- Greed, politics, and CanSecWest
- Windows Search 4.0 preview: first impressions
- Is Microsoft artificially delaying XP SP3?
- The six month *nix itch: How should I scratch it?
- You can never have too many cores
- Was Vista DOA?
- Windows "Workstation" 2008 results lead to backlash from Vista zealots
- Windows "Workstation" 2008: One week later
- Windows "Workstation" 2008 Clobbers Vista in Benchmark Testing
- Microsoft owns up to Vista's flaws (sort of)
January 27, 2008 | Comments: (0)
Windows 7: Will they or won't they?
With all the speculation surrounding Windows 7 and its ever accelerating launch schedule, I found the following quote from an "official" Microsoft email to be most intriguing:
"We are still in the planning stages for Windows 7 and expect it will take approximately 3 years to develop."
The above quote comes from a message supposedly received by the folks over at winvistaclub.com. I say supposedly because the site is clearly a Vista "fanboi" endeavor, and I wouldn't put it past such people to go and fabricate such a Microsoft "response." However, I also think it's worth taking another look at the evidence both for and against an early Windows 7 debut:
- As far as the enterprise is concerned, Vista is a disaster. No matter how Microsoft tries to spin the numbers, the fact remains that they dropped the ball with "Windows NT 6.0." Too much "fat" for the masses and not enough "meat" for corporate IT. And the blame rests squarely with Jim Allchin, a guy who to this day still doesn't have a clue about the needs of IT professionals (your Banyan days will forever haunt you, Jimbo).
- Save XP is gaining momentum. More and more IT shops are simply saying "no" to Vista and sticking with XP in the hope that Windows 7 will be the version that Vista should have been. Microsoft needs to seize on this and start fleshing-out its Windows 7 strategy ASAP. Come 2009 there'll be some hungry IT patrons looking for the "meat" they were denied with Vista!
- This ain't your father's Windows dev team. Steve Sinofsky runs a tight ship. He also has a penchant for under-promising and over-delivering. Witness Microsoft Office, a product that rivals Mac OSX in terms of trumped-up "new features" per version -- but which also tends to ship on schedule.
Translation: This is a Windows dev team that will set realistic goals and keep the "pie-in-the-sky" stuff from distracting them from their ship targets.
- Making Windows 7 a success won't be as hard as you might think. After the Vista debacle, IT shops fully expect Microsoft to pull out all the stops with Windows 7. The very fact that we're even debating the possibility of the company shipping a version of Windows early speaks volumes about the level of expectation. To botch Windows 7 would be suicide, or so the conventional wisdom goes. That alone should be enough to guarantee a solid release, one that redresses Vista's myriad shortcomings and throws a much needed bone to corporate IT types.
Will Microsoft ship Windows 7 early in an effort to salvage its enterprise reputation? I'm guessing yes, if for no other reason than they can. It won't take a major engineering effort to turn the ashes of Vista (which, despite its reputation, did incorporate some good ideas) into a solid OS that corporate IT actually wants. Just trim the "fat," fix the compatibility "gotchas" and start listening to what the guys in the trenches are saying for a change.
And whatever you do, don't give it another stupid name like Windows "Horizons" ... or anything to do with the environment ... or shellfish.
Posted by Randall Kennedy on January 27, 2008 05:23 PM
RATE THIS ARTICLE:
-
- COMMENTS
Actually it seems it's coming out in 3 years since the release of Vista in November 2006. The quote at www.winvistaclub.com is partly incomplete.
See here:
http://www.crn.com/software/205918985
"We are currently in the planning stages for Windows 7 and expect the development to take approximately 3 years since the release of Windows Vista."
Posted by: Clive at January 27, 2008 05:49 PMIt's not clear what exactly they can do different in Dimdows 7. How to remove the "bloat" without removing actual features? But weren't those extra features supposed to sell Vista in the first place? So will Dimdows 7 offer fewer features than Vista?
Or will it offer even more features, hence more bloat?
Posted by: Lawrence D'Oliveiro at January 27, 2008 08:49 PMD'Oliveiro,
For starters, they need to review the working set and resource consumption of each service and kernel component. My guess is they didn't pay as much attention as they should have since they were targeting SOTA hardware. And in that regard they succeeded: Throw a few GB and multiple cores at Vista and it performs "OK" most of the time.
However, Microsoft made the mistake of not allowing the user to effectively "dial-back" some of the bloat - for example, by turning off features like SuperFetch and the Indexing Services - in order to make it run on systems that were SOTA just a few years ago (and which still grace many user desks). It doesnt' take too many poor showings on "borderline" hardware to establish the perception that an OS is "slow" and "bloated," especially when XP runs great on these boxes.
Fortunately for Microsoft, by the time they ship Windows 7, most of this "borderline" hardware will have been swapped-out. So, assuming they keep the code bloat in check - and perhaps even optimize it a bit so it runs faster than Vista on the same hardware - the industry will likely laud them for finally producing an OS worthy of widespread adoption (though in fact they can only claim partial credit - the rest is just the natural hardware turnover cycle working the bail them out).
Anyway, that's my take...
RCK
I've got the Software Assurance paid up to deploy vista in my small biz environment, but I've declined for all the reasons everyone mentioned, but also because the license activation is so onerous. If you reimage systems more than once in a machine's lifetime, then getting Vista activated is a pain. The XP volume license version trusted me with non-activating codes. If Vista trusted me, I must actually use it.
Posted by: Joe at January 28, 2008 05:09 AMJoe,
Good point! It seems that in their zeal to squash piracy they've managed to make Vista's registration process so enterprise-unfriendly that it's almost not worth the effort. A quick scan of my blog history shows that I've been bitten by more than my fair share of WGA "burps," some of which left me completely disabled. Another area that Microsoft would do well to address with Windows 7...
RCK
I think the Mac / Windows commercials have gotten to them and they are about to throw in the towel and licence OSX, put it in a box with Windows 7.0 on it and call it a day.
Posted by: Ed at January 28, 2008 11:47 AMThey might do that, but they will have to make a few tweaks before it is Microsoft Ready.
1. Implement the DRM protection so people can't copy copyrighted material on to their hard disks and distribute it.
2. Implement Windows Genuine Advantage so that people won't illegally copy the OS.
So, the same genius who removed the print icon from the default Office 2007 toolbar is handling Windows 2007?
Pardon me for failing to think this is reason to believe that Windows 7 will be any better than Vista for those of us who use computers as business tools.
Posted by: Jon at January 29, 2008 01:14 PMAllchin is probably one of the smartest guys I have ever met. Not only does he know the enterprise, his focus on security in Windows Vista has made the world a safer place. From what I know he fought all kinds of odds at Microsoft -- pushing for the things that you seem to care about. His contribution will be so missed.
Posted by: Gary at February 2, 2008 07:14 AM
