Time to split up Windows?
- 2
- Add a Comment
Microsoft recently announced that they would be taking on the Mac when it comes to user experience. They intend to make Windows as easy to use and as stable as Mac OS X and bring back some of those users who have left Windows. Is it doable? In a word, No. In many words, the reason they can’t do it is because the vast majority of their installed user base don’t seem to want any type of change other than new features, but they seem to be completely unwilling to give up their old software and their old peripherals. They want Windows to do everything seamlessly and have it work with every piece of software and hardware ever created, in order to do that the operating system ends up being bloated and slow. What Microsoft should do is break Windows into two separate operating systems, one for business and for low end computers, and one version of Windows for higher end systems that has the new features that Microsoft wants to put in without having to worry about the backwards compatibility - similar to what Apple did when they decided to ditch the old Mac OS and introduce OS X. Apple let their customers know that OS X would not work natively with almost anything they had software wise and that the drivers for their peripherals might not be updated, but that newer peripherals would have drivers. Apple was able to do this with the vast majority of their installed user base because it was so small and so loyal to the Apple brand, it did not hurt that OS X was a massive leap beyond what the older Macintosh operating system had been. Microsoft doesn’t have the loyal customer base, but what they do have is a massive market share and they can play with that, they can fix the problems with Vista, make it as much like XP with a pretty user interface and then step away from it - no more new features or eye candy. They could probably get a way with a second service pack that gutted the Vista bits out and put some XP bits in and have all those business owners and low-end computer users be permanently satisfied. They don’t seem to want change. Microsoft would then be free to do the work they want to do on a new operating system without having to worry about backwards compatibility. Windows 7 should be the first to drop support for old peripherals and old software, gear it towards the most loyal group of users who seem to continuously by the latest hardware - gamers and creative types. Microsoft could work closely with game developers and with graphic design companies to make games and graphics/content creation programs that were custom designed to work flawlessly with the operating system. Of course the hardware would need to be agreed upon ahead of time, Microsoft should work closely with their biggest sellers in order to come up with a set list of pre-approved hardware that could be rigorously tested to make sure it always worked without any driver issues. Windows XP could be included on the new system inside of a virtual machine, just like when Mac OS X included OS 9 in order to ease the transition between the two.
2 Comments
Rick
July 30th, 2008
at 1:28pm
You make it sound as if it were a bad thing, that when it comes to serious computer users that “they don’t seem to want change”. Of course they don’t want change, except perhaps the performance gains provided by improved hardware. The goal of business computing is not to decorate the office space with the latest glitz. The goal is to work uninterrupted, seamlessly, accurately and efficiently. Change just for the sake of change seldom meets any of these goals, and usually runs contrary to those goals. ROI. The bottom line is what drives business. Yes, tighten security, streamline the code, but don’t break what’s already working great.
The ultimate OS for most businesses would be a version of XP SP3 that is stripped bare of all of the gaming-compatible and other non-business-related nonsense, with as much of the beefed-up security model of Vista added in a manner that doesn’t break all of those multi-$100K customized XP-compatible applications that business depends upon. Why bother wasting the CPU resources and OS bloat by having the DirectX framework installed on a PC used for crunching spreadsheets and report documents?
Few successful members of the business world are going to be sacrificing their crucial business operations to gussy-up the office with a glitzy new OS, just for the sake of the glitz. So your suggestion (in not so many words) for Microsoft to keep XP in the market, and keep it fully supported and patched as is, is a capital idea. A dollar is a dollar, and if the dollars come from Windows XP purchases and support, all the better not to have to develop a new OS.
Roelof
July 30th, 2008
at 5:54pm
The author of this post owns an Apple, I assume. At least he sounds somewhat biased towards Apple. Apple has a loyal customer base. Microsoft has an amorphous group of computer nitwits who are fine with anything as long as it works. That is exactly what irritates me so often in Apple users. They think they´re a little better than anyone else who does not have that logo on their machine.
I don´t see what is wrong with wanting stuff to work. That is what it is there for. Not to make you buy new software or peripherals. Apple´s leap from Mac OS to OS X is every marketers dream. I bet Steve Jobs was laughing all the way to the bank.
As for loyalty, I don´t see what good that would do me. It´s just business. Computer manufacturers are trying to make a profit on their products, and that´s fine. I base my purchasing decisions on the same business principle. I´ll start my loyalty program the day they decide to give away computers at cost price.