Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 23rd Oct 2010 22:23 UTC
Windows "Windows 7 might be a massive commercial success and an undeniably rock solid piece of software, but Microsoft is apparently unwilling to rest on those soft and cozy laurels. Asked about the riskiest product bet the Redmond crew is currently developing, its fearless leader Steve Ballmer took no time in answering 'the next release of Windows'." Also of note in this same video interview thing: Ballmer states that Silverlight is now pretty much strictly a client, non-cross platform thing, while explicitly stating that when it comes to doing something universal, "the world's gone HTML5".
Thread beginning with comment 446894
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Risky?
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Mon 25th Oct 2010 03:32 UTC in reply to "RE: Risky?"
Bill Shooter of Bul
Member since:
2006-07-14

Good point, Vista was a crappy Beta of what turned into a decent product. The success of future products cannot retroactively make what was a bad product, good. It is never necessary for any company to release a crappy version of a product ahead of an actually decent version.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Risky?
by kaiwai on Mon 25th Oct 2010 04:21 in reply to "RE[2]: Risky?"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Good point, Vista was a crappy Beta of what turned into a decent product. The success of future products cannot retroactively make what was a bad product, good. It is never necessary for any company to release a crappy version of a product ahead of an actually decent version.


One could say the very same thing about Mozilla Foundation and the craptastic releases of Mozilla suite - it formed the foundation for Firefox, Thunderbird, Lightening, Songbird and many other applications that use Mozilla core technology. Out of a crap piece of software came marketing leading software titles based off the foundations set by the initial crap release. I do understand from the consumer perspective Vista was a let down but if one views it from the perspective of being long term foundations for future products then it is a great move be it painful for all concerned.

Any sort of change that happens will never come smoothly; MacOS 9 to X was disruptive, I used to hear people complain about out MacOS 9 was faster, that MacOS X was a step back rather than a step forward. Now fast forward to today and Snow Leopard is rock solid and no one would ever think of going back to the bad old days of MacOS 9. Windows Vista wasn't as big change as MacOS 9 but it was a huge leap when you consider how disruptive it was for many people. Graphics drivers had to be re-written from the ground up again for WDDM, many applications simply didn't work because of the new stringent security, some device vendors stopped supporting their hardware altogether as to cash in and force people to upgrade their hardware. In terms of the scope of the change it was huge but like MacOS 9 to MacOS X, it laid the foundations for a great future.

It will be interesting though what Windows 8 has in store - if it means more stripping out of built in software, finishing off Media Foundation so it is a complete replacement for previous API's, better use of Direct2D/DirectWrite then Windows Vista will re-enforce itself as the grounding of future development that pulled Microsoft forward.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Risky?
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Mon 25th Oct 2010 14:52 in reply to "RE[3]: Risky?"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

Disagree. Mozilla was headed down the wrong path. Only the phenoix, which cut against the grain of Mozilla's existing path created a decent browser. If they had had a small and light browser ( stop laughing, pheonix was small light and fast when released) in mind from the begining, then they could have made a bigger impact sooner. Those earlier big, crappy clunky Mozilla releases DID NOT have to happen.

A good example of all of this seamless transition is the one MS made from Win 98/Me to XP. They were completely different code bases, different kernels,ect. But, no one could really deny form day 1 that XP was infinitely better than win me/98.

But yes, OS X is another good example of a bad release, but they made it a little better by including the Classic environment until OS X got good enough UI wise, and most applications were updated. 10.0 had some major issues, but from 10.1 released a couple months later. IMHO 10.1 was absolutely better than OS 9, but it did lack some GUI features of 9, so I sort of understood why some crazy mac addicts were unconvinced.

Reply Parent Score: 2