What are they doing now? Playing a game of taking out features from one version and then blackmailing users to buy the 'new' version if they want back that feature?
What happened to 10 year release cycles? XP was around for ages, now it seems every new year Microsoft is releasing a 'new' OS to pay dividends to the hoardes of worthless baby boomer stockholders.
"We have offered them (the Arabs) a sensible way for so many years. But no, they wanted to fight. Fine! We gave them technology, the latest, the kind even Vietnam didn't have. They had double superiority in tanks and aircraft, triple in artillery, and in air defense and anti-tank weapons they had absolute supremacy. And what? Once again they were beaten. Once again they scrammed [sic]. Once again they screamed for us to come save them. Sadat woke me up in the middle of the night twice over the phone, 'Save me!' He demanded to send Soviet troops, and immediately! No! We are not going to fight for them."
What are they doing now? Playing a game of taking out features from one version and then blackmailing users to buy the 'new' version if they want back that feature?
What happened to 10 year release cycles? XP was around for ages, now it seems every new year Microsoft is releasing a 'new' OS to pay dividends to the hoardes of worthless baby boomer stockholders.
Who knows, maybe they're trying to be more like Apple
Whaaaaaaat? They haven't even released Windows 9 yet.
According to Microsoft, they technically consider Windows 8 and Windows 8.1 completely separate operating systems. So I guess you could call Windows h8.1 "Windows 9" As time goes on, I hate Windows 8 as a whole more and more. Especially trying to fix it once it has broken.
Maybe they should call it Windows 1.0. Because we will likely need to wait for 4-5 more versions till it really turns into something useful.
Originally posted by PeteS in CA
Remember that by the time consequences of a short-sighted decision are experienced, the idiot who made the bad decision may have already been promoted or moved on to a better job at another company.
Who knows, maybe they're trying to be more like Apple
I have to say that I am beginning to see M$ adopt Apple's "Use it how we tell you to" attitude (which is a big part of the reason I hate Apple) with Windows hate. They really should have made more of the big changes optional rather than insisting that's the new way to use Windows. If they haven't got their act back together by the time they drop support for Windows 7, I'll be moving on to Linux.
Perhaps they didn't want people calling it Windows Nein !
Most users nowadays i don't think care what OS they use, with the proliferation of smartphones and tablets Microsoft is seeing a decline in the home market. Enterprise have just or are in the process of updating to Win 7 as the amount of time/effort to retain to use 8.1 is unnecessary. There are a couple of nice features in 8, but for the vast majority an update to use them is not worth it.
At least they have finally figured/listened that touch is not the new interface.
6 jumped over 7 and ate 9. Microsoft has skipped over version numbers in the past, it's not really a new development and probably has to do with marketing more than anything else.
"¡Me encanta "Me Encanta o Enlistarlo con Hilary Farr!" -Mà mismo
"There's nothing more unattractive than a chick smoking a cigarette" -Topcat
"Today's lesson in pissivity comes in the form of a ziplock baggie full of GPU extension brackets & hardware that for the last ~3 years have been on my bench, always in my way, getting moved around constantly....and yesterday I found myself in need of them....and the bastards are now nowhere to be found! Motherfracker!!" -Topcat
"did I see a chair fly? I think I did! Time for popcorn!" -ratdude747
Windows 7 is really version 6.1, 8 is 6.2 and 8.1 is 6.3 as typing ver at the command prompt will tell you.
Linux is not even a OS as it's just a kernel, the userland is packaged by someone else. FreeBSD on the other hand is a complete OS based on code where all the modern networking stack came from. Both are more stable than Windows but Windows has the applications as none of the former will help me make a 5 digit income per day for the last 6 years. I'm a Microsoft and Apple shareholder. OSX is a free OS currently as upgrades no longer cost money. OSX also runs on top of a Unix OS FreeBSD + mach which is based on NeXTStep, the Unix OS that Steve Jobs created with NeXT Computing. Maybe Windows 10 is going to run on top of Unix as well.
I think you have some facts a bit mixed up concerning *nix OSes. The kernel is considered to be the core OS and a GUI is not required for the kernel OS to operate. The development paths of the mentioned *nix OSes are also not quite to your description.
Regardless, I doubt that M$ will go Unix based. They have too much invested in their NT OS and will probably continue to refine it.
I hope its good, Iam the only one in my Techteam at work that uses Windows 7 on my main PC they got upset when I uninstalled 8,personally I would take a fast machine with Vista SP2 over a 8 machine.
My Computer: AMD Ryzen 9 3900X, Asrock X370 Killer SLI/AC, 32GB G.SKILL TRIDENT Z RGB DDR4 3200, 500GB WD Black NVME and 2TB Toshiba HD,Geforce RTX 3080 FOUNDERS Edition, In-Win 303 White, EVGA SuperNova 750 G3, Windows 10 Pro
...personally I would take a fast machine with Vista SP2 over a 8 machine.
Vista isn't the demon its been made out to be if the system has enough RAM. When Vista was released, 512mb of ram was the standard.....and everyone knows how poorly that would perform. 2gb, vista runs pretty nice actually, SP2 really seemed to have fixed a lot of the memory-sucking quirks.
I will never have 8 on anything I use. I don't even use 7. Windows Server 2008 can be carved into a really nice workstation!
Skipping windows 9............that should tell yuo something about the internal collapse. I could see postponing it pending improvements or bugs, but to just skip it?! 8 was such a bellyflop, and there are so many other viable choices today.... The only people that don't realize its not 2002 anymore are the Microsoft people...
I think you have some facts a bit mixed up concerning *nix OSes. The kernel is considered to be the core OS and a GUI is not required for the kernel OS to operate. The development paths of the mentioned *nix OSes are also not quite to your description.
Regardless, I doubt that M$ will go Unix based. They have too much invested in their NT OS and will probably continue to refine it.
Linux has always been a Unix like OS and the only thing called Linux is really the kernel as the userland or basically anything other than the kernel is packaged in more flavors by different packagers than there are flavors of ice cream. FreeBSD came from 386BSD which came from BSD 4.4lite, most of the networking code used in modern OSes came from BSD. Apple's Vice President of Unix Technologies was one of the founders and release engineer for FreeBSD. OSX's Unix portion is called Darwin while the GUI is another issue. I never said anything about GUIs since my Unix machines do not even have a GUI environment. We build WAN routers and run over 5,000+ servers in the ISP I own and operate for the last 18+ years.
Microsoft originally had its own Unix called Xenix which was later sold to SCO (Santa Cruz Operation). Hotmail which Microsoft bought originally ran on FreeBSD and later on, they replaced the front-end with Windows Server while the backend was still FreeBSD, I think it's all Windows now. In any case, they can always borrow things from other OSes into NT just back in 1987 or so, there was OS/2 which was from both Microsoft and IBM. Windows 3.0 and later 3.1 later became popular and they each went their own ways.
Microsoft I doubt will be filing bankruptcy soon since it has a market capitalization of $378 Billion, Google has a market capitalization of $388 Billion, Apple has a market capitalization of $588 Billion. GE will be bankrupt before Microsoft will with $252 Billion. Microsoft stock hasn't moved until Steve Ballmer stepped down and Satya Nadella stepped up to the plate.
Comment