5 ms·

This article dodges (willfully ignores) the every-other good-bad release schedule that has tended to be the pattern of Microsoft (and Star Trek movies). 2000:

This article dodges (willfully ignores) the every-other good-bad release schedule that has tended to be the pattern of Microsoft (and Star Trek movies). 2000: good ME: bad XP2: good Vista: bad 7: good 8: bad

arihant 14y ago
And that pattern dodges the base case - Win 98: bad? I don't think so.
- notatoad 14y ago
  It takes a bit of tricky counting to make the pattern work. 98/ME/2000/XP/XPSP2/Vista/7.
  - petercooper 14y ago
    2000 shouldn't be in the list as it was a Windows NT so that clears it up. 98 - good, ME - fail, XP - good, Vista - fail, 7 - good, etc. (Although this whole idea is pretty silly to start with ;-))
    - Espressosaurus 14y ago
      Guess what XP was based on: Windows 2000.
corporalagumbo 14y ago
I have never understood this sentiment. If it's such an easy pattern to spot, how come someone in senior management at Microsoft hasn't spotted it too? Is your average internet commenter really smarter and more perceptive than one of the world's largest and most successful companies? Furthermore, has Microsoft not grown as a company at all for the last ten years? Has the IT environment not changed at all either? And is history destiny? I would argue no to all those notions. I think Microsoft in 2012 is a much more disciplined, focussed, and frankly ambitious company than it was in 2002 or 2006. The development of 7 and especially how the company communicated with the public about 7 was a quantum leap from Vista. As far as I can tell, Microsoft has carried forward all of those improvements into the process of building 8. If it is making mistakes with Windows 8, they are entirely different genres of mistakes than it made with Vista or ME.
- toyg 14y ago
  It's easy to explain: it's just a media narrative. If I know in advance that the next product will be much better than the previous one, why should I read any "news report" or "analysis" about it? I'll just enjoy the goodies when they land. But if there is criticism, well, I better read up so that I can react accordingly -- here's my money and my ad impressions! The same will happen, in reverse, with the following release. Even Apple is subject to these media cycles (see antennagate, batteries exploding etc), they just manage to deflect them to smaller items, stuff most people don't care about. Microsoft seems to struggle much more when trying to control product perception across media channels.
RexRollman 14y ago
It's more like this for me in regards to the NT line: NT4 (Good) 2000 (Not) XP (Good) Vista (Not) 7 (Good) 8 (Not)

arihant 14y ago

And that pattern dodges the base case - Win 98: bad? I don't think so.

notatoad 14y ago
It takes a bit of tricky counting to make the pattern work. 98/ME/2000/XP/XPSP2/Vista/7.
- petercooper 14y ago
  2000 shouldn't be in the list as it was a Windows NT so that clears it up. 98 - good, ME - fail, XP - good, Vista - fail, 7 - good, etc. (Although this whole idea is pretty silly to start with ;-))
  - Espressosaurus 14y ago
    Guess what XP was based on: Windows 2000.

corporalagumbo 14y ago

I have never understood this sentiment. If it's such an easy pattern to spot, how come someone in senior management at Microsoft hasn't spotted it too? Is your average internet commenter really smarter and more perceptive than one of the world's largest and most successful companies? Furthermore, has Microsoft not grown as a company at all for the last ten years? Has the IT environment not changed at all either? And is history destiny? I would argue no to all those notions. I think Microsoft in 2012 is a much more disciplined, focussed, and frankly ambitious company than it was in 2002 or 2006. The development of 7 and especially how the company communicated with the public about 7 was a quantum leap from Vista. As far as I can tell, Microsoft has carried forward all of those improvements into the process of building 8. If it is making mistakes with Windows 8, they are entirely different genres of mistakes than it made with Vista or ME.

toyg 14y ago
It's easy to explain: it's just a media narrative. If I know in advance that the next product will be much better than the previous one, why should I read any "news report" or "analysis" about it? I'll just enjoy the goodies when they land. But if there is criticism, well, I better read up so that I can react accordingly -- here's my money and my ad impressions! The same will happen, in reverse, with the following release. Even Apple is subject to these media cycles (see antennagate, batteries exploding etc), they just manage to deflect them to smaller items, stuff most people don't care about. Microsoft seems to struggle much more when trying to control product perception across media channels.

RexRollman 14y ago

It's more like this for me in regards to the NT line: NT4 (Good) 2000 (Not) XP (Good) Vista (Not) 7 (Good) 8 (Not)