So what should Bill and Steve do with these wondrous resources? My suggestion: Start over.
Yes, I think they should build a new operating system, as much from scratch as necessary, to solve Windows's most intractable problem: it's not all that easy to use and really isn't getting any easier. It's also bloated with features and controls that most people never need, further weakening its ease of use.
In short, we need a new Microsoft OS that's actually easy to use, runs easy-to-use applications, and adapts itself to each user's specific digital environment -- the other computers, phones, music devices, video gear, still cameras, etc., with which most of us surround our PCs.
There's ample precedent for this. Apple has, after all, started over twice -- once in 1984 with the original Macintosh and again more recently with the Unix-based Mac OS X. Of course, many would say Apple's whopping 2.3 percent market share would be more than ample argument against starting over.
Still, I think real ubiquity -- that is, computers everywhere that everyone can use -- will never be achieved with Windows as we know it today. If anything, Longhorn looks like it'll add complexity, not remove it.
We need an operating system that's smarter and presents a less bewildering array of options and choices than today's Windows. We need more of the OS -- especially network setup and access controls -- hidden under the hood, where users never have to see them.
We need an operating system optimised for home and small business users and another with enhanced functionality for large businesses, or maybe just one OS that self-configures itself based on what it sees on the network.
The various flavours of XP point in this direction, but neither Home nor Pro meet the basic requirement of being both simple and powerful. There's much in the Pro edition that home business users might find useful; Media Centre Edition is built atop Pro, suggesting that advanced consumers would find the Home Edition pretty useless.
Talkback
Dave..... We already have all that as you kept alluding to, Mac OS X! Hell, let's just dump Windows now and stop the pain. Why wait for Microsoft to catch up to what Apple already has. Imagine the perfection that will be OS X by the time this new Windows comes out, much less when Longhorn comes out in 5 or so years! But alas no, the lemmings will continue to buy whatever ill-coded, bloatware, tripe that Billy Boy and his minions tell them to. Case in point: Opera. If PC users REALLY cared about quality, then Opera would be the most popular PC browser, not Internet Explorer. Internet Explorer however is "good enough" and it comes from Microsoft so it has to be the best, right?. I might add that Bill was so scared that people may actually find another browser that worked far better that he wound Internet Explorer's tentacles all through out the OS! Geez...
Nice idea, but it wont work. The reason why the Mac IS easy to use is that it is limited. There is only a small number of hardware options and combinations compared to the staggering number of wintel white-box cheap-o discount hardware options. They don't make the whole package and, as such, it will never feel truly integrated.
I'm not a MIcrosoft Fan? (Now who these days would admit to being a 'Microsoft Fan'? You would be more popular by saying, "Yep I voted for George W.") But it has to be said Windows does seem to be finally getting their. Windows 2003 wasn't actually a bad operating system and the pervious release XP was third bad either.
Rebuilding an operating system from scratch could just be a complete nightmare, just think about re-writting all those applications that currently work on Windows and who's going to pay for that? Microsoft? Yeah right! This is the very reason why most companies aren't running towards Linux as fast as they can and re-coding everything in Java. The simple truth is that the people who pay the bills are interested in any technology only answer to how they can save money and spend less and get results in the quickest time with the smallest amount of investment.
Business isn't full of techno evangilist and frankly never will be. So Linux isn't going to take over the desktop untill it can do exactly what windows does today ... but better, cheaper and easier ... and ofcourse with next to no hassle to convert. So windows is going to be around for awhile. Like it or hate it, you are stuck with it!
People are only interested in doing the same job but just better. Very few are interested in turning the world on it's head every few years with a new release. The IT industry prefers quiet gradual revolutions these days, keeps the buyers happy.
So what should Gateys spend his cash on. Well the answer to that is education!
The gap between having computer knowledge is not is greater than every and the most dangerious thing in IT is lack of knowledge. I sat in ameeting the over day when a senior IT Manager said "What is wrong with FTPing data files around the enterprise?" it was like the whole OLTP thing had past him by, and that's because it had! The sad thing is ... he is a major decision maker in a company that employs 9000 people.
Bill Gates has his work cut out and 49 Billion can be very quickly spent
First you want a Pentium Mac. Lacking that, you want Windows to become a Mac. Be careful what you ask for. Remember Bob.
I am sure it is kinda difficult when you work for a PC magazine yet covet a Mac.
PC users started with DOS. Then were in for a major interface change with Win 3.1. Then another major interface change with 95, and more with XP. Each time becoming more "Mac like," despite continual criticism of Macintosh specifically and Apple generally by many Windows users. (As a Mac user, I was more proficient using Win 95 at its introduction than were users of DOS or Win 3.1).
The Mac on the other hand has stayed surprisingly consistent since its inception despite a major processor and OS change.
I used to work for a computer store many years ago (before Windows) and I remember a customer who wanted a Macintosh on his PC. After being unsatisfied with Quarter Deck I gave him the most obvious of recommendations. Why not buy a Mac. Now, more that ever, the advice holds true. I have witnessed user who would benefit greatly by using a Macintosh go to great lengths to try to make their PC more Mac-like. And now your advising Microsoft to do the same. You wouldn’t even be making the suggestion if you were not aware of the considerable benefits to using a Macintosh. Why not just say so.
BTW - using Macs since 1989, have never reinstall the OS, never had a virus, and have never spent a weekend trying to configure a hardware add-on, printing has always been WYSIWYG. If I plug my USB printer into the Mac (I use the same printer for Mac and PC laptop) after starting a print job, it will do what I expect, PRINT! On my PC, I will first get an error. Then I will have to reboot and restart the application. I have to remember to plug the printer in before I power up the PC. That is plug and play on Mac versus PC. It amazes me what some people will put up with to "save a few bucks". And since my mac stays relevant longer, I have spent much less on hardware than had I been exclusively using a PC. Now think about your experiences with a PC since 1989. . .
I am not in love with Apple. It is just that the Mac has always worked for me and not against me. That is what I call a true friend. And for that I am truly grateful.
Errr. what do you think .NET is?
It *IS* the new platform.
Why doesnt MS start developing a grafical User Interface for LINUX?
Within 3 years, I realy believe that LINUX will have REAL presence in the ENTERPISE.
i cannot understand why people should always expect anything from microsoft? Hello? duh? when are people going to realise that Mirosoft primary task is to monopolise the software market and not to develop innovative software.Pratically, all of Microsofts products were either bought,ripped-off, or copied from someone else so with that track record do people expect anything else from Microsoft? The idea for the Windows GUI was ripped off from Apple for example.Office,internet exploer,hotmail,even age of empires, are all products bought by Mirosoft NOT developed with the hope of maintaining it's dominant postion in the PC market. Pople should not be confused here Mircosoft is not a software comapany that develops innovative software like Sun did with Java or Adobe with Acrobat.This is why Bill Gates keeps on talking about "Virtual companies" in his wild, confused, and contradictoy autobiography...what he means by virtual is the ability to rip other peoples ideas off market them successfully(usally with plenty of bugs) to gulliable suckers like us
Microsoft have $49bn spare? Looks like they charge too much for their bloatware. Why not cut vs.net/office retail prices in half so that more people can afford to buy? This would stop the average lower class wannabe from flooding the Internet with their P2P swapping and maybe we would have a few more people developing some neat software.
Nice idea, but can you really see Microsoft making things easier. Windows XP whilst a big improvement over earlier incarnations causes me no end of problems. Having grown up with Windows 95, etc. I have been used to finding things in a particular place, now with XP the same things are hidden and take longer to find (these are things that the casual user would not normally use, as they would use the supplied wizard, which often has less functionality).
I think the best thing they could do would be to lower their prices to a more reasonable level, that way more people would be likely to update their OS to the latest release, after all if they can practically give the OS to computer manufacturers, surely they could offer upgrade prices to existing users that are more acceptable, after all most shareware program updates are a fraction of the cost of a full product purchase.
Suggesting MS "ripped off" Windows from the MAC is outrageous, when Apple "ripped it off" from Xerox in the first place.
Hello David
I think you're wrong, but I don't have time to argue much against you, however here are some arguments why you are wrong:
first of all I love Windows. Windows 2000 and XP are so great OS's that I can't imagine that I once lived with Win98.
You are wrong in many of the thing you say windows hasn't, i.e. synchronization, backup and so on, but worst of all, you argue against yourself, saying: keep it simple´while you still want it to do everything for you.
try doing your research before just letting some crap out.
Kind regards
Mathias Vestergaard
-------------------------------------------
MT Productions
Individual Internet-solutions
www.mtproductions.dk
mathias@mtproductions.dk
Phone: +45 27102711
-------------------------------------------
You must also remember that a start-over will mean that all the existing programs will be useless, unless you add some backward compatibility, and then we're at where we started.
stupid article. poorly argumented.
Can I just correct one piece of IT folklore that is absolute rubbish: MS did not rip the Windows GUI off Apple. As anyone who's older than 12 knows the entire the WIMP (Windows Icons Mouse Pointer) GUI (Graphical User Interface) was developed by Xerox's PARC (Paolo Alto Research Centre) and demonstrated to both Gates & Jobs for free. Apple were just first to implemet it.
If you all want to worry about something then think about the global consequences of Windows Server 2003's forest merge utility. How long before this is a compulsary, background task and Gates controls the world by default?
Client device O/S don't seem so important now do they...?
FYI, whoever said Microsoft ripped the GUI from Mac, you my friend are just brainwashed. Mac ripped it from Xerox.
Two thoughts, one that would make the IT world a better place and one thought on MS vs Linux debate.
<RANT>
Many people think things should be easier for "users". As a system administrator and former helpdesk guy, I think what's needed is for this entire generation to simply die and anyone under the age of 16 move to fill the void. Sounds harsh, but guess what people you can't use a Pentium 90 running Win9x anymore. Upgrade. Not your computer, your skills and mindset.
M$ vs Linux. Anyone who has ever been responsible for maintaining a NT/2k server and migrated to Linux will never go back. That's not the case with Linux -> MS. I can manage my Linux servers from anywhere in the world and it's just like I'm there in the office. When NT needs work done to it the NT admin must drive to office or use some clunky "pc anywhere" software (and pay for it).
Linux on the desktop? The same people say "until Linux can do what MS does it will never take over." The only thing I can't do with my Linux desktop (RedHat 9.0 w/ KDE) is play modern hi-proformance games that require DirectX support. When I do play games, I boot my Wintendo and kill pixels.
</RANT>
Totally agree! Microsoft needs to start over. Instead of stealing other people's ideas, the software company should gather and study every operating system's strengths and weaknesses before creating a brand new OS from scratch.
FYI
Apple did not rip off the GUI from Xerox. They _licensed_ it from Xerox. Microsoft _did_ rip off the GUI from Apple.
See for example:
http://www.mackido.com/Interface/ui_history.html
ah David you sound like a closet Mac addict, not a bad thing, I'm one. It's to bad more corprate and IT people don't push the issue. M$ has sold the world a bill of goods for years, and it appears that now they are going to have to pay the piper of give it up. To bad that more journalist don't ask these questions or make suggestions as you have.