5 ms·

Entirely an enterprise play - gone are those firms that essentially say "we'll stick with XP". They'll either be forced into a subscription model or will switch

by someear 11y ago

Entirely an enterprise play - gone are those firms that essentially say "we'll stick with XP". They'll either be forced into a subscription model or will switch off to another platform. This is also a huge win for not having the need to support super old OSes, which is a huge tax in not just support cost, but also testing and designing for backward compatibility.

dzhiurgis 11y ago
This is also a significant driver development cost increase for OEMs.
- nly 11y ago
  Presumably they won't be breaking driver compatibility often.
- bjwbell 11y ago
  I'm not so sure. The changes on the graphics side from say Windows 8 to 8.1 were minor, leaving out new features such as directx tiled resources. The windows driver model had its last major revision in XP -> Vista.
macspoofing 11y ago
This is an anti-enterprise play. There are significant costs to OS updates, including retraining, downtime, and legacy (working) software compatibility. Most enterprises are pretty good at applying security patches but rightly balk at full OS upgrades. >This is also a huge win for not having the need to support super old OSes Who wins?
- golergka 11y ago
  Traditional Windows version updates, as in, from 95 to 98, from 98 to XP, etc — yes. But that's exactly what they're trying to eliminate, and use a modern update mechanism that is supposed to be easier than applying patches.
- raverbashing 11y ago
  So this means enterprise IT will actually have to hire knowledgeable people, and not buy "enterprise solutions" that only bring new computers to a halt, cost an arm and a leg and bring negligible benefit. Move the workflow into the web, ditch "office suits", don't touch ANY sw crap by IBM. About 90% of your workforce can do with an Ubuntu workstation.
aleem 11y ago
I think this goes far and beyond Enterprise play or anything of that nature. There is a lot at stake here. This is a response to a bigger paradigm shift that is the web and software as a service and Mobiles. If you are on Windows XP and windows 7 rolls out, you have the option of upgrading, not upgrading or switching to a Mac (or similar). Gmail versus outlook is another good example. With Outlook you would need to shell out big bucks and wait for the next major release. A three year release cycle has really got to suck for the team. If your team's major feature X didn't make it in the current release, you could very well end up waiting another three years. Gmail's releases by contrast are liberating. The Chrome browser versus IE is another glaringly obvious misstep. One doesn't even care about version numbers anymore and releases indiscriminately while the other feels like an antiquated behemoth that rears it's ugly head every few years and then goes back into hibernation for years. It's a shame, really. The mobile landscape has shifted to something similar. My upgrades on iOS come seamlessly and effortlessly. Apple can push whatever it wants down upgrade pipeline without costs. For years desktop companies have relied on pushing the hardware limits to force users to upgrade their hardware, followed by the operating system and consequently all the software running atop that OS. It has been a tremendous boon for every Windows-based software company, almost guaranteeing fresh inflows every three years. So this is going to have an impact on the entire ecosystem. From a developer's perspective: Software rewrites cause regression. Microsoft has been regressing all over the place, for years now, most prominently with their Windows releases. For anyone who doesn't write software for a living, regression happens typically when you rewrite a piece of code and in doing so reintroduce old edge conditions or have to re-tweak all the features around it. Only after that does the new rewrite start paying dividends. Continuous release cycles sidestep the regression issue to some extent by making the iterations smaller and the features less jarring for the users (Windows 7). As a consumer: I like the AppStore model because it doesn't charge me for versions (I know that might note bode well for developers because lifetime revenue per app becomes fairly static. A good friend of mine is just completing a rewrite of his app and his entire existing user base will probably end up getting it for free. However, this is still the option of IAP, product SKUs or subscription models).
- emp_zealoth 11y ago
  I'd hardly call Gmail updates liberating. Every time i am forced to check it, it seems to have removed another useful feature, or broken my web browser in some horribly misguided flash of "brilliance". Last I checked it is impossible to open email in new tab. At least I haven't found the Magical Arcane Only True Way To Use Gmail.

by someear 11y ago

dzhiurgis 11y ago

This is also a significant driver development cost increase for OEMs.

nly 11y ago
Presumably they won't be breaking driver compatibility often.
bjwbell 11y ago
I'm not so sure. The changes on the graphics side from say Windows 8 to 8.1 were minor, leaving out new features such as directx tiled resources. The windows driver model had its last major revision in XP -> Vista.

macspoofing 11y ago

This is an anti-enterprise play. There are significant costs to OS updates, including retraining, downtime, and legacy (working) software compatibility. Most enterprises are pretty good at applying security patches but rightly balk at full OS upgrades. >This is also a huge win for not having the need to support super old OSes Who wins?

golergka 11y ago
Traditional Windows version updates, as in, from 95 to 98, from 98 to XP, etc — yes. But that's exactly what they're trying to eliminate, and use a modern update mechanism that is supposed to be easier than applying patches.
raverbashing 11y ago
So this means enterprise IT will actually have to hire knowledgeable people, and not buy "enterprise solutions" that only bring new computers to a halt, cost an arm and a leg and bring negligible benefit. Move the workflow into the web, ditch "office suits", don't touch ANY sw crap by IBM. About 90% of your workforce can do with an Ubuntu workstation.

aleem 11y ago

I think this goes far and beyond Enterprise play or anything of that nature. There is a lot at stake here. This is a response to a bigger paradigm shift that is the web and software as a service and Mobiles. If you are on Windows XP and windows 7 rolls out, you have the option of upgrading, not upgrading or switching to a Mac (or similar). Gmail versus outlook is another good example. With Outlook you would need to shell out big bucks and wait for the next major release. A three year release cycle has really got to suck for the team. If your team's major feature X didn't make it in the current release, you could very well end up waiting another three years. Gmail's releases by contrast are liberating. The Chrome browser versus IE is another glaringly obvious misstep. One doesn't even care about version numbers anymore and releases indiscriminately while the other feels like an antiquated behemoth that rears it's ugly head every few years and then goes back into hibernation for years. It's a shame, really. The mobile landscape has shifted to something similar. My upgrades on iOS come seamlessly and effortlessly. Apple can push whatever it wants down upgrade pipeline without costs. For years desktop companies have relied on pushing the hardware limits to force users to upgrade their hardware, followed by the operating system and consequently all the software running atop that OS. It has been a tremendous boon for every Windows-based software company, almost guaranteeing fresh inflows every three years. So this is going to have an impact on the entire ecosystem. From a developer's perspective: Software rewrites cause regression. Microsoft has been regressing all over the place, for years now, most prominently with their Windows releases. For anyone who doesn't write software for a living, regression happens typically when you rewrite a piece of code and in doing so reintroduce old edge conditions or have to re-tweak all the features around it. Only after that does the new rewrite start paying dividends. Continuous release cycles sidestep the regression issue to some extent by making the iterations smaller and the features less jarring for the users (Windows 7). As a consumer: I like the AppStore model because it doesn't charge me for versions (I know that might note bode well for developers because lifetime revenue per app becomes fairly static. A good friend of mine is just completing a rewrite of his app and his entire existing user base will probably end up getting it for free. However, this is still the option of IAP, product SKUs or subscription models).

emp_zealoth 11y ago
I'd hardly call Gmail updates liberating. Every time i am forced to check it, it seems to have removed another useful feature, or broken my web browser in some horribly misguided flash of "brilliance". Last I checked it is impossible to open email in new tab. At least I haven't found the Magical Arcane Only True Way To Use Gmail.