Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 9th Apr 2012 14:38 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless "Windows Phone is fighting an uphill battle. Microsoft still has work to do in terms of user experience and the big hardware partners like HTC and Samsung are starting to lose interest and putting in only token efforts. But Nokia is keeping the platform in the conversation. We're not willing to consign Windows Phone to the same level of hopelessness as the open-source webOS or the out-to-pasture BB OS precisely because Nokia is too big and too active a partner." Having a big partner is by no means a guarantee. Microsoft is doing whatever it can - both legal and should-not-be-legal - to get people to buy Windows Phone, and it isn't working. A brand only gets you so far - you need a compelling product, too, and as much as I like Windows Phone, it's just not there yet compared to iOS and Android.
Thread beginning with comment 513525
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[9]: Doomed
by gonzo on Tue 10th Apr 2012 17:42 UTC in reply to "RE[8]: Doomed"
gonzo
Member since:
2005-11-10

Actually it is.


Whatever.



Only because they don't realize they have a choice.

What do you mean? Who's buying Macs? Who's downloading all those Linux distributions?

You think you're so smart and others are so stupid? Get a life pal, you're not that special.

Given a choice and equal prices, people tend not to choose Windows unless they have a specific application that they need that not on the other platform.

No, actually, people tend to use pirated Windows, risking problems with law, etc. Yes, people do know about Linux and Mac.

Only 85-90%? Use to 95% or better. It's slipping, and only going down.

Windows did not have any competition until Apple moved to x86 platform. And some people simply want something different. Nothing wrong with that.

In the end, it'll probably be a 3-way split between Linux, Apple, and Microsoft; but both Linux and Apple marketshare on the desktop is growing.


Oh yeah, this must be year of Linux on desktop, right? I've been listening to that since like '98 or so. Windows 7 is selling like crazy. Even more embarassing for Linux & Macs, people rather stay with Windows XP, 12 years old Windows than going Linux/Mac.

People tend to steal Windows, rather than to use free Linux. That says enough.

The Win32 API for one - haven't looked at WinRT yet, but I doubt they fixed some of major security issues that were present in Win32 (e.g. Handles and their use - it's kind of a gaping whole when another application can without your permission change the interface of your application.)

No system is perfect, but Win32 is just fine.

But so is the whole Program Files structure - or Program Files (x86) for 32-bit software under 64-bit Windows.

That is a good thing actually.

The Windows Registry was a great concept, but poorly implemented and completely unmaintainable. The list goes on.

What do you mean poorly implemented and completely unmaintainable?

You're just repeating usual /. trash. No substance in your claims.


Under Windows NT (of which XP, Vista, 7, and 8 are part of) yes, you could - but only if you used some very advanced tools to do so.

What advanced tools? Since Windows 2000, you simply go to Disk Management and mount disk to a folder. I don't think NT matters any more.

Oh, and they don't let you use those tools on anything less than the Professional versions (at least for Vista and later).

Not sure, I'd have to check, but if so, so what? Home users don't do stuff like that. They simply plug new hard drive in, get new letter associated to it and that's it.


You cannot do what he is saying from the installer.

Yes, from the Windows installer you can choose which drive to install Windows to. But you cannot change where the Program Files, Program Files (x86). User Profiles, or other system directories go in the installer.

Aha, OK. Yes, you can not.

You have to move them after-the-fact, update the appropriate registry settings (if you know them, or know the tools to modify them), and then hope you don't have any applications that require those folders to be on C:\; and yes, there are many applications out there that are hard coded for Program Files to be C:\Program Files, and for the Windows Directory to be C:\Windows, or for the System32 directory to be C:\Windows\system32.

You can use unattended installation actually to solve that problem.

BUT AGAIN, this is not an issue: in network environments, you have roaming profiles anyway.

On a single desktop, it simply doesn't matter. You simply do backup of your files to a separate drive and that's it.


More do that than you realize; but I do agree - it's mostly the hardware extremists, and the people that are having broken computers fixed.
..
Yea, you would have to tweak it to make it work. While OS X just loads all drivers, so no need to tweak.
..
Not so much. To get Windows to do a lot of things you have to tweak it for your use; though most people just pay BestBuy, etc to do it for them.


Actually, I have to correct myself: how do they distribute system images where I work? They prepare images, then run sysprep (before, not sure it is still used with windows Vista/7) and then can "restore" that image to any new hardware. I think those images can also be maintained offline (patching, drivers, etc).

So, no, it is not a problem, it is solved long time ago.

Installing MS SQL Server on your desktop to do development only works for a very small usage of SQL Server. Any serious usage of SQL Server requires a dedicated server to host SQL Server.


Same applies to any database. If you need HA or high performance, you need server grade hardware and/or cluster environment.

However, we (programmers, where I work) all have SQL Server running on our desktops and we all have no problems doing our work. Databases are not that small. WTF are you talking about?

SQL Server is not a very good database implementation. It's almost on par with Oracle; however, unless you are building a major database farm (and sometimes even then) neither Oracle or SQL Server are very good as they are too feature rich and bloated.


LOL. I won't even comment this stupidity. Sorry, not trying to insult you, but you are just being ridiculous.

Postgres, MySQL, BerkleyDB, and many others will do 99% of database usage far better than SQL Server or Oracle.

Haha.

All my Windows development (yes, using Visual Studios) is now done under a Virtual Machine; and honestly, Windows runs better for me that way than it ever did as my host OS. For once, Visual Studios and Windows isn't having major performance issues.


Yeah right. Everybody knows running Windows inside VM works better than running in on bare metal :-)

I use Linux for everything else.

What else? Surfin' the net and ping local host all night long? ;) Yeah, you can't do that on Windows ;)


Bottom line:
See how great your Linux is, so you need Windows inside VM to get everything done.

I don't need second OS. Case closed.

Edited 2012-04-10 17:58 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[10]: Doomed
by gonzo on Tue 10th Apr 2012 18:04 in reply to "RE[9]: Doomed"
gonzo Member since:
2005-11-10

Just to add:

Use to 95% or better.

And where do you go once you're at that point? To 110%?

Duh.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[10]: Doomed
by TemporalBeing on Tue 10th Apr 2012 18:26 in reply to "RE[9]: Doomed"
TemporalBeing Member since:
2007-08-22

"Only because they don't realize they have a choice.


What do you mean? Who's buying Macs? Who's downloading all those Linux distributions?

You think...you're not that special.
"

Most people go to BestBuy/OfficeMax/Staples/etc and just pick something up. BestBuy does have Macs available, but they tend to steer people to the Windows systems any way. So unless people are aware of Linux or Mac, they tend to only buy Windows.

It has nothing to do with being special or anything. Just the dynamics of how the sales work. Most people are also too lazy to reinstall the OS to get Linux. So Linux on the desktop won't really take off until you can pick it up pre-installed at one of those stores.

In the mean time, it's mostly people in the IT/Software industry that do use Linux as well anyone they've exposed it to that didn't have a reason not to, typically with their help getting the first install done.

"Given a choice and equal prices, people tend not to choose Windows...

No, actually, people tend to use pirated Windows...
"

Again, that's only true where people think they have no choice but to use Windows. And there's less piracy of Windows going on now, then there was 10 years ago - in part, because Microsoft is (ala BSA) trying to crack down on it even in countries like China.

"Only 85-90%? Use to 95% or better. It's slipping, and only going down.

Windows did not have any competition until Apple moved to x86 platform...
"

Wrong.

Apple presented just as much of a challenge when on PPC. Their move to Intel had nothing to do with improving their ability to challenge Microsoft's market share.

What changed was Apple's focus from being a computer company to a consumer electronics company. By becoming larger than the Mac (e.g. iPod, iPhone, MacTV, etc.) they also increased their share of the desktop.

What also changed (in the last 5 years) with the advent of Android and iPhone/iPod is people are starting to understand that they don't need Microsoft to use computers, etc. So more people are moving away from Windows.

MacOS itself hasn't really changed. Just people's perception of the market. This incidentally is also benefiting Linux, but to a smaller degree since many applications available for Windows are also available for Mac.

"In the end, it'll probably be a 3-way split between Linux, Apple, and Microsoft..

...
People tend to steal Windows, rather than to use free Linux...
"

Not so much any more. I never said it's be the "year of the Linux Desktop", just that eventually it'll be a split between 3 players. However, Desktop OS's are becoming less and less important - and Microsoft will die as Windows Desktop declines since too much of their business is dependent on Windows and MS Office.

"The Win32 API for one...

No system is perfect, but Win32 is just fine.
"

Win32 is a piss poor API.

"But so is the whole Program Files structure - or Program Files (x86) for 32-bit software under 64-bit Windows.

That is a good thing actually.
"

It's better to have something that is easier to understand and find things under, see the GP.

"The Windows Registry was a great concept, but poorly implemented and completely unmaintainable...

What do you mean...?
"

The Windows Registry was a great concept. However, the APIs to it are rather poorly implemented - they could be a lot better - and there's no ability to maintain the data in the Registry.

Any application can write pretty much anywhere in the Registry; and no application is responsible for managing what Registry value belongs to what application. So there is no easy way to clean the registry - e.g. removing unused keys when an application is uninstalled since most applications don't remove their own keys when uninstalled (sometimes on purpose, e.g. license keys).

As a result, Windows eventually slows down due to a bloated registry.

yes, there is software out there to clean the registry - but they had to go through a lot of research to determine what to remove, etc. Such functionality should have been built-in from day one.

For instance, WinNT has the idea of a Registry Hive. Each application could be (i) separated into its own Registry Hive, and (ii) have to request permission to access other Registry Hives with the other applications approving of it or not. In such a case the Registry Hives (stored in files) would be portable between systems. However, Windows does not use Registry Hives that way - again, poor implementation of their own specification.

"Under Windows NT...but only if you used some very advanced tools to do so.

What advanced tools?...
"

Most users are not aware of the Logical Volume Manager (aka Disk Management) and associated tools. They are also not aware of NTFS Junctions; and Microsoft does a good job of hiding that functionality.

BTW, you're using Windows NT.

"Oh, and they don't let you use those tools on anything less than the Professional versions (at least for Vista and later).

...so what?...
"

But that's the point. If you want to be useful it has to be functional on all versions of the system. Otherwise people won't use it, and applications won't support it unless they are targeting a minority of users.

You cannot do <that> from the installer.
Yes, from the Windows installer you can choose which drive to install Windows to. But you cannot change where...

Aha, OK. Yes, you can not.
You have to move them after-the-fact...

You can use unattended installation actually to solve that problem... [/q]

It matters a lot more than you think as it directly affects the ability to switch software between computers, or to reinstall the OS without wiping out everything else. And no, Unattended installations - which are custom built, btw - are not a solution. Do a Linux install and see how easy it could be to have it in the installer.

"More do that than you realize; but I do agree - it's mostly the hardware extremists, and the people that are having broken computers fixed...

...They prepare images, then run sysprep...and then can "restore" that image to any new hardware...
"

That's only a solution for Corporate environments where massive amounts of computers are being built routinely; not for home users.

"Installing MS SQL Server on your desktop to do development only works for a very small usage...

...we...all have SQL Server running on our desktops...
"

So you are either using SQL Server incorrectly, ignoring a lot of its features, or not doing very intensive database functionality in your application, or need a very big database.

MySQL/Postgres can both do all of that, enable all features, etc. and run on your desktop with a large database without issues.

"SQL Server is not a very good database...

LOL. I won't even comment this stupidity. Sorry, not trying to insult you, but you are just being ridiculous.
Postgres, MySQL, BerkleyDB, and many others will do 99% of database usage far better than SQL Server or Oracle.

Haha.
"

Your own ignorance and loyalty to Microsoft betrays you.

"All my Windows development (yes, using Visual Studios) is now done under a Virtual Machine;...

Yeah right. Everybody knows running Windows inside VM works better than running in on bare metal :-)
"

If performance is an absolute, then bare metal is better. No question there.

"I use Linux for everything else.

What else? Surfin' the net and ping local host all night long? ;) Yeah, you can't do that on Windows ;)
"

I pretty much do all my development under Linux. I boot up the Windows VM on occasion to use MSVS for a Windows build, and a couple pieces of old software my company insists on using. On average, I spend may be 2-3 hours a month using Windows.

Bottom line:See how great your Linux is, so you need Windows inside VM to get everything done.


Windows is not necessary to do business, live, etc.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[11]: Doomed
by gonzo on Tue 10th Apr 2012 18:53 in reply to "RE[10]: Doomed"
gonzo Member since:
2005-11-10

Most people go to BestBuy/OfficeMax/Staples/etc and just pick something up. BestBuy does have Macs available, but they tend to steer people to the Windows systems any way.

Now that is simply not the truth. They actually always try to steer you to Mac, because profit margins are higher there.

Again, that's only true where people think they have no choice but to use Windows.

Yeah, people don't know about Linux ;)

And there's less piracy of Windows going on now, then there was 10 years ago - in part, because Microsoft is (ala BSA) trying to crack down on it even in countries like China.

We could debate piracy levels, but my point is still valid: those people can steal Windows or use free Linux. They chose to steal, rather than Linux. 'nough said.
Wrong.

Apple presented just as much of a challenge when on PPC.

Wrong. Apple presented a threat, with what 1% market share?? Haha. Even DOJ said Apple is not competition since it runs on PowerPC and thus concluded MS holds monopoly on desktop PC market.


Their move to Intel had nothing to do with improving their ability to challenge Microsoft's market share.

It had everything to do with that. Otherwise they would not do it.

So more people are moving away from Windows.

People want something different, nothing wrong there. But that is not to say Windows is poor choice. Some people will buy Honda, some will get Toyota.. nothing wrong with either. OK, Toyota had its share of fun recently :-)


MacOS itself hasn't really changed. Just people's perception of the market. This incidentally is also benefiting Linux, but to a smaller degree since many applications available for Windows are also available for Mac.

Yeah right, except that it moved to PC platform :-)

Not so much any more. I never said it's be the "year of the Linux Desktop", just that eventually it'll be a split between 3 players.

Wake me up when that day comes.

However, Desktop OS's are becoming less and less important - and Microsoft will die as Windows Desktop declines since too much of their business is dependent on Windows and MS Office.

Again, wake me up when that day comes.

Not saying that it won't come, but we're still far from there.

Win32 is a piss poor API.

Whatever.

As a result, Windows eventually slows down due to a bloated registry.

;) Registry is not implemented in such a way that seek times increase significantly with size increase. There are different data structures, you know? Sequential access is not how registry works ;)


yes, there is software out there to clean the registry - but they had to go through a lot of research to determine what to remove, etc. Such functionality should have been built-in from day one.


Not needed. See my previous answer.

On top of that, since Vista many parts of Registry are virtualized and stored in each user's profile.


Most users are not aware of the Logical Volume Manager (aka Disk Management) and associated tools.
They are also not aware of NTFS Junctions; and Microsoft does a good job of hiding that functionality.

Many people not aware of many things.

BTW, you're using Windows NT.

What?

But that's the point. If you want to be useful it has to be functional on all versions of the system.

No.

Otherwise people won't use it, and applications won't support it unless they are targeting a minority of users.

Home users won't use it anyway. See, you just said earlier that people are not aware of Disk management and junctions even when they are available.

And no, Unattended installations - which are custom built, btw - are not a solution. Do a Linux install and see how easy it could be to have it in the installer.

Real world says different thing. Unattended installations work well.


That's only a solution for Corporate environments where massive amounts of computers are being built routinely; not for home users.

LOL Again, when it's not there you complain. When it's there, you complain.

What's stopping you from using sysprep. Nothing.

So you are either using SQL Server incorrectly, ignoring a lot of its features, or not doing very intensive database functionality in your application, or need a very big database.


Now you are just saying things that are pure trash.

We use SQL Server incorrectly? How so? We are ignoring those features that we do not need, until we need them. What are you talking about --- not doing intensive db functionality in our apps?

When we do need to work with VERY large databases (those that have copy of live data), then we connect to our QA or pre-prod environments. Our internal policy simply does not allow us to copy those databases locally. Local dev databases are smaller of course, no real live data there, but all the functionality is there.

You simply don't know what you're talking about.


MySQL/Postgres can both do all of that, enable all features, etc. and run on your desktop with a large database without issues.

And SQL Server can not run large databases on desktop workstation? WTF???

Your own ignorance and loyalty to Microsoft betrays you.


Yeah right, SQL Server and Oracle suck, MySQL beats them all. Hahahaha ;) Funny.

Windows is not necessary to do business, live, etc.


Still, you do have Windows under VM. I don't need second OS.

You can lie (to yourself) all you want, but until you remove Windows from your system, all your talk is crap (not trying to insult you).

Edited 2012-04-10 18:55 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2