Windows is doomed(theweek.com)
theweek.com
Windows is doomed
http://theweek.com/articles/721988/windows-doomed
62 comments
Just for fun; I recorded a macro in LibreOffice Basic that sets the text in a cell.
This is a sample:
Now in MS Office I'm pretty sure this would be something like ActiveSheet.Cells(1, 5) = "foo". There is nearly no discovery for the LO Basic equivalent 'sheet.getCellByPosition(3,16) = "foo"'.
It really is worlds apart. I don't see how a moderately sophisticated user can learn to write LO macros without finding a reference manual and investing hours orienting themselves. I've seen people teach themselves to a useful standard using MS Office macro recordings.
EDIT More importantly, a novice wouldn't necessarily understand that the recorded macro isn't the accepted way to select a cell. Even realising that a cell can be selected with one line is hindered by the LO macro recording.
This is a sample:
dispatcher = createUnoService("com.sun.star.frame.DispatchHelper")
dim args1(0) as new com.sun.star.beans.PropertyValue
args1(0).Name = "ToPoint"
args1(0).Value = "$C$7"
dispatcher.executeDispatch(document, ".uno:GoToCell", "", 0, args1())
Now in MS Office I'm pretty sure this would be something like ActiveSheet.Cells(1, 5) = "foo". There is nearly no discovery for the LO Basic equivalent 'sheet.getCellByPosition(3,16) = "foo"'.
It really is worlds apart. I don't see how a moderately sophisticated user can learn to write LO macros without finding a reference manual and investing hours orienting themselves. I've seen people teach themselves to a useful standard using MS Office macro recordings.
EDIT More importantly, a novice wouldn't necessarily understand that the recorded macro isn't the accepted way to select a cell. Even realising that a cell can be selected with one line is hindered by the LO macro recording.
That's a ridiculous level of verbosity for what should be the most basic of tasks. Not to mention is has its roots in Java. I would have figured that LibreOffice, which is touted as an MS Office replacement would have full compatibility with Macros written in VB.
They really need to make an easier and modern way of scripting in LO.
Wow; that is horribly unreadable. :-(
Macro-programming Office documents is one of those things that should immediately elicit the question "Is there a better solution?" There almost always is. Office documents are an extremely poor workflow and a terrible artifact for data.
Which is why replacements seldom have more than the most trivial of automation -- the people who are making the move usually change their workflows. The offices that built around Office 95 are, however, still doing things the way they always do.
EDIT: What a changed world when this is a contentious comment.
Which is why replacements seldom have more than the most trivial of automation -- the people who are making the move usually change their workflows. The offices that built around Office 95 are, however, still doing things the way they always do.
EDIT: What a changed world when this is a contentious comment.
The thing is, it can be done by a "non programmer" without IT or admin overhead. Building or buying a new solution outside of Office requires far more buy-in and cost.
It may not be the best workflow, but it is the most accessible one for an individual to start with.
Edit: for what it's worth, I agree that it can be a hindrance to a company when it becomes a core operating process. However, that doesn't mean that it is inherently wrong for many needs
It may not be the best workflow, but it is the most accessible one for an individual to start with.
Edit: for what it's worth, I agree that it can be a hindrance to a company when it becomes a core operating process. However, that doesn't mean that it is inherently wrong for many needs
Sure, I get where it comes into play. A team usually has the "techie" guy who decides to roll some macros, and soon it becomes embedded. In the last decade and before this was the engine of an enormous amount of end user computing.
But in 2017, it is almost always a very bad sign. Which is why the competition have mostly abandoned automation of the 1990s Office sort.
But in 2017, it is almost always a very bad sign. Which is why the competition have mostly abandoned automation of the 1990s Office sort.
What is a "better" solution? If a macro-programmed office document is doing its job, what constitutes "better"?
Why scarequote better twice? It is possible, you understand, for some solutions to be better than others.
In 2017 there are shockingly few cases where macro programming an Office document is an ideal solution, and it is usually a really clear sign that you're approaching the problem wrong. It was seldom a good solution even in 2010.
It's funny that in these conversations people always bring up finance. I work in finance, for a wide variety of companies making a wide variety of solutions. Excel automation is a curse. Every Excel automation is an abomination from a decade plus earlier -- islands of data, extraordinarily full of errors, security nightmares, data exposure risks, and on and on.
In 2017 there are shockingly few cases where macro programming an Office document is an ideal solution, and it is usually a really clear sign that you're approaching the problem wrong. It was seldom a good solution even in 2010.
It's funny that in these conversations people always bring up finance. I work in finance, for a wide variety of companies making a wide variety of solutions. Excel automation is a curse. Every Excel automation is an abomination from a decade plus earlier -- islands of data, extraordinarily full of errors, security nightmares, data exposure risks, and on and on.
This. I don't think those automated Excel spreadsheets are doing as great a job as people think. Every time I've been brought in to try and migrate people away from these kind of solutions, we've exposed many bugs. Some not a big deal, others costing the company real money.
Doomed in this context doesn't mean "is extinguished from all use". For instance, CAD is an absolutely tiny usage of an OS. Minuscule.
Office...I'm in finance and massive numbers of people are either working on ancient versions of Office, or they've transitioned to alternatives. Office is absolutely enormous in scope, but it's one of those things that is detrimental to many workflows because of its powers. Many shops prefer webapps and on-demand generated consumables. Even Excel is very rapidly dying.
The criticality of Windows has absolutely imploded, and is nothing like it was. If someone wants to use Linux, or OSX, or Android, or whatever, in most cases it fits in many workflows with absolutely no issues.
On the home front the single thing keeping Windows running in most home situations is game compatibility. A massive number of home users never go outside of the browser, and those that do usually do just for games.
Office...I'm in finance and massive numbers of people are either working on ancient versions of Office, or they've transitioned to alternatives. Office is absolutely enormous in scope, but it's one of those things that is detrimental to many workflows because of its powers. Many shops prefer webapps and on-demand generated consumables. Even Excel is very rapidly dying.
The criticality of Windows has absolutely imploded, and is nothing like it was. If someone wants to use Linux, or OSX, or Android, or whatever, in most cases it fits in many workflows with absolutely no issues.
On the home front the single thing keeping Windows running in most home situations is game compatibility. A massive number of home users never go outside of the browser, and those that do usually do just for games.
I definitely fall under your last point. As soon as I can play my entire Steam library on a Mac or Linux, I'll make the switch. Until then, I'm stuck on Windows.
"Windows is doomed" doesn't mean windows is going away. As long as its market is stagnant and it isn't picking up new domains while it's competitors (linux, OS X, android) are, it becomes just a piece of legacy technology that has to stick around but isn't going anywhere. There are very good reasons why Windows tried going with mobile, IoT, and AR/MR for its future growth.
"Doomed" means a slow eventual death, not an immediate one. This reminds me of how people were so busy knocking down strawmen with the whole post-PC thing.
"Doomed" means a slow eventual death, not an immediate one. This reminds me of how people were so busy knocking down strawmen with the whole post-PC thing.
If "doomed" means a slow eventual death, absolutely everything has been doomed from the start.
Yes, death is inevitable. The trick is, can you tell where your life rise ends and your fall begins? Doomed is typically identified at or after that point.
Windows hasn't been on the upswing since the early 2000s. According to this definition, the product has been doomed for over half its life.
Having worked at Microsoft from 2007 to 2016, I definitely saw windows during my almost tenure go from a growing profit center to all of a sudden having losses.
I think that a significant reduction to the user base may actually lead to Microsoft actually stopping all further development of windows, because I believe that the cost of developing, updating, and securing windows is massive.
They have enough market to justify continued development at a slower pace, but windev (OSG?) is no longer going to have growing profit and they would probably cut back on R&D and focus on ASG and C&E where profit growth is happening.
Reading the article, the problem becomes more obvious: without mobile, they have a huge gap in their offering and have to embrace competing OS's (Cortana goes nowhere with a non mobile windows).
Reading the article, the problem becomes more obvious: without mobile, they have a huge gap in their offering and have to embrace competing OS's (Cortana goes nowhere with a non mobile windows).
Pardon my ignorance but what's OSG, ASG or C&E?
I don't disagree with your thesis, but I think that your bullet points are weak. But I do think that is illustrates the real point. It's going to take a lot of little things to change before windows is doomed.
However, I do see it as a possibility that windows being doomed as a consumer OS might happen in our lifetime. As more things move to service oriented and more devices become connected it's very plausible that the majority drop their desktops and laptops and rely on mobile and chrombook level devices.
However, I do see it as a possibility that windows being doomed as a consumer OS might happen in our lifetime. As more things move to service oriented and more devices become connected it's very plausible that the majority drop their desktops and laptops and rely on mobile and chrombook level devices.
If you think that having a real alternative to Office is a minor point, than you haven't worked in a corporate environment, and I'm not talking about Internet companies, but traditional medium-sized engineering companies, accounting, legal studios, government agencies etc...
Millions of professionals very good at their jobs, but with no particular technical proficiency, have been using Word and Excel for years, and convincing them to switch to something else would take much more effort that any IT manager with a budget can possibly muster.
Millions of professionals very good at their jobs, but with no particular technical proficiency, have been using Word and Excel for years, and convincing them to switch to something else would take much more effort that any IT manager with a budget can possibly muster.
Moving the entire world's manufacturing processes is not a "little thing to change". Same thing with Active Directory - millions of people work through this system, it's no small task to transition them to something else.
It's not doomed as a consumer OS. People want to use the same OS at home that they do at work, it feels familiar to them and they already know how to get stuff done.
It's not doomed as a consumer OS. People want to use the same OS at home that they do at work, it feels familiar to them and they already know how to get stuff done.
Most CAD programs work on Mac. It's just 2x-4x more expensive to buy comparable Apple hardware that runs it.
I agree that the scripting is a moat around Window's dominance but most small businesses run Windows because the hardware is more affordable and a lot of people are comfortable with Windows. Office is also super cheap now and free alternatives kind of suck and they address common pain points incrementally better than they did 10 years ago. In other words, it doesn't feel like free Office alternatives are keeping up. For example, LibreOffice stopped trying to improve compatibility with MS Office documents. I get the philosophical reasons but if you want to migrate end-users, you have to care about things like that.
At my son's public school, he was being taught to use Google Docs because (of course) it's more affordable than buying a bunch of copies of Microsoft Office for the kids. He was doing homework one day and he was trying to do some common formatting thing in Google Docs. Can't remember specifics. After a few minutes of trying to help him figure it out, I was like "let me introduce you to this little program called Microsoft Word". It blew his mind after using Google Docs.
I agree that the scripting is a moat around Window's dominance but most small businesses run Windows because the hardware is more affordable and a lot of people are comfortable with Windows. Office is also super cheap now and free alternatives kind of suck and they address common pain points incrementally better than they did 10 years ago. In other words, it doesn't feel like free Office alternatives are keeping up. For example, LibreOffice stopped trying to improve compatibility with MS Office documents. I get the philosophical reasons but if you want to migrate end-users, you have to care about things like that.
At my son's public school, he was being taught to use Google Docs because (of course) it's more affordable than buying a bunch of copies of Microsoft Office for the kids. He was doing homework one day and he was trying to do some common formatting thing in Google Docs. Can't remember specifics. After a few minutes of trying to help him figure it out, I was like "let me introduce you to this little program called Microsoft Word". It blew his mind after using Google Docs.
I think CAD is a great example, because CAD products do exist for Mac OSX, which at this point is the only viable competitor to Windows, even including a 2015 port of AutoCAD. BIM exist, like ArchiCAD. It's not that the Mac is a complete dead end, but the resources required to target the Mac are non-trivial and it has to be worth the investment.
For years high end Unix workstations dominated in the 3D graphics and design field, in engineering, industrial design and fabrication, basically anywhere a computer+engineer generated the kind of income which justified a $50,000 computer (epitomized by SGIs and Dec Alphas) plus equally or more expensive software licenses.
What happened is the bottom dropped out of the hardware market. The Pentium Pro came along, Windows NT 4.0 was released with OpenGL support, Nvidia brought powerful 3D to the consumer desktop, computers with 256MB or more of RAM were commonplace, and all of this was available for a few thousand dollars. Over time, almost everyone making software for these platforms either jumped ship or went broken.
So while there's a historical precedent for this same migration in the computer field, something's different this time. There's no room at the bottom.
For years high end Unix workstations dominated in the 3D graphics and design field, in engineering, industrial design and fabrication, basically anywhere a computer+engineer generated the kind of income which justified a $50,000 computer (epitomized by SGIs and Dec Alphas) plus equally or more expensive software licenses.
What happened is the bottom dropped out of the hardware market. The Pentium Pro came along, Windows NT 4.0 was released with OpenGL support, Nvidia brought powerful 3D to the consumer desktop, computers with 256MB or more of RAM were commonplace, and all of this was available for a few thousand dollars. Over time, almost everyone making software for these platforms either jumped ship or went broken.
So while there's a historical precedent for this same migration in the computer field, something's different this time. There's no room at the bottom.
> common CAD software
OnShape is a viable online replacement for SolidWorks but it is hard to transition people from their favorite software package.
CAD is not the biggest deal and is not a major factor, even if some people think it is. Less than 1% of corporate office computer workers are CAD and it is probably way less than that even.
Office and Active Directory are a big deal though.
OnShape is a viable online replacement for SolidWorks but it is hard to transition people from their favorite software package.
CAD is not the biggest deal and is not a major factor, even if some people think it is. Less than 1% of corporate office computer workers are CAD and it is probably way less than that even.
Office and Active Directory are a big deal though.
CAD isn't the only major program though.
Adobe Suite is another major factor: Wacom Tablets are still superior to iPad Pencil and Surface Pen (although the Surface Pen provides a cheap entrypoint for these programs). And nothing on iPad has the featureset of Photoshop (or Manga Studio or whatever you prefer)
Non-CAD programs like Blender, or Maya and whatever, are still best on a PC.
----------
And as long as you're using PC software, you'll need an IT department that supports enterprise PC operations. Active Directory and Group Policy really does make life easier for any IT Administrator who is in charge of 100 to 1000 computers.
Adobe Suite is another major factor: Wacom Tablets are still superior to iPad Pencil and Surface Pen (although the Surface Pen provides a cheap entrypoint for these programs). And nothing on iPad has the featureset of Photoshop (or Manga Studio or whatever you prefer)
Non-CAD programs like Blender, or Maya and whatever, are still best on a PC.
----------
And as long as you're using PC software, you'll need an IT department that supports enterprise PC operations. Active Directory and Group Policy really does make life easier for any IT Administrator who is in charge of 100 to 1000 computers.
Both the adobe suite and Wacom tablets work on Mac, not sure what you’re trying to say here.
I'm sorry, but OnShape doesn't even come close. We don't even have to start talking about the functionality. The fact that there's no sane PLM options instantly kills it for corporate customers, and it will stay that way until there is.
Do the official online versions of Office qualify as viable alternatives, or could they potentially be in the future?
Obviously this would require Microsoft themselves to undercut Windows, but Office is such a cash cow for them, they might see it as worthwhile.
Obviously this would require Microsoft themselves to undercut Windows, but Office is such a cash cow for them, they might see it as worthwhile.
I think they'd be quite happy to undercut Desktop/Mobile Windows in favour of Office. Long term Office may be the most viable product. There are already online and mobile versions that don;t require anything Windows related (they aren't feature complete yet by any means, but that will eventually change).
Even Server Windows to an extent if their other on-prem cache cow (SQL Server) does well on Linux.
Windows is not their core priority these days. The Azure platform is, and Windows is just a part of that which could be swapped out. Maybe Windows will just become a free (though obviously not Free) product, with the money coming in from Azure + SQL + Office.
Even Server Windows to an extent if their other on-prem cache cow (SQL Server) does well on Linux.
Windows is not their core priority these days. The Azure platform is, and Windows is just a part of that which could be swapped out. Maybe Windows will just become a free (though obviously not Free) product, with the money coming in from Azure + SQL + Office.
Exactly my thinking. Office probably has more legs. Attempting to keep it tied to Windows in order to save Windows could end up bringing both down, and I think they know this.
Back in the bad old days, Microsoft could barely be convinced to keep a Mac port of Office going, and that was basically to keep the government at bay. But they seem to be more open now.
Back in the bad old days, Microsoft could barely be convinced to keep a Mac port of Office going, and that was basically to keep the government at bay. But they seem to be more open now.
COBAL was doomed 30 years ago, it's still not quite 100% dead yet. But, it might as well be.
Windows is on the same path in part from the windows 10 fiasco, but also from the stagnation in computing hardware.
Consider Direct X with ever improving hardware it's was a hard target to keep up with. But, now they would have to make changes for the sake of change while providing backward compatibility...
Windows is on the same path in part from the windows 10 fiasco, but also from the stagnation in computing hardware.
Consider Direct X with ever improving hardware it's was a hard target to keep up with. But, now they would have to make changes for the sake of change while providing backward compatibility...
If we could run entirely in a web browsers, it's a real alternative for everything. Probably Web Assembly might be the answer.
How many times are pundits going to keep repeating that cellphones/tablets are going to kill off laptops and desktops before they realize how ridiculous that is?
The only one that has a remote chance of killing either one at this point is Microsoft themselves through continuum and X64 code running on ARM. Even then, phone horsepower is still not enough to fully replace my laptop and desktop usage. I don't see that changing anytime soon with the issues fabs are having getting to smaller process sizes.
The only one that has a remote chance of killing either one at this point is Microsoft themselves through continuum and X64 code running on ARM. Even then, phone horsepower is still not enough to fully replace my laptop and desktop usage. I don't see that changing anytime soon with the issues fabs are having getting to smaller process sizes.
Doomed and killed off don't mean the same thing. Everyone in tech who isn't busy knocking down poorly constructed strawmen acknowledge that post-PC has already happened. That market is no longer expected to grow.
"Doomed" to me doesn't sound like "not expected to grow". It sounds more like "expected to die off". I mean, tv sales have been dropping for the last few years, but we're not saying the tv market is doomed because we don't expect that market to die. I think a better word for "not expected to grow" is "saturated".
In any case, the use of the word "doomed" is hyperbolic or at the very least ill defined scaremongering.
In any case, the use of the word "doomed" is hyperbolic or at the very least ill defined scaremongering.
The TV market as a growing interesting market for innovation is almost dead. If you are in the tech industry and looking for the next big thing, you aren't look around TVs.
I really don't think many here actually read the article and instead just focused on the byline without any context.
I really don't think many here actually read the article and instead just focused on the byline without any context.
Meh, Google doesn't really offer much by way of a platform for development (sure, I know some here code on Chromebooks) and severely risks demonopolisation; Apple will have to pull some magic out of the bag if it wants to stem the flow of developers and professionals leaving its platform and Windows is still on a significant number of productive workplace desktops (such as mine here).
Phones are not computers and are deviating ever more from being mistaken for devices that can be used for actual productive work.
So Microsoft lost the mobile handset/OS race.. so far.
I'm not encouraged that any of the reasoning in this article represents nails in MS's coffin.
Phones are not computers and are deviating ever more from being mistaken for devices that can be used for actual productive work.
So Microsoft lost the mobile handset/OS race.. so far.
I'm not encouraged that any of the reasoning in this article represents nails in MS's coffin.
The main argument is economical; desktop computers are stale (well, thanks AMD for stirring it up recently a bit), most people now treat computers as home appliances that need replacement once in 5-10 years. In mobile, market still grows (even if showing signs of saturation), there is still a year-to-year progress making newer models appealing and there are more mobile devices that computers with faster replacement rate. So what MS was getting on new end user licenses is lost; they lost mobile as well; the only move left are subscriptions which individual users hate and businesses love.
No it isn't, this is bullshit.
As long as finance managers want to download their financial data from SharePoint to Excel, their reports generated on Crystal Reports and edited on Word and as long as finance managers are the ones paying for new software and computers then both Windows and Microsoft have a bright future ahead.
It is called synergy. The same "walled garden" approach that Apple uses for consumer market is working very well for Microsoft on the enterprise market.
As long as finance managers want to download their financial data from SharePoint to Excel, their reports generated on Crystal Reports and edited on Word and as long as finance managers are the ones paying for new software and computers then both Windows and Microsoft have a bright future ahead.
It is called synergy. The same "walled garden" approach that Apple uses for consumer market is working very well for Microsoft on the enterprise market.
Every time I see headlines like these (likewise regarding Mac OS etc.) I'm left wondering if people realise where the software for these platforms come from.
Without Mac OS there'd be no iOS apps (or at least, many fewer). And without Windows there'd be many fewer Xbox and likely Android apps too.
Non-mobile computing is needed until (at the very least) the bulk of development for mobile is done _on_ mobile (hint: I doubt that will happen any time soon).
Without Mac OS there'd be no iOS apps (or at least, many fewer). And without Windows there'd be many fewer Xbox and likely Android apps too.
Non-mobile computing is needed until (at the very least) the bulk of development for mobile is done _on_ mobile (hint: I doubt that will happen any time soon).
This is what I don't understand. I understand that most consumer activities (e.g. mail, social, search) can be achieved on mobile without missing a beat. Static content and most dynamic content have been solved for mobile devices for a while. What they seem to miss is that any substantive work is a hassle to complete on mobile.
If you ignore the lag from the CPU or memory constraints, the interface is just not conducive for working. Who wants to edit text documents or spreadsheets, used a shell, or edit code on a 5 inch screen? Who wants to use a soft keyboard for any non-trivial amount of work? It's not that it can't be done; there are much more attractive options readily available.
There there's the argument about connecting mobile devices to monitors, using adapters/bluetooth for peripheral devices, and thin client setups. If that's the case, why don't you grab a cheap laptop? Mobile is gimping you at that point.
If you ignore the lag from the CPU or memory constraints, the interface is just not conducive for working. Who wants to edit text documents or spreadsheets, used a shell, or edit code on a 5 inch screen? Who wants to use a soft keyboard for any non-trivial amount of work? It's not that it can't be done; there are much more attractive options readily available.
There there's the argument about connecting mobile devices to monitors, using adapters/bluetooth for peripheral devices, and thin client setups. If that's the case, why don't you grab a cheap laptop? Mobile is gimping you at that point.
Once you accept the fact that the meme of the dying desktop and mobile only comes from people who are "creative" by answering mails/reacting on social media and dragging things from A to B, you will quickly understand that the desktop on which most of the grunt work gets still done will still be there for a long time.
> Without Mac OS there'd be no iOS apps (or at least, many fewer). And without Windows there'd be many fewer Xbox and likely Android apps too.
One can develop Android apps just fine on Linux. It's a superior experience to Windows or macOS IMHO.
Honestly, I find the modern Linux desktops friendlier to non-power-users than modern macOS or Windows.
One can develop Android apps just fine on Linux. It's a superior experience to Windows or macOS IMHO.
Honestly, I find the modern Linux desktops friendlier to non-power-users than modern macOS or Windows.
You might want to add "and 2017 is the year of Linux desktop" as long as you're at it.
Windows was doomed in 2009, 2005, 2001, 1993, etc.
I think the rule is if you're marked as doomed incorrectly more than three times over the course of a decade, then you are too big to fail and are, by definition, not doomed.
I think the rule is if you're marked as doomed incorrectly more than three times over the course of a decade, then you are too big to fail and are, by definition, not doomed.
I dunno, I'm going to keep upgrading my Windows box and version so long as it stays the primary gaming platform. Consoles are fine and all, I even have a couple modern ones, but there's still no replacement for mouse & keyboard for hi-fidelity input, and the only desktop that lets you play the vast majority of m&k games is Windows.
That'll keep it in the home, and AD & Office will keep it in the workplace. Seems not so doomed to me.
That'll keep it in the home, and AD & Office will keep it in the workplace. Seems not so doomed to me.
As a developer, my interests are in maximizing the value of my skills. I want my expertise to be applicable across multiple platforms; I want projects which I develop to be portable across multiple platforms; I wish to minimize the amount of pointless superficial interface information I must learn as platforms rise and fall and instead focus on deepening my comprehension of computer science fundamentals.
I hate that the platform vendors cannot ally themselves with those interests and must instead always attempt to lock developers in, damaging us economically and wasting our time and human potential.
When a vendor suffers because their lock-in attempts falter, I can't help but feel schadenfreude. Now, if only their competition were consistently better...
I hate that the platform vendors cannot ally themselves with those interests and must instead always attempt to lock developers in, damaging us economically and wasting our time and human potential.
When a vendor suffers because their lock-in attempts falter, I can't help but feel schadenfreude. Now, if only their competition were consistently better...
Off topic: Microsoft was not only accused of monopolistic moves, it was found guilty.
I'd contend that the desktop OS in general is doomed. Besides a mention of iOS's aid to MacOS's popularity all the author's arguments apply to mac (and Linux desktop).
If Microsoft hadn't created Azure and started shifting their efforts to be an enterprise development company a few years ago, they'd be the next RIM.
But...even if Windows goes away, there's AWS and Google Cloud, but the ability to migrate existing legacy enterprise applications into Azure, as well as leverage new features like machine learning and cognitive vision, will let Microsoft stay alive.
How successful will it be in the long term is the question.
But...even if Windows goes away, there's AWS and Google Cloud, but the ability to migrate existing legacy enterprise applications into Azure, as well as leverage new features like machine learning and cognitive vision, will let Microsoft stay alive.
How successful will it be in the long term is the question.
It feels like Microsoft is entering the next stage of the IBM lifecycle -- technology eliminates the value of the monopoly, and they're forced to find new ways to make money, while they coast for a few years on market inertia.
Ultimately MS (like IBM) will not to be able to sell anything outside the C-suite, because anyone closer to the technology knows there are better cheaper solutions.
(But Xboxes...hmmmmm...maybe my view is a little to simplistic.)
Ultimately MS (like IBM) will not to be able to sell anything outside the C-suite, because anyone closer to the technology knows there are better cheaper solutions.
(But Xboxes...hmmmmm...maybe my view is a little to simplistic.)
Have you heard of Azure?
Yes. An compared to AWS it's been immature, buggy, unreliable, and caters to the admin acting like a button mashing monkey that tries to solve problems by turning things on/off in the Web UI instead of using a programmable repeatable, scriptable "environment as source". Hopefully, others have had better experiences, but so far I'm wanting to run away screaming.
> instead of using a programmable repeatable, scriptable "environment as source".
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/azure-resource-manage...
Thanks for the time capsule experience though, sometimes I miss the legendary zealotry of Slashdot.
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/azure-resource-manage...
Thanks for the time capsule experience though, sometimes I miss the legendary zealotry of Slashdot.
No, actually. Today's Windows is more attractive than ever. As a developer, I even prefer it - unlike macOS, it has WSL, and you see it's evolving quickly unlike macOS, which feels dead. Also, given .NET and PowerShell run on Linux and macOS, they are a worthy investment. I only wish Chocolately had a vibrant community as Homebrew - it lags behind, and even for basic features, you have to cough up money.
This article rehashes the well-known challenges and missteps that have made Windows much less relevant.
It totally misses the scale and intertia around Windows in the enterprise. It may not show up as the hot platform for new applications on HN, but it's not remotely "doomed".
It totally misses the scale and intertia around Windows in the enterprise. It may not show up as the hot platform for new applications on HN, but it's not remotely "doomed".
I do agree with the article, but it doesn't seems that Windows will be going very soon. Too many applications are still dependent on it, and PC gamers, both casual and hardcore, generally prefer using Windows and are a large portion of the market.
Windows is doomed as soon as .exe is. But really how did it make it so far?
Mobile is not a major threat to desktops, they serve different purposes. People who have desktop PCs aren't getting rid of them because they bought a phone or tablet. Even though Microsoft has questionable practices they still have the best desktop OS. This is clickbait trash journalism.
- there is a viable alternative to Microsoft Office on the desktop. This doesn't mean one that gets most of the way there; LibreOffice and company, Office on mobile, etc. don't quite cut it. Macro jockeys and VBA scripting are huge game changers for corporate clients, especially in the finance and accounting worlds.
- common CAD software has been entirely ported to a new platform and has complete feature parity. Considering how conservative engineering/manufacturing firms can be, this will likely never happen. No large engineering corporation will ever risk, or run the risk of ever having to run the risk, of even the slightest of hiccups in a large software migration. The only big swinger even making an attempt in this department is Siemens NX, and even we're still quite far out from feature parity for even that single package.
- Active Directory has a viable counterpart for a competing operating system. Some people are trying, none are truly succeeding.
Those three points alone are enough to prop up Windows for the next couple decades. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of Windows, Microsoft, their business practices, or many of their ideas on how things should be done. However, it drives me up the fucking wall when people make dumbass claims that Windows will die within any reasonable timeframe (20-30 years).
EDIT: As a quick clarification, I bring up CAD not because it attracts a large userbase (it doesn't), but because switching away from Windows means that the manufacturing base of the entire world will undergo a massive change that could prove fatal in many ways. This means that any company with a significant CAD userbase will be using Windows, even if the HR, IT, etc. doesn't, in an attempt to consolidate overhead. This also means that many companies that work with engineering/manufacturing companies will stick with it for compatibility's sake. Many people are commenting that CAD/manufacturing doesn't account for many users, but that's beside the major implication. Engineering and manufacturing customers alone could ensure at least a workable level of Windows support, all while indoctrinating most of their employees in to Microsoft's ecosystem.