Windows in dire straits -not the rock band ? ?

[Livvy]

I recently read an article about the future of MS -Windows with a very thorough analysis of the Windows platform ( and the way development of new Windows versions is handled at Microsoft ) .Peruse this :

Windows is 'collapsing,' Gartner analysts warn

The basic analysis - when you get rid of all the unessential stuff in the article - is that Microsoft has really not "innovated" its development procedures . They tend to work at a very tight schedule for release of the next Windows but this means they usually can't meet the deadline. To solve this they go back to elements used in previous versions of Windows ( huge chunks of those versions in fact ) .

As a result Windows now has loads of redundant code embedded in its very core . We all know what this means ( just look at the minimum requirements to run Windows Vista ) . The analysts are in fact also saying this can't be continued ad infinitum , MS is approaching the point where Windows becomes too bloated ( not with necessary code but with all the redundant left-over code from previous versions ) and this is already impacting sales .

In addition to this the licensing policy is ,hmmmm, bad , hence all the folks running illegal versions of Windows /Office . Fortunately they offer a solution as well, it's not just critique for the sake of bashing Microsoft .

What MS needs to do in very near future ( and there's signs they're doing it with Windows 7 ) is to get rid of all the redundant code and start pretty much from scratch . They can then develop an OS which has a modular design ( LINUX has that for example ) where end user only installs what he/she needs from an OS .
This also simplifies adapting the OS for stuff like mobile devices .

It will be interesting to see if Microsoft will read this and follow up on it .Those guys writing the article aren't some idiots , but very professional and knowledgable people who have been active in the business for long time.

Most analysts have already concluded Vista has failed and is an "in-between OS " ( not unlike Windows ME) . They base this on the number of companies switching to Vista ( consumer-sales aren't decisive for MS, business sales are ) which are way below par.That means Microsoft has to get it right with Windows 7 ,in my opinion.

By looks of it the "failure" of Vista also means Windows 7 release has been pulled forward .

[Celestin]

Windows Vista also failed because Microsoft just had too many people working on it. That's right, too many people. Ever hear of the term "too many cooks spoil the broth?" Well, this holds fairly true in software as well. In fact, there's even a rule about it. I forgot what it's called, but it goes "adding more developers to an already late project will only make it later."

I'm too tired to actually go into details about this, though if people were curious and asked, I wouldn't mind explaining. But for now, I'm going to end this post like this.

[Yamii]

Vista was supposed to be a "from the ground up" OS, new source coding an all. But some how that didn't even pan out.

[Yakuzan]

Heh I like Vista, it runs well on a good computer. Some neat new features too, I agree if I could get the drivers to go back to XP I would though.

[Casket]

The new Ubuntu (Beryl?) will be the undoing of Tiger and Vista.

[Dez]

It's funny how some ppl label Vista as "crap" because their comps can't handle it.

[Livvy]

Vista was supposed to be a "from the ground up" OS, new source coding an all. But some how that didn't even pan out.

Originally they planned to finally let go of MS-DOS and NTFS ( NTFS is derrived from MSDOS as well ) and implement a completely new and very fast file management system . This was planned for Vista ,mind you. I haven't heard anything about this FMS anymore since , not even for windows 7 . One can only assume the entire plan has been scrapped and with it any chance of true innovation.

Point is : MS has been using MSDOS ever since they first started . Everything is based on it . But the more you put around MSDOS ( the shell ) the more bloated the entire thing gets - MSDOS was great until , say, the 80's but these days it's beginning to show its flaws because it wasn't meant to handle multimedia for one . And given the fact they hardly put out the source- code ( so 3rd party developers can tweak it ) there simply is no way forward .

It's funny how some ppl label Vista as "crap" because their comps can't handle it.

lol, you think companies can't afford PC to run Vista ? They choose not to upgrade to Vista .

MS gets most revenue from companies , not from consumers.

oh,btw : my computer can handle Vista with room to spare ,but I don't want to run Vista because I worked in PC repair shop until recently and saw first-hand it simply wasn't worth the investment ( especially considering XP is simply less of a resources hog ) if you had XP.

[Celestin]

Originally Posted by Dez

It's funny how some ppl label Vista as "crap" because their comps can't handle it.

If you know me, you know I go by the facts. I do the research and I avoid saying things like "I feel" and "I think." I have consistently defended Vista on the grounds of its merits and have likewise attacked its faults. Vista might not be crap, but Vista is the epitome of crappy software engineering.

Unless you get very lucky, you are not going to get world class software with crappy software engineering practices. That is the bottom line. Even already, university classes in computer science teach the terribly tragic tale of Vista's development cycle as a cautionary tale of what to avoid doing and as the basis of how programmers should approach software engineering ( how we learn from Vista's software development ). Very few of those professors use Vista.

[Livvy]

Vista might not be crap, but Vista is the epitome of crappy software engineering.

That is the issue MS are faced with .The way they develop anything ( OS or new office version or whatever ) hasn't evolved at all . Thus you see MS running one step behind lots of other companies - just check the battle with Google , Google's staff has the instinct to buy into what will be hot tomorrow whilst MS tends to try buying what is hot now - it's also something good old B. Gates has commented on .

Lack of true innovation ( not just innovating the product but how the product is developed ) is always fatal in the long term.

[Celestin]

Originally Posted by Livvy

That is the issue MS are faced with .The way they develop anything ( OS or new office version or whatever ) hasn't evolved at all . Thus you see MS running one step behind lots of other companies - just check the battle with Google , Google's staff has the instinct to buy into what will be hot tomorrow whilst MS tends to try buying what is hot now - it's also something good old B. Gates has commented on .

Lack of true innovation ( not just innovating the product but how the product is developed ) is always fatal in the long term.

Exactly. Finally, somebody else who is willing to figure out what they are talking about first before actually talking. Man, I swear, certain people never bother to do any research... It just kills me inside.

Windows Vista was the largest software project in history. It involved thousands of people for like a freaking decade and I will even go as far as to say that Vista was a success.

But the problem is, Microsoft should've carefully reevaluated how they developed their product instead of just expanding on what they had. Instead of saying "what is the problem and how can we address it" they just hired more people and added more layers to the hierarchy. When one employee wants to make a change or discovers a bug or something, he has to send an email to his superior for approval who has to send it to his superiors for approval and the list keeps going up until it gets to the guy who can actually approve it. Just for where I work, with maybe 3 or 4 layers, the top manager gets like 150 emails an hour and she still has to do her own work too. Now imagine that same thing with maybe 10 layers. It's not bad, it's a catastrophe. And the entire time, that employee is sitting their, twiddling his thumbs waiting for his approval.

[Livvy]

But the problem is, Microsoft should've carefully reevaluated how they developed their product instead of just expanding on what they had.

This caused - primarily - by the tight and inflexible release schedule MS is using . Like I said : Vista was going to have a new file management system, but due to time - constraints ( it had to be released at a certain date ) they had to abandon that idea .As a result Vista is a "hog " because the very core of Vista was meant to run on the new FMS . The fact they had to revert back to MSDOS and previous windows-kernels meant it became bloated .

More worrisome is that the new FMS isn't developed at all it seems . I haven't heard anything with regard to it for windows 7 either....

[Celestin]

Oh really, I haven't heard about this new FMS. Could you point out some links / give me some information about it? This would actually make tons of sense.

And I don't know if you can call Vista's release schedule tight. They spent years and years developing that sucker. Thousands upon thousands of man hours in R&D. I primarily attribute Vista's crappiness to an inflated and convoluted organizational chain of fail.

moblog: The Windows Shutdown crapfest

Sadly, I am finding this thread to be one of the more interesting threads on the forum atm.