Gartner -- Windows collapsing under its [closed source] weight
Ignoramus16894
http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=8428
Gartner: Windows collapsing under its own weight; Radical change
needed
Microsofts Windows juggernaut is collapsing as it tries to support 20
years of applications and becomes more complicated by the
minute. Meanwhile, Windows has outgrown hardware and customers are
pondering skipping Vista to wait for Windows 7. If Windows is going to
remain relevant it will need radical changes.
That sobering outlook comes courtesy of Gartner analysts Michael
Silver and Neil MacDonald. Half of a full room of IT managers and
executives raised their hands when asked whether Microsoft needed to
radically change its approach to Windows. Windows is too monolithic,
says Silver.
Silver also gave another anecdotal point to show the conundrum
Microsoft is in: Clients are calling him to ask whether they should
skip Vista entirely and wait for Windows 7, which promises to be more
modular and potentially lightweight. Adrian Kingsley-Hughes has also
found an impact on Vista from all of the Windows 7 chatter. Silvers
recommendation: Go with Vista but on an attrition basis. As XP PCs
die, replace them with Vista PCs.
MacDonald argued that Windows may need multiple kernels to support
increasing demands from customers and hardware makers. One size doesnt
fit all, says MacDonald. For instance, look at the various demands an
OS has to deal with:
windows4.png
If Microsofts response is to become more complex Windows fall will
accelerate. As Windows stands today its already too bulky.
windows3.png
So what does Microsoft need to do?
For starters, Windows should create versions for specific uses. These
modules would be able to swapped out depending on the customer. From
Gartners presentation:
The more interesting question here is whether one OS can address
both architectural requirements. Microsoft believes that it can take
its core Windows software offering and package it to address these
different architectures. But can this same approach be extended to
embrace cloud computing and real-time architecture demands?
Also see: Jason Perlow: If I were to design Windows 7
Mary Jo Foley: Why Windows 7 might go to pieces
Multiple Windowsthat will be virtualized of coursewill screw up
Microsofts business model. Microsoft doesnt like anything in between
Windows and the hardware. Ninety-five percent of its revenue comes
from OEMs, says MacDonald.
Regardless of the pain for Microsoft, the software giant needs to
shorten development times and innovate on an ongoing basis, make its
experience consistent between platforms and solve compatibility
problems among various flavors of Windows.
A few key redesign ideas from Silver and MacDonald:
Windows should be able to be tailored to specific
applications. MacDonald questioned what the OS will become once
applications are virtualized. Do you need a full OS everywhere?
No. The job of an OS may be taken over by the hypervisor. Stray
thought: Taking that logic further perhaps VMware becomes the real OS.
Better security. MacDonald says Windows should link identities to
applications so software doesnt act abnormally. For instance, Notepad
would be limited to inputting text. Why would notepad.exe have rights
to network ports, the registry and scan a file system? Notepad should
be assigned an identity and limited to a specific use. Microsoft
doesnt do this today, says MacDonald. It would require significant
kernel changes. MacDonald added that few operating systems limit what
applications can do. The one software project that takes this approach
is the One Laptop Per Child project.
Make migration to new versions easier. Application packaging takes
forever, says Silver. Theres also the problem of Windows rot. Windows
rot is what happens to a machine after running Windows for three or
four years and it gets slow and barely functions. The fix is to
reinstall everything and rebuild the PC. Thats a manual effort that
takes too much time.
Simplify licensing to focus on specific devices. Licensing is too
difficult for mere mortals to understand, says Silver. The problem: A
version of Windows is tied to one PC. The way people work today will
require a licensing do over, argues Silver. From Gartners
presentation:
It is possible that several entities will own different hardware
and software components on a single machine, and there needs to be
flexibility in ownership, management and movement of the
assets. Microsoft Windows and Office licenses are ultimately tied to
the device and not to the user, which makes no sense in a world in
which a users work space migrates between multiple devices.
Something as common sense as Id like Office to go with me doesnt work
under current licensing, says MacDonald.
The bottom line for Gartner is that Windows needs to be replaced,
lock-in needs to end and product schedules need to be more
predictable. Windows should also be more manageable. The Windows user
experience will become less integrated to become a composite adaptive
work space, which means in English that some applications will be tied
to location and the users identity.
All of these items are good ideas that are very academic. Will Windows
7 become this adaptive thing that Gartner describes? Probably
not. Gartner argues that Microsoft should use virtualization to solve
the backward compatibility issue plaguing Windows. Will Windows 7
jettison its current kernel for multiple versions? Not likely.
Some of these changes may happen, but the move will be gradual at
best. I agree that Windows has too many legacy constraints with
reverse compatibility, but what would happen if Microsoft did a clean
break from older apps? Meanwhile, these legacy constraints have also
provided billions of dollars in revenue for Microsoft. One of the
reasons Microsoft has a monopoly is because it still works with older
stuff. If Microsoft did a clean break it would give you an excuse to
pick a new operating system.
Windows clearly needs to change, but the question is really
timing. How fast will Windows collapse under its weight? Itll take
longer than folks think.
Cork Soaker
: customers are
: pondering skipping Vista to wait for Windows 7.
I'm one. I hope it's better than Vista!!
ysdywmf
"Ignoramus16894" <ignoram...@NOSPAM.16894.invalid> wrote in message
news:ZeGdnbVqo_BmgGPa...@giganews.com...
>
> http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=8428
>
> Gartner: Windows collapsing under its own weight; Radical change
> needed
>
Moshe Goldfarb
You're not alone, for sure.
Add me to the list if I haven't gone Mac by then.
--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
Jerry McBride
From what's been posted about windows 7, it's being built around
microsofts "small kernel" that had the video layerrs stiped oput along with
a lot of other cruft... That being the case, I highly doubt that it's going
to be compatible with anything current todate. More than likely, it'll mean
another roud of software overhaul of the likes never seen in Redmond
before.
For me, it's just another blip on the radar... Linux is taking over, haven't
you heard?
--
Jerry McBride (jmcb...@mail-on.us)