Microsoft Windows Officially Broken

Smartoffice News ^ | 27 September 2005 | David Richards & WSJ

[Halfmanhalfamazing]

Windows was broken and Microsoft has admitted it. In an unprecedented attempt to explain its Longhorn problems and how it abandoned its traditional way of working, the normally secretive software giant has given unparalleled access to The Wall Street Journal, even revealing how Vice President Jim Allchin, personally broke the bad news to Bill Gates.

[Halfmanhalfamazing]

A key reason: the growing threat from rivals such as Google Inc., Apple Computer Inc. and makers of the free Linux operating system. In recent years these companies have been dashing out some software innovations faster than Microsoft.

[Halfmanhalfamazing]

You'll be getting a better windows because of competition.

Perhaps now Windows can leave it's decade long beta status.

[sono]

It's a kinder, gentler evil empire.

[Halfmanhalfamazing]

ROFL!

[TXBSAFH]

I guess outsourcing a load of your development to third world countries is really showing a return now Darth Bill.

[martin_fierro]

My favorite video of Bill Gates pouting

[JerseyHighlander]

Thanks! Hilarious way to start my day.

I meant log on for NT Bill...

[spintreebob]

One MS problem might be trying to be all things to all people. After millions spent by many Fortune 500, client server, SQLServer, VB and .net have just not been able to scale up to high volume transactions and databases. Big companies are going back to big blue.

90% of corporate data is still in IMS and performing rings around anything MS could do. DB2 has more new development (that actually work in production) than SQLServer.

MS doesn't want to admit it. But MS is nothing more than a pimple that is scratched on the corporate body of IBM.

[general_re]

The headline is really a bit misleading - MS revamping its development process in the face of more complex systems does not imply that the process was inappropriate for less complex systems.

[staytrue]

Care to prove this outsourcing claim ?

Longhorn's code was MS's top secret project.
This is a made in the USA, and Redmond, WA fiasco.

[evolved_rage]

<"There're weaknesses in everything we're doing today," Mr. Allchin says. "But it's such a huge step up from where we were."

No kidding....

[dogfighter]

Microsoft is such garbage. I feel almost communist for being such a supporter of open-source software, but it really is such a better solution. Can't wait to throw off the chains of the MS blue screen for good.

[mikegi]

About all I can gather from this article is that the NT base had built up hacks/workarounds over the years and needed to be cleaned out. The "modularization" stuff sounds like they've made some internal, informal interfaces into real (but still internal) APIs.

Allchin has done this type of thing in the past. Back in the Cairo shell days (1994?), a lowly coder-bee sent him email saying that the effort was too big, too complex, and would never work in practice. The coder-bee suggested that they take the Win95 shell and modify it for the NT base. Allchin replied that he had never heard anything about the problems and called in his subordinates to answer the questions raised. Cairo was cancelled and the Win95 shell was adapted for WinNT (version 3.5?).

[PissAndVinegar]

"I feel almost communist for being such a supporter of open-source software"

I've never understood that concept - how is sharing ideas communist?

Most OSS 'enhancements' made 'by the people' are made for one person's or group's needs. The only difference is they can share it back with the community where someone else can pick it up to customize it to their needs.

However, some licensing terms are definitely anti-capitist - they specifically disallow you from incorporating that code into a product for profit. While I understand the intention, I don't agree with it.

[Kewlhand`tek]

I thought this article came out like a month ago. anyway, I have been using the PDC ulitmate winvista 5219 version or what ever it is called. I dont see anything wrong with it. Works just as well as winxp. I have had it hang on install of a few of my PCs.

[1rudeboy]

The headline is really a bit misleading . . . .

More than a bit. I read the actual WSJ article, and found it to be about MS revamping its development process.

[general_re]

Quite. You wouldn't want to build a car by hand, from scratch, but that doesn't mean that it's not a good way to bake a cake. Nor does it mean that your cake is "broken" if you change processes to build a car.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

I feel almost communist for being such a supporter of open-source software

I feel a little that way about using a Mac. Steve Jobs is a pinko who thinks it's acting on "principle" to not advertise on Rush's program - even though that could potentially give a real boost to his business. But then, I don't get the impression that Bill Gates is the second coming of F A Hayek either.

When Apple went to System X they had to make a "Classic" environment under sys X to run Sys 9.x software under, and they made utilities to facilitate the porting of applications software over to System X. The obvious question about this new "Leghorn" version is the manner and extent to which such a fundamental rewrite produces backward compatibility with old Windows software.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

Again???

Wonder how I'll ever get on FR?

[js1138]

But someone left the cake out in the rain, and we'll never have that recipe again.

Oh no.