1 Comment

Summary:

Says Paul Thurrott: Having dealt with Microsoft for many years, I can say this much with certainty: The company is literally filled to the brim with some of the brightest, smartest, most insightful, and friendliest people I’ve ever met…Despite these enviable assets, Microsoft has made some […]

Says Paul Thurrott:
Having dealt with Microsoft for many years, I can say this much with certainty: The company is literally filled to the brim with some of the brightest, smartest, most insightful, and friendliest people I’ve ever met…Despite these enviable assets, Microsoft has made some mind-numbing mistakes. It (illegally, as it turns out) artificially bundled its immature Internet Explorer (IE) Web browser so deeply into Windows in order to harm Netscape that it’s still paying the price for the decision–a full decade later–in the form of regular critical security flaws that have taken away time from developers that might have otherwise been spent innovating new features.

Is karma kicking in? I can’t speak for their talent pool statistics, but haven’t some of their finest deflected to Google? This comment from Thurrott reinforces my idea that Microsoft should follow Apple’s example with Windows. Prior to OS X, Apple had a lot of problems with their OS looking forward. You can flame me all you want, but OS 9 sucked for not having memory management, solid multi-user functionality, and modern graphic support where Windows NT and up did this as a standard feature. So if you really want to know why Mac’s have a hard time breaking into the enterprise during the 90’s, it’s because of this reason (and a few others, but this is the chart topper). Apple tried to keep the OS 9 code going, but (long story short) ended up scrapping the code for NeXTStep/OS X. Even OS X sucked at first, but look at it now?! The reality is the code running Windows needs the same fate, as it is easy to assume it contains snippets dating back to 3.1 for workgroups. Microsoft favors compatibility where Apple favors innovation, and both companies find themselves in positions that work for them respectively. The problem with Microsoft’s position on compatibility is they haven’t let go of any compatibility. I don’t see why Vista should support, for example, the ISA bus. Most of the motherboard manufacturers haven’t shipped ISA equipped boards in four years, yet drivers for it are shipping in the beta builds. Also, it doesn’t give customers a warm fuzzy feeling when Microsoft announced they were starting over again on the Vista coding efforts. It’s gotten out of control for them to manage, and it’s time to cut the tree down and let a new sapling grow NeXT to it.

  1. Well Duh! Something a lot of us have been saying since Windows 98!!! What would be funny is to see how much UNI* is embedded in Windows.

    If Apple can undergo such a paradigm shift to walk away from a proprietary OS to adopt a free one, albeit tweaking it, why hasn’t Microsoft done so.

    You said it, Microsoft = compatibility (read scared of losing it’s market) and Apple = innovation.

    Good luck to Vista but I can’t get excited about yet another Microsoft OS that squares to impress the enterprise with wonderful ideass about media management… Yawn, yawn boring, I’ve heard it and seen it all too often in MS’s marketing life before. However, there is a place for everything.

    Share

Comments have been disabled for this post