F
fb
Here are some interesting comments on that subject:
"Article (20 things Windows 7 MUST include) shows how much of a failure
Microsoft's Marketing team is, not how Vista failed.
For example, although there are tiny CPU scheduler changes in Vista, the
big changes things like a GPU scheduler, and I if the author of the
article doesn't even know which or what the difference is, show how sad
the level of understanding of Vista is.
Additionally, the article lacks any technical credibility, as it argues
for Windows 7 to be more modular, but then goes to use Linux as an
example of a good thing. Linux is the opposite of Modular when you look
at what Linux is specifically, as the kernel architecture is not only
not-modular, but spaghetti'ed together, to the point that a scheduling
lock change has disrupted the whole kernel development process.
Linux is NOT a modular OS. The UNIX framework and the 'separation' of
the OS layers is modular, but has NOTHING to do with Linux. Windows, to
Window Manager, to core OS and kernel levels are separate because Linux
doesn't strive to be a GUI or provide an upper level OS environment. In
this understanding, DOS was also very 'modular', as it separated the
Window Environment (Win3.x) as well. (This type of misunderstanding is
where an editor would normally go, ouch, this article needs to be
reviewed by a technical writer before we post it.)
One thing I have argued about Vista all along is a two fold problem.
First the MS Marketing Team have little understanding what Vista does
that is good or cool, and the MS Marketing team/business side had too
much control over the versions of Vista released, and fragmented
features across versions.
For example Flip3D is NOT a feature or even that cool, is the result of
the cool technologies of a Vector composer in Vista, that is doing
things even KDE 4 or OS X can't do. Yet marketing says nothing of this,
any only talk about Flip3D as a feature.
If you look at the OS X 10.5 release, Apple listed 300 features new from
10.4. However, if MS would have done this with Vista, and been as picky
as Apple was about what little things it wanted to 'list' as features,
the list would have been 5,000-10,000 features new in Vista. Yet Apple
was able to act like 10.5 had more 'features' over the previous version
than Vista did, which is so far from true, it is plain hyperbole.
The different Vista versions, especially the Basic and difference from
Home to Ultimate was insane and stupid. Sure business doesn't want Media
Center installed on computers, but MS should have provided two versions.
Business ONLY, that had a default install that doesn't easily allow the
games etc, but are still available, and a Normal version that will allow
have a default install, and give both versions the ability to select
what features they want with a clear understanding of what they are.
So with the versions MS blew it. Additionally, because a lot of the
'cool' features were only in Business or Ultimate, MS could fight about
against Apple. Take Time Machine form OS X, Vista's previous versions in
Ultimate and Business do every that Time Machine does, easier, with
existing backups, in addition to providing the time snapshots on the
volume without moving GBs of data to the backup every hour. Microsoft
didn't leave the UI in the Home versions, because of the stupid
marketing/business teams at MS, and so Microsoft couldn't advertise it
or even shove Time Machine back at Apple, showing that it was a poor
copy of a technology already in Vista.
"Article (20 things Windows 7 MUST include) shows how much of a failure
Microsoft's Marketing team is, not how Vista failed.
For example, although there are tiny CPU scheduler changes in Vista, the
big changes things like a GPU scheduler, and I if the author of the
article doesn't even know which or what the difference is, show how sad
the level of understanding of Vista is.
Additionally, the article lacks any technical credibility, as it argues
for Windows 7 to be more modular, but then goes to use Linux as an
example of a good thing. Linux is the opposite of Modular when you look
at what Linux is specifically, as the kernel architecture is not only
not-modular, but spaghetti'ed together, to the point that a scheduling
lock change has disrupted the whole kernel development process.
Linux is NOT a modular OS. The UNIX framework and the 'separation' of
the OS layers is modular, but has NOTHING to do with Linux. Windows, to
Window Manager, to core OS and kernel levels are separate because Linux
doesn't strive to be a GUI or provide an upper level OS environment. In
this understanding, DOS was also very 'modular', as it separated the
Window Environment (Win3.x) as well. (This type of misunderstanding is
where an editor would normally go, ouch, this article needs to be
reviewed by a technical writer before we post it.)
One thing I have argued about Vista all along is a two fold problem.
First the MS Marketing Team have little understanding what Vista does
that is good or cool, and the MS Marketing team/business side had too
much control over the versions of Vista released, and fragmented
features across versions.
For example Flip3D is NOT a feature or even that cool, is the result of
the cool technologies of a Vector composer in Vista, that is doing
things even KDE 4 or OS X can't do. Yet marketing says nothing of this,
any only talk about Flip3D as a feature.
If you look at the OS X 10.5 release, Apple listed 300 features new from
10.4. However, if MS would have done this with Vista, and been as picky
as Apple was about what little things it wanted to 'list' as features,
the list would have been 5,000-10,000 features new in Vista. Yet Apple
was able to act like 10.5 had more 'features' over the previous version
than Vista did, which is so far from true, it is plain hyperbole.
The different Vista versions, especially the Basic and difference from
Home to Ultimate was insane and stupid. Sure business doesn't want Media
Center installed on computers, but MS should have provided two versions.
Business ONLY, that had a default install that doesn't easily allow the
games etc, but are still available, and a Normal version that will allow
have a default install, and give both versions the ability to select
what features they want with a clear understanding of what they are.
So with the versions MS blew it. Additionally, because a lot of the
'cool' features were only in Business or Ultimate, MS could fight about
against Apple. Take Time Machine form OS X, Vista's previous versions in
Ultimate and Business do every that Time Machine does, easier, with
existing backups, in addition to providing the time snapshots on the
volume without moving GBs of data to the backup every hour. Microsoft
didn't leave the UI in the Home versions, because of the stupid
marketing/business teams at MS, and so Microsoft couldn't advertise it
or even shove Time Machine back at Apple, showing that it was a poor
copy of a technology already in Vista.