Slashdot Mirror
Looking Beyond Vista To Fiji and Vienna
Vinit wrote in with an article that describes Microsoft's strategy for future versions of Windows. It begins: "As we all know that Microsoft Vista was originally scheduled to be released in 2003, after two years of Windows XP, but it got delayed by over five years due to various reasons. Definitely, Vista is very very improved OS over the previous versions, but the delayed in the launch has cost Microsoft, billions of dollars. Now the question at the moment is, what exactly after Vista? Microsoft can't afford to wait another five years for an operating system. People are becoming more aware of the choices they have, and Linux is no longer a hobbyist OS, and that day isn't far away when it becomes simple enough to be a viable alternative to Windows. The competition is fierce. That is why, to stay at the top, Microsoft has planned a 'Vista R2', codenamed 'Fiji' which will be released some time in 2008. And after Fiji, there will be Windows 'Vienna'. Windows Fiji, will not be a totally different OS from Vista; but it will be an add-on. Whereas Vienna will be totally different from Vista."
Ok, so from TFA: "One thing is for certain, Vienna won't be just an operating system, but a new generation in computing."
.Mac. Or, come to think of it, do what I've already done; use LiteStep and mod my current XP install.
How, we all ask, will it achieve such wonders?
The answer: "Windows Fiji will feature a more powerful sidebar, Monaco, a music authoring tool similar to Apple's Garageband, default playback of HD-DVD, more advanced Speech Recognition, and new themes, icons, wallpapers, games, and minor tweaks to almost everything."
Mmmhmm. I can't be the only one sitting here thinking 'what a load of bull'. I mean, really, if I wanted to get this apparently 'new generation' of computing, I'd go out and buy a
A illiterate intro based on a brief article from a random blog that doesn't quote any sources. That's what I call credibility.
Right, because when you have a product that essentially sells itself and has no real competitors, why would you want to keep releasing new versions that people will line up to pay for over and over again?
Witness the release of Vista, and then witness a re-release a couple of years later with bug fixes, feature improvements, security improvement rollups, and a few new (probably non-exclusive) applications rolled in to make the pill go down more sweetly. Everything old is made new again. Move along.
What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
...why should we believe anything that Microsoft says about the feature set of a distant-future operating system? Furthermore, the days of geek dominance of the computer world are long over -- average people simply don't care what bells and whistles an OS has. They want to send email, play games, browse the web, play movies, organize their music, and write a few reports. Without having to worry about their computer being infected. All of those things are properly OS-agnostic: Firefox with Gmail and Flash, VLC and OpenGL work much the same on any modern OS. The only reasons for MS's continuing OS dominance are inertia, the forced tie-in with its flagship business apps, and DRM.
There are two kinds of people: 1) those who start arrays with one and 1) those who start them with zero.
Yes, he's been crazy about speech recognition, and it makes a certain sort of sense. However, the idea that speech recognition alone will replace the keyboard interface shows a lack of imagination. Part of the reason we've stuck with keyboards for as long as we have is they're efficient. They're cheap, can operate easily in noisy areas, and allow for purposeful manipulation of text. If you're a good typist, keyboards can be faster and easier, too. And can you imagine trying to play Half-Life with a speech interface? Keyboards aren't going anywhere.
So what does that leave for speech? Maybe you can say, "launch microsoft word" and then, once it's launched, you start typing. Or you could say, "next song" and iTunes would switch to the next song instead of having to click on a button. Wowwie! And what happens when you're sitting at your computer, and you say something to your friend about "the next song in my playlist..." How does it know you don't want to go to the next song?
The problem is that having computers respond naturally to speech requires an awful lot of AI that we won't have anytime soon. Even if we do have that amount of AI in a PC someday, it's still not clear that a keyboard won't be preferable for many interactions. Of course, maybe once we have that level of AI, we won't be trying to type anything up anymore anyway. I'll say, "Computer, please write a letter to my mom." and the computer will just do it. "Computer, write me a slashdot post on this topic."
There are only two groups of people I'm aware of who think that it's a good idea speech recognition for the purpose of doing away with keyboards, and have really good text-to-speech to you so you won't have to read. Those two groups are "children" and "Bill Gates". The best major applications for these technologies are accessibility for the disabled and portable devices. That's pretty much it for the foreseeable future.
Which is, funny enough another blog. Not just any blog, but a blog with a single post by one "James Kyton" who doesn't appear to have any profile on the internet (pseudonym).
While I have no other reason to question the integrity of the blogger, or the uhm... other blogger. My bullshit detector is hovering at about '9'. I am a cynical man, and this new business of establishing credibility through a network of blogs ("gross" syndication might be too generous) instead of a genuine original credible content rubs me the wrong way. There are a lot (most?) of blogs out there with no other purpose than to serve as an adsense speed bump between you and what you actually want to read. A great many of which don't even lead you there, but to a labyrinth of plagiarism and advertisements that if you are diligent enough to follow the long trail, end at a wholly non-credible source (if they source at all).
Yes, it is the second time I posted this, but since that thread was off topic and you are addressing the issue directly... forgive me.
Platform advocacy is like choosing a favorite severely developmentally disabled child.
I have no use for Vista or any of it's follow ups.
I have no interest in an operating system designed to protect content owners, protect microsoft with horrible activation functionality and little to no benefit to myself.
If I didn't require Windows for work I'd have nothing to do with it. I've been a long time Windows user since Windows 3.1 and each release seemed to be such a major improvement over the previous. Until Vista. Vista is not a users operating system. It's more of a prison.
Voice recognition is a stupid way to enter text into a computer. In a cubicle, where your neighbours can hear you it's completely annoying. In your house, where you have the TV on in the background and kids continually talking, I can't imagine it would work that well, Unless you had a silent office where you weren't going to bother other people, I couldn't see this being an advantage. And even then, People don't talk how they write. If most people saw what they said written down on the screen, they wouldn't even be able to understand it. Keyboards work a lot better for entering text.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
Because if you rent a single "last" version to them then they will pay you money forever, and you don't need big product launches every five years.
Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
Seems like best argument for every feature Microsoft axes - "it isn't used anywhere!". But ohh boy, it IS used. Just ask any larger than medium business sysadmin or even more - some small business who have colosal mix of everything. Just don't tell them that because of new new shiny laptop they have to choose either to pirate Windows XP or just switch everything to IP?
Question is - why Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, even AIX can provide support for IPX and AppleTalk, and Microsoft new, ohh so super new OS can't?
user@ubuntubox:~$ stfu This server is going down for shutdown NOW!
Blackcomb was the name, now it's morphed into "Vienna." Windows code names seem to come from resorts. I believe that what we call "heavy irony," as Windows is neither relaxing nor fun.
Good. Cheap. Fast. Pick Two.
You appear very fast to judge things, but I think you might be missing a big piece of the action there, or the potential action, most likely because you are younger and still fit. I am guessing on that though.
In a perfect world what you said makes some sense, but think on this: In the US the population is aging. Younger folks are a minority, and guess what? You'll get old, too. With aging comes afflictions like arthritis. Once you get it, even a twinge, you'll understand how incredibly $valuable$ and how incredibly useful a voice activated system could be. The first company to really nail it will be rich beyond the dreams of avarice as the expression goes.
MY GF has it in her hands, sometimes she just sits and cries because her hands are on fire,that's how she describes it, like being on fire, and then she can't do anything, nothing that requires any dexterity at all. She used to do fine painting, a lot of intense sewing, etc, stuff like that, but can't anymore. Typing is just out, and there are many many millions like her out there now. It's like having no fingers at all, but it hurts. She can only type very slowly and painfully and because of that hardly uses her computer anymore.
Now, how abvout blind folks? Think it might be a handy option for them as well? How about folks with anything like palsy? Heck, I am thinking for me, say I am out working on some vehicle and I want to look something up. Spend 5 minutes with the degreaser before I go touch the keyboard, or just yammer at it to get to where I want to get, and print it out? Useful there too.
As we all know that Microsoft Vista was originally scheduled to be released in 2003, after two years of Windows XP, but it got delayed by over five years...
...but the delayed in the launch has cost Microsoft, billions of dollars.
Call my math fuzzy (it's happened before) but if it was originally scheduled to be released in 2003, and it's being released in 2007, then the delay was less than five years...
I've heard similar figures thrown out before, but where do these figures come from? How has the delay cost them? One could argue it has resulted in lost revenue, but XP was still selling well during that time and Vista will be making its sales now. Delayed revenue perhaps, but lost? Are they talking perhaps money spent on developers and such? That might be a point, but billions? What would be the reference for that?
I love my sig.
That's because as an OS matures, the amount of new features and functionality that is required or even thought up, becomes less. Bugs get ironed out until there are litteraly no more bugs. OS X has been maturing and developing in both features and fixes since its conception. Of course, the computer industry never stands still, so an OS will always have to accomidate for new hardware, standards, and security concerns.
But here's an example:
MacOS 10.2 needed a better way of navigating individual windows, so designers created Exposé for 10.3... problem solved. From then on, there's no reason to spend a lot of time and energy into window navigation features. Little by little, every need gets satisfied, and there's less and less big new features to create.
I'm not saying that OS X is perfect, or even close to perfect; I hope it continues to grow and evolve as long as it exists. For one thing, it bewilders me why the designers have never bothered to standardize the window design in the Finder... which is still a bit clumsy. For the most part, Apple is pretty solid on creating very concise UI standards that are based on fundimental principals of grapic design and interface philosophy... but the finder is one area that they've stumbled a bit, and even though its probably more functional than OS9s, it's not as air-tight in regards to keeping with a standard Look & Feel. The original intent of brushed metal, for one, was a standardized Look & Feel for applications that simulate physical hardware: calcultors, CD players, Movie players, etc, so why it shows up in file navigation systems and web browsers is beyond me.
So, OS X has some improvements to make, but from a functional standpoint, they're small knit-picks.
Multiplayer Gaming (defined): Sitting around, discussing single-player games with my friends, at the bar.