Rumour: Is Microsoft to bin windows???

[0iD]

http://www.computerworld.com/action/...ce=rss_topic89

Some very interesting documents have been leaking out of Microsoft. They clearly indicate, believe it or not, that Microsoft is considering shifting its users from Windows to a new operating system: Midori.

[Mithrandir]

Also see HERE

[AledJ]

I'm sure i heard bout this last week on the bbc news tech site. Still it makes an interesting read. But anyway, windows and xp will be with us for very long time.

[PeterStoba]

interesting stuff

[finlay666]

I doubt it will be happening for quite a while

[Stringent]

Yeah, this is quite far off. Till Internet speeds are like instant.

[Lucio]

I have to say it's hardly an unexpected turn of events, the world has finally realised that we don't need to keep getting new versions of an OS every couple of years if they ones we have are designed to deal with new hardware developments. It's a bit like Games Workshop's business model, release a new version of the game every 3 years to draw fresh blood in, and thus draw in the old customers who then find that the new blood doesn't want to play with the old rules that they cant' buy anywhere.


The idea of Midori is interesting, making an OS that's designed to work whether it's installed on a single machine, or on hundreds spread around the world is an interesting challenge and it'll be interesting to see what Microsoft make of the idea (if anything)

[dangel]

I have to say it's hardly an unexpected turn of events, the world has finally realised that we don't need to keep getting new versions of an OS every couple of years if they ones we have are designed to deal with new hardware developments. It's a bit like Games Workshop's business model, release a new version of the game every 3 years to draw fresh blood in, and thus draw in the old customers who then find that the new blood doesn't want to play with the old rules that they cant' buy anywhere.

Nothings changed - Windows will keep shipping (hopefully) on it's 3 year schedule, and people will pay for it (one way or another). Apple will do this each year What you want is "Windows Fortune Teller Edition" - designed by devs who came back in time. The World has not realised anything: MS Research have been punting new OS ideas around for years - I don't see this being any different.

[BEANFro Elite]

But being a Microsoft product, wouldn't people just refer to it as Windows anyway?

[lodore]

not sure i like the idea of downloading the OS from the internet when i want to use it.
with the way os's are now i can choose if i want to upgrade to the newer version of it and upgrade the apps or not. im thinking i may lose that control.

[mylaura99]

microsoft would be insane to bin such a cash cow.

[this_is_gav]

microsoft would be insane to bin such a cash cow.

You think this wouldn't be a subscription-based package?

[Saracen]

not sure i like the idea of downloading the OS from the internet when i want to use it.
with the way os's are now i can choose if i want to upgrade to the newer version of it and upgrade the apps or not. im thinking i may lose that control.

I am sure, and I don't like it.

You think this wouldn't be a subscription-based package?

That's one of the reasons I don't like it. Not the only one, but a good one.

While the idea may have advantages for some folks, and in some situations, I can't see any circumstances in which I'm prepared to rent the OS like this, or prepared to be dependent on internet access (and therefore my ISP) for whether my PCs will start or not, or to pass that degree of direct personal control over my systems out of my hands (or my physical location).

The ONLY way I can conceive of me doing this is if no suitable OS exists that allows me to not do it for systems I need to run, and if working legacy systems and OSs no longer cut the mustard. And I don't see that happening in my working lifetime.

For the vast majority of what I do, Windows XP will do the job. For that matter, and while I wouldn't want to go back, I could probably survive on Win98. Most of my needs aren't actually that technically demanding. So switching to a net-dependent OS, based on virtualisation, and paying rent for it? Not a chance. When you see me do that, keep an eye out for ice-skating demons, because Hell will have frozen over.

[Funkstar]

The problem with a lot of the discussions about Midori is that people aren't thinking long term enough or big enough.

Midori isn't about taking windows and turning it into an online application. It isn't about downloading it every time you run it. And it isn't about just relying on your internet connection.

It's all about taking the idea of cloud computing and brinking it down to the OS level. This could be contained within your own network or it could include internet services too.

[Saracen]

Well, given the early state of this speculation about Midori, it seems rather tricky to be sure what it'll end up as. Using the definitions in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_computing, my comments of my attitudes still apply. Whether it's grid or cloud, whether it's internet or LAN-based, I see little point for me. I'm not interested in the service model, because I'd bet my boots that if Microsoft have their eye on this, one way or another, it'll be based around revenue streams.

In discussions on Vista, I've repeatedly said that, for me, I see no convincing reason to upgrade. At least, not yet. My logic is that to do so has a cost, and to get me to stump up that cost, I have to be convinced that the benefits gained justify the cost, both of licences and of the effort involved, and of the learning curve.

That argument, in one form or another, is used by most businesses to decide if a given course of action should be taken. And MS, along with much of the rest of the industry, have got a problem. A LOT of users are quite happy with XP, not because it's better than (or even as good as) Vista, but because they've got it, have paid for it, have staff used to using it, and don't see where the benefits from Vista are to justify the direct and indirect costs.

In other words, both hardware and OSs have matured to a point where, for the most part, people can just get on with using their computers, and not spending half their time upgrading them for the sake of it.

The whole computer world is finally growing up. I used to change printers (for photos) regularly, because the generation I had was markedly inferior to the generation just released. I've lost track of how many upgrades I went through, but suffice it to say I've still got about 6 generations of photo printer here now, for one reason or another. But recently? Well, I'm on the verge of upgrading my current Epson 2100 to the new R1900, or maybe 2880. But I'm certainly not likely to do it again for several years.

The same was true of CD burners. But they've reached (in the form of CD/DVD burners) a pretty mature, stable level. Hell, I used to do it with Audio CD players for the hifi. Every couple of years, a new machine. The current Marantz (KI-Sig) has been in use about 10 years, if memory serves, and will stay in service until it dies, or until I shift everything to a media server.

Every technology goes through this. The classic is digital cameras. I dread to think how many of them I've been through. But the current one does almost everything I want, and does it perfectly well-enough. So, like I did with film SLRs years ago, I've bought one that should fulfil my needs for some years.

The market has matured to the point where the current state of the art is, for most people and most purposes, sufficient, and the reasons to upgrade are smaller and smaller with every iteration. And that, I think, is what's got MS worried. The resistance to upgrading to Vista has, in my opinion, rather badly shaken them. And they are aware that the phenomenon is going to get worse, not better. The revenue streams from a new OS are likely to be, at best, far more spread out as more and more people decide to hop off the upgrading merry-go-round, because what they've got is, well, okay for the job.

And the only real answer to that is to move the goalposts. And if that means shifting OSs from a 'licence it and buy it up-front' model to a 'rent it monthly' model, then so be it.

It may well be the future of computing, too, especially in the corporate world. But for home users, and especially for users like me, no thanks. If, and only if, there's a convincing reason to go that way will I even consider it. If I'm not convinced by Vista, I'll let you guess how unconvinced I am by the sheer concept of Midori.

I like PCs because of the P. It's personal. It's in my control, immediately and directly. And it does everything I currently want, or can anticipate wanting. Hardware is getting more and more powerful, too. To be honest, much more powerful than I need, already. And whether it's cloud or grid, I can't see that the Midori concept offers me anything I either want or need. And until or unless that killer purpose emerges (and I'm open to it, if it does) I'm even less interested in clouds than Vistas.

So, computers are reaching the point that TVs had reached prior to the advent of flat-panels and HDTV, which was that most people bought one and just used it until it packed up, because it was a mature technology. And naturally, the industry doesn't like that idea one bit. They want us all upgrading as regularly as they can achieve it, because it's the only way we'll keep getting our wallets out.

[directhex]

microsoft research do a lot of fascinating work. a lot of it won't ever come to market in any recognisable form, though. you can file things like midori under that header