Welcome

Microsoft’s latest version of Windows, Vista, has been taking flak from the tech community for years. Even while in development, journalists and geeks were moaning about the incompatibility, the performance, the multiple versions, and pretty much every other attribute of an operating system. As Microsoft’s most visible product (and flagship brand), it’s a big target, but are we being too harsh?

Apparently not. The recent release of Service Pack 1 stirred up the hornets nest yet again and a fresh volley of scorn is headed towards the Vista folks. In fact, some people are calling for Microsoft to completely abandon Vista and write it off as a misstep in the OS journey. They did it a few years ago with Windows Millennium Edition (ME), so it’s not without a precedent. While this might seem a dramatic step for Microsoft, my proposal on how “fix” the Windows landscape is even more out of the box. No pun intended.

First things first, get over this idea that the same OS can run on every PC around the world and serve the needs of every person for every purpose. Yes, that’s what gave Microsoft its power in the 80s and 90s, but the universality of Windows is what has caused all the problems of viruses, spyware, zombie machines, botnets, and of course anti-trust hearings for Microsoft. We need different operating systems for different functions.

For office work, and most professional practices, we will still use Windows. The cubicle worker won’t miss a step as software titles will run the same as before. Business, accounting, scientific, and architectural software will run exclusively on Windows. The key point of the new Windows is that it’s designed to be administrated by an IT guy. Users by default will NOT have administrative access to the system, but instead will rely on a network admin. Obviously, this is for security and consistency across the network. Additionally, the new Windows will be completely devoid of possessive pronouns and cutesy icons (e.g., “My Documents”) but instead an ultra-clear and simple structure of how to organise files. Connectivity is key, as Windows machines will almost always be connected to some sort of network.

For home use, Microsoft should introduce a new product, perhaps called PC OS. This system is designed for a multi-user interface where one of the users (most likely the parent) will serve as the administrator. Here we’ll find warm and friendly icons and other interface eye candy, if so desired, because it is intended for a wider lay audience. This is not for computer geeks because it will lack powerful back-end features like VPN networking and file hosting. Another dramatic, but necessary, course of action would be to build PC OS not on the Windows source code, but on some sort of Unix, like Mac OS. This would make the system more secure, at least for a little while under hackers get their teeth into it. Traditional Windows applications will run in virtualisation, implying that you should really be using this software at work, not at home. Titles like Quicken, which are intended for home use, would run natively on this system, but the Office Suite would not. Eventually, software developers would create a stripped down version of the Office suite for PC OS. After all, how many features do you need to compose a three-line letter to your landlord?

The third and most expert system will actually be a Linux distribution from Microsoft. Let’s call it Microx. This is hackable, modable, and open source. Microsoft generally will not support this product because of the community support and use of open standards. For an educated user, this OS can be an email machine for your mum, or a server with firewall for a worldwide network of geeks. Atypical by most commercial standards, this product will only be targeted at the top 1% of computer users who demand openness and the ability to control their own systems. Microsoft would need to step in and create some sort of virtualisation feature for those odd occasions when you do need to run Windows or PC OS software. Aside from that, it’s all about the community supporting one another to continually improve this OS.

The big question mark is what do about gaming? Most video game developers will state very plainly that the only reason they develop for Windows is because it’s the most common OS. Duh. But what if it weren’t? What if most gamers decided to move to PC OS? What if games were developed using open standards like OpenGL instead of Microsoft’s DirectX? Well, if PC OS is based on a Unix backbone, then it will mean that gaming companies will begin to develop those that platform, allowing them to get PC OS, Mac OS X and Microx users all in one go. But change of this magnitude never comes easily.

Microsoft is already working on the next Windows release called Windows 7, so obviously they’re not taking my advice, but they still haven’t answered the big question of what will be done about Vista. For the moment, it’s “Stay the Course”. Where have I heard that before?

// a tale of brands & branding, computers & gadgets, video games
// 2 Comments »