Vista 2007. Fire the leadership now!
2007.
It certainly sounded like Microsoft leadership committed to us, our customers, our partners, and our shareholders that Vista would be out in 2006.
Slip!
We should have asked for more details around the "or else" part of that commitment.
I was upset at missing the back-to-school market. Now we're missing the holiday sales market. All of those laptops and PCs are going to have XP on it. What percentage will upgrade to Vista? Well, I guess that's the little dream that I need to give up on. Vista's deployment is going to come from people buying CPUs with the OS pre-installed, not dancing down the CompUSA aisle as they clutch that boxed version of Vista to their loving chest. So not only did we miss last year's opportunity, we're missing this year's opportunity, too. With the convergence of high-tech media, this holiday season would have been an explosive nodal point to get Vista out for a compounded effect.
Personally, I've been holding off of buying a laptop and a new mega-big-iron PC until Vista is done. I'm super-excited to get Vista Ultimate on that new PC and be able to hook Media Center up to my Xbox 360. And now I'll wait.
In my afternoon daydream, after Allchin's email went out, I imagined all the L68+ partners from the Windows division gathered together and told, "You are our leadership. When we succeed, it is directly because of how you lead and manage your teams. When we fail, it is directly because of how you lead and manage your teams. We've had enough of failure and we've had enough of you. Drop off your badge on the way out. Your personal belongings will be dropped off at your house. Now get out of my sight."
Sigh. Well, I'd settle for the version: "... When we fail, it is directly because of how you lead and manage your teams. We reward success. We do not reward failure, especially sustained failure that has directly affected this company, its future, and its stock price. You will not receive any incentives this year. You will not receive a bonus. You will not get a raise. You will not be awarded stock."
People need to be fired and moved out of Microsoft today. Where's the freakin' accountability?
Discussions elsewhere:
In the meantime, the discussion of how you'd sell Vista in 30-seconds to a non-techy consumer hasn't come up with much Abbie-understandable reasons other than "cooler games!" Sure, Abbie probably spends a lot of time with solitaire and minesweeper, so that's good. But most of it focuses either on issues so deep and technical that the average consumer is going to shrug and say, "Hell, I don't think I need any of that!" or on issues that make you think that XP is a ticking time-bomb of unstable code ready to explode 1s and 0s over anyone who looks at it wrong. And as for Alpha Geeks and super-users, it sounds like LUA is going to be a daily pain in the patootie.
The good news? Well, we've got plenty of time to conjure up reasons why Vista is going to be better than XP in a way that anyone can understand and agree with. Plus $500 million to spend doing it.
Oy. Oy. Oy.
Updated: added the Channel9 link.
582 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 401 – 582 of 582There has been a lot of criticism and complaining about bad management on this forum.
I think that at leased from a costumer's point of view the problem are the fact that Microsoft has an monopoly in the the operatingsystem business with its 95 %
I think that every company that has this market share will eventually loose its costumer base when and if its starting to produce crappy over bloated software that no one really wants and don't have the choice not to pay for when they buy a new pc Ewen the employees at the company (MS) think its crap.
In an market economy the usual thing for a company that evidential produce crap products would be to go out of business, but because the US government seems to bee weary found of monopolies a l a Soviet union this would newer happen.
What I mean is that since Microsoft doesn't have to compete they can produce what ever crap software they want and people would still end up with its product because of the OEM deals with major pc vendors etc. I think this is wary wrong and doesn't belong in a free market economy nor anywhere else.
Most people doesn't have a choice since they can't choose another OS at the computer store if they wanted to. And that is the main reason why so many people hate Microsoft.
With other words, there's no freedom when buying a computer.
Of course you can download some Linux iso s but since its not on the computer when you buy it most people would newer ewer try it and that is a shame because most linux distributions are really good and since there are many of them you could always find one that fits your needs.
One size fits all is not the way to go because you can newer ewer please every user out there, that is simply impossible.
Most people wants something that is simple to use yet stable and virus free. Some people like eye candy ala Mac OS X and others don't but it should be up to the end user to choose an operating system, not Microsoft. At least in an modern free country in an modern free world.
By the way monopolies are illegal in most countries at least in theory.
I've been an happy linux (mostly xandros but have tried other distributions to) user for about six years now and would only buy an windows based computer when h*ll freezes over or when the monopoly is broken down.
There is something you missed. It has been said elsewhere on many news sites but I will say it again.
Many people will not wait for Vista. They will not buy new hardware with XP either. They will buy a Macintosh. It's a cold fact. Apple will have a terrific rest of the year.
Personally, I was hoping for summer release and buying a new computer with Vista on it. I am now collecting money (trying to convince myself that I have nothing better to do with the money that I have already) for a brand new shiny Intel based Mac Mini.
How likely I will buy Vista after that purchase? Not very.
For those who are REALLY interested to understand IBM's desktop and collaboration strategy, you should familiarize yourself with the Workplace Managed Client:
http://www-142.ibm.com/software/workplace/products/product5.nsf/wdocs/workplaceclienttech
It has already been said here in this blog - the role of OS is diminishing and collaboration and productivity tools are going to be delivered in a rich client / citrix fashion in the enterprise world. No more OS dependency, no more full MS Office suits to all employees => significant cost savings!
Yes, it's true, that for example the built in Open Office based productivity tools of Workplace Managed Client aren't 100% as good as MS Office. True. But lets be honest, isn't it healthy development to reduce the features of a word processor from 50000 to lets say 1000?
The desktop dominance of the future is NOT about the OS itself, but applications. It's always the applications, like MS Office. Document format, like Open Document Format (ODF) will also play a major strategic role.
I am one of those lame testers that were "removed" approximately a month ago to pave the way for the full transition of BVT/FVT to IDC.
While I was employed for the past 11 months testing the code produced by Windows Core, I came across a staggering discovery, and that was that the majority of our tests when they failed spectacularly were deemed "Approved by Component Developer".
This was just shocking to me at first to pass packages and updates for GDR that were incapable of being removed or broke compatability with such things as Winlogon if the machine had not yet been activated. Now that was a fun issue that was thankfully repaired after a major complaint that I filed.
So, this really does not surprise me that everything started to slip. I have seen what Vista and Longhorn Server (as of the last build I tested) have been so am confident that I will not be upgrading my personal computers to it any time soon.
It is just scarry to see things like the ability to access the "Help Viewer" through the Login screen to gain full control over the system (Yes, it was still there as of 5283).
As a hint, it involves a URL and EXPLORER.EXE and you can gain Admin Rights.
Does anyone feel threatened by the GUI Google is building on Ubuntu? The way things are going for Google, the average consumer sure seems to TRUST Google a lot, and with the free software they keep cranking out like Picasa, and others I would not be suprised when they release there own Office package too. So when Google releases a live CD to test there new OS, I bet people will try it.
Also dont be suprised when a Live CD (that runs on any general pc) of OSX comes out too. I also believe that MSFT should be worried with OSX 10.5.1 because I have a feeling that due to the the 10.4.5 being hacked and made available for most general sse2 machines, Steve Jobs will have no choice, but to make 10.5.1 for sale and support general PC hardware.
I like MSFT a lot and use all OSs (Linux, Unix, Windows, OSX, TSOL, etc). I beleive MSFT did a lot in the mid 90s and had to create a lot of new standards, but the competition has caught up (It blows me away by how far Linux has come since 1996). If MSFT does not take some action I do see them falling. Hopefully Billy G can gain some perspective and regain control of his company like Steve Jobs was able to do when he was invited to take back his company.
Anyways, I believe this year generally is starting off slow, but I sure beleive that it will end with a bang in all aspects, and can't wait to see what happens. Heres to future OS competition, and I guess we will see if darwins theory holds true.
late ... JNN
Monopoly...is a great enemy to good management.
The Wealth of Nations, Book I Chapter XI Part I
Vista is what happens when every decision is made for business reasons not technical ones. In the end despite managment's best efforts reality prevails.
There is a saying in EE, the most reliable transistor is the one designed out of the circuit. Small efficient modular code is technically superior but will not help M$ maintain it's monopoly.
Lot of hot air around. 80% of large software projects are late by more than a year, and of these one in five never ship at all - I think this is what Gartner reports. msft ought to have got this on everyone's wall long before now.
Apple took note - didn't try to deliver the whole piece from day one - that failed with Copland. 10.0 to 10.5 is a work in progress - appreciated by most who wanted to get away from OS9. Only grow what you can eat.
And don't forget that Apple had an Intel version of OS X from 10.0 so the big switch hasn't been that big. Rosetta is the lifesaver for them - wouldn't have been possible without this.
And if case histories mean anything msft should check on IBM - not making much money from systems now, mostly from services, and the PC never made them any money.
Being big doesn't stop a corporation from focussing on the wrong way of doing things. Top down control doesn't deliver big software projects - clear boundaries and empowerment at component level makes more sense. But too late for Vista.
Firstly, I am a linux user, and comments such as ditch XP and use Linux just aren't appropriate, or helpful. I love Linux it has all the flexibility I want, and I have never had any problems with hardware, in fact I get a far higher framerate on my graphics card in Linux than in XP.
I started using MS back in the good old days of DOS, then I moved onto Win 3.1 and progressed along as each version came out. Just for the record I have to say Win 3.11 was the best version MS released in terms of stability. I stopped using MS products when XP came out, I was quite impressed with 2000 despite a few flaws, but I just found XP to be too infuriating. It felt like a lot of the old ways of doing things had been broken in order to gain an interface that to my eye looks like something that should have Teletubbies in it.
I really do not agree with some of the things MS has done in the past, and I think that those responsible should pay. Not the company as a whole but at whatever level of management is responsible for some of its unbelievable behaviour.
I think .NET is great, but I would still rather use Java simply because it is far more portable.
I want to see MS succeeding again at what really matters, the software, it seems recently it has become more about marketing and legal. Take the Get The Facts campaign, comparing running Windows on a pretty much bog standard PC to running Linux on a server? Thats some pretty bad marketing, I don't know many who didnt pick up on that.
I really hope that MS can sort itself out, theres been some great software out of you guys (I loved Age of Empires) but theres also been some not so good software, from my point of view. I should add that when i say not so good I mean for my needs and purposes, I'm not commenting on anyones coding ability.
All the company needs is a shakeup, a CEO with some real business ethics and it can go back to what its good at, stable reliable software.
I for one will be buying a copy of Office 2007 when it comes out, if only to see what it is like. With regards to Vista sorry but I'm not shelling out my hard earned to get an OS that encumbers me with more DRM and god knows what.
I truly believe Vista is going to flop, but hopefully it will awaken someone in your company and there may be a restructuring where it is most needed.
Hang in tight guys its gotta get better
I'm a 3rd party dev, not related to microsoft at all. I'm in the position to work with .net 2.0 and especially winfx. I'm actually loving avalon and indigo alike, and I have had the feeling that these are the real innovations that will actually help me create better software for our customers.
After reading some of the negative posts about vista being a dog and bloated and basically _crap_, I'm really interested in opinions about these new technologies.
If microsoft is a chaos from the inside and creates bug-ridden software, then should we even take the time to learn how to develop with winfx? Will that atleast be stable and something to be proud of?
Hubris is the problem. Hubris.
Quoting: Anonymous , at 1:37 PM
> Let me explain something to you.
>
> There are two types of people in this world.
There are two types of people in this world. The ones who divide people into two groups and the others who don't.
And BTW, it has nothing to do with OS-es, believe it or not.
For MacOSX users (like me) - MS Windowses are kind a "stick" in the Apple's ass to force it to create an actually better OS for customers. And I have all the reasons to be happy about that. Obvious as it is, there is no "stick" in the MS's ass, since all the candidates like OS/2, Desqview and others were killed long time ago.
All the problems You see are just consequences - like dinosaurs died, revolutions eat their own children, governments corrupt, monopolies collapse under their on weight and human race eating away their future. All just because they (or we) are biggest, strongest, boldest etc. And don't have a "stick" forcing to be better.
Being a last (or highest?) in the "food chain" is actually a curse - the extinction will be inescapable. But there is a light side: dinosaurs were replaced by mammals (like we), IBM lost the throne to MS and so on. The world will not end, only evolve - and if MS will survive, though it will not be the "mightiest" this time (and maybe with the same "stick" I am speaking about), where's the tragedy?
I have been awaiting Vista, but since I have four PCs to keep up around the house now, and the not-as-soon-to-be-replaced XP home is still $200/license for 3 of the four, it has finally got me into flavors of Linux that I've put off installing on home PCs. I don't build power systems, I usually build my home systems for under $500, and having run Linux on one or two now, it's hard not to be permanently converted.
The recent screenshots are pretty, but I never needed pretty, I needed working. And while my Win32 boxes need to be cleared off and refreshed each year, we've got a linux box at work with over three years of uptime and no performance degradation.
Good luck with Vista, I looked forward to it a while ago, but it's like when I bought my first non-Ford vehicle (moved to a Japanese import) I found that my loyalty had been misplaced.
I will still run at least one Win32 PC in the house whenever Vista comes out, but it's not going to be my de facto standard by then as long as other operating systems keep doing so well for me.
Diermuid.livejournal.com
Fire the leadership. Excellent. Why not just fire everyone?
The gods know I'm no fan of the leadership team, but I'm also not a fan of simplistic attempts at solving complex problems, and decapitation is overly simplistic.
Microsoft has turned itself into a complex problem with little to no evolutionary process to address it. Every time someone gets a wild hair about the newest greatest project management system (scrum?), or some arbitrary date gets missed, or maybe Venus is in the 8th house or something, we deploy the corporate etch-a-sketch and have another friggin' re-org that will "realign" ourselves in order to "position" us to ride the next "wave of innovation", or something similarly unintelligible and just as devoid of substance.
"I've been blue for a little over two years, and in that time, I've been re-orged four times."
"Four?"
"Four, Bob."
If every re-org were an improvement instead of some baby-chucking bathwater competition, maybe leadership would have a middle-tier that actually knew how to competently manage a project. Maybe the middle-tier would actually have effective processes in place with which to manage those projects. Maybe stock prices would climb out of the toilet on their brand new set of Darwinian appendages, and this would be an honestly attractive company for more than the mediocre to work for.
And maybe pigs would fly out of my butt.
As an IT Manager that was basically blackmailed by MS into purchasing their upgrade strategy licensing. We were promised upgrades over 2 years ago. We were promised XP migration support too. It never happened but, we've been forced to keep paying. Paying for what? Vaporware!
We have over 250 Windows 2000 systems because XP wouldn't run our in-house apps and MS wouldn't help even though they promised us assistance in migration. We spent tens of thousands of dollars to MS for basically nothing!
We have 20% of the divisional departments running on Suse now. If this test works for 1 year, our division will be a no MS house in 2 years. We just can't afford MS anymore. If our division can do it, then the entire corporation is considering the transition as well.
Yes, we are paying for Suse support agreements. We're not a "free" user. As a big insurance company, we do need to cover our bases but we cannot afford to waste money for another year or two.
As a BSD Unix developer, I've been reading these threads with some amusement. I've got FreeBSD, Linux and Windows machines at home. I work with FreeBSD, Windows and Linux at work. Some of the pro-Linux-desktop comments above have been hilarious.
I've been a die-hard Unix guy for 17 years, and a die-hard FreeBSD developer for many many years now. I have a BSD desktop at work, but alongside my BSD desktop system at home I have a Windows box for games. I've always used my own unix-based desktop systems. In spite of occasional problems and disasters, I've stuck with eating my own dogfood and never seriously felt the urge to switch to windows.
However, there is no way in hell that Joe User is going to cope with a typical Linux or BSD desktop in more than the short term. Sooner or later, they're going to need something that isn't available, or something is going to break and require surgery to fix, etc. Without a good friend nearby for help, they'll likely be sunk. Remember, for many people, the OS is a means to an end, not the end itself.
But lately something interesting happened. I got a Mac for my son (age 11) to do his school work on (as seperate to his windows games machine with all of its viruses, spyware, crashes, etc). I used it myself for a bit to re-familiarize myself (I last touched a mac in about 1989 or so). I was really struck by 1) how it Just Worked, and 2) it didn't get in the way.
How logical can it get? Installing and uninstalling an application by dragging its folder into the 'Applications' folder! No registry nightmares. No shared files scattered all over the c:\windows directory. No reboots. and best of all, no freaking Installer programs! Just drag the application into the apps folder and you're done. There's no need for an add/remove programs control panel because it Just Works.
The bundled apps Just Work. The terminal window is real. The shell is a real shell. The mail program is quite decent, as is iCal, iPhoto etc. Add so on.
This has seriously shaken my devotion to my Unix roots. I'm having a daily struggle to not replace my desktop with a mac, both at home and at work. Windows never did that for me. Not even close, and I don't see anything in Vista that will add that level of 'Just Works'. I'll still do my BSD work, but I think my time with messing with unix+x11 desktops is over. (I'd like to spend my time doing productive things than trying to figure out why my X11 server is crashing this week.)
This is IMHO the real danger for Microsoft here. It doesn't matter if Vista was delayed or even how late it is or isn't. The danger is that the perceived delay makes news, and that plants the seeds of doubt. Some of those people will walk into an Apple store on a whim, out of curiosity, to see what they're missing. Once they get a taste of 'just work', they get hooked and start telling their friends who are struggling with Windows.
Sure, there will be lots of folks who could easily transition from a windows desktop to a linux desktop. But the real threat to Microsoft the ones who switch to OSX and wonder out loud "why didn't I do this sooner?" and tell their friends.
The Windows -> OSX transition is a simplification step for many people, while the Windows -> Linux desktop step tends to add power at the cost of complexity. I wouldn't apply the "Just Works" description to ANY of the unix desktop environments I've ever seen. Of the folks who could switch away from windows, I think there is a larger portion who would be a lot happier on OSX if they actually gave it a serious shot compared to the portion that could switch to a Linux desktop.
Remember, the OS is a means, not the end.
WinFS is just an example of where Microsoft has been missing the point with the windows direction. Adding abstract features or redesigning the icons in the control panel or coming up with new icons doesn't solve the core issue that there are so many things that are much harder than they have to be. (eg: installing/uninstalling an application). One shouldn't need a wizard to install an app! OSX has shown that it can be done.
If Microsoft thinks that adding complexity will solve their problems, without also biting the bullet and making things 'Just Work' without screwing up, then the unthinkable will continue to happen.
Microsoft has got to re-focus on the "Just Works" aspect. 10 years later, it is still equally as hard (or even more so!) to manage a windows machine than win95. Even switching from windows 3.x .ini files to the registry hasn't helped. There has been no real progress besides eye candy and integration to extinguish competitors. Even the switch from the legacy windows core to the NT kernel hasn't been a uniform advance. For all the stability gained, a whole multitude of new ways to crash it have arrived.
Eye candy won't make up for bugs or crashes. If Vista is late, it had better be bombproof and virus proof as a result or that will be more good news for Apple.
As an aside, to the folks that think that the enterprise release of Vista will cause a large deployment.. think again. Remember how many large corps resisted leaving Win2k for XP and how Microsoft had to keep extending support for much longer than they wanted? Our deployed desktop fleet (10-20 thousand machines) don't have a snowball's hope in hell of a chance of running Vista the way its meant to be run. 256M or 512M ram, cheap graphics cards or integrated graphics, slow cpus, etc. Yes, our newer machines are faster and more powerful, but the majority are already uncomfortable running win2k or XP. I know our IS folk pushed hard against XP to start with in order to keep the number of platform variations down. I don't believe that our corporate desktop scenario is that unusual. There is just no way in hell that there is going to be a mass Vista migration in corporations.
with all due respect, it's "/." not "\."
I question how many people would really want Vista anyway. I have been perfectly happy with XP and see no reason to switch.
Changing management? But how about a 3 day strike to clear everyones heads. Then meet on a creating agreements on procedures, testing, and realistic dates, etc. At some point you have to do more than agree there is a problem.
From a consumer's point of view and as someone who likes Open Source, I hope the delay of Vista will give Linux enough room to gain a solid foothold in the desktop market.
With "solid" I mean a marketshare of maybe 20%, so making games and hardware specs available will be more attractive to publishers and hardware vendors. At that point, I believe that the "playing field" would become really level and MSFT would have to improve significantly to survive.
Which they could probably do, given their financial reserves. And 10 years from now, a renewed MSFT could challenge some Linux vendors that have grown fat and lazy by then ;-)
To the guy who complained about the Fisher Price look of XP...I agree but, are you kidding? Why don't you just turn it off and revert to the classic look? Jeez.
There are so many problems with slipping this thing that a simple firing won't solve it (admittedly, it'd be a good start).
First: Firings. I don't think your list is long enough. Frankly I think everyone in the Windows division GM and above plus Ballmer should be let go. Bill should be allowed to resign. I know that sounds crazy, but think about it for a second.
Second: Compenstation. Bring back lower salaries and lots of stock options. You want to see products shipped, that's the way you do it. I don't think anyone is lazy or stupid - just unmotivated. I know a lot of people who work 10+ hours (including myself) but the vast majority of people are 9-5ers. And you know what? They're smart. Why the hell am I working so much for a 6-7% raise anyway when I could work far fewer hours for 3-5%? I'm an idiot and those guys are geniuses. And if you think that given the current stock price this is a bad idea, see my first point - that alone is likely a 5 point pop on the stock.
Third: Vista. Scrap it and start all over.
A Windows Dev
Ok, first I have to make a few disclosures:
1) I am a Unix and Linux geek
2) I currently own a Mac
3) I was a Microsoft zealot before converting to 1) and 2).
As an "outsider" I dislike Microsoft because of the management. I'll be frank about it: they have always sort of put me off. I can't remember exactly where I became frustrated with MS, but I think it was around the time Ballmer declared jihad on Linux. I read his stuff, and the lawsuits about "patent infringement" he was threatening a) seemed toothless and b) reeked of the monkey's fear. I thought for a second he was going to fling his feces at us. That is what prompted me to begin questioning my MS loyalty. I began realizing that Microsoft was a rather odd company. I began reading about the anti-trust trials and the countless attempts of various "experts" and MS executives to pull one over on the court. And the result? MS was given a slap on the wrist (which is hardly their fault; the Bush Administration is really at fault for providing a toothless settlement).
At the time I was heavily into web development, and I though IE was the best thing since sliced bread. This, mind you, was probably about 4 years ago in 2002. I was learning some of the nuances of web development, such as CSS, and began learning about the stark incompatability of IE with respect to CSS, XHTML, and other standardized features. I was not alone. I found hundreds of different websites in which web developers were just absolutely frustrated with MSIE. It was through this I was first exposed to some little insignificant browser far from production release on something like version 0.6 beta. I think at that time, it was called Phoenix or Firebird (can't really remember that far back); today we call it Firefox. I was astounded (even then) by the features and the simplicity of Firefox, and was happy about it being free.
This partly led me to explore that aforementioned anti-trust case DoJ brought against Microsoft. I began exploring Mac and OSS/FSF alternatives to Windows and I was astonished with the simplicity and ease of use from both Mac and Linux. Mac was sexier than XP, and Linux had rock solid performance (I once accidentally wiped a system I had installed on Linux and while the machine was still running, I was able to recover all of my lost files without having to reboot or stop the services loaded into RAM.) I discovered many erroneous features in Windows, such as the Windows Explorer's ability to hang for hours on end. I had previously thought that this, and many other features, were just part of computing, but soon learned how wrong I was.
Later MS launched the ill-named "Get the Facts" campaign to combat the real and well-percieved Open Source threat. The campaign had a bit of a problem: the facts were and are, (ahem) quite unfactual. Microsoft has in the past couple of years done nothing to change its projected image as the bloated warmonger of software. Vista has been delayed twice (if not more, I'm forgetting each different announcement). XP has had a myriad of viruses and security flaws identified, many of them "critical." MS executives seem to just ignore the real problems. "We innovate," they say, being in some cases more ambiguous than George W. Bush. Specifically, Ballmer really pissed me off about Google. Any CEO who believes his office is a WWE ring is mistaken, and Ballmer will be lucky if his foul-mouthed speech is ignored in any new antitrust investigation of the company.
About 2 weeks ago, I read about Bill mocking the "One Laptop Per Child" initiative, and my first cynical thought ran thus, "he's only bitter because he can't monopolize the poor people too." (OLPC's '$100 laptop' runs Red Hat Linux). His arrogance astounded me. I'm still not sure if the project really is the most effective project at combating poverty, but the more I read into it, the more I think it has the potential. A few days after this, Vista was delayed again. MS has never had the best PR department, but this just nailed the coffin shut.
Reading this blog, I'm beginning to feel that monopolies really are like communism: success as well as failure is rewarded. A cult of personality at the top "leads" the organization. They also refuse to admit failure, and do everything possible to censor anyone who might speak out. I think MS has single-handedly proven its own monopolistic practices here. The lack of competition just murders innovation and productivity. Fortunately for the buyers, MS is only a business, and where MS fails others will step in. My hatred of MS is not eternal; if some radical moves are made, I will gladly consider using MS products again. But right now, MS is taking anticapitalistic moves and thus I vote with my wallet. I'll believe Vista when I see it.
I’m a long time s/w developer, targeting mainly Windows in recent years. I don’t work for MS, never have.
I took a good look at Linux for the first time a couple of years back. It was pretty rough round the edges, certainly not a consumer product. Last month I took another look. A very much smoother affair, installed out of the box with no problems and all the normal things your average consumer would want to do worked straight off – email, web, word processing with openoffice, etc.
Linux may not yet have quite the polish of XP. But, it is getting pretty close. Its rock-solid stable in a way that I doubt an MS O/S with its backward compatibility baggage could ever be. It can clearly undercut any MS offering in price. It comes with an office suite that is more than enough for the vast majority of users. And, its not a MS product. Lets face it, MS is not exactly the most popular tech company on the planet.
MS ought to be *really* worried about Linux. Actually I’m pretty sure it is already. Perhaps this explains why MS has got so busy patenting everything it can think of.
By the way, I’m no OSS freak or Linux hacker. I write closed source apps just like MS. And Visual Studio still beats anything available on Linux.
Its been a long time coming… but there will come a showdown in the next few years that will pit Vista against Linux. And I believe Linux will prevail.
As I understand it, the real cash generators for MS are Windows and Office, with virtually everything else not breaking even. If that’s so, may be a very bumpy ride is coming in Redmond.
Best wishes to those working on Vista and other projects at MS. Although Windows is not my primary OS, I appreciate the vast pool of talented people at MS and the importance of MS to the U.S. economy.
I will happily wait however long is needed for Vista if that means a huge leap in resistance to malware. This aspect of Vista is far more important to me than new features. I believe even non-tech types are very aware of past security issues and will appreciate the value of a hardened product. I believe such advances can be marketed without having to present XP as flawed.
The world and malware have changed, a new version of Windows designed to cope with this would be very much appreciated.
I use XP on one of my machines currently. I'd like to run it and later Vista along side OS X on the MacBook Pro. Although people have already devised ways to dual-boot with Windows XP, I'd much prefer using Virtual PC for side-by-side convenience. I hope that MS is able to release an Intel version of VPC soon (with XP and perhaps a coupon good towards Vista). XP security issues would be less of a problem for me under VPC than with a "real" PC. I would normally disable networking, and also keep a locked second VPC disk image on the drive which could quickly be duped whenever there's a need to restore to a clean system. VPC's ability to copy/paste between Windows and OS X is important to me.
I hope MS can offer VPC for Intel-Mac soon.
Except for gaming, the future value I'll see in Windows and MS apps depends largely on malware resistance and being able to easily share data with OS X and Linux (I use Ubuntu). Please don't force closed proprietary file formats on us. I absolutely will not use them.
Change to a new business model!
Let's view the decision from a different point of view:
It was the absolute right decision! But the business model has to change.
Microsoft Windows is the de-facto standard OS (sorry Linux, Mac OS). And as a standard it is more important to be backwards compatible than to introduce new features or versions! We are in a commodity business.
We deliver the infrastructure of modern computing. And our customers expect us to deliver!
Windows has to work no matter what.
Can you imagine your cable company introduces a new version of cable television and suddenly 5% of cable customers can not watch television anymore? There would be a revolt! The FCC would get involved and heads would roll. And we are only talking about television here. Let's face it:
These days all essential IT services and the internet depend on Windows. The world depends on Windows!
We need to ship a modern OS but not at the expense of reliability! We have the responsibility to keep the world's IT infrastructure running smoothly.
A small delay of a few month far outweighs the possible risk in shipping a new product that is flawed.
What we have to change is our business model. Just like phone and cable service we have to switch from a release oriented business to a service and infrastructure business. Our customers will be much more appreciative of our products when we deliver great service. And we can charge a small monthly subscription fee. Everybody is used to spending more than 100 $ a month for phone and cable service. This is the business model we have to aim for.
Like it or not ... the future is here
In reply to the first comment by anonymous.
Windows ovbiously needs a clean start, I think everyone realizes this but the brass must believe they can pump more out of that kernel and make people wait.
It needs to be rebuilt from the ground up, starting at the kernel and the problem with that is, software. People want an easy upgrade path. They want to pick up a copy, walk it over (install), and continue what their doing. If it had its clean start, that wouldn't be possible. Old software wouldn't work properly. Afterall, if most were ready to drop everything they've used and start over, what was to keep them from switching to Apple's platform?
Simply put, if the OS works differently (new kernel): Old stuff won't work. Old stuff not working: unhappy customers. Unhappy customers: unhappy profits.
Even if Vista moves a lot off the kernel level in the name of security. We're not going to see a major revamp for sometime. And you would have to convince a lot of people to change their computing habits before the brass would change their plans.
Crikey, guys, you want to make Windows great? Pull all that damn NetDDE/ActiveX/.NET crap out of the core, especially the "typhoid-mary" HTML control, and sit down and give us a clean CONSISTENT and TIGHT word-size-independent API for everything. If that means turning existing code into stubs around a new API, do it.
Use Interix, take advantage of it.
Get rid of drive letters completely.
Get rid of every namespace component that ties you in to one instance of an object.
I don't care whether you call the root "\\" or "//" or "/", but get a single-rooted file system that doesn't care where drives really are. I'm tired of shuffling stuff between C: and D:, let "\\Program Files" be on multiple physical drives.
But bring back SWITCHAR and let "/" be used as file separators. That'd get rid of hald the IIS explots and a bunch of browser exploits and make people writing C++ code so happy they don't have to write "\\\\FILESERVER\\SHARE\\FILE" any more.
All these stupid niggly nasty details make people so unhappy they miss the good things like the consistent GUI and keyboard bindings.
HOLY SHIT! I can see what is wrong with Microsoft right here in this blog. I've been gone for 7 years after trading my best years and my marriage for the company, and I'll be dammed if any one of us who were killing ourselves back then would have gone so public with this mess. Who do you kids think you are hurting with all this? Yourselves, your shares and your futures. Who do you think you are kidding? Things are shitty all the time when you are pushing an OS out the door. We didnt have all the automation and process that you have their now, we just had fist fights and in-your-face questions about your brain power, and then your mother's. I remember when Ballmer was chief cheerleader and enforcer, and we needed him to be that. He is horribly wrong for his current role because he is detached from the every day mood. He used to set the tone, now he follows it, trying to steer from the rear. Steve needs to go back about 10 years and start roaming the halls again, yelling at stupidity and pumping people up. Maybe someone can apologize to Silverburg well enough to get some insight? Maybe a lot of the old faces need to come back and clear away a lot of the clutter and process and bullshit that has taken over, and let Microsoft get back where it belongs, kicking the crap out of the competition. It seems the life blood is being leeched right out of the place, and everyone's worst fears are coming to pass. Microsoft has gotten fat and stupid. Well, knife that baby and start over, dammit. But whether that happens or not, stop badmouthing your own company, you bozos. That is your own money you are pissing away. Be constructive. Sure, people need to go, processes need to change, but in your frustration, dont make it easier for the competition to slander you to the customer. I left my heart and soul in that company, and if you young punks fuck it all up with the help of peter-principled management, it is your own damn fault. Fight your battles. Tell the truth. If I had a stupid manager, I could tell someone without fear. When I was there, that blue badge meant that I was among some smart people. I look at this list of whining and wonder what the fuck happened? Take it internal, you losers! And if you cant do that, get the fuck out. But you wont, because those bennies are awesome huh? It seems me and my bretheren paid for them, so you and yours could piss them away, along with any kind of Esprit de Corps we once had. SHUT UP AND GET BUSY, you bums!
You mentioned that you're going to be buying two new computers some time in the future, but will hold off until Vista ships. There are probably a lot more like you, and I think it may begin to take its toll on Windows PC sales in the coming years. It's clear that MS's management doesn't listen to "low-level" employees, it doesn't listen to end users, but maybe they'll start to listen when the OEM manufacturers that account for {VERYLARGE}% of Windows sales start to complain that egregious software delays are costing them sales.
When Brian Valentine started mucking things up in numerous groups years ago, and I realized that he could do so with impunity, I did the only thing left for me - I left. And I never looked back.
I'm happier for it and the rest of you would be too. The opportunities in the local Puget Sound area for ex-Microsoft employees are stunning. I'm paid more, I'm happier, I'm learning more, and I spend far more time with my family.
There's a vibrant world outside. Consider living in it.
This is a little bit funny. Microsoft has it's problems as has been shining through since WinME and SQL 7.0. I am a programmer who has worked in both Shrinkwrap (Prod Dev) and IT. I have been a long time M$ fan, but M$ strategy of bundling more and more just to release new software that has a value add (upgrade incentive) has irritated me since I started in this industry 15 some years ago. The only people that ever do upgrades are MSDN subscribers. The general public upgrades hardware, not OS.
All the additions do is break my software requiring me to focus more on making my software work with the OS rather than focusing on actually making my software better.
From a basic architectural perspective, Windows needs to be much more decoupled from it's core applications (IE, Office, IIS, Exchange, etc) so that improvements can be made to the core without having to be made specifically for a single app. I have seen from the outside the cheers and parties that happen when MS Apps dev groups get thier code in the kernel. That is a really sad political/power play attitude to have when MILLIONS depend on the kernel being stable.
Maybe it's time to find a new OS to root for (forgive the pun) if you guys have completely abandoned basic technical architecture strategy for politics and power.
I wonder why Microsoft doesn't use their money to make an excerpt out of this blog and start to consider all these arguments given here.
(Especially from their own employees and these IBM and BSD-guy above)
Instead all the Microsoft employees have to post anonymous here. That reminds of the system we had in eastern Germany years ago. If you point out a problem or try to improve something you'll be on some kind of blacklist. That was one of the reason the GDR doesn't survive. (And ok, the fact the we economically depend on western germany since 1981)
Btw, i am still waiting for an OS from microsoft which is not patronizing in any way and rocksolid. Why is it so difficult to make a bullet-proof windows system?
(Wasn't VMS on which NT is likely based on kinda rocksolid?)
Where does this featureitis come from?
Anyhow, IMHO OSX is not really an alternative to Vista since its patronizing too.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=ZgZQ_It0weI&search=Mac
Why not taking the codebase from XP-Sp2 and making it as rocksolid as possible?
Since that will probably not gonna happen, i do continue using W2KPro which runs really stable (at least on my machine).
OSX as an alternative? There a far more better ways than throwing money out of the window or into Apple's support-center. I would wait for Ubuntu with an OS-X like Windowmanager.
MS sounds just like the company I just left: AOL, uuh Time Warner. There is a certain critical size at which companies no longer seem to be able to inovate. I left AOL because of this, and I short TWX and MSFT stocks for the same reason. I sit and collect my profit from their incompetence and frankly could care less whether either company figures out how to right the "Titantic". Ah, free markets, gotta love em.
I've been studying and using Microsoft technologies like .NET, DirectX, and Win32 for the past 5+ years. I have a serious investment in time and resources wrapped up in MS technologies. This, and this reason alone, makes it difficult to switch to another OS. I don't want to learn new languages and APIs after becoming "a master" (BIG double quotes there) of the existing ones.
So, when a developer such as myself - who is often accused of being a Microsoft fanboy - decides to buy an Apple computer for development, look out.
Some of the posts i've come across are very enlightening while others are, undoubtedly not. We have those who are fanning the flames of anti-MSFT protest, but I think you kids fail to realize that MSFT employees are still, exactly that, employees. They get pay-checks and have to support families just like everyone else does. This maneuver to push VISTA off by another year is no doubt going to hurt its market share. Im curious to see what result, if any, this will have on widescale Linux adoption. My University is already switching heavily to open source platforms. From what I can tell VISTA is going to be one bulky, resource eating monster, even though I can in no way back that up with fact: its pure speculation. Just throwing some thoughts out there. End of my rant. Thanks for listening. :D
I am not a Microsoft employee. Lost oppertunity? how? I buy a PC it has windows XP, Vistaor whatever I don't care. I might if I need to upgrade later, but that is more money in your pocket. As far as being late, that does look bad. I hope it does something new, or better. Otherwise it will be late and ho-hum.
I have used various computers from the VIC20, Apple II to my P4. I enjoyed learning DOS commands, which is one of the reasons I have been using various Linux distributions for the last 5 years.
Every Windows update from 3.11 up has changed some of the commands, so that they no longer work. Windows help feature is joke. I have an Xp dual boot partiton I only use for games and reading .wmv files people email me. Linux I can configure so that it works the way I want it to. Windows irritates me, because I can't do that with it. DRM irritates me, because if I pay for a CD, I should be able to copy it for my car. I already pay a fee when I buy the blank CD's that is supposed to cover this use of copyright.
Will I be interested when Vista comes out? Hell, no!
Yeah right! When software succeeds, leadership is responsible and when software fails, leadership is responsible.
Leadership doesn't write code. Did the software work? Maybe some of you finished your components, but did all of you?
The leadership must have said, "Well, gee, the software works perfectly and does everything our customers want, but we're not gonna release it anyway...just because we can."
Yeah, that's what happened. The programmers all wrote perfect code, but the leadership decided not to releast the software to millions of customers anyway.
I'm sure the leadership of all the rest of the Fortune 50 wish they'd thought of that idea.
Maybe they can all join David Cole on his 'voluntary' sabbatical.. hehe. I'm in the MSN division and I can just imagine how we're going to perform over the next few years when saddled with 'Windows beauracy'.
Some of the posts i've come across are very enlightening while others are, undoubtedly not. We have those who are fanning the flames of anti-MSFT protest, but I think you kids fail to realize that MSFT employees are still, exactly that, employees. They get pay-checks and have to support families just like everyone else does
You fail to realize that they can have opinions that go against 'eating your own dogfood'. Just because you market it, support it, sell it or build it doesn't mean you like it, like the company, your co-workers or even like supporting products by your company.
Hell I worked for Amazon and while I was there there were alot of things I didn't like. My wifer worked for REAL and there are somethings she liked and others she didn't.
Now? I dual boot Win2k and Red Hat. When Vista comes out, I may upgrade to XP just so I have a copy before they stop supporting it. But for now, I can do everything I want in Win2k and Linux... so why do I need to EVER upgrade??
Especially when Microsoft starts telling me I need new HARDWARE?? No not just to add more RAM but to replace everything including my monmitor. Screw that and screw them! I build my boxes from scratch and the day they come out with an OS that rejects my monitor is the day I swap ALL programs (including my games) over to Linux. Yes you can play all your games on Linux... I currently play Half-life 2 and City of Heroes under Cedega on Linux with better performance than Windows.
My bet? Dell will release an AMD machine and a Linux distro for Christmas.
Solution?... internal competition.
split windows into three:
1. xp soldiering on forever;
2. a new consumer OS designed just to do all that stuff with photos and music and games that home users seem to like, but built with minimal hardware or software back compatibility;
3. a new business/developer OS designed to be easy to administer and configure, without dumb eye candy features, without the OS trying to second guess the user's intention, without stupid personalisation features and without unneeded back compatibility.
Check this article from the NY Times Windows Is So Slow, but Why?
...Eight years later, long after Microsoft lost and then settled the antitrust case, it turns out that Windows is indeed stifling innovation — at Microsoft.
The company's marathon effort to come up with the a new version of its desktop operating system, called Windows Vista, has repeatedly stalled. Last week, in the latest setback, Microsoft conceded that Vista would not be ready for consumers until January, missing the holiday sales season, to the chagrin of personal computer makers and electronics retailers — and those computer users eager to move up from Windows XP, a five-year-old product.
In those five years, Apple Computer has turned out four new versions of its Macintosh operating system, beating Microsoft to market with features that will be in Vista, like desktop search, advanced 3-D graphics and "widgets," an array of small, single-purpose programs like news tickers, traffic reports and weather maps.
When the NY Times starts publishing articles like this you know you are in big trouble.
Wow. I'm amazed to read the bitterness in those working for the most successful software company in the world. As an outsider, I had the impression softies signed on because it was a sure bet to make them rich. Instead, I am surprised at the levels of passion so many posters have for the technology they work on, and saddened by how the company appears to be pissing it away.
There are still places passionate engineers can help to change the world, and at least one is looking for excellent people to help:
http://www.apple.com/jobs/
I have never heard so much rubbish about some software, after-all life will go on and the world will keep turning even if Vista is a little delayed. I find it hard to believe how a delay in a software release can provoke mass hysteria and the call for heads to roll. Sit back relax have a glass of wine and if you really must freak out about something have a look at the world news. I will happily use Linux and XP for another few months and maybe much longer.
IMHO, PC hardware just isn't ready for Vista. There aren't even any Direct X 10 video cards on the market yet. PCs still often only come with 512 megs of ram (which is barely enough for XP to run well). Wait a couple years and hardware will be powerful enough to handle the bloatware that is Vista...
So tell me as a consumer after reading these posts, why should I buy vista?
If the people who develop the product have no faith, then all is lost.
To the person who referred to the 'OSS Trash', this kind of attitude will be fatal to Microsoft; if you've lost a customer, rather than insult them, why not try to get them back?
If you are fed up of working at Microsoft, join NetAlter.
We are looking for some great coders. visit www.netalter.com for more details.
Wait until [Unix FreeBSD] Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard with DBFS, unparalelled stability, ease of use, elegant GUI, easy to use/high quality included applications, and Universal Binary application availability ALL start shipping with Intel 64-bit Merom [mobile], Conroe [desktop], AND WoodCrest [server] in calendar Q4 of this year and Q1 of '07.
There is something ironic about Linux/Unix folks peeping of words like "elegant GUI", "usability" etc. You're late to the game.
Now Apple, I can repsect their efforts with OSX. Its sad to hear how much management beauracracy has hurt windows development. I also find it quite amusing listening to supposed insider developers talking about stock values and such. Its been discussed recently that being a publicly traded company can eventually lead to the degredation of your product. GM, Chrysler, Ford are good example of behemoth companies who have lost their edge because at the end of the day, shareholder value becomes far more important than the quality of the product. It sounds like cutting management isnt the only problem at MS.
And back to OSX. OSX is a great "looking" OS. Its obvious Vista is trying to duplicate the glossy look of OSX. But behind the scenes OSX is nowhere near as complete an OS in terms of using it in a business environement where one needs to utilize it on a network. Apple fans can take the OSX bit too far. The same way they can over emphasis the greatness of the IPOD compared to other MP3 players on the market. There are better MP3 players than the IPOD. OSX is a vast imporvment compared to OS9, but the windows advantage is the same usefullness with robust networking and application support. Also I dont think Steve Jobs is man enough to license OSX on PC hardware. But if he did, wow watch out MS.
Microsoft is 1980s-IBM revived. the Return of the Living Bureaucracy. Let me explain.
I had an interesting experience with some Microsoft software today. I've started this little open source project, not intended to be humungous, and started it in Linux. But I intend to port it to MS Windows as soon as I get it compiling.
So I get a copy of MS Win2k, the only version of Windows I feel really comfortable with, and install it. I also get a copy of the Visual Studio C++ Express, because I want to ensure that whatever I write can be compiled with Microsoft's Own. It demands Service Pack 4. Fine, not a problem. I install that, and it likes it, and I like it as well. So I start the VS C++ Express installation again.
What's this? No IE v6 SP1 installed? It refuses to install.
VS C++ Express is a compiler, frgodsake! Why does it need the most current version of Microsoft's bug-ridden web browser? Whatever for? Every other MS Win32-based compiler I've ever used in Windows, has installed without a hitch, just requiring the bare minimum - MinGW, my current favorite, just installs. OpenWatcom - just installs. lcc-win32 - just installs. Pelles C - just installs. I haven't got around to installing either the Intel CC for Win32 or the TenDRA C/C++ yet, but going by the standard compilers I've mentioned, they should - just install.
IBM in the eighties and early nineties had a very bureaucratic way of getting developers up and running, which inevitably meant they didn't, which accounts for OS/2's slow start, and eventual pulling out of the race. The only thing in their favor was that they didn't delegate this bureaucracy to their development tools.
IBM lost the desktop OS competition. It's starting to look as if Microsoft has elected to follow in IBM's footsteps.
I am a Linux supporter and fairly critical of Microsoft (except the entire XBox team, they rule).
But I do not see why one would be upset when Microsoft is doing the right thing for a change. They harmed their reputation badly by releasing unstable products. It seems that Microsoft is delaying Vista because some problems need fixing. This is the RIGHT and RESPONSIBLE thing to do! Instead of rushing Vista out bowing to some idiotic marketing plan they are at least trying to do it right this time. Highly commendable!
Maybe the people listed should be fired, it is hard to tell from the outside. But nobody should be fired for having the courage to delay shipment of an immature product! Why not fire some lawyers and marketing people for a change? They are the ones harming Microsoft's reputation most.
Delaying Vista will not get Microsoft into financial trouble. But continuing to suck badly might in the end.
And if you cannot wait to get a decent Media Center on your PC why don't you try MythTV?
As a potential customer, do I care about a Vista delay? Not a bit, I have OpenSuse working just fine for me!
Do I care whether Vista will be good? Yes! I will probably have to use it at work and might use it at home as an exotic alternative to Linux. But I will consider doing so only if Vista is good. Very good.
Hello?
It's not about the OS! We could not care less about the OS. Just give us Internet access and a fast and compliant browser. Your client-side OS is just a slow, expensive, overweight piece of software that's in the way of next generation content. The only thing that locks me to a MS OS is our company's policy to use MS Exchange without a working web interface :(
I think that you being a MS employee and not seeing this coming is bad enough. i voiced my opinion at the announcement of "mid-late '06".
http://traer.blogspot.com/2006/02/vista-6.html
some of you want these guys fired, others those. let me tell you a saying in german which hits the nail on the head: DER FISCH STINK VOM KOPF! which means the fish smells from the head. its gates himself who gets 100 percent of the blame for not being on top of things and doing what it takes to get a freakin kick-ass OS out of the door on time.
Come on guys, Ballmer is the man now, dog!
The funniest part, to me, about this whole Vista debate is that when I worked at Microsoft as a bottom-feeding support "engineer" I predicted everything would end up the way it has. I tried to warn people but who listens to some poor schmuck doing nothing but taking the heat for all the mistakes the developers, managers, and executives made? Bugs? WON'T FIX! Ship dates? DON'T BET THE FARM! You think you're talking about anything NEW? All I've read here is the same crap I heard 15 years ago, mostly from management. Don't believe one word management tells you and you'll be all right. Don't believe one word the developers tell you and you'll be even more all right. In short, if you work at Microsoft, keep your cool and don't listen to anything you hear from anyone who doesn't sit right next to you--and even then, be careful.
That is brilliant, actually... I am referring to the post right before mine. Splitting windows into three forks... that IS brilliant.
MS missed an entire generation of server desktops with XP/2003. In my company, we never bothered upgrading our Win2000 servers.
Our desktops went to XP but the enterprise stuff all stayed on Win2000 or went directly to Linux.
Vista is going to be to the desktop what Win 2003 Server was to the back office, an OS that most people will ignore, unless it comes bolted into their system.
If Jobs really wanted to get back at Gates now, he'd drop Apple prices down to Dell levels.
The main people who are panicking about whether Vista it comes out now or is 6 months delayed seem to be selfish MS employees (like this blog entry author I suppose?) who care more about their options than whether Vista comes out right or with bugs that make it a complete PITA to use.
End-users care more about getting a debugged Vista, rather than getting Vista 'now'. We're also far more interested in the quality of the software rather than on who is at the helm or on half-baked 'advanced' features like WinFS that will be more trouble than they're worth.
People seem to forget that if it weren't for the people being berated in this blog entry (Allchin and Valentine), the successes that were Windows 2000 and XP wouldn't have come about and Linux would have creamed Windows a long time ago.
"3. a new business/developer OS designed to be easy to administer and configure, without dumb eye candy features, without the OS trying to second guess the user's intention, without stupid personalisation features and without unneeded back compatibility."
We need this more than anything.
"But for now, I can do everything I want in Win2k and Linux... so why do I need to EVER upgrade??"
I hear you. I started using NT3.51 when W95 came out. Loved NT4 and Office 97. W2K was a good upgrade. Got upgraded to WXP at work and latest Office 2003 and don't quite see the point. I was quite happy at home with W2K and Office 97. I look at Vista and I see upgrading my hardware, cost, and all the features that seemed like they might have been worh waiting for seem to have been dropped. Why would I want to upgrade to this? I don't get it.
As I have been slowly moving to a lot of open source apps on Windows, I'm thinking about giving Linux a serious try. I've played around with several distros and haven't had any serious headaches so far. It seems to work well. The forthcoming Novell
SLED 10 looks impressive. And if I need to run some Windows apps I'll install W2K into a VMware virtual machine...
I see a lot of other comments like mine above from other people who are neither Mac nor Linux fanatics. It maybe only a trickle but you should start to worry. A few years ago if someone had suggested I move to OSX or Linux I would laughed.
I used to work for a company that went for years with slipped software schedules and continually losing market share (the at one point owned their market). And after three years of steadily declining sales and repeated layoffs, the just kept going. No repercussions, no nothing. At one point, when the president told people there would be no raises in a given year, after people complained he said he hadn't gotten a raise in 2 years.
Do you think he deserved a raise. I just found it amazing that some companies don't hold the upper management accountable when things go wrong. Yes maybe it's not their fault. Maybe the schedules are to aggressive. But they should be making sure that doesn't happen.
If we (software people) miss a date, we get crap for it. If management makes a totally unreasonable requirement then nobody seems to be for blame. It's just 'one of those things.'
Absolutely amazing!
It´s done, when it´s done.
Quality is more important than pushing a product to the market, that`s not ready to fill the consumers expactations. When the developement will last till 2008, it will last till 2008.
GreetZ
Peter Stönzel
*shakes head*
I am suprised at some of the comments here, but I feel your pain. I do NOT work for Microsoft, but sit as an outsider (rather sort of insider) waiting for the latest axe to fall.
Vista was supposed to be a Windows 95. Vista was supposed to be the revolution and experience that Windows XP was trying to promise.
Vista was supposed to be [fill in the blank]
Currently the feature sets avaiable look pretty, and Vista (even with current beta builds) runs faster on my machine that Windows XP does. From a technical standpoint its disheartening to see features stripped, and then more pulled from the magical pot.
Perhaps Management Gates, Ballmer, Allchin, Valentine etc can recover from this, but with the way its being played out its a PR nightmare, and rightly so.
From my point of view (which most of you may not care about) I think that Microsoft should pull the release date and shoot for maybe December of next year... Put WinFS back in, put the other features that were pulled back into this OS so that innovation can continue.
Personally I do not want a Windows XP SP2 ME or the like, which I feel is where Vista is currently aimed. Sorry to all of you who have worked your asses off to make this product, but sadly the leadership has made it so.
Point of fact that Vista is not ready to launch, and won't be for some time (in my eyes).
Oie Vey!
What if MS adopted a policy of not announcing ship dates until they had actual ship dates? People would be outraged. What if they adopted a "damn the torpedos ship it now" attitude? People would be outraged. What if they dropped all backward compatiablity in order to ship a meaner leaner Windows on time, secure and stable? People would be outraged. What can they do other than the path they have choosen? Which is piss off everyone just a little.
I've been a Linux user at home since 1997, but I think those who are claiming this delay will have some major effect on Linux adoption are completely deluded.
Linux's roadblock to adoption hasn't been that Windows is "more user friendly" for a couple years now. All the enhancements to the Linux desktop lately have been cleanups and eye candy. In the next year we'll see both newer versions of Linux and Vista copying OS X's "lickable" eye candy. Not making it friendlier, just prettier.
The problem has been certain classes of drivers (modems, wireless, graphics) that due to various vendor issues are more of a problem on Linux, "pet applications" (like Visio in business, TurboTax at home) and games -- though I'll bet the more successful the XBox 360 is, the less important PC gaming becomes.
Vista delaying lets the Linux desktop get even prettier -- maybe it'll beat Vista out the door with full transparency effects, etc. Big deal. It won't help the driver situation or the pet applications, both are longer term problems.
I will say I don't get the Vista hardware requirements. Its fine that you can use less intensive graphics, but with those high memory requirements they are really shooting themselves in the foot as far as corporate adoption. If what I'm hearing is true and that 1GB is NOT enough to run Vista and several applications at once comfortably, the minimum requirement in the corporate world for it will be 2GB. Since they never upgrade hardware (visiting each PC when they are all over the world, at home, on the road, etc. is way too expensive and difficult) they won't upgrade to Vista until their normal 3-4 year hardware replacement cycle has everything with 2GB as a minimum configuration, a configuration they only very recently started buying. So the uptake in corporations might not happen until 2009 or even 2010. Those who decided to pass on Software Assurance aren't going to be contributing to Microsoft's bottom line for a while, so don't expect any real moves in the stock price from the Vista release beyond the bump all the publicity will cause. Buying some put options a year out right after Vista's release might not be a bad investment, because that bump won't last.
If a company's chief software product is in bad need of fixing, isn't it the task of the company's Chief Software Architect to see that it gets fixed?
I'm not a Microsoft employee, but I've been following the company loosely since 95. I've gotta say, your blog post is great to see. Someone should be shot for Vista's delay - I think it should be whoever up top is pushing this 'out-Google Google' agenda. Windows Live? Gimme a break; MS's money is in Windows, and it's about time their leadership remembers that. It's great to see that you guys are committed to that end; to releasing a quality OS that not merely adds functionality or performs tasks a tad more efficently, but allows the user complete and total accessibility and encourages them to actually use half of it; and *ON TIME*, damnit. I've heard that Vista's leadership is being shaken up, and I think it's about damned time.
To merge three points: 1) Act more like Apple, 2) end support for so much legacy hardware and software, and 3) mitigate headaches from upgraders with inadequate hardware.
Perhaps Microsoft ought to consider limiting the hardware supported by Vista. Give design requirements to manufacturers which do not include support for legacy products. Support software which was designed for XP, and only that far back. Finally, do not release an upgrade version. Most of us are using computers that are incompatable with Vista anyway. To use Vista, a full-computer upgrade will be necessary for most. Why not encourage a clean slate for everyone?
Folks, you're never going to switch to anything but Windows, so you have no say in the matter. We all know that most people who threaten to go over to Linux or Mac OS X are just making empty threats, or else they would have gotten sick of MS's crap and switched a while ago.
Unless enough people really start voting Windows off the island with their wallets and pocketbooks, MS has absolutely no incentive to change. None. This is just a PR black eye, nothing more.
joecab
I think the REAL REASON for the delay is that they can't come up with a good packaging design.
Welcome to the nightmare of IBM. Funny, things come around full circle if you wait long enough.
When you have a system with N parts that interact with each other, there are O(N^2) relationships between the parts. Thus, if you double the number of parts, the number of relationships quadruples.
From reading many of the early comments on this thread, it appears that managing interdependencies is starting to take too much of developers' and mangers' time.
As project scale increases, design must increasingly favour clean, minimal interfaces, not only between code modules, but between development groups.
I suspect this is a large part of the problem.
The last time I bought Windows as an upgrade was when I bought Windows 95.
I moved to Mac last year and eagerly bought 10.4 when it came out. That's the first time in 10 years I actually bought an OS upgrade for an in-place system. Why? Because there hasn't been any innovation to successive generations of Windows OS' since '95 and NT 4.0.
Under the covers it's gotten exponentially more complicated but at the user level? Nada. Windows still blue screens with frightening regularity.
Oh...and whoever chose that damned Teletubby "skin" for XP ought to be saying "time for tubby bye-bye."
At last, I see that the core developers have awoken from their slumber and now see the M$FT for what it is. Kudos to you. Kudos to discovering what the rest of the world has to put up with - software that is not driven by excellence in design, but by marketing and greed.
It is interesting to me that your competitors are able to manage large projects (Mac OS X, Linux Kernel) with fewer developers, yet the current perception is that there are fewer defects overall in competitors than in Windows. Comments about over-structured code management abound, and the concept that people are unable to fix things without going through layers of management astounds me. One comment had an interesting point - if security was to be trusted, then place a system on the internet with something of value; of course, this would never happen, but the point is made - trust and loyalty are not something arbitrarily given, and people (both at home and in business) are beginning to accept that flawed software is a way of life.
You want to know what really happened, from an outsider looking in?
You painted yourselves into a corner. The moment you decided to make sweeping architectural changes to the system - "But the browser is a part of the OS!" - to meet non-technical requirements, is the moment that you effectively blew your foot off. In the name of compatibility, you continue to promote these architectural flaws, and like a castle built on sand, the foundations are cracking under the enourmous load.
You can say what you like, and you can choose to ignore me, but you do so at your own peril. Becauase, I am your customer, I am the person that pays money to buy your product, which pays your paycheck. Microsoft's issues may seem like many, but in reality, there are only a few:
1. You don't listen to your customers, and you don't care about what they want. I have seen this time and time again, and it has never changed.
2. Your architecture, while initially well designed on paper and cleanly laid out, has been crippled and/or polluted through the years, to the point that it will collapse.
3. Many of you are calling for the resignation of senior management. You are right in doing so, but for different reasons - those same people are driving your product in a direction that was designed solely to maximize profit, customers be damned and workability is not our problem around here...I have said for the last 5 years that Microsoft will never change until all of their senior management are fired and replaced, because they are the ones running the ship aground to be beached.
Sorry if I stepped on a nerve or two, but someone had to say something - agree or disagree, there, I have made my peace.
Notepad is symptomatic for Microsoft and its ability to meet real customer needs. It's the most terrible application ever written. On Win9x it even has a 64kb limit(!).
Ironically it never crashes. Hence - it's Microsoft single sucessfull product.
"To all the ABMers, OSS zealots and MAC fanboys: go back to your YHOO message boards or Slashdot and leave this site to people who actually want to see MSFT improve."
The root cause of the problems at Microsoft is the often-unwarranted idea that Microsoft Always Knows Better.
While I agree that just shouting "Get a penguin! Get a Mac!" isn't a useful part of the discussion, you might do well to keep your own trap shut and listen to any useful advice that does manage to filter through from the rest of the computer industry. You'll just have to put up with the plain fact that many in the rest of the industry have found good cause for disliking Microsoft and aren't shy about letting other people know why.
As a former Microsoft employee with no kind words at all to say about the company itself, I am still vitally interested in a cultural and technical renaissance at Microsoft. I have too many friends still working inside the company, and I wouldn't mind working there again if the corporate culture improved.
For that to occur, one of the first things that needs to go is the Ballmeresque "Get the hell out of my yard!!" ranting aimed at people who currently aren't using Windows.
Maybe you should consider dropping that attitude yourself.
I have been watching Ballmer very closely for the past few years I noticed that he has no vision technology wise, heck I think he doesn't even have a good grasp on new and emerging technologies, and I don't know what Bill Gates is doing he should have fired Baldmer a LONG time ago he really need to wake up and get his priorities straight
OS X is already superior and Linux is catching up and can't they hire any decent UI Designers?? my god all all of MS resources you would think they can get the best designers money can buy and I am here scratching my head wondering why are the 32 bit icons from win-95 are still there?! it's embarrassing........
The fact that MS management feels it has to resort to unfair business practices to help keep its monopoly in place, rather than let the product's quality speak for itself such that people rush out to buy it on its own merit, is just confirmation that even top MS management KNOWS it's crap. And doesn't care.
I've worked as a computer tech for a number of years. As such, I've of course had to work with MS software every day because that's what most customers have. While MS' business practices have long disgusted me, it's the years of longstanding Windows problems that have finally overflowed my frustration threshold. The once fine art of computer repair (anyone remember checking IRQ usage and changing jumper settings to resolve conflicts? ) has devolved into a neverending parade of spyware / adware / trojan horse / keylogger / virus removals, and little else. A recent study showed that 60% of all Windows systems are infected with some type of spyware. I've consistently found that each spyware tool removes only about 25-35% of the malware on a given system, so you have to use 3-4 of them and still can't be guaranteed it's 100% clean. I've talked to so many customers who were victims of identity theft as a result of malware, that I've become thoroughly convinced that doing your online banking or shopping on a Windows machine is utter lunacy. And after cleaning malware and fixing crashes 8 hours/day plus service calls, the very LAST thing I want to do is come home and jack with MORE antispyware updates and crashing on my home network.
I've gone from grudging acceptance that sloppy Windows development has kept me in steady employment, to utter exasperation and outright hatred of its existence. I finally swore off Windows in favor of Linux, and began looking for Linux or even Mac work because I'm just tired of all the nonsense now. I'm sure there are plenty of others just like me. After all, if we have to learn a new interface on every new Windows release anyway, why not take that opportunity to just learn a better OS instead?
I'm convinced that many MS developers are incredibly bright, energetic, innovative people full of promise. Despite this, Windows is a train wreck in slo-mo. I've personally watched its security holes instantly bring huge and powerful companies to their knees. One can only imagine the IT and lost labor costs incurred. But it'll be a cold day in hell before the "good ol' boys" at the top will go around firing each other, even after a blogful of well-founded complaints.
Why waste your time and potential on 10-16 hour days, desperately trying to save the Titanic with bailing buckets until you've become weather-worn and disillusioned? MS top management has clearly demonstrated where their minds are at. Your talents could be put to much better use making a difference elsewhere.
The thing is, it doesn't matter if Vista slipped for another year...or 3. There's just no competition out there on the desktop.
Apple will always be shackled by Jobs , his hardware fetish, and the subsequent hardware tax.
Linux..bahaha. What Linux? Suse, RedHat, Debian, Ubuntu? KDE or Gnome? Linux isn't even an operating system. It'll always remain a workstation tool or geek/hobbyist playtoy on the desktop until someone decides to stop playing catchup. I run desktop at work because I have to program for it, but I've been waiting for years for something really viable to come out.
So a month slip is not going to mean anything except that more bugs will be squashed.
Come on Guys, Cut Microsoft some slack!!
Man, I'm an Apple fanboy, but Vista's tech has been looking very cool to me. Who cares if it ships a few months later after a 5 year project? MS will be fine. People were doing the same kind of doom-and-gloom naysaying bitching about NT5 being years late. Well, that worked out pretty well.
As one other poster mentioned, the thing I'm most excited about with Vista is that there won't be a kindergarten-designed interface that will want to make me violently vomit each time I see it. Granted, MS doesn't even seem to even be subtle about the way it is using the same glass gradients that Apple is using in its OS and on its web pages, but at least the appearance is a vast improvement. Too bad that WinFS won't make it, it sounds like it might have some tremendous potential which might lead us into the next era of desktop computing. With all of the talk about the Information Age, our computers will become true clusters of information...as a large database, instead of the traditional file system we have used for so many decades.
The fact that Vista has been delayed again doesn't bother me. If it had been pushed back from October to November, would people be worried so much, or is it more psychological that it won't appear until 2007, instead of 2006? Personally, I'd rather see Microsoft put in the extra time and effort and polish it off before releasing it. A company I used to work for was more interested in getting out on time, rather than getting it out right. And very often in those hurried situations, a quickest-solution-to-get-done was used, which caused complications later on. Get it done right, or don't do it at all.
Some people have mentioned backwards compatibility. Can someone explain to me why Vista needs to be backwards compatible with ANYTHING designed to run on an OS pre Windows 2000?
How many programs are still in active use that need the older APIs? Can't that small number of programs be supported under Vista using VirtualPC to run a stripped down copy of Windows XP like Apple did with OS X? Isn't it doing something rather like that to run 32 bit applications on 64 bit Vista (the WoW layer stuff)
I have to think MS people are smart enough to figure this out, so I don't believe for a second that backwards compatibility has anything to do with Vista's schedule problems or bloat. That's just a red herring.
Its not like a rewrite from scratch, they gave up on that in 2004, this is mostly prettifying the XP interface and adding some mostly independant new features. Just like how Windows 2000 was NT 5.0, and XP identifies itself as NT 5.1. Does Server 2003 call it itself NT 5.2? If so, Vista ought to be NT 5.3, though I have the feeling it probably shows up as NT 6.0, just to make people feel like it is a bigger milestone than it really is.
There are so many rumors flying around, and from reading the comments by MS people or at least those who claim to be MS people, I'm not sure even the rank and file MS coders know what the real issues with Vista are. Yes, it sounds like it is buggy still and some are not proud of it at this point, but all software of this size has many thousands of bugs. XP had over 60,000 open bugs when it was released, the Firefox browser has thousands itself. But both are usable pieces of software, people learn to avoid doing stuff that causes it to break -- "Doctor, it hurts when I do this"...."so don't do that"
I really would love to know the real reason the guys at the top put in that short two month delay. The key clue is how the corporate release is still going to be in November 2006 like it always was. So they really aren't buying any time, unless they intend to give them IOUs for the CDs in November and give them the real thing in 2007 as a way to avoid screwing over everyone who has Software Assurance contracts that expire at the end of this year. Didn't they already automatically extend those contracts for free for the early adopters who signed up and had contracts expire in 2005 since they would have ended up getting nothing. They knew that treating their most loyal customers that would be a disaster. But rather than extend the contracts again and lose on that revenue, they are going to technically have given them Vista in 2006, but still get them to pay for an extension on their SA contract. Not sure if it would be a good deal, since I see no reason to believe Vista's successor will be out before another 3-4 contract would be up, unless MS releases a service pack as a new OS as was done with Windows 98 and especially 98 SE.
(as I sit here typing away on my iMac)...
I put well over $1000 into a PC to play games during my time working at a fairly well-know computer retailer. I left for grad school in Aug. 2005, at which point I was excited about getting Vista for my PC (and maybe upgrading a few components). But now? I have serious doubts that go way beyond the fact that I'm broke. I'm running an AMD64 3500+ with 1gig of Corsair XMS PC4400 and I might need more? My nVidia 5900XT certainly needs upgraded, but come on MS! As having occasionally being forced into trying to sell a PC (I worked in the warehouse), most customers do not want to spend a lot of money. In three years, I only heard one (1) person say that money was no object. Most people want a PC that will send email, surf the web, play music, and maybe a few other minor things. The small market of hard core gamers and power users are willing to spend a lot of money to upgrade their systems just to run an OS that apparently looks a lot like OSX? Where's the selling point? "Hey buy this great new OS and get a new computer too! Well, you have to buy the new computer first, but.."
Here's an idea (to echo some earlier posts). Put out something that the average user wants. Screw six versions of Windows. Have a version for average users (incorporating the Media Center stuff), a version for enterprise customers (and the power users who want the extra stuff), and a server version. Get rid of the ancient code that I have heard about. As someone who had to migrate from OS9 to OSX, it sucked for awhile, but it got better as apps became native to OSX. Remember, this suggestion for improvment is coming from a Mac user. Sometimes, you can learn from your enemy, but avoid just copying from them.
For the poster claiming that you need to by a new OS for a Mac every year, you don't. My parents are still using OS 9.2.2 which is about 5 or 6 years old. We just like to upgrade to the "latest and greatest."
If you keep waiting for the next great thing, you'll be waiting forever. Set a goal for Vista and get the thing out. Quit trying to add new things that are bogging you down.
Just a note of encouragement. I am an Apple user since 1988, and probably about the age of a lot of you MS people (the engineers at least). While I don't use MS products (except office) I DO want Vista to succeed! (it keeps Apple honest, and give me options if I decide to test the waters)
The job field I am currently trying to enter sounds a lot like your PM position, in that I manage groups of people on a task, and along the way try to create and improve the processes that make the end result possible.
In general terms, I would like to know what you would tell your PM's if you had a chance to hang out with them socially at the Pub one day. No asskissing, but rather the things that if your PM (and organization as a whole) did would improve the end product and result in overall success of the organizaion.
Tell me what you would do to get things back on track. (I work in an entirely different industry, so I am just trying to apply these lessons to my own skillset)
Oh, and to the OSX users out there, please don't gloat or spout off, it only ticks off the guys who work way too many hours for too little pay. A healthy computer industry is good for us all.
Oh, and to the poster who talked about applications and network support lacking for OSX, please elaborate - I don't understand what you meant by that. Obviously its not that important to me because I haven't missed it in the past several years, but I would like to know what I am missing.
"The main people who are panicking about whether Vista it comes out now or is 6 months delayed seem to be selfish MS employees (like this blog entry author I suppose?) who care more about their options than whether Vista comes out right or with bugs that make it a complete PITA to use."
You know, I'm gettin' tired of the people who keep coming on here and putting Mini down for starting this blog entry which has allowed hundreds of people [most MS employees] to voice their common voice that "all is not good in the hood."
This has nothing to do with "selfish MS employees", it has everything to do with corporate accountability and management dysfunction.
If the delay was really only 6 months, then I'd be saying the same thing about "better late and great, than on time and not so fine."
Vista was initially supposed to be introduced in 2003.
"Gates confirms Windows Longhorn for 2003"
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2001/10/24/gates_confirms_windows_longhorn/
That;s a little more than 6 months.
MS has not responded to, or made itself a part of, the innovation of open source, Internet, music and video, which has been driving the computer industry in recent years. They follow out of necessity not creativity, and always in a clumsy way. There is no interest in cross-platform compatibility or enabling users to do more with their computers, they go where they perceive there to be a comfort-zone market. I have never bought a PC out of a desire to own one, only out of necessity, and I have never looked back on owning my first Mac - nobody in their right mind returns to Windows after leaving it.
"If a company's chief software product is in bad need of fixing, isn't it the task of the company's Chief Software Architect to see that it gets fixed?"
Exactly. But he fancy's himself to be "above" coding now. He's a has-been that only retains that title because he's the founder.
- GATES: RESIGN NOW!
- BALLMER: YOU"RE FIRED! [now dance, monkey boy]
- L68+ AND MANAGEMENT FIGUREHEADS: Get your $h!t right, and await you're destiny after Vista ships.
- STOCKHOLDERS: DEMAND THESE ACTIONS!
Now, all the intelligent, talented people at MS, take the company over and bring back the innovative spirit it has been missing since the mid-late 90's.
"Folks, you're never going to switch to anything but Windows, so you have no say in the matter. We all know that most people who threaten to go over to Linux or Mac OS X are just making empty threats, or else they would have gotten sick of MS's crap and switched a while ago."
I personally witness 2-4 people switch to Mac everyday, 5x a week, and have done so since the "switcher' campaign started back in '02, and we're not even considered a high traffic computer store, much less an Apple Store or even an Apple Shop at CompUSA.
Do you really think that the huge popularity of the nearly 200 domestic AND international Apple stores [by years end '06, 150+ as of now] that have opened in less than 5 years is because of the Mac "faithful"?
http://www.apple.com/retail/
Seriously guys, THIS IS NOT A JOKE.
"Unless enough people really start voting Windows off the island with their wallets and pocketbooks, MS has absolutely no incentive to change. None. This is just a PR black eye, nothing more."
Plenty of people are doing just that, and this isn't "just a PR black eye." TAKE THE DESKTOP OS BACK OR ELSE!
Don't even get me started about the bubbling corporate interest over Apple's Xserve hardware and Mac OS X's UNLIMITED-CLIENT server software offering for $999.
http://www.apple.com/xserve/
http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/
I suspect that when Apple goes 64-bit "Woodcrest" Intel with those puppies in Q3-Q4 of this year, but especially when Mac OS X Leopard comes pre-installed on them in Q1 of '07, A LOT of enterprise customers who have been "kicking tires" the past couple of years will finally "buy the car."
Don't believe the propoganda that this is all, "just propoganda." I didn't even know until a short while ago, that Apple had gone into the server market, much less that they had these:
http://www.apple.com/xserve/raid/
http://www.apple.com/xsan/
My point is simple. You know that Mac users don't switch to less supported Linux or back to less secure windows. You know what I've seen for the past 4 years?
Switchers switching switchers.
Again, seriously guys, THIS IS NOT A JOKE!
Whilst I am sure there are many talented and bright folk at Microsoft, what never of some of them in the company and yes, it's leadership. I think Vista is a wake up call to all the bright ones, get out!
Go out there and do your own thing! When is someone just gonna take the smart ones and start something new, something different!
In Steve Jobs-speak, aren't you tired of running the copiers?
Quality over ship date doesn't bother me. What bothers me is politics over quality or ship date.
Yes, people in management should be fired. However the worst offenders are middle management - around the director level. When a director like David DSouza says, with a straight face, "I don't care if this decision will make us miss the deadline and produce lower quality code. This is how we are doing it because THIS is the Microsoft way." you need to wonder why he still has the job.
Granted their managers should see this and clean it up. However when "schedule chicken" is a defined internal term for lying to upper management about what you can do - you have a problem. When you are reward to lying about when you'll be done (and then missing your promised date) - you have a problem. When you are not rewards (and often punished) for providing a realistic date (and consistantly meeting your realistic dates) - you have a problem.
I left Microsoft (Longhorn team) about 1 year ago because of stupidity like this from Management. 1 year later, after I could have delievered my feature, it still isn't finished. They've increased the size of the team and are still doing it "the Microsoft way" because that is so much more important than getting it done on time and at high quality. I would guess when Longhorn does eventually ship these same directors will get nice big bonuses and promotions.
Quality needs to start at the top. VP's need to demand quality driven peformance from their Directors. It needs to be about the customers and the software, not about who tells the best lies. Or at least hold them to the lie - just make people accountable.
Just wait everyone, Vista will be great! Watch this video that highlights some of the changes that are to come. Way to innovate Microsoft!
http://youtube.com/watch?v=4pqYDJSQbvo
I work for a small Open Source company and I thought I'd provide my two cents. Disclaimers upfront: I've never been a big fan of Microsoft products.
This Vista debacle seems to be the latest in a number of blunders that are all contributing to a very nice market for people in my line of work... by huge numbers, companies are switching away from Microsoft solutions and turning towards alternatives like Linux (Enterprise varieties: RH / Suse).
I see Apple's move with OS X as a great example of how to escape a cycle like this... If the OS is crap, ditch the original source base, take a relatively proven platform that has a liberal, commercially friendly license (like FreeBSD) and use it as the base for a new OS / product... it just makes sense! And for the people pointing out that Apple's 10.0 was a piece of crap: this may be true in some respects, but the fact is that the foundation was usable... hence the reason 10.3, 10.4 (and soon 10.5) are such great products that were delivered on time with a fairly rapid release cycle.
the true problem with both the vista slip and microsoft in general is middle-aged american management, from front line all the way up to steveb. i am an american msft employee working abroad for the last 4 years and all i see in working with redmond is incompetence. 95% of people in redmond are incompetent. they are doing nothing, blaming everyone else and at home at 6:30pm in time for turkey pot pie.
the only ways to revitalize msft are:
1) hire managers only from the outside
2) ensure managers, at all levels, are under the age of 27
3) take every single person over the age of 27 and make them an individual contributor.
This mess clearly shows the disadvantages in NOT having split the company into two as the monopoly court decision originally wanted, until political friends were encouraged to change the judge in the case at the behest of senior MS management.
Office is the jewel in Microsoft's crown that is being hobbled by the OS mess. Money that would flow in to shareholders from sales of Office will not because Office 12 has had to be delayed because Vista is being delayed. In a seperate company Office 12 could be launched when it was ready, just not for Vista. But it could have worked on Mac OS X. And maybe on XP. And why not on Linux?
The Windows management needs the shock of potential non-existence many small companies live with every day, the threat of a competitor destroying them. Having Office work independently of Windows would bring a huge blast of fresh thinking to Windows.
As any monopolistic organisation ages, youthful exuberance turns into entrenched bureaucracy in which managers are more interested in protecting their backs, positions and ego driven self-images than addressing real issues; they begin to sweep problems under the carpet. Just like in communist USSR: no competition for monopolies rewards mediocrity.
And any reward scheme that allows for retirement after only five years must be bad for any business.
to those who are distraught...worry not. microsoft didn't get where it is by allowing product quality dictate success. vista will be a "hit" whether it is or not.
they'll pressure their OEM's to recommend it. they'll pressure developers to get on board. they'll make their latest apps dependent on it. then they'll spin adoption numbers so it appears to be the success they so need it to be.
unfortunately, the thing microsoft most needs is what its size and complexity most notably preclude and that is real innovation. instead of robbing OSX for ideas, microsoft needs to reevaluate what an operating system needs to be and go from there. unfortunately, that involves the possibility of alarming or even dumping part of their customer base and i doubt microsoft has the stones to risk that. the worm has turned and the "everything to everyone" philosophy that served them well in the windows 95 era is killing them now...ensuring that they will never be better than adequate.
Microsoft Windows is in need of a complete rewrite from the kernel up. Microsoft has fumbled network security for 10 years, and is still a regular festival of mistakes for the average user, who is owned by trojans and malware on a regular basis.
I see this as part of my job on a daily basis, as an ISP security guy, responding to incidents where our customers get owned. Other than the rare overachiever installing insecure php, overwhelmingly, the single most prevalent daily problem for us is Microsoft Windows security, or lack thereof, on the customer premesis. Even with firewalling, even with XP SP2, even with up to date anti-virus.
The simple truth is Microsoft can not be made secure because of all the dumb mistakes Microsoft has made enabling every single widget out there to talk to the kernel, back and forth, bandaid walls of security or no security at all. The WMF exploits were proof of this -- 10 years ago someone wanted Word to be able to execute files so they enabled something. It sits there undetected and being exploitable all this time. How many other wide open holes exist in Windows versions that Microsoft can't find or won't spend the resource to fix, or more importantly, CANT, because to fix would be to break dozens of legacy applications or legacy expectations.
Microsoft's coded itself into a huge corner, and at this point could be said to be the identity thieves best friend. As millions of ownable PC's sit there defenseless on broadband being botted and keylogged on a daily basis, who here can honestly say Microsoft can do anything competent or effective to fix the problem that 10 years worth of stupid coding decisions has created?
Microsoft software is the identity thieves ally, out of the box it is insecure, and every single reader of this needs to be aware that it is not a lan admin issue (though there are plenty of incompetent lan admins contributing) .. it is very simply a bad business decision, thousands of them, to hand mom and pop internet a buggy and insecurable OS that cannot defend itself without a whole LAN architecture and an IT professional protecting it.
Microsoft software does not belong in the home unless it can be made secure, and it cannot be made secure without a tear down and complete kernel and drivers and architecture rewrite. Executed by none of the current coders at Microsoft.
Never happen, but it needs to.
(...)Be the rats to jump off the ship, except that ship ain't sinking, because it's too big.
By Anonymous, at 11:42 PM
As big as the unsinkable Titanic?
honestly? nobody out here cares. the vast majority of consumers don't know whether they're running 'Windows XP' or 'Dell'. the vast majority of businesses aren't going to upgrade right away regardless. vista can be as late to the party as it wants to be, and everyone's still going to offer it a drink.
The Vista delay is only the symptom not the problem. So untill moderation has been disabled you will never get to the real solutions, or is that what you want?
Guys 'n gals, this blog and all the posts following it miss the point completely: MSFT isn't about quality and it never was. MSFT is about making money anyway it can, and the idea that "quality" in some way drives the company's efforts is ludicrous. Apple is the same way. I guess you can't say that the open-source Linux distros are the same way, but then, they suck bigtime.
If you guys would just learn to work inside that framework, you'd be a lot happier. Forget quality and security and just think "what can I do to make a fast buck for Microsoft?" That's what all the execs do, why aren't you following their lead?
I have been reading this blog, which is quite interesting, but demonstrates that the majority of the posters are completely missing the point. Microsoft is not in business to make software, Windows, Office, or anything else. Microsoft exists to make money, and so long as it does so, the senior executives will be safe from firing, and will continue to be rewarded.
Fundimentally, it does not matter if Vista or Office ship in 2007 or 2700, so long as there is a long term revenue stream for Microsoft. Thus, the most interesting posting, and the one that really cuts to the kind of issue that executives think about is the one about the legal situation with the EU and the server market share. Delaying Vista a year or two will have little or no impact on Microsofts long term revenue, but allowing the EU to open the server protocols definitely will. Hence, the correct decision for management is delay Vista, and anything else, as long as needed to eliminate the threat to long term revenue.
Grousing about the delay and management simply shows that the majority of Microsoft's staff think the company makes software. It doesn't; it makes money.
What's the point?Microsoft's only threats are Novell and Apple.Apple is limited to 1 vendor,and that will change the day that Steve Jobs prances around the Apple HQ in a dress.Novell will have no sucess in getting PC makers to sell SuSE,and it can be easily bought up.
The DRM _has_ to go.
I consult to a number of
Fortune 500 companies on
security issues. I've advised
them that purchasing and
deploying an OS with embedded
DRM is an ironclad guarantee
of insecurity -- since DRM is
designed as a deliberate
back door in the OS.
Now, they don't know what they're going to do about that
yet, but "deploy Vista" is
already off the table at all
of them, and discussion is
now ongoing about what the
alternatives are, what the
migration path might be, etc.
So the fact that it's been
delayed really doesn't affect
them: they're not going to
buy it anyway, because they
don't want to compromise
the security of their operations in order to deal
with OS features they don't
need, don't want, and which
are being rammed into Vista
to appease the MPAA/RIAA/etc.
So while those features may
help turn Vista into an
entertainment platform,
they will also lose you
corporate seats. By the
thousands. Because those
people have been paying attention to things like
the Sony DRM debacle and they
now understand, very clearly,
that DRM is a threat.
I've been a PC owner (and Microsoft fan) since 1994, and an MS-DOS user since 1987. Earlier today, I made the switch and orderd a new Mac.
I'd love to rejoin the Windows world, but I probably won't. I wanted to buy a new PC for a year now, but was waiting for Vista. My old machine needs replacing - but it seems silly to wait another year for a Vista box.
So I went to Apple. Not because I willingly drank the Kool-Aid, but because Microsoft forced me to.
Isn't Karma wonderful?
Bill? If you're reading this...remember Gary Kildall?
Maybe you should start over with your own code this time.
Funniest thing said to date in this thread!
I was a Windows maniac from Windows 3.1 until Windows ME (boy did that thing suck!). In 2001 I switched to MacOSX and am very happy.
In the past two years, I have personally switched six of my family members and three of my co-workers from Windows to MacOS X just to escape doing Windows tech support for a platform increasingly plagued with viruses, DLL hell and random slowdowns/strange behavior.
However, I do feel that Windows has it's place -- particularly in the business world where the investments are too heavy for them to turn away now. Besides, being a stockholder of BOTH Apple and Microsoft stock, I have a personal interest in seeing them both succeed.
I find that it is rather sad that Microsoft is spending time (and more and more time) trying to put OS X face and features on a weary, legacy windows code-base like XP. While Apple is cranking out newer, cooler, better versions like clockwork on a newer better base platform like OS X.
As a software developer, I can redily attest that regression testing old code for backwards compatibility while trying to add new features gets increasingly difficult and very time-consuming as the code gets older. If Microsoft keeps this up, they are in grave danger of losing significant market-share; particularly in the consumer markets to Apple and Linux who can always release more features faster than Windows and the frustration in using Windows XP is quite high. With so many Vista delays and feature cuts, nobody is going to line to up use this until SP3.
It's time for Windows to get a heart transplant. Like many others, I suggest something like the following.
1) Cobble together the code and bug fixes in Vista that are backwardly compatible with XP and release it as a new service pack (heck with everything that's been dropped, this is probably what Vista is anyway). Promise to keep releasing security patches for XP for the next five years.
2) Start from scratch to create NewWindows 1.0 only claiming backward compatibility with .NET applications. This brand new version of Windows MUST be optimized to run on high-end hardware that is shipping today (2006) and it must have large bits of the new technologies and security features that were orignially promised in Longhorn/ Vista and along the way dropped. Since there are NO backwards compatibility issues except for .NET, this should be MUCH simpler to write/test.
3) Eat your own dog food by porting Office using .NET and use it as the first application to be released on the NewWindows. In fact, along with Office, Port IE, Media Player and Media Edition apps, MovieMaker and all of the other iLife wannabe applications ALL using .NET technologies. Doing this will give the third-party developer markets a reason to believe that their software can be ported as well. This first version of NewWindows is aimed squarely at the consumer markets.
4) Release this in time for Christmas 2007 season. And then, like Apple, commit to cranking out new versions/upgrades every 12 to 18 months.
5) In the Summer of 2008 release server and professional versions of NewWindows just to get it out the door for the early adopters and give the third-party developer markets a hard-target to code to and release on.
As for XP, keep releasing service packs and security updates until the new Windows is released in 2007 and warn the third-party developer partners that XP end of life will happen in about 2015 and that they need to port their applications to .NET to be compatible with NewWindows.
There are MASSIVE numbers of applications to be ported so this much time is needed.
This will be painful for five or so years and Microsoft WILL LOSE some market-share to Apple and Linux (but this is going to happen anyway). However, this change will give windows a new start and a chance to create a new platform, to really compete, API to API, smart developer to smart developers, cool application to cool application, on-time release to on-time release with those folks in the Apple and Linux camps.
I will agree that this solution sounds radical, but anything short, and I see a dark and sad future for Microsoft (and it's time for me to dump my stock now).
If Microsoft was a country and Ballmer was president, I’d say that his administration has been a failure from the outset. From the ill timed Comp 2000, to the latest Vista delay, it has been one failure after another. The last straw was Allchin’s “situation normal, we’re all fine here” memo announcing the slip. It’s no wonder that the stock has been flat for 6 years. The fish rots from the head down, so the first thing we need to do is fix the fish’s head. It’s time to vote the rascals out. As a stockholder and employee, I plan to use my next proxy vote for the annual shareholder meeting to vote down the current board members unless they replace Ballmer now. I encourage everyone who is tired of watching their company go nowhere to do the same.
Disclaimer;
I am providing this info because I truly believe that competition drives innovation. The people who have posted on this blog saying things to the effect that "there is no threat posed by Apple" need to take off their rose-colored glasses, because they're really doing all of you MS employees who want to make a difference by changing course and re-invigorating a once innovative company, a disservice.
HERE'S ANOTHER CLUE [03.28.06]:
"In a stunning move, BAPCo, the industry-standard
Windows benchmarking consortium, announced that Apple Computer has joined up as a member. 'BAPCo is responsible for the SYSmark 2004SE and MobileMark benchmark suites we use at PC Magazine Labs for testing PCs.'"
This is significant because it means that Apple has now committed to Windows-based performance testing, and it will influence industry-standard testing methodologies going forward, possibly including Mac OS X testing. We speculate that Apple will now develop Windows drivers for Intel Macs ..."
Now why would Apple be interested in Windows-based performance testing?
"Mac Os X 10.5 Likely To Have Virtualization, Windows Support"
http://gearlog.com/blogs/gearlog/archive/2006/03/28/8751.aspx
Microsoft itself is a great company with large amount of highly motivated and intelligent employees. But sometimes the priorities and vision from the top management are a bit "lost" and detached from the reality.
The field (people actually facing customers and partners) have really hard time in explaining the bureaucratic processes within Microsoft... so, the pain is all over, not just in dev teams.
One thing that may or may not seem obvious: as a potential customer, Steve Balmer's antics leave a really bad taste in my mouth and don't give me a great amount of confidence in the company he leads (I know, it's not precisely fair to judge a company by their most public leader, but this is my reaction). I really don't think he's doing MS any favours with his constant PR blunders (whether it's inflammatory rhetoric that compares OS software to cancer or it's stories about him throwing chairs).
I don't have anything to do with MS but reading this thread makes me see/understand why it is that I came to loathe Windows so much. I spent ten years with it, but switched to OSX in 2001. A breath of fresh air or what? I understand heavy duty Win brigade who say it is eye candy, but I can assure you it is deeply, subtly, amazingly efficient and reliable. Of course it can be faulted but it is light years ahead of XP.
And therein lies one of MS's big problems. They have been forced, beyond their means and capabilities, to add features to VISTA to enable it to compete with OSX. The result has been...delays, more complexity, and most certainly an even more user unfriendly experience.
You're still getting paid either way, so pull your head in. If you don't like your work, you are always free to leave.
Its time to leave your idealistic little hidey-hole and come in to the real world.
I appreciate that backward compatibility has been a drain on the development team's ability to move forward. But it needs to be said that backward compatibility (BC) is hugely important. BC has been one of the major factors in Microsoft's success and persistence in the market.
As a developer, I really don't want to have to drop everything and revamp my apps every time MS comes out with a new OS, especially if I'm in the middle of developing a new application. I am very grateful that stuff I wrote circa Win 95, runs on OS that didn't exist when the app was released.
As a customer, I would have serious reservations about upgrading if it meant re-purchasing all my apps.
More needs to said about the heroic lengths MS has gone to, to preserve BC. I once read that when a new release of Windows was being tested, a major game failed because the game's programmers referenced a free'd pointer. MS modified the OS' behavior to accomodate it. There's no point in blaming the game programmers for the mistake. The customers would never understand or care, and the new Windows would have seemed the culprit. I'd love to read about more anecdotes like this.
Have you ever been to WinHEC? The effort required to coordinate and standardize all the manufacturers is huge. This is the unsung work that ensures all the new stuff works.
I respect the Mac and Unix family of technologies. I hope they thrive, for they are a fount of innovation. However, as a small developer, I also know I couldn't survive if the market split 50/50 and I had to double my development costs for the same number of customers.
Microsoft has been guilty of certain abusive and hostile practices. But personal computing would be far less advanced than it is today if someone had not been there to develop and enforce software standards like drivers, GDI, TrueType, etc. Standards promote volume, volume leads to revenue, and revenue funds technological advances.
Here's my wish: develop a rock-solid, bullet-proof, stripped-down no-frills Windows, that runs legacy Windows apps (under some restrictions), and supports all the drivers. Make it unpirateable, and charge $1,000. I'd snap it up in a minute.
PS: I run Linux at home, and let's just say it's not ready for the consumer.
Once on-chip virtualization comes around, it will be standard-equip on PCs by 2009, which should herald the release of BlackComb. Since the on-chip virtualization allows for virtualization without, for the most part, any performance hit, Microsoft will be able to add a virtual stripped-down vista for backwards compatibility. Apart from this virtualized old windows, windows would have a completely new kernel and would be able to completely remove DLL hell by redesigning windows from the ground up. All old applications would run virtualized and all new applications would be able to run natively. Even though the old apps would be virtualized, they would get around 90% of normal performance if the virtualization technology is used correctly. This re-architecting of windows would allow for much better security and development because it would all be done from the ground up.
I'm so late here, no one is going to notice, but I've just spent a facinatingt hree hours reading the thread, and here's my 10c:
Software Assurance: Sorry but I am culpable in this farce, and yes, it's totally based on duress and false promise. And FYI, I think SA is still trying to convince SMB customers to upgarde to XP! Yes it's 2006 and the bulk of SMBs are happy with Windows 2000. Good look with Vista.
Comments about Enterprise HAVING to use Vista when they buy new hardware are ill-informed. 100% of customers buy licenses independantly of their hardware purchases and put the image that works best for them on every new machine.
OEMs are pissed as hell about Vista. The promises from high up in MS are stalling their sales (holiday 2006 is going to be a bloodbath). In addition, they're all in major hock to Intel for 2006 marketing dollars and if they don't ship machines, they don't buy chips, and if they don't buy chips, they have to repay all that money to Intel. Most OEM marketing recieves 55% reimbursement from Intel. Average OEM's are looking at a bill of $100 to $150 million they will have to give back to Intel at the end of 2006 if they don't meet their numbers. Thank you Microsoft.
Developers, seriously if you're working 16 hour days and are getting frustrated, what difference does it make if you start drinking at lunch and do nothing? I stopped trying at work years ago and have seen little or no difference in my impact and output. My liver isn't so happy, and I do believe in the moral Jack Lemon was trying to get across in Days of Wine and Red Roses, but really, invent a coctail and stick to it. Your body and brain will thak you in the long run. I'm nicely toasted right now and my spelling and grammer are far better then 96% of the ernest posters here.
Yes, Apple V MSFT is boring.
Yes, short the stock.
Yes, buy the stock.
And one final word to MSFT employees. Find Dick Brass (if he still works there). Find him an seek his guidance. Encourage him to take you sailing, you will learn a lot.
I have to say:
If the things in Microsoft are as they are they will lose costumers.
I am a windows user since 2000 (6 years with my PC) and I am thinking in buy a MAC (6 years and I want a MAC). They are cute, small and affordable.
what about attrition with the people who are burnt out and have had enough? i can guarentee you if there is a enough folks who try to leave with a mass exodus, they will lock down on internal xfers and cause folks to start looking outside the company (yes, this includes good people who fall into the bad attrition bucket). Then what? I look at headtrax and see about 5,000 people who work in windows (am I right in the number?)
I get emails and calls each day ridiculing the vista slip, they ask me who is getting fired? All I say is that from the PR and internal mail it seems only Mike Nash got singled out for "security" issues, but surely they will just move VP's around to another group. Others outside would love to see public messaging around who was held responsible for this, I don't care what you say this was worse than Windows 2000.
Steve Ballmer is the first person that should be fired. It appears like many other VPs are getting the pink slip, yet Ballmer manages to stay in power. Look at the value of the Microsoft Stock since he has been in charge. It won't take you long to figure which way is up. the stock is about the same price as in 1998. Hmmm... July 1998 Ballmer become president, then CEO in 2000. Down, Down we go and how much Ballmer has made...only a few know.
Bill G needs to look at the company and see that it is time that Ballmer, Bill G's friend, left the company --- voluntarity or otherwise! We used to be a company with a heart, a company with vision and purpose. Those of us that have been at Microsoft for a long time would like to have that same of fervor, drive and sense of accomplishment we used to have. We don't want to leave, we love the company, but we need new fresh leadership that can guide the company for the next 25 years. Goodbye to Ballmer, he has been here long enough and screwed up as much as we care to endure.
I have a question. Is the next MS OS (Vienna is it?) going to have legacy support too?
OK as comment poster number 50,000 may I say this:
I have used a PC since the days of Compaq portables and IBM PC's - and I am finally leaving. Having endured the constant upgrades of Windows (which are merely new coats of paint over the previous versions (its embarassing to see MSDOS still in Win XP) I switched to a Mac - have a used one now with OSX but will buy the new Intel Mac desktop when it comes out. I hold MSFT stock and AAPL stock - I have been losing money on the MSFT stock but made money on AAPL (nice little gadget called the iPod helped out).
Face it Ballmer (and I can't believe you deny your kids Google and iPods) your attitude is killing this company. In the old days Microsoft knew how to compete - now you are fat and lazy.
Ballmer - either leave - or go buy yourself an iPod and realize that even though your company is a monopoly it is destined to rot on the throne unless you either leave or change your company radically. Apple is great at reinventing itself - Microsoft stinks at reinventing.
What about me is that I am only happy that MS delayed Vista. The delay means that less bugs will be there.
Most of MS products require at least one SP to start working.
Office XP needed 1 SP, Office 2003 stopped to crash during spell-checking of documents in my native language only after SP2. (IBM/Rational products are not much better, btw)
I am a software developer and I know what the marketing pressure is. These awful beings do not think about people, they just want money - right now. They do not understand that quality is P0.
Wow, that's a lot of comments I just waded through. For those interested in a synopsis of all of this angst, I posted what I consider the most relevant comments at "The Best of Vista 2007. Fire the Leadership Now!".
I was in Goodwill yesterday and there was a black t-shirt with a longhorn steer promoting the longhorn MS team. Soo good. The shirt is years old, a broken discarded dream selling for 1.99.
I almost bought it to wear to work next week, but then realized that $1.99 was too expensive to mock a dying kingdom.
Hold onto the war chest, it will stay afloat for years. The rest of use have moved on years ago.
I am a veteran of several Microsoft RTMs however, I last worked at Microsoft in 2000. I came to this blog because the official explanation of partner requirements causing a delay in the Vista release made no sense to me. While reading comments in this blog it appears the disfunctional culture that began to take root in the late 1990s remains firmly entrenched within the OS groups. The only surprise is that problems so obvious for so many years have not been fixed.
To the Office person who wrote that she was told "this really isn't the place for a woman", I was told almost verbatim the same thing in 1998 while working on Windows Server 2000. I choose to move on and interviewed with other groups, including IIS development where I was told the position I was interviewing for would have to work heavy overtime on pornography projects. Luckily, I found other work with marketing and consulting groups but eventually left in 2000. The reality of working inside Microsoft is so very different than the public image Microsoft seeks to project.
A wise man once said:
"Mac OS X proves that it's easier to make UNIX pretty than it is to make Windows secure."
Microsoft is currently caught between a rock and a hard place. The copmpany's management is undoubtedly aware that the competition, primarily from Apple but also from Linux and other open source O/S's, is stronger than it has ever been. If we were in the early days of PCs, if everything were at zero, and users and manufacturers were given the choice of one of these O/S's, Microsoft wouldrestrictive agreements. These methods tend to work fine, even as long as competitors' products are slightly better, as people normally need real motivation to change.
Regarding Vista, Microsoft know that the release of this O/S will be a "make or break" situation. Release a buggy, unattractive O/S too early and they will have problems due to the competition - the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back for users and manufacturers.
Microsoft are also aware that they will have to re-write the whole O/S from the ground up (and should have in fact done so a long while ago). No software can last indefinitely without such a re-write, and the longer such a re-write is delayed, the longer subsequent upgrade and development of the current software takes due to the complexities of add-in code.
In my humble opinion, Microsoft made a mistake in charging ahead with Vista when they could have imitated Apple and re-written the O/S.
The thing is, Microsoft know this. They know they made the wrong decision. But what can they do?
They can pull a rabbit out of the hat and produce an O/S which wows the audicences - an unlikely occurrence.
Alternatively, the company could make the decision to suffer a little for several years, sellsXP (and issued service packs) for virtually nothing, and live off their income from X-box tie-ins, Office and other products. While doing this they can re-write Windows from the ground up and release the spanking new solid attractive version in a few years time.
Obviously some custom will leach during this time, but the very low price of XP and its SPs, combined with an excellent support (which Microsoft have to develop), would keep the majority of folks loyal and satisfied.
Vista was, and is, a mistake. Customer loyalty is a very strong thing indeed but in the end the product has to remain quality too. Microsoft know that Vista has to be exceptional, are aware that it isn't, think that it is too late to re-write the O/S, and are therefore running around like headless chickens in search of an easy solution.
There are no easy solutions. The only answer is a very difficult path that has to be taken - re-invent the company ethos and the company O/S but do it in a way that tries to minimise damage to the current user base. The users must be listened to, the company should never try to overstretch and introduce unwanted features and software.
The majority of us just want stability, solidity and usefulness with a wee bit of glamour thrown in. Microsoft needs to bear this in mind and get back to the ethos of old when this is what they delivered (from time to time anyway).
The nails are slowly getting hammered into the M$ coffin.
The new Macs with Intel processors can run Windows, too, Apple officially announced today. This technology will be built into their latest OS, 10.5.
http://www.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/
Did anyone else read Bob Cringely's story the other day about Paul Allen? A very good piece titled "Prisoner of Redmond."
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20060330.html
Where are the promotions? When the first Longhorn died a miserable death Joe was promoted. Surely this disaster will get some of the guilty a promotion?
Since we don't fire people, then put them high enough in the org where they won't do any more damage
Hi,
There seems to be a problem with missing text from the first paragraph of my comment which you published. I don't have a copy of the original text (how stupid is that?) but it was probably along the lines of the following:
Microsoft is currently caught between a rock and a hard place. The copmpany's management is undoubtedly aware that the competition, primarily from Apple but also from Linux and other open source O/S's, is stronger than it has ever been. If we were in the early days of PCs, if everything were at zero, and users and manufacturers were given the choice of one of these O/S's, Microsoft would not hold the number one position.
Microsoft has to date depended on strategies such as requiring users to upgrade the O/S to support/handle new hardware and software, tying in customers to long-term support agreements, tying OEMs to restrictive agreements, and restricting compatibility with other systems. These methods tend to work fine, even as long as competitors' products are slightly better, as people normally need real motivation to change.
...
To Pierre's comment:
"Microsoft has been guilty of certain abusive and hostile practices. But personal computing would be far less advanced than it is today if someone had not been there to develop and enforce software standards like drivers, GDI, TrueType, etc. Standards promote volume, volume leads to revenue, and revenue funds technological advances."
FYI-TrueType was also an Apple invention. MS didn't do that either. Nothing original comes from Redmond.
From Wikipedia:
"TrueType is an outline font standard originally developed by Apple Computer in the late 1980s as a competitor to Adobe's Type 1 fonts used in PostScript. The primary strength of TrueType is that it offers font developers a high degree of control over precisely how their fonts are displayed, right down to particular pixels, at various font heights."
For the folks saying not to worry about Linux, it's not-ready-for-prime-time, here's a thought: just took my old Dell 8000 laptop (700Mhz P3), loaded Kubuntu Linux onto it, then ran the Automatix script to pull in [ multimedia players and codecs, OpenOffice, Acrobat, Skype, P2P clients, Firefox & Opera browsers, development IDEs ], and tune the DMA settings for the HD. A file transfer of music and pictures over from my XP desktop box and I was good to go.
My cost: the download time for the initial DVD-ROM and about two hours of checking progress during commercial breaks in the NCAA title game. I have a desktop, browser, office suite and media players. I can do basic development in HTML, C++ and Java. I can play music and DVDs. This would handle most of the consumer market minus gaming.
And Vista's delayed into '07.
Why MS doesn't improve their existing produts instead of create new ones? I don't want Vista, I want a better XP, a more secure IE. Is that possible? When Vista will be ready, it will not have no more update on XP, so we won't have the choice to put Vista. But Vista will be more greedy and we will have no choice to upgrade our computer too. Bull****
I have never seen a Mac in my life. I don't live in US, that's why. MS employees who are afraid of Apple just look funny.
I even like big delays between releases of new OSes - this means less new things to study for developers.
Better stop releasing bugged software, even for developers. I don't like VS2005's PREFast crashing in front of me, but I have no choice.
I don't like having "using namespace std;" in the MFC headers, but I have no choice but to patch MFC headers.
I'm afraid users will soon have choice. And I don't like this.
Is the problem just blind employee obedience. Do we all need reminders of Stanley Milgram's experiment:
http://learningat.ke7.org.uk/socialsciences/Psychology/PsyRes13/Milgram.htm
Have you guys seen this:
http://www.parallels.com/en/products/workstation/
Allows you to run multiple operating systems on the same box, at the same time - on the CPU wthout an emulation layer.
For example, you can run Windows XP as a hosted operating system in a window on a machine booted into Mac OS X, or, you can run Solaris and Linux as hosted operating systems on a machine booted into Windows, etc.
To Pete the Jock, please remember:
O/S != Operating System (ever heard of an Operating/System?)
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20060330.html
I wanted to second the poster who talked about making sure his proxy voting counted this year by NOT voting for whomever is up for reelection in the BOD. These guys are freakin asleep at the wheel and just billg's and Steveb's lapdogs. They need to have Steveb go ASAP...or else they (BOD)go. Steve can no longer be not held accountable...he keeps "sacrificing" the guys below him in his never ending "re-org" circuses but never seems to take any responsibility. Out with monkey boy, now!!!
This just goes to show you that everything that starts the wrong way, ends in an inevitable crash and burn.
Mr. Gates has been stealing, cheating, killing, up-grabbing, ripping, and emulating hundreds of companies, products, and even individual developers for, basically, greed.
As a Windows user since version 3.1, and every version ever since, I wholehartedly have to say that judging from every release of the OS it is quite evident that MS has no interest in the final user, only money.
Microsoft, much sooner than later, is going to implode. That is the only crystal clear affirmation we can make as of this moment.
2 years ago, as the development of Longhorn progressed, I kinda thought that they'd finally gotten a clue and started listening to the market.
A year ago, even, I was still excited about all the promised features and usability Longhorn would bring to any user.
Don't get me wrong, to most of the Windows team out there, I KNOW that you have left blood, sweat and tears inside those walls... but, people, I guess that just wasn't enough.
I have to say "Too late".
I know that to you I'm just a simple end-user, but believe you me, there are A LOT like me.
End-users that just gave up on you.
And I am convinced that this has everything to do with bad management, starting with your leader.
I read here in these posts that "Vista is MacOS 9", and I have to agree.
I agree in the sense that Vista will be the first attempt to marry usability, with stability and security. Emphasis on "first attempt".
If the company survives this implosion... who knows? Windows' next version might bring what Mac OS 10.0 brought to the whole Mac user platform.
I'm sorry, and, again, I know I'm just and end-user, but hey, is people like us who make companies great or just die. Why? Because we are the ones that buy your products. And if you can dissapoint a long time Windows user, reluctant to switch... believe me, you can dissapoint the kind of user who walks into a CompUSA store and expects his/her $800 Dll. laptop to do Word.
And if you don't believe me, tell that to my 1 year old PowerBook G4, or to my soon-arriving MacBook Pro.
Personally I don't care how long Vista is coming, so long as it works. I purchased XP 64 with a new PC last year. To date I still cannot get drivers for such exotic peripherals as my web cam or wireless LAN. Microsoft tell me it is the vendors fault for not writing drivers. Many vendors tell me they just build the cards and are supplied the drivers by the chipset manufacturers and the market is not big enough to bother with, and why couldn't Microsoft write a compatability module like the Linux people did so I can use 32bit windows drivers anyway?
Given that Vista wont allow the installation of non-certified drivers, and I don't think a single one of the 64bit drivers I DO have was certified, one has to wonder exactly which machine it will run on, there certainly wont be a wide choice on past experience.
Software compatability is another issue. I bought the machine with a dual core CPU. Effectively none of the applications I ran previously work 100%, and games are simply a joke. Some I can get to run ok by jumping in and setting CPU affinity. If I get in early enough and pick the right cpu, the gamr seems to run ok. Others simply crash. Others seem to alternate between working and not working depending on the latest update loaded.
Given the fiasco I have suffered with this piece of c$%p (I am about to UPGRADE to 32bit XP and chuck this C$%p in the bin) I won't be rushing out to "upgrade" to Vista, and certainly not to a Vista rushed out the door half complete to suit an edict issued on high, which is what I fear will be foisted upon us even if launch is slipped to the 2nd quarter next year.
The "commercial" release this year is itself simply a cynical "face saver" so they can claim they met the release date. Everyone knows businesses are slow to upgrade to new OSes. The company I am with has only officially decided to shift to XP since the official end of support for NT. Many of our machines still do not have XP installed (we happily paid for XP licenses and then installed older versions to keep a SOE). I can't see us installing a single Vista until XP support officially ends.
amen to that.
The folks extolling MacOS X should be aware that not all is wine and roses there, as this frustrated post (from a developer of a leading open-source Common Lisp implementation) makes painfully clear.
I quit using Windows XP over 6 months ago and now my main OS is Ubuntu Linux. Reasons I left Windows where simple
1) Fed up with paying Microsoft
2) Fed up with Viruses and Spyware
My Linux machine now does everything my Windows machine did.
Why would any business want to pay another £60-70 for Vista, whats different about it.
XP was a good product minus the viruses and spyware, and most people I speak to see no reason to upgrade, so what does Vista offer lets be honest.
Sell it to me.
Does it make me business any more productive?
RE: to the comment by Austin about the Longhorn T-shirt.
I have a black T-shirt that says 'Introducing Longhorn', with a picture of a disk below it. I wear it with pride. Why? The disk is Mac OS X Tiger.
And more on topic, I just sat down and came up with an idea for a completely redesigned file system. I don't know how hard it would be to do, but I'm going to try to make it, as an experiment.
Lets see what one new coder working in his spare time can do, compared to hundreds who have it as their job.
When I have to transfer files through our corporate intranet, and move myself to several different computers in several different offices, because my company refuses to pay license fees to load all the software I need on *ONE* computer, 'Productivity' is obviously NOT a factor in choosing to run Microsoft products. I will spend a week doing what would otherwise be a few hours work. When I suggested that we run some Open Source alternatives to fill in the gaps, the IT Wizards threatened to burn me at the stake for heresy! Now, I take my important work home, and finish it on my Linux box to get it done on time.
I seriously doubt that switching to Vista will change that for the better.
OK...
Asking for a fresh start "now" is irresponsible. The endless frustrations are obvious, but your intentions are ironic. Stay the course and demand "firings" after the release. Your mutiny does nothing to further the cause of the Vista initiative and is divicive and embarassing.
We MS customers are sick and tired of the excuse-minded employees. If there is a change to be had, it should be the hiring of success- minded individuals who keep their eye on the prize.
I am a proud user of WinXP SP2 and I am confident Vista will kick ass. The Windows team should be proud of the work so far. You all had many difficult choices to make. It is not easy to overhaul Windows. I am sure no one ever said it was going to be. Redirect the anger at yourselves, shift your attitude toward the positive, and just get the project done.
Success and failure lie on the same road. Success is just a bit further ahead now. Belive me -when Vista is released in 2K7, everybody will be gushing. This will all seem like a bad dream, and you will be that much stronger for it.
(Themes in this thread are outsiders saying "Use Linux/OSX!" or Microsoft employees or ex-employees saying "dear god, it's worse than you/I think" and so on. I want to add to the theme of "watch out! look at what's happening!")
A buddy of mine owns his own small computer shop in Maine. He's made a good bit of cash with a tiny startup that's grown into a reputable business doing MS networking and such. He says he owes his job to the piece of c$%p that Windows is - with OS X, he finds that people can do their own networking. He adds that defenders of MS make the mistake of conflating the OS with the other software. Exchange and Outlook aren't the reason to defend the OS itself. He thinks the OS is total crap.
And he's switching his users and himself to OS X these days. Security issues are tiny. Networking Just Works. Etc. No, there's not the same infrastructure as on Windows, he points out, but with a solid OS and a good network and access to google, etc., what do you need to worry about?
When the small guy (not the large corporation, but the small guy) begins to shift away from MS because the bloatware drives him ape, there's yet another nail in the coffin.
Plus, he and I agree on one point: OS X has figured out a way to USE the processor power that Vista will require. iLife Just Works; it also keeps improving. On a PC, we go ape. On a Mac, we get things done.
I can't imagine a use for Vista, I really can't. The software that runs on top of it? Sure, but that's not f$#%ing Vista. A good, solid, simple OS without IE, without the awful insecurity, and I'd be a lot f$%^ing happier.
Of course, I'm pretty happy with OS X and have been since I moved from the PC for full time work.
> And he's switching his users and himself > to OS X these days. Security issues are > tiny. Networking Just Works. Etc.
That one is pretty obvious actually. Of course it just works, it runs on hardware that are built by apple. That's a big problem with windows, and linux as well, there is so much unknown hardware out there. And they basically have to support every piece of hardware ever made, while apple just have to support a few piece of hardware, that are all known to them.
And this is, in my opinion, part of the problem microsofts has created. If you look at the total price of buying a computer I think you will find one interest thing. The software is a huge part of the cost. While microsoft has kept its profit margins on the software, the hardware companies have had to slash theirs. You don't make big profits on hardware, but on software.
Basically that puts the hardware makers into a position where prices have to be cut, to make a profit. Think the so called 'winmodems' back in the 90' is a good example of this. You cut back on hardware, and the modems are dependent upon software in windows to work properly. And the result? Not usable if you don't run windows, not always stable, and software solutions are generally speaking slower than hardware based solutions. All in all, the customer are worse off. And who makes the big profits?
Mind you, I do understand that companies have to make a profit to continue to remain in business. It is the size of that profit which I see as a problem.
To make my point. If the profit on the hardware were bigger I think the components would be of higher quality. Not so much cutting corners to keep the cost for the manufacturer down. And higher quality components would ultimately result in higher quality computers.
And since the the total price of computers really can't go up, (what is the marked willing to pay?) those money has to come from somewhere else. Where? By cutting back on the software prices. And at this moment in time that basically means for microsoft to cut it profit margins.
Or there is the other option, linux. Lower cost software is always an option. And I for one think that will happen before microsoft cuts is prices. Sorry, history is a pretty solid indication of how microsoft reacts. Prices go up up up. Obviously, that can be said for a lot of things.
Microsofts cuts or the your of linux on the desktop (again). Which will come first?
Just my two cents...
K
On the SLIM chance that any MS employee's are still reading this, please take some advice from a hacker. A couple of buddies and i have been tooling around with the vista available via torrent. Look, please stop dorking around with the GUI aspects. The XP components are appealing, work well, and are just the right complexity for your average end user. If i wanted super neato sh1t i would switch over to my linux partition. PLEASE just keep with the skin you have out right now and update security. Release new media players as time passes and leave it at that. I have no problems with the UBER huge memory required for current vista, but your average user will be pissed and wont buy your product. I don't want to see OSX (vomits) get all hyped up, so work with us here eh?
Where can I get one of those "CPU's" with an embedded OS?
Or are you one of those dills that cannot seem to understand the CPU is the "Central Processing Unit", NOT the entire box?
Yet here you are with a well read blog because people think you may know something about computers ... duh!
This thread is facinating. I'm only about halfway through, but thought I could throw in a few comments as an outsider.
I work in a big corporation. Very big. In the top few Fortune companies. In 2003 we upgraded from NT4 to Win2K. We don't use XP anywhere in the world, as far as I know. I don't know if the global IT direction for us is to skip XP and go straight to Vista, but we're pretty conservative so I doubt it.
We would be one of those key customers for Microsoft that they want to entice, but even as far from HQ as I am, I can say with some confidence that it's *extremely* unlikely that we would be installing it until at least two years in.
I don't think any really big corporation would jump on the Vista bandwagon in the first year of release.
I'm a Mac user at home, and I cringed at some of the comments I've read so far. OS X is a great OS, but it's not holy. Apple make a few mistakes each release, which they tend to rectify in the next release (except the damn Finder). Apple is *very* different from Microsoft, and OS X doesn't attempt what Vista tries to (or was going to try to).
But that's largely a red herring - the Vista delays have all the hallmarks of project management being out of control. It doesn't matter what happens at other companies. This is a Microsoft issue, and even here on the other side of the planet it looks really bad.
WoW...This is what we don't need:
"Success and failure lie on the same road. Success is just a bit further ahead now. Belive me -when Vista is released in 2K7, everybody will be gushing. This will all seem like a bad dream, and you will be that much stronger for it."
What a way to Guarantee this debacle will happen over and over again. How about showing it won't by listing the lessons Learned...
The consumer version delay is only a few months.
Based on the comments here it seems that the developers spend only 10-20% of their 14-16 hours 6-days a week writing actual code/fixing bugs.
If this is true, the short delay does nothing for bug fixing, as next to no code will be created or improved during that short space of time.
Linux people need to get their live cd's bundled with PCs sold on the Home Shopping Network.
You need to have a hip-hop street marketing team hand out cd's to highschool kids and hang around the entrances to computer stores. Pretend as if linux distros cost money and you're "giving them away free".
The PC gaming industry needs to pool some funds and strongly support the windows gaming environment emulators for linux.
OpenGL needs to catch up fast and then surpass DX10 asap.
The hardware in last years MacMini FAR SURPASSES an equally priced Dell (at least in my country). This years MacMini's can run Windows. All computers can run Linux.
Let's imagine malware/viruses/spyware does not exist....
OSX out of the box is more USEFUL than a fresh install of Windows(any version).(and I dislike the OSX interface both visuals and functionality)
Really, who uses that movie maker shit that comes with windows.
Has it ever even been UPDATED in terms of better functionality???
Every other 'Security' Update for OSX also includes some major new feature to existing apps or a new utility app or general speed increase of something.
Microsoft doesnt listen to customers OR common sense or each other.
If they did, there would be preconfigured options upon installation specifically geared towards home, corporate yuppie, and corporate IT, that chose the proper services to run or not run.
I would pay for future service packs for windows XP if they truly stopped the torrent of viral problems and slowly but surely replaced the legacy crap with new secure stuff that eventually becomes Vista...(sounds like OSX 10.0-10.5 strategy)
Like many of you, about 20 people (friends/family) rely on me to tell them what to do with their PC. A strong anti-vista/anti-windows word of mouth campaign carried out by all of us can have an effect Windows' ubiquity.
People, even though they can't tell the difference between windows and dell, are already quite accustomed to bootlegging software. I explain Package managers as the ultimate and simplest software bootleg program that even install the program for you.
You people bitching about backwards compatibility. Try VMWare or Virtual PC. I've got tons of old favorite windows apps that I've had since win95 running on Windows 98 within VPC on OS X.
Back to gaming:
The people making lots of individual millions are the solo developers making those simple
2 minute arcade games. Get those people to port their stuff to linux so mom and pop will have something engaging and entertaining to do occasionally.
'maybe' even go so far as to have a few web sites with great online games that are only accessible via a linux box....maybe.
make people feel like there's an 'in' crowd and linux is their ticket. It's working for apple.
I’m speaking as a client who has absolutely no idea what’s going on inside the company. You’ve missed your launch date for Vista twice. Chances are you’ll also miss the third. Eventually when the product will finally make it to the market I won’t bother looking for it.
Taking five or more years to develop a new operating system creates enormous expectations in terms of new features. I have barely found five or so new features that I consider interesting. The result is that when it will finally be released I might get extremely disappointed due to those expectations.
As a client I also don’t like Balmer. I find him extremely ignorant and arrogant. Sure CEO’s at his level tend to be arrogant but he lacks any sense of civilized behavior and style. I strongly believe that this man will eventually be the tombstone of Microsoft.
I also speak as a client who paid $2.000 to buy .NET Studio version 2003 Architect Edition only to find out three years later that you give your new version for free. Well if your strategy fails don’t throw it in my face. I hate that. I also hate to see that investing on a technology supported by the biggest software corporation might not be such a bright idea after all. If your .NET platform fails I’ll have some serious problems. What the hell is wrong with your management and strategists guys?
I think http://www.arcon5.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=765 should be added to discussion. Or the forum http://www.arcon5.com/forum
Maybe there homepage http://www.arcon5.com
As an outsider, I seriously appreciate all of these comments. I will also say that a lot of companies historically have faced crises like this when they get too big. Microsoft should split itself into two companies -- one for OS and one for apps.
Office is a great product -- and I have to say that the one thing that burns me up about it is that a program like Word is better on the Mac edition than it is on my Windows machine! Seriously, why is that? Isn't this embarrassing for folks in the company? And no, I don't want to buy OneNote for that -- it's just more complicated and less usable.
But there is no reason Office should be dragged down by OS problems. OS development should stand or fall on its own.
I know this was proposed by the big court case a few years ago. I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about a business decision, best for Office, best for shareholders, best for the consumer -- and with a little luck and a bit of competition, best for Win OS too.
Regarding Apple licensing Mac OSX to other manufacturers; not gonna happen. Apple's excursions into the land of licensed Mac-clonage during the mid 90's was arguably a major contributing factor in bringing Apple to it's knees.
Given Jobs' personal involvement in bring the end to the Mac-clone era, I find it difficult to believe that he'd now turn around and effectively reinstate the program on the basis that "just because it can be done - it should be done."
Plumb
Watching them take out things like new FS makes it seem that it is going to be eye candy and tools that already exist (well, maybe not by MS but they exist). If they put out a WFW3.11 to Win95 type of change it will be worth it, otherwise what a complete failure of such a prolonged OS upgrade.
Even worse will be if they rush out another Win98 First Edition. Flaky, was that Beta and SE was the release, did I misunderstand the First Edition? Or better yet the way they left the Win9x family off with WinME, eeewwww, the most incomplete OS release. What does marketing or sales sneak in late at night to annouce 'Gold Code' when the developers aren't around? Quick Salesboy, to the presses, before the evil programmers come!
I think MS has become the IBM they beat out (feels like OS2). MS has become big, fat, ... like IBM. Too many hands into far too many cookie jars.
I would love to buy MacOS for AMD one day soon.
P.S. Steve Jobs I am serious, I hate you (I am old geak, and read about some of crap you did to programmers and you sound like a few &$@# I have done work for over the years). But, I swear I will put on a I Love Steve Jobs shirt and change my ways if you give us MacOS for AMD (the general public and not just Mac hardware owners). Please Steve, through a dog a bone....
It would be a hell of a lot easier to return to, and follow this blog if comments had a DATE on them rather than just a TIME stamp! Showing a time stamp of "By Anonymous, at 8:22 AM" is useless info! Typical M$. What a pain returning to and trying to find where I left off reading in this marathon.
I can see why M$ products are illogical-- the pattern continues in individual output. Good luck, guys--but you're going to need a hell of a lot more than luck to survive the next technology decade. Guess your next operating system will be due by then right? One every 10 years? That is IF Vista is even out and functional by then.
Who cares. There are better things out there to run on computers than Windows. And if you are playing games, XP will work just find, I like 2000 myself, but that's just me.
Come on ,guys, what the big deal is here. You get your Vista bits within a year it is not the end of the world like you know. It is a giant company, and frankly I am impressed that they will deliver despite sloppy management up and down the chain. Well ,not only sloppy, but also rich and arrogant. What can we do?Nothing,just relax and wait.The boat is heavy, hard to steer and will keep going, when it stops it will turn around or may be it will go down, who knows.Lets hope nothing major will hapend to us,as users and customers . I will use basic of this for my new dissertation .About a months before I have finish my essay ,in case if someone looking for info for they project you may have a look in here: http://www.coursework4you.co.uk/sprtcasec92.htm
Why are they stalling on RC1. They said by the end of August. Now its September. WTF is with this OS
This forum is gold. I dont envy you guys at MS one bit. As an end user of MS, and an IT professional, i have to say The work you have all done on Vista Has Impressed me. Everything is where i would expect it to be. I have all the informatio i need at my fingertips, and suprisingly, Everything but my digital Camera Installs perfectly. I just wish it could play a video or DVD without giving me a "windows media center, or Windows Media Player Has stopped working" no matter what format the video is :(
Anyways. When it finally ships, i am definately going to be buying this. Mainly for the Eyecandy. It really is a Beautiful System. Maybe a little resource intensive, but i can live with that for prettyness ;)
I think i can speak for alot of the home consumers when i say, Vista is worth the wait. But from the perspective of an IT professional, Vista is just as functional as XP from the features i have seen so far, but is alot prettier :)
Keep it up. :)
Some terrific posts, from a variety of perspectives. A fine read.
My perspective for comments:
"Vista" is just that - eye candy, as mentioned above. Programmers: there is value in eye candy. The interface and usability is of high value to the end user.
However, the problems and frustrations mentioned throughout the posts confirms that one of MS's continual personality traits has yet to be addressed: Launch First, Fix Later. Too many bugs. Too much bad press.
MS still needs an attitude adjustment, although with Vista they have obviously hired better designers ;)
Thank You All.
Musings from a Cerebral Palsy Webmaster
i cant wait to try the new features of windows vista. based from the previews, its looks good, improved but not revolutionary.
Treo Ringtones
Vista is maybe a nice tool,
but it's far frombeing power-savy...
MS needs to put the accountability into the teams' hands through self management. MS needs transparency of issues on their projects. MS needs priorities based on the customers actual needs.
I wonder if, in ten years, Microsoft will will still have the same stranglehold on the OS world?
A question about the MSFT stock: I noticed that on April 29, 2006, the MSFT share value went from $27 to $24. I found no comment about that anomaly in this thread. Can anyone explain why that happened? Was that a delayed effect of March 21? Thank you.
hmmm interesting
I was told by many people that i should not get Microsoft Vista for so many different reasons, but i figured it would give it a shot anyways. I would have to say that getting microsoft vista has added more problems in my life than anything. Emailing people has become a problem with word, excel, etc. When attaching a document in an email i have to go and change the type of document before i send it off. I really should of listened to everyone and stayed with the Old reliable XP!!!
It would of course turn out that windows vista is indeed a powerful operating system. You simply need to get at the very least the recommended hardware requirements. My co worker runs vista on two machines, and his home machine is a 64bit system. Vista just flys on that machine even over RDC.
Does anybody realised that Microsoft is forcing to sell you vista and you cannot revert back to XP?! I'm not happy with that!
Quick solution - look for laptop without OS. Then Install Linux or... any other.
home improvement
home improvement
home improvement
home improvement
home improvement
home improvement
home improvement
home improvement
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
DEBT
Hi,
This is Jack. Vista is developing more and more these days and dominating micro soft products.
As this could well be continued till they make hard work.
____________
Jack
for sale by owner
I like to use the vista 2007 for the computer. It is really nice to use. It is very rapid to use. I think this kind of thing will really makes to improve the quality in the market.
You just got mentioned at the general session of Educause by Gary Hamel. Very cool!
Post a Comment