Facebook Plunges Again
Tumblr 101: Tips And Tricks To Get Started
Lessons learned from Vista
A bit more than a year after going gold, Microsoft is already assessing and discussing some lessons learned from Vista's underwhelming debut. ZDNet quotes Microsoft VP Mike Nash about the problems associated with the Vista launch and steps the company plans to take to prevent those kind of problems in the future. The two main problems Microsoft seems set on avoiding with the next version of Windows, dubbed Windows 7, are fewer architectural changes to Windows itself and more realistic release schedule.
The amount of significant changes to the core OS were blamed for many of Vista's delays, as well as many of the compatibility problems with existing products. While Microsoft doesn't regret making these changes to Vista (well, so they say), they are not making changes on that scale with Windows 7. When it comes to addressing release issues, Microsoft has made the decision to be less transparent about release schedules, only making information available when the date is actually feasible. Right now, Microsoft is aiming to launch Windows 7 sometime in 2010 (or 2011 or 2012...this is still Microsoft).
Comments
36
Subscribe to commentsMikeNov 15th 2007 12:39PM
These problems are largely due to foundation on which the OS was built: Windows 95. Microsoft is in a Damned-If-You-Do/Damned-If-You-Don't situation because they have people screaming about stability and security, while other scream about compatibility. They are trying to please everyone and it's costing them dearly.
Microsoft can learn a HUGE lesson from Apple's switch to Mac OS X. Apple wisely decided to rewrite the OS from scratch using modern programming practices and standard interfaces as opposed to Microsoft's hodgepodge of APIs. Backwards compatibility was (largely) preserved using a sandbox for OS9 apps.
Transitions are painful but Microsoft needs to think about the long-term benefits rather than the short term pain...
Mark ZJan 9th 2008 11:49PM
I have a major recurring issue with Vista: periodically the items at the bottom of the screen get mixed up such that if I click on one, it activates the window associated with a neighboring item. When this happens I have to reboot.
R K AngelNov 15th 2007 6:34PM
What most of you do not realize is that Vista was designed to ...make you buy new computers!
Resource hungry? Takes too much time to loador do anything? Buy a new computer (just like XP, Win 98, etc in their day)
This was called "Planned Obsolescence" back in the 50's when cars were designed to start breaking every 2 - 3 years and now we have it in computers which boosts computer manufacturers sales and over 80% of Vista computers are new computers.
Who cares if the features don't work well or as advertised, who cares if it constantly needs maintenance to run properly.
It's all about selling computers and to he!! with functionality. If people wanted a well designed Operating System they would just buy Macintosh anyway
*(OOOOOps! They ARE buying Macintosh! Forget I said that!)
TimboNov 15th 2007 6:43PM
Windows history:
Dos - great OS
Win3.1 - good OS
Win95 - Good OS
Win98 -awesome used it for a long time.
Windows ME - where are you going? terrible design.
WinXP - WOW! only took you 5 years to complete!
use it today!
Windows Vista - looks just Like Windows XP more like MAC OSX
poor operating system used it on a tablet PC
I think MS is due for a WOW OS. Well see.
I actually using Ubuntu to write this comment.
CCNov 15th 2007 10:36PM
Bought a new PC for my mom, telling her about how Vista would mean less security issues, would run faster, better.
Her new Compaq came with Home Ed. pre-loaded on 500MB of RAM and a 2Ghz+ processor.
The thing can't even run itself.
It can barely boot, let alone function normally. Her old XP box, ten years old now (orig Win 98) was ten times faster. Her new box w/ Vista can't even play the opening animation without chopping it up, spurting through it. Pathetic. A scam. Opening applications? Takes five minutes per. Email? Web surfing? The basics? Slower than any PC I've used in the last ten years. Total amateur hour, selling these unusable paperweights.
Now I owe my mom a great deal of cash (which I plan on getting from Microsoft, forcing a refund) -- am fully embarrassed, trying to reinstall her old computer, not even rolling the new PC back.
If only she had moved to a Mac like I've been asking since 1984... Microsoft owes me for a lifetime of heartache and hassle, being the only nerd in the family and on-call for this Chinese-knockoff-grade crap 24-7.
James AbelaNov 15th 2007 9:58PM
I had a very simple system for convincing my wife to use Linux (Ubuntu flavored) I told her it was an upgrade to the OS (XP) and it would make the machine run faster. It did and she loves it! Our two OSes now have names, "The fast one" and "The slow one".
Marv SwettNov 18th 2007 12:32AM
I don't have any issues with Vista.
That's because I don't run Vista. I haven't run any Microsoft products since Win98SE.
I'm upgrading my laptop to Fedora 8 tonight. Nothing in the Microsoft library impresses me enough to switch back. Reading the discussion here just convinces me that making the full switch nearly ten years ago was the smartest move I've ever made.
OmegaWolf747Nov 15th 2007 10:28PM
Other than a lack of driver and software support (Comodo, where's your new firewall?), I don't see many differences between Vista and XP.
I do however, dislike Aero and set the skin to Windows Classic.
Vista is a premature release. MS should have waited until 08 to release Vista. There was no need for them to release it this year because XP is still going strong.
I honestly wish MS would allow at least eight years between each OS. There's no need for them to crank out a new OS every four years when the previous one was still running well.
mikeNov 17th 2007 3:47AM
Apple has already 60% of market share in Japan – where Windoze has dropped from 70% do 28%. It is a matter of time before Apple has the same numbers all over the world. Microsoft should take as long as it wants because by 2012 nobody will be using windoze anymore. M$ has the delusion that people like Windoze. People use Windoze because it comes with fresh machines but as time passes people are looking to other alternatives, cause windoze sucks.
mikeh2Nov 16th 2007 12:45AM
Vista definitely changed too much. Apple has the right approach to Operating Systems - a big bang once a decade or so and then small updates every year or so. Microsoft did neither a big bang (akin to the first release of OS X) nor a minor upgrade.
New code and features means new bugs and new design mistakes. Guaranteed. Vista has too much that's new.
We saw this with Mac's Leopard. The Time Machine feature and firewall were both new. Both were buggy and suffered from design mistakes.
Why software development is so poor, I don't know. But it is.
If you're buying a new Windows machine, go for XP.
See
http://blogs.cnet.com/8301-13554_1-9770230-33.html
and
http://blogs.cnet.com/8301-13554_1-9784657-33.html
T8rNov 16th 2007 5:48AM
>>Copying every file you click and drag. I want to move it, not copy it.
>Strange. For me just dragging moves it. I have to press ctrl to copy it.
If you're dragging a file from one place to another on the same drive, it will move it by default. Dragging to another drive, it will copy by default. If you hold control, it will do whatever the opposite of the default is for that situation. Been that way since Win95
GordonNov 16th 2007 9:20AM
I've been using Vista for months and couldn't be happier. I don't really understand all the animosity against UAC, it just asks for permission when admin privileges are needed, just as Linux does... and Linux fans are always bragging about how good this is. Funny that they find the same mechanism so annoying when it's about Windows. Maybe what that really means is that MS has gotten it right with UAC.
Anyway, if you don't like Vista, you know what you've got to do. It's also funny that people complain so much about Windows but actually, the number of Linux users on the desktop is as low as it has always been. And it's like that for a reason: you get what you pay for.
Spencer FergusonNov 16th 2007 4:02PM
Perhaps a series of more minor monthly changes, as opposed to one huge release, would be a better fit for Microsoft in the future? This certainly couldn't be done anytime soon, but might be much more of a reality when virtualization becomes more prevalent.
GordonNov 17th 2007 5:57AM
That is zealotry speaking. OS X will always be a niche product as long as it is tied to Apple hardware. And anyway, Apple does not have the resources, the knowledge, or the will to support a worldwide, massively used consumer OS.
Oh, and there are people who like Windows. They are just not as vocal about it as the Apple and Linux zealots. They can be recognized by one quiet fact: they are not switching to anything, and last time I look, they're still over 90% of computer users.
JohnNov 17th 2007 1:21PM
Vista is great if your running it on a quad core processor with 4GB of RAM and a badass 512MB Graphics card
But most people arent, the main problem with Vista is the hardware requirements side, if you have awesome hardware its an amazing OS
jeffNov 26th 2007 3:29PM
All the people that complain about UAC obviously havnt used Linux before. I have Fedora 8 and Ubuntu 7.10 and they both have the same thing pop up. Want to update, root password window pops up. But since its Linux its ok for it to happen. I have been running Vista since it cam out and havnt had any problems other than driver issues at first. These have been fixed and now it runs fine. The thing is any system will crash if you do something stupid to it. Dont do anything stupid and you wont have a problem.
I think the reason people hate Microsoft is the fact they make money and people are jealous. Look at what Ubuntu has done to get market share and compare it to what MS does. For example Shuttleworth bashing Open Suse after Novell made the MS deal. Open Suse had nothing to do with it yet he bashed them big time, yet nobody said anything bad about Ubuntu, funny how that works.