Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 12th Jul 2013 12:01 UTC
Windows The general gist? A minor update somewhere this year, but the real update won't come until 2014. In the meantime, we'll have to... "Resuming..." ...settle for CardDAV/CalDAV support, some additional HTML5 support, and fixes for Xbox Music metadata. We were promised regular updates and an early access program for enthusiasts - but Microsoft failed to deliver, once more. For all intents and purposes, thanks... "Resuming..." ...to the switch to the Windows NT kernel, the Windows Phone we're using today has very little additional functionality to offer over what we were using on WP7 release day. I've been a Windows Phone user since WP7 release day, but Microsoft has lost me.
Thread beginning with comment 566951
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Nelson
Member since:
2005-11-29

Windows Phone, Windows 8, IE11, the failure of Windows Vista and then success of Windows 7,the recent reorg. at Microsoft, the failure of the Surface, to me all point to the same.


Whoah, let's not go overboard. The Surface sold more than the Nexus 10, more than Chromebooks, and vaulted Microsoft to 7.5% of the tablet market earlier this year. They're continuing to iterate on the device and launching new models. They're including Outlook for Windows RT (I hear its all of Office) and writing Metro version of the Office apps.

You have a very peculiar definition of failure, given that Microsoft's own financials show that the Surface lifted Windows revenues beyond what would've been a flat quarter.

Windows 8 has sold north of 90 million copies using conservative estimates at this point, and is selling licenses at the same rate as Windows 7 did (which no one regards as a failure, even you)

IE10 has recently displaced IE9 in usage share and IE11 will likely do the same -- it is pushing their standards support forward in meaningful way. Not only that, they've actively removed compatibility APIs and become a more agile and forward facing browser. They even support WebGL, something I never thought they'd do in a million years.


It seems no one has realized it by now, but at this point i'm almost convinced.

The closed software development model of MS is making the company slow and unable to compete.


What!? Microsoft released 8.1 a year after Windows 8, VS2013 a year after VS2012, IE11 a year after IE10, etc.

The improvements in VS2013 are especially dramatic, and the entire WinRT platform as a whole is more fleshed out. How is this a slow company? The entire company is operating on a yearly release cadence.


When all the industry was like Microsoft, they had the edge, but now all their competitors base much of their platforms in open technologies, and are able to advance their product development cycles much, much faster.


Sigh, I do not know how you get away with such pointless garbage. Microsoft is within their rights to develop in house whatever technologies they feel like, and in fact, they are wildly successful and profitable because of it.

VS is a billion dollar business, EACH OFFICE PROGRAM is a billion dollar business, their Cloud is a billion dollar business, enterprise management software, etc. You name it. They are more successful today than they've been in a while.

Microsoft is printing money well into the end of this decade.


pushing products earlier and then getting them to mature state after many release cycles. But this doesn't work anymore in today's software ecosystem.


Compared to what? I'd like to see an example of a polished product out of the gate, because if you've done a day of engineering you'll know that to be patently false. Android was completely and utterly terrible on day one, so was iOS (didn't even have 3G, MMS, etc), so was (and still is) various Linux distributions which ship with tons of experimental garbage, so what the hell are you even going on about?

Software is a game of trade offs, did Microsoft make the right ones, was Windows 8 tragically doomed? Hell no. It had problems, but all software has problems, shipping schedules are never easy to beat, and if Microsoft could just throw money at the problem it'd be a solved issue.

These are interesting and complex engineering challenges and whether something is open or closed source is inconsequential. By the same token, one could argue that the infighting and lack of centralized leadership on many open source projects (lets not get into the slow standard setting processes of shit like HTML5) is as much as a detriment.


So, they are falling behind the rest of the industry by releasing products that seem promising but are still not quite there (making users unhappy)


I think you take Microsoft's struggles in the phone segment and use it to cast judgment on the whole of MS, which is intellectually dishonest.

or by being forced to abandon technologies because they have no longer resources or money to allocate to them (making developers unhappy). It also doesn't help they want to focus into devices now (making hardware partners unhappy).


Microsoft has more money than they know what to do with, and has the resources to do whatever they want. However money as I said before doesn't always solve the problem.

Microsoft had structural deficiencies and infighting which hampered innovation. Windows Phone and Windows divisions didn't talk for a long time. WinDiv was more or less kicking and screaming into helping the WP team for 8.

The reorg attempts to fix this.


So, yeah, I believe their pride will be their doom if they don't change course and start playing nice with everyone else.


Another Microsoft dooms day comment, how new and exciting.

Reply Parent Score: 6

reduz Member since:
2006-02-25

You don't understand. It's not about sales or how well Microsoft is doing today.

My post was purely about raising a point on how long it's taking Microsoft to catch up, not that they aren't or that they are not doing well.

Let's agree on something:

-They have a successful business model, at least for now.
-They produce good quality products given enough time.


But also let's also agree that:

-They are not setting trends anymore.
-They are playing catch up in all the new technologies and markets.
-It takes them a long time to catch up.
-In the meantime, they are forced to release unpolished products, or lacking in features in respect to the competition.

Then, in retrospect, how long did it take..

-Apple to create an OS from scratch?
-Google to react to iOS?
-Google to create a standards compliant browser?
-Google to create a Desktop OS from scratch?
-Apple to create a new standards compliant C/C++/ObjC compiler? (llvm)
-Firefox to create a Phone OS.
-Sony to create Orbis OS for PS4

Then there's all the trends on virtualization, communication, streaming, etc. by using open technologies.

So the fact is that:

-Everyone is creating new products very quickly, thanks in great part to open technologies.
-Microsoft needs a long time to create new, quality products, with everything done inhouse, IE11 is finally getting there, Windows Phone and Windows 8 still have some way ahead,

And the question is: Can it survive, or at least stay relevant, in the long term with this strategy of creating everything 100% inhouse, given they are not setting trends anymore AND they are slow to catch up?

I hope i'm wrong, but I see it difficult.

Reply Parent Score: 6

Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

You don't understand. It's not about sales or how well Microsoft is doing today.

My post was purely about raising a point on how long it's taking Microsoft to catch up, not that they aren't or that they are not doing well.


Okay, I didn't get that from your original point but for the sake of moving on I can certainly agree there. Microsoft is moving too slowly, specifically with their mobile phone offering.



-They are not setting trends anymore.
-They are playing catch up in all the new technologies and markets.
-It takes them a long time to catch up.
-In the meantime, they are forced to release unpolished products, or lacking in features in respect to the competition.


Yes. Agree on all fronts. The reasons behind it are symptomatic of a broad disorganization that hopefully in light of the recent reorg can be addressed.

For example, Julie Larson Greene who Ballmer trusts and respects moved from SW to HW to run Surface, Xbox, and other hardware efforts both announced and unannounced.

Its a peculiar choice, but it makes sense if you view it through the prism of the mishandled Xbox One unveiling and messaging. She gets results. She cleaned up Office, and then cleaned up Windows post-Vista. Sinofsky gets a lot of credit, but she pulled a lot of the strings behind the scenes.

So I think a lot of the slowness is a self inflicted wound, and hopefully one that can be addressed. With Windows and Windows Phone (even Xbox) under one cohesive banner, we'll see a lot of resource sharing and less duplication of effort.

For Phone7, those guys wrote their own custom kernel (CE6/7 hybrid), their own telephony and 3G/4G stacks, their own derivative of the .NET CF (3.7 vs 3.5 in WM), their own Silverlight fork (SL 3.5 roughly, then SL4), etc.

The situation was similar for Zune, their XNA port was completely custom. XNA wasn't even really liked by the Xbox team.

In my opinion a lot of these internal power struggles are what doomed or severely hampered a lot of these efforts. Left hand not knowing what the right hand does type of thing. From this perspective, the criticism is warranted because this type of mismanagement is unacceptable.

Ballmer reacted, but only after others made it painfully obvious to him through iOS and Android successes. It shouldn't be like this. They were ahead of the curve with slate computing, the Courier, and a lot of the innovations in Zune are just now being copied by competitors (Streaming subscription music services like Spotify were only a glimmer in their creators eyes).


-Apple to create an OS from scratch?
-Google to react to iOS?
-Google to create a standards compliant browser?
-Google to create a Desktop OS from scratch?


A lot of these things were long times in the making, if you think about how long the iPhone and iOS was in development prior to the unveiling this will be obvious. The same goes with Android which was an acquisition, and the WebKit powering the core of Chrome.

I think what Google did and what Apple did are amazing feats no doubt, and Microsoft should be rightly criticized for moving slowly. I just think some of that criticism can be blunted given these facts.


-Apple to create a new standards compliant C/C++/ObjC compiler? (llvm)
-Firefox to create a Phone OS.
-Sony to create Orbis OS for PS4


The FFOS is far from done, and will likely have the traditional version one deficiencies that all projects have. The PS4 is in the same camp. Fully agreed on LLVM its a marvel.


Then there's all the trends on virtualization, communication, streaming, etc. by using open technologies.


Microsoft is currently eating VMware's lunch with Hyper-V, this is actually a recent change. The advances in 2012 and 2012 R2 are huge shifts in virtualizations. MSFT was late to the IaaS thing with Azure though, but they're having great success there now.


-Everyone is creating new products very quickly, thanks in great part to open technologies.
-Microsoft needs a long time to create new, quality products, with everything done inhouse, IE11 is finally getting there, Windows Phone and Windows 8 still have some way ahead


I see your point, definitely. I just think Microsoft uses a great deal of open tech, especially in their Cloud offerings and interoperates well with Hyper-V (they actually improved VM support for Linux as a host in 2012 R2)

Their developer division with .NET has embraced open technologies, the standard process, and they've open sourced large swaths of their frameworks and is actively accepting community input into the development process. Look at TypeScript for example, that's a new Microsoft. They've put the top C# guy on the job.


And the question is: Can it survive, or at least stay relevant, in the long term with this strategy of creating everything 100% inhouse, given they are not setting trends anymore AND they are slow to catch up?

I hope i'm wrong, but I see it difficult.


I think they're doing some stuff in house and out sourcing to existing tech where it makes sense. For example HD Insight on Azure is a distribution of Hadoop by HortonWorks, and their IaaS stuff means they get a lot of other databases (Mongo, Riak, etc.) for free by running them on Linux VMs in their cloud. They don't need special Windows-ified versions of those things.

So its true to an extent in my opinion, but its a situation that's actively being remedied.

Reply Parent Score: 4

toast88 Member since:
2009-09-23

Jeez, your Microsoft-fanboysm is kinda annoying.

For you:

> http://www.osnews.com/thread?566910

I wonder what it takes for you to realize that Microsoft is one of the companies the world would be better off without them.

Seriously, are you holding Microsoft shares or work for them?

As for the Surface? What the f--k are you smoking? Surface is one of the worst-selling tablets ever. Microsoft even had to cut orders before they even shipped Surface! [1] I don't know in what universe you live, but in this universe, Surface isn't selling at all, the same goes for Windows 8.

And, no, OEM sells don't really count because these are subsidized and people usually wipe Windows 8 immediately for Windows 7.

Adrian

> [1] http://www.businessinsider.com/digitimes-microsoft-cut-surface-tabl...

Edited 2013-07-13 20:26 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

If you're not going to address my points, then don't reply to my comment. Its quite obvious by your rhetoric that you have an irrational contempt for Microsoft. Its especially telling that you ignore actual financial and market results for the Surface.

http://m.techcrunch.com/2013/04/25/strategy-analytics-q1-tablet-sta... 7.4% market share for Windows tablets, excluding hybrids with touch.

http://www.citeworld.com/business/21749/microsofts-surface-strategy...
Surface helping Microsoft's bottom line

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ewanspence/2013/04/20/microsoft-surface...
Surface outselling Nexus 10

http://bgr.com/2013/03/18/google-chromebook-sales-rumor-383110/
Surface outselling Chromebooks

And I don't think I need to point out the high ASPs of Surface devices against others, especially the Surface Pro.

Edited 2013-07-13 20:43 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

shotsman Member since:
2005-07-22

What about the fact that IE10 (fully patched) still does not work with some websites that handle Chrome and firefox and importantly IE9 perfectly well.

We have banned IE10 from all our systems.
IE9 with is frequent crashes is bad enough but IE10 fails to render a load of sites that IE9 at least handles half decently.

If this is progress according to MS then I'd hate to see what happens when they really go into decline.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

I can't begin to comment without knowing specifically why, but my guess is that those websites have faulty feature/browser detection that causes them not to work.

If you're curious, I'd try those same websites with IE11 which goes a good way towards overcoming some of the obstacles thrown their way by web developers who mistakenly think that IE can't handle certain features.

Also, there are some things that IE does better than Chrome/FF and vice versa. This is the point of competition.

I don't think its a bad thing that IE is on a yearly release schedule now and gaining more standards support (and even WebGL, surprisingly) at a faster pace.

Reply Parent Score: 2