From the ashes of Vista, what might rise?

Fri Apr 11, 2008 11:45AM EDT

See Comments (212)

Amid an overwhelmingly negative presentation from analyst group Gartner that claims "Windows is collapsing," many are beginning to wonder what is in store for Windows 7, and how radical a departure from its current code base W7 might be.

Vista is clearly the straw that has broken the camel's back. Years and years of bloated code and a failed attempt to support 20 years of outdated software and ancient peripherals have left the operating system a total mess. Vista is so big and complicated that attempting to build additional code onto it is futile.

Is it back to the drawing board for Microsoft? Signs seem to indicate that, yes, Windows is headed in a whole new direction now.

The most popular notion is that Windows will go "modular," offering an operating system that you'll buy in pieces, and possibly pay for on a month-to-month or year-to-year basis.

What does "modular" mean? Look at Windows Vista itself to see a primitive version of modularity in action: Vista comes in (at least) four major flavors, each of which contains different features that the other versions lack. Want Media Center? Upgrade to Home Premium. Want hard drive encryption? You'll have to upgrade to Ultimate Edition.

Windows 7 would likely take this even further. Instead of offering four pre-packaged versions, you might start with a relatively cheap Windows Basic setup, then start adding modules as you need them. Photo management may run you an extra few bucks. You might even have to pay extra to get a media player or a web browser (though that seems unlikely).

The next question is how you might pay for this, which is a bigger question mark. Some speculate that Microsoft may move toward a subscription model, charging you by the month or the year for your computer to keep working. This would be great for Microsoft, as it could force you to upgrade -- and pay -- whenever it wanted simply by pulling the plug on old apps. It would be considerably less great for consumers, for exactly the same reason.

Still, it may very well be an improvement over what we're stuck with now. Even Gartner seems to think so; it says right in the title of its aforementioned presentation that "what comes next will improve." Let's hope so.

Comments on From the ashes of Vista, what might rise?

Post a Comment

Join in the discussion. Here you'll see the comments in the order they were posted.

  • 26 Posted by bateeples on Thu Sep 3, 2009 3:02PM EDT Report Abuse

    There's never been a better time to buy a Mac! ;)

  • 28 Posted by jd_1876 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 4:31PM EDT Report Abuse

    People, get Macs, they're awesome, I have a MacBook and I will NEVER go back to MS. Also, what's the big idea with the subscription model for the OS? Sorry Microsoft, won't work. So what are they going to do now to get control of the world's economy? And in the process the universe's? Amazing what people will do to get extra $.

  • 30 Posted by lilpoe1951 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 6:51PM EDT Report Abuse

    Oh sure what about us poor elderly who only gets this for the joy of games and meeting people on diffrent suites,We can,t afford to pay more for Browsers or other things we need. It comes with all the programs that Microsoft seem to think you need ,why,why can,t they leave things alone?

  • 31 Posted by pcofmind1 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 8:04PM EDT Report Abuse

    Ya know, between my sometimes drunken Vista notebook -- loaded with the best hardware specs, by the way -- and the news presented above, I edge ever closer to going Apple, and ridding myself of being a slave to the incompetence coming out of Redmond, WA. It's just cutting the cord on 15 years of the Windows platform, plus having two nice, fairly-new HP computers that makes me hesitate. Vista is no doubt a disaster, as my too-many-to-count system crashes (a.k.a. Blue Screens of Death) can attest to. Apple products overwhelmingly just "work right out of the box".....and they work flawlessly. That ticking sound? I think it's the clock running down on my time with Windows.

  • 32 Posted by aprkareckas on Thu Sep 3, 2009 2:57PM EDT Report Abuse

    A subscription OS is the straw that breaks this camel's back. I put up with various incarnations of Windows, including ME, but I would change to Linux before using a subscription OS.

  • 33 Posted by muscogeekid on Thu Sep 3, 2009 7:30PM EDT Report Abuse

    It's funny, I've seen numerous people post that they will switch to a Linux OS if MS moves to a subscription model. But is that a realistic option? I've installed 3 different distros of Linux myself. All of them had various problems with hardware drivers and few of my Windows based programs will run on them. So, if I switched today, I would essentially be starting over, which just isn't practical for me. Not to mention the fact that just installing/setting up each distro took days of work. I'm a fan of Linux and hope to see it grow in popularity, but it's not really meant to be a Windows replacement, not yet anyway. But for anyone who is industrious, I recommend you not wait for a drastic move from MS. Go ahead and install Linux today. All you need is time.

  • 34 Posted by jg76aries on Thu Sep 3, 2009 4:34PM EDT Report Abuse

    Hmmm...sounds like they're going to have to start doing what Linux is doing already. Nearly all distros are modular already. Wine works great but needs USB support to be added, virtualization is another option. And there are a wide variety of apps that cover the same functions as most popular windows apps. mp3, aac, and windows media fuctionality has to be added on but there are plenty of downloads available. Ubuntu seems to be by far the easiest to use. Microsoft moving to a subcription model though, I don't agree with that at all. Charge for the base install and for the subsequent packages maybe, but as a one-time fee, not on a m-m or y-y basis. Though that may work for enterprise contracts.

  • 35 Posted by brenton.schmitt on Thu Sep 3, 2009 3:12PM EDT Report Abuse

    Let me guess.. The author of this article owns a mac? My house has 4 different people using 5 different vista machines. Apparently we are just lucky, we have not had one problem. I hear about all of these problems, and everyone talks about them.. But u dont usually talk to someone that has actually had a problem.

  • 36 Posted by jessiah331 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 4:33PM EDT Report Abuse

    I agree that building up applications would seem good. Then you only pay for what you need. Forget paying to keep my computer working. WHAT?! That Apple that I have been putting off is looking REALLY pretty now...

  • 37 Posted by lamebear49 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 4:56PM EDT Report Abuse

    Oh, and btw, Yahoo, let Microsoft take you over, and I will be seeking a different homepage.

  • 38 Posted by jonathon9763 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 4:40PM EDT Report Abuse

    Wow! I agree with atleast two people that posted, muscogeekid and kupriaa1. I wouldn't mind paying yearly for anything, I pay monthy for MMORPG's all the time and I never really notice any updates or whatever they clain to do with my 15 bucks or so. And also even though I dont care much about Vista (haven't used it to much though...) I know pretty much the just of it. I think people are jumping on the "Unix" band-wagon with linux and mac fan boys. As soon as one of these becomes as big as MS everyone is going to think they are some kind of big bad wolf. You cant please anyone, you either have the admin that wants to control everything and doesn't want Vista to fix a network connection or you have the person that knows little of nothing that wants a OS that does everything. You cant be mad either way, they have to keep people employed yet at the same time stay ahead of competition. One last thing I am tired of hearing linux is "Free", if you dont know what the 'free' means you should never use that term. No free beer here!

  • 39 Posted by tcisco33 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 9:57PM EDT Report Abuse

    I wouldn't be opposed to a fee-based OS depending on how it is built and billed. The roadblock to my Vista enjoyment is the fact that I'm a PC modder. I change my processor and motherboard often enough during an OS iteration that I will (and have) exceed the "Authentication" limits on Vista very quickly. (Three alterations to any or all of the following; processor, memory, motherboard and hard-drive, if I remember correctly.) A subscription OS, that is (securely) tied to my name and credit card, rather than my hardware for authentication purposes would be much preferred. That way, it doesn't matter what I do to my hardware, the folks in WA will only charge me for the single installation on my single PC. If that cannot be accomplished, I will definitely do whatever I have to do to forego the Windows experience. There are other bundled programs that I can live without, which makes modular subscriptions appealing as well, if the price can be kept reasonable. I don't NEED Windows Fax, or Outlook Express, or IIS, or Windows Meeting, or Windows Picture Gallery; having those modules hanging out for a 50-99 cent monthly addition to a base subscription wouldn't be bad. Then if I want a non-standard app or utility, I can go get it. That would limit quite a bit of the hard-drive bloat caused by peripheral installation: HP All-in-One that installs it's own picture manager, fax manager, scan manager when 9 times outta 10 Windows has an accessory application that does the same thing. So I uninstall the HP utilities to keep a lean hard-drive. With a modular design, I wouldn't have those redundant Windows applications, and my hard drive would stay skinny like I prefer, then I can just install my peripheral. There does seem to me that there is a lot of code provided in Windows to help you "do everything", when in reality most of the devices we purchase come with software designed to make the device work. That implies to me that Microsoft could spend more time addressing a stable OS that makes the BASE hardware (microprocessor, harddrive, memory, and I/O)work correctly and efficiently (not meaning that they don't already); leave the peripheral software to the peripheral manufacturers. I think that a price that starts at $8.50 a month for a basic setup, and $15.00 a month for the version that does everything but smack your newborn infant on the behind would be just fine, and pretty reasonable. The lower price is based on a pro-rated installation of Vista 32-bit Home priced at $99.99 at a popular online retailer. Just another non-negative view from off-center.

  • 41 Posted by modemstorm@sbcglobal.net on Thu Sep 3, 2009 7:24PM EDT Report Abuse

    This sounds like just alot if not all simple propaganda. If you're the type of soul that would put up with paying around $600 a year for basic cable to watch your very own TV, then sit back and let them sell us another OS we don't need or want, to take the place of the last one, ad infinitum!

  • 42 Posted by brianpseay@verizon.net on Thu Sep 3, 2009 3:13PM EDT Report Abuse

    I agree with every one else. I would never want an O/S that was billed on a subscription basis. Being able to but the modules that you needed might work alright, as a lot of times, most that is, I don't need everything that comes with the O/S, but I would buy the ones I needed, as long as they were reasonable. But, I would draw the line at having to pay for it month after month. It's bad enough having to upgrade,buy a new computer, but to pay a subscription on top of that, I don't think so. I'll be learning Linux real quick.

  • 43 Posted by sting6ph on Thu Sep 3, 2009 9:44PM EDT Report Abuse

    Ha! That's one of the most stupid ideas by Microsoft. Why don't they just upgrade the security of XP? We really don't need crispier visuals as our hardware and video cards could do that for us. Monthly fees? No thank you. You're just making hackers and software pirates smarter when you do that.

  • 44 Posted by agrampa2 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 2:47PM EDT Report Abuse

    I'd just rather see Microsoft get it right the first time around. Windows 2000 was probably their best OS...as far as I'm concerned, anything after that, well, as the saying goes,...."If it ain't broke don't fix it."

  • 45 Posted by sally_1512 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 9:01PM EDT Report Abuse

    I would just not pay for any of it and stick to my trusty ubuntu thankyouverymuch!....Seriosly, because having a gazzillion configurations that run up to $400 for an OS is not bad enough, now I will have to continue paying for the OS until my hardware dies and it is time to pay even more?

Post a Comment

Sign In to Post a Comment

My Tech

Please enable your browser's cookies to activate the My Tech column.

Also on Yahoo! Tech

Computers Home Office Wi-Fi & Networking Phones & PDAs Cameras & Camcorders TV & Home Theater Portable Audio
 

Site Map | Tour | Subscribe to Yahoo! Tech

Question and Answer content at Yahoo! Tech is written by Yahoo! users at Yahoo! Answers. Yahoo! does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any Yahoo! Answers content. For more information, read the Full Disclaimer.

Opinions expressed by the Advisors are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Yahoo! Inc. Yahoo! receives no compensation from any manufacturer or distributor nor does it compensate any Advisor for the coverage of any product or service in any Advisor's content.