back to article In three hours, Microsoft gave the Windows-verse everything it needed

In a three-hour session at Build 2014, Microsoft pulled itself further clear of the wreckage created by the company's ex-Windows 8 chief Steve Sinofsky. Most keynotes ramble at least a little bit, but the sheer deluge of updates at Microsoft's annual developer conference yesterday seemed to leave the audience battered and …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Clueless

    Microsoft still haven't got their act together. I honestly can't commit to any of their techs any more. They certainly can't.

    I've been burnt too many times by their killing of products, but at least they weren't as obvious as this nuclear disaster in slow motion.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Unhappy

      Re: Clueless

      "I've been burnt too many times by their killing of products"

      Quite. When they miss the boat they run around like headless chickens (apologies for metaphors.) I learnt my lesson when we worked closely with MS to develop corporate web applications in the mid-to-late 90s. A project budgeted at over a million, running for 18 months, was eventually brought to its knees by multiple changes of direction from them, each previous "strategy" being abandoned and us with it. You only have to find alternatives to this type of nonsense once, and then discover that they're not as wonderful as they think they are.

      1. mattd73uk

        Re: Clueless

        You gave up on MS the 90s? So you missed out on the hugely successful XP, Windows 7, and the .Net platform now in its 11th year? It's one way to go.

        Me? For me it's like musicians - I chose what I like, I don't pick one then blindly buy everything they do. I buy the stuff that makes me happy.

        By the sound of it MS are on their way to making something that makes me happy.

        1. Roo
          Gimp

          Re: Clueless

          "By the sound of it MS are on their way to making something that makes me happy."

          I'm going to reserve judgement on that one until braver folks have had a chance to cut their teeth on it.

          In my view Microsoft are in a pretty good place in terms of having a broad spectrum of technologies, some of them able to play in the consumer space. They seem to be throwing a mix of R&D projects while reacting to the (negative) feedback of Win 8, this could actually help folks out *and* move their myriad of platforms forward.

          We'll see, but if anyone can pull off a turn around like this I think it's MS with Bill Gates lending a bit of drive & vision - it's still a long shot though.

          I really can't believe I just wrote all that. I want to point out that I still don't like the way MS conduct their business, and I hope that they can live along side Open Source / Free Software through harnessing their R&D brain trust rather than trying to crush it through legislation & taxation.

          Gimpmask because I think there are good odds that this post will come back to haunt me.

        2. Uffish

          Re: Clueless

          This is a curate's egg situation, "parts of it are good" is not healthy.

        3. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Clueless

          "By the sound of it MS are on their way to making something that makes me happy."

          A chapter 11 filing?

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Clueless

        > they run around like headless chickens (apologies for metaphors.)

        That's a simile!

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Clueless

      >>>> Microsoft still haven't got their act together. I honestly can't commit to any of their techs any more. They certainly can't.

      True, all this talk about "developers, developers, developers" was a load of crap. They alienated us, fed us BS, talked down technologies while the market was embracing them, then gave us the Win8/RT/WinPho nightmare.

      Wanna code iOS/OSX? Objective C and XCode.

      Wanna code Android? Eclipse/ADT.

      Someone asks you to write a Windows App? I haven't got a clue what we're meant to use now. Tbh, I'd use a browser.

      1. RyokuMas

        Re: Clueless

        "Wanna code iOS/OSX? Objective C and XCode.

        Wanna code Android? Eclipse/ADT"

        Wanna write for pretty much anything? Use C# and Xamarin, and only worry about maintaining a single code base with some very minor tweaks for how the underlying system behaves (eg: handling an incoming call on mobile).

        I can now take a game that I've developed on one mobile platform (usually Windows Phone as I prefer Visual Studio to Xamarin Studio), and go from "new Android Project" to "running game requiring a bit of plumbing work (ie: call handling)" in under an hour.

        1. Bogle

          Re: Clueless

          Xamarin at $999/year/developer/platform is a bit pricey, no? Most folks aren't going to chance that and I suspect they aren't going to see a return on the WinPho platform if they do. Is this a popular choice?

          1. RyokuMas

            Re: Clueless

            "Xamarin at $999/year/developer/platform is a bit pricey, no?"

            Depends what you're after. If you're an indie wanting to experiment, you can start off with, just Android (for example) for $299 for a year's support. And "support" is the key word here - from the Xamarin site FAQ:

            "What happens when my Xamarin subscription expires?

            Your apps will continue to run even after your subscription has expired. Your Xamarin license is perpetual. If you choose not to renew your subscription, you will no longer have access to new releases and support, and we will be very sad.."

            ... in other words, you can still build and deploy apps, you just lose updates and support. In fact, their support team recently helped me fix a problem I had that prevented me doing just that, even though my licence had expired!

            On the other hand, if you're looking for business use, think about how much it would cost to employ specialists for (say) both and Objective C specialist team for iOS and a Java specialist team for Android. You'll soon recoup the $999 out of a salary you don't have to pay since you'll need fewer developers to maintain a single code base...

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Clueless

          >>>> Wanna write for pretty much anything? Use C# and Xamarin, and only worry about maintaining a single code base with some very minor tweaks for how the underlying system behaves (eg: handling an incoming call on mobile).

          I'll check it out, cheers.

          1. RyokuMas
            Facepalm

            Re: Clueless

            Jesus, who downvotes someone for wanting to check something out? Has Eadon gotten back on here?

  2. Spearchucker Jones

    Lots more than that -

    They also open-sourced Roslyn (the C# compiler written in C#), they've open-sourced WinJS, and introduced .NET Native. And then of course there's Cortana...

    1. diodesign (Written by Reg staff) Silver badge

      Re: Lots more than that -

      Andrew wrote this piece about an hour before the Roslyn announcement. We've got something about that coming up.

      C.

    2. Tyrion
      Linux

      Re: Lots more than that -

      >They also open-sourced Roslyn (the C# compiler written in C#), they've open-sourced WinJS, and introduced .NET Native. And then of course there's Cortana...

      There's a difference between open source and, free and open source. In Microsoft's case, the former is encumbered with patents. So take a good look at Android and Linux, and watch how Microsoft asserts its patents to rid itself of competition, then think again whether or not it's a good idea to adopt Microsoft technologies.

      I for one won't touch dotnet with a ten foot barge pole. Its cross platform support is sketchy at best, and the patents that surround it are concerning to say the least; especially when Microsoft's past behavior is taken into account.

      FOSS technologies are the future, not proprietary, patent encumbered ones like Microsoft produces.

      1. Anonymous Bullard
        Thumb Up

        Re: Lots more than that -

        "FOSS technologies are the future, not proprietary, patent encumbered ones like Microsoft produces."

        It's released under the Apache licence

        1. Sandtitz Silver badge
          Facepalm

          Re: Lots more than that -

          "It's released under the Apache licence"

          Now now, look what you did - you spoiled all the fun with your unwelcome little fact. Tyrion was an a roll with 5 upvotes already!

          1. All names Taken
            Happy

            Re: Lots more than that -

            Is that Tyrion son of Tywin, lord of the 7 etceteras?

          2. Jamie Jones Silver badge

            Re: Lots more than that -

            "Now now, look what you did - you spoiled all the fun with your unwelcome little fact. Tyrion was an a roll with 5 upvotes already!"

            Indeed. As a long time opponent of Microsoft OS's and business practices, I get frustrated by the damage done by the FUD spreading Linux users that happen to be cult-of-RMS fanbois, they do more harm than good to Linux and FOSS in general.

    3. amanfromarse

      Re: Lots more than that -

      Roslyn is very interesting and I believe that .Net native is a by-product of that.

      WinJS, javascript interfaces to the Windows API, who cares? Phonegap catchup.

      You didn't mention Universal Windows Apps. Plenty of euphoria on 'tech' blogs over this, when it's actually just PCLs with new Visual Studio solution templates.

      1. RyokuMas
        Trollface

        Re: Lots more than that -

        WinJS, javascript interfaces to the Windows API, who cares?

        FTFY :)

    4. bigtimehustler

      Re: Lots more than that -

      Open sourced WinJS...oh thank the lord! I think not...I think humanity would have been better off had they not bothered!

  3. Roo
    Windows

    Took them long enough...

    But it's nice that they care enough about their jobs to actually deliver 90% of a consistent target for developers to aim at.

    POSIX must have outlived more MS APIs than I've had hot dinners by now. :P

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Took them long enough...

      Ignoring X11 for a moment… which has similarly been around almost as long as I've been alive.

      1. Roo
        Pint

        Re: Took them long enough...

        "Ignoring X11 for a moment… which has similarly been around almost as long as I've been alive."

        Have an upvote, I was going to include X11 but I thought, let's not dilute the point... But while we're at it, how about some of the newbies like zlib, STL, libTIFF, OpenGL, OpenSSL, ... and so on... ? ;)

        Have a beer for the freedom and free beer !

        P.S. I recall a TV item on the MIT team working on X - and their 1MIP, 1Megapixel workstation - the specs seemed fantastic at the time, but I felt they were way too low for what they were trying to achieve. Then along came Apollo, Sun et al and suddenly you had hi-res full colour UIs on monster monitors. A Windows 3.1 PC was a bit of a let down after experiencing an Apollo Domain box for 15 minutes. :P

        1. Kristian Walsh Silver badge
          Joke

          Re: Took them long enough...

          The only reason X11 is still around because nobody has figured out a way of shutting it down it that'll work on all implementations.

      2. Michael Wojcik Silver badge

        Re: Took them long enough...

        Ignoring X11 for a moment

        Technically, X11 is a protocol. The API is Xlib. Ah, sweet pedantry.

        X11 is a relative newcomer - only been around since '87. Various UNIX APIs (later standardized by POSIX and X.Open, and then the SUS) and parts of the C library (later standardized by ANSI X3.159 and ISO 9899) have gone unchanged since the early '70s.1

        Similarly, MVS goes back to '74 and many of its APIs live on in zOS today.

        In Microsoft's defense, sort of, I will note that there are still available Windows APIs that haven't changed since Windows 2.0, such as SendMessage. (They may date back to Windows 1.0; I never wrote code for anything prior to 2.0.) So that makes those APIs as old as version-11 Xlib. Of course, keeping some APIs says nothing about the ones that were discarded.

        For that matter, NTVDM maintains various DOS APIs, such as they are, and it's still present in 32-bit Windows 7. That pushes the oldest APIs Microsoft still supports back to 1981, though purely as a curiosity.

        1Roughly 1973; before that the C language was sufficiently different that the APIs can't in fairness be considered the same in most cases.

        1. Richard Plinston

          Re: Took them long enough...

          > That pushes the oldest APIs Microsoft still supports back to 1981

          MS-DOS 1.x APIs were cloned from CP/M with only minor changes, so make that 1975.

  4. Tyrion
    Linux

    Too Little Too Late

    In all honesty, I think it's too late for Microsoft. The world has moved on from Microsoft's proprietary API's to FOSS solutions like Android, ChromeOS, Ubuntu, and SteamOS. Who really needs Windows these days? Some might say the enterprise, but I don't think the enterprise really matters because they're always a decade behind everyone else. Eventually they'll catch up as well, and they won't be going Windows that's for sure. Business, governments, etc always eventually follow the consumer trends. Especially since BYOD and cloud computing now do most of what traditional fat clients used to do.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Too Little Too Late

      Down-voted for mentioning the once-promising and now a dog turd UBUNTU

    2. mmeier

      Re: Too Little Too Late

      BYOD mostly means iThingy or Windows these days and this will likely grow since BYOD get's more formalized currently and the question is more and more often "will it integrated with the company network/security setup". Getting a Win8 tablet pc "in" is easier in 90+ percent of the companies (that already run/use Windows Authentification) than doing the same with an Android. iOS being the "one with paying customers" gets some support at least. Helps that there is only one manufacturer...

      And outside a few very powerful units - BYOD can not replace a classic desktop. Legal reasons alone make sure of that since a "computer based workplace" needs to follow "da rules" and a 10'' touch tablet does not. And once you start looking for the needed docking stations etc - welcome to the Intel / Windows (or MacOS) world. And as much as I like a good tablet pc for meetings, presentations and similar customer events - for programming and larger writting jobs it gets snapped into the docking station connected to two big monitors and a keyboard. And that is a HUGE 13'' Convertible with a top end keyboard etc.

      OS is "whatever fits the needs and infrastructures" and "whatever runs the software I want/need". Both in companies and in most peoples privat lives. Computers are tools for about 98 percent of the end users, they do not want a DIY system that needs experiments/trials to get a software/hardware running or one that is no longer supported 12 month after introduction (Hi Samsung, Bye Samsung)

      Proprietary API are not a problem as long as they are well documented and long term stable. Say "will be supported at least from 2003 to 2014". Unstable API (and ABI) that change every year or so are a LOT more problematic since they require a constant re-work. Windows, Solaris (and I assume MacOS) keep API, ABI and driver models static at least two major releases often more (Win8 kicked XP driver support IIRC)

      1. bigtimehustler

        Re: Too Little Too Late

        Actually, I think you are mostly right, apart from on one point. In the consumer landscape computers are not just tools, they are increasingly moving into the fashion area and that puts a whole different spin on it, a spin Microsoft has never been able to get rotating.

    3. Si 1

      Re: Too Little Too Late

      I agree it's too little, too late. I think the sudden appearance of Office on iOS is a sign Nadella recognises market share is more important than quibbling with Apple about their 30% App Store cut.

      Imagine what the market share of Office on iOS would be if Ballmer hadn't wasted nearly 2 years arguing the toss about that. Instead they're now trying to charge £80 a year for Office when all new iPhones and iPads come with Apple's Pages/Numbers/Keynote apps for free.

      Unless you're a power-user that needs macros and mail merges those apps are more than adequate for any average user, meaning Microsoft are again losing out on capturing new Office users.

      I like what Nadella is doing, but I think it really is too late to turn the ship around...

      1. mmeier

        Re: Too Little Too Late

        As soon as you use the stuff in the office / in BYOD the "can understand MS Format fully" element comes in. Not "almost" not "mostly" but "100 percent as the original". Been there, done that, thought about MARVing the customer.

    4. Jamie Jones Silver badge

      Re: Too Little Too Late

      "The world has moved on from Microsoft's proprietary API's to FOSS solutions like Android, ChromeOS, Ubuntu, and SteamOS. "

      Hmmmmm, another one who thinks FOSS == Linux/GNU

      Your use of the 'fanboi-alert' penguin icon was a clue!

      1. Kristian Walsh Silver badge

        Re: Too Little Too Late

        "The world has moved on from Microsoft's proprietary API's to FOSS solutions like Android, ChromeOS, Ubuntu, and SteamOS. "

        With the exception of Ubuntu, all of those are like Free, Open-Source Software, but not actually FOSS. However you build them, the free sources of Android can't make the Android or ChromeOS that Google gives to its OEM partners.

        To add to Jamie's point, above: I'd argue that the products that have done most commercial harm to Microsoft are Apache, PHP and MySQL, but I guess as they're not GNU-licenced, they don't count?

        1. mmeier

          Re: Too Little Too Late

          I do not see much financial harm done by Apache or PHP. The Apache runs just fine under Windows as does PHP. Choosing between them is often a "what do we run also" question. If i.e Sharepoint is part of your setup you'll more likely use IIS and a ,NET language

          One could argue that mySQL eats a few MS SQL Server licences and/or into Access (more into the latter) but if I NEED a full sized RDBMS with Triggers, Stored Procedures etc the competitors are Oracle, DB/2 and Sybase.

          And while MS would gladly sell you a Visual Studio they have included the IIS with all server versions of Windows (and quite a few non server ones) since NT4. And the Dev Environment always was an "enabler" not a cash cow. The full versions are costly for a hobbist but small money for a professional developer who makes money with it. OTOH most hobbist can do well with the free version.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Too Little Too Late

          "Apache, PHP and MySQL"

          Those all run fine under Windows. And are much less likely to be hacked on that than say on Linux.

          And they don't really cost Microsoft anything commercially - MySQL is on a par to the free version of SQL Server but with far fewer features, and Microsoft includes IIS / .Net in with it's OS licences.

          1. Richard Plinston

            Re: Too Little Too Late

            > MySQL is on a par to the free version of SQL Server

            Except it is not really free. Not only is it time limited but you need to buy CALs for the clients to access it.

            """SQL Server 2014 is available for download today as a 180-day free trial version through Microsoft's TechNet Evaluation Center here."""

            PostgreSQL is better.

          2. Vociferous

            Re: Too Little Too Late

            > Those all run fine under Windows.

            No, not really. They run, but slowly, with missing functionality. When you use them side by side, as we do, it's very obvious they were written for Linux.

            >Windows. And are much less likely to be hacked on that than say on Linux.

            News to me.

            And isn't the free included-with-the-OS IIS limited to a total of 10 simultaneous connections?

    5. briesmith

      Re: Too Little Too Late

      "I don't think the enterprise really matters "

      Tyrion, you're obviously a genius seeing the world in a far cleverer way than the rest of us. Or quite mad.

      Or just plain silly.

  5. Mage Silver badge
    Mushroom

    I hate to bang on about this AGAIN

    But this is garbage and always has been except for trivial widgets:

    " Finally, at long last, developers can use "90 per cent" (its figure) of the same code base to create Universal Windows apps for Windows Phone, RT, desktop Windows and now Xbox."

    No you need DIFFERENT GUI and UI strategies for

    1: small phone/screen

    2: big phone

    3: tablet

    4: Desktop / laptop etc

    5: TV with only a remote

    6: Games console with game pad etc/

    7: Server, even if GUI as it has to be bandwidth / Remote Access friendly

    Underlying non UI related code could be the same. But writing the SAME non-trivial application for these is fantasy. The same GUI dehydrated death no matter if old idea of miniaturising Win9x for WinCE 320 x 240 or expanding Zune GUI ported to phone up to a desktop.

    Sinfofsky was doubly mad forcing one tile GUI yet different APIs.

    Also ditch the stupid ribbon and Win 2.0 themes.

    Fix the damm bugs in Explorer there since 1995 instead of messing with new features.

    Obviously APIs to access storage / files / draw primitives / print / communication etc should be the same. But even if EVERY API was identically compatible for the 7 platforms there you'd be moron to port say the same 3D modelling or accounts package with no GUI or design changes. I'd guess a trivial thing like an eBay sniping tool could be a little "widget" the same on all.

    1. Spearchucker Jones

      Re: I hate to bang on about this AGAIN

      Ah. Silly me (and one or two others) then, for spending all that time creating a responsive design for my web site. Did you know that XAML is mark-up in the same way that HTML is? And that you can build your app using HTML and JavaScript instead of .Net?

      Oh, and if you'd paid attention you'd know that you can choose which parts to share, and which not, and that you can even choose to share no components at all (*gasp*).

      1. Ken Hagan Gold badge

        Re: I hate to bang on about this AGAIN

        "Ah. Silly me (and one or two others) then, for spending all that time creating a responsive design for my web site."

        If your website tries to look the same on all these platforms then yes, you've wasted your time. If it adapts to the target device and offers different layout, different facilities, different navigation, then you've done just what the man said and created different UIs for each case. Well done.

      2. RyokuMas

        Re: I hate to bang on about this AGAIN

        "And that you can build your app using HTML and JavaScript instead of .Net?"

        But would you want to? For me, there are a few things that I've yet to see Javascript do well enough for my liking. Little things like, ooooh, readable code, inheritance, interfaces...

    2. Michael B.

      Re: I hate to bang on about this AGAIN

      That's why the universal app projects in Visual Studio allow you to share as much or as little common code as necessary. If you do have something that works fine on WinPhone then you can go ahead and push it, otherwise you can tune controls or whole pages to look the best on the different platforms.

  6. netdemon

    The new CEO is on the right track, in my humble opinion. The latest move of giving away Office to iPad users is the perfect indication that he is thinking with a clear head. If Microsoft cannot make money selling tablet hardware, at least try to profit from the tablet market in software. Many users, especially corporate users, will want to pay for Office 365 so they can create Office documents on iPads instead of just reading them. That will provide a steady revenue stream eventually. If Microsoft does not do this, eventually some other office productivity software will take hold on tablet devices and Microsoft will be locked out once again.

    I think Microsoft's long term strategy should involving better focus on their core products: operating systems, office productivity and server software. Anything else is a distraction. Microsoft will never beat Twitter and Facebook in social media. Xbox is finally making money, and it should be put on the block for cash. Microsoft needs to stop trying to be everything to everybody. Many of the recent acquisitions are waste of shareholders' money and are merely more distraction to Microsoft's core businesses.

    1. jonathanb Silver badge

      Office for iPad may be good, but an £80 per year subscription to be able to edit files is way to expensive. If they sold the app for maybe £15 - £20, I might consider buying it if the reviews were good, but I'll stick with Kingsoft Office and Apple's own offering for now.

      1. JaimieV

        Not trying to defend the cost, but...

        If you (or your workplace) already has an Office365 subscription for your use, then the iPad apps are included in that. There's no extra fee. And the sub you make for the iPad version includes the desktop versions, likewise.

  7. CNXTim

    Too little too late? don't be preposterous!

    It is patently absurd to say the largest software company in the world is in a position of 'too little too late'.

    Serious IT decision makers in Government and the Corporate world trust them - and for very good reasons.

    And also absurd to lay all the blame with Sinofsky - the buck stopped with Ballmer IM(not so H)O the most inappropriate CEO of a software company EVER (after Klessig of Quadratron) .

    Bad decision Bill - BAD!

    If 'Nuttella' keeps making these style of decisions he can turn the 'ship of fools around' for sure!

    1. amanfromarse

      Re: Too little too late? don't be preposterous!

      It's not absurd, maybe premature.

      You have seen the market share for WinPhone and Surface?

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Too little too late? don't be preposterous!

        WinPhone nwo has over 10% UK market share! And over 10% of the EU big 5 too.

        1. Peter2 Silver badge

          Re: Too little too late? don't be preposterous!

          Be honest, the only reason every business deploys windows is because there is no alternative to it for most businesses.

          Most companies don't so much buy windows, as buy the industry specific software that you need for the business which happens to run on windows.

        2. Tyrion
          Stop

          Re: Too little too late? don't be preposterous!

          >WinPhone nwo has over 10% UK market share! And over 10% of the EU big 5 too.

          That's a complete and utter lie. In Germany it's hovering about 5-6%, and Germany is the EU's biggest economy. I'm sure that inconvenient truth won't stop you fantasising.

    2. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge
      Trollface

      Re: Too little too late? don't be preposterous!

      Serious IT decision makers in Government and the Corporate world trust them - and for very good reasons.

      Flimflammery, kickbacks and the delusion that Symantec Antivirus will keep the bottom from falling out?

      And also absurd to lay all the blame with Sinofsky - the buck stopped with Ballmer.

      Yes, he should have cashiered the Sinoguy immediately instead of letting him run with dimwitted ideas.

      But it's good to hear that Microsoft is finally shuffling its feet.

      1. Chika

        Re: Too little too late? don't be preposterous!

        > > Serious IT decision makers in Government and the Corporate world

        > > trust them - and for very good reasons.

        > Flimflammery, kickbacks and the delusion that Symantec Antivirus will keep the

        > bottom from falling out?

        Probably. The trouble is that too many people making the decisions are either of the over-cautious type (I don't want to change the habits of a lifetime) or the one-button-fixes-everything type. It isn't unusual for them to have an IT type advising them, but it isn't unusual for the IT type to either be almost as ignorant or, more often, ignored because they don't use the right buzzwords.

        > > And also absurd to lay all the blame with Sinofsky - the buck stopped

        > > with Ballmer.

        > Yes, he should have cashiered the Sinoguy immediately instead of letting

        > him run with dimwitted ideas.

        Sinofsky probably got away with it by keeping his profile high only where it was needed. The problem there is that it's the sort of strategy that bites you in the bum eventually and when it does, your own bum isn't the only one up for mastication.

        > But it's good to hear that Microsoft is finally shuffling its feet.

        Maybe. There's still time for them to trip and fall arse over tip. We shall see.

    3. JLV

      Re: Too little too late? don't be preposterous!

      >Serious IT decision makers in Government and the Corporate world trust them - and for very good reasons.

      I think you are correct in that statement. The world of IT would be a poorer place without MS.

      Monopoly? They wish. They had one 20 years ago, when Linux was Unix and much the worse for it. They had it on IE. They had it on Office and they still do, if you want Office. They had on PCs before the oh-so-fashionable Macs, back in the dark pre-Darwin days.

      Oh, they would love to have it, back too but they've lost a lot of trust and goodwill along the years.

      Still, Microsoft for better or worse is a third alternative, between Linux and Mac. For big companies who don't need to be web-facing by nature, it is the alternative to Linux. Macs suck at entreprise stuff and that is part of their appeal and limitations. For Joe Average consumer, not my intellectually erudite and IT-savvy peers on this forum, the choice is Mac vs Windows because Linux is unknown and, horror, un-Branded territory. Yeah, I'd set up my grandmother with a Linux box to email & browse, if I had a grandmother, but no average grandma is gonna walk into a store and buy Linux.

      A Linux vs Mac world would quickly degenerate into 2 distinct markets, each with one supplier. A Linux-only world? I know I don't want it personally but I am also pretty sure the ecosystem of ideas around Linux would be poorer for not having competitors to learn from.

      Think of how much GUI experience has been gained with Windows 8 and the Metro UI. Primarily things not to do. The world of marketing and product design as well - it has learned that users hate change and if you change things than you better make things a lot better. And if the majority of your user base is bitching then it's time for plan B and not stick your fingers in your ears.

      Think of how much smoother the Unity/Gnome 3/KDE 4 rollouts would have been if the Metro trainwreck had shown the perils of pell-mell radical, our-way-or-the-highway, paradigm rethinks to the GUI reformistas in advance.

      The world thrives on competition. It need not and should not be unethical, but competition is a necessity and choice is a boon to customers and users.

      Hopefully Microsoft will emerge a less arrogant and more capable company. Security and API stability is one way to regain trust from us techs. And Nadella should respect chairs and avoid throwing the poor things around.

      1. RyokuMas
        Pint

        Re: Too little too late? don't be preposterous!

        Have an upvote (should be +100) and a Friday beer for a being a voice of reason among the bile that is so often thrown back and forth between the rival camps on these forums. Hat's off to you, sir!

    4. simon_brooke

      Re: Too little too late? don't be preposterous!

      Just as it was absurd to say that the IBM PC was 'too little, too late' in 1982. But it was - Compaq ate their lunch. Now Compaq, too, are gone. Or that Alta Vista was 'too little, too late' in 2000. But it was - Google ate their lunch, and DEC is gone. AOL is gone. Netscape is gone. Silicon Graphics and Sun are gone.

      All these companies were dominant within their areas of the computer industry in their day. This industry changes fast. Microsoft will go - it may not be in the next five years, but they'll go.

      1. Michael Wojcik Silver badge

        Re: Too little too late? don't be preposterous!

        Microsoft will go - it may not be in the next five years, but they'll go.

        Was anyone suggesting they'd last forever?

        Without some time limit, that's a degenerate claim; it doesn't mean anything. I take your larger point (though I'd quibble about IBM and Compaq; the PC achieved what IBM senior management wanted, and IBM stayed in the PC business long after Compaq was swallowed into the HPaq disaster). The tech industry moves quickly and high-flyers are often brought low quite quickly. The same may happen to Microsoft, particularly since for the first time it's being led by a non-founder, which could strain its corporate culture further. But I wouldn't want to put any bets on when that might happen either - it's just too hard to predict.

  8. K

    forced then-CEO Steve Ballmer to take notice, and deal with the carnage

    I'm all up for the Sinofsky bashing - But is this El-reg giving Balmer undue credit?? Lets face it, this happened on his watch, when public and business alike screamed "this is a disaster", he was wearing some magical earmuffs that translated it to "this is the bollocks!", and he persisted with this until he was finally pushed out (Thank god!)

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    "What we didn't hear from Microsoft was a clear over-arching direction. Whether, for example, the software giant will continue Surface, its own tablet hybrid hardware. Or how it justifies retaining Bing and Xbox. "

    I'm not sure how you can see Cortana or the Bing apps on Windows or the maps apps and argue that Microsoft has to <I>justify</I> retaining Bing. Microsoft is a huge body with many moving limbs but without Bing those limbs would be brain dead. Functional but not 'smart'.

  10. Andrew Jones 2

    I have to admit - I watched roughly half to 3/4 quarters of the conference (on my Chromecast) before I fell asleep, and I was quite impressed with what they have achieved. My major issues with Windows 8 seem to have been satiated, things like being able to get the shutdown button without faffing about with opening up the "charms" bar to get into settings and then shutdown. It was obvious what a complete balls-up they made of Windows when - an announcement of being able to minimise full screen apps and also make the taskbar show up OVER the full screen apps - was met with extremely loud applause. Their Cortona app looks quite impressive too, but unfortunately Windows Phone in general still looks absolutely abysmal. Still... baby steps.

    For those of you wondering "how did he manage to watch the conference on his Chromecast, I don't want to watch a 3 hour video on my laptop" - here is how - Click the link, choose your Chromecast, press play - this link redirects to dabblecast - but the forum wouldn't show the full link. http://goo.gl/QWJA6Y

  11. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    None of this changes anything

    Microsoft are still on the road to going the way of the dinosaurs. Windows phone is dead, xbox one stillborn, windows 8 dead, office irevellant.

    1. Elmer Phud

      Re: None of this changes anything

      "windows 8 dead"

      (And W98 SE was miles better than W98)

      Yes, dear - we know that .

      Some of us aware of an update of W8.1 that will pretty much give us W8.2 (or W8.1 SP2).

      And guess what?

      We are happy with it.

      I'm so sorry that I don't have time to arse around trying one Linux distro after another, finding out what devices now don't work - that sort of thing.

      Some of us don't spend all bloody evening under the bonnet of a half-working computer and don't want to. We are not the modern equivalent of car-fiddling 20 somethings who brag about tiny inconsequential tweaks that took hours to sort out.

      1. hplasm
        Windows

        Re: None of this changes anything

        "We are not the modern equivalent of car-fiddling 20 somethings who brag about tiny inconsequential tweaks that took hours to sort out."

        So stop installing 3d party fixes for W8's shortcomings and bragging about it.

      2. Obvious Robert
        Linux

        Re: None of this changes anything

        Elmer Phud wrote

        I'm so sorry that I don't have time to arse around trying one Linux distro after another, finding out what devices now don't work - that sort of thing.

        Your name is perfectly appropriate, Elmer FUD.

        1. RyokuMas
          Stop

          Re: None of this changes anything

          "Your name is perfectly appropriate, Elmer FUD"

          ... but his statement is also accurate - at least in my experience. I have nothing against Linux, but given the nightmares I've had with most of the open source tools I've tried in past, there's no way I'm voluntarily wiping my dev box without absolute certainty that it won't end up only being useful as a doorstop.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Stop

      Re: None of this changes anything

      "Microsoft are still on the road to going the way of the dinosaurs. Windows phone is dead, xbox one stillborn, windows 8 dead, office irevellant."

      Much of that may be true in the consumer sector, but it simply isn't the case in the enterprise and no amount of wishful thinking will make it otherwise. For Microsoft, that is and always has been the primary driver for revenue.

    3. Conrad Longmore

      Re: None of this changes anything

      Windows Phone is far from dead, but it has a long way to go. Sure, if Nokia wasn't on board with Windows then it would have gone the way of the dodo. Take a look at the Lumia 930 if you want to see where Windows is going.

      As for Windows 8, it's a sound and very capable operating system which has been substantially spoiled by having two interfaces glued on top. Microsoft need to find a way to make the UI function more like Windows 7, without Metro apps cropping up when you least expect them.

      As for Office.. I don't think any other application comes close to the capabilities of Office 2013. Yes, things like LibreOffice aren't bad for free, but the real thing is more capable.

      Xbox One. What's that?

      What Microsoft are trying to do here is play the long game. Kids these days are being brought up on the conventions of smartphones and tablets, the Win 7 desktop UI will eventually become a relic. Only Microsoft.. well, perhaps Microsoft and Canonical.. have an idea of how it will all fit together five or ten years down the road.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: None of this changes anything

        "As for Windows 8, it's a sound and very capable operating system which has been substantially spoiled by having two interfaces glued on top."

        Sigh... I keep hearing this... Win8 is actually great except for the UI... what exactly is the evidence of this? Okay, maybe it does some ... what, file management? ... operations faster than Windows 7. Does that make it a terrific operating system? How are its internals actually any better or even just equivalent to Linux or OS X or anything else?

        AFAIK, Win8 still has the registry (disaster), DLLs (disaster), requires crappy kludges to support anything POSIX (not a disaster, but...) and doesn't have any sexy OS features like being real time. Not that it's a huge deal, but at least Mavericks has a new OS-level feature of compressing memory, which is kinda neat. (Something that Linux has been doing optionally for a long time of course, I know.)

        So what does the "operating system" part of Win8 bring to the table that's so great again?

        1. mmeier

          Re: None of this changes anything

          Q: What's the problem with the current (W7 and better) registry?

          Q: What's the problem with the current (W7 and better) DLLs?

          Q: How many client systems are real time? How many server ones?

          Q: And of those how many are HARD real time like the old ORG/M or (IIRC) OS/9?

          Q: What do I need RT for outside of specialist systems

          Q: What is the benefit of Posix?

          Q: Does Linux support Access Control lists OOB?

          Q: Where is the equivalent of WSUS or ZenWorks? (And no, the Repositories run by "somebody else" are not)

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: None of this changes anything

            Problem with the registry: it's a system-wide repository for software settings that's divorced from the file system, which makes it hard or impossible to tease out the settings for specific software and copy said settings/data to another computer. Was there anything in Win7 or Win8 to corrected this basic design flaw? (Which wouldn't be impossible. Maybe the registry functions were virtualized to instead write data to files in the user directory...)

            Problem with DLLs: at least in the past they've had crap versioning and the OS was crap at keeping track of dependencies, so it was easy to either delete a DLL that was necessary for some software you still had installed, or you would end up with unnecessary zombie DLLs that weren't being used by anything and just wasted space. AFAIK versioning got better years ago but I don't know that the latter problem has been solved. And now there are also managed code "frameworks" with similar problems.

            Benefit of POSIX: is this not obvious? Pretty much everything besides Windows is POSIX and can all run more or less the same software. Do you really not immediately understand the benefit of being able to run all this cross platform software?

            Also, I'm not saying that OSs necessarily need to be real time, but it would at least be something that people could point at to indicate that the OS was somehow better or different than previous versions.

            Also BTW Linux has had ACLs OOB for like the last 11+ years. http://users.suse.com/~agruen/acl/linux-acls/online/

            Dunno about WSUS. I'm not a Linux expert.

            1. mmeier

              Re: None of this changes anything

              Transfering settings etc. between boxes - why? If you are in a "roaming" environment there is a central software repository with standard installations or a "default image" anyway (and that HAS all the settings since it is basically a backup) and the rest is done by the server storing your relevant profiles. If it is for backup - you can easily do that. The days of "tweaking the registry" died somewhere around the "days of the DOS extenders". OTOH the "guess where config file x is on distribution y" or even the "horde of config files" on Solaris are a PITA for most users

              DLL Versioning is a problem with all dynamically linking OS, Unix/Linux is no better there. Requires lib x version a.b.c is a problem. Windows is smart enought not to kill newer versions. And multiple .NET versions can exist on one box

              "Posix" is a combination of API definitions and tool definitions. And the API are abstracted away in the compiler libraries so I do not care (much). Non UI / non Appserver software is portable if necessary. More complex stuff is either in a language that does not care (Java, PHP), runs in an app-server or needs UI changes anyway (Try porting a Swing based UI to Android, join the "Nuke Mountain View" fan club)

              Doing x for the sake of x (Real time is a good example) is stupid showmanship. RT, even more hard(time guaranteed) RT is extremly difficult to program and absolutely unneeded for 99.9 percent of the users. "Close enough" time shedules (That Unix and Windows can do) are more than enough. And those who do need RT - need a certified system and often are restricted to "use THIS". Been there, wrote the Fortran/Dicol and Step5 code.

              As for ACL: There is some support for the older, withdrawn version that can be switched on/used. Under current Windows versions - they are on. Always.

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: None of this changes anything

                Transfering settings etc. between boxes - why? If you are in a "roaming" environment there is a central software repository with standard installations or a "default image" anyway (and that HAS all the settings since it is basically a backup) and the rest is done by the server storing your relevant profiles. If it is for backup - you can easily do that. The days of "tweaking the registry" died somewhere around the "days of the DOS extenders". OTOH the "guess where config file x is on distribution y" or even the "horde of config files" on Solaris are a PITA for most users

                Mmmm yes, because everyone's got their computer on a Windows Active Directory domain, even the home users! (Ignoring the BYOD crowd who buy a laptop with the Home or Standard editions, then expect domain access, I have two of these to support at work.)

                Probably the worst bit about the registry is that there's all kinds of magic buried in there about what hardware is in the machine, and if that doesn't match up, all hell breaks loose. Linux actually barely remembers what it had from one boot to the next: it auto-probes much of it.

                Think about what happens if a motherboard dies and you have to move the hard drive across to another computer? Most versions of Unix/Linux are happy once you update /etc/fstab and the boot-loader: they'll boot up to the point you can then fix everything else up (such as video). Windows 7+ are not particularly happy, Windows XP even less so.

                For the user's part on Unix/Linux, the "hordes of config files" that pertain to a user usually live in their home directory. Often the file begins with a dot, so copy across all the .dot files and you'll probably get what you're after in 90% of cases.

                Just like in Windows, if you get their profile directory, you can probably shift that without too many problems.

                However if you just want to move the settings for one application… if all the settings are in the registry, then you're in for fun! On Linux you can probably go hunt for a file called .foorc in $HOME and hit paydirt.

                DLL Versioning is a problem with all dynamically linking OS, Unix/Linux is no better there. Requires lib x version a.b.c is a problem. Windows is smart enought not to kill newer versions. And multiple .NET versions can exist on one box

                Mmmmm, but when app A installs foo.dll version 1, and app B installs foo.dll version 2, is NTFS smart enough to work out that when app A asks for "foo.dll", it wants version 1 and not version 2?

                I know ISO9660 does versioning, but even then I don't think that'd work that well.

                On Linux, the library would be installed with a name something like: libfoo.so.1 and libfoo.so.2. No naming clash there.

                "Posix" is a combination of API definitions and tool definitions. And the API are abstracted away in the compiler libraries so I do not care (much). Non UI / non Appserver software is portable if necessary. More complex stuff is either in a language that does not care (Java, PHP), runs in an app-server or needs UI changes anyway (Try porting a Swing based UI to Android, join the "Nuke Mountain View" fan club)

                POSIX is more than API, it also describes the shell commands and syntax. I can write a shell script in the classical Bourne shell, and be certain it will mostly do the same thing across different Unix systems.

                It's for this reason, autoconf emits scripts in Bourne shell.

                Porting such things to Windows is a pain because amongst other things, there's no 'make', there's no 'sh', and so I've got to maintain a whole special build system just to support Windows. Yes, there's newer alternatives like cmake, but there's a lot of existing software that predate it and for whom, GNU autoconf works fine.

                Doing x for the sake of x (Real time is a good example) is stupid showmanship. RT, even more hard(time guaranteed) RT is extremly difficult to program and absolutely unneeded for 99.9 percent of the users. "Close enough" time shedules (That Unix and Windows can do) are more than enough. And those who do need RT - need a certified system and often are restricted to "use THIS". Been there, wrote the Fortran/Dicol and Step5 code.

                Hey, you brought up real-time. :-) You asked what the need was, I gave you examples of (soft) real-time systems. I also acknowledged that hard real-time was a more specialised case, and pointed out that some versions of Unix do that too.

                As for ACL: There is some support for the older, withdrawn version that can be switched on/used. Under current Windows versions - they are on. Always.

                Yep, and most Linux distributions I've used have it turned on too. Under Unix-like systems, you may use it, but there's a simpler alternative that works well enough for most uses. Under Windows you have no choice.

              2. Richard Plinston

                Re: None of this changes anything

                > As for ACL: There is some support for the older, withdrawn version that can be switched on/used. Under current Windows versions - they are on. Always.

                That is because *nix always had a useful permissions system, along with multiple groups, sgid, and multiple file links (hard or symbolic) that could achieve the necessary levels of permissions and restrictions.

                Windows never had anything like that so they had to graft on ACLs. Linux can have ACLs but they are an unnecessary complication in most situations. Windows _must_ have ACLs because there is bugger all else.

                > (Try porting a Swing based UI to Android,

                """Now though CodenameOne allow you to create mobile apps using not just Java but even Swing. Best of all there's even a free version. """

                Or AjaxSwing: http://www.creamtec.com/products/ajaxswing/solutions/java_swing_ui_on_ipad.html

                Try porting _anything_ to Windows Phone.

                1. mmeier

                  Re: None of this changes anything

                  A sorry but NTFS HAD file permissions etc. from day one. And was part of NT from at least 3.51. So it always had a well developed permission/restriction setting. MS-DOS and the UI-Add ons (Win3.x, 9x) had not.

                  CodeName One says nothing about Swing, it has a UI Builder that looks like doing a Swing-App. And the external build server is a "thanks but probably no thanks"

                  AjaxSwing says it can Wrap a Swing App. If that works, great.

                  1. Anonymous Coward
                    Anonymous Coward

                    Re: None of this changes anything

                    A sorry but NTFS HAD file permissions etc. from day one. And was part of NT from at least 3.51. So it always had a well developed permission/restriction setting. MS-DOS and the UI-Add ons (Win3.x, 9x) had not.

                    Indeed, I just attached a blank disk to a VM and fired up an image of Windows NT 3.1 here. Aside from NT crapping itself when it came face-to-face with a Ivy-Bridge Core i5, I managed to format a disk as NTFS and have a gander. So yes, not that I doubted you on this one, I can confirm that ACLs were present in Windows NT 3.1 which, to my recollection was the first release.

                    (And it's been 20 years already!)

                    One thing I pointed out before, on Windows, you've got nothing but ACLs for permissions management. There is no other option.

                    To compare with Unix, yes, 12 permission bits and a UID and GID field is rather quaint, and yes, ACLs can do that and more. But, it's widely understood and well supported. If you need more advanced features, setfacl and getfacl are there but most of us will stick with good ol'e chmod and chown as they do "good enough". :-)

            2. Solmyr ibn Wali Barad

              Re: None of this changes anything

              "AFAIK [DLL] versioning got better years ago"

              WinSxS provides...ahem...wildly fluctuating values of $better.

          2. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: None of this changes anything

            Q: What's the problem with the current (W7 and better) registry?

            Fragile, difficult to manage, overly complicated, difficult to update without a running instance of Windows.

            When it works, it works reasonably well, except some developers use it as a dumping ground for all kinds of crap that doesn't belong there.

            But if your Windows installation goes belly up and you need to change a registry setting, you're in for hell. Contrast this with the nearest Linux equivalent I can think of: gconf, or the MacOS X equivalent, plist files, both of which are basically XML files stored with a strict naming scheme.

            So anyone with sufficient knowledge can edit the appropriate file with a text editor to correct problems, a text editor that might be running from a LiveCD — this is more difficult to achieve in Windows with the registry.

            Q: What's the problem with the current (W7 and better) DLLs?

            Nothing with DLLs themselves, the biggest problem is Windows package management. MSI is a step forward, but there's still a lot of cowboy installers out there that just ram stuff in where ever it seems to fit.

            End result: the OS has no idea what package owns what file, and so when you go to install a package that conflicts, the installer will likely just overwrite the existing DLL with theirs, or the uninstaller will delete it breaking something else. Worst of all, the DLL version information is embedded in the file, rarely does it feature in the file name.

            Contrast this with Linux: where the package manager is responsible for installing and uninstalling packages, will scream at you if you attempt to install two packages which both include the same file, and dynamic libraries are named by their version number (so multiple versions can be installed in parallel).

            Q: How many client systems are real time? How many server ones?

            Not hard real-time, but you try listening to music or doing anything multimedia-related without some kind of real-time support. Multimedia is a real-time application, if the decoder doesn't keep the buffer on the DAC filled up, the buffer drains, under-runs, then the user complains that the audio is crackly.

            VoIP is where this is particularly felt, and is applicable to both server and client — the whole system has to operate to real-time constraints. Too bigger buffers, and the latency becomes untenable for regular conversation, too little, and you become vulnerable to buffer under-runs.

            Q: And of those how many are HARD real time like the old ORG/M or (IIRC) OS/9?

            There is a hard real-time fork of the Linux kernel. Solaris also supports hard real-time.

            Q: What do I need RT for outside of specialist systems

            See above. Hard real-time tends to be more for control systems, and thus tend to be more specialist in nature, however examples of soft real-time systems abound everywhere.

            Q: What is the benefit of Posix?

            Write-once-compile-everywhere. Where there are differences, the changes are small enough that simple #ifdefs in C code can handle it.

            I recently did a project wherein I was porting a coal train weighbridge system from SCO OpenServer to Linux. The system itself was based on MacroView SCADA and used UUCP as a means for transmitting weighbridge reports via phone lines back to the central office for billing.

            The field computers needed to talk to a particularly old weighbridge controller. I was able to take the source code of their old driver, tweak a few serial port settings in the code and compile it for Linux. The biggest changes were in the stty settings for the serial port, everything else more-or-less JustWorked™.

            I hear one of their techs (with no Linux experience) was able to take a field computer out to site and get it going without assistance. A true plug-and-play system.

            I shudder to think what hell I'd be in for if I had to port the thing to Windows.

            Q: Does Linux support Access Control lists OOB?

            It has done for some time. Do we use them? Most of us find that the old-style Unix permissions work well enough for our needs. ACLs are useful in edge cases, but are overcomplicated for the bulk of permissions requirements.

            Q: Where is the equivalent of WSUS or ZenWorks? (And no, the Repositories run by "somebody else" are not)

            Perhaps you'd like to elaborate on what WSUS and ZenWorks do that aren't present in the open-source offerings? Rather than expecting us to be Microsoft-experts as well as Unix ones.

            My rough recollections of ZenWorks was that it allowed deployment of software to a network of machines: something addressed by the combination of repository managers (e.g. apt, yum, etc) and orchestration software (e.g. Ansible, puppet, chef, etc).

      2. Solmyr ibn Wali Barad

        Re: None of this changes anything

        "Only Microsoft.. well, perhaps Microsoft and Canonical.. have an idea of how it will all fit together five or ten years down the road."

        Oh, why settle on five, when they're aiming for 500. It's got Electrolytes!

  12. Ken Hagan Gold badge

    Multi-threaded, eh? Gosh, how modern.

    "Microsoft demonstrated a new Windows RT sync app that talks to some old database code using synchronous calls, but without blocking the user interface thread as synchronous calls used to do in the Victorian era (eg, 1995)."

    I think you need to explain this a little more. As it stands, it sounds underwhelming.

    1. Michael B.

      Re: Multi-threaded, eh? Gosh, how modern.

      They demoed a couple of different routes of taking ancient applications and porting them to modern systems. The one above used DAL of an ancient C++ app and porting it to Windows 8.

      Another technology on the 2nd day involved automatically porting a VB 6 application to WinForms and then as a final step to an ASP.Net website.

  13. Hans 1
    Joke

    In three hours, Microsoft gave the Windows-verse everything it needed

    World-wide Vaseline shortage

  14. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Wreckage created by Steve Sinofsky?

    "allowing Office documents to be rendered very well by OTHER PEOPLES BROWSERS is one of the most destructive things we could do to the company".

    "I an reading about the Gateway adoption of the Corel software. I am interested to understand what this means better and how it relates to any contracts we have with them"

    "With Netscape and Corel working together its nice that we organized ourselves so the group attacking Netscape and the group attacking Corel are under common leadership"

  15. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Is Universal Windows the equivalent of yet another API?

    ".... Sinofsky just created three more mini-Windows"

    "Finally, at long last, developers can use "90 per cent" (its figure) of the same code base to create Universal Windows apps"

    I'm confused! It sounds to me as if Microsoft is busy developing yet *another* mini-Windows. A fourth?

    Any news on when the new API will ship in the future versions of Windows XX? Until then, isn't this just vapourware?

    1. Richard Plinston

      Re: Is Universal Windows the equivalent of yet another API?

      > I'm confused! It sounds to me as if Microsoft is busy developing yet *another* mini-Windows. A fourth?

      Actually that would be the fifth unless we ignore WP7 that was dumped and replaced by the incompatible WP8.

  16. All names Taken
    Paris Hilton

    Musings

    1 - remember network navigator used to charge $10 (I think) until MS introduced IE - for free

    (MS knows how to capture market share)

    2 - Apple's client group sort of trusts Apple and puts up with its products?

    3 - MS client group wonder what all the hype is about only to be disappointed (again)?

  17. Fat Northerner

    The answer is obvious.

    The world is populated by "UI Experts" who've never written a line of code in their life, they are "Experts" in "Experience"

    I wouldn't trust any of these people to toast bread.

    So, can we have a button, top right, which switches between "Their seamless experience" and the old fashioned Windows interface, which simply worked, with an added Up button in explorer, the return to a search which radically just searched files when you wanted to, and didn't wander off searching things just in case you wanted to, and then only searched things it thinks you might be interested in, or marketeers have paid for you to see first.

    Completely radical, I recognise, but with the removal of the dozens of background processes, letting Microsoft approve and be aware of everything you do, Windows would absolutely fly.

    I don't want whole screens of information blocking everything I do, because I can't minimize it or shrink it without removing it. I don't want a window, just because it's playing music, to look like the turner prize. I just want text menus, buttons that look like buttons and so on.

    I don't want an Icon which is what they think save as is, today, and a different icon in the next version of the product. I don't want big flat tiles. If I want to know the news, I'll look at it. If I want my wife to see my porn, I'll show her it, and so I don't want them putting pictures on folder icons showing publically what's in folders that I'm not looking at. I don't want libraries. I want to know exactly where I've put something. I don't want aero peeks. I want all the rubbish chopped off and every CPU cycle going towards improving the performance.

    Google is no better. They used to have links to websites along the top. News, shopping etc. Now they're "Apps" and you have to click a link to "Show the Apps" and then wander around looking for it in the morass of coloured pictures.

    Jesus.

    Why can't Microsoft get it into their thick skull. I don't want their latest style experiment. A computer is a tool for working.

  18. kmac499

    I repost from one I did earlier.

    “It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single Exec in possession of a Vision, can usually screw a company up." 'pologies to J Austen

    Sadly, like politicians, in a lot of cases the people who want to be in charge should be automatically disqualified. The mildy sociopath, self deluding, arrogance, character of some VPs\CEO etc powered by the positive feedback of silly bonuses is totally destructive.

  19. David 138

    I have been playing with 8.1 Update. Its alot better than 8. Never really tried 8.1. If they bring in a start menu and the ability to prevent apps hiding the task tray im sold. DX12 sounds tastie too. MS seem to be on the up.

    On the PS3 vs Xbox One its too soon to tell. Xbox seems a better all round machine. But who would buy either with so few games. This Christmas is the one to watch.

  20. RyokuMas
    Paris Hilton

    Two steps forward...

    "Finally, at long last, developers can use "90 per cent" (its figure) of the same code base to create Universal Windows apps for Windows Phone, RT, desktop Windows and now Xbox."

    You mean just like they could when XNA was still a supported architecture? Let's see some official endorsement and support for Monogame on the XBone, Microsoft!

    (yes, I know there was no RT in XNA times... but there was Zune, which was just about as popular...)

  21. GeekinOrpington

    Isn't it time for microsoft to start testing ALL their employees for class A drugs, I can see no other reason for their erratic policies.

This topic is closed for new posts.

Other stories you might like