Slashdot Mirror
Gartner Analysts Warn That Windows Is Collapsing
spacefiddle writes "Computerworld has an article about a presentation from Gartner analysts in Las Vegas claiming that Windows is 'collapsing', and that Microsoft 'must make radical changes to the operating system or risk becoming a has-been.' Michael Silver and Neil MacDonald provided an analysis of what went wrong with Vista, and what they feel Microsoft can and must do to correct its problems. Larry Dignan of ZDNet has his own take, and while he agrees, he suggests that the downfall of Windows will be slow and drawn-out. As an interesting tangent to this, there's also a story from a few days prior about Ubuntu replacing Windows for a school's library kiosks, getting good performance out of older hardware. '[Network administrator Daniel] Stefyn said he was "pleasantly surprised" to discover that the Kubuntu desktops ran some applications faster with Linux than when they ran on Windows. An additional benefit of Windows' departure from student library terminals saw the students cease 'hacking the setup to install and play games or trash the operating system.'"
Wait, Apple didn't have to customize OS X to run on the iPhone, it was perfect the way it was?
Wait, it's easier for people to develop and distrubte applications for the iPhone, even though the ability isn't avaiable yet?
Are these guys supposed to be taken seriously?
"...An additional benefit of Windows' departure from student library terminals saw the students cease 'hacking the setup to install and play games or trash the operating system....'"
Yeah, well just wait until he realizes what they have moved onto hacking....!!!
Most users do not understand the benefits of Windows Vista...
You mean the almost-constant nag screens?
or do not see Vista as being better enough than Windows XP...
Making them smarter than the lying marketroids selling it...
to make incurring the cost and pain of migration worthwhile.
Translation: People are smarter than they think, and an OS that takes twice the hardware to be twice as slow AND even more incompatible with previous software isn't worth my money.
Of course, they still get sales - from the same idiots at my work who want to be upgraded from Office 2003 to Office 2007 because it's a bigger number, and then complain that they are confused by Office 2007 and want the tech support guys to "fix" it.
For how many years have slashdot 'experts' been predicting the 'downfall' of windows? For 23 years they have not just controlled, the word is 'dominated' the desktop environment. For the majority of computer users, the words 'Windows' and 'Computer' are borderline synonymous.
And you're proof? Because some users believe that 'Vista sucks' blah blah blah. How many people started ringing the bells for Microsoft after Windows ME? We saw how that worked out...
I don't know if Windows is going to collapse, as the article implies. I think they're guaranteed a certain minimum of customers each year, just from either individuals or companies who know it as the familiar choice, that doesn't require much retraining to use. Where I work we use a Windows server to run a phone-calling application for non-profit donations, despite the fact that by using, say, Apache and Linux the company could save a bundle. So there might be more emigration to another OS, but I don't think it'll kill off Windows, if only because the average user doesn't appreciate the benefits of switching to one of the myriad other options.
It would be nice if my OS didn't need 1+gb of ram just to run smoothly so a smaller windows would be great. I don't however think the entire OS will be run virtually ever....
Whose to say that if you can't secure a Windows install you can secure a Linux system. Maybe this is just an example of security through obscurity rather than an actual enhancement.
An additional benefit of Windows' departure from student library terminals saw the students cease 'hacking the setup to install and play games or trash the operating system.'"
Yeah, that'll last. I'll give it a week before someone finds a manual and migrates their "expertise" to their new operating system.
I wrote my first program at the age of six, and I still can't work out how this website works.
until Netcraft "confirms it"[tm].
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
I can see this happening rather quickly at home. It hasn't been hard to convince my family members to get away from Windows. While my wife is probably more computer savvy than most, she hasn't had any problems switching from Windows to Linux, and actually likes it more. It's been more difficult for others I've gotten to switch, but in general the result has been positive.
The corporate world is a completely different story, though. Many large, medium, and small companies have committed vast resources to development in .Net. And while a good chunk of that can be run on Mono in a non-Windows environment, it's not entirely the same, and transitioning to something else, from a OS or software perspective, is going to take even more time and money in an economy where money isn't readily available.
Additionally, while you can probably count on your IT staff to have a reasonably easy transition to something other than Windows, your non-tech employee base is almost certainly going to have a great deal of difficulty. Add in the fact that lots of small and mid-size businesses use "friendly" accounting software that runs solely on Windows, and I think Microsoft has a much larger buffer for error than most people think.
Will it happen? God I hope so... but I'm not optimistic it will happen even in the next 5-10 years.
Proudly supporting the Libertarian Party.
Unfortunately, my meat printer is jammed. I think I should have stuck to flank steak; in retrospect, it appears that hamburger wasn't such a great idea.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Michael Silver, it should be noted, is fairly neutral in his coverage of Microsoft. Here is a link to his past papers:
http://www.gartner.com/Search?op=16&f=2&keywords=&bop=0&op=16&sort=73&archived=0&simple1=0&n=8332&authorId=8332&resultsPerSearch=0&dir=70&sort=73&dir=70
The problem, as I see it, is not Vista itself. Rather, it is the slow but steady migration from PCs being central to computing tasks to reliance on servers for processing power and storage. Although Outlook client may run on your PC, the real work managing your company's mail is handled in the backrooms on server hardware. They aren't running client Windows back there.
So on the front end, as McNealy and Ellison have been saying for a decade, computers require less and less individual computing power, and backend servers need more and more. This is the problem for Windows because the growing requirements of the OS to do all the cool things that users like is outstripping the pace at which the needs of the users are growing. Translation: Vista does too much unnecessary stuff (however cool and flashy it might be.)
Apple does this too, but their hardware requirements are automatically met by virtue of them selling the hardware themselves. Linux, OTOH, is both a low-end client and a high-end server. It fills the roles needed by users without bringing with it a hefty cost per unit.
The upshot is that the PC as a computing platform is ailing. It will always have its place, and it will hang on for quite a while longer. However, the general trend towards less necessary functionality on the client end and more stability and power on the server side means that alternative systems now have a lower hurdle to gain a foothold in the upcoming paradigm shift.
We have already seen a huge shift away from laptops as the mobile computer towards dedicated devices like the Blackberry and smartphone. As we progress, many of the roles that the PC plays now will move closer to the user so that the usage scenario no longer is sitting in front of a glowing monitor but rather sitting back and doing the same job faster and more easily than currently performed. I, for one, welcome our new embedded overlords.
After all these years saying Gartner "analysts" doesn't know their as from their elbow, I am *so* conflicted ...
http://www.tobyspinks.com/images/oreally.jpg
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups!
I've always been puzzled by these reports. How are they created? Why? Someone has to create them and get payed for it - who pays for them? I doubt it's just a matter of bored analysis sitting at their desks and saying "well, I might write something about ... Windows... today".
-- Sig down
When a technology service becomes ubiquitous and homogenous and - importantly - ceases being innovative, it runs the risk of becoming a candidate for conversion into a public utility. To stave this off, either ongoing innovation is required or the illusion of innovation and change is required. Microsoft has done a bit of both with Windows. But it's a thin veneer. As a result, poopulist efforts to 'socialize' this technology into a public utility are surging; hence, Ubuntu et al.
A-Bomb
Whenever someone mentions of them, all I remember is this funny article from El Reg: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/02/17/itanic_oracle_idc/
Windows NT was developed by Dave Cuttler (of DEC VMS team) based on a operating system specification developed by IBM. (It was supposed to be released under the name OS/2 version 3).
Microsoft implemented the Windowing API on top of that operating system.
The fact is that Microsoft has never developed a commercial operating system from scratch!!!
They have only incremented the original Windows NT (a.k.a. OS/2 v3.0) code base, for example by:
- replacing the OS/2 file system delivered in Windows NT with the more modern NTFS
- re-writing the OS/2 deveice driver layer of Windows NT with a new, 32-bit and C-based API [the original NT device driver model was 16-bit and assembler-based]
- moving the implementation of the graphics API into the ring-0 kernel [big mistake!]
- replacing the OS/2 multitaskin DOS compatibility (i.e. the text window of Windows) with a less DOS-compatible one, which was supposed to run on multiple processor architectures.
The effort to create a new operating system core for Vista failed because of lack of in-house knowlege.
The task of writing a new core OS (under the Windows API) seems to be too difficult for a company run by marketing people and lawyers.
If anything, legacy code will be Microsofts downfall (as TFA stated). I saw this happen firsthand for a company I worked for over a decade ago. They had a pretty impressive application and a long list of Fortune 500 corporations as customers. Even IBM (we're talking back before the Windows 3.x days) was basically giving the company a few million dollars a year for the privilege of reselling the software themselves. Well rather than build new versions of the application from the ground up, or even introducing potential incompatibilities between major releases, the powers that be insisted on full backward compatibility.
Over time more competitors showed up in the marketplace, and as the economy shifted IBM stopped tossing money in our laps. Our engineers (of which I was one) spent most of their time trying to figure out how to shoehorn new features and entire new parallel products on top of the existing legacy codebase. The inevitable result was that we struggled while our competitors came out with newer, more modern & more powerful software. I eventually left that company to go to a startup where 7 others from this company had already gone to. That company was acquired a couple years later, and the application pretty much no longer exists.
If the engineers, who had requested the ability to create a new product from the ground up, had been listened to, then perhaps that company would still be around and competitive. It was mainly because of the business decisions to retain backward compatibility, like MS has done with Windows, that they eventually disappeared. As long as MS maintains their own demand for backward compatibility they'll be waging a slow & prolonged war that they have no chance of winning.
They'd be able to install software with apt or Synaptic if they had the root account's password, were in the sudoers file, or found a privilege escalation exploit.
Presumably the first two options are disallowed by policy and machine setup. The latter is a hazard of running computers. That's not security through obscurity, that's security through proper setup and patching the OS to make sure exploits are eliminated as they're discovered.
I know. That's why I found it fascinating. I had to double-check the date to make sure it wasn't a leftover April Fools' story...
And of course, now that Someone Influential has gone all Chicken Little on Microsoft, the story's spreading around and inspiring spinoffs. Google News is grabbing about 40 last time I looked. I'm as interested in this effect as I am in the story itself. Maybe more.
That which does not kill us makes us... st
Why not use Xubuntu or Fluxbuntu for older machines? That's what those distributions are intended for.
I'm probably going to get flamed for this.
One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
...do we really need Gartner to tell us that Vista is crap - one year and 3+ months after it was release?
Statements like "Users want a smaller Windows that can run on low-priced -- and low-powered -- hardware..." make me wonder if these guys graduated at the top of their class at Captain Obvious University.
Additionally they state "...increasingly, users work with "OS-agnostic applications..." - is there a reason for them to not just say "web apps"? And how about the fact that most large organizations have so much legacy code that even if Windows development stopped entirely today, you wouldn't get rid of all of that desktop apps for many, many, many years.
""Apple introduced its iPhone running OS X," no, it's a variant, which is a code-word for sub-set.
That Microsoft's presence in the home will begin to waver, and people will replace their Windows PCs either with Linux installs or Apple Macs.
But Microsoft's dominance in the work place will remain for years to come. There are simply too many apps that run on Windows PCs to make them easily replaceable. Unless, of course, everything goes thin client, which it certainly won't overnight.
I might be wrong, but the average home user really only needs a bunch of things,
- A web browser
- A way to play music and movies
- A way to manage photographs
- Basic word processing needs
And Linux has all of these already.THE HONOUR OF THE KNIGHTS - CC Licensed Sci-Fi Novel
who said in 2001 that we'd all be using IM instead of email at work by 2006? My inbox says otherwise. I'll put this with all the other World of Tomorrow prognositcations, in the circular file.
it has also been reported that Apple (APPL) is still very near to death's door.
I've bought my Mum a laptop for her birthday. It comes with Windows Vista but I'll be removing it and putting (K)Ubuntu on it instead.
Why? Because I'm worried about security. I don't want to put Firefox on the machine and constantly worry about the default browser (and its homepage) being reset. I don't want to one day be looking on Slashdot and read a story about how just browsing the web on Vista will compromise the machine and turn it into a zombie. I don't want to get a phone call from her because it's prompted her to allow or disallow an action.
I just want to install Firefox, set the homepage to Google and be done with it.
Summation 2
Windows has always been a dog, but that has never stopped it. Vista is a dog, but I still have customers clamoring for it despite our best efforts to get them to stick with XP. The only way Linux will compete is if they build new platforms for people to do business on. Trying to clone the MS platform is always going to be buggy and incomplete. FOSS developers would do good to spend some time temping around as office admins to get an idea of how offices actually use their computers.
Lucid, interesting, and well written.
I prefer rogues to imbeciles because they sometimes take a rest.
Of course Windows is going to decline.
The International Monetary Fund just announced that the sub-prime crisis has tipped the USA into the worst recession since the Great Depression of the 1930s. During recessions, the first thing to get cut back on is unnecessary infrastructure replacement -- and PCs have been marketed on the basis of planned obsolescence for around a decade now. So the PC replacement cycle will be hit, hard.
Vista is a resource hog, Ubuntu is just about coming up to mass market usability, and a lot of places are going to stop replacing their PCs annually or bi-annually in the next couple of years. Unless Windows 7 is as comparatively lightweight as XP, it's going to crash in the "upgrade your OS" market -- only new PCs will ship with it. So Microsoft will have two poor sellers in a row -- which is enough, in the mind of the fickle public, to establish a trend, and with Apple chowing down on 25% of the high-end laptop market already, they're in danger of being squeezed between a high-end competitor and a low-end one.
But.
Windows is so big, with such a huge established base, that its decline will resemble that of the old IBM mainframe environment -- which is still doing fine, decades after the death of the mainframe was predicted. This ain't going to happen overnight.
It's a simple formula that college kids don't understand until they are unemployed for a few years after college. That's when the blind chanting enthusiasm for the "best" product is put to the test.
Because Apple is even more expensive and just as proprietary as Windows, won't let me build my own system, and is poorly supported by software developers. If Apple dominated the market, there is every reason to believe they would be just as heavy-handed as MS, if not much worse.
Because doing anything in Linux ends up with me banging my head against my computer screen. Even Ubuntu, the most user-friendly distro so far, is an endless series of frustrations. "Why can't I just download a piece of software and double-click on it to install?!?!" "What is the difference between KDE and Gnome and why should it matter?!?!" "Why do I have to go to the command line interface to do even basic stuff?" Hell, until the latest release, Ubuntu wouldn't even let me attach a projector without a complicated edit to the Xorg config file. ARGHHHHH!!!
Windows may die one day, but it's going to take a *lot* more work before anyone else is going to slay that dragon.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
All the man said was that the students stopped "hacking the setup to install and play games or trash the operating system."
If you infer any more from that statement than that the kids stopped hacking to install games or trash the os, that's about you and whatever you're bringing to your reading of the article.
Balmer is a Tyrannosaurus, a dinosaur of the past. He's still playing an aggressive dominance card of leadership, but his ship has started sinking very slowly a long time ago. His style of management is imperious and ignorant. This used to be the way to go, when Microsoft was a aggressive and flexible shop going for world domination - not by being better, but being faster, and by _setting_ standards instead of waiting for them to evolve. Those times are long gone. Microsoft is a moloch. Vista didn't set any standard for anything. Apple did on the desktop and Google and others did in the web. And still there we have yelling Balmer as commander in chief shouting at those who could know better instead of listening and comprehending what is really going on.
Microsoft got all corporate and forgot their customer were the *end users*.
They seemed to get it in their head their customers were the people asking for DRM throughout the OS.
They seemed to believe the end users (the ones who have to pay for, and use their product) don't matter. They thought people just wanted some fancy need interface tweaks, and they'll accept whatever is forced on them.
It turned out they were wrong.
Microsoft need to strip it down, make the next version wicked fast, make it open to people who want to use their platform and media the way they want, and encourage developers. Backward compatibility? Only to the extent of running the top 500 well-behaved applications.
Give the next version away. Use the slogan "We're showing Windows the door".
There are folks that take the word of Gartner like it is manna from heaven and it continues to amaze me. They've managed to position themselves a trusted source by putting products in a 2x2 square after they interview people using the software despite the fact that most of the time they end up being wrong. Like any good psychic, they only refer to their successes at predicting the future and hope people will forget when they missed the mark.
STFU & GBTW
... it's not that I'm not looking forward to a world where MS no longer controls the desktop market. It's just that in the places it matters, MS software is *so* much easier to use than the competitors.
An example, if you will: I recently wanted to set up a mailing/scheduling system at home because I have way too many computers to manually add all my appointments and contacts to. My order of preference for these kinds of projects is usally Linux first, and then MS, so I tried setting up Zimbra (thanks for acting like MS and locking features down, asshats!), then Scalix (holy hell, I've never seen such a complicated management interface) and finally Kolab (feature incomplete). I spent a total of about 40 hours getting all of these things to run.
I was left with no choice other than an MS solution. I had all the bits and pieces lying around the house, and in the end, it took less than two hours to put together an AD domain controller with Exchange running on it. And that includes the time it took to set up each of my seven computers to talk to the system.
Really, I don't mean to come off as an MS shill. When I'm working for myself, Linux is my first port of call. But OSS is far behind MS on the usability front, and until it catches up, the (bulk) business customers that drive the IT industry won't abandon MS.
ERROR: No mod points in account. Abort, Rety, Fail? _
perl -e "eval pack(q{H*},join q{},qw{70 72696e74207061636b28717b482a7d2c717b343 637323635363534323533343430617d293b})"
I thought that Gartner was a Microsoft sock puppet...am I wrong? Or is Microsoft (via sock puppet) floating the idea that big changes are coming? Maybe they really are going to re-write Windows 7 from scratch (or put it on a BSD kernel - even better, but much less likely).
Rule of Slashdot #0: You and people like you are not representative of the larger population. - A.C.
Lets be honest windows isnt going to go anywhere UNTIL the gaming community has an OS shoved down its throat that works better then windows and has the software and hardware support availability, which apple DOESNT have and never has, same with linux
the gaming communities are huge and until the millions of gamers internationally become satisfied with an OS windows will reign supreme
This just in:
THE SKY IS FALLING
EVERYBODY RUN
PS: Caps lock is cruise control for cool 8-)
2008 Server will hit its stride and people (the people who count - the ones that set policy) will be like 'Oh yeah, these guys what they are doing' - That'll go a long way to restoring Window's rep.
On the consumer side - by the time the Windows franchise is killed off people won't even know what OS they are running. You'll be buying your 'device' with a set of dice as you like services and people won't know where the device ends and 'Net starts.
MS knows this, that's why they are breaking into robotics, cluserware and consumer devices. That's why they are building a comprehensive line of applications, online services, and cracking verticles like medical and automotive.
All of you open source developers hoping for the day that Linux/BSD/etc is taken seriously as a consumer platform (similar to what Windows and the Mac OS have enjoyed for over a decade) need to start banding together now to discuss how to make something as complicated as Linux truly accessible to any user without sacrificing the benefits Linux offers. Until commercial entities like Adobe see that there is a viable audience to market their products to in Linux/BSD/etc, these OSes are going to live out most of their lives as little more than behind-the-scenes grunt-work software or as a niche item on a hobbyist's / enthusiast's computer in some basement.
Somehow, there needs to be some form of interface consistency across the board that is logical, useful and attractive to even the least intelligent of users.
Take the 3D application "Blender" for example. Most of us know that Blender itself is fairly powerful when used correctly by the right person. Yet despite the fact that Blender is both power and free, your typical consumer level user is far more likely to gravitate toward products like Carrara Studio, based almost entirely on it's presentation and interface design. People don't like it when their software intimidates them and they are more than willing to pay good money to avoid it whenever possible.
You also have to consider that time is a major factor as well. While anyone could "learn" to use Blender effectively and efficiently, the time invested in overcoming the learning curve is too much for many of us. If you were to compare Blender's interface directly against Carrara Studio's interface. Most users would again gravitate toward Carrara since they perceive a much lower investment of time involved in trying to "get it". The reality though, is that the core learning curve on either of these apps for most functions is probably identical.
Overall though, it's likely going to be a lot more difficult than it sounds to put a new face on Linux to make it pretty, useful and non-threatening to the average user. Hell, Apple's been trying for nearly 10 years with Mac OS X, and they've only just barely got it right. (Despite the numerous flaws...) It can be done, but it'll take a lot of effort to really pull it off.
8==8 Bones 8==8
... Microsoft is a moloch... Moloch Mo"loch, prop. n. [Heb. molek king.]1. (Script.) The fire god of the Ammonites in Canaan, to whom
human sacrifices were offered; Molech. Also applied
figuratively.
[1913 Webster]
2. (Zool.) A spiny Australian lizard ({Moloch horridus}). The
horns on the head and numerous spines on the body give it
a most formidable appearance.
[1913 Webster] Molokane
-- From The Collaborative International Dictionary of English v.0.48
I personally don't think Linux is ready to take the load and replace windows quite yet. It's almost their but not there. Things like games, or ease of use for those who have no idea what a computer is.
While I am no Microsoft fan being a Linux and Mac user, I am not stupid enough to believe this story again. For years, literally years, people have ben predicting the downfall of the evil empire. Still hasn't happened. No matter how cute the "Alternative OS" community wants to sound in its references to Ghandi, it does not change the fact that until something better comes along, no Linux and Mac are not better from a business stand point, Microsoft is not going anywhere.
As a Linux user I have the opposite frustrations when I come to use Windows. "Why do I have to search the web to find a piece of software to download? Why can't I just go to 'Add/Remove Programs', type in the name (or a keyword) and click install?", "Why can't I chose a different desktop environment when I log in?", "Why can't I use the command line to do even basic stuff?"
Different strokes for different folks.
Stupid flounders!
I've been dual-boot Ubuntu/XP for a few years.
I have a proprietary software package that runs only under XP, or I would be Ubuntu only. With each passing year, I watch XP get slower and Linux faster... the bloat is truly destroying XP. I agree that to survive and compete, MS must cut the bloat. Even then, you won't see me going back...
It must be those Internet Black Holes!
The first rule of the internet is Do Not Offend the Love of Fanboys. You have questioned the all-knowing, all-awesome Apple, and will be punished.
you guys are in dreamland.
They made a fundamental error from the start. A fundamental error. What impresses folk from an OS is not flashy gimmicks or features, it's simple speed. This is not inherently built in to the OS, in fact by all accounts it is cumbersome. The flashy bits are undoubtably good, and maybe they will be borrowed by competitors in the future, but apart from the initial show off to friends or colleagues etc, we don't need em. We do need a desktop which loads in seconds, apps which render a functional interface as soon as you click on them. I know users are invariably dumb, so hence the need for the system to automatically do things for them and force them to verify everything constantly so their boring legal people can say "oh we warned you about that", but irrelevant if you get so used to the damned things you click close on the boxes whenever you see them because they are so irritating. Oh and (this is windows in general) if I right click an object, I want to see the menu instantly, not wait 10 seconds for it to load, or worse for the whole OS to freeze because I was trying to continue to do work. Fundamental stuff really. I'm a software engineer, so I know these things are theoretically possible, though maybe not in a hugely bloated organisation?
lack of games trashing the system
historically, lack of games has been seen as a neg for linux - but perhaps it is the big thing that will get linux widely adopted: if linux doesn't run any games,maybe a lot of school people will use it, which will bootstrap adopttion
An additional benefit of Windows' departure from student library terminals saw the students cease 'hacking the setup to install and play games or trash the operating system.'
In other words, nobody uses them anymore.
Gartner just wants to appear to be a "leader", so now that its obvious to anyone with more than 3 brain cells still funcitoning that Windows has nowhere to go but down, they're running really fast to get in front of where those in the know have been heading, and make it look like they somehow have a clue.
They don't.
But anyone who needs these "analysts" to help them form an opinion doesn't have a clue to begin with.
Kevin Smith on Prince
Oh, the irony....
Regards;
I thought Windows ME was going to turn MS into a has-been. And remember how XP was never going to be taken seriously?
It's funny how wild speculation about a company's demise always seems to be exaggerated when that company has billions of dollars to sink into R&D.
-c
"I hope I don't make a mistake and manage to remain a virgin." - Britney Spears
And really, there are a lot of people who don't have a clue, who need "analysts" to help them form opinions: they're called "customers" or in some circles "clients".
Rule of Slashdot #0: You and people like you are not representative of the larger population. - A.C.
I don't care if you do switch to Linux. I'm still not fixing your computer.
Microsoft and its users deserve each other. MS wants them to just buy it and the users want it to just work. That relationship will go on for a while. What did collapse is the market for the old MS business model. You can't win US market share just by shipping software on new computers anymore. They might be able to do it again with emerging markets around the world, but is Vista the OS for those affordable systems?
was Xenix. Sorry but between the registry crap and feature bloat they have rendered all other OSes since unstable - Vista is no exception. When I
crash my GUI, I would prefer startx it than reboot again.
would prefer to run apps in a non admin mode using simple group permissions.
would like to restore my machine back to original state periodically without obtuse registration requirements !!
would like a cheap low functionality OS with decent drivers - thats all.
Linux is right there.
Is for Microsoft to use the BSD kernel for Windows 7. They won't use Linux because it's GPLed, and I'm sure they took a look at Apple and went 'Damn, that makes sense'. Why do you think they said they could deliver Windows 7 in a year?
I call it 'The Aristocrats'
Of course the death of Windows will be a slow process, for one reason and one reason only: Microsoft's got enough money to guarantee it happens that way. I kind of doubt they're going to go bankrupt in the near future, especially given the other pots they've got their spoons in, like video games or software.
I haven't had a chance to use Vista for an extended period, but if it's anything like the new Office it's got to be a complete disaster. It still amazes me that they managed to break features that used to work - when you copy a graph into Word from Excel, for instance, the font size and alignment of the graph change to the point where it's completely illegible. That used to work.
Goo goo g'joob.
There's no real class system here. The comments about low UIDs are a JOKE, okay? It's really more of a meritocracy. If you are tactful, humble, erudite, and most of all, well informed on the subject you are posting about, you will be respected and modded up, even if the view is unpopular and you have a seven digit UID. If you are an asshole or an idiot, you will be modded down. As a general rule. There are exceptions.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
To all those people who tout linux as being the best they are quite ignorant. The best is whatever operating system suits your needs. If all you do is email and web surf then any operating system will do. If you are a developer then maybe Linux/Unix is better suited for you. If you are a gamer then Windows is better for you due to it being both DirectX and OpenGL Compatible.
'[Network administrator Daniel] Stefyn said he was "pleasantly surprised" to discover that the Kubuntu desktops ran some applications faster with Linux than when they ran on Windows.
Is this supposed to be some glorious revelation? Ok, so some run faster on Linux than on Windows. That also means some run faster on Windows than on Linux.
While soulskill did a good job of shall we say adding value to my submitted writeup and citing additional sources, i wish my last line had been left intact, going by much of the discussion that's been generated:
"We've been batting the idea around for weeks now. Are these isolated, over-hyped events, or is this the beginning of a lasting trend?"
I never meant to imply that we should all just take Gartner at their word without the presence of any sodium chloride...
That which does not kill us makes us... st
I can't for the life of me imagine a day when Gartner wasn't MS's Bitch. Did she catch MS in bed with someone else? A man perhaps?
Windows isn't collapsing yet, but it is weakening. It is weakening such that Linux has a chance to survive outside obscurity. More clearly, every year that Linux can survive, gain steam, gain development, is *a* year of Linux, maybe not *The* year. Linux has offered some of us a kind of redemption. Years ago, we thought DOS would last forever. Windows including Windows 95 was just a DOS Program. Back as late as 1999, alot of games were still made for just DOS. In the mid 90s, you couldn't possibly exit Windows fast enough. But we were wrong. DOS did die. at least MS-DOS. Linux offers new things beyond what DOS ever could. Yet, there are still things from DOS that can never be run on Linux without a Virtual machine. Like Blood. Those of us who remember back when computers were Heterogeneous, and remember when all Microsoft made that was particularly useful was DOS, and other vendors filled other voids, owe it to themselves and have a duty to redeem themselves by supporting Linux, code for Linux. If your a programmer, do everything you can. Code Engine replacements for games like Blood. For where games go, so goes the rest of the computer industry. For those of you supporting Microsoft, do you really want to spend the next twenty years in slavery? I don't.
I used to work at a place where we had a Workflow system that passed around a "pre-XML" XML structure (our application was finished before the XML specification). The original engine was written in VB6 including the XML-like parser COM object, which was also in VB6. Performance was pretty bad.
In order to get away from the increasingly-nasty VB6 code base, we did a complete rewrite in Delphi. We did extensive testing to ensure that the new engine, while 5X faster, still did everything correctly.
Some time later (after the XML spec was finalized), I wanted to rewrite the XML parser using MSXML for speed. The boss wouldn't allow it, because it might break backward compatibility. I told him I could do both but he didn't believe me. Fortunately, he was laid off and the new boss said, "Hey, as long as you're sure it'll work." I rewrote the parser, which could easily identify the old version of the XML (because it had multiple roots). It wrapped it in a standardized tag (which became the standard on the new version) and went on it's merry way. I even translated all the XML access methods into their MSXML equivalents. In fact we made every piece of the engine forward and backward compatible with every other piece of the engine. You could mix and match at will. We even changed the SQL layout, but made an updatable View which looked like (and was named the same as) the old table.
After extensive testing of every record that had ever gone through our system, we implemented the new version with a 10X-20X speed improvement. And now, the entire codebase was rewritten from the ground up in Delphi and this allowed us to make a multi-threaded version which was again, 5X faster. And all these speed improvements were very welcome, as the number of records going through the system kept going up and up.
You can rewrite from the ground up and also keep backward compatibility, but it requires you to do some testing work to be sure. But honestly, it wasn't nearly as hard as the managers thought it would be.
Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
Sy, I'd thought that there is a 1:1 relationship for this between German and English. On my mind was the equivalent to 'juggernaut'.
Since Windows Me was released, MS's share price has gone down the drain and MS is depleting its one famous cash reserves (in aimless attempts to control some field, any field) like if there is no tomorrow.
/.ers but by investors with responsibility to spot good deals for their clients.
If the unwise buyout of Yahoo succeeds, for all intents and purposes MS would have no cash left in the bank.
Share are not driven by hysteric
MS share price going down the drain is saying that people doing their homework don't trust the company at the moment.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Windows 7 does have a lot of buzz around, as evidenced by the frenzied reaction to Gates saying it'll be out in a year. As many people have said, MS messed up with ME but then created an extremely good OS with XP.
MinWin is one of the things I'm interested most about windows 7. very high compatibility with full windows yet uses much less resources.
From TFA Summary: "must make radical changes to the operating system"
Any software developer knows that 'radical changes' to working (however imperfectly) code is a bad idea. The only thing really wrong with Vista (other than the necessity of all those graphics in the first place, which boils down to a matter of opinion) is the video drivers, which can be blamed on Nvidia and ATI, not Microsoft. I get similar problems using the proprietary binary drivers on Linux from time to time as well though. It usually only crashes Xwindows rather than requiring a reboot, but you probably shouldn't be running a 3d graphics on a machine with uptime requirements in the first place.
Mr. Silver and Mr. MacDonald are either:
a) Complete morons
b) Covert Linux enthusiasts frustrated by Linux's slow advances in the desktop space
c) Very knowledgeable about the direct relationship between sensationalism and ratings and lack thereof between intelligent analysis and ratings
I've used Vista on a laptop with Intel graphics and it runs just fine.
It's just image composition, Intel chips can manage that.
What exactly is the difference on a high-end graphics card?
No sig today...
UNIX and Linux easily scale from 133MHz/16MB (and smaller) machines to supercomputers. Maybe you choose to leave out some modules or tools on the smaller machines, but it's the same codebase.
Microsoft has been incapable of delivering such a scalable system. Windows Mobile is an entirely different codebase; it's not just a version of Windows XP/Vista with some functionality missing. And it's not just the kernel that fails to scale, it's the UI, the tools, everything.
(Apple is as bloat-prone as Microsoft, but they started with a more scalable platform when they adopted Mach, so they are in a somewhat better situation than Microsoft.)
Microsoft screwed up their engineering, and they screwed the industry in the process, and the market should punish them for that.
Of course, this is very easy to fix; but trumpeting "There is no configuration required to enforce this!" when there actually is, however minor (removing the users from the 'admin' group, or using visudo), might be counterproductive.
What's purple and commutes? An Abelian grape.
I find it weird that the 3 people I know who have tried Vista much prefer it and won't go back to XP.
I myself switched to Vista and after SP1 I find it to be better than XP or Ubuntu for desktop use for multiple reasons (e.g. fast standby and resume, integrated search, stable composited GUI, beautiful fonts, awesome media center mode, per application volume control, less buggy, the list goes on).
For the life of me I do not understand the bashing its getting from all sides at the moment. Yes it was buggy when first released but then compare it to KDE 4 and MacOSX first releases. Yes it is a bit slower than XP, but is more functional and nicer to work with.
How many of the haters have tried Vista SP1 on a modern desktop? From my experience and from those of the people I know, it rocks.
Bollocks. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_desktop_operating_systems lists five different sources, and none of them show anything like the change you claim has occured in the last 18 months.
What's purple and commutes? An Abelian grape.
On the other hand, at least xrandr on the command line does occasionally work, which is more than can be said for the old Screens and Graphics utility. Which I have never seen do anything, ever, except trash xorg.conf to the point where X won't start.
It is time more people acknowledged that X11 is a piece of crap and is the reason why Linux doesn't have more market share. You still hear people trumpeting about X.org's backwards compatibility and how an xorg.conf that worked in 1980 will still work today. It's a windowing system; we don's need backward compatibility with several decades ago, we need to to work now!
What's purple and commutes? An Abelian grape.
Wifi and dual screens are going much better in Ubuntu, and 8.04 gets released this month.
Ubuntu is at the point where you can get document editing, web browsing, email, image editing, and more from the DEFAULT install... hell, even from your live disk.
Almost everything is easy in Ubuntu, and any issues are easily fixed by searching google (Which is not always the case with Vista, Xp, and other windows OS's I use).
On a side note, here is a link to setting up sync contacts using evolution from your blackberry: http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=190938
Link for using iphone, ipod touch: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/PortableDevices/iPhone
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=588246
They also seem to suggest "syncevolution", link here: http://www.estamos.de/projects/SyncML/
I guess what I am trying to say is: That was a LOT easier than to try and trouble shoot why Vista won't sync with device X in my opinion.
I steal signatures. This one used to be yours.
Given that its most people's most important communications device, what is a few bucks. Personally, I'd much rather pay a few extra bucks for a finished product fully managed by any vendor. Just because UBuntu runs on old library computers we are supposed to believe that it runs flawlessly on any mobile/cell devices (after being tweaked and recompiled, of course)? That is a stretch.
As a replacement for windows, Unbuntu or Kunbuntu is an incredible operating system. Its intuitively easy to use, sets up easier on anything, graphically beautiful, better default games. Runs well on a machine with 500mhz, 256mb ram(likes 512 a little better), default intel card, and 10gig hard drive. Even doing updates on it is so incredibly simple.
I've been testing linux over the years from time to time to see what its potential usefulness to the user is. Right now, more than anything is the perfect time to make the switch within the non-commercial environment.
The only time I would use MAC, or windows. Is when you need the potential from exclusive software located on those operating systems. Otherwise, I'd opt to simply run Ubuntu.
Could this be the year of the Linux desktop?
Also, as other people have pointed out, NT was in no way "based on OS/2". In fact, it was originally intended to replace the OS/2 kernel, because the OS/2 2.0 kernel was considered to be so behind (among other things, it was hybrid 16/32-bit)! It also inherited its LAN manager, and implemented part of its API; but it was written from scratch: the architecture of the kernel is fundamentally different.
What's purple and commutes? An Abelian grape.
Apologies; you're right: the default user type is "Desktop User", which I assumed had sudo privileges; turns out it doesn't. Thanks for correcting me.
What's purple and commutes? An Abelian grape.
Apologies; turns out that the default user type for new users, "Desktop User", which I assumed had sudo privileges; actually doesn't after all.
What's purple and commutes? An Abelian grape.
If you RTFA you will see some good free advice from the analysts - produce a truly modular OS and extensively use virtualization to support a range of OS functionality. Sounds like a pretty good idea, and I see no reason why it has to be Microsoft that picks up and runs with this.
The only real argument for OS superiority that MS has right now is that only Windows will run all Windows software, past and present. This keeps IT pros tied to Windows, because their co-workers demand being able to use the same software, and uninformed IT drones susceptible to purchasing successive versions of the increasingly crappy OS due to deceptive marketing. This is not a winning business model in the long-term, as people will someday realize, hey, I saw this other OS out there that is lighter, faster, more secure, and easier to use. But in the short term it keeps people from tossing out their support contracts and Windows licenses so that they can run their old software. This has turned the war against Windows into a war of attrition.
Your pants are SO on fire!
/. group think?
"My EIGHT YEAR OLD computer came with a pentium 4 2.8GHz, "
Lies.
"1GB or RAM,"
probably a lie
"Radeon 9800 Pro,"
Lie.
"uns Vista Ultimate perfectly fine, including the "bells and whistles" like AERO."
Lies.
Geez dude, don't go around saying you had technology that didn't exist on slashdot. You will get called on it.
It also proves that your are lying to make an MS product seem better then it is? Are you really that entrenched into the MS way? or are you just trying to be cool by being counter to what you perceive as the
Man, I hate apologists.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
MS's biggest problem is bloat entirely because they always keep changing directions, always keep making mistakes, always keep inventing new APIs frameworks because
the old one is too crap or not future proof. They always say, "ok we made a boo boo, heres a totally new funky api" so now we have an OS with 100s of APIs and versions of
the same library, often running at the same time. What they should do is expire any hacks/apis that try to do workarounds to make >6yo stuff work. They try too hard
to make everything work from win2.0 days. Stick to a simple api thats expandable, and dont keep making new layers or hacked versions. Its like having 94 libcs or 12 Gtks.
Maybe if more people wrote static lib exes, we wouldnt have this problem, whats the point of OO if it never works and you need 34 copies of the same lib?
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
Can windows just KILL C: finally? and map all C: calls to users profile dir but with full perm? /drive0/ or something...
Bingo its secure because the REAL C: is
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
I for one welcome the mighty year of linux!
At last! My CHIP Magazine from 1998 is still right - TEN YEARS LATER!
Sorry, but I belive that Microsoft FUD has fogged some brains here! .. Ring 3). The OS/2 kernel, written specificatlly for the Intel processor, made use of three out of those four levels. The NT kernel was written to support RISC processors (because that was the target of the original OS/2 version 3.0 specification). Thus the NT kernel only recognized two levels, privileged and unprivileged code.
True, Dave Cuttler was hired to implement the new kernel (and also true that the Windows API was implemented on top of that), but since I have the complete documentation available I stick to the truth:
Even though Windows NT kernel is re-implemented from scratch, it was based on the original OS/2 version 3 kernel specification. It closely maps to the 32-bit OS/2 kernel functionality, with the following two exceptions:
- Intel had hardware support for four levels of insulations (called Ring 0
- Similarly, the OS/2 kernel made use of the hardware registries and hardware support for implementing the memory page tables. The NT kernel, ment to be portable, implemented the same entirely in software. (This, by the way, made the NT kernels rather slow on older processors).
----
Wikipediaa should not always be trusted to be accurate. This time, however I can cofirm Wikipedias version (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_NT_3.1):
"Windows NT was originally intended to be OS/2 3.0, the third version of the operating system developed jointly by Microsoft and IBM. When Windows 3.0 was released in May 1990, it was so successful that Microsoft decided to change the primary application programming interface for the still-unreleased NT OS/2 (as it was then known) from an extended OS/2 API to an extended Windows API. This decision caused tension between Microsoft and IBM, and the collaboration ultimately fell apart. IBM continued OS/2 development alone, while Microsoft continued work on the newly-renamed Windows NT."
Windows NT originally was a thinly disguied implementation of thje OS/2 version 3 specification.
Microsoft FUD wants you to belive differently.
If you visit the following Microsoft page (http://www.microsoft.com.nsatc.net/technet/archive/ntwrkstn/reskit/os2comp.mspx?mfr=true)
you will be able to se for yourself to what extent OS/2 was supported in the origial Windows NT.
The web page claims to say that OS/2 device drivers do not work in Windows NT. In the Alpha and beta versions of I86 NT the OS/2 device drivers worked fine. I can not warrant that they still did that in the final product.
The claim above that Windows NT did not contain any 16 bit code is totally untrue: The kernel, being a micro kerrnel, may not have had any 16-bit code in it (since it was compiled with a 32-bit compiler, but for the longest time a good part of t he Win API was 16-bit (for backward compatibility reasons).
The message of my initial comment thus is still valid: Microsoft has never developed a full-fledged operating system from scratch. And maybe they never will.
YEA! student's can't install games on linux! .....
because there aren't any :'(
Six score characters.
Brevity being wit's soul
I have enough space.
Irony of ironies, before dumping my PC and moving to the Mac, I wrote a blog post comparing Microsoft to the fall of communism; namely, that an inefficient system was collapsing under the weight of an enormous legacy, and that entropy awaits.
Here is link to full post if interested:
http://thenetworkgarden.com/weblog/2007/03/microsoft_and_t.html
Cheers,
Mark
1) A "Lite" version Mac OS X Leopard does indeed run on the iPhone. The core is different, but Apple is pretty good with Hardware Abstraction Layers. OS X also runs on PowerPC processors. They can probably move to better processors as they appear, and that will give them a competitive advantage.
2) Wrong. How could you think that it wouldn't take a lot of work to squeeze this down and isolate services to be able to run on an iPhone?
The iPhone did indeed hold up the release of Leopard -- probably because they didn't want to have to redo this system but merely add-on features for the "heavy" version.
3) They have beta version of iPhone tools. It did expire recently. You'd have to ask someone who has made an app for Symbian, Nokia and Microsofts cell phone OS about development.
"Are these guys supposed to be taken seriously?"
>> Now here I agree with you. This is, after all, the "Gartner Group" which includes a guy named Gartner and his Dog. He gets high marks for self-promotion techniques, but I've always suspected him of having opinions that followed money. I don't think he is any more insightful than the average post on Slashdot -- however, that is high praise since most of these analysts couldn't get a Kharma of 2 on Slashdot.
>>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
Slashdot, you helped answer an old question I had several years back. Aside from the usual Linux/Microsoft banter, it provides some insight into adjustments to market shifts. We see this event naturally in social groups. Its cool because it means that progression has a realistic chance of survival in our modern world.
Whether or not Microsoft succeeds or not doesn't really matter at this point. I wouldn't be surprised if they turned it around with all the money they have. In the end they will probably end up like Apple did before Steve Jobs came back or IBM before Steve Jobs first came into the market. It would be a shame for Microsoft to waste money on a company that might or might not provide a solution. It's a huge risk, they need to focus on where the market it going and how to adapt through their own independent will.
I guess another question you have to ask is do you build software first and figure out its function and surrounding politics or do you focus on the politics and build software around it.
I don't understand why people on this site don't enjoy the current situation. Linux is a capable, freely available operating system which does everything I want (fortran compiler, emacs, latex, views pdfs). It works on hardware that's five years old or a month or two old, and once I set it up I never have to upgrade anything until I buy a new machine (4 years or so).
.application_name?
Why would you want anything to change? If it becomes more ubiquitous, it will by definition change. All this focus on making it more usable is already starting to screw it up. Ubuntu is a disaster. Ugly complicated scripts everywhere. Pointless complexity. Gnome inherited many of the bad aspects of windows. Why gconf? Why not just
There should be several different operating systems. Linux is not a good platform for desktop computing (of course, neither is windows, but that's besides the point). Let linux be what it should be and let Windows do whatever it is people do with their computers.
Slashdot was a small town where everyone knew everyone by number.
Seriously - I'm curious. I'm not a hacker, but do understand things a bit. I get how you compiled a vulnerable version of ping, and copied it to your now-available $USER shell. I assume this would mean the ping executable is at most UID/GID User:User, rwx 777.
How do get from there to root? A local buffer overflow in a non-privileged ping executable allows you to get access to privileged memory ranges not controlled by ping, but rather by some privileged process, and you use that access to that privileged memory area to get to root?
If that is somewhat correct, it seems like the memory manager is to blame, not a bad ping programmer. Why should ANY non-privileged application be allowed to do that by the MMU? If not a buggy ping, then what's to keep you from downloading a purposely-written overflow app from a website and breaking out with a that?
Is that what NX fixes? But wouldn't some non-kernel privileged memory still need to be marked executable for root and setuid apps? Does NX thus have some policy mechanism for what program and/or memory range is and isn't vulnerable to overflows?
I understand the 50,000 foot view of SELinux and AppArmor - do they operate in this domain, or more at the file-and-kernel-ABI access permission level (rather than in this memory-range level)?
Thanks for the info....
That comment is hilarious; true, but hilarious.
I went and installed Windowblinds and a Vista skin on our XP machines. Now users think we have Vista for all intents and purposes, and I get to support XP. It's win-win!
... shit! That means that we're going to have this crap around if not forever then at least for something like two decades.
Now, mod me down freely. My karma can't get any worse...
I hate that idiom. My dog runs faster than me :(
As is all security, really.
If you've set it in a reasonably public place, people might not check over your shoulder to see what you're doing on it, but they will notice if you start opening the case and poking inside.
And you are drastically trivializing that process, too. You'll need to be able to shut it down (which your user might not have rights to), then plug your extra IDE drive in... Whoops, that mobo only has one SATA port. What do you do now?
I mean, yes, given unlimited physical access, there's not much that can't be overcome in some way. You could pull the RAM -- it retains its memory, unreliably, but it's there. You could install a hardware keylogger, and come back later. You could pull the hard disk, put it in another computer, reset the password, then put it back in the kiosk-ified computer.
But really, we're talking about a somewhat public place, fairly limited time until you're discovered, probably security cameras anyway. Put a reasonably locked-down Linux there, and you're no longer the low-hanging fruit -- people will just go next door where they have admin rights to a Win2K box.
Also, while X terminals would be very secure, they'd also be a bit slower than even a netbooted PC.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
Microsoft's revenues are increasing at a pace that is difficult to grasp. 15% in the US. 20% in Europe. 30% in the emerging markets of Asia and Africa. Each quarter.
67 cents of every new retail dollar spent on PC software goes to MS Office.
Command line woes nonwithstanding, the grandparent was pointing out that most things the great-grandparent pointed out were a case of things not being the way he's used to, rather than being a flaw of the OS itself.
Congratulations. Of all the replies to my post, you currently seem to be the only one who understood the point I was making.
Stupid flounders!
I don't know if anyone has mentioned it yet, but ReactOS could be very interesting as far as the OS "wars" go. Link to wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactos A little blurb from the site: "ReactOS® is an advanced free open source operating system providing a ground-up implementation of a Microsoft Windows® XP compatible operating system. ReactOS aims to achieve complete binary compatibility with both applications and device drivers meant for NT and XP operating systems, by using a similar architecture and providing a complete and equivalent public interface." Basically if they can deliver on it you will have an open source operating system capable of running all of these legacy applications and whatnot.
What Microsoft needs is for it to be easier to write apps which require the new OS, thus forcing people to upgrade if they want the latest version of that app, or if they want to use all its features.
Unfortunately, we've had six and a half years to get really good at developing apps for XP -- thus, just about anything MS could add to Vista is already done, as a third-party app or library, on XP. So they actually have to go after the customers, with shiny new features -- and again, most of the ones that actually matter already exist on XP. (Want desktop search? Google has one, and Vista apparently backported the Vista one to XP anyway.)
About the only way I see this working is Microsoft giving away their OS and selling apps. There still isn't a complete answer to Office. But I do think that they won't be able to sell Windows to consumers anymore.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
Enough said
Your kickback check was late. AGAIN.
Don't let it happen again.
*HUGS*
Gartner
Can someone explain to me why Microsoft can't say release a new OS based on a UNIX like kernel similarly to what Apple did. If I am not mistaken they had their own UNIX version called Xenix in the past.
They could then release a legacy compatible API or emulation level, (whatever you want to call it) independent of the kernel that will run legacy windows applications?
2. Don't forget that Microsoft pays Gartner millions of dollars a year for advice, er, subscription research and custom research. When Microsoft doesn't cough up enough, they get kicked in the shins as in the case in point. that's a sales technique.
3. You gotta be kidding me? Windows Vista is hardly "collapsing" by any definition of the word. Trust me, a frequently quoted IT industry analyst for 20 years, Windows will still be running on millions of computers 20 years from now.
4. History: IBM's OS/2 desktop operating system may still be operating at banks and financial services companies somewhere. I lost track, but it was still in service, if unsupported by IBM, just three years ago. It was killed a decade ago. Moral: it takes about forever to kill off an OS with installed base of software. Another example would be Mac OS 9. Still ticking.
Windows is like an old whore, she has her ways, she has her Johns, but her time is passing as she shows her age. She charges for everything as she know, soon it will ber her time to retire. I keep windows xp pro around for Rainbow Six and little more, most of my computing consists of multimedia streaming, entertainment, my business Accounting and Web Site, all of which I trust to the secure and stable Ubuntu. I agree with Gartner groups, Ubuntu will quietly take over the desktop world as Vista unravels. I purchesed Vista in the hopes of seeing my 64 Bit investment pay off. Vista Ultimate now sits on my shelf and my primary machine, an AMD X2 is running Ubuntu 7.01, smoothly, securely and with no hassle. Yes there are almost managable daily security patches, which run far more smoothly than the Vista process did.
Thank Gates Its Finally Gone!
Couldn't happen to a better company.