Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 13th Jan 2014 10:06 UTC
Windows

Paul Thurrott on the next version of Windows and the future of the platform.

In some ways, the most interesting thing about Threshold is how it recasts Windows 8 as the next Vista. It's an acknowledgment that what came before didn't work, and didn't resonate with customers. And though Microsoft will always be able to claim that Windows 9 wouldn't have been possible without the important foundational work they had done first with Windows 8 - just as was the case with Windows 7 and Windows Vista - there's no way to sugarcoat this. Windows 8 has set back Microsoft, and Windows, by years, and possibly for good.

With even Paul Thurrott claiming Windows is in trouble, it becomes virtually impossible to deny it is so.

Thread beginning with comment 580623
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: Microsoft in transition
by davidiwharper on Tue 14th Jan 2014 00:59 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Microsoft in transition"
davidiwharper
Member since:
2006-01-01

Maybe because they don't have to clean off their relatives' XP systems anymore ;)


Haha, true! :-D

Also, I think the fanboys were really let down by how bad Vista was, and when 7 came along they were just incredibly relieved that it was more than half way decent.

Reply Parent Score: 3

WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

Was Vista really that bad, if you used it on a machine with up to date drivers and apps? And would 7 had fared any better had they released it when Vista originally came out? In other words, was 7 just fortunate enough to have been released after Vista?

Reply Parent Score: 3

WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

Was Vista really that bad, if you used it on a machine with up to date drivers and apps?


I don't think it was ever actually as bad as people make it out to be, it just was all the issues with drivers not being updated for Vista and PC-manufacturers selling Vista on machines that very, very clearly were not suited for running it that created this image that Vista itself was somehow a horrible creature. The transitional period from XP - driver model to the newer one was really confusing for the layman and many a manufacturer didn't bother to upgrade their drivers at all just so they could push people to buy new peripherals, so is it any wonder that the layman then started blaming Vista?

And would 7 had fared any better had they released it when Vista originally came out? In other words, was 7 just fortunate enough to have been released after Vista?


Had there been no Vista in-between I really doubt the situation would've been any different.

Reply Parent Score: 4

davidiwharper Member since:
2006-01-01

Yes it was still pretty bad, even with just the plain OS, the basic Internet apps (Flash, Adobe Reader etc.) and Office 2007. The security model was awful (UAC had only one setting - on for everything), I/O performance in Windows Explorer was atrocious, a lot of simple stuff was broken (e.g. I had to create a registry patch to fix handling of MSP files, Microsoft's own patch medium of choice) and it was soooo sloooooow even on top end hardware. I bought what was then a top of the line Quad Core Q6600 in late 2007, and it crawled along with Vista; when Windows 7 was released two years later - remember, 7 has the same core as Vista and was 99.99% compatible with Vista drivers and applications - it flew along nicely for the rest of its lifespan.

I think if Vista had come out in a polished Win7-like state, with the speed of 7 and the application compatibility of 7 [especially the built in XP Mode], while it would certainly have had teething troubles due to driver issues and so forth, there wouldn't have been the continuing furore that accompanied the actual Vista product. A big part of the ongoing hatred for Vista was due to the lack of a response from Microsoft. The major problems with Vista (speed, poor application compatibility) are still present today if you happen across some poor bastard running it on their PC - Microsoft bundled all of the improvements into Win7 instead of actually fixing Vista.

Someone mentioned the netbook wave that erupted around the time Vista came out. If Win7 had been around instead of Vista, then XP wouldn't have been needed for netbooks. (XP is pretty horrible on netbooks FWIW while 7 is more tolerable.) That alone would have changed quite a bit of the narrative.

Edited 2014-01-14 06:46 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3