Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 25th Feb 2007 22:19 UTC, submitted by jayson.knight
Windows Microsoft has released a list of 800 applications that should run properly on its new Windows Vista operating system. As expected, virtually all of Microsoft's own offerings are on the list - including the latest Office 2007 products. Also included are a host of business and security applications from vendors ranging from Intuit to Trend Micro. And desktop applications from Google, which ramped up its rivalry with Microsoft earlier this week with the introduction of online business applications, made the cut. However, noticeable by their absence are applications from a number of the world's biggest software companies, including Adobe Systems, IBM, and Symantec.
Thread beginning with comment 216573
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Just 800?
by Almafeta on Mon 26th Feb 2007 02:58 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Just 800?"
Almafeta
Member since:
2007-02-22

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding (it wouldn't be the first time). My impression was that a certified application is known to work, whereas a supported application is guaranteed to work (for paying customers).

Ah, there's the misunderstanding. It's my understanding that supported applications are applications that are known to be able to run on Vista, while certified applications are those that MS has given its 'stamp of approval' -- something that Microsoft guarantees will run on Vista.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Just 800?
by butters on Mon 26th Feb 2007 04:01 in reply to "RE[4]: Just 800?"
butters Member since:
2005-07-08

certified applications are those that MS has given its 'stamp of approval' -- something that Microsoft guarantees will run on Vista.

I guess I still don't understand. What actions does Microsoft take if their customers report flaws in certified applications? I just don't see how they can provide any sort of guarantee unless, by accepting a certification, the application's vendor agrees to service any problems that might arise. To do this, the vendor will probably have to make similar agreements with other vendors from whom they license proprietary code. And so on until all vendors involved in the production of the application have signed on to agree to support this guarantee.

You can begin to see that proprietary software is a support nightmare. When it works, it's great. But when it breaks, you better hope the proper agreements are in place to make sure somebody with source code access has agreed to provide service.

Even within a large proprietary vendor, many customer issues become a huge production to resolve when it isn't clear which part of the code is responsible for the issue and which department should be tasked with providing a fix. The developers don't really care who does what--they all have too many tasks in their queues as it is. They just hack away at their assignments with their speakerphones on mute, listening to the managers argue over headcount and "bandwidth."

I've been an OS developer in both community and proprietary models, and in my experience with proprietary development, there's always at least 3 times as many managers as could possibly be useful. If a development process isn't established to let the developers manage themselves, i.e. assign issues, coordinate the ordering of commits, make sure issues are resolved correctly and within a certain amount of time... then no amount of management can save the project. For one thing, when developers go to management with problems, we usually have to restate the situation at least three times in successively simpler language until the blank stare on their face finally shows some level of understanding.

I've gotten at little OT, but just suffice it to say that Microsoft's certification is just wishful thinking. They've exercised due diligence in verifying that the applications work, but just watch the fingers start pointing in various directions when something blows up.

Reply Parent Score: 5