Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

The New 'One Microsoft' Is Finally Poised For the Future

Soulskill posted about 7 months ago | from the future!-future!-future! dept.

Microsoft 270

redletterdave writes: "The stodgy old enterprise company whose former CEO once called open source Linux a 'cancer' is gone. So is its notorious tendency to keep developers and consumers within its walled gardens. The 'One Microsoft' goal that looked like more gaseous corporate rhetoric upon its debut last summer now is instead much closer to actual reality. No longer are there different kernels for Windows 8, Windows Phone or Windows RT it's now all just One Windows. As goes the Windows kernel, so goes the entire company. Microsoft finally appears to have aimed all its guns outside the company rather than at internal rivals. Now it needs to rebuild its empire upon this new reality."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Trolling? (5, Insightful)

Craig Cruden (3592465) | about 7 months ago | (#46728317)

They have a long way to go, one user interface for all idioms is kinda stupid..... that is why they are getting all the bad press with Windows 8.

Perhaps... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46728377)

One interface, yes is probably not the greatest idea that they have ever had, but one code base... Actually a pretty good one. It allows for them to iterate more quickly, support a greater range of hardware, apps, and all around capabilities. At the same time it also allows your cell phone to be subject to the same ransomware as your desktop!

Re:Perhaps... (0)

Craig Cruden (3592465) | about 7 months ago | (#46728555)

One code base in a well designed componentized system is ideal, but the last time the windows code was leaked it was a disaster area....

Are you sure? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46728643)

I heard that when source code for older versions of windows were "leaked", it was quite pristine. Do you have links to this "disaster area"?

Re:Are you sure? (1)

Craig Cruden (3592465) | about 7 months ago | (#46728687)

The links have long disappeared due to DCMA takedowns.....

Re:Are you sure? (0)

NatasRevol (731260) | about 7 months ago | (#46728689)

I guess you haven't heard that the phrase 'spaghetti code' was invented for Windows 95.

Re:Are you sure? (2)

Capt.DrumkenBum (1173011) | about 7 months ago | (#46728793)

Sorry, but I was producing 'spaghetti code' long before windows 95 came out.
Perhaps I should sue. :)

Re:Perhaps... (1)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | about 7 months ago | (#46728653)

One turd, not several. Wow. :-)

Re:Trolling? (4, Insightful)

bhcompy (1877290) | about 7 months ago | (#46728381)

Rather than one interface, they should just enforce what they did ages ago and maintain a consistent style guide(until they broke it with things like ribbons). The GUI can vary, but keep the flow, terminology, and the look as similar as possible.

Re:Trolling? (2)

Craig Cruden (3592465) | about 7 months ago | (#46728471)

I have a large monitor and I sit 2 arms lengths away, but Microsoft in their wisdom thinks that the interface for that should lean towards touch. If they treat the small phone screen the same as a large screen interface, and that everyone is going to use touch interface - then you're not creating a usable platform for any since you are constantly making compromises. You can use the same operating system core, the same API, and make things interoperate without having the same interface. If I wrote a desktop app to have the same interface as my phone app - either my desktop app is wasting a lot of real-estate and making inefficient use of resources - or I am making it very difficult on the phone user since he is constantly zooming in and out to fill in a bloody form...... the operating system interface is no different.

Re:Trolling? (2)

Jeff Flanagan (2981883) | about 7 months ago | (#46728549)

Microsoft *thought* the desktop should lean toward touch. They seem to have revised their opinion on that.

Of course touch can be useful on a desktop. I was able to start my father on Android as his first internet-connected device, and he was easily able to transition to Windows 8 on a desktop PC because of the touch interface. A mouse isn't intuitive to us all like touching a visible object with a finger is.

Re:Trolling? (1)

JohnFen (1641097) | about 7 months ago | (#46728879)

Microsoft *thought* the desktop should lean toward touch. They seem to have revised their opinion on that.

Or so they claim. I haven't seen much real evidence of that, though. Win 8.1.1 threw a couple of small bones in that direction, but those changes were pretty weak sauce. Perhaps Win 9 will show something more substantial.

Re:Trolling? (5, Funny)

PPH (736903) | about 7 months ago | (#46728611)

I have a large monitor and I sit 2 arms lengths away,

Evidently, Microsoft's UI was designed for users with longer arms. The ones that drag on the ground when they walk.

OK, gotta go now. [Ducking and running]

Re:Trolling? (0)

Craig Cruden (3592465) | about 7 months ago | (#46728667)

finally a use for facebook "like"

Re:Trolling? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46728625)

I don't see anything about one interface. I read only that there would be one common kernel.

Re:Trolling? (1)

Craig Cruden (3592465) | about 7 months ago | (#46728745)

Well maybe I read it in combination with experience with Windows 8 UI which is "one" now. The problem is that even when talking about one kernel, that is already a problem from a properly designed system point of view. The kernel is a collection of services, not all services are required for all platforms.

Re:Trolling? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46728933)

I don't think even Microsoft is stupid enough to use a monolithic kernel anymore. You can have a single modularized one, though.

Re:Trolling? (1)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | about 7 months ago | (#46728893)

They copied that trend from Ubuntu Unity.

smiley (0)

For a Free Internet (1594621) | about 7 months ago | (#46728331)

Bob smiles at your area.

I'll believe it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46728343)

when I see IE running on Linux ... or people actually WANTING to run IE on Linux...

Re:I'll believe it (1)

wiredlogic (135348) | about 7 months ago | (#46728567)

Been done [wikipedia.org] . At least for Solaris and HP-UX.

Re:I'll believe it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46728645)

True. But that doesn't answer the "WANTING" part...

now if they'd let us have our desktops back... (1)

swschrad (312009) | about 7 months ago | (#46728365)

the 8.1 update didn't fix all the issues with Metro, uh, Modern kicking your desktop and work to the curb when it feels like it. sucks. HULK HATE 8 !!!

Re:now if they'd let us have our desktops back... (1)

jones_supa (887896) | about 7 months ago | (#46728445)

Apparently the recent updates brought the Modern apps to taskbar and gave them an autohide title bar with minimize and close controls. When the Start Menu update (the most important piece) arrives later, it's gonna be pretty good already.

By the way I actually like the idea of snapping the Modern apps to the side of the desktop. It's a good way to utilize a widescreen monitor by docking Twitter or something else there. I wouldn't care about Modern apps otherwise, but this is a fun feature.

Re:now if they'd let us have our desktops back... (2)

Jeff Flanagan (2981883) | about 7 months ago | (#46728587)

By the way I actually like the idea of snapping the Modern apps to the side of the desktop. It's a good way to utilize a widescreen monitor by docking Twitter or something else there. I wouldn't care about Modern apps otherwise, but this is a fun feature.

Of course. The whole problem with Metro/Modern was that they set their user-interface back to the DOS days with only a single application displayed at a time. As long as Metro apps work in Windows, Metro is no longer a huge step back.

Re:now if they'd let us have our desktops back... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46728661)

I never had a problem with Windows 8. As I do no posses any mental or learning disabilities.

Seriously its just a new Start Menu when on the desktop. Get over it.

Re:now if they'd let us have our desktops back... (1)

NatasRevol (731260) | about 7 months ago | (#46728705)

And a shit search bar.

And half assed access to settings.

Good for devs. (5, Insightful)

digsbo (1292334) | about 7 months ago | (#46728379)

One thing this should help with is not making devs afraid to adopt a particular technology from MS, which is later trashed due to it having won a political, rather than technical, battle for promotion. For example, WCF was touted as the only way to do XML/HTTP services replacing the binary remoting protocol for several years, and then WebAPI replaced it. WCF devs are now irritated. Same with SilverLight, though WAY worse - "this is THE platform for Windows 8!", then, "Uh, not really.". I get the sense these teams have to compete for their platform to get noticed and marketed, instead of collaborate and take the advantages from two competing platforms.

Re:Good for devs. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46728455)

This is actually accurate. Teams had to compete for budget. So basically think Apple during the Lisa/Apple II days.

Re:Good for devs. (1)

avandesande (143899) | about 7 months ago | (#46728589)

If we went 'ad nauseum' with your example everyone will still be using COM and ActiveX

RE: COM (1)

xdor (1218206) | about 7 months ago | (#46728743)

You make is sound like a bad thing.

Re:Good for devs. (1)

ArhcAngel (247594) | about 7 months ago | (#46728931)

My company IS still using COM and ActiveX you insensitive clod!

Re:Good for devs. (1)

bazmail (764941) | about 7 months ago | (#46728593)

True. So true. We narrowly dodged the WCF bullet by delaying so long in switching to it that it was dead by the time we were ready. Straight to WebAPI.

For years MS was run like the UFC with battling stables of fighters constantly trying to fuck eachother up, ultimately at the expense of the Devs/Users.

Remains to be seen if the new guy "gets it" and smashes the toxic and entrenched Fiefdom system that exists in Redmond.

Re:Good for devs. (1)

slack_justyb (862874) | about 7 months ago | (#46728785)

Totally hit nail on head there. It's always been a gamble which of the different frameworks will mesh out in the petty internal battle. It's hard to bank on any MS tech because you never know when it might just up and vanish. I've seen some say, oh then I guess we should just stick to COM then. No, but changing the game as often as I change my phone isn't going to help you win converts.

doubt it (5, Insightful)

phantomfive (622387) | about 7 months ago | (#46728383)

"The stodgy old enterprise company whose former CEO once called open source Linux a 'cancer' is gone. So is its notorious tendency to keep developers and consumers within its walled gardens.

I doubt it.

"If you want to use a Microsoft app, you can find it on whatever platform or device you are using, not just on Windows. Running behind everything is Microsoft’s Azure cloud and services."

That sounds more like it, you can have any platform you want, as long as it's running on Microsoft. Seriously, who do they even think they are fooling? It' sounds like an employee pep meeting.

"Time will tell if Microsoft’s overtures to the open source community are a real and altruistic form of doing business"

They aren't altruistic. If you think they are, I am just flabbergasted.

Re:doubt it (1)

phantomfive (622387) | about 7 months ago | (#46728435)

Although come to think of it, this post is long-winded and adulatory, but it does give good insight into what Microsoft is planning for the future, and why the board chose the CEO they did. He is planning on making windows Azure the platform that runs the internet, and making a ton of revenue that way.

I'm somewhat skeptical that they will be able to compete with OpenStack. Not because they can't make a better product, maybe they can; but because people are still wary after the destruction of VB. Why would you build your entire product on a platform that could be destroyed in a moment Microsoft decides they don't want to support backwards compatibility again? That's not a good technology decision, it's not even a good business decision.

Re:doubt it (1)

Jeff Flanagan (2981883) | about 7 months ago | (#46728633)

Please define "VB" as used in your post. It usually stands for Visual Basic, but that hasn't been destroyed - even going all the way back to the pre-DotNet VB6 the apps run fine on Windows 8, so that can't be it.

Re:doubt it (0, Troll)

phantomfive (622387) | about 7 months ago | (#46728907)

Please define "VB" as used in your post. It usually stands for Visual Basic, but that hasn't been destroyed - even going all the way back to the pre-DotNet VB6 the apps run fine on Windows 8, so that can't be it.

Microsoft 'supports' VB6 just enough that shills and sycophants like you can write posts saying they still support it. You can sometimes get those apps to run (assuming all the libraries you need work, which might not be the case), but if you want to change anything you better hope you can get VS6.0 running on Windows 8 (it crashes on startup).

Microsoft had no migration path for those apps other than "rewrite your code for .net." If you don't understand why that is a problem, you're on the wrong website. Developers did rewrite their code, mainly into web apps. I'm betting they won't want to fall into the same trap again; on the other hand, human shortsightedness springs eternal, so maybe developers will lock themselves into Azure.

If Microsoft hadn't failed at that crucial point of backwards support, the world would still be running on Microsoft, certainly for business apps.

Re:doubt it (2, Funny)

Jeff Flanagan (2981883) | about 7 months ago | (#46728923)

>Microsoft 'supports' VB6 just enough that shills and sycophants like you can write posts saying they still support it.

Why didn't you just say that you're an idiot?

Re:doubt it (1)

Tough Love (215404) | about 7 months ago | (#46728715)

...He is planning on making windows Azure the platform that runs the internet, and making a ton of revenue that way...

Their only hope is to bulldoze the Windows servers and put in nice Linux clusters like everybody else. Otherwise, the inevitable result will be high comedy. Except for those unfortunate victims who decide to throw their corporate fortunes in with Microsoft's big system expertise.

Re:doubt it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46728835)

>Their only hope is to bulldoze the Windows servers and put in nice Linux clusters like everybody else.

How's that? The MS servers are already better in that they've never been wide-open with Heartbleed like Linux servers are. Now that we've clearly seen that open source does not equal secure, much of the perceived benefit of using open-source software is gone.

Re:doubt it (1)

phantomfive (622387) | about 7 months ago | (#46728941)

Except for those unfortunate victims who decide to throw their corporate fortunes in with Microsoft's big system expertise.

Sir, that only sounds like more comedy.

Re:doubt it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46728755)

I doubt it.
 
What you think doesn't matter and the following points will show why.
 
  That sounds more like it, you can have any platform you want, as long as it's running on Microsoft. Seriously, who do they even think they are fooling? It' sounds like an employee pep meeting.
 
Soooo... a service running on an Apache web server is now magically a Linux app? Yeah, that makes a ton of sense.
 
I guess you can run Google Apps on any platform you like, as long as it's Linux!!!! HERP!!
 
  They aren't altruistic. If you think they are, I am just flabbergasted.
 
Did you real the part about "Time will tell if..."? Or are you really going out of your way for the cheap knee-jerk damn-near-illiterate mod points from clueless fanboys?

A possum playing possum (5, Insightful)

bazmail (764941) | about 7 months ago | (#46728393)

I still dont' trust MS. Once they start getting back large market share the old anti competitive stifling old fart of a company will emerge from behind the mask again.

They need to just continue to wither away. The software industry has never been as vibrant or innovative as the last few years when MS was down.

Re:A possum playing possum (3, Insightful)

jellomizer (103300) | about 7 months ago | (#46728451)

This would happen to any group that gains market control.
IBM, Microsoft, Apple...

If a Linux distribution somehow got a large foothold in the market, they will find a way to keep their dominance. Having a particular fork of the kernel, a distribution system that is a bit different, rename some folders around. Add a closed source install tool or Windows manager....

Re:A possum playing possum (1)

bazmail (764941) | about 7 months ago | (#46728523)

Correct. You'll notice I'm not shouting for any particular company to gain a monopoly or near-monopoly, As none of the companies you mentioned have ever wielded, or indeed abused the kind of power MS had, they are not considered as dangerous or debate-worthy in this regard.

The health of an eco-system can be measured by its diversity and MS has repeatedly demonstrated itself to be a diversity-killer.

Re:A possum playing possum (2)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about 7 months ago | (#46728635)

They never stopped trying. What do you think Secure Boot is? Anyone can design an effective vendor-neutral protection system against boot-sector rootkits - it's a simple matter of storing the EFI bootloader hash in config flash and requiring a new one be re-hashed manually after OS installation. Trivial. But somehow Microsoft and Intel instead managed to come up with an over-complicated solution that just happens to only work for OS vendors which have the market share to get their own public keys added to the configuration by motherboard manufacturers? I'm not buying that as simply inept design: This has to be a deliberate attempt to inconvenience rivals while claiming to be about improving security.

Re:A possum playing possum (1)

Capt.DrumkenBum (1173011) | about 7 months ago | (#46728713)

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

I am so glad (0)

Anon-Admin (443764) | about 7 months ago | (#46728395)

I am so glad that I quit running windows. I converted to Linux when Windows 3.1 went to Windows 95 and have never regretted it.

Re:I am so glad (4, Insightful)

HerculesMO (693085) | about 7 months ago | (#46728427)

It is a good case however, for you to not really be in the position to speak from knowledge on the subject. You've hated MS for years, and adding your two cents about "yea I went to Linux" over ten years ago seems about par for the course of Slashdot angry posts about Microsoft.

It's a tool. You use it in the right place, at the right time. When you get religion about a tool, then it tends to be a problem. MS or not.

Re:I am so glad (3, Insightful)

jones_supa (887896) | about 7 months ago | (#46728583)

It's a tool. You use it in the right place, at the right time. When you get religion about a tool, then it tends to be a problem. MS or not.

This. Many people seem to think that Linux and OSS is some holy water which should be applied everywhere possible to automatically make things great. And just like with a religion, friends and families must be converted.

Re:I am so glad (4, Insightful)

JohnFen (1641097) | about 7 months ago | (#46728915)

Linux is no panacea. It is, however, a completely reasonable alternative for those who don't like Windows.

Re:I am so glad (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46728663)

... and adding your two cents about "yea I went to Linux" over ten years ago seems about par for the course of Slashdot angry posts about Microsoft.

Nearly twenty years ago actually. Windows 95, surprisingly, came out right around 1995.

Re:I am so glad (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46728737)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoe-fitting_fluoroscope was a tool too.

Re:I am so glad (1)

Anon-Admin (443764) | about 7 months ago | (#46728871)

Ok, I went to linux 20 years ago.

I am also in IT, I am a Linux systems engineer. (over 20 years at it, Solaris before that, Sun OS before that, SCO and ATT System 5 before all of it)

I use windows on my work desktop because someone else decided it was the correct solution.

I have listened to management for 20 years demand that "It should be a windows solution" when really the solution should be looked at and choices made based on the merits of the job at hand.

I don't hate Microsoft, I also do not believe that every answer should be to use a Microsoft product. If a tool is a tool then join me and give Linux a try, otherwise you are the one who is not "in the position to speak from knowledge on the subject"

Godwin's law. (3, Funny)

RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) | about 7 months ago | (#46728425)

Ein Windows Ein SDK Ein...

err sorry.

Re:Godwin's law. (1)

bob_super (3391281) | about 7 months ago | (#46728581)

Jest if you want, but the "One $company" slogan has been used by my last two employers and at least 4 companies I worked with.
While it somewhat makes sense in the case of recent mergers, it's mainly just one of the recent CEO buzzwords.
We know that most CEOs are sheep who just follow groupthink to be safe ("everybody else agrees it's the right thing now")
Wouldn't you, if you had that much at stake?

Re:Godwin's law. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46728685)

What's a Scompany?

One Kernel? What Does That Mean? (0)

snookerdoodle (123851) | about 7 months ago | (#46728447)

"No longer are there different kernels for Windows 8, Windows Phone or Windows RT"

Umm, is this honest? If I buy any tablet running Windows 8 now, I can now run any Windows application on it?

Re:One Kernel? What Does That Mean? (5, Insightful)

ledow (319597) | about 7 months ago | (#46728521)

I don't think you have much of an idea of what a kernel is.

Just because you have the same kernel does not mean that you can run the same applications.

Re:One Kernel? What Does That Mean? (1)

squiggleslash (241428) | about 7 months ago | (#46728565)

An operating system is more than a kernel, and additionally the same kernel may run on different CPUs, so no, just because two computers share the same kernel doesn't mean the same apps will run on them.

Look at, for example, a Linux based OS like Ubuntu vs a similar Linux based OS like WHAT_YOUR_ROUTER_RUNS for an obvious example! (Was tempted to use Android as the example, but I believe Android uses some customizations to the Linux kernel that make it not-quite-Linux-kernel-though-from-a-developers-standpoint-youd-never-know)

Re:One Kernel? What Does That Mean? (5, Informative)

thevirtualcat (1071504) | about 7 months ago | (#46728577)

Yes, it's true. They run the same kernel.

But no, you can't run Windows applications on a Windows RT or Windows Phone device.

iOS runs the same kernel as Mac OS X, but you can't run OS X applications on iOS.
Android uses the Linux kernel, but you can't run Linux Desktop applications on Android. (At least, not without a lot of work adding the needed libraries and recompiling everything for ARM.)

"Same kernel" doesn't mean "all the applications are interoperable."

Re:One Kernel? What Does That Mean? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46728681)

No, in the same way you can't run the same applications on your router, your phone and your Linux desktop, even though they're all using the same kernel (and even though in the case of Linux, the kernel is a much bigger part of a complete OS than the kernels in most other operating systems).

Re:One Kernel? What Does That Mean? (1)

TMYates (1946034) | about 7 months ago | (#46728857)

Probably not entirely true right now because most of their development has not touched the SDKs for these platforms. It is still a work in progress and their new Unified App framework will most likely make your desire a reality. The fact that they went from Windows CE during the Windows Phone 7.X and earlier days to an NT kernel for 8 shows this progress in the phone space for Microsoft. It also helps that they are migrating from XAP apps to Appx. The new Xbox One uses something based off Windows 8 components (At least kernel, not sure of anything else). Even the Windows for ARM called RT (Big fan of mine by the way for all the haters out there).

They are getting there, but it is not an overnight accomplishment. That would be like saying tomorrow PS3 games will work without recompiling on an Xbox. They have to update headers and references to SDKs they are using to make it work on another platform. This is where Microsoft is really wanting to head with the Unified Apps. They want to have their framework on everything so you do not have to recode. Even better that they are open sourcing good portions of the .NET framework. That would potentially mean that even Android/Linux could use the same app in some ways.

Marketing only. (0)

AntEater (16627) | about 7 months ago | (#46728459)

They're still evil.

Re:Marketing only. (1)

Krishnoid (984597) | about 7 months ago | (#46728869)

They're still evil.

It's one Microsoft, so it's it's, not they're. Also, while this is promising:

The New 'One Microsoft' Is Finally Poised For the Future

of moving from many to one and hopefully beyond, this statement seems a little premature:

The stodgy old enterprise company whose former CEO once called open source Linux a 'cancer' is gone.

However, this a hopeful trend towards you eventually being able to use the plural "they're". At that point, though, "still" may no longer be valid.

die already!! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46728467)

"Now it needs to rebuild its empire upon this new reality."

now it nees to die and get out of my news!

That's not the only thing that's gone... (4, Interesting)

lord_mike (567148) | about 7 months ago | (#46728479)

Their motto of "Developers, Developers, Developers" also disappeared with Ballmer's exit. Everything is now getting locked down to the max in their attempt to be like Apple. What makes it worse is that they don't seem to have a direction as far as application development goes. They were strongly pushing portable .NET when there was no need for cross platform applications, but as soon as ARM gets into their mix of products, they drop that strategy and go with a native code strategy. It's all mixed up and extremely confusing. Their complete lack of direction is certainly not welcoming to developers trying to figure out how they should target the Windows platform, and that doesn't even take into account their confusion on user interfaces as well.

Microsoft's previous success was based on offering very cheap products that were friendly to developers. Yeah, their products were buggy and unfinished, but they were a bargain, and you could always "embrace and extend" them as you saw fit. Now, they are trying to market themselves as a premium luxury product like Apple (at least the consumer end) and walling the garden as much as possible. They're locking down the hardware, too, and alienating their hardware partners, who were the greatest drivers of their previous success. It's a big change. Can they do it? Hyundai managed to convert themselves from being a discount car manufacturer to a more upscale brand, but Hyundai didn't have the problem with their brand reputation that Microsoft has. Microsoft has made cheap crap for so long, I don't see how they manage to convince everyone that they are now an "upscale" high quality manufacturer of products and services.

Re:That's not the only thing that's gone... (2)

mbkennel (97636) | about 7 months ago | (#46728553)

| They were strongly pushing portable .NET when there was no need for cross platform applications, but as soon as ARM gets into their mix of products, they drop that strategy and go with a native code strategy

I think that was driven by power dissipation motivations. The purpose of fast native code isn't speed, but low power consumption.

Re:That's not the only thing that's gone... (1)

Tough Love (215404) | about 7 months ago | (#46728651)

They were strongly pushing portable .NET...

I thought that .NET was dead. [roundcrisis.com] Does anybody really know?

Re:That's not the only thing that's gone... (3, Informative)

lord_mike (567148) | about 7 months ago | (#46728829)

.NET seems to live in a zombie state, not really dead, but not really alive, either. They haven't killed it, but they aren't going to expand on it, either. Who knows where things really stand. The RT strategy seems to be in constant flux, too.

Re:That's not the only thing that's gone... (1)

jones_supa (887896) | about 7 months ago | (#46728703)

Microsoft's previous success was based on offering very cheap products

I don't remember such time. Microsoft software has always been quite pricey.

Re:That's not the only thing that's gone... (1)

lord_mike (567148) | about 7 months ago | (#46728889)

Windows was cheap. For most people it appeared to be "free". A lot of their stuff seemed pricey at the time, but they were always cheaper than their competition. SQL Server cost less than Oracle. IIS cost less than Netscape Web Server. Windows Mobile cost less than Palm. Visual C cost less than Borland. Office cost less than Word Perfect. Mcrtosoft's pricing is what drove a lot of these guys out of business. Microsoft's products were cheaper quality-wise, too, which is why they have such a terrible reputation.

Re:That's not the only thing that's gone... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46728721)

Their motto of "Developers, Developers, Developers" also disappeared with Ballmer's exit.

That's been gone for years. They've been deprecating APIs and introducing the new "hot" APIs at a rate so quickly no developer can keep up. Silverlight and XNA are the ones that affected me the most, but I've heard other developers complaining about others.

Let's use a sailng metaphor (1)

david.emery (127135) | about 7 months ago | (#46728483)

The new captain has set a new course, one that veers away from the rocks. But this ship will take a long time and a lot of leeway to make that turn.

(Of course, I thought the old captain should have been 'relieved for cause' years ago, but since personally I'm neither a customer/user nor a direct shareholder in MSFT, it really wasn't my business :-)

Re:Let's use a sailng metaphor (2)

Tough Love (215404) | about 7 months ago | (#46728585)

I was saddened to see Ballmer go. I felt that all the Microsoft toadies richly deserved him. It would have been nice to see him go down with the ship, but I knew in my heart what rats do when the water starts rising. I sincerely hope that Nadella proves himself fully worthy to fill Ballmer's clown shoes.

Re:Let's use a sailng metaphor (1)

jones_supa (887896) | about 7 months ago | (#46728837)

I sincerely hope that Nadella proves himself fully worthy to fill Ballmer's clown shoes.

I actually expect Nadella to be the best Microsoft CEO so far.

Re:Let's use a sailng metaphor (1)

roc97007 (608802) | about 7 months ago | (#46728845)

> I was saddened to see Ballmer go.

Agreed. If nothing else, he was entertaining.

Re:Let's use a sailng metaphor (1)

roc97007 (608802) | about 7 months ago | (#46728833)

Really? Or has the captain issued a press release intended to placate passengers while doubling down on the course into the rocks?

Re:Let's use a sailng metaphor (1)

david.emery (127135) | about 7 months ago | (#46728909)

Fair enough, and that begs the question whether the passengers on the ship could ever tell the difference...

Welcome to 2004 (4, Funny)

HangingChad (677530) | about 7 months ago | (#46728489)

Microsoft: Yesterday's Technology Next Week

They always reminded me of Yoyodyne Industries from Buckaroo Banzai, where the future begins tomorrow.

Re:Welcome to 2004 (1)

Krishnoid (984597) | about 7 months ago | (#46728891)

Actually, the first thing that came to mind for me was: "Last year's zero-day exploit ignored for a while, then eventually fixed in an upcoming Patch Tuesday".

The One Microsoft (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46728497)

One Microsoft to rule them all, One Microsoft to find them,
One Microsoft to bring them all and in the darkness bind them

Walled gardens??? (5, Insightful)

DoofusOfDeath (636671) | about 7 months ago | (#46728499)

So is its notorious tendency to keep developers and consumers within its walled gardens.

What on earth are you talking about? Windows 8 is all about forcing people to get software from Microsoft's store. That's exactly opposite of leaving behind walled gardens.

Re:Walled gardens??? (1)

phantomfive (622387) | about 7 months ago | (#46728629)

I tried to figure that out too. The article is talking about the future, Microsoft's intentions, so it would be fair for them to say they intended to change it in the future.

That was the viewpoint I used to read the article, and I looked specifically for that walled garden problem to see what they planned on doing about it. As far as I can tell, they are doing nothing about it, absolutely nothing. When they say they will let you leave the 'walled garden,' what they mean is they will let you use Microsoft Office inside of Apple's walled garden. So have fun, you newly liberated developer. And by liberation they mean you use Azure.

Re:Walled gardens??? (1)

roc97007 (608802) | about 7 months ago | (#46728819)

> I tried to figure that out too. The article is talking about the future, Microsoft's intentions, so it would be fair for them to say they intended to change it in the future.

And who, not under the influence of recreational pharmaceuticals, would actually believe that?

Re:Walled gardens??? (1)

phantomfive (622387) | about 7 months ago | (#46728927)

I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. By which I mean, I won't give them any money and watch them as I fully expect them to continue to deceive.

Re:Walled gardens??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46728655)

This needs to be modded way up to the top.

App store is the ultimate walled garden.

Re:Walled gardens??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46728659)

Yeah, it was always easy to use 3rd party applications with Windows and it's only with 8 that they're really pushing for the walled garden, this is totally backwards.

Poised for the past (5, Insightful)

Tough Love (215404) | about 7 months ago | (#46728507)

Nothing about Microsoft has changed except its PR spin. It remains the same morally bankrupt skofflaw monopolist it has always been. Puff piece.

You're a puff piece. I would also suggest reading (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46728771)

WerenCole

First step (1)

Dcnjoe60 (682885) | about 7 months ago | (#46728591)

One code base is just the first step. The problem is how tightly the presentation layer is tied to the kernel. Microsoft would have been in a better position if they broke it out more like the linux pyramid with a common kernel at the base, plumbing in the middle and a display manager on top. Then, the presentation layer in that display manager could be swapped out as needed based on the form factor involved.

KDE did this with their netbook and desktop interfaces. Regardless of which one you use, it is still all KDE underneath. One Microsoft should be about have "one" Windows with interfaces tailored to specific use cases, not "one" interface for all use cases.

Summary for those who get suicidal from corpspeak (1)

avandesande (143899) | about 7 months ago | (#46728621)

Windows operating system will be free for devices under 9 inches

EOM

Re:Summary for those who get suicidal from corpspe (2)

Grow Old Timber (1071718) | about 7 months ago | (#46728757)

Even for a windows vibrator?

People sure do like to beat the cancer thing (3, Interesting)

Daniel Hoffmann (2902427) | about 7 months ago | (#46728727)

But GPL is indeed cancerous, intentionally so. Interacting with GPL code is a mine field if you don't want to GPL your code as well, there was no lie in that.

Re:People sure do like to beat the cancer thing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46728801)

I expected to see your comment modded out of existence, but you're totally right.

I hate to say this... (0)

Sla$hPot (1189603) | about 7 months ago | (#46728787)

But MS is getting smarter and smarter every day

One too many? (3, Insightful)

slapout (93640) | about 7 months ago | (#46728795)

I would have thought they'd want a kernel optimized for small devices driving the phones and a different one for desktops. Maybe have them implement the same API. But isn't the kernel something you'd want optimized for the device family?

ok... (1)

roc97007 (608802) | about 7 months ago | (#46728797)

> No longer are there different kernels for Windows 8, Windows Phone or Windows RT it's now all just One Windows.

Maybe not right now, but soon. And that's a good thing how?

> As goes the Windows kernel, so goes the entire company.

Um, yep. And again, that's a good thing how?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?