Windows 10: Can Microsoft Get It Right This Time? 489
An anonymous reader shares this article about what Microsoft needs to accomplish with Windows 10 in order to make gains in the mobile market and everywhere else. "Later this week Microsoft will provide more details of Windows 10, most likely focusing on how the new operating system will look and feel on smartphones and tablets. According to Mary Jo Foley, Microsoft is likely to unveil a version of Windows 10 that's expected to work on Windows Phones and smaller Windows tablets running ARM and perhaps Intel processors. Microsoft will be hoping that by making it easier for developers to build for tablets and smartphones it can take some of its dominance of the desktop world and port that to the mobile world. That may help a bit, but will not in itself create the breakthrough that Microsoft wants: when it comes to mobile, Microsoft's Windows Phone is still a distant third in a two-horse race."
betteridge's law of headlines (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
So if they had instead asked, 'Will Microsoft get it wrong this time?' the answer would still be no? Seriously, that 'law' has its place but there should be another one, for every question based headline that is trying to provoke a one sided discussion, someone will immediately answer with a 'no' and call it a Betteridge answer. I'd almost prefer someone Godwin and article than Betteridge it...
Re:betteridge's law of headlines (Score:5, Insightful)
The trick to the Betteridge law is that when a journalist writes a headline as a question, the question is suggesting what most people find improbable; and the improbable rarely happens.
Re: (Score:3)
The trick to the Betteridge law is that when a journalist writes a headline as a question, the question is suggesting what most people find improbable; and the improbable rarely happens.
In in the case of certain publications, where the editors want to inflame the masses by suggesting that their fondest prejudices MIGHT be true.
Different trick (Score:5, Insightful)
The trick to the Betteridge law is that when a journalist writes a headline as a question, the question is suggesting what most people find improbable; and the improbable rarely happens.
There's some of that. But that's more about choice of subject matter. A journalist ALWAYS needs to write something that is SOMEHOW different from what the reader believes. (If he's just reinforcing what the reader believes, why should a reader bother reading his output?)
The real trick that leads to qusetion-headlines (that are almost always implying something that's wrong) is different.
When a journalist writes a juicy headline as a question, it's because he couldn't find evidence to support the conjecture, but wants to run it anyway.
Usually this is because he guessed wrong. The deadline is approaching, he's got to publish SOMETHING to stay employed, and he just wasted a bunch of time researching something that didn't pan out. Oops! So he runs his orignnal conjecture and the workup he did on it before finding out that it was either wrong (usual) or maybe right but couldn't be supported in the time available (rarely). He just phrases the headline as a speculation rather than an assertion.
That way his credibility isn't wrecked for the future, he gets to publish something, it's interesting and plausible (even though probably totally bogus), and in those rare cases where it WAS right he's scooped his competitors. However it comes out it's a win for the journalist - though it's a bunch of noise for the readers.
Comment removed (Score:4, Informative)
Re:betteridge's law of headlines (Score:5, Insightful)
1. Most mainstream apps exist on iOS, and often, on Android as well, but rarely on Windows Phone. To make things worse, a lot of the apps in the Windows store are web wrappers - they invoke Internet Explorer, which pulls up the home page of the app in question. Microsoft really needs to rein this in, if they want to escape the perception of being the Linux of phones, as far as app support goes
2. In cases where apps do exist, they sometimes lack features of their Android or iOS equivalents. Also, aside from the web wrappers I mention above, too many apps just suck. While I haven't checked the case in Android, for iOS, Apple screens apps before allowing them into the app store [apple.com]. Both Google & Microsoft would do well to take a page out of Apple's book here, even if they choose not to be as strict as Apple
On the laptop side, Microsoft should give users options of having either the Windows 7 or 8 as the interface. From what I've seen of their desktop interface, yeah, the start button and pull up menu is there, but after that, when you click on an option, it again gives you a whole bunch of big icons, rather than the side menus that were there under Windows 7. My suggestion - have the option of making 10 look exactly like 7, if that's what the user wants. Any new wizards, reserve it for Metro.
One last thing - since Microsoft owns the product, now instead of Windows Phone, name the platform either Metro or Lumia.
Re:betteridge's law of headlines (Score:5, Funny)
Okay Hitler, whatever you say.
Re:betteridge's law of headlines (Score:5, Interesting)
Or more precisely - Microsoft has been in too much hurry pushing new OS versions after Windows 7 with no real user benefit.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
There are hidden costs and yes web developers HATE XP. Most people do not know what an internet browser even is. So they will use IE 8 and this is what most slashdotters do not understand.
Web developers don't actually hate XP. They hate IE 6 and IE 8. Developers are just fine with people who use current versions of Chrome or Firefox on XP. (Chrome support of XP will end in April; no end of Firefox support of XP has been announced.) But as you point out, too many people running XP also use those horribly obsolete browsers.
Re:betteridge's law of headlines (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: betteridge's law of headlines (Score:5, Funny)
Why does Newton get credit for Gravity ?
Re: (Score:3)
Probably for the same reason that Layne Thomas gets the credit for all debates being ultimately over defining a word [c2.com]. It's been around longer: "misunderstood words" in Hubbard's Study Tech method (1972) and "rectification of names" in Confucius's philosophy.
Re:betteridge's law of headlines (Score:5, Informative)
Betteridge gets credit because of Stigler's law [wikipedia.org].
For a moment lets suppose they do get it right (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Yea, my perception of windows 8/8.1 is that under the hood it's very good, better than 7. It's all in the UI which is completely idiotic.
THIS! My experience with W8/8.1 was that for the most part, it worked. I didn't like the forced updates, and updates bitching up apps, and the mail client was miserable - no POPMail? Seriously? And the difference between a desktop app and a Metro App shortcut? And taking simple basic items that were working since 95 and changing them for no good reason other than change? Fuggitaboudit.
But yeah, the underlying system was okay. (not being sarcastic despite the complaints. In the end though, I decided it wa
Windows 10 is Windows 7.10 (Score:5, Informative)
They took the Windows 8 'core', upgraded it a bit, rejiggered some window effects, and re-added the desktop as primary for a desktop/laptop experience.
The only thing people hated about Windows 8 on a PC was the interface. If this gets rid of that it will not be as bad as Windows 8 which means they did something right...
Re:Windows 10 is Windows 7.10 (Score:4, Insightful)
"Later this week Microsoft will provide more details of Windows 10, most likely focusing on how the new operating system will look and feel on smartphones and tablets."
So basically what they are saying is they are still forcing the Tablet/Smartphone interface on PC's and laptops.
Re: Windows 10 is Windows 7.10 (Score:5, Informative)
Ah nope. The metro interface will be part of a new smart display. If you have a touch screen and if some other conditions are met you will see metro. Otherwise you will see the standard desktop.
Basically a convertible tablet laptop will/should change between metro and standard desktop depending on orientation of the display.
Re: (Score:3)
I tried it and absolutely loathed it. It's pretty clear a significant number of users clearly either disliked the interface or were confused by it. The incredibly lethargic adoption rates of Window 8 support that assertion. The interface was probably very nice for a touch device, but it was clunky and absolutely sub-optimal for mouse+keyboard devices. I tried it out and absolutely hated it almost from the moment I started using it. And I don't consider the requirement to hack in a third-party start but
Microsoft needs to undercut the competition (Score:4, Interesting)
Right now, as the underdog, their focus should be marketshare. But right now, their mobile stuff is too damn expensive. I looked at a Surface tablet over Christmas. Nice piece of tech, but at $800 I just laughed and walked away. Similar Android tablets are less than $200.
They need to be pretty much giving this stuff away right now to pry the market away. Maybe do something like when they gave all MSDN subscribers a Pocket PC (I think that was around 2002) to get it out there. But they also need to make it competitive with Android stuff. Cheaper even.
After they capture market share, then there will be more people developing for it which will lead to more apps for it. But first they've got to get it into people's hands. That's not happening right now. There's a huge potential for Windows on all devices, PC and mobile, but they are acting like they already own the mobile space and instead they are a weak third party in the mobile game. They really should be questioning the wisdom of cannibalizing their desktop OS in a mad gamble to build mobile marketshare. I think they are going about it backwards.
Re:Microsoft needs to undercut the competition (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Microsoft needs to undercut the competition (Score:5, Interesting)
For $800 you must have been looking at the Surface Pro 3. I don't think an Android tablet is an apples-to-apples comparison. The Surface Pro 3 runs a full Windows 8 OS. It is basically a laptop without a permanent keyboard. The Surface 2 is more like $450. This is much closer to the price range you're talking about.
The real problem with Microsoft's tablet experience isn't the price of the Pro 3. I think it's a great piece of kit and compares favorably to a laptop for many usage scenarios. The problem is the Windows RT used on ARM phones and tables. Specifically, the Windows RT app ecosystem. There just isn't enough going on to make it a compelling platform.
Microsoft is great at making terrible decisions. They could have tried to capitalize on their their existing platforms with good market penetration to bootstrap a great app ecosystem. Instead, they wanted to have what Apple has. They wanted to control everything so they could milk it all for money. Unfortunately, they didn't offer any other reason to get developers and users to switch.
I can't see myself ever getting a Surface or Windows Phone. However, I probably will get my wife a Surface Pro 3 when her current laptop dies.
Re:Microsoft needs to undercut the competition (Score:4, Interesting)
To quote Frozen, "Let it go! Let it go!'
Android and Apple have sewn up the smartphone market pretty well. Android fully raced to the bottom, so there is almost no chance to ever undercut short of paying people to use their phone OS. At best you will have a news funky OS on the same cheap junky hardware. How will that make the OS any better? I'd argue that MS's desperate attempt to get some toehold in mobile is just good money being thrown after bad.
Worse yet they screwed over their flagship Windows OS trying to chase mobile.
I would argue that they need to concentrate on keeping their cash cows going and stop sacrificing them on the altar of mobile/touch. The OS needs to be leaner and meaner. The interface should be streamline rather than abandoned for something new and shiny. Apple did not throw away the interface when they totally overhauled their OS with OSX, nor did they wholesale force the iOS interface onto the desktop (yes, some sharing has occurred, but it has been gradual). MS has does a good job pissing off its core customers needlessly over and over, and that is what needs to stop ASAP.
Until MS rebuilds their reputation to be a net positive, just being as cheap as Android will not be enough to get mobile market share. Instead people currently are cranky about the end of support for XP, still remember Vista, mostly like their Windows 7 box, are either avoiding or hating a new Windows 8 box, and are cautiously hoping they will just be able to get work done one whatever POS version 10 MS ships next. Oh yeah, and still despising the ribbon interface (WTF?!).
Re: (Score:3)
To quote Def Leppard, "Let it go! Let it go!'
Fixed that for you.
It will never happen (Score:2)
Like shooting at a moving invisible target = ReactOS will never win trying to catch up to running windows
Re: (Score:2)
Among popular consumer operating systems, Windows has the best track record in terms of longevity.
Re:It will never happen (Score:4, Insightful)
...Windows has the best track record in terms of longevity....
Probably because Microsoft messed up the "next version" and people do not want to upgrade.
Re: (Score:3)
...Does any other popular consumer OS get that level of support?...
The real question is: does any other popular consumer OS need that level of support?
.
If Microsoft did not mess up the "next version" as much as they have done, there wouldn't be the need to stick with a particular version for so long.
As an alternative case in point, my three Windows PCs tend to stay with a version until that version is no longer supported. While my single Macmini has had the OS upgraded to the newer version a few times, and all at no cost or bad experiences to me.
With the Macmini, t
It's Microsoft tone-deafness that scares users (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It's Microsoft tone-deafness that scares users (Score:5, Informative)
Yeah, no, not really, though. Most consumers are a lot less idealistic than you seem to think. Even most of the guys who scream "this time they've gone too far! fuck 'em" eventually find a rationalization to stay with Windows.
The reasons for buying Windows 10 are pretty much the following:
- 'It was bundled with the computer'
- 'I needed the newest version of Windows to run x'
- 'They told me I should't use XP anymore and this was the Windows they sold.'
And then there's also what seems to be the largest part of consumers: the part that actually likes Windows 8.
Re: (Score:3)
Those are not the real problems. The real problems is the users that don't like the new versions and hence stay with the unpatched, insecure old ones.
Re: (Score:3)
We forgot Vista, we forgot ME... okay you didn't but the market did. I'm good until 2020, in consumer time that's ages. If Win10 lets me just not use the Metro crap I'm good for another 10 years (5 years normal + 5 years extended support). For example recently I and some friends have been playing COH2, what's the WINE rating? Garbage. Mac support? None. I can't not have a Windows desktop around, there's no equally compelling social reason to have a Linux desktop.
I know I can use it (had it as my primary des
It doesn't have to get it right (Score:5, Insightful)
It just has to be a lot less wrong than Windows 8.x. Enough so the corporates will eventually install it. Thats all that matters.
What other horses? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Yes they did, problem is only that this is where they landed, catapulted from 1995.
I hope not (Score:5, Insightful)
The worst thing that ever happened in computers was that we had one monopoly, being Microsoft in the desktop market. Microsoft didn't even see the Internet coming when it was pushing MSN. If not for Trumpet I don't know how else you could connect. There was no native support. Still today I say the one think that is holding most companies back is Microsoft. Exchange and MS Office as two examples. Most people believe that these are the best of the best. but trying to have this discussion will just produce a flame war.
Re:I hope not (Score:5, Insightful)
Not trying to start a flame war, but what would companies use instead? Lotus Notes? Open Office? (Although LibreOffice is my primary suite at home, I don't see how it fits into a business environment as well as MS Office)
I don't think any of it is perfect, but they really are pretty much the best solution for business at this time. I don't see anything better to switch to.
Re:I hope not (Score:5, Funny)
My company uses Lotus Notes, you insensitive clod!
Re:I hope not (Score:5, Interesting)
Not trying to start a flame war, but what would companies use instead?
This is exactly the problem, and I'll underscore it with an inquiry to anyone who echoes the grandparent post...
Amongst the reasons Exchange is as readily used as it is, isn't because Exchange itself is some awesome piece of software. Exchange is part of a bigger ecosystem that incorporates a few major pieces:
--ActiveSync - and more to the point, ActiveSync support from billions of phones and tablets.
--Active Directory - single sign-on through Outlook from a domain user, and the reverse: creating a mailbox also creates a user in AD.
--Outlook - a mail/contact/calendar/task client that has a handful of competitors that excel in one area or another (IMO Zimbra coming pretty close), but still a program whose replacement will require a barricade on the door to keep out the execs who wish to use their torches and pitchforks.
--Self-Hosted - Gmail and company don't count.
I've seen plenty of great answers to one or more of these solutions. I'm a fan of the super-easy-to-use-and-manage IceWarp, but the Icewarp mail client is lacking pretty notably. Google is great if you're okay with them having your mail (many are), but unless there's an on-site version of Gmail, it's not a fair comparison fight. Univention makes a pretty good PDC replacement, but using for its mail server isn't the greatest and mobile device support is lacking. Zentyal and ClearOS are also great for small environments, but scaling becomes a problem.
So, to those who say "Exchange Sucks", I say "fine. Show me a better system that satisfies all of the above criteria, and I will be MORE than happy to take a long, hard look at it." I don't like Exchange, or its CAL structure, either...but "worst except all the rest" seems to apply here.
Re: (Score:3)
--Outlook - a mail/contact/calendar/task client that has a handful of competitors that excel in one area or another (IMO Zimbra coming pretty close)
I think I won the buzzword bingo on this section alone:
"Our activities in the social space are rooted in building relationships. Social destinations were created for this reason - connecting people and providing outlets to share. By maintaining our commitment to building these more personal relationships, we are able to provide our brand fans with an authentic social experience that is focused on connections, discussions and shared experiences."
- Mike DePaolo, Team Titleist Manager, Titleist
Not exactly what I see replacing Outlook at work.
Re: (Score:3)
Trumpet was a pretty easy way to connect to the internet with Windows 95. Sure, Windows should have had TCP/IP but if there's an easy workaround, who really cares? Anyway this is 20 years ago, it's like refusing to buy an iPhone because you hate how Apple got rid of 3.5" disk drives way too early.
And Openoffice & iwork have been around for years now, and are still obviously inferior to MS Office.
Re: (Score:3)
The example I presented was to show how a one supplier fits all solution in computers is the worst thing that can happen.
As to your iPhone example it's more like avoiding an iPhone because the phone is not yours even when you purchase it. You require Apple's approval in order to use it. Your require the carriers permission to change sims. You are not permitted to remove certain software. Your purchased phone is not yours to do with as you please.
Apple was in the lead in the personal computers with the Apple
Re: (Score:3)
Which also meant you had to code to the lowest possible denominator.
Solaris has a kick-ass new feature in it's shell? Too bad; can't touch it. IRIX has a neat library to do something? Too bad, can't touch it. You can code to C-89, maybe POSIX, and that's that.
Both approaches have advantages and disadvantages.
Not about mobile (Score:5, Interesting)
It's not about mobile. Windows 8, as a purely mobile, touchscreen OS, was okay. No major complaints there. The problem was that Windows 8 on Desktops, or even laptops with a touchscreen, tried to enforce an extremely oversimplified interface onto desktop users. Then to add insult to that, they had two parallel paradigms (Windows and Metro) and half the settings are in one place and half in the other. The solution is simple: they have to support both. The reason is just as simple. Right now I'm using my Lenovo Yoga 2 Pro as a laptop. So I want it to behave as a full featured desktop OS with all the power, control, widgets, bells and whistles I need to do all the things I need to do. As soon as I flip the screen around into a tablet mode, I need to be able to use it as a tablet.
I pretty much am at that state now with some 3rd party software, although again, half the settings are in Metro and half in classic Windows. So it's not like it would be all that hard for MS to get this right. They've just done the same thing they've done over, and over, and over. They take a paradigm or design philosophy, and push one or two steps too far.
The other big issue with Windows 8 is it had to bridge the divide between classic laptops, and the next generation laptops that have touchsreens. Metro with only a mouse? Awful. They force that on people, and the users hated it. Personally, I've only ever ran Windows 8.1 on my own machine that also had a touchscreen, so it wasn't nearly as bad.
Re: (Score:3)
But it kinda is about mobile... taking marketing and design attention away from the desktop. The old saying goes, "rob Peter to pay Paul". Microsoft is, at best, neglecting the desktop and at worst making it suck, in order to support and even market their mobile platform... a mobile platform that nobody except Microsoft has any reason to care about.
I couldn't care less about Microsoft mobile. Between iOS and Android, there's not anything I see missing. If Microsoft would simply target and support those
Microsoft will be more successful with Windows 10 (Score:5, Insightful)
And with good reason: the default user interface of Windows 10 on desktop and "conventional" laptops is the Desktop user interface, not the "Modern" tiled interface that frustrated users transitioning to Windows 8.x to no end. As such, users of Windows 7, Vista and XP will be able to transition to Windows 10 quickly, and that means much higher consumer end user and corporate user acceptance this time around, meaning likely a much more "normal" upgrade cycle.
Re:Microsoft will be more successful with Windows (Score:5, Interesting)
Correction. The "Modern" tiled interface didn't frustrate users "transitioning to Windows 8". It is simply bad. Horrible. The worst UI in the history of Windows, and since that history includes Windows ME and Vista that's saying quite a bit. It would be more appropriate to say that the UI in question is what PREVENTED the transition of users to Windows 8--not because they couldn't figure it out, but because they simply deemed it garbage.
One OS to rule them alll ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Wasn't Microsoft making noises about releasing a single OS which would be the same for a mobile device and a desktop?
In which case I expect a "one size fits some" approach, which will lead to a bloated mess on smaller devices.
Mobile devices aren't the same as desktops, don't have as much resources, and need to be a little more slimmed down -- like apps which weigh in at 10s of megs instead of gigs.
I'm just not sure Microsoft is going to hit the mark and not end up with something which is useless on at least one platform.
I don't want my tablet or my phone running the same OS as my desktop -- because that makes no sense unless you're just going to force the mobile devices to get even bigger.
Sometimes, I just think Microsoft has no real understanding of the markets they're chasing.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:One OS to rule them alll ... (Score:4, Interesting)
Problem is nobody cares. All anyone cares about is the apps and when the app you want or need to run is a traditional PC UI it will not translate to a touch UI automatically.
So windows will suck on touch devices like it always has, because of the apps that we want and need to run.
Re:One OS to rule them alll ... (Score:5, Insightful)
No, I'm missing how a bloated hog of an OS trying to be all things to all people isn't going to be a bloated hog of an OS.
If you're using the same OS on my phone as you are on my server ... it's going to probably do a shitty job on one of them.
It tells me that MS either can't, or won't, embrace the notion that you have different builds for different things. They've always had this "common OS for everything" mentality -- which to me says they don't understand how those platforms differ. Or they don't care.
Re: (Score:3)
If memory serves me right, so is MS. IE being "an integral part of the system" ringing a bell?
Re: (Score:3)
I think you're missing the part where the GUI and the OS are two different things.
Yes, they are two different things. But in the world of Windows, no one really cares that they are two things.
It's Windows. Period.
Re:One OS to rule them alll ... (Score:5, Informative)
MS has had this weird obsession with a single OS for all devices since forever. The first incarnations of Windows phones had the XP desktop crammed on them. The biggest impact they had was to keep the smartphone market small and dysfunctional until Apple and Google came along. Now they are trying the opposite tack and cramming a mobile OS onto the desktop and are wondering why people are staying away in droves.
Until they give up this obsession and make a mobile OS and a separate desktop OS, they are going to stay stuck.
Doubt it (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Doubt it (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Doubt it (Score:4, Insightful)
Newer releases of Windows try really hard to get me to use some stupid online account to log into my own computer. At the same time, all sorts of spying and datamining features are conveniently brought into play.
I'd be surprised if Microsoft cared enough to spy on you. But, by signing in with an online account your settings sync between different computers/reinstalls. Tech people like talking about "the first thing I do when I reinstall my machine is ...", and a lot of that now goes away if you log in with an existing account, and all of your settings are laid down for you.
One OS to rule them all (Score:2, Funny)
And in the darkness, spit up the blue screen of death.
Dominance? (Score:2)
... take some of its dominance of the desktop world ...
Outside of the enterprise world, is Microsoft really dominant on the desktop anymore?
.
Anecdotally, it looks like Microsoft is losing its dominance in the consumer desktop world to Apple, i.e., Microsoft no longer enjoys the 90+% marketshare on the consumer desktops that it once had.
One thing right in my book (Package management) (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Magic 8-Ball says ... (Score:5, Funny)
> Windows 10: Can Microsoft Get It Right This Time?
Outlook not so good
Only if they cleaned house. (Score:5, Interesting)
I have a Surface Pro and while it's nice it's still clunky as hell, Windows 10 will not fix this because honestly Windows is 100% crap for a touch interface. The software and OS are not designed for touch and therefore will be clunky.
Windows 10 for laptops.
Windows Touch for touch devices.
Stop trying to unify the two because IT WILL NOT WORK. windows 8 sucks horribly on a laptop but works nice on a tablet. windows 10 is awesome on a laptop but SUCKS on a tablet. (Yes I tried living with it on my surface pro for 4 weeks. it sucks as much as windows 7 does and windows 8.1 does when using non touch apps)
So unless they fire all their management and design teams and start over with people that understand that the two ecosystems are different and need to remain separate nothing will change.
Proof that your touch UI and OS is crap when your users of your flagship device use a mouse and keyboard with it most of the time.
You answered your own question (Score:3)
Later this week Microsoft will provide more details of Windows 10, most likely focusing on how the new operating system will look and feel on smartphones and tablets (emphasis mine).
Or, in short, NO.
I am going to say "Yes" (Score:5, Insightful)
Now to speculate, my belief is MS will continue its cheap/free licensing of Windows 10 for tablets and phones. They will also offer a free/cheap upgrade for Windows 8 users to upgrade to Windows 10, and unlike Android tablets MS can push that right to users without having to go through the OEMs (not sure about Windows Phone 8) so we'll quickly see Windows 8 market-share plummet and 7 and 10 will be the majority of users.
Now despite all this Windows will likely still drop marketshare on the desktop and will gain a bit on the mobile side. Linux folks will still use Linux. Apple folks will not be dropping their Macs and iPhones to get Windows 10, but that doesnt really matter. If Windows 10 is technically as good/better than 8 and get' the interface right (which it seems like they are doing enough to satisfy desktop users) then they will keep their Windows userbase happy and likely Win10 will be the one we see business move off Win7 and right now that's likely job #1 for them.
Re: (Score:3)
There's a program (free, though you may have to sign in with a Microsoft account) for getting OS updates on Windows Phone direct from Microsoft, without waiting for OEM or MO updates. It's called Preview for Developers, and has been available for well over a year. Despite the name, it's release software - same version that people on the normal upgrade path eventually get - and available to anybody who bothers to set it up. There's already a new version of the program for WP10, though it's not active (i.e. y
Checklist for MS (Score:5, Informative)
It needs to be smooth, it needs to be organized. The OS needs to stay out of the way and not over-complicate things. We are there to run applications, not Windows. Windows needs to run and organize files and applications, that's it.
A simple file copy shouldn't take several minutes to start. When I say copy, start copying! We need Windows, not tiles. Windows is the name of the OS after all, and IMO the Windows paradigm still works. They need to preserve backward compatibility except when it would too badly affect performance or security. And I don't think it would or else MS themselves wouldn't be recommending DOSBOX to run 16-bit applications.
Re: (Score:3)
Windows needs to run and organize files and applications, that's it.
And manage network connectivity. And printers. And other hardware. And the clipboard. And other means of sharing between applications. And multiple user accounts. And virtual desktops. And VMs. And a way to search the stuff on your machine. And task scheduling. And updates. And joining your company network. And syncing with your phone. And credential management for internet certificates. And cryptographic and other similar services. And language support. And network device discovery. And I'd hope for a seam
No. Larger organizations stop being rational. (Score:5, Interesting)
Look at your own experiences with governments, phone companies, cable companies, banks.
The kind of focused, reasonable analysis needed to produce workable products seems to end when the greatest concerns in the organization are self serving personal behavior and organizational preservation.
Which means that Microsoft is at the mercy of some dimwitted manager who's had a brainwave and somebody's ear. The results are usually disasterous (e.g. Windows 8 interface, Powershell interface instead of VBScript.net, the lack of realistic automated language migration from something like Winforms to ASP, WPF, etc. which could have been avoided with forethought and better design...). Somebody wanted their good review and their bonus. That's all it's about now at Microsoft, or any large organization.
Know when to hold 'em, and know when to fold 'em (Score:3)
IMO, Microsoft has a big hit on their hands with Windows 10, from the looks of the developer preview. If it continues as planned, it should be the upgrade all of the Windows 7 holdouts have been waiting for. It has package management from the command line (a real plus for I.T. folks supporting these systems on a network), and native support for the latest hardware technologies like USB 3. The problems with the Metro UI in Windows 8 should hopefully be worked out, too.
But Windows Mobile for phones? They've tried and tried again and it's pretty much a non-starter. People simply aren't that interested in a Windows UI on a cellphone. IMO, they need to cut their losses and quit trying to have Microsoft everywhere. Focus on what works and build on that. EG. Move forward with such things as Office for iOS, because that's being smart. (It costs too much to try to convince everyone to ditch an iPad and buy a Surface tablet instead. Make your money off selling apps for iOS instead.)
Yep!!! (Score:3)
Businesses have still been buying Windows 7, AFAICT. Once Windows 10 is out, they may well be more receptive.
This one is not difficult for Microsoft to get right. They had the right interface w/ Windows 7 on desktops/laptops. That needs to be the Windows 10 interface for those devices. For tablets, one could be given a choice of the 7 or 8 interface, and for phones, the interface is just fine.
The issue that MS has in the Tablet/phone space is that Windows RT/Windows Phone is a late entrant to the market, and alien to the ARM platform - Windows CE notwithstanding. Also, MS doesn't have the Wintel apps to leverage that space, and is therefore at a disadvantage. I have a Lumia, and the main issue for me has never been the interface. It's the fact that most of the apps suck, and also, most of the popular apps in the market are present on iOS and Android, but not on the Windows Phone. As a result, the phone is partly useful for professionals (has Skype, Office, OneNote, ADP, Concur, and a few useful apps) but pretty poor as a general purpose phone.
While Microsoft has done a good job in having a common development platform, it would do well to regulate what goes into its app store. Right now, too much of it is crap, in sharp contrast to iOS. Not sure about Android
They can but will they? (Score:3)
MS of course can get it right if they just design a solid desktop OS. They have come a long way in stability while maintaining pretty much their desktop monopoly. All they have to do is update the OS for the current tech and continue to polish the desktop UI that has been progressing for years.
But they don't want to do that. They want to use that desktop monopoly to force their way into the mobile market and thus we had Windows 8. And even with that failure they can't just let it go. And I've used the Win10 preview and it still is not as good a UI as Windows 7. It does make a fair amount of concessions to getting back to more of a Windows 7, non-mobile UI, desktop but it still sucks compared to Win7.
And the real thing that I don't understand it this obsession with trying to merge two different UI formats into one. When I'm using a mobile device that has no keyboard/mouse then of course I want a UI that is designed for that. But when I am on a computer with a keyboard and mouse I freaking want a UI designed for that!
I'll finish with an obligatory car analogy. When I'm driving a car I expect that the controls reflect what I'm trying to do. But when I'm in a boat, while similar, the controls are changed to suit that vehicle's needs. UI's should be the same way. And there is no reason why MS should accept that they can have two UI's for their OS.
8.1 better than 7? (Score:5, Insightful)
In what way? Internally maybe. From a user perspective on a PC? Absolutely not.
Re: 8.1 better than 7? (Score:5, Informative)
Just throw classic shell on it, 8.1 is way better than 7. XP was great in it's day - as windows goes - It's day was just stretched a bit longer than it should have because Vista.
Not quite. Win8 (and by extension) Windows 10, still has problems where previously unified interfaces for controlling system behavior have been split between Metro/Modern apps and traditional windows.
One example: in Win7 I click the network icon in the notifications area and a small window pops up with the connections; I can then right-click a connection and select Status for information on what IP/DNS is currently assigned or Properties to get to its security information.
Clicking the network icon on Win10 does the same thing as Win8: giant Metro panel covering a large portion of the screen, most of it wasted in "Airplane Mode" that I have no use for, and right-clicking the connection only has options that are more at home in a cellphone than in a desktop OS: estimated data usage, metered connection, forget this network. Clicking "View Connection Settings" opens another Metro-style "PC Settings" window that is designed for touch, so OS standards like right-clicking don't work.
http://i.imgur.com/8Csqe77.png [imgur.com]
In short, it's still trying to integrate two different UI designs, and it still doesn't work. It's not as terrible as Win8 at it, but it's still in plenty of places to be annoying. It's also very inconsistent in what gets a Metro panel and what doesn't.
Nothing beats 10 (Score:3)
because Windows 10 == Windows X
Re: 8.1 better than 7? (Score:5, Insightful)
Ummmmm... if I have to tinker and toy to get a system running sensibly (and, bluntly, replacing the shell is a pretty deep modification), that doesn't qualify as "needing a fix"?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Can you explain how an OS geared towards "Apps" is a better fit for the desktop? Or how treating relatively large screens like they have a lack of real estate is an improvement?
Windows 8 is just OS for consumers. Hopefully Windows 10 will be useful for things other than Facebook.
Re:There's nothing wrong now... (Score:4, Informative)
It's better on the inside, especially the DLL sharing. (Rather than each running app having a separate in-memory copy of a DLL, now if separate apps have the same DLL dependency, then there's only one copy in memory. Probably my favorite feature of Windows 8)
But the interface still sucks. I've used 8.1 as my primary desktop OS for almost a year now (Stock install, no Start Menu third party add-ons), and while it's a solid OS, there's still so much missing from the Metro interface.
Recently used documents is the thing I miss the most.
And just exploring through the tree-based Start Menu is something I really miss. I end up with so much stuff installed I forget some of it. Would occasionally just surf thru the Start menu to re-discover stuff. But with 8.1, if you don't remember it, you're not going to find it. Sure you can go page by page through all the listed stuff, but that's far more inefficient than being able to walk through a tree-based menu.
Re:There's nothing wrong now... (Score:5, Insightful)
Rather than each running app having a separate in-memory copy of a DLL, now if separate apps have the same DLL dependency, then there's only one copy in memory. Probably my favorite feature of Windows 8
Huh? DLLs are shared libraries. They've been shared between all applications that use them since 16-bit versions of Windows. The only time that wasn't the case was when you couldn't locate them at the same virtual address (win32 dlls are not position-independent code, because PIC is slower, so are statically relocated for a particular address), but in 64-bit apps DLLs are PIC and so that's not an issue.
Re:There's nothing wrong now... (Score:5, Informative)
Kinda right, kinda wrong...
See http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/arc... [msdn.com]
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:There's nothing wrong now... (Score:5, Insightful)
>Windows 8.1 isn't in need of being fixed, really. It's better than Windows 7, which was better than Windows 2000 (windows XP was a heaping pile of dung).
Huh? Your UID is not so high that you should be making such comments. But lets deconstruct it for the lols.
XP was a heaping pile of dung? XP had its issues, like every OS, but compared to having to run the OS on top of DOS like Windows was previously doing it was a huge improvement. Further the staying power of XP alone is a good indicator that it was not bad at all.
Next you say that 8.1 is better than 7. Why? What exactly does 8 (or 8.1) offer in technical terms beyond what 7 offers? There are a few things I'll grant it does offer but it does not offset the fact the awful UI that it has. A UI not designed with a desktop workflow in mind but rather a power play by MS, that failed, to force people into accepting such a UI for all devices.
Re: (Score:3)
"run the OS on top of DOS like Windows was previously doing" - you're aware that there were Windows versions between 3.11 and XP, right? None of them ran on top of DOS. Hell, I'll even ignore the fact that the GPP explicitly called out Windows 2000, which (being NT-based) was *exactly* as DOS-based as XP.
The 9x family (95, 98, ME, and their various releases/service packs) booted up through some DOS code, but DOS was basically no more than a bootloader for them. This OS family ran 32-bit protected-mode kerne
Re: (Score:2)
If Windows 10 doesn't use the same installer for phones and desktops, then it's not the same OS.
Ah, I guess that means using a web installer vs. ISO gets you two different operating systems.
Gotcha.
Re:Who cares? (Score:5, Funny)
You probably shouldn't. Do you ask that question for every piece of software that you don't use?
Re:Who cares? (Score:5, Informative)
Why should I waste my time with Windows 10?
Why? Well, if you want to run Windows Applications :-)
And it's Windows 7, I haven't even looked at Windows 8.
Short Answer: No, you should not upgrade.
Long Answer: If you're interested in kernel side stuff, like most OS releases kernel changes are incremental. Here are a few :-
0) Secure Boot - With a chained OS boot you can be sure (well, its microsoft :P ) that your kernel mode components have been cryptographically verified. IIRC they started using this 10 years ago with the xbox 360. Ofcource the 360 security was promptly broken after people figured out how to patch the firmware, but I still think it is a nice-to-have feature.
1) Client side Hyper-V runs all OSs, including host OS on a thin hypervisor with minimal performance impact (Intels SLAT tech)
2) Native USB 3.0 , I've found that on Windows 7 third party usb 3.0 drivers are a hit/miss in terms of maximum performance.
3) Stricter LFH (Low fragmentation heap) Internals (guard pages, less determinism, etc) -Result - You're better guarded against buggy drivers and potentially malicious kernel mode components.
4) Newer API for driver mem alloc (NonPagedPoolNx) - IIRC windows kernel components have switched to using this. Result - Stability boost, Security boost - all kernel memory objects are in non excutable mem, etc
5) Uses Intels new-ish RDRAND instruction for a higher quality random number gen as the basis for ASLR
Re: (Score:3)
Why? Well, if you want to run Windows Applications :-)
I'm wondering why we need a new Windows version every couple of years, just to run some applications.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah. 99% of all users don't care about stability (3, 4) or security (5).
Just because he uses ugly computer terms doesn't mean that those don't translate into improvements that a mother could love.
Re:Historically speaking (Score:4, Funny)
They also had no experience in fucking up Windows 8 before it came into existence, and look what a fine job they did!
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Yes? No? Maybe So? (Score:5, Insightful)
I understand a end user saying something like this but if you are an IT professional I'm surprised to hear that. As an IT professional you life will always involve learning new software and technology. The day that isn't true you're probably are out of a job or at the bottom of your field.
Re:Most vocal Win8 haters aren't Windows users (Score:5, Interesting)
Most of the complaints I hear about Window 8 come from people who've bought a new PC, booted it up, and have no freaking clue how to use it. 'WTF?' they say, 'I thought this thing ran Windows?'
Re: (Score:3)
The other day, I booted up a new-in-the-box Acer laptop (or Asus, maybe) and was pleasantly surprised that it was already set to boot to desktop.
There's a fuckton of good stuff under the hood of Win8; the start menu just went fullscreen.
Win8 - MS French white flag edition? (Score:3)
What about the applications which are the entire reason to use the computer in the first place? You've just thrown all of those away as a consequence of a vunerable system and they have to be set up again.
Even without malware infections I've had to re-install MS Office twice on a users MS Win8 machine due to it getting configuration information messed up. MS Win7 doesn't seem to have that problem, so it
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
As the underdog, they'll need an revolutionary product, not the evolutionary junk they've tried in the past.
IE is a good example of how long it takes the evolutionary approach to take hold. And it was given away.
Windows 10 is something they are trying to sell into new markets, while simultaneously protecting the desktop market. This approach is doomed.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Windows RT was a fiasco b'cos Microsoft tried using a non-Intel CPU as their platform and failed. Better CPUs have failed before this - MIPS and Alpha. ARM is even more anemic than these other 2. Microsoft should have stuck w/ the cheapest and most battery efficient offerings from Intel and AMD.
What is the biggest selling point of Windows? The gazillion Wintel applications out there, which are NOT there on other CPUs, even ones that Windows has been ported to. When poised against an existing well est