Stop Microsoft
All Things Microsoft => Microsoft Software => Topic started by: skyman8081 on 25 April 2005, 23:15
-
Here is an interesting question for you. If you were in control of Microsoft, what would you do to change the company?
You can't do anthing that would either eventualy put them out of business, or something that would incur a large amount of losses. You are accountable to the stockholders.
It seems there is a lot of blind MS hate here and that people are opposed to ANYTHING microsoft does. So I thought I would turn the tables.
I would release less info on Longhorn and not announce anything until we have concrete details and information, instead of blind speculation. I would also create a new API that is more strict and secure with strict application guidlines to go with it and send it to all developers with an ultimatum, make your applications work with this new API, or you won't be able to run them on the next iteration of Windows. I would also open the upgrade paths more to allow people to exchange their current version of Windows, provided thay have the install media and COA, and exchange it for free with the new one for the first 6 months of release, then charge a nominal fee for it.
-
I'm going to say this before anyone else does, I would open source all of the software.
-
You've already done this thread, skyman. I can't seem to find the old thread however. :o
-
1.) get out of the hardware business.
2.) release the code for all previous versions of windows
3.) cancel development of longhorn.
4.) rewrite Windows from scratch, using a whole new API system completely incompatible with previous windows renditions.
5.) fire the greedy big wigs and cut their golden parachute.
6.) make a version of all non OS products for any current OSs that are available that work, not works-ish.
7.) tie nothing into the OS but the OS, no media player or webrowser tied down so that the user can remove them without hassle.
8.) separate the system update to its own program.
9.) open the source of the new OS for the community to help with patches, possibly not fully public but to those that have asked for verification.
10.) 2 versions of the OS only if that, regular and server.
-
so then, I could direct all the pissed off stockholders and people with old versions of windows with no real incentive to upgrade to you?
and you would handle the unfair termination lawsuits?
-
I would also create a new API that is more strict and secure with strict application guidlines to go with it and send it to all developers with an ultimatum, make your applications work with this new API, or you won't be able to run them on the next iteration of Windows.
That's easy to say, but in practice it's almost allways market suicide. Ditching backward compatibility is one of the primary factors that led to Apple losing almost all of their share in mainstream PC market in the mid to late eighties. When Apple moved away from the Apple II series to the Macintosh, users were forced wih a choice - Buy a Macintosh and replace every peice of software, or buy a PC - there was NO middle ground, as the two platforms were completely different, and completely incompatible. Users complained but it was too late for Apple to do anything. Most people ended up buying PC's, as you could buy an entire PC, plus software for the same price as just buying just the Machintosh. As a result of this, Apple's market share declined from something respectable (15%?) to almost nothing (1-2%?).
Ironically, Microsoft virtually "rescued" Apple from bankruptcy in 1997. Microsoft invested $150 Million in non-voting stock in 1997 - right around the time Steve jobs came back on the scene. This is how IE came to be the default browser in MacOS for a few years. Since the Macintosh arrived, all subsequent versions of MacOS have been backward compatible to previous MacOS versions, and they have slowly gained back a little bit if their marketshare. Apple learned their lesson, and was a painfull one.
-
As a result of this, Apple's market share declined from something respectable (15%?) to almost nothing (1-2%?).
The Apple II had 29% at its high point. Macintosh had about 10% in 1990, and slowly bled to an apparent 3% as of last year. Many question the current numbers, however.
-
Ahh. That's why I put question marks by my marketshare numbers.
-
Many question the current numbers, however.
It seems to me like Apple has been gaining marketshare in the past couple of years. This is just going by how many people I've met that owned Mac's compared to how many I knew several years ago. Perhaps the statistics are lagging, and the 3% was actually a reality a few years ago.
-
I actually seem to remember noticing a "Top 50 growing corps" article in Information Week a couple weeks ago. They also had a top 25 list which apple was on and microsoft was not, lol. I'm at college atm, I'll dig it out the filing cabinet and post it when i get home tonight.
-
so then, I could direct all the pissed off stockholders and people with old versions of windows with no real incentive to upgrade to you?
and you would handle the unfair termination lawsuits?
Easy, VPC to run the old stuff with patch support for 5 years from the time announced.
most ppl wont upgrade their OS anyways, they'll just buy a new machine, preloaded with the new OS. Maybe sign a deal with the box builders that they can't preinstall anything, just give a DVD with the software package they want to offer with the option to not install certain apps.
-
If I could change things, I would have a registery cleaner which automatically cleansed it without you having to download one and trying to read the instructions on how to use it. Not all people are computer literate and some of the stuff is beyond our comprehension.
But when you screw something up trying to clean the registry, you either must buy a new computer or pay someone to come straighten up your mess, and not all techs are knowledgable with the registry keys either. But buying a registry cleaner or even using one of the free ones, doesn't tell you much on how to use it. Besides that, the ones for sale, Microsoft probably owns those anyway!
Also, in order to open certain files, it says you need RAR to do it with, and if you don't have it, which most of the computers don't come loaded with, you have to buy that too. Anything to make a buck for the 'Rich Microsoft!!' Also, in using the Microsoft Clipart, it's totally different from years ago where they made things much simplier. Even now, it's hard to download clipart. They need to KISS (keep it simple stupid) !! MicroManny:thumbdwn:
-
I actually seem to remember noticing a "Top 50 growing corps" article in Information Week a couple weeks ago. They also had a top 25 list which apple was on and microsoft was not, lol. I'm at college atm, I'll dig it out the filing cabinet and post it when i get home tonight.
According to the "Global Top 50 Fastest Growing Companies" April 11 issue of Information Week, year-over-year growth: Apple Computer is ranked #17 with a 33% total rev YOY growth last year, microsoft was nowhere to be found on the list, while Yahoo inc was #1 with 120% total YOY rev growth, eBay is ranked #8 with 51% , Symantec #18 with 33%
-
I'd keep everything and stop buying out other companys. I'd put that money into fixing windows and making it a stable OS. Also make an open-source program for some software - not all, and not the OS. And pay people to find flaws so they can be fixed.
-
You've already done this thread, skyman. I can't seem to find the old thread however. :o
I remember it was called "What can Microsoft do right?" and it appears to have vanished along with many posts/threads when we shut down in October and reopened on a new server back in January.
-
About tightening the API, it could be done without breaking backwards compatibility. Here's how:
First, let applications to provide manifests for what they want from the APIs, exactly. After that, things other than these wouldn't just work. This wouldn't break anything, since applications would themselves state what they want and what they don't. This is important because it's theoretically impossible to determine if an application does action X during its runtime or not, without actually running it. If the application states that it's not going to do it, then the mechanism doesn't need to be provided and the application is known to be safe in that regard.
Provide a developer version of windows which requires that all applications manifest what they need, and by default applications run in a very restricted environment with limited API availability, registry and filesystem scope and so on. Developers don't mind it as much as the masses do. Developers can fix things. Developers can hack. Since this version of windows would be extremely security restricted, it should be made "free" and installable alongside any other properly licensed windows system. Give enough powertoy goodies with this release to make developers prefer it, and all future applications will come with proper manifests shipped.
In few years, once there's a significant amount of manifested applications in the market (or perhaps even earlier) release a tool for manifest auditing. The tool would be used to scan system for any non-manifested software, and to determine which applications require privileged API functionality such as unlimited GetAsyncKeyState, SetWindowsHookEx, AttachThreadInput which are used for keyloggers. Properly behaving applications don't need to GetAsyncKeyState while they aren't active, or do global hooks, or attach themselves to threads they don't own. Non-manifested applications thus simply couldn't act as keyloggers, as they wouldn't have access to the required APIs to implement them. Same applies for many other sorts of malware, they still need APIs to function.
Once most commonly used applications are manifested, release Server edition which allows for manifest signing. So, no applications will run on the server unless they come with a manifest signed by the administrator. The signed manifest will specify exactly what APIs the application is allowed to access and so on, and everything will be fine and happy. If this works fine, release same and similar functionality for home systems, which warn users if they're trying to run application that requires risky functionality. They might still click yes, but at least they'll have the choice.
Finally, this will need some design changes as well to allow for finer granularity of the manifest checking. A text editor needs to save the file, but otherwise it won't need to read/write anything on its own. An ideal solution would be that the text editor saves data to a stream, and the stream is saved by a common control which lets the user choose where to write the data. This way the files in text editor could only be opened through user interaction, with exception of special files in manifested directories. I'm sure Microsoft has resources to make this design change if it wants to, and it's only necessary to let applications manifest strict scopes while allowing broad access to the system for the user.
Oh my, that's long. I hope the idea got through, I've been thinking about this for a few days now :p
-
That doesn't suprise me, MS doesn't have anywhere to go from here, hence why they are trying to diversify their range of products so that they can keep growing instead of stagnating at the top. If Windows is a commodity, it's hard to try and keep marketing it. Why do you think MS is pushing the Xbox, they need it. Windows and Office won't stay profitable forever, and MS is smart, they know this.
Anyway, If I ran MS, I would also focus a lot more on the Xbox and Xbox 360 to make it a profitable revenue stream, at the same time, as I said, making longhorn the best OS it can be. Bar all backwards compatability, it keeps it from advancing.
-
Backwards compatibility is one of the reasons MS has kept their dominance on OS market. It'd be stupid to throw it all away.
-
What did MS start out with? What was their main work in the 70
-
If I was in charge of Microsoft I would cut back on spending money on research and development and instead form a special team of spies who just go steal other companies ideas for me. I would increase the amount of money that flows into my back pocket and fill my driveway with nice cars.
-
Why can't the rewrite ther OS break all backwards compatability and then use a Wine like compatability layer to run all of the legacy code?
After all this is how UNIX can run Windows programs and how Windows NTxruns old Win3.x 16-bit programs.
-
Why can't the rewrite ther OS break all backwards compatability and then use a Wine like compatability layer to run all of the legacy code?
After all this is how UNIX can run Windows programs and how Windows NTxruns old Win3.x 16-bit programs.
NT can still execute them native to a certain extent.