Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 22nd Oct 2007 13:48 UTC
Permalink for comment 279811
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-04-01
So, can we admit then, finally, truthfully, and in an unbiased form, that Windows itself is done?
Windows - at we know it today - is in its downswing. Yes, it's everywhere, and it's the basis for virtually every corporate environment. But the word is out. Any major shop who isn't evaluating alternatives is woefully delinquent. If Microsoft has any chance of surviving in this arena for more than the next decade or so, they need a dramatic change.
What Thom is proposing here, essentially, is scrapping Windows as a whole. Save only the kernel - nay, a subset of a fraction of the kernel - and rebuild a new OS atop.
I welcome this move. Windows is fundamentally used-up. The licensing is draconian. The software is a constant battle for most users. I should know, I support hundreds of them. They don't work on Windows - they work in spite of it.
So I agree that a move like this would be a great strategic move for Microsoft if they want to stay relevant in the long run in this corner of the market.