Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Microsoft Corp. - Moderated (MSFT) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (11651)	3/26/2006 9:16:35 PM
From: Mary Cluney	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 19790

The new work, Microsoft decided, would take a new approach. Vista was built more in small modules that then fit together like Lego blocks, making development and testing easier to manage. That sounds like a no brainer. Is there any other way to go?

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (11651)	3/26/2006 11:29:32 PM
From: JP Sullivan	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 19790

I might as well be the first to say it here (flame-proof suit on): BG messed up BIG TIME. As Chief Software Architect, he did not have the guts to say "to hell with compatibility -- we need to start on a clean slate and head out in a new direction." Instead he hid in the safety of the compatibility shadow and Vista is what you get. There's only so much one can wring out of the current Windows architecture and I'm disappointed that such a brilliant guy couldn't or wouldn't see this :( I've always admired the man and still do, and there's no denying his achievements at MSFT. But it's time for him to go. (And he definitely should take Ballmer with him.) People say that Apple's meager/miniscule/pitiful share of the PC market is one reason it does not have the compatibility burden of MSFT. But this is only half the story, IMHO. Apple orchestrates and manages its OS transitions well. There's always a period for people to move over to the new platform, but everyone knows it's coming and they can prepare for it -- although many of us go kicking and screaming. This is what MSFT has not had the gumption to do. I don't know why. If a pipsqueak like Apple can tell its users to just get over it, I can't understand why a big powerhouse like MSFT can't do the same thing -- these past five years could have been spent preparing everyone for the big changeover, but that's not what happened. The only conclusion I can draw is that the company has lost its nerve. Sure, there's a huge, huge risk to doing this and the alternative (the status quo) is much more palatable from the cash flow point of view. But I wonder how long this can go on before the next iteration of Windows/Vista implodes. Only time will tell, I suppose. -we-

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (11651)	3/27/2006 2:23:57 AM
From: dybdahl	Respond to of 19790

I think it is 5 years ago, that I said they would either choke on making new Windows versions, or not be able to do real innovation. The problems include, that they do innovation by mixing code with data definitions (typical problem for those who use OOP incorrectly), and that they still haven't gotten rid of the idea of binary backwards compatibility, with all the bugs from previous versions. This results in inefficient and unclean designs, adds complexity, reduces determinism in planning, and adds R&D costs.