IT Investor's Journal: Has Microsoft peaked?

[sime]

Bloody hope so...

http://management.itmanagersjournal.com/management/04/07/06/1351259.shtml

Later

Sime

[Refalm]

I think it's all going to depend on how much Longhorn is going to suck. It sucks as it is.

Too much DRM and NGSCB, and a 3 GHz minimum system requirement. Longhorn is so bloated that Microsoft had to hire former Be programmers to fix them a SQL-based FS called "WinFS", to further index their complex structure.
The only thing for Microsoft to save themselves is to throw out that Windows NT junk, and start all over with the former Be programmers as project leaders. They can keep NT for their server OS, because it's (almost) working for servers (not as good as UNIX though, but at least they tried).
But servers don't matter much though, their two most major products - Windows and Office - is what they should pay their attention too. And as of now, they're really screwing up Windows beyond being worse.
Don't matter, Linux is increasingly becomming better by the day, and has a very good chance at defeating Microsoft at the desktop platform.

[WMD]

quote:Originally posted by Refalm:
Longhorn is so bloated that Microsoft had to hire former Be programmers to fix them a SQL-based FS called "WinFS", to further index their complex structure.

Is that factually true?  If it is, it's quite funny, because once again MS has hired good programmers to fuck up a system.  

[M51DPS]

Even if microsoft does decide to invent a whole new system (again), it would probably just add to the overall bloat. They'd just add NT as a subsystem running next to the DOS subsystem, and windows will still suck. Things aren't looking too good.

[WMD]

quote:Originally posted by M51DPS:
They'd just add NT as a subsystem running next to the DOS subsystem

Hmm...an NNT (new new technology    ) system, with two subsystems running next to it...so, will DOS apps require 2Ghz to run then?  

[solarismka]

quote:Originally posted by WMD:


Hmm...an NNT (new new technology     ) system, with two subsystems running next to it...so, will DOS apps require 2Ghz to run then?    

or NNTDOS (Thhe new new technology disk operating system!)

   
Does anyone have new information on the new build?

[solarismka]

I think the artical has mentioned something very important. M$ knows that I.T. and coucumers are not upgrading their system so less money is comming in their way.  By the use of product activation and Licenses they tried to squize what they could out of their customer base.  However that drove the I.T department and even some consumers to look for alternatives or stay where they are!

Longhorn, as I see it, is a change on how a machine is sold.  The whole point of Longhorn is that instead of you owning the OS and the software in it.  Its rented to you by M$ and their partners.  That way M$ can have a stady growth of income.  More or less.   Longhorn is a web application dependent on the M$ .Net infrustructure and M$ itself.  

Of course this is a bad idea for consumers since they no longer own their machines but have to conted with a flat rate and a sign up fee.  To M$ renting software not selling it is the future of business.  

[Nate]

quote:Originally posted by M51DPS:
Even if microsoft does decide to invent a whole new system (again), it would probably just add to the overall bloat.

If MS were to create a whole new system, it would do completely the opposite. Their current line of operating systems carry on inefficient parts of past OSs, creating clutter, incompatibility, and the need for nasty SPs. If they started a new system, although hardware drivers and type may no longer be compatible, it would bring it back up to a more-decent level of operation compaired to the performance it needs to function at all.

[Orethrius]

Precisely; in my opinion, the best thing Microsoft could do right now - short of making their OS open-source - is to raze the system down to the components of 3.xx, then restart from there.  Everything went downhill after that point.

[WMD]

quote:raze the system down to the components of 3.xx, then restart from there.

I hope you're not talking about the kernel that 3.x ran on.  

I'd say, though, that the 3.1 API was a lot more streamlined than that of late.  Therefore, what you want to say, MC, is "Strip things down to NT 3.1, and start from there."  

[solarismka]

quote:Originally posted by WMD:


I hope you're not talking about the kernel that 3.x ran on.    

I'd say, though, that the 3.1 API was a lot more streamlined than that of late.  Therefore, what you want to say, MC, is "Strip things down to NT 3.1, and start from there."    

But didn't they say that they are building Longhorn from scratch?  I know they have already said it about win95/2k and XP!

[Nate]

quote:Originally posted by kn0wn:



But didn't they say that they are building Longhorn from scratch?  I know they have already said it about win95/2k and XP!

It's deffinatly not coming from scratch. The betas are the reincarnation of XP (although, in fact, most of it IS XP).

[WMD]

Building Longhorn from scratch would fuck MS over.  Not the plan.

Longhorn now is essentially XP with a new API layer added, supposedly for security or something.  It's slow.  Period.

[Nate]

quote:Originally posted by WMD:
Building Longhorn from scratch would fuck MS over.  Not the plan.

That's hardly true, working from scratch would allow MS to fix all the problems they have now (besides legal). It may cause initia hardware problems, but it will allow Windows to live on. On the course that Windows is on, it won't exist within the next decade or two.

[WMD]

If MS broke all existing apps, their monopoly would be in grave danger.  People would be waiting for new apps, and Linux people would be talking about how they already have more than Longhorn (which would be true for a time).  If people then listen, Windows won't have that 93%+ market share that MS thrives on.