Microsoft is giving up on Windows 8

Nightly Business Report: Market Focus

 

Don't think so.

What you see in April will be another service pack like update.

 

Dang, had some hope for the Windows 9...

 

He's right they are.

Code Name: Threshold.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/01/13/windows_9_coming_april_say_microsoft/

Bringing back the start menu!!!!!

 

No. Threshold is not Windows 9.

It is an update to 8.1.

Edit: Let me rephrase.

I it launches this April, it is a 8.1 update.

If it launches in 2015, as new rumors claim, then yeah, it can be Windows 9.

http://www.engadget.com/2014/01/13/microsoft-may-preview-windows-threshold-in-april/

At this point, it is all rumors.

Microsoft already told everyone that they were moving to a 2 year schedule for OSes. It is not due to the failure of 8/8.1. It is to keep in line with how Apple does it.


Despite who is right or wrong (I might be), this is not due to the success or failure of Windows 8.

 

Are you kidding? Windows 8 has been an abysmal failure.....and yes, it will come out next year.

 

A failure compared to what?


Sold more than any other current consumer desktop OS.

Windows 8 at its worst is far better off than OS X at its best.

 

Am I the only one that thinks Win 8 should be killed. With fire?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AdNvNy5WIco

 

Meh. I use OS X, but I've never had trouble with Windows 8. When changing an interface, things always get worse before they get better.

Look at OS X 10.0. Total mess.

 

Killing it with fire is more fun. :-D

 

I'm always up for a good roasting.

 

I wonder what that will mean for the extended support phase and OS lifespan.

Sorry to hear about your recent troubles.
I hope things get better soon.

 

Thanks for your concern

That is a good question. This 2 year cycle isn't business friendly unless the support is much longer.

 

Developers are receiving - yet again - new driver-guidelines.

I've never seen Dot-Updates get such complete driver updates before Win 8.1. Manufacturers now have specific Win 8.0 drivers, specific Win 8.1 drivers and Win 8+ soon.

Has anyone else seen Dot Update driver changes so extensive?

I think the arguments about "selling masses of copies of Win8+" is distorted because MS acknowledges that volume-license sales are far far below expectations, meaning they're not selling the 100-, 500-, 1000 and 10,000-license products like they've done since 2000 and XP. W7's VL sales have increased in the last year, far more than W8's. THIS has to be a huge red-flag to Ballmer-dom.

 

I will stick with Win 7 for the time being. I suspect that there are many consumers, businesses that are also taking a wait and see attitude with Windows.

 

I don't think anyone has seen dot releases have new driver guidelines because that stopped happening with Windows 3.1. Windows 8 --> 8.1 is the first time that has happened in many years.

VL sales are going to be to businesses, so that is not surprising. Businesses never move to the latest OS, but instead a proven and mature one. Businesses are just now going to 7 (many forced out of XP), explaining the increase. This in itself is expected behavior.

 

MS's Win7 VL sales were high at the end of W7's Year One as SP1 was released. They continued high for another year, then flattened expectedly. Now, they've picked up again as a certain slap towards Win8 - 8.1. Just as those VL'ers skipped Vista, it looks like Ballmer's Baby+DotOne are going to be skipped.

I thought 8.1 would provide an opening, but the Driver Issues that have cropped up seem to indicate "rush job again" and any smoke on THAT horizon sends VL'ers far, far away.

MS might have kicked the hardware industry to make sure all their prices halved and everyone would easily justify a half-the-price new "Win8.1-Ready" computer, although MS's attack on their so-called hardware partners via Surface probably is one more reason HW vendors can sit back with relatively stable prices over these last couple of years. At least they don't have Thai floods or Hynix fires to send more prices soaring.

 

I guess we will have to agree to disagree regarding Surface.

The Surface is hardly an attack, anymore than Nexus devices are with Google and their partners. If OEMs feel attacked, they need to step up their game. Business 101.

Surface is reference device to guide customers and OEMs to their vision of what they want 8 and 8.1 to be. Just like Google does with their Nexus line.

 

I agree completely with this. IF this is 'the attack' as publicity cited OEMs as claiming, the OEMs are in such terrible shape anyway.

I have always separated the UI side of Win8 from its OS. Microsoft does too. But Windows has always had multiple UIs, including the DOS command-line side, the Aero-vs-Classic, etc.

It's interesting that Win8 has maintained the entire structure for the Classic side of the UI. The entire Start Menu structure and reg entries are there - that's how all the add-on Shells work so readily.

I thought the real experiment might be Win8.2 to see if some of those structures were removed. Since I enjoy having a UI that users can tailor to their own uses instead of relying on Ballmer to insist on only his choices, I am once again looking forward to Win9's next changes. Or return to the user's own definition of his productive best interface.

 

I have a feeling that the reason why they left that legacy stuff behind is because non-Windows 8 ready win32 apps would probably balk at them missing.

 

You overclockers always forget about the way the CPU overheats...roflmao

 

Nope, we know a lot about heat and cooling.

 

David, perhaps this would be better on a separate thread, but could you describe the productive uses you're finding on a Surface (or tablet)? If you have some unique services on it, I'd like to hear those descriptions.

"Work in progress" is my assessment, too, but in reality, I'm trying to find the unique and productive uses for it. So far, the 2003 Viewsonics (with XP) were much the same as today's tablets in functionality. Web surfing has increased only because of the web content, but I'm not certain I can evaluate today's tablets - Surface, etc. - are so much better, although they are half-the-cost of those 2003 Viewsonics.

 

While "giving up" is indeed more indicative of "slow news day" mentality, Ballmer probably hopes his golden parachute isn't paid off in Win8 licenses vs Win7 with the HP pronouncement of now openly offering Win7 sales again.

I can't remember any company trumpeting their marketing effort's re-release of an old OS before.

Microsoft doesn't have to give up on Win8. The marketplace has been raising its eyebrows for a long time now.

Is anyone seeing a big-box store displaying more Win8.1 PCs than Win8? Our local Fry's isn't - it's about 50 to 4 at this point. SO weird to have a 5-month old New Release still barely displayed and just about never receiving blaring sales-headlines. (The Fry's newsprint ads will have an occasional "starburst" ad proclaiming "Win8.1 Ready!" but never a mention of "now with Win8.1".)

The same Fry's in only showing two new HPs with Win7, by the way, although I understood the Win7 effort was tied to their on-line sales.

 

When Surface users start designing and compiling programs for THAT product ON that product, then I'll consider it 'full featured'. But touch-screen typing sucks - on every device - and if I've got to have a keyboard, then I want a good one. Having it advertised as a hippity-hoppity picnic-table "watch entertainment but don't use productively" item put me off, and this year of usage still hasn't won me over.

For our productive uses, it's handier to sit at tables and hold up a Surface (or any tab) in a "Lookee? See?" presentation to show an audience rather than spin my laptop for audience views. But then using overhead projectors or large monitors is better than that. The classroom environment where tablets can eliminate paper-handouts is a good use, but handwriting recognition software has its limits and often requires a superior learning commitment, too - it's still quicker to take notes and sketch around on a piece of paper, I find, especially for several hours.

I am not seeing much Metro Usefuless compared to Desktop Programs. The strongest benefit to Metro is that everyone can be ultimately subscribed/tied/hooked into a Microsoft Store for usage measurement, identification and more payments to MS and their partners.

And this is not a benefit to consumers or users - but to Microsoft and their Store partners.

 

Not really. They will just rename it Windows 9. They need to rebuild the OS from the ground up, using a real Linux Kernel, then keep all of the old legacy programming in it.

They brought in Samba for use for creating Storage Spaces, but dropped the ball, but making Metro the main interface when they released 8, instead of giving users the option to choose.

 

Why would Microsoft need to use a Linux kernel?

Not that they ever would, because it would mean they have to publish the kernel source.

 

Incorrect. Did Apple ever publish to the public their BSD kernel for OS-X?

 

Yes. Apple has given back to the OSS community.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_(operating_system)

That said, the BSD kernel uses BSD licensing, which does not require redistribution of source.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD_licenses


Apple's kernel (XNU/Mach) uses Apple's own licensing. It also doesn't require source code to be given back.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Public_Source_License

Linux is GPL, and requires redistribution of source.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License

Still think I am incorrect?

 

Microsoft has also given back to the Open Source community, so your point is pointless.

 

No it isn't, you are just embarrassed because you were wrong.

My original point was that they would not use the Linux kernel because of having to open source a major part of Windows. They would be contractually required to do it.

 

I can't think of a reason why MS would want to support Linux. It's up to Linux to chase them.

Why would 'winning' the Linux audience be a ticket to MS's future fame & fortune?!! Only a Ballmer company thinks like that and delivers some penguinesque UI du jour.

It's up to Linux to chase them. Get Samba up and running from Moment 1, and never let a Linux newbie worry about accessing his years of Win files or having cooperative machines. Then deliver great alternatives to all the popular Win programs, and do it without store subscriptions, ID tracking and threats of usage fees.

 

Sorry, but Microsoft is now using a lot of GNU & Open Source in Windows 7, Windows 8, Server 2k12.

 

In MS Lab, they have Linux machines in there. Matter of fact, they run Linux servers for storage and Database use in-house.

Now they are working on a new project in their Skunk works, called "Midori", that they have been working on since 2003. http://microsoft.wikia.com/wiki/Midori_(operating_system) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midori_(operating_system)

The problem has been with Ballmer holding up the release of Midori, not the Sales. The whole drive on 8 by Ballmer, was to kick start them into bringing back out a tablet driven by a OS, that could be multi-platform capable.

The big problem is, that the idea died somewhere mid-stream from what the programmers came up with, and what the higher ups wanted at MS.

When Gates was running the show full time, MS listened to their customer base. When Ballmer got behind the wheel, the train derailed somewhere right after he took the reigns, and that is when you saw them throw one terrible project after another out the door.

As for Linux chasing them, it is actually the other way around. Linux is now the leader in running Servers for Databases, PBX systems, routers, modems, etc.. There is more stuff running Linux then you realize.

 

Ok, I will bite. What are you sorry for?

Linux is not GNU, and not all open source falls under the GPL. The Linux kernel is. Let me repeat this again, GNU and Linux are not the same thing.

GNU does fall under GPL as well though, so i would appreciate if you link me to source code for those open source applications in Windows? Thanks

Edit: No need, you are referring to Interix, which is akin to something like Cygwin. Only present in certain versions of Windows, and is an addon to add a compatibility layer of sorts for some nix applications. Still nothing major like a kernel.


I never said that Microsoft doesn't dabble with open source, in fact they have several open source projects out there available. I merely said they won't be handing out source for a major OS component like a kernel, which means the Linux kernel will not be used by them. Can we stick to the original point?

 

Gates had his share of follies when he was CEO. Anyone remember Windows Me? How about Bob? Ballmer also had his successes, such as WindowsXP and 7.
Edit: Let us not forget that many of the open source projects started under Ballmer's lead, not Gates.

We aren't talking about embedded systems, nor were we really talking about server space. We were talking about business and consumer OSes, where Linux certainly is not beating out Windows by any means. Heck, Apple is smacking around Linux on desktops and workstations.

 

Just because Gates was in power at the time that ME came out, does not mean that it was his responsibility. Ballmer was the one responsible for the disaster known as WinME.

"In the 20 years following his hire, Ballmer headed several Microsoft divisions, including operations, operating systems development, and sales and support. From February 1992 onwards he was Executive Vice President, Sales and Support. Ballmer led Microsoft's development of the .NET Framework. Ballmer was then promoted to President of Microsoft, a title that he held from July 1998 to February 2001, making him the de facto number two in the company to the Chairman and CEO, Bill Gates."

 

First time I've ever heard someone say a CEO is not responsible for something.

 

Again, Gates was not in command of the wheel for ME, Ballmer was. As for the whole Microsoft/GPL:

"Microsoft has released Microsoft Windows Services for UNIX which contains GPL-licensed code. In July 2009, Microsoft itself released a body of around 20,000 lines of Linux driver code under the GPL. The Hyper-V code that is part of the submitted code used open-source components licensed under the GPL and was originally statically linked to proprietary binary parts, the latter being inadmissible in GPL-licensed software."

Should I keep going on?

 

If you wish to. Of course you made my point right here:

They released the source code for it.

Can you again show me where this has anything to do with the Linux kernel being used in Windows? Hyper-V is not the kernel. You seem to deflect more and more.

 

I see that from your history Adrynalyne, that you are on a power trip, and want to just play games. Sorry if you want to be the bully that you have made yourself to be, but you really need to just stop arguing about this whole thing.

Face the facts, that yes Microsoft like all companies have made mistakes. But also in turn, Microsoft has made changes in other areas that are not related to the consumer market, for how computers are used these days.

 

I wasn't rude to you until you told me I was incorrect and then said my point was pointless. Which, I might add, you still haven't addressed. I am not on a power trip (nor am I bully), it just amuses me that you never admitted were incorrect about released source code being required for GPL protected items, such as the Linux kernel. You then went off on multiple tangents, equally as rude with your 'sorry' comments (which you did again in here). So if you wish to end this conversation, that is fine. We still made no headway to understanding why you think Microsoft would move to the Linux kernel, especially since they would be required to give everyone the source code for it. I guess I am just a mean guy for wanting accurate information. :confused

Never said otherwise.

 

I've seen a lot of Microsoft Labs with a huge variety of 'other systems' running in them. Heck, I understand MS employees might even carry iDevices, Blackberrys even Palms! They've also had rooms of Stratus, HP and IBM mini's and mid-ranges, too.

I don't confuse "using other systems" with "developing those solutions for sale as an MS product" though.

 

hmmm just wondering where it is stated in Microsoft, Google, Apple, or any other software/hardware company that requires it's employees to utilize just their own products. To me this would seem to be counter-productive as it would stifle the creative development of anything. There are many different programs that are created based upon one's experience on a different program and expanding upon that.

BTW Adrynalyne you have always been a bully towards me so now I'm going to go cry in the corner for a while

Honestly Brownizs you have been around this board long enough to know better than to take comments and discussions too seriously. We all make choices on whether or not to participate in any discussion and as such we need to take responsibility on staying in that conversation or leaving it gracefully if it gets too hot for us.

I've never known Adryn to be a bully, quite the contrary. He is to the point and sometimes quite blunt but then again so am I. He also can and does admit when he is wrong as well. Something that I need to learn from time to time.

Anyway, enjoy yourself here in the forums as I'm sure you have in the past. Be civil with each other and if you take offense at something that has been said you have three choices:
1. Get out of the conversation
2. Send a PM to the offending person requesting a different solution or explaining your feelings
3. Notify a moderator for their input on the thread.

Now back to your corners you two and try to have a nice day!

Yours,
Jack

 

Gimme your lunch money!

:-D

 

be careful or I might have to call Abbey up and tell her you are picking on me! ;D

 

On the topic of 'Microsoft is giving up on Windows 8'

Everything I find indicates that Windows 8.1 Update 1 will be in March. Not Windows 9.

More: Microsoft Windows 8.1 Update 1 rumoured for March 11 Patch Tuesday rollout