3 ms·

This sounds good in theory, but when Microsoft did just that in 2011 with Windows 8, it ended up backfiring on them big time. It's pretty clear Windows has org

This sounds good in theory, but when Microsoft did just that in 2011 with Windows 8, it ended up backfiring on them big time. It's pretty clear Windows has organizational and structural problems. Mainly because every product they release is always only 80% there. For some reason, whatever it is, it gets mostly finished, shipped and then abandoned and moved into maintenance mode. Yet, it works for them. They usually always win in whatever market they go after. So I can't say they are incentivized to fix those structural problems.

notatoad 5y ago
>This sounds good in theory, but when Microsoft did just that in 2011 with Windows 8, it ended up backfiring on them big time. the problem was that while windows 8 had *somebody* with a vision behind it, the vision never really made it through to the product. windows 8 was obviously the product of a dysfunctional system that was pulling in two completely opposite directions - the consumer devices side who wanted modern touch-friendly designs to compete with iPad, and the business customers who wanted the windows they were familiar with and didn't want to have to re-train their employees. and what we ended up with was a half-assed implementation in the middle. "we want to do the best possible job of supporting the huge number of existing applications and users on our platform" is a perfectly valid vision for the future of windows. vision doesn't have to mean change. The problem with there being no vision is you get both the change and the hesitance to change.
- mycall 5y ago
  The craziest part was how Windows Server 2012 included Windows 8 UI. The worst of both worlds.
  - vetinari 5y ago
    The funniest part is, that Windows Server 2012 had a "desktop experience" feature, which basically brought it on par with Windows 8, UI-wise. It was much more usable if you didn't install it.
- mr_toad 5y ago
  At least some business users love leaving greasy fingerprints all over their surfaces. First pre used surface I got I practically had to sterilise.

notatoad 5y ago

>This sounds good in theory, but when Microsoft did just that in 2011 with Windows 8, it ended up backfiring on them big time. the problem was that while windows 8 had *somebody* with a vision behind it, the vision never really made it through to the product. windows 8 was obviously the product of a dysfunctional system that was pulling in two completely opposite directions - the consumer devices side who wanted modern touch-friendly designs to compete with iPad, and the business customers who wanted the windows they were familiar with and didn't want to have to re-train their employees. and what we ended up with was a half-assed implementation in the middle. "we want to do the best possible job of supporting the huge number of existing applications and users on our platform" is a perfectly valid vision for the future of windows. vision doesn't have to mean change. The problem with there being no vision is you get both the change and the hesitance to change.

mycall 5y ago
The craziest part was how Windows Server 2012 included Windows 8 UI. The worst of both worlds.
- vetinari 5y ago
  The funniest part is, that Windows Server 2012 had a "desktop experience" feature, which basically brought it on par with Windows 8, UI-wise. It was much more usable if you didn't install it.
mr_toad 5y ago
At least some business users love leaving greasy fingerprints all over their surfaces. First pre used surface I got I practically had to sterilise.