Things Microsoft Shouldn't Do: Promise Faster OS Release Times
from the just-saying dept
Microsoft is famous for shipping software late. That's why it was no surprise when they delayed Vista again and again and again. It's status quo for Microsoft. So why is Steve Ballmer going out and claiming that Microsoft will never again have this big a delay between releasing operating systems? At the same time, Bill Gates is saying a much more responsible thing: the product shouldn't be released until it's ready. Speed to market and the gap between releases shouldn't be as important as getting it right. Unfortunately, Microsoft doesn't always get things right either -- even with the delays. In fact, for whatever changes Microsoft is pushing these days, it still seems like Vista is going in the wrong direction. With more and more services and applications (finally) moving online, why isn't Microsoft focused on building a lightweight, easily extensible platform that can be built upon, rather than building up an increasingly bloated, do everything, operating system?
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Is Microsoft really the same OS?
But of course, you knew KFC is really a Japanese company, right? Not an image the American branches want you to see.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Is Microsoft really the same OS?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Is Microsoft really the same OS?
Oh and BTW KFC is in fact an american company. It's now owned by YUM! and was previously owned by pepsi...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I agree. While online apps are all the rage nothing can replace the speed and convienence of having your files and apps on your hard drive.
Also, reality check, not everyone has fast reliable internet access (Which is almost a prereq for using online apps).
Finally, who wants to plug into the internet to do every little thing, sounds like a recipe for disaster when the internet connection fails for some reason (which happens more often than your hard drive failing, things server outages, Telco problems, local hardware issues, heck, the weather!).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
They Have a Good Point
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Vista is rabbish
Above all, as a Java developer, every time I try to compile an application, it prompts me with a security message (which I couldn't get red off), then opens a new DOS window, and closes it even before I could see the results of compilations.
For those reasons, I don't really care when they're going to release it...as I am sure it would be as secure as the previous releases of MS Windows.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Vista is rabbish
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bah
Those "stupid security messages" are one of the huge features of Vista - even administrators run with the minimum priviliges of a normal user unless they need them. That means viruses be completely unable of doing any real damage to your computer, unless you specifically give them permission in the "stupid security message."
Because of the new security model, Internet Explorer runs by default in a special "restricted mode" in a separate process with zero permissions and any file access redirected to a special "fake" folder. This means any online attack would be more or less impossible - completely compromisng Internet Explorer 7 would give you access to, um, nothing.
Compare explicitly authorizing administrator priviliges for individual tasks (such as clicking "no" to a virus wanting to wipe your Windows directory or change the registry) and an incredibly secure Internet Explorer with Windows XP and, yes, it is more secure.
Besides, you're pretty dumb if you can't figure out how to use a compiler.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Vista is rabbish
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Vista is rabbish
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Combat Piracy and Sell More Units
Then, sell all the extra stuff- WMP, office, etc... on top of that.
They'd cut piracy to zero and reduce their ever-increasing costs of maintaining a securing a 15-year old codebase. In ten years, Microsoft must have spent BILLIONS on Internet Explorer... money that could have been spend building a better mousetrap.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Combat Piracy and Sell More Units
There would be no ANY advantages over Linux. Well, there aren't any already, but then it would be absolutely obvious. And MS would still charge $49.99 for that?! lol.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Combat Piracy and Sell More Units
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Microsoft and Fast OS releases
Had Gates and co. did things differently in the beginning they'd be fine, but they paved a way for people to become infamous by screwing others. Amazing how the tide turned. Bill with his famous "You can't use that, but you can license it from us" set the computing world on its butt figuring out how to loan software to people (read your end user license agreement if you're not sure what I mean, you don't own it, you're renting it).
However, you cannot legally rent it to others, you have to create it first before you can rent it to others by creating your own license agreement.
What Microsoft should do to get back on point is start releasing something to plug all the holes in that piece of swiss they call and OS and allow people to work vs. have to fix it on a daily basis. If they're not sure how to do it, I will lend them an hand...for a price.
MM
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Microsoft and Fast OS releases
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Microsoft and Fast OS releases
because games play SO well on a MAC
because everyone has all that money for new hardware and software
because everyone loves that you cannot build your own mac
LOL A MAC indeed...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yeah, for some reason when you have a $2500 machine, shitty software doesn't seem to run slowly.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why stick with Microsoft?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Why stick with Microsoft?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Why stick with Microsoft?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Why stick with Microsoft?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Why stick with Microsoft?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Maybe that is because not everyone is having internet connection all the time as we speak? In addition, all the internet security hoes have made it not always preferrable to run programs from remote servers. At last but not least, when the user OS is so stripped down and all the programs depend on remote servers, Microsoft has to make a much more powerful OS to support. Either way, Microsoft has to make a more powerful server OS, why not just make all OS powerful when you are making server OS powerful?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
same ol' same ol'
@ the dodo that talks about vista beta, i mean BETA, being slow, well.....maybe it's logging all kinds of stuff for BETA purposes in the background. i mean, it is BETA.
@ the person that doesn't like the interface. umm...ok. i don't like olives or mushrooms.
@ the person(S) that wants a thin OS, run Lonhorn Server Core. it won't even have a shell. you can do everything (DNS, AD, WINS, FILE, PRINT, DHCP) from an MMC remotely and interface with the OS via CLI. hmm...wait a sec...no IE, no Image Viewer, no WMP....wait a minute....let's rethink this. i do want my OS to actually do stuff don't i? hmm....it is written to be used by BILLIONS of people accross the world, in numerous continents, multiple languages, different timezones....this might be a little more complicated than my basic VBScript writing (actually copying stuff posted on sites) and WebDev (again copying other people's stuff) skills.....
@ those that don't like all the pop-ups. what do you propose? either not prompting you to block content and just letting it run (in which case you bitch about security), not prompting you and blocking (in which case you bitch about functionality), or prompting you and giving you a choice? you see, anyone that TRULY works with security and systems knows that there is a trade-off between security and funtionality beyond the catch buzz words and blanket linux/mac is more secure phrases. they understand that security has overhead.
you know what, it's easier to blindly say that MS Sucks and that you guys are right. MS Sucks and you guys are right. Ignorance and mindless ranting is bliss, ain't it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Should have gone linux..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What MS should've done
MS has the wrong business model. The "problem" with software is that eventually, you get it right, or reasonably close. At that point, people ask "Why bother upgrading?". MS has tried to offer "features" coming out of its ying-yang. The result is a big bloated monstrosity that requires you to purchase a new computer. Heck, it requires *A VIDEO CARD WITH MORE RAM THAN WIN98SE REQUIRED TO RUN IN*!!!
Redhat has the right approach for a commercial OS. Charge for support, but don't keep screwing around with the OS..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What MS should've done
You keep on sending those checks to microsoft. I'm sure they'd appreciate it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Redhat Approach....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Wikipedia - Windows 2000
Microsoft offers Windows 2000 Advanced Server- Limited Edition, which was released in 2001 and runs on 64-bit Intel Itanium microprocessors.
so now that you are only 5 years out of date, why don't you try knowing what you are talking about prior to opening your pie hole
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Vista = WRONG WAY
I'm using ubuntu for at least ten months now, and I have to tell you that NEW OS DOES NOT NEED TO BE SLOWER THAN ITS OLDER VERSION! I recently upgraded from breezy to drapper (on my 4 years old machine) and the new version boots faster and runs much faster, as the previous! (yes, the upgrade was fast & none of my personal settings were overwritten). I bet that users of other Linux distros usually experience the same thing.
"why isn't Microsoft focused on building a lightweight, easily extensible platform that can be built upon, rather than building up an increasingly bloated, do everything, operating system?"
The answer is, that they want to own their customers. Start using m$ implementation of something and you're stuck with it for life! They could also load their "lightweight OS" with open source applications that do everything, even better. But that's not gonna happen...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Since a few days, I have to work under windows, again, and where KDE somedays behaved awfully latency requiring, windows just look not-moving at all. Well, that's just my impression, and shouldn't be a starting point for another OS war.
So, me too, I think, MS should make windows just move quicker and faster. -- And more rich in valuable features. (Who needs menus fading in/out, while not having easy mouse/keyboard shortcuts at hand to move any windows?)
Just my 2 cents.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Walter Dnes is an idiot
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Better this OS Better that OS
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
duh..
well there goes the neighbourhood...
vista looks ok i guess, needs a ahrdware spec thats way to high just for the OS though. mind you by the time its released that may not be a problem.
not getting it though, that WGA crap means i'm not buying MS again.
Not that they don't have a right to stop copyright infingment, but pissing off the peeps that *have* bought legit copies..
sorry 'last straw' time. I'll use what i've got and take my chances.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Comp,aints against Microsoft
MS is like EVERYONE else, they work to make money, and in OS's, that means you have to make new versions every so often, because noone wants to keep paying for an OS they baught 5 yrs ago. Each new version do something MORE then the last one, noone wants to pay for a new product thats no different from the one they have. Even if it does work perfect every time for every user.
As for Linux, Mac OS, Unix, etc., we dont srr as much trouble with those for one simple reason. Not that they are better, but that they are not so widely used. 1% of 50 million is a much higher number of reports then 1% of 100 thousand, but they are both 1% of the total number. Hackers, virus builders, and chronic complainers only attack OS's that effect the majority of users. So, everyone go buy Mac's, and for 6 months, if we're lucky, we'll all be safe and happy. But Mac will be our next MS inside a year.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I remember
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Futile Arguments
Oh but I'm not about to say, "Go Linux, Go Mac (Ick), Go 98SE." Because all 3 of those would be incorrect statements. First lets take a look at 98SE, a truly innovative OS for its time. It still in fact has many lovers and I'm sure that 10, 20, even 30 years from now... a computer somewhere will have 98SE on it. But it's outdated, and no matter how many security patches and hardware support it could get, sooner or later, software would simply not be able to run on it any longer, regardless of the hardware.
Now lets look at Mac, not exactly the best choice in the world either. With all the Mac zealots floating around I wont say much... the crazy stupid bastards that they are. But Mac doesn't have full support by all software creators, especially including game developers. Mac also refuses to let people like me, do my job, which is fix and customize PCs. You want something fixed... take it to a licensed retailer or send it to the company... but god forbid you put 3rd party hardware in there... or use someone else to fix what isn't theirs.
Mac tries too hard to monopolize their hardware, which is why it doesn't have as large of a user base as a normal PC. Not to mention the insane costs of a Mac for that sole fact, that they dont want to go through 3rd party hardware vendors to make production costs cheaper. The OS is innovative... and that should be enough, but it isn't, so Mac fails.
Now finally Linux, possibly THE best alternative to Windows out there today. In fact I'm still in awe of what all Linux has to offer. There's only a few problems with Linux. First off, it will never bring in a huge conversion rate for one sole reason alone: Despite the fact that it has a software alternative for EVERYTHING, simple ones at that, it simply has no support for games.
Game developers do not make high end games for Linux, even though the process would be so simple. The reason being? They dont get paid to code software for a free OS. And also some game developers dont want to give out their source code for the game, which is pretty much a set standard on Linux.
Lastly, Linux is pretty much for semi intelligent people. It's not for the common masses, morons looking to download porn, script kiddies who want to find security holes, and above all... java programmers who dont know how to spell (Couldn't resist, sorry). It requires some basic computer knowledge to run it minimally, and alot of computer knowledge to make it run as smoothly as you want it to. Because Linux can't sugar coat options like MS can... because that'd be anti Linux... for Linux is all about power and user options in the purest form.
So all in all, we're going to have to suffer with MS unless someone out there, who is truly inspirational comes along and leads us out of this oppressive computing era. Sorry people... but... that's just the way it is. And things will never be the same.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Futile Arguments
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Futile Arguments
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Futile Arguments
http://www.ifilm.com/ifilmdetail/2751590
There is some generic software for music on linux here and some other BS... You should also try using SourceForge
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I want an option to disable the pop-ups. Here, how's this?: "Would you like to allow this action? Yes, No, Always, Never" If my firewall can do it, so can Windows.
Oh and to those complaining about no fast reliable internet access, nobody said you had to upgrade your OS. Why should that hold the rest of us back? That would only give average people a reason to demand these services so coverage can be increased.
To the person who praised Windows 98 - I don't remember it ever being lightweight or fast on the hardware of the time. I recall many BSODs, endless searches for drivers, etc.
And regarding the Vista beta, I don't see the point of upgrading. There is absolutely nothing even tempting about it. The interface is clunky and mac-like and all of the decent features they were going to include have been cut out.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How can you say this is status quo
During the 90's. Microsoft developed 7 versions of there OS, and this not including server versions of NT4.0 and Windows 2000 and mobile CE versions and embedded versions. And guess what, people bitched and complained about how fast Microsoft was rolling out operating systems. People couldn't understand the need to upgrade from Windows 95 to 98, and the SE and then ME and then 2000. People said it hurt the industry because it forced people to upgrade rapidly wasting money unnecessarily.
Now, people are complaining about how long Vista is taking, saying that the years involved in development, and constant postponement is hurting the industry?
WTF!
I am sorry, but when it comes to Microsoft, I am tired of the "Status Quo" of being negative about anything they do, especially with there is no thought or reason for it. And the person who submitted this article a completely MORON! It is obvious he knows nothing about Microsoft's game plan, and has ignored developments in the Microsoft camp in order to lash out with is obvious bias and unfounded hatred.
Microsoft is heavily going in the direction of online services, their whole Windows Live product line is a testament to that. As well as the whole .Net platform which is geared towards developing online services. But they can't just end traditional desktop application support in one go either. Rather then just saying "Customers want online services" Microsoft is tentatively rolling out online services to see if customers bite. I mean, how many dot.com bombs have happened because corporations under or overestimated the needs of customers. Consider that still a large part of the population doesn't have broadband service, putting all your eggs into online services doesn't make sense.
As for making Vista too bloated? I mean, come on, get real guys. Microsoft is finally doing what Apple has done, added a decent search index system, gadgets, and other bells and whistles that make an OS easier to use. What people perceive as bloat, the UI, Microsoft is finally utilizing the full power of your system by leveraging your idle GPU to render UI components. The UI does not tax your CPU, thus allowing your CPU to be used for the intention of the application, not to render the application.
Nobody complains about Apple not providing a lightweight OS environment and turning to online services. Its this kind of double standard that I find is just a sign of ignorance, how Apple does everything right, and Microsoft wrong, when in fact they are doing the same thine. Why not complain that Apple should move its iLife applications as online services, rather then weighing down and OS with over 10 gb of files.
Anyways, I am not Microsoft's champion either, and they have done some vile business practices in the past. But I develop Windows applications, and I have to find the silver lining, and I find that Microsoft is doing more right then wrong these days. Just that stupid moronic people can't let go of the past, they are still bitter about the whole 90's Microsoft to realize Microsoft has moved on and making an OS for the 21st century.
Finally, if you have not USED Vista, then you have no business saying there is no reason to upgrade. Use it, even once, and you will find it to be streamlined and worth an upgrade over XP, even in just the way it organizes multimedia. There are numerous performance and power efficiency options that I like (hybrid drives and Superfetch) The only feature excluded is WinFS. But I would still recommend that you get it with a new computer when you buy or upgrade to one because Vista is all about leveraging new hardware features.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: How can you say this is status quo
I'll admit I am a Mac user, but at the same time Macs are not perfect and I still own an XP system at home. The biggest downfall of the Mac is the lack of Universal application support because many vendors simply choose not to support Mac for whatever reason. To the guy who said OS X is 10 gigs or so, I agree the OS is HUGE to say the least, but the conviniance of being able to plug in just about any device and have it simply work is great. What this guy doesn't tell you (or may not know) is that you can delete (remove) any unused (or unwanted) printer drivers, fonts, etc. and free up about 2 + gigs of space.
Anywho, just my 2 cents
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: How can you say this is status quo
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Well...
...it might be becuase the internet, or at least the high speed that would cut download speeds for upgrades and patch to a reasonable timespan, isn't as commonly available as people (with high speed) think?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's not about the OS...
So you use their formats. You use MS Office and save as a .doc. You use WMP to rip your audio and you save as .wma.
Face it, the majority of computer users aren't bright enough to download the LAME encoder and set up their windows media player just to encode their CDs in a semi open format.
They also aren't going to download winAmp/foobar.
If they do use a different Audio Player it will be iTunes, just because it's easy/popular/they have an iPod/they've heard of it/ it looks pretty/ etc.
In which case they're being swung into AAC, and although it's easier to swtich iTunes from AAC to mp3, it's still defaults to AAC.
It's all about the formats.
If microsoft has 75% of the users using .doc format to save their documents, and if half the music that's being ripped from CDs is WMA, and if 90% of the browser users is IE...
Then they've got a serious advantage over any other platform out there.
THAT's why they won't make a lightweight framework.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It's not about the OS...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It's not about the OS...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
TEST
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
WOW - You people are rather serious about this.
I like the fact that now I can run 5 machines and my Xbox 360 and stream ripped media directly to whichever TV in my house. I like the Bluetooth media center remotes.. I like the whole damn package. And I really hate Microsoft, but when compared to the ridiculous standards and BS that Mac’s pull off... or the counter intuitive installation of software media on UNIX or Linux. Though RPM’s are kind of sexy with all there clickable goodness, the days of “make” and “config” will hopefully be coming to an end soon. I personally think that this is seriously a day and age of Pick You Poison. After all who really cares what OS you use as long as you can complete the task at hand in a timely fashion with it. After all I don't care what browser you are using to view this page or the OS supporting it. Why? Because it's not mine, that’s why.
I will use whatever OS happens to be there when I turn on the machine. Because after all being good with a computer does not mean you are only good with an application... Like Windows... If you don't want it, can't afford it, or simply don't know how to use it... Then don't...
Or buy a book....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Who wants bloat and why wait for it?
If you really want a computer system to do what YOU want and ONLY what YOU want, build our own hardware, put it all in a box, then write your own OS and apps. Otherwise, live with the fact that business' cater to the largest group of customers, not the few select who will never be satisfied with someone elses idea of a good product for the masses.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]