie, software installation is well not a smooth as it could be.
11.3.2. Re: And the ABMers will have a field day!
none none - 04/09/08
They're already whining how Vista doesn't support all of their existing HW/SW.
Speaking as a Linux user, why would I expect Vista to support ANY of my software? Those are XP users who are whining, not ABMers. (They would use Anything But Vista, remember?)
11.3.2.1. Got me on a technicality!
ye - 04/09/08
That should have been "the" and not "their":
"They're already whining how Vista doesn't support all of their existing HW/SW."
11.3.2.1.1. Re: Got me on a technicality!
none none - 04/09/08
Still, only Windows users are whining. Non-Windows users are just rubbing your nose in it and you choose to call it whining.
Have a nice day!
11.3.2.1.1.1. Hmm, not really
GuidingLight - 04/10/08
Who cares that Linux has a 1% market share? If it works for you, then that should be the end of it.
You do not hear the Apple camp complaining about their 5% market share, they just happily use their computers and are done with it.
So it is the ABMer's complaining here, the "I'm the little guy and I just hit the big guy and ran" mentality.
Seriouslly, If you love Linux so much, why bother with a Windows story?
11.3.3. AMBers don't matter at all.
No_Ax_to_Grind - 04/09/08
If they aren't running MS products then they have nothing to cry over and MS really doesn't care what their opinion may be.
11.3.3.1. Yes and no....
James Quinn - 04/09/08
At least SOME ABMers are former MS users and like any
business MS would love to win back a few former clients
don't you think? Besides MS might want to pay attention to
those who do take the leap to another OS it's not all that
easy. It basically goes against human nature to do so and
having and understand of the why behind this might server
MS well.
Pagan jim
11.3.3.1.1. Not really
No_Ax_to_Grind - 04/09/08
"At least SOME ABMers are former MS users and like any business MS would love to win back a few former clients
don't you think?"
Not really. Being honest here, MS has MUCH greater opporunities in new markets with a better Widnows than worrying about the tiny minoroity that moved to anotehr platform. The truth here is that ABMers are not going to switch back, thats why they are Anything But Microsoft. People don't give up their religion...
11.3.3.2. Quite so. ABMers are pretty much irrelevant here. It is
hkommedal - 04/09/08
the Anti-/Pro-Vistas and Anti-/Pro- XPs that counts a lot more.
11.3.3.3. Bitty - 2 little points of facts
jacarter3 - 04/11/08
1] A lot of the the people that you called "AMBers" [sic] are not. Many of them use MS products daily.
2] A lot of eh true ABM people used MS products at one time or another. Their experience drove them to chose to leave MS behind forever.
BTW I fit both of those profiles in spite of recently shelling out over $300 for another GD MS license. But know this, fool, a very large portion of the people you call ABM have to use their MS crap everyday.
11.3.4. Well what do you expect...
storm14k - 04/09/08
...when the MoBsters biggest argument against all other OS's has been lack of compatibility with Windows software? What goes around comes around I suppose.
11.3.5. There may be an alternative to this.
hkommedal - 04/09/08
Number 1: Scrap support for too old hardware and software.
Number 2: Make additional MODULES for those who DO need something old.
Example if someone needs old serial ports supported, then load a module for that. It does not need to be in there by default. ONLY loaded WHEN required. That will usually mean that most modules will NOT take resourses most of the time.
The modules could also be as some kind of resource-pool, that was hardly ever used.
11.3.5.1. Alternative
Dumber_z - 04/09/08
I like your thinking. I would like to keep my OS as is (I have gotten used to it and have learned to use it at a satisfactory level after 5 or 6 years...don't have the time or patience to learn new or upgraded OS). Open Sources have been fantastic...don't need to upgrade to a new OS. Keep up this mandatory upgrading and most consumers are going south, and there goes internet customers...kiss. Let the high end designers come to the customer for awhile instead of visa versa...I, for one, am getting tired of being led (jerked) around.
11.3.6. If MS makes its decisions
Michael Kelly - 04/10/08
based on the tauntings of zealot detractors then they deserve to fail. If they can't make hard decisions on their own then they need new management.
Fixing Windows' problems is really simple. Make it a modular OS. Let those in charge of the modules innovate without some guy in upper management holding them back. And let modules compete against each other (e.g. Juk versus Amarok). Upper management should only make sure basic frameworks do not get broken. That's not to undermine the importance of a framework, but upper management should not be micromanaging the departments the way they do now.
11.4. Legacy SW
levinson - 04/09/08
Friend of mine is running MultiMate - for an old spreadsheet
document he uses for his portfolio control. His old laptop
died so he had to buy new hardware. Got it with XP just to be
safe about continuing to run MM, and it still does. However,
MM will only print to a parallel port... and the new laptop has
only USB. What's he going to do in a few years when this
laptop dies and the latest Windows won't run MM? Maybe
he'll finally convert to Excel!
11.4.1. Legacy software also dies.
No_Ax_to_Grind - 04/09/08
Your friend needs to upgrade if he wants to upgrade his hardware and OS. It really is that simple.
I have an old small block Chevy (327) that was designed for unleaded fuel. I can whine all day long about it but no one is willing to put lead back in gasoline for me. Things change...
11.4.1.1. Legacy Software
Dumber_z - 04/09/08
I haven't tried in a while but you used to be able to buy lead additives at an auto parts store. Be that as it may, some of us are willing to pay NOT TO UPGRADE so we can spin the tires once in a while without having to learn how to drive a race car.
11.4.2. If a future Windows was more module-based, then
hkommedal - 04/09/08
compatability-modules could be made. Then only those who needed them would have to load them and only WHEN needed.
Same thing with HW.
11.5. Re: Man, I have been saying this for 5 years.
none none - 04/09/08
At some point, Microsoft needs to step up and dump the legacy support and be honest with users and tell them straight up the newest version of Windows is NOT going to run legacy and they should NOT buy it.
I agree with you but there's a fly in the ointment. Who is going to support, say, XP, indefinitely? Because it's closed source, Microsoft is the only company that can, say, patch the kernel.
If MS actually did take your advice, even though it's not in its best interests, there might grow a small industry maintaining the systems of users who should not upgrade, but it would only be able to engineer around the edges. It couldn't really support the product itself without access to the code and the ability to modify it.
11.5.1. No need for support.
No_Ax_to_Grind - 04/09/08
Ok, so you have an old box running DOS 6.2 and an app you simly love. Why do you need to update anything about it if its been doing every thing you wanted for 20 years?
Answer, you don't...
11.6. In many ways, Vista is the first volly in ...
mwagner@... - 04/09/08
.. this battle to shift away from legacy code. Vista is the first OS from Microsoft to enforce Windows XP programming practices. That's why third-party drivers and code doesn't always run under Vista. Poorly designed code is just not reliable under Vista.
Vista is less vulnerable to attack but anti-virus vendors cried foul because Microsoft closed the holes used by hackers AND anti-virus vendors so their programs could work as intended.
Users believe all the FUD about Vista because they want an excuse to bash Microsoft.
11.6.1. "the first volly in ... " the first volly in .. .. this battle"
Ole Man - 04/09/08
Yeah, but firing blanks never hurt anyone.
Besides, winning ONE battle doesn't mean winning a war.
11.6.2. Wrong about the 3rd party drivers and code...
cheesyone - 04/10/08
The reason so much 3rd party drivers and code doesn't work with Vista, is that it is not "certified" Vista compatible. M$ has always charged for "certification" since the program began. Until Vista, non "certified" drivers and apps could still be loaded and work. No longer true! But don't blame it on Vista - hell anyone knows that the coders who were able to keep up with every other iteration of Windows just got really stupid this time around - NOT!
Once again, M$'s greed is costing them customers, but all you fanboys continue placing the blame elsewhere.
11.6.2.1. Ummm do you really understand what he's talking about...
socialism=nowhere - 04/11/08
Anything - with the exception of nVidia - that was certified for Vista has worked great! Anything else - crap shoot. Sorry to burst your obviously limited bubble but he's correct.
11.6.4. True to an extent
No_Ax_to_Grind - 04/11/08
I hear what you are saying, but the fact remains Vista is huge and that comes (in part) from trying to suport everything from the past 3 decades.
11.7. They can't do that, either
Yagotta B. Kidding - 04/09/08
At some point, Microsoft needs to step up and dump the legacy support and be honest with users and tell them straight up the newest version of Windows is NOT going to run legacy and they should NOT buy it. Of course that means they may lose a few sales but its still the right way to move FORWARD.
But their business model won't let them do that, either. The reason is that people buy computers to run APPLICATIONS, not operating systems. There are a LOT of mission-critical applications out there that keep people tied to Microsoft.
Dump the backward compatibility and all you do is create a market for MS' competition to own and grow in. Before long, that becomes an attractive platform for new applications and MS has real trouble.
11.8. Then why buy windows if you cut legacy....
dunn@... - 04/09/08
Like the author said if they cut legacy then my investment in software goes out the window (no pun intended).
With that in mind then I have to make a decision as to whether to stick with Microsoft and if they did it once (cut off legacy) then I will be wary of buying back in to Microsoft.
This is the VERY reason that Intel is not selling millions of Itaniums. It's not that they are not a better architecture, they are. Rather it is because it isn't x86 architecture and you have to start all over again.
Not just users but developers and then it becomes the "chicken and the egg" situation where developers are waiting to develop on the new platform until a substantial user base is built while the user base won't buy in until the apps are there.
Microsoft just needs to go back and clean out the the XP OS, add some more value to it like a faster kernel, better OS support for MultiCore processors as in load balancing tasks, etc.
Why they did what they did to Vista I'll never know, protect the user from the user at all inconvenience and give a new UI that requires more graphics processing power and memory than the whole of XP required of CPU and memory else it runs like a snail. Vista on laptops forget about it unless it is a $3000 laptop with a car battery tied to it.
11.8.1. $3000 for Vista is BullS**t
High Plains - 04/10/08
I bought a new laptop for $999.00 and it is running Vista Ultimate SP1 and I have had zero problems. No blue Screen, unexpected shutdowns, software compatibility problems or any of the other so called problems you ABMers have.
As one of the ABMers suggested Ms people are not as smart as the Linux crowd and that may be why we don't experience the problems Linux users have; we are not smart enough to know when we are having a problem.
11.8.1.1. Thou hast said it
Ole Man - 04/10/08
Pronounced your own judgment, out of you own mouth (or keyboard, as it were).
11.8.2. Why they did what they did to Vista I'll never know
Ole Man - 04/10/08
Well, it made you appreciate what you already had (XP), didn't it?
How many complaints have you heard about the WGA and DRM in XP since they dumped Vista on the world? Not many, eh? Whereas the uproar was beginning to be deafening pre-Vista.
That's age-old common philosophizing. If you want to make people appreciate something bad that you're pushing on them, just dump something much much worse on them. Works every time, guaranteed!
What I don't understand is why people can't see it. they must be too busy looking for something that aint there and never will be, and too excited about the garbage that is there.
11.8.2.1. Your memory is terrible
rtk - 04/10/08
There was a huge uproar over WGA on XP, the bloggosphere was alive with Linux fanbots and "casual copiers" pretending to be enraged MS customers.
Your chicken little act didn't work then, and it'll work just as well this time.
11.8.2.1.1. You really wish, don't you..........
Ole Man - 04/10/08
(Don't answer, we all know the answer)
Re-writing history works about as well as repeating your wish, over and over and over and over...... still doesn't make it true.
11.8.2.1.1.1. Says the guy
rtk - 04/10/08
who spends his days and nights wishing someone, anyone, will believe is repeated screams of impending disaster.
How about a post of you crying the blues over XP's WGA? Or is this a different Ole Man?
http://talkback.zdnet.com/5208-9584-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=30665&messageID=574614&start=0
Might want to reboot that memory of yours.
11.8.2.1.1.1.1. Thank you for bringing that up
Ole Man - 04/12/08
A perfect example of what WGA is good
for.
Only in your dreams am I the only one
complaining about WGA. You cannot
cover the tragedy up with your
belligerent arrogant attitude. Some
of the dirt is beginning to seep from
under the rug whence it was swept.
11.9. Is legacy software really the problem?
mikewarns - 04/09/08
Supporting the oldest legacy software requires little more than creating a virtual machine that can remap, oh, LPT1 to USB. DOSBox does a good, stable, open-source DOS emulation for running DOS apps, though it is game-oriented so it doesn't remap printer and serial ports. Nothing a clever programmer can't fix.
As for 16- or 32-bit Windows software an emulator should be easy enough to implement while still being faster than it was on that old computer. And could be a separate purchase for those folks who need it.
An ability to read and write legacy files is a trivial problem, especially when it's Word or Excel reading files created by an earlier version. No software company should complain about something that easy--give it to the new guy to get his feet wet.
From my experience, the problem with MS products is constantly added new functions and just plain bloat that doesn't really add usefulness and subtracts useability. Look at Outlook--the package itself is vast, especially for what is little more than a freakin' email and calendar program.
And the ribbon on the new Office is silly: it cannot be customized or turned off and was, as near as I can tell, a change for the sake of change. Worst of all, in this age of wide screens the ribbon is stuck at the top of the screen, reducing vertical space for your Word documents. That one is inexcusable.
11.9.1. About the Office UI
CobraA1 - 04/09/08
"And the ribbon on the new Office is silly: it cannot be customized or turned off and was, as near as I can tell, a change for the sake of change."
Two percent of people customize Office at all. And 85% of that two percent make only minor modifications. Less than half of a percent of people who use office actually make major changes to the interface.
More often than not, people actually make accidental changes to the UI and don't have the time or knowledge to reset it. How many times have I seen stuff like a tool bar, or even the menu itself, out of place or in an odd location, because somebody accidentally dragged it there?
http://blogs.msdn.com/jensenh/archive/2006/03/02/542118.aspx
So, the office team decided to allow minor changes. They put in a quick access bar that can be customized.
If you really want major customizations, add-ins can still customize it, so look for an add-in that suits your tastes.
http://blogs.msdn.com/jensenh/archive/2006/06/27/648269.aspx
And yes, you can make the ribbon dissappear: Double click a tab, or press Ctrl+F1.
http://blogs.msdn.com/jensenh/archive/2005/10/19/482631.aspx
The lead for the UI design team has put together a very good web page and blog about the UI and why they made these decisions. I'm not saying you have to agree with the decisions, but it does help you to understand why they did things the way they did.
http://blogs.msdn.com/jensenh/archive/2006/11/10/the-office-2007-ui-bible.aspx
11.9.1.1. Re: About the Office UI
mikewarns - 04/09/08
Thanks for the links. While I can see your point I still believe locking it at the top of the screen, rather than on the side, was shortsighted.
11.9.1.1.1. What's more stange is
pkrdk - 04/14/08
Firstly, that we give people who writes letters a landscape monitor and not a portrait one. Letters are written on A4 this side the Atlantic, letter format your side. Apple once had a monitor fitting an A4 paper.
Secondly, that there are no complaints about the UI being totally different from earlier 'offices'. Rememeber all the fuzz about the extreme learning curve that made it impossible for plain users to learn OpenOffice? OO has an almost completely identical UI to Office 2003.
11.9.1.2. Office 2007 has amny features I do NOT like and will NOT use the suite....
carlsf@... - 04/09/08
I will be staying with Office 2003.
Office 2007 DONT LIKES...
1) Ribbon interfave sucks as does navigation
2) Macros and Templates do NOT cone across from 2003 very well
3) Backward campatiability from 2007 to 2003 what a joke MS
11.9.1.2.1. agree some
CobraA1 - 04/09/08
The ribbon is different, but I think it's better once you get used to it. A lot of features are no longer hidden underneath a million layers.
I dunno about macros and templates, honestly I rarely use them.
Backwards compatibility is indeed a bit of a joke - especially since the Power Point viewer that comes with Office 2007 when you "Package for CD" seems to be for 2003! What's up with that?! It's just plain stupid. I lose a lot of effects like soft shadows which really make my presentations look more professional. I can't believe Microsoft left out the 2007 viewer.
11.9.1.2.2. After a bit of digging . . .
CobraA1 - 04/09/08
After a bit of digging, it sounds like the compatibility break was mostly about switching to the new XML based formats, and was done under a lot of pressure from various governments.
If you enable "Show Developer tab in the Ribbon" in the options, you get an entire tab dedicated to developer stuff like macros and templates. Hope that helps.
11.10. Form the OS marketer's point of view ...
The Smoking Man - 04/09/08
you may be right.
Having worked on mainframe systems prior to PCs, bespoke systems have a lot of time and money invested in them.
Some companies I worked for were still using code first created in the 1960's on IBM machines ... The true Legacy systems.
Most users simply want a word processor or a new media player.
What about corporations with extensive investment in software development for their own bespoke applications?
When a bank can still use code on an IBM mainframe generated almost 5 decades ago and it still functions, why would they transfer to an OS they can't rely upon to do anything the same even 5 years on?
Techonology is moving faster than need in many cases. Most people have not mastered the use of all the features of 'Word 97' and Microsoft has released at least 3 newer versions of a program that simply formats words on a page. And why do they upgrade ... because M$ no longer offers support should the product call part of the OS that does not exist any more.
Face it.
Microsoft is a vast make work project forcing change for the sake of change and not for advanced functionality.
Your average secretary can make do with Word '97.
Your average accountant can run a spreadsheet of the same vintage and not notice any degradation of functionality.
It is not NEED that is driving most upgrades. They are forced on users out of the threatened lack of support.
11.10.1. Re: Form the OS marketer's point of view ...
mikewarns - 04/10/08
>> Techonology is moving faster than need in many
>> cases. Most people have not mastered the use of all
>> the features of 'Word 97' and Microsoft has
>> released at least 3 newer versions of a program
>> that simply formats words on a page.
And Word 97 format has become one of the standard formats for transferring files. During a recent period of unemployment I found that the only formats anybody wanted resumes and cover letters in were Word97, RTF (1987), and plain ol' ASCII (first release in 1963, last update in 1986).
And I think we can safely say that most users have not yet mastered the use of all the features of WordPad, much less any version of Word.
11.10.2. That and new fileformats
thungurknifur - 04/11/08
"It is not NEED that is driving most upgrades. They are forced on users out of the threatened lack of support."
That and the added "features" in the new versions that wont work on older software.
Combine that with giving away free copies of the new version to high management of Corporations.
They use it, send files to staff running older versions who cant open them up.
I've seen this happen. What our incompetent management did was upgrade all instances of Office to the latest version (at HUGE costs).
What they should have done was to uninstall the new version and strip the pompous jackass high in management of his admin rights so he couldn't do it again.
11.11. Double standard and hard pill to swallow for stone-age die-hards
YinToYourYang-22527499 - 04/10/08
If you don't want legacy support then why use Windows at all?
Isn't the non-legacy, modern operating system Mac OS X?
Answer from Windows zealnuts: Because we need all those
Windows applications which don't run on Mac OS X.
(shh...ignore that Intel Macs actually do run Windows, but
more importantly the fact that switchers have discovered the
freedom from breaking with Microsoft's albatross of an
operating system).
11.11.1. Well that's one OPINION ... and well we know what that is worth
socialism=nowhere - 04/11/08
nothing. There are well at least 10 people here that would day Ubuntu, and several million that would say Vista, and a few million that would say Apple. So basically that was a op-ed piece, but just worth of bird cage lining.
But thank you for showing us your Rainbow...it's very nice.
11.12. Virtualization
thungurknifur - 04/11/08
Yeah, you'd think the MS Engineers were clever enough to put some kind of virtualization/emulation layer in there in order to run older software.
But then, they ARE Microsoft Engineers, so that's not very likely...
12. RE: Gartner: Windows collapsing under its own weight; Radical change needed
Windows Defender - 04/09/08
Microsoft is creating a version of Windows from from scratch. Don't ask me how I know
12.1. Errr, because they have to?
fr0thy2 - 04/09/08
Because years of bullsiht and rubbish ain't cutting it? LOL ....
12.2. Gee In 5 Years Time...
swbobcat - 04/09/08
M$ MIGHT produce an OS that actually runs in 64 KB (not MB). The funny think about M$ is that every time they produce an new OS it requires more and more RAM to do the the exact same thing as the old OS. The ONLY way I'd touch VISTA would be if M$ PAID me some BIG $$$ to use their bugware .
Now that M$ no longer supports Win '95,'98, Win ME, Win NT, etc. why not put the source code out there so people can fix the gazillion bugs. If not, since M$ does not sell people a product, only a LICENSE, then M$ should be obligated to continue to support all their old OS's. They can't have their cake and eat it too.
12.2.1. Ge in Five Years TIme
Dumber_z - 04/09/08
I been wondering that since paying the high price of the first windows...I know very very few people who got any quality support before a new upgrade...then it started all over again. We were all lemmings but what can we do?
13. RE: Gartner: Windows collapsing under its own weight; Radical change needed
notlehs - 04/09/08
I think Windows is doing just fine for the most part. Vista works as good as XP once you turn off all the BS (Windows Defender, Sidebar etc) gunk that everyone seems interested in.
The real problem with Vista is licensing and expense. I think Microsoft should offer ONE version. Windows Vista Ultimate... PERIOD. The upgrade price should be statically set at $49 and $99 for the full version.
Oh.. and get rid of that Windows Authentication nonsense... let people install your software. It helps you to sell more software...trust me on this. Let computer Geeks buy one copy and install it on as many machines as they want to. People will still buy new machines and pay, and MS would have the entire geek world using nothing but windows and singing their praises.
13.1. Very true
mcicogni - 04/09/08
I totally agree. MS licensing, designed to maximize their income from OEM sales (one PC=one license) makes sense to them but for everyone else is just silly.
I got Vista only because it was on my new PC. And boy, was I disappointed. Take out transparent window borders and all you have is something that you need to work hard to make run almost as XP does. And let's forget Defender and Sidebar, which really are pallid imitations of real programs.
Coming to Windows Authentication: MS had stumbled on the Right Way of making its software ubiquitous: let it run wherever it was installed, fake indignation at everybody, and unleash lawyers on the real pirates. But thay managed to scrap this one, too.
Too bad for them, I guess.
13.2. PC side coudl live with one or two versions
royalef - 04/09/08
I agree for the most part. Microsoft has bulled about reducing the number of versions of Windows for years, but every step of the way they clearly are just lying. With every revision they develop offshoot, abandoned children they probably wished they had aborted.
Windows Media Center 2002, which also has a 2004 and 2005 version although they don't ID they clearly when installed. Then there is Tablet & PC editions. XP, XP Pro. Now we have 4 versions of Vista--which include the Ultimate--which offers the user nothing but a promise of cool apps--which have never appeared. I wonder when that class-action lawsuit will start.
I could deal with home & corporate if Corporate was unique to corporate needs, but there is nothing about it that benefits corporate scales of deployment.
With XP it was all fake marketing to just milk different segments for different dollars. There is no value. And this is where MS is clearing in need of being deeply sued.
One of the major issues I see if MS is withholding security features from home users, denying security to 100's of millions of users, unless they pay up.
Microsoft long ago stopped caring what users wanted and began just marching to the emporer's drum. You can see how they used to pay attention a decade ago. When they transition from Windows 95 they included a CLASSIC START MENU option for people who didn't like the newer XP extended menu. In VISTA, the CLASSIC MENU option is still there. So you can roll back to how the 12 year old opperating system works, but you can't revert to the very popular Windows XP Start menu. This shows they were catering to users back then. Now they don't give a crap.
13.3. Ultimate is $20 more costly than Windows XP Pro
ye - 04/09/08
Interesting how many are faulting Vista pricing but not XP Pro pricing when the difference is only $20.
13.3.1. Marketing strategy ...
The Smoking Man - 04/09/08
Since most IT managers are saying they won't touch it with a barge pole, they are offering it at the 'low introductory price' in hopes they can get some of these dust covered copies to move off the shelf.
The IT world has been burned one two many times to get excited about a new Microsoft product and most tend to hang back as long as they possibly can so they are not bloodied by the 'bleeding edge' of the latest Microsoft product.
The general rule is that you don't move until at least SP1 is released ... and only then, reluctantly.
13.3.1.1. stop making broad assumptions.
rtk - 04/09/08
Most IT manager are not saying anything of the sort, most are well on their way to finalizing their roll out plans, if they haven't already begun them.
SP1 is out, that's the queue many were waiting for.
13.3.1.1.1. making broad assumptions?
Ole Man - 04/10/08
Or ignoring all evidence?
Why not post a little evidence that "most (M-O-S-T) are well on their way to finalizing their roll out plans (of Vista), if they haven't already begun them"?
I have seen very little evidence of ANYBODY planning to deploy Vista (Microsoft web pages and propaganda doesn't count, they tend to be a tiny bit biased, and that would be making a broad assumption).
13.3.1.1.1.1. Or ignoring logic...
rtk - 04/10/08
140 million, 14% of the installed base. Even given a plus/minus of 5% means a TON of machines out there.
Of course, you honestly believe there's really only a handful of machines that are powerful enough to run Vista, and those were bought by 12 people that didn't realize they were getting Vista instead of XP.
Speaking of biases, I don't think your claims of seeing no evidence of vista deployments are believable, since you seem to know very little about technology in general.
13.3.1.1.1.1.1. It would serve thee far better
Ole Man - 04/10/08
To try to prove some of your own beliefs, rather than attempt to interpret my beliefs to me.
For example, you could start with the source whence you pulled your imaginary numbers from.
Some of us can and do read enough to know past and present events. Too bad you are so in the dark.
13.3.1.1.1.1.2. you're too much fun.
rtk - 04/10/08
For example, you could start with the source whence you pulled your imaginary numbers from.
What numbers? you mixing trolls again?
Some of us can and do read enough to know past and present events. Too bad you are so in the dark.
You can't even remember your own opinion about XP's WGA from 6 months ago. Don't think we should be counting on your version of history past...
13.4. ...radical change
Dumber_z - 04/09/08
uh...praises being sung by the geeks, you mean....
14. I didn't charge clients thousands of dollars for a report
jperlow - 04/09/08
... that said the same thing:
http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=8134
14.1. Maybe you should? [nt]
olePigeon - 04/09/08
nt.
14.1.1. It's the same old story.
odubtaig - 04/09/08
It takes thousands of pounds to bring in a consultant to go over everything and say exactly the same thing everyone on the ground has been saying for years.
Funny thing, I know just how underqualified (by their own admission) some consultants are.
14.1.1.1. Most consultants are not only underqualified
Ole Man - 04/09/08
But practically useless, too.
I consult with my grand-kids quite often, and they very seldom even pay attention to my advice.
The difficulty for consultants is finding somebody who isn't too smart and wants to be consulted. Then there's the matter of a pay-check. The consultee must be dense enough to pay handsomely for advice that he/she isn't even sure is right or not.
Lotsa water flowing under that consulting bridge. Kinda like the guys who usta be garbage collectors. Now they're called "Sanitation Engineers", and they get paid a whole lot more than plain old garbage collectors.
Technological innovation, don'tcha know.
14.1.1.1.1. Re: "Sanitation Engineers". . . Well I dread the day they
hkommedal - 04/09/08
are called "Recycling Techicians" . Their wages will go rocketing.
15. RE: Gartner: Windows collapsing under its own weight; Radical change needed
hypermark - 04/09/08
Irony of ironies, before dumping my PC and moving to the
Mac, I wrote a blog post comparing Microsoft to the fall of
communism; namely, that an inefficient system was
collapsing under the weight of an enormous legacy, and
that entropy awaits.
Here is link to full post if interested:
http://thenetworkgarden.com/weblog/2007/03/microsoft_
and_t.html
Cheers,
Mark
16. RE: Gartner: Windows collapsing under its own weight; Radical change needed
daliaga@... - 04/09/08
Hi all,
I cannot believe that it took so long to Gartner analysts to discover that OS Vista is bulky and unfriendly. I said exactly that two years ago in this blog/forum and I quote "I have been working in the industry for a long time and this OS is not up to my expectations. I believe it will be a big flop just as the Millenium OS. It is bulky and not user friendly...All in all I rather stay with WinXp and keep upgrading 'till the release of something better.
http://talkback.zdnet.com/5208-3513-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=26627&messageID=500321&start=-1
Sincerely,
David Aliaga
17. RE: One size DOSEN'T fit all?
d_suse - 04/09/08
MacDonald argued that Windows may need multiple kernels to support increasing demands from customers and hardware makers. ???One size doesn???t fit all,??? says MacDonald.
Funny, this works with Linux...
17.1. Linux makes use of modules to a large extent. If you
hkommedal - 04/09/08
don't need the module it is never loaded.
18. Vista is a flop like Millenium!
daliaga@... - 04/09/08
Hi all,
I cannot believe that it took so long to Gartner analysts to discover that OS Vista is bulky and unfriendly. I said exactly that two years ago in this blog/forum and I quote "I have been working in the industry for a long time and this OS is not up to my expectations. I believe it will be a big flop just as the Millenium OS. It is bulky and not user friendly...All in all I rather stay with WinXp and keep upgrading 'till the release of something better.
http://talkback.zdnet.com/5208-3513-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=26627&messageID=500321&start=-1
Sincerely,
David Aliaga
18.2. Oh no. Win ME carries the flop "crown".
hkommedal - 04/09/08
It is THE king of flops.
(Sorry. misposted first.).
18.3. Linux is a flop! Vista sold 150 millions copies.
qmlscycrajg - 04/10/08
Linux is a flop, NOT Vista
18.3.1. Wrong.
frgough - 04/10/08
HP, Dell et al sold 150 million computers with Vista pre-
installed. There is a difference.
18.3.1.1. Not to Microsoft...
TheWerewolf - 04/10/08
They get paid either way.
So, unless you're going to seriously argue that somehow Microsoft has colluded... well, everyone into preinstalling Windows on their hardware when the actual customer wants Linux...
18.3.2. Most uninstalled
symbolset - 04/10/08
You do realize that makes Vista the most uninstalled OS in the history of IT, don't you?
Behold, the power of Microsoft!
18.3.2.1. He's right about one thing, though
Ole Man - 04/10/08
Microsoft DID get paid for them. Many of them twice. Some of them three times, even. That's how they jack up their numbers, and why they beat their drums so loudly.
They really meant it when they said: "What we're really after is simply that people acquire a legal license for Windows for each computer they own before they move on to Linux or Sun Solaris or BSD or OS/2 or whatever."
18.3.2.2. Oh, I doubt that.
rtk - 04/10/08
Even the serious Linux fan will readily admit to installing and using multiple distributions.
Linux is by far the most uninstalled OS in the history of IT.
18.3.2.3. Show me the numbers and proof of that please...
socialism=nowhere - 04/11/08
I see that all the time for the jealous wannabe's and have yet to see a qualified article on it. I know several families that have bought new computers with Vista and not a single one went back to Windows XP. Not one...this is just typical I no-nothing garbage being repeated.
19. Microsoft even knows
Clewin - 04/09/08
Win7 devs have already acknowledged that legacy code will go into a legacy module and be virtualized (much the way Macs did moving from a OS9 to OS X). Win7 itself will not be burdened by legacy code but will be able to run it, but kiss your drivers goodbye again (it's possible they may work with Vista drivers - depends on OS design).
20. Is MacDonald on the Vista Design Team?
Steven Rogers - 04/09/08
I guess when you're Gartner, you can say in the same breath: 1) Windows is too bloated and
complex 2) Windows needs an Application identity system that controls app access rights to
OS subsystems.
Maybe MacDonald is on the Vista design team? Sounds like the same logic that got them where
they are today. Everyone thinks it's too bloated - except for their own little pet feature.
Windows Bloated: it's news features like this that keep Gartner on top, and keep us coming
back to ZDnet. Sheesh - only an idiot wouldn't realize by now that Windows is bloated. The
question is what to do about it - it's not easy, as these guys demonstrate by complaining
about bloat while advocating more.
21. RE: Gartner: Windows collapsing under its own weight; Radical change needed
Geezer Dude - 04/09/08
From a user standpoint, the only reason I use Windows in any flavor is software availability.
There are more choices and some really good software developed by both Microsoft and other developers that require me to use Windows.
If equivilant software (features, useablity and end-product acceptance over a wide client base) were available under a slimmer, lighter and faster OS I'd switch in a heartbeat.
But until Office, Photoshop, etc. become more OS diverse it's what I'm stuck with.
I also assume that if such a migration were made, the resulting OS wouldn't be a slim or light enviornment. The overhead of supplying the necessary hooks and applets (kernels) to allow the programs to run would bloat that OS also.
Vista is a hardware hog, but I haven't had any performance issues with it yet. XP was lambasted as being too harware intensive when it first came out. That said, the hardware requirements are becoming outrageous and are forcing consumers to shell out huge amounts of money, not to get ahead but just to float in the waters.
Windows will collapse and become an ancedotal phenomenon when the major software players become more platform diverse, which is bound to happen.
22. Try this with Windows
Michael Of Atlanta - 04/09/08
I've got a notebook running Ubuntu. I tinker with it, probe it, tease it, try to break it. The other day, it was totally destroyed. I dropped the DVD back in the drive, did a virgin install, Ubuntu recognized all my devices and was up and running in 30 minutes. Then, slightly high on endorphins, I downloaded Heron. It installed virtually unattended, and upgraded my browser to Foxfire V3b4 or 5 and upgraded my openoffice.org. Beautiful. Effing Beautiful.
22.1. Try what with Windows?
ye - 04/09/08
I'm not exactly sure what you're asking people to do. Surely it's more than just re-installing the OS?
22.1.1. I should have been more clear...
Michael Of Atlanta - 04/09/08
The article mentions how Windows gets slow with time. Have you ever tried to do a clean install? I've done it a few dozen times, and it is always a pain, which is somewhat counter intuitive as Windows is the de facto standard. I guess my core problem with Windows is this:
It just doesn't work like it should.
22.1.1.1. I've done plenty of installs. Haven't had a problem with them.
ye - 04/09/08
"The article mentions how Windows gets slow with time."
Yep...no surprise an article spreading FUD has FUD in it.
"I've done it a few dozen times, and it is always a pain, which is somewhat counter intuitive as Windows is the de facto standard."
Really? It's pretty simple. Vista made it even more so. Though I think I'd give the nod to OS X in ease of installation.
22.1.1.1.1. Windows rot is FUD?
storm14k - 04/09/08
You can't possibly be suggesting that Windows rot doesn't occur? You can defrag, periodically reboot and even not install or remove anything and it gets slower. I have it running in a VM now which I boot infrequently and don't install anything on and it has slowed to a crawl.
The OS war is fun and all but lets be real about it.
22.1.1.1.2. Windows does get slower over time
voska1 - 04/10/08
Not so sure that's a problem exclusive to Windows however as I've not used the Mac OS enough to see if it has the same problem. I know Linux/unix doesn't have that issue though.
All I know for sure is that yearly re-install of Windows actually speeds things up. Now that could be my use of Windows. I'm a gamer and I'm always installing and uninstalling games. As time goes on it gets slower and slower. Right now XP is incredibly slow for me and I know when I install it next it will pick up in speed. At work I don't do the same type of installing I do at home and no issues with speed so I suspect that it's the installing and uninstalling that causes the problem. So really it's not a OS problem but use problem. It could be the OS but I really don't use Linux like I use Windows so I can't really compare that. Same thing with the Mac.
22.1.1.1.2.1. Depends on the user not the OS...
socialism=nowhere - 04/11/08
I have had XP on this machine (work) for 3 years and it is just as fast as when I received it. Vista has been on at home for a year and it's fine...so I have to disagree from personal experience. I have Ubuntu but have not used it enough to say either way.
22.1.2. Not just install SO
green alien - 04/09/08
But install apps and user data: simple, clean and effortlessly. MS tries to make user confusion by making simple tasks complex, and with a lot of hidden work. The purpose of this is a mistery - are they making money with users suffer? Or the strategy to buy +hw and +sw slipped this time? One of my Vista machines, when browsing a folder with mp3 files - just browsing - turns the machine unusable, with terabytes of accesses no one (except Mr. One or Mr. two) on Earth knows what's for. Same machine with XP works fine and fast. Not an old machine, but a dual core with 2GB ram. Maybe it's time to MS make software for people.
22.1.3. Things like having ALL personal files on a separate
hkommedal - 04/09/08
partition ( /home), makes it a lot safer to mess about with.
When you re-install, you still have all your data intact.
23. Create versions for specific uses?
PB_z - 04/09/08
"For starters, Windows should create versions for specific uses"
Kind of like Home Basic for basic use, Home Premium for media center use, Business/Enterprise for corporate use?
People have been blasting the multiple-SKU-ness of Vista; how is what you're proposing any different?
23.1. Just a couple of examples:
hkommedal - 04/09/08
1 You could have a Media-centric version (even with all the DRM in it).
(DRM should hopefully die soon anyway as PART OF an OS.)
2 You could have a pure office-orientet version that was DRM-free and was designed to do office-work and very little else.
3 A basic "hardly do anything"-version that depended on extra modules according to what you wanted. (example: Gaming-module; hardly any games running without it and a "accounting"-module that took security and encrytion extremely seriously.)
24. True to a point
coffeeshark - 04/09/08
I would prefer a modular approach as in Server 2008, where you install only the profiles you need on a machine.
This would also be applicable to Windows Mobile, which would simply be a limited subset of a full Windows install.
25. Can you say Apple for All?
iMarc - 04/09/08
I am a Loud and Proud OS X User. I have an MacMini Core
Duo (Purchased Early 2007) and a PowerBook G4 (Purchase
d Pre-owned Late 2007) Both of my Machines are Running
the Current release of OS X; Leopard. I bought the family
pack license so I can have OS X Leopard on all my
machines Legally. I hope to add on to my Mac family Mid-
Summer. My brother is an avid PC User, Currently running
XP, He bought Vista Home Premium and was VERY dis-
satisfied. He downgraded once more, to XP. I have not
had one problem from either of my Macs. Even though my
brother is using XP, he still encounters numerous errors.
Vista is just a complete mess-up. My predictions are that
Apple will take over the Computer Market. And probably
one day Linux. Linux just has not caught on yet. The
mainstream issue with Microsoft is that they have forgot
about the user, and have just focused soley on the
businesses. To bring the company back up to health they
will need to make Windows 7, a dang good OS, and prove
it. Otherwise, Apple I see will be going mainstream in the
matter of a few years. Microsoft will need to make
Windows 7 more than what OS X is now. And stop
copieing OS X features as well. Oh yeah, trash the
Activation!
25.1. Only if it comes with Windows preinstalled.
No_Ax_to_Grind - 04/09/08
That way I wouldn't need to go out and buy it like so many Mac users do.
25.2. Mmm.. meanwhile, here in the real world...
TheWerewolf - 04/10/08
First off, Apple is a *hardware* company not an OS company. They make the vast portion of their profit on the sale of hardware. There's no evidence that they could handle becoming an OS company without licensing to other companies, and if that happens, trust me, you'll be reading articles like this in a few years with "Apple" in place of "Microsoft".
Second, the reason there is no activation is because MacOS X has hardware DRM integrated into it - without serious hacking, you can't just install it on any PC, it requires a TPM preloaded with an Apple PKI Key in writeonly store. That means you can't reliably run it on anything but their hardware.
Third, Microsoft's #1 customer in terms of dollars is businesses. The home user for Windows isn't anywhere as big a money maker for them. The reverse is true for Apple, so of course Apple focuses more on the home user.
Fourth, Microsoft copies some of Apple's features - but guess what - Apple copies some of Microsoft's - and they BOTH copy Linux and other OSes. Get over it.
Finally, here's the thing that keeps getting missed in articles like this: Windows is running on around 92% of every computer in THE WORLD. Think about that for a moment. More than 9 computers in 10 are running Windows. If you extend that to 'computers running Microsoft software', it goes even higher and over to Macs running Office (which makes Microsoft a nice bit of change).
Linux is only making a dent in small formfactor portables like the Eee - but there so much demand for a Windows version of these units that they had to go to Microsoft and get help to fit WinXP on it. On the mainstream desktops - less than 1%.
Even in servers, where Linux has a logical place, after surging to around 24% market share, they've been in retreat.
MacOS will fight for a few percent back and forth - and might even get back to it's all time share high of 11%, which it hasn't seen since the early 90s, but sorry - the rumours of Microsoft's death are greatly exaggerated.
26. RE: Unless a Miracle Happens!
netzd - 04/09/08
Unless a miracle happens, Windows future is doomed to
failure driven there because of it's past success! Today,
despite what Linux fan boys like to think, if Window fails
there is only one real competitor to step into Windows
shoes: OS X!
Linux is too fragmented, too immature to take Windows
place; only OS X is mature enough and large enough to
take over, that is if Apple licenses it; a very big if?
Only Apple has the billions of dollars and infrastructure to
replace Windows; you don't think that a bunch of scattered
people, working long hours for nothing, is going to have
the focus to really replace Windows? It takes money, and
lots and lots of it to be able to focus the engineering staff
to be able to accomplish such an undertaking.
As far as Linux really being free.... it isn't! Sure you can
download and install it for free, but if you really need help
and support, searching long and grueling hours in Linux
forums isn't going to cut it. If you really want great Linux
support it's going to cost you a leg and arm.... Linux
support companies don't make money by giving help for
nothing!
26.1. Linux is way ahead.
PMDubuc - 04/09/08
Linux is way ahead of Windows in all four for of the design criteria mentioned in the article. So-called "fragmentation" is not an issue. It's only a symptom of Linux's flexibility and modularity. Windows is criticized for being to "monolithic." Get it? Billions of dollars of infrastructure are not required to replace Windows. It won't take any more effort on the part of the end users to replace Windows with Linux for most applications than it would to replace it with OS X! What you say in the last paragraph about Linux requiring help and support is not any more true of Linux than it is of Windows or OS X for that matter. The main difference is that you don't have to pay hefty license fees for Linux. If you have a reasonably talented IT staff, you don't have to pay for support either.
26.2. Let me help you because you're lost.
storm14k - 04/09/08
As far as Linux really being free.... it isn't! Sure you can
download and install it for free, but if you really need help
and support, searching long and grueling hours in Linux
forums isn't going to cut it. If you really want great Linux
support it's going to cost you a leg and arm.... Linux
support companies don't make money by giving help for
nothing!
Red Hat support does not cost an arm and a leg. And Windows users hit Google just like everyone else to solve problems. Pure FUD on your part.
Linux is too fragmented, too immature to take Windows
place; only OS X is mature enough and large enough to
take over, that is if Apple licenses it; a very big if
In what market? Surely you can't be talking about servers. And the desktop market is only held back by the Windows culture of users that haven't learned anything new. Aside from that Linux stands to do a much better job on the desktop.
On the contrary Windows fanboys have failed to realize that this so called scattered group of people has already produced a product that can match and exceed Windows. Availability through vendors is the current hurdle. They are the ones that will offer support...not the Linux developers as you seem to think. With each new mini laptop and low cost PC that drops with a Linux OS that support infrastructure is able to grow.
26.2.1. I wish Windows users would hit google.
odubtaig - 04/09/08
I'd have more damn free time.
Walking your girlfriend through sorting out her mum's computer that hadn't been updated in so long it needed SP2 (then finding it chokes on the 256MB RAM installed and needs upgrading), then a firewall installing, over MSN.
That's pain.
Seriously, how many people would find KB909095 with any degree of ease?
26.3. And if you need Microsoft help?
Ole Man - 04/09/08
What? Call the OEM? Or call India?
It surely would be a miracle, if you could get anybody who speaks English, isn't reading from a cue card, and knows enough to spell help and maybe even perform a minute help function.
26.3.1. Reboot and call me back ...
The Smoking Man - 04/09/08
That wasn't so hard was it???
;-D
26.4. if you knew anything about Linux....
mdsmedia - 04/09/08
....or Open Source software you'd know that Free doesn't mean "free of charge". It means "freedom", so please don't give your expert opinion on the problem of Linux when you have no idea about it.
27. RE: Gartner: Windows collapsing under its own weight; Radical change needed
netzd - 04/09/08
I agree, Ballmer has to go, along with the most of the old
guard at Microsoft. After all, Microsoft is lacking in resources
- they have more money and the largest staff of great
people; what they lack is direction and focus, all of which
Microsoft's leadership shows that it lacks!
28. RE: Gartner: Windows collapsing under its own weight; Radical change needed
jay@... - 04/09/08
Well,Balmer is "Certainly Professional" but, curiously lacks insight towards the "future of the global workspace".
Understandably, inherent changes will take place in due time. Patience is a virtue here, as things will unfold, undoubtably slow.
However, intelligent solutions will prevail, they always do, whether MS likes it or not. A managed pathway to enhanced productiviy and finacial reason is impending.
MS's "ME" attitude will wane in the face of "Real" "Solid" solutions that are on the boards now.
Take care, and make the best of it for now....
JV
29. Hail captain obvious
davey23 - 04/09/08
Good for these guys. They spent millions of dollars figure out something that Linux users and PC personnel have known and been saying for years. They should be proud of yourself, and the people that paid them ought to kick themselves in the butt.
30. RE: Gartner: Windows collapsing under its own weight; Radical change needed
mwagner@... - 04/09/08
It's hard to argue that Microsoft is 'on-the ropes' with a hundred million licenses of Vista sold and hundreds of millions of Windows XP clients and a 90+ percent market share.
So what if Linux is "just as good" if the average consumer cannot buy a fully-functional Linux box and use it without special knowledge -- let alone buy the same applications as they have come to depend upon.
Similarly, the consumer can buy a complete system from Dell for half what a new iMac costs. It doesn't matter if the iMac can do more if consumers don't need the extra capabilities enough to get Apple off of that 5% market share.
From an operating system design perspective, all of what you say is true but consumers want a general purpose product that can meet all their needs.
Would it benefit Microsoft if Windows Mobile and Windows Vista were completely binary compatible? Absolutely! Modularity could make that possible -- along with a host of other dedicated products built upon plug-n-play components of windows.
Will failure to move in this direction ultimately be Microsoft's downfall? Well maybe. When a competitor comes along with the will to take on Microsoft for the commodity products such a move would make possible, then perhaps Microsoft will be threatened but, UNTIL THEN I don't see it happening.
Apple is too dependent upon the premium end of the market to compete for the commodity desktop and Linux is perfectly happy competing for the lucrative machine-room server market to put any effort into a truly consumer-friendly desktop Linux product.
If a Linux vendor decides to take on Microsoft in their market segment, maybe we will see a change but right now, I see no hint of it!
30.1. I see you running around for a long time yet
Ole Man - 04/09/08
Busily propping up Microsoft... a little prop here, a little jack there, a big stack of blocks somewhere else.... until they are finally lying stone cold dead.
Then, I see you being one of the first ones to kick Microsoft and tell them they might be resurrected some day in the distant future, but you see no hint of it now.
The moral of the story is: Stay on the side of the top dog until they are beaten, then jump on the side of the NEW top dog, and you will always be on the side of the top dog.
30.1.1. I see you
mdemuth - 04/09/08
making the same mindless, witless, wishful thinking statements for longer.
Moral of the story? You can do nothing but mouth the same drivel over and over again.
You've been dead wrong every time, but keep trying. Sooner or later you might stumble on something.
30.1.1.1. I see no evidence of anything you say
Ole Man - 04/09/08
But since you are the great visionary, keep trying. You might even run across something to back up what you say, one of these years.
Don't let facts get in your way on your meandering journey down the hallowed halls of Microsoft malfeasance.
30.1.1.1.1. Old Man or Old Dog
High Plains - 04/10/08
There is a saying that you can't teach an old dog new tricks. It must apply to some old men too.
Ole Man, do you just write one thing and cut and paste to create a new post.
BTW, I am more than 15 years older than you.
30.1.1.1.1.1. What are you trying to say?
Ole Man - 04/10/08
That you can't learn anything new because you are old, even older than I?
You must have a serious handicap. I still learn something new every day.
Your feeble attempt at personal insults are about as meager as your obvious knowledge about software.
31. RE: Gartner: Windows collapsing under its own weight; Radical change needed
Geezer Dude - 04/09/08
I posted a long winded response earlier, having to do with needing Windows for my apps, etc., etc.
I believe the bottom line is: we, the users, drive the need for OS development/bloat. I run Office 2007, Adobe CS3, want my Itouch connected and so on.
If a modular version of Windows comes out, I'll probably bloat the thing just to keep my apps and toys working.
Similiar issues will crop up in the corporate workplace, with many client needs that need to be met.
Until we slim our needs down, OS bloat is here to stay until someone develops an OS that loads and unloads modules as needed for a particular event. Which leads to another batch of problems.
32. Is it Mac time?
davidr69 - 04/09/08
"As XP PCs die, replace them with Vista PCs."
I am running my music studio on a PC that's several years old and at the time could only be max'd to 1G of RAM. Now that I'm finally getting into VST Instruments (e.g. Addictive Drums), my computer is being taxed. However, I know that if I get a new PC with Vista on it, I may have hardware and software compatibility issues. There is no question about it: I need 100% compatibility.
So if compatibility is an issue, how does a Mac factor in? Every piece of software/hardware I have works on the Mac. I think I'm going to have to get and admittedly expensive Mac but at least I'll be able to continue using all of my software.
32.1. If you need 100% compatibility why would you...
ye - 04/09/08
...consider a Mac?
32.1.1. Why I would consider a Mac ...
davidr69 - 04/09/08
What I need to work is:
Motu 2408mkII
Motu 308
Edirol UM880
Cubase 4
Focusrite LiquidMix
Universal Audio UAD1 Ultra Pak
EAS Neodynium, Finnis, Equim, and Firium
XLN Audio Addictive Drums
EZDrummer
iZotope Ozone 3
Some of this stuff has issues with Vista, but not with a Mac.
33. Free advice to Redmond:
SpikeyMike - 04/09/08
Build a "shell" on top of BSD or some other existing business-friendly licensed OS. For backwards compatibility, contribute to the Wine project. There is no reason not to contribute their Win32 API code, as they've moved on to WinFX. Here's a quote:
"The Win32 API, reigning king of the desktop for a decade, is dead; long live WinFX, Win32's successor. WinFX is a new .NET-based API that provides managed access to the three Longhorn pillars???Avalon, WinFS, and Indigo???and all other new Longhorn functionality."
http://visualstudiomagazine.com/features/article.aspx?editorialsid=1741
Now, that doesn't make everyone compatible by itself, but if they were to release their new API's too(WinFX), then we'd have a common platform to write to, even for new applications. As it is, all new applications are targeting Linux (in my company).
I would rather develop my applications to be cross-platform. You see, just because I prefer to use a non-Microsoft OS, doesn't mean I should force my customers to do the same. Choice. I've made mine, but am willing to let others make theirs.
-Mike
34. RE: Gartner: Windows collapsing under its own weight; Radical change needed
ceh4702 - 04/09/08
The biggest problem is Microsoft should be split up like the courts wanted to do but were too chicked to do. Force Microsoft to build the Operating system seperate from everything else like servers and SQL and Mail Applications. Only then can Microsoft try to build just an operating system or just server software. They shift people around from project to project too often and some people who dont even know what they are doing who were working on 2008 Server are trying to finish Vista. This just creates confusion.
Microsoft set our to make an Operating System through obfuscation. They pruposely built an operating system to try to make it hard for outsiders to understand. They did it so well that they can not even fix the monster they created. They need to go back to the basics of design. As the boy scouts would say KISMIF; Keep It Simple, Make It Fun!
35. Gartner Finally Sees the Light
cyberscan - 04/09/08
Gartner has been so many years stumping
for M$. It is refreshing to see this
firm finally see Microsoft products for
what they are. People have to buy new
and newer hardware to do the same thing
they have been doing before if they want
to use support from Microsoft. I bought
my computer in 1998, and it is still
running strong. I have a DVD burner, do
movie editing, and have a 1 TB drive. I
also run Linux, and I don't have to worry
about re-installing my operating system
every year in order to mitigate OS rot.
36. Bill wants to work with immigrants
BALTHOR - 04/09/08
An exe is an exe all software should work in all computers no matter what.
37. Use Wine, not a Newer Windows
cyberscan - 04/09/08
Most liklely, your app will run fine in
Linux if you use Wine. I have tried XP
and Vista, and I dislike them both. I
refuse to have crapware shoved down my
throat. I will always fond a way to make
the Windows stuff I use run under Linux.
37.1. To Wine or Not to Wine
Geezer Dude - 04/09/08
Wine is a great crossover app, but requires the user to be very involved in porting over Windows apps. And there are still glaring holes in what is and isn't supported.
But it's a huge step in the right direction. Perhaps future iterations will have a more streamlined/automated process to get things working.
37.2. Wine is great...
frgough - 04/10/08
...for Windows 98 software.
37.2.1. You have got to research your subject.
odubtaig - 04/10/08
Given its success with a variety of games, Office and being about the only platform outside of virtualisation that can run multiple versions of IE (very useful for webdev).
Maybe you can use it to play Portal or Team Fortress 2 on OS X, I hear CrossOver Mac is somewhat behind the Linux version but maybe it's worth a try?
38. Problem is Ballmer
GeiselS@... - 04/09/08
When Steve Ballmer stepped in and Bill Gates stepped out, the company lost its vision and focus. Until someone has the smarts to realize that many of the issues Microsoft faces today are a result of Steve Ballmer just conveying the same crap over and over and over again, Microsoft will be set on its misguided path.
The solution starts with replacing Steve Ballmer. Its been said for years now by countless number of people. When will Microsoft wake up and see that the guy just isn't cut out for the job.
39. Larry - story suggestion...
gdstark13 - 04/09/08
How about a story or case study of a small company (100 or so employees) that converted from Windows to a unix variant or mac os? Specifically I would appreciate an honest accounting of the problems that were encountered - retraining employees, lack of vertical apps, etc.
gary
40. Mo' MemreyMulti=Ultie64&7, Compromise
VONDRASHEK@... - 04/09/08
Hardware Catch up is Really big term here, Mainly64Ultimate needs Multi core with memory contoller onboard for each core. Just to have Fabulous memory space availabilty & be multicore for intro of Seven. You can have it both ways. Just Hardware delay is all thats Hold Back.
Signed:PHYSICIAN THOMAS STEWART VON DRASHEK M.D.
41. Isometric maybe !!!!!!!!!
rtirman37@... - 04/09/08
Nothing but another big improvment for home user should the Media departures finish The Dream left by the Founder.
42. RE: Gartner: Windows collapsing under its own weight; Radical change needed
The_Quietman - 04/09/08
I think that MS and well as software developers waste too much time and resources (both theirs and ours) on appearance rather than function. All those fancy graphics do absolutely nothing except to waste resources and slow down the computer. I still do all my serious work using DOS (actually DOS mode in Win98SE because I can't get the DOS drivers anymore), what I can't buy I write. DOS running on an Athlon XP or Pentium 4 is faster than you can imagine. For browsing I am forced to use Win2000 or XP because the software is no longer supported for Win9x and as we all know, firewalls and anti-virus/anti-malware software are required. Yes, I have tried linux (3 different versions) and SUN's Solaris 7 but after using hpux at work I am spoiled and found the versions I tried severely lacking. Unfortunately hpux won't run on an X86 CPU but I would switch at the drop of a hat if it were available.
43. K.I.S.S. Right?
Narg - 04/09/08
I think MS has forgotted the K.I.S.S. principle. The statement at the start of the article "becomes more complicated by the minute." is one that has bothered me tremendously over the past couple of years. It seems Microsoft is making Windows so complicated today, that administrating it, and yes even just plain USING it is becoming a chore. There seems so many "switches" and "changes" are just simply not needed. Many are there for the "experience", give me a break! Chunk the candy and just make a simple straight foward OS that works. OK?
44. Does nobody have a long time memory?
CobraA1 - 04/09/08
"Meanwhile, Windows has outgrown hardware"
Where have I heard that before? Oh, yeah, every time a new OS is released. Go back and count the number of times people complained about the hardware requirements of XP's interface, which definitely took more horsepower then 98's.
They're leapfrogging. It's happened before, and it'll happen again. It's not changing.
"There???s also the problem of ???Windows rot.??? Windows rot is what happens to a machine after running Windows for three or four years and it gets slow and barely functions. The fix is to reinstall everything and rebuild the PC. That???s a manual effort that takes too much time."
Agreed, and I blame the Registry in part for it. It created problems and fixed "problems" that didn't exist and didn't need to be fixed. In fact, it made them worse. Trying to find something in the registry is incredibly more difficult than finding settings in an .ini file. I suppose today we can replace the .ini files with XML - that would be a move forward. But the registry is a move backwards.
"For instance, look at the various demands an OS has to deal with:"
Yeah, a fake diagram with silly things. "Drivers" for "cloud computing"? That's a joke. I like the hamster, though. Reminds me of what companies like Gartner really think of consumers. We're just hamsters locked in cages doing what Gartner pleases.
"If Microsoft???s response is to become more complex Windows??? fall will accelerate. As Windows stands today it???s already too bulky."
This is what was written in most articles about XP when it came out. In 2010 (or later; Windows 7 will probably be delayed), Vista will be fast and Windows 7 will be slow.
"Better security"
Yeah, okay. Great. Security has a cost: Convenience. Look at UAC. I'm not saying not to invest in security. Just keep in mind that people hate inconvenience.
"'Licensing is too difficult for mere mortals to understand,' says Silver."
Agreed.
"MacDonald argued that Windows may need multiple kernels to support increasing demands from customers and hardware makers. ???One size doesn???t fit all,??? says MacDonald. For instance, look at the various demands an OS has to deal with:"
Back to this: I have to disagree. The various versions of Windows are already complex enough to sort out. People are getting confused, and he wants more versions? Gimme a break. We want one version of Windows, not several dozen.
44.1. agreed!
merc2dogs` - 04/09/08
I'll happily take one version, give me the option of installing the features I use and skipping those that I have no use for. It would allow me to tailer an installation to my purpose and make windows a much better OS in my opinion.
Ken.
44.2. "Trying to find something in the registry is incredibly more difficult"
Ole Man - 04/09/08
Just for you guys (and girls) who are still stuck with windows, a FYI
Karen Kenworthy has a great FREE tool that will search (and/or modify) anything in your Windows registry. She has a lot of other great Windows tools, too. Do a search for "Karens Tools" and download it for free. Karen has a free Windoze newsletter that is veeeeery informative for Windows users.
If you are stuck with Windows, why not be smart about it?
45. RE: Gartner: Windows collapsing under its own weight; Radical change needed
woodmont - 04/09/08
Application resource control is available in many Linux distros. For most purposes AppArmor is the most appropriate choice for linking an application with a profile of required resources. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AppArmor
SELinux is generally used to control labeled resources in an OS requirement.
In either case, the answer is the same: Linux provides proven solutions.
46. RE: Gartner: Windows collapsing under its own weight; Radical change needed
Rambo Tribble - 04/09/08
Microsoft will buy Xandros. In one fell swoop they will get the most Windows-like of the Linux distros, the Scalix mail server and Codeweavers. If the Yahoo! deal goes through, they'll have both the OSS contenders against Exchange in their pocket. Through Codeweavers they'll have an instant compatibility layer for running MS apps on Linux and be able to migrate to an actual business-grade operating system. Meanwhile, they'll be able to derail the Wine project to prevent competitive distros from offering similar functionality. And, with the size of Xandros, the SEC won't bat an eye.
This, of course, is very bad news for the world at large, but at least we will be treated to Ballmer trying to find weasel room to explain how Linux is now a good thing.
47. The solution to "complexity" is 50 different versions?
mlambert890@... - 04/09/08
Gartner has sailed off the deep end. If they're angry b/c MSFT isn't paying up enough, just say so.
How is introducing choose your own flavor of Windows going to FIX complexity?
What would fix complexity is dropping ALL of the legacy support. That would also sink MSFT and cause Gartner to slam them for dropping legacy support.
The beauty of Apple's model is that they dont care about legacy support, dont care about hardware requirements, and just pair an OS with a machine generation. Cant run it? Too bad. AND they get kudos for it.
Gartner is looking to capitalize on the flavor of the day which is to spin the Win 7 story out of control.
The Vista FUD is just ridiculous. I have it deployed on hardware ranging from 3 year old XP hardware to current and as long as you have 2GB RAM it runs fine. Let me tell you something.... In my enterprise experience you CERTAINLY dont run PRODUCTION OSX or Linux without 2GB RAM either... this is all BS.
47.1. spot on
jiagebusen - 04/09/08
it's called GIGO, at least back in the days when we had fun mucking around with computers. gartner and the writer are just typical of many reporters--too much to eat.
when terabytes of storage cost nothing and internal memory is soon to be a non-issue, give me a break and find something worth talking about.
of course there are issues with windows. so what? get over it and play with it, break it, put it on a clone. even put it on a mac. ha! how funny it that. can't do the opposite, though. and THAT is what it's about.
48. RE: Gartner: Windows collapsing under its own weight; Radical change needed
ralphrides - 04/09/08
Wait a minute, link modules of windows to a location. Only have modules loaded for certain applications. Are you nuts! That defeats the whole idea of a personal computer. Might as well go back to the bad old days of terminals! How can Apple come out with new and better and leaner OS versions each year? My old 7 year old 550Mhz PowerPC based Ti runs faseter and more stable on Tiger (OSX 10.4.11 than it ever did on 10.2. So how did Apple do it?
50. RE: Gartner: Windows collapsing under its own weight; Radical change needed
atari8bit@... - 04/09/08
all the more reason to move on, whether it's a Mac, Linux (Unix boxes), or something else.
By 2009 FusionBox, Parallel's and Vmware and even M$ VM will solve your compatibility problems and also run whatever M$ decides to throw at the consumer at an acceptable speed.
I run a X24400 w/ 27800gtoc's, a 185 opty at 2.8 w/ 2 8600gtOC's and the ONLY friggin OS I won't run is Vista I am tired of hearing about Aero Glass on a AMD 4000 and a Geforce 7600. You HAVE to be kidding.
Linux isn't ready evem today in many areas, but it will be the way things are going. I run Mandriva 2008 power pack and it's nice, but my hardware is overkill. Wireless still needs work but Wine, Crossover and a few other apps run Windoze games fine.
Of course the kernel in Windows is overloaded. It's too busy trying to find memory to use in Vista.
51. RE: The fall of Rome/M$
bmujahid - 04/09/08
LINUX RULES. If 50 is the new 40, linux is the new Windows.
I vowed never to install another Windows upgrade after paying good money for Vista (which intentionally has a linux-like GNOME look and feel) only to find I couldn't run it on my Dell system.
I just completed configuration of an old Dell Dimension 2400 with Oracle's "unbreakable" enterprise linux ULN (Red Hat RHEL by any other name). Went with this distro to set up training labs for Oracle University 10g/11g (married to ULN). Now, keep in mind I wanted to compare apples to lemons after paying for Windows Vista and NOT being able to get it to run on the same machine due to problems with Intel 845 chipset integrated graphics incompatibility with Vista. The only drawback encountered in the conversion was that I needed to upgrade the Dell bios from A00 to A04 (moral of this story. UPGRADE driver first). Once that was done, ULN installed like a breeze with 1024 x 768 screen resolution.
Now is the time for hard-core OS command prompters to take the linux plumge and get an "amicable divorce" from Microsoft. Once IT types get hardened in the saddle, it will be a much easier sell for non-techie converts.
Happy trails!
51.1. Must try out the new Ubuntu.
joe.smetona@... - 04/10/08
I've been working with the 8.04 Ubuntu alpha releases and Firefox beta releases for a while. They are very impressive.
It's worth waiting for the final release and giving it a try.
I haven't used Windows in about 4 years. My family is used to it and the kids are familiar with OpenOffice. It's not hard to adjust.
52. You don't need 20 different kernels.
kraterz - 04/09/08
You really don't need 20 different kernel types for different applications. You could make do with just two. One for servers, workstations and the likes, and the other for embedded and handheld devices.
They can take a page out of the FreeBSD and Linux books - the same kernel with very little change can run on a 32-dual-core IBM Power6 based 595 server to a Pentium-II. An embedded version could come with just the relevant features, heck, you can fit a core OS, scheduler and basic IO in less than 5K of RAM, throw in a TCP/IP stack if needed and some basic connectivity and you have a full fledged near-RTOS for embedded / phones, etc.
52.1. Agreed
boed - 04/09/08
They keep talking about this and that but ignoring the plank in their eyes. People hate Vista for two reasons. I've upgraded about 25 clients from Vista to XP and they all had the same complaints -
SLOW, SLOW, SLOW - let me be clear on NEW Core 2 2.6 GHz processors, 2 GIGS of RAM, 512mb video cards, fast hard drives with 32mb Cache - VISTA IS SLOW - SIGNIFICANTLY SLOWER THAN XP. I upgrade them to XP from Vista and everyone is amazed at how fast their new hardware is running this old XP OS- plus they can run all the same apps Vista is - then they ask what the point of Vista is.
Second reason - I've yet to meet anyone who didn't feel like UAC treated them like morons. For UAC to be of any use - it should look at what folder the app is running from - if the required dlls are there - then compare them to a database and say - YES for you - if not go to a website for software vendors to register their software so it can verify the software is valid - if not then ask you but only if it hasn't exhausted what would be the right way of preventing malware from running.
52.1.1. My Vista is faster than XP with only 1GB RAM
qmlscycrajg - 04/10/08
My Vista is faster than XP with only 1GB RAM
52.1.1.1. You can't be doing much with it then.
odubtaig - 04/10/08
But then, people do tell me I have a ridiculous number of windows, browser tabs, etc open.
Not my fault I need 16 odd tabs per window when I'm browsing an API doc.
52.1.1.2. Why then?
boed - 04/10/08
Why did MS underestimate how much was required to make Vista run on PCs that ran XP with no issue?
Why does INTEL, AMD and nVidia always show off their fastest hardware on XP - would vista run so fast they are afraid of destroying the space time continuum?
Why does Intel, AMD and nVidia always show off their low end portable hardware on XP - is Vista just too exciting that they don't want to distract people from the new hardware?
Why do companies have ads that they will upgrade you from Vista to XP?
Why do I make so much money upgrading people from Vista to XP on new equipment with plenty of memory, fast core 2 processors and a host of other goodies?
Why do my customers thank me so much after I upgrade them from Vista to XP?
Why has the IT industry as a whole said that Vista sucks and not recommended migrating to it?
Why to all the technical journals say Vista is too much of a resource hog?
Why do all the techical article writers who do benchmarks between Vista and XP always find XP to be the winner?
Why do industry researchers recommend against Vista?
52.1.1.2.1. You asked, here are my replies...
Master Guru - 04/11/08
Software evolves, the hardware makers need to keep up.
Because XP was the benchmark when product development started years ago. Again, the hardware folks are the slow ones.
The hardware folks want to keep selling their 20 year old technology.
They are not making any money doing that. Who sponsored the ad, Google? I trust them to be honest about their competitors not one bit.
Because you want to double your profit and install Vista again later, instead of informing the customer how they messed up.
Because your customers do not like change. Most like new things.
Because IT Dept's have been gutted and those left have not spent the time to learn. That will not bode well in the near future for you.
IT Dept's tend to grab new young hires and boot the old ones who cannot or will not adapt to change.
It is well known for about 4 years that the next Windows OS (Vista) would require a higher spec'd PC.
None show in a public way for inspection by third parties these machines.
They read blogs instead of Technet.
...BTW, the facts are wrong. All is just flat out inaccurate. Maybe you only know 2?
52.2. you don't need 100000000000000 linux distro
qmlscycrajg - 04/10/08
you don't need 100000000000000 linux distro
52.2.1. Absolutely 100% agreed.
kraterz - 04/10/08
I agree with you 100% that the linux market is a very very confusing place with all the zillion distros.
This is why there's a ton of support behind the mainstream distros like RHEL, Ubuntu, etc to popularize them and make them the distro(s) of choice.
52.3. I disagree slightly.
odubtaig - 04/10/08
One thing Linux has demonstrated nicely at times is that a server kernel is not optimum for desktop or workstation use. One thing a server kernel is designed for is raw throughput at the expense of immediate usability. This is awesome when you need the kind of performance which returns database search queries in a minimum time, but one thing a desktop/workstation kernel needs is immediate usability for interactivity. Whatever else you may think of Apple, they got that right.
Case in point: 64 studio explicitly uses a Linux RTC kernel. The reason for this is best demonstrated when I try to play an mp3 file on the OpenSUSE default kernel on my aging Athlon64. Stutter just doesn't cover it, great big hocking pauses while some other process with a negative nice value uses way more priority than necessary... does. I'm sorry, but if I can't even play an mp3 file smoothly the whole way through because the kernel scheduler doesn't allow enough priority to user processes for that, it needs to be changed. That the OpenSUSE realtime kernel eliminates this issue proves this.
52.3.1. Can be tuned with kernel parameters.
kraterz - 04/10/08
Well that's true, but suppose the kernel was designed to be a little more flexible, with the ability to fine tune the relevant parameters at runtime by changing certain parameters via /dev/***
That would allow us to have a single kernel release for servers, workstations, PC's etc but the response (raw data crunching vs desktop useability) can be tuned and set up during install time or through a config GUI app.
Yes, for some parameters you'd require a reboot, e.g., changing the scheduling algorithm etc, but that's a one-time thing.
52.3.1.1. You already can.
odubtaig - 04/11/08
Completely Fair Queuing is the default for newer Linux and you can alter which scheduling method is required. It is, unfortunately, not quite so simple which is why both multiple scheduling methods and multiple kernels are available.
53. Gartner asked a question with no room to give the RIGHT answer
boed - 04/09/08
The question isn't whether Windows 7 needs to be modular, the question is - is Vista code so bloated it slows down a system. Instead of adding useless crap like transparent borders that require 1 Gig of video memory (exageration for effect) figure out how to make a file copy take less time, figure out how to make a PC boot faster, figure out how to optimize code so if it recognizes during install that it is going on a multiple core PC that it takes advantage of them, figure out how to make a PC shut down faster, figure out how to make games run faster, figure out how to make opening apps faster.
To sum it up since MS can be a little thick at times - make the OS run faster whether everything is installed or just the very core.
Remove bloatware but keep a gui interface - is that an impossible task? XP does everything vista needs to do but faster - are you telling me XP couldn't be optimized to be more efficient? I'm not saying XP never goes away - I'm saying Vista is dead - learn from your mistake - don't take some bad advice from someone who asked a question with no room for the right answer.
Does VIsta suck - obviously but WHY exactly (don't limit my choice to just one answer) - not does it suck because it is monolithic.
54. RE: Gartner: Windows collapsing under its own weight; Radical change needed
Larry63 - 04/09/08
What a lame article; why does everyone have such short memories.
Everything goes in cycles, first the hardware can't keep up with the software, so the software programmers take heat for bloat.
Then the hardware blows past the software and analysts say that the CPU and GPU manufacturers are developing too much new technology that will never get used properly by the available software.
The advice to:
???Go with Vista but on an attrition basis. As XP PCs die, replace them with Vista PCs.???
Can work, but short memories prevail again, do you really think ???Windows 7??? will ship on time???come on; the target date is 2010, but the same rules apply:
1.) Windows 7 will be late (how late: my guess2011- 2012)
2.) Vista will get much better (nobody liked XP when it came out; W2K is fine, worked good and didn???t need all the resources XP did, sound familiar)
3.) Hardware will get much faster (anybody reading the latest Intel announcements lately)
4.) The learning curve for people to migrate to a new OS is always steep and brings with it a lot of resistance.
5.) The expense of new equipment is never looked forward to by anybody or any company. Hey didn???t I have the fastest CPU and video card you can buy two weeks ago????
6.) Writers recycle the same articles from the last cycle.
56. RE: Gartner: Windows collapsing under its own weight; Radical change needed
vincent@... - 04/10/08
Win 2000 Pro the best
57. Collapsing Windows
w.caelli@... - 04/10/08
The idea that "The one software project that takes this approach is the One Laptop Per Child project." is simply WRONG. By 2002 we should have been used to a "mandatory access control" style operating system that does exactly that - create a "profile" to be enforced for each "subject" and "object" - down to the level of a file, port, program, thread or whatever. Well - we have had it for almost 10 years - the NSA's Secure LINUX (SELinux)!
See it in RedHat 5 etc. The problem is NOT the understanding of technology - it is the complete disinterest of the computer industry in developing and marketing really secure operating systems and middleware. And that occurs because in a market driven, laissez-faire economy there is NO MARKET for security unless Government takes its proper role in protecting teh community ... just as has been done for other industries such as cars (seat belts, braking standards, etc.courtesy of Ralph Nader), pharmaceuticals, food, transport, fire extinguishers, etc.
It is now time for Government to lead by example -- all Federakl systems should be up to MAC (via trusted profiling) by 2010, say. Yes - that means radically changing the Microsoft Windows kernel... but they looked at that as early as 1994 in an interesting security study to see how it could be done then with Windows'NT!
That is the sort of REAL challenge that Chertoff (DHS) should be setting up. Just look what happened to Microsoft's "Palladium/NGSCB", SUN's "Trusted SOLARIS", TIS's "Trusted XENIX" via Microsoft's own Xenix or UNIX port, etc etc.
Bill Caelli
58. It is not Windows which is collapsing. It is your disk structure.
koby@... - 04/10/08
You may measure how close you are to the point in which you have to re-install everything. If you do so, it will not come to you as a surprise.
A free download from www.disklace.com
59. Modularity
D. T. Schmitz - 04/10/08
Which do you think is more easily maintainable?:
[url=http://blogs.zdnet.com/images/SysCallIIS.jpg]A) Windows[/url]
[url=http://blogs.zdnet.com/images/SysCallApache.jpg]B) Linux[/url]
Windows: Care for some spaghetti with marinara sause?
Linux: Schmart!
esactly!
59.1. linux is just the kernel, NOT an OS
qmlscycrajg - 04/10/08
you can't compare a kernel with a whole OS
60. RE: Gartner: Consistently Wrong
MSBassSinger - 04/10/08
I first came across Gartner opinions and predictions over 10 years ago, and when it comes to Microsoft, they are consistently wrong. Why their opinions keep getting published is beyond me.
MS really screwed up with Vista. Those of us who have been around a while also remember DOS 4.0 and Windows ME. Somehow, MS survived.
As to the Gartner idea that the OS should be able to be broken up into pieces to be combined as appropriate, MS has been doing that for years, beginning with NT. Where do you think the embedded Windows OSs came from?
Gartner probably has no clue as to what MS Research has waiting in the pipeline. If Gartner's opinion was taken from a verbal survey in a meeting room, that is pretty sorry and very unscientific and unprofessional.
Thsoe who think this is Linux's opporuntity - forget it. At the end of the day, Linux (like all UNIX OSs) is just the most recent incarnation of a 40 year old dinosaur that was designed intentionally to be cryptic and hard to use. There is a reason UNIX has never been popular on the desktop - it is just too hard for most users to put up with, and when it runs multiple applications, it very resource hungry and inefficient.
MS's biggest weakness is the lower quality due to the decline in the percentage of Americans in the design and management ranks, and the increase of non-Americans in those jobs. It may save MS money now to hire cheaper labor, but native-born Americans overall make much better products, and is why MS did so well to start with. If MS falls, and like all companies, some day it will, it will be due to MS's poor choices, not the availability of a "better mousetrap".
60.1. WOW
Shadowbelly - 04/10/08
Is it due to the food that native-born americans are more able then everybody else in the world???????????????? Bigger then most and more fat then most is, but more capable?? Of what??
Get real. Money does the trick not nationality!
And MS doesn't need to hire 1 American for the price of 5 somewhere else, because probably, just probably those 5 will be able to discuss, and get to a better solution.
BTW try any recent Linux distro, will you, and then talk again, but knowing what you're talking about.
People use MS OS because they are used to. Full stop. It is not better, leaner, more clever or more anything then any other current OS. Just more used, and it is monkey see monkey do, just like in many other aspects of life.
60.1.1. Just what would this world be like without American ingenuity?
MSBassSinger - 04/10/08
The US has been the leader for many decades in technology and in sacrificing the lives of its citizens to protect freedom worldwide, as well as shelling out more per capita (government and individual non-government spending) to help others around the world.
Didn't you ever wonder how an originally poor, agrarian nation like the US has come farther in 250 years than all the so-called "enlightened" nations have come in a thousand years? Why is it that most progress in science, technology, medicine, and government has come from the US? And the only land we have taken in war, unlike many countries around the world, are the small plots of land to bury our war dead on that freed those countries. There is not another nation in history that has accomplished anything nearly as much as the US, nor has the freedom and prosperity for all its citizens like the US. Even our poorest are better off than the middle class in many other countries. of course, unlike the rest of the world, we have largely shunned socialism.
It is that legacy of a unique American culture that underscores why I wrote what I did. In general, if you want something done right and the best it can be done, get an (conservative) American.
60.1.1.1. Just what would this world be like without...
Shadowbelly - 04/10/08
The Greeks; the Egiptians; the Chinese; the Arabs; the Iberians (Portuguese and Spanish); the Dutch; the French; the English; the Germans; the Indians; the....................
They are just too many to mention. Honestly I don't get your point.
If ANY company wants to be Global it has to have worldwide coverage not only in terms of offices and products, but also in terms of Human Resources.
Or do you really believe that the enlightened American do know and is the only one that knows about everything people want and need worldwide?
I know, for you it's just a matter of "if it's good enough for the GREAT Americans, then it has to be GREAT for the dummy not-american"!
It's pretty sad that for a country that hires the biggest number of foreign "brains", people think that the brains are all American.
60.1.1.1.1. It's not even a fair comparison
MSBassSinger - 04/10/08
I do not discount the contributions of the civilizations you mentioned, but there is no comparison to what the US has done, and in much shorter time. Not a one of them evolved to the level of freedom and opportunity that the US has - in fact, of the remaining ones, they came to implementing those concepts after the US. Of all of them, the English have contributed the most.
If any company wants to be successful in non-American markets, they need to do the same thing they do in American markets (aside from the graft and corruption so rampant in many non-American markets): provide goods and/or services that people want and can buy. The nationality of who they hire is irrelevant to the buyer - they just want a good value for their money.
Having worked for many years with people from several nations, having travelled overseas on business and pleasure, my experience is that native-born Americans tend to be more creative, more intuitive, and better able to see solutions where none before existed. Those general human abilities are enhanced significantly as a result of having been raised in the traditional American culture that fosters their growth.
I never said anything about absolutes, as you tried to introduce by way of a red herring. I am saying that the tendency is towards better quality and a smarter product the more you hire Americans raised in the traditional American culture, regardless of their race, religion, or national origin. MS has moved away from that, and it shows in the quality and efficacy of their products.
60.1.1.1.1.1. I know it very unlikely to be true, but it sounds like
hkommedal - 04/10/08
your main teacher was Adolf H.
You are displaying an 80% image of his teaching.
60.1.1.1.1.1.1. Untrue...
MSBassSinger - 04/10/08
and you need to study history. Try thinking and reasoning instead of just feeling and be reactionary.
Hitler and the Nazis were socialists and economic facists (as in the National Socialist party), and the primary inspiration for Mein Kampf was Karl Marx's writings. Nazism was a nationalistic socialism, whereas Soviet communism was a global-oriented socialism. That explains why they were first allies, then enemies. Only room for one red.
America is just the opposite. Hitler and the Nazis based their views on racial parameters, which were ludicrous at best, and they hated Christianity. Traditional American culture is based on ideas, largely derived from the Protestant tradition.
My comparison was on that set of ideas that this country was founded on. Those ideas work for anyone who tries them regardless of race, socioeconomic status, religion, or national origin.
I guess when you can no longer argue the merits of your position, you just pull out the old chestnut of Hitler. Kind of like the Democrat party in the US does.
What I wrote is zero percent of Nazism.
60.1.1.1.1.2. That is not true and you know it!!
Shadowbelly - 04/10/08
Otherwise american companies wouldn't need to buy european ones. By the way, even NASA uses technologie from abroad.
I to work with people from several nations, and let me assure you, a good product in American standars is not necessarily a good product everywhere.
I to went overseas, and let me tell you, your liberty is no better then mine, and one thing that americans simply don't understand "It is not up to you to decide what liberty and democracy and socialism (btw not an american invention) are!!"
Feel sorry though, because if you where right, american cars, for instance would sell like beer in Europe or Japan, but no because in fact those people have better products, and more important developed to suit their specific local needs.
Really think Nationalism is a good thing, bashing everybody else just because their not Americans is not.
60.1.1.1.1.2.1. You'll get what you want...
MSBassSinger - 04/10/08
before long. American companies, at least the large ones, have become more like European companies. We have 3 Democrats (Obama, Clinton, and McCain) running for President, and one of them will win. They will help lead our Democrat Congress and national government even more towards socialism - again, like Europeans. What makes America great will take a back seat, until like the the late 70s, they fall flat and we go back to being what made us great.
Meanwhile, the almost majority of us who are still conservative and are still pursuing excellence and quality will keep plugging away, enjoying life, and enjoying the puzzlement of why anyone would want to embrace the failed economic, social, and foriegn policies of European socialists.
As MS continues becoming more Euro-like, eventually either they will turn back or another group of Americans will make a better product (and no, it won't be a descendant of teh dinosaur UNIX).
60.1.1.1.1.2.2. Trully hope you're right
Shadowbelly - 04/10/08
Not sure, though, at the light of recent economic events...
Regarding the other. One day it will have to exist something else, because in the trully free(as in liberty) nature of the market, it makes no sense that one company in whatever niche takes up to 90% plus of the market.
60.1.1.1.1.2.3. A word on the US economy
odubtaig - 04/10/08
The continuing deregulation of the US economy is bringing it ever closer to the state which precipitated the depression of the 1930s which in itself was caused by an absence of regulation of the financial markets.
In the meantime, that NAZI is the acronym of the German for National Socialist Workers Party is apocryphal, it's a known longstanding tactic of fascists to claim to be socialist. Nowadays they try to call themselves National Anarchists (nationalism is specifically incompatible with anarchism). The NAZI party's union busting, deregulation and corporate favouritism were specifically right wing. Lenin and Stalin's enforced nationalisation of the capital, flat-rate wages and anti-individualism were specifically left wing. The only thing they had in common was the police-statism and dictatorship. Also 'communists' kill anyone who disagrees with them, faschists target people based on race as well (although either may or may not be homophobic). Also, I don't remember the Soviets having a Eugenics programme. Maybe I missed something?
Really, you're not in a position to lecture anyone on their historical knowledge. The underlying differences in ideology is why Hitler refused Stalin's offer of alliance. After all, a large part of NAZI propaganda was specifically targeted against Communists, blaming them for Germany's poor economy and specifically linking them with Jews. Communists were either forced out of Germany or sent to forced labour camps years before they invaded Austria.
Seriously, you're not in a position to lecture anyone with your half-knowledge.
60.1.1.1.1.3. You need to put up your high horse
Ole Man - 04/10/08
You are riding the poor fellow to death.
I am an American myself, and proud of it, but I must say..... you do not represent true American patriotism.
Where do you think Americans came from (other than the original American Indians)? And we have rejected Socialism, you say? Then why is it you pay into a "Social Security" system, and collect a "Social Security Check" when you reach the specified age?
Do you even know the definition of "Social"?
Let me give you a clue. There are some very smart Americans. There is also some very dumb Americans. Aaannnnnnnd..... there are some very arrogant Americans. I don't know about the first two categories, but YOU seem to fit into the third one perfectly. Sounds like you are a Microsoft employee. Is that the link between this article and your rant?
Otherwise, I see no connection at all to your riding your American steed roughshod over the world at large. Give the poor beast a rest... puh-leeze.
60.1.1.1.1.4. WOW - for the most part your right.
socialism=nowhere - 04/11/08
Except the Germans have contributed quite a lot to modern day technology and the US owes a lot of it's modern day innovation to them. However, they (even with their software ) over engineer, but it has become this signature...(i.e. BMW Mercedes etc.).
60.2. If Gartner is wrong you must work for them.
storm14k - 04/11/08
A system that wasn't designed to run on PC hardware isn't popular on the desktop....naw....REALLY?
And then you say Unix and its children become resource hungry when running multiple applications? Please learn to recognize the task manager vs the system monitor.
And apparently they haven't done that great of a job with modularity since they have to scrap to get their OS onto minimal hardware that Linux can easily fit.
Who could possibly take anything in your post serious?
62. RE: Gartner: Windows collapsing under its own weight; Radical change needed
Juergen Hartl - 04/10/08
If windows would be available for free (like Linux) - How many Linux installations (except Servers) do you think would be left?
It all comes down to money - too cheap to spend the $150???
63. RE: Gartner: Windows collapsing under its own weight; Radical change needed
Axsimulate - 04/10/08
There is a big issue with Vista right now. That is there are too many versions of Vista and it's confusing the crap out of OEMs and consumers. And your solution to fixing Windows is to fragment it to even more? I don't think so.
Windows needs to be rewritten from the ground up and utilized industry standards, not Microsoft standards. There is no way Microsoft can pull this off by the 2010 timeline. Unless the original Longhorn, you know the one that was "scrapped" before they started the new Longhorn/Vista, was renamed to Windows 7. That would give them about 9 to 10 years to have worked on it by 2010. Then maybe, just maybe, they might be able to squeak something out by 2009. If not then all your going to get is a warmed over Vista.
64. What MS will do
High Plains - 04/10/08
All of this talk abnout MS collapsing is a crock.
You ABMers talk about how poorly Microsoft products perform.
Use Linux to create gather data from a relational database, create a cube and export it to a spreadsheet for user interface and do it under 30 minutes.
I can with MS
64.1. For how much??
Shadowbelly - 04/10/08
How much does it cost you in licenses overall?
64.1.1. How much does it cost
High Plains - 04/10/08
Per user, not much. Besides, if it generates income it is just a cost of doing business.
What would it cost you to do it with Linux?
64.1.1.1. A fair bit less, but NOT gratis. All systems can do this. (nt)
hkommedal - 04/10/08
nt
65. RE: Gartner: Windows collapsing under its own weight; Radical change needed
RamonFHerrera - 04/10/08
> IBM's monopolistic practices (For which they were convicted)
IBM was never convicted. The case against them was dropped and the cure for their monopolistic behavior was left to the marketplace forces. You must be thinking AT&T.
-RFH
66. RE: Gartner: Windows collapsing under its own weight; Radical change needed
RamonFHerrera - 04/10/08
> IBM chose a 16-bit processor for their IBM PC computer
It wasn't even a 16 bit processor, it was a 16/8 bit. It was the 8088 which used 16 bits internally and 8 bits for the data bus. IBM chose the 8088 over the 8086 or a Motorola chip.
16-bit processors were state of the art in 1981. It would be years before 32 bits processors became available.
-RFH
67. RE: Gartner: Windows collapsing under its own weight; Radical change needed
RamonFHerrera - 04/10/08
Your friend should use Acrobat's virtual printer, and print to PDF.
-RFH
68. Another "clean break"? I doubt it.
mlgoff_59 - 04/10/08
Microsoft did a "clean break" once before. It was called Windows NT 3.5x and it infuriated most users. It can be argued that NT 3.5x was a failure. Whether it was or not is immaterial because it demonstrated how poorly a "clean break" is received by the end-users.
Rather than a "clean break", Microsoft should quite trying to stifle competition by integrating application with the OS. Which MS refers to as "innovation". Browsers, Media Players, Game Engines Firewalls, etc. should be separate applications. I don't need Games Engines (e.g. DirectX) on my development machine.
69. RE: Gartner: Windows collapsing under its own weight; Radical change needed
mcclung@... - 04/10/08
Windows has already collapsed. Linux is faster, more featured, much more secure, and a lot more fun. I can't imagine anyone who had a choice choosing Windows. Problem is most people are not given a chance to use Linux. Why is that, I wonder? Monopolistic tendency maybe?
MacOS X a pretty good operating system, also.
69.1. i wouldnt say necessarily more features
pcguy777 - 04/10/08
common... thats kinda funny actually
70. RE: Gartner: Windows collapsing under its own weight; Radical change needed
Al_Fresco - 04/10/08
It's not just Windows that is too monolithic. The PC itself is too monolithic. As technology matures it normally becomes more modular and specialized. Whether it's the practice of medicine, hand tools or law for that matter. It's been called the Modular Pendulum. The PC has remained a generic box. What passes for innovation is the reorientation from laying flat to standing on its edge - tada - the "Tower". Sad
71. RE: Gartner: Windows collapsing under its own weight; Radical change needed
whooliebacon - 04/10/08
Amazing Gartner would use Windows and innovative in the same sentence. Mepis and PClinuxOS are innovative and solid performers. One more time. Windows is stale. The MS idea of innovative is to bully Yahoo.
72. Gartner Is Praying Windows Not Collapse
g15host - 04/10/08
How else would their make money from consulting without
the MS philosophy and technology fuddling everything up
in IT? The last thing MS should do is listen to what Gartner
and IT managers have to say. Windows has problems, and
the fix won't be easy, but it still owns 90% of computer
land. The same IT managers who listen to this shill are the
very ones who contributed to and are responsible for MS's
monopoly and keeps MS in business. You want to know the
problem - look in the mirror. All you need to do is stop
using Windows for 3-5 years. You can bet your corporate
dollar it will get cheaper and better really fast.
73. RE: Gartner: Windows collapsing under its own weight; Radical change needed
cameljockey - 04/11/08
I sleep better at night knowing windows/ballmer
users are in such misery. they deserve it.
74. Same issues they've been facing for 10 years
Chad_z - 04/11/08
For starters, Windows should create versions for specific uses.
And just how is it Microsoft could NOT see that coming? They're supposed to be one of the top technology companies in the world and yet the Linux solid state laptops caught them almost completely by surprise. They bet the market would go to quad cores and 4 gigs of RAM and they were caught flat-footed when the market resisted that change. Vista was the worst OS they could have fielded at that point in tech history.
Microsoft has historically been in a position to dictate where the market is going. In some ways they still can. But all along they claimed to be "listening" to their customers. That may be, but they were certainly listening to what they wanted to hear.
So now MS wakes up to the hard reality they can't dictate to the market anymore. So now, once again, they're behind the curve. They're products don't fit market needs and they have to play catch up. Just what they've been doing the last ten years.
SSDD in Redmond.
75. More troll bait from ZDNet
Duke E. Love - 04/11/08
Unleash the freetards!
75.1. Sounds like you hate freedom. Well, in the
hkommedal - 04/11/08
land of the free, not everyone agrees with you. You could consider a move to North Korea, had they only had food enough to go around.
75.1.1. go figure why an imbecille was appointed president
llval@... - 04/13/08
the people got used to be cheated as customers already.
76. RE: Gartner: Windows collapsing under its own weight; Radical change needed
spyro17@... - 04/11/08
Perhaps the trick will be a progressive break over time, dumping Windows versions at the bottom of the compatibility list with each coming version. Windows 7 can phase out 95, 8 can phase out 98, and so on. That way, legacy code can be kept from expanding infinately, and Microsoft can continue making money off of modern replacements for old applications that no longer run on new Windows.
After all, who still uses Windows 95 apps anymore anyway? In that much time, it stands to reason that something better will have come along, and if it hasn't, then clearly the application was not popular enough to warrant a replacement, and likely, few people, if any, will still be using it.
As far as hardware goes, I do think MS needs to rethink things. They severely overestimated the average user PC when designing Vista, and the average buyer budget with Vista-capable PCs. They need to trim things down ALOT with Windows 7 to get ahead again, because most people don't have top-of-the-line PCs, and will be looking for an OS that can run well on lower-end machines like their old friend XP can. If Seven doesn't deliver on this, they'll switch to an OS that can.
77. RE: Gartner: Windows collapsing under its own weight; Radical change needed
njo_ldc@... - 04/11/08
I think with MS Vista that MS forgot (KISS) Keep it simple stupid. This is what I prefer. I wish I could of stayed with Windows XP. Nancy
78. Who cares about Gartner? Who is Garner to judge it?
qmlscycrajg - 04/13/08
Who cares about Gartner? Who is Gartner to judge it?
78.1. Ultimately, every man will be his own judge
Ole Man - 04/13/08
Trouble is, some of Microsoft's dirty
little tricks (malfeasance) is
becoming public knowledge. They
cannot keep all the dirt swept under
the rug permanently. This is as it
should be.
Ye shall reap that which ye sow. Some
of it may be seven fold, too.
79. RE: Gartner: Windows collapsing under its own weight; Radical change needed
markyannone - 04/14/08
More often than not, hardware manufacturers decide the fate of an OS, and consumers decide the fate of the hardware.
PS: When is ZDNet going to fix this posting error?
80. RE: Gartner: Windows collapsing under its own weight; Radical change needed
n4lxl - 04/15/08
With every release of Windows, the consumer is pressured to buy it, then---upgrades hardware to optimize---takes months to learn how to use---searches/waits for required drivers---replaces older software that won't run---receives little real benefit over last version!
This is a ME$$ in all aspects....how to break the cycle?
81. And here's the proof ...
ttocsmij - 04/16/08
"Windows should be able to be tailored to specific applications."
Years ago the government passed on the opportunity to fix this whole mess. They had the chance to separate the operating system (OS) from the application programs (eg, Office). They dropped the ball. The Europeans are still trying but have lost their focus. Good luck to them.
That would have been the time to forcibly separate M$ into two companies, or divisions, with total transparency between them. In other words, M$ applications developers would only have access to the same OS information as every other developer. In other words, a level playing field where true competition would deliver the best products at the best price.
It didn't happen. And so we now have a so-called OS that is really just another bloated application that lumbers along doing it's best to perpetuate the monopoly that created it while keeping its hardware allies in business trying to keep up with its insane appetite.
And so we're back to the opening quote.
"Windows should be able to be tailored to specific applications."
Nope. Windows should be forced back to being just an operating system. Just a program that interfaces application software to the hardware. As was intended before the marketing genius got involved.
Then the M$ application programmers might have to actually compete with others ... oooo ... what a shock that would be in Redmond. Those $2,000 doorknobs would be shakin', eh!
82. Original Gartner Report Here
desmondhaynes - 05/05/08
Check it out here:
http://techwatch.reviewk.com/gartner-report-excerpts
83. Why is MS incapable of making it simpler?
brendan@... - 05/05/08
They entirely confuse 'functionality'--an unquestioned good--with 'adding more and more functions--not always so good.
fishing your way through Windows (or even worse, Office 2007) to find the one thing you want to do is a confusing trip into the labyrinth. developing new modular forms is just their way of avoiding confessing that they've loaded their products down with so much crap that almost all of us would rather not have to deal with (or learn to ignore, either--also a burden on the consumer), that we no longer enjoy the products at all.
THIS is why they spend years developing each new generation only to have buyers immediately complain that it their products are still slow, confusing, unfriendly, and the like. It's because microsoft has become so phobic that someone might mention a 'function' that they didn't provide that they are incapable of sending out an elegant, competent program that will do anything clearly, directly, quickly, or (heaven forbid) cheaply.
their entire business model, or at least their entire mindset, is of this bent, and it will not be cured simply or soon.
vista is the example everyone cites of this disease, but i'd say office 07 is an even better (worse) example. whichever, for most small businesses and many individuals, it is actually now a legitimate consideration to look into non-ms alternatives. unthinkable only a few years ago.
84. RE: Gartner: Windows collapsing under its own weight; Radical change needed
ujhrdngjk - 08/12/09
MKV to XVID Converter||MKV to PS3 Converter both are brili tools for mkv convertible videos.