I have to stop reading ComputerWorld. I used to get some relevant information from the articles. Sometimes they still make me go Hmm. But more and more they just make me frustrated with the whole business and, particularly, some of the players in it.
Take Microsoft, for instance. Please.
I ran across Shane O’Neill’s article tonight entitled Microsoft to handle managing three operating systems in ’09 . While he was essentially discussing the challenges Redmond faces in the next year trying to recoup market share with Windows 7 that was lost due to the problems with Windows Vista while at the same time trying to sweep Vista under the rug, Launch Vista and phase out Windows XP, all he really did was annoy me. Perhaps I took it the wrong way. It just came across as an attempt to make me feel sorry for Microsoft.
The title sounds like “managing” three operating systems is some big deal for Microsoft. Are we supposed to feel sympathy towards Microsoft here or something? So what? They “managed” multiple operating systems at one time before. Remember Win 95, Win 98 and NT4? 98, 2000 and XP? Hey, they just released 2008 Server. This is their business model. This is what they do. Where’s the beef?
It’s really only two operating systems anyway, if you want be technical. XP and Vista/Windows 7. Let’s cut the hype and be honest, Windows 7 IS Vista. You think Mojave was just an “experiment”? It was a marketing test.
If Microsoft can redress Vista and fool a survey group, then it shouldn’t be difficult to sell it to the public.
Windows 7 will be nothing more than Vista in a new outfit. Sure, they’ll tweak it a little here and there, but it will be just as bloated, just as clunky and just as expensive as Vista (and maybe more so). It may have a new face and new name but will still be Vista under the hood.
What Redmond really needs to do is completely rebuild Windows from the kernel up. They need to cut the fat, streamline processes and improve overall performance.
Just because computers today have the resources to run a huge piece of code doesn’t mean the resources should all be consumed by the operating system. On the contrary, the OS should have the smallest footprint possible in order to reserve those resources for all the applications and data.
Remember DOS? It was there because it had to be there to run the programs. It wasn’t THE reason for owning the computer. That was the first and only OS that Microsoft got right, because it was there to perform a function, not BE the whole show.
Years ago a computer purchase was made based on the customer’s requirements for applications needed to perform duties and the duties they needed to perform.
Today, forget the jobs and applications. Now we purchase a computer based on the needs of the operating system. There’s the problem.
So, if Microsoft is “managing” three operating systems in 2009, they get no sympathy from me. They’ve done it before, they can do it again. Poor Microsoft, no soup for you.