Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 6th Apr 2008 09:38 UTC, submitted by Francis Kuntz
Windows Ars analyses the concept of a modular Windows, and concludes: "Modularization - and the discriminatory pricing it permits - might appeal to accountants and economists. But it is bad for consumers, bad for Windows, and ultimately, bad for Microsoft. A modularized Windows, or worse still, a modularized subscription-based Windows, undermines the purpose and value of the Windows OS. If it comes to pass it will surely sound the death knell of the entire Windows platform."
Thread beginning with comment 308394
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
And the most popular version is...
by uteck on Sun 6th Apr 2008 12:32 UTC
Member since:

Windows Game. The stripped down version for gaming. But the Xbox group will never let this get off the ground as it would directly compete with them.
From what I hear about the infighting between various departments inside MS, I doubt they would let a potential successor arise. With a dedicated gaming version you could run an emulator for your old Xbox games and not have the expense of the hardware development that a consul has. And considering the poor quality of the Xbox hardware and the sizable cost of development and production, this could cause a dramatic shift in funding.

So, modular Windows sounds good, but I think internal politics at MS will ensure it does not work.

Reply Score: 4

Frobozz Member since:

Windows Game. The stripped down version for gaming.

You read my mind perfectly. As far as I'm concerned, I can do the majority of my "work" on Linux. To me, Windows has become nothing more than a glorified gaming platform. I'd gladly take a version of Windows for gaming - why bother with all that stupid eye candy when you aren't going to be seeing it for more time than it takes for Spore or Crysis to load?

Reply Parent Score: 1