Reply to post: Re: Support is impossible

Re: Support is impossible

@ ZanzibarRastapopulous

That's my assessment. There are probably some better technical bits to W8, but we really don't need or want a new UI.

MS problem is that they munge the two together. No-one *wants* an OS. You just need one to use their apps. They should sell the thing on its technical merits and refine the GUI. Sadly, W8 is not about the desktop, its about getting people used to MS' mobile GUI. They shot themselves in the foot when they made it mandatory.

What they should have done is make mobile apps run on desktop windows under TIFKAM. The mobile app makers could have sold mobile apps to desktop users. TIFKAM could slide in from the side like traditional *nix multiple desktops & Apple full-screen apps.

Now MS are in a marketing nightmare. W8 looks like a failure. If W8 was W7+powershell+architecture changes, no-one would really care, they would still buy it if they needed it. Apple got the marketing right. All releases are minor versions of version 10. All versions are recognisable as OSX. Yes they gush about "magical" and "revolutionary", but if you liked OSX before you'll still like the new version - it isn't that different. No-one really cares if you're still on Snow Leopard.

I'd have been far more impressed and likely to buy a new version of Windows if it had a new security model for applications. Make the "File" menu part of the OS. Writing files outside of the application's $app/conf or $app/data location (as defined in the installation manifest) is prohibited and can only be initiated via the (OS-provided) File menu, by a GUI user. Does an application want to create a network socket? Get a kerberos ticket authorising it first. The PDF viewer does not need network access. Neither does Word or Excel. If there is no kerberos ticket, flag up a warning to the user about what's going on. Provide an option for geo-location lookup from MS. The File menu can include network protocols (SMB, HTTP/S, S/FTP, SSH) but in that case the OS is handling the request, and can provide an audit log of the URLs requested.

Those would be features worth paying for. They don't have to be compulsory, MS could give priority in its store or co-marketing funds to apps which conform.