1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

News Gartner: Windows is collapsing

Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by Tim S, 14 Apr 2008.

  1. Tim S

    Tim S OG

    Joined:
    8 Nov 2001
    Posts:
    18,881
    Likes Received:
    78
  2. naokaji

    naokaji whatever

    Joined:
    8 Dec 2006
    Posts:
    1,879
    Likes Received:
    10
    They are right, just look at the slow uptake of vista in business. Simply put, most companies dont have pc's that are even close to running the most basic version of vista.
     
  3. LeMaltor

    LeMaltor >^_^

    Joined:
    3 Oct 2003
    Posts:
    2,102
    Likes Received:
    25
    Long live XP! :D
     
  4. Techno-Dann

    Techno-Dann Disgruntled kumquat

    Joined:
    22 Jan 2005
    Posts:
    1,672
    Likes Received:
    27
    ...wait a second. They complain about Windows being too bulky, and then say virtualization is the way forward?
     
  5. Orlix

    Orlix New Member

    Joined:
    9 Dec 2007
    Posts:
    70
    Likes Received:
    0
    yes... you virtually change to the next windows by installing LINUX.
     
  6. mclean007

    mclean007 Officious Bystander

    Joined:
    22 May 2003
    Posts:
    2,035
    Likes Received:
    15
    Yeah, I missed that one as well! Virtualisation has a lot of benefits, but reduced complexity isn't necessarily one of them!

    I guess what they're trying to say is that Windows should have a minimal, super-efficient, bulletproof kernel, which interfaces directly with the hardware and does the lowest level stuff like basic file I/O, bootstrapping drivers, talking to peripherals etc., and then have Windows sitting on top of that (presumably as a bundle of different modules). It's essentially another layer of OS, which could be called a virtualisation layer. The kernel/modules approach means you only load what you need, you have much tighter control over which applications can do what, you can terminate individual modules (e.g. if they crash) without bringing the whole OS down, and upgrading individual modules becomes much easier, often not even requiring a reboot. This is what GNU/Linux does, and if MS could replicate the same model with the familiarity of Windows, it would be fantastic.
     
  7. MiNiMaL_FuSS

    MiNiMaL_FuSS ƬӇЄƦЄ ƁЄ ƇƠƜƧ ӇЄƦЄ.

    Joined:
    24 Dec 2003
    Posts:
    6,395
    Likes Received:
    100
    when there's a nice linux based OS that will run everything windows currently does i'd happily switch.
     
  8. pumpman

    pumpman New Member

    Joined:
    7 Jul 2004
    Posts:
    1,035
    Likes Received:
    2
    Well if it did collapse under its own weight it would be a very slow death, I can see Microsoft releasing a core windows , in much the same way as you have basic , home premium, Ultimate , but with windows core and every additional feature you want would be an add on. Windows is only bloaty because it has a lot of things it has to try and work with.
     
  9. EmJay

    EmJay New Member

    Joined:
    28 Jun 2007
    Posts:
    316
    Likes Received:
    0
    Bingo. Windows is expected to work with everything, flawlessly, which leads to the great majority of its problems. I'm not sure what the solution is (I'd be rich if I did), but it will probably require MSoft to relax their stranglehold on consumer's use of their product. That'll be their downfall, if anything.

    Personally, I'd love to see the above suggestion of a Linux-style kernel with various modules that can run on top of it to suit preferences and hardware. MSoft could do fantastically well if they made the kernel open-source, and then only sold the modules - it might hurt their monopoly, but enough people are addicted to the Windows look/feel that I'm guessing they'd do just fine.

    I don't know. Whatever happens, it'll be interesting.
     
  10. Nexxo

    Nexxo Queue Jumper

    Joined:
    23 Oct 2001
    Posts:
    33,366
    Likes Received:
    1,185
    I must disagree. Even the relatively underfunded NHS has systems capable of running Vista in Aero mode.
     
  11. TGImages

    TGImages Grandpa

    Joined:
    11 Aug 2004
    Posts:
    160
    Likes Received:
    1
    Windows, or Mac OSX for that matter, should be an OS. Period. Provide a common GUI and a way for apps and devices to communicate with each other.

    Then, all the Media players and interfaces, apps, web browsers, etc. should each be completely stand alone. The separate "apps" should live and die on their own merits. The more crap they bundle just makes the OS seem bloated and most of this bundled stuff eventually becomes part of the core OS when there is no need to do so.
     
  12. Silver51

    Silver51 I cast flare!

    Joined:
    24 Jul 2006
    Posts:
    2,962
    Likes Received:
    287
    I *like* a lot of the bundled stuff that comes with Vista.

    Admittedly, an option to not install the parts you will never use (IE) on setup would be nice. But I've always found Windows to be a comfortable environment where everything works and where you don't need to be a programmer to install stuff.

    I don't think we can guess the future of Windows based on our current view of the computer world. It will change in due course, as will other OS's and the hardware we run them on.
     
  13. Breach

    Breach Modding in Exile

    Joined:
    20 Jun 2005
    Posts:
    396
    Likes Received:
    1
    They definitely need to innovate to stay alive, another "vista" will kill them.

    I think overall MS needs to find it's identity again. Meaning drop the Zune, drop your efforts to beat Google at search, stop anything that isnt making software that lets people use a computer, whether a desktop, laptop, smart phone etc. That is how MS became so big, but now they are bloated trying to be like everyone else and failing at all of it in the end. Vista to me is the end product of their star software not getting the development it deserved, resulting in a prettier XP that no on who knows better will fork over money for the "upgrade". You know there is a problem when even your OEMs start offering XP again.
     
  14. Woodstock

    Woodstock So Say We All

    Joined:
    10 Sep 2006
    Posts:
    1,783
    Likes Received:
    2
    @Silver51 you dont need to be a programmer to be able to install things in linux, hell pretty much every package manager has a GUI interface.

    @Breach do you really think MS would have would have paid all those programmers for a new UI

    @EmJay/mclean007 if you want a linux (style) kernel, use linux. I personally love being able to change the kernel it suit my needs
     
  15. dslickness

    dslickness New Member

    Joined:
    27 Feb 2008
    Posts:
    21
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm an XP fan, and I'll never change over to Vista unless performance was better or stayed the same. They were so concerned with the look (compared to OSX) that they cluttered their GUI.
    How hard is it to continue the greatness of the XP OS, and improve it to make a more stable, high performing, and clean system?

    Well just like WIndows ME, a total mess. Maybe MS will wise up and make a cleaner low profile OS. I hate to say this but Apple has it down when they make incremental changes to their OS. The look is generally the small, but with improved features. (NO A DOWNGRADE)

    Anyway, I don't hope for MS to fall. I just want them to retrograde. Just return to the greatness of XP
     
  16. Nikumba

    Nikumba Member

    Joined:
    29 Aug 2001
    Posts:
    645
    Likes Received:
    11
    Well how about Apple have to write for a TINY amount of hardware, compared to Microsoft who have to wrtie software for a MASSIVE amount of hardware, so they will be issues

    I use Vista, and I love it, even at work now, using Vista, XP for me now is just a step back in the way things work. I have also tried Ubuntu Linux, however after the devs failing to fix a problem over the last 3 versions, I really cant be arsed with installing it, then bodging it to make it work, its things like that that will prevent Linux going fully mainstream.

    Of course if they ever manage to port DirectX to Linux and game devs make games work on Linux then I would look at swapping over, but until then I will happily stick with my Vista, IE7 and Office 2007

    Kimbie
     
  17. CanadianViking

    CanadianViking Beast from the North

    Joined:
    22 Nov 2007
    Posts:
    201
    Likes Received:
    0
    ...work on decreasing development times?

    "Hey Ted, I told you to be done Windows 56 by Thursday. We need to get it out the door by next week, so we can have Windows 57 ready for next month!"

    What does he expect? If anything, I would prefer a LONGER development time, if that means bug-checking and getting all the kinks out.

    Personally, I've played with Vista on my mom's laptop, and I love it. It's very sleek, and it runs well if you don't have ancient hardware. (her laptop isn't even that great; move forward already guys, this stuffs improving quick). I still love XP because I know what I'm doing on it having used it for years, but I still am quite attached to Vista.
     
  18. Mentai

    Mentai New Member

    Joined:
    11 Nov 2007
    Posts:
    758
    Likes Received:
    1
    I'm going to install both XP and Vista on my new computer to do a performance comparison in the games I play. I'm guessing the difference will be neglible, especially if I tweak Vista a little to eliminate some bloat. I really don't think it deserves half the hate it's getting...
    I kinda like Vista, although admitedIy wouldn't bother with it if they had released dx10 for XP.
     
  19. BurningFeetMan

    BurningFeetMan New Member

    Joined:
    24 Feb 2006
    Posts:
    114
    Likes Received:
    0
    Exactly right. Some obvious proggies,
    • Internet Explorer: Nope - Firefox
    • Windows Media Player: Nope - Winamp
    • Outlook Express: Nope - Firefox/gmail
    • Windows Messenger: Nope - Digsby
    Infact, looking at my start menu, there are tonnes of Windows applications sitting there, waiting to be used, that are never used! Needless to say, thanks to Windows and it's bloat, I now enjoy Nliting my install disc as a regular hobby.
     
  20. xrain

    xrain Member

    Joined:
    26 Jan 2004
    Posts:
    403
    Likes Received:
    21
    I'm quite happy with my 64 bit version of vista ultimate, it seems to actually load faster on start-up than my bios does. My bios takes about 20 seconds to load and vista about 15. The only problem I've had so far, was trying to install vista with 4 gigs of ram and not having the hot fix that lets you use 4 gigs of ram, it caused a series of very strange issues.
     
Tags: Add Tags

Share This Page