- Site menu:
- Latest Discussions
- Latest Newswire
- Archives
- Submit Story
- Story HOWTO
- Syndicate
- E-mail Alerts
With Microsoft in Chaos, Our Moment Has Arrived
Apparently, Microsoft's next release of its flagship operating system, called 'Vista', has been delayed yet again. This really isn't surprising news, due to the fact that it's been delayed quite a number of times already. What is surprising, however, is that according to reports, some Microsoft developers are now in open rebellion. Yes, these same developers who normally thrive on their daily diet of Kool-Aid and dog-food have called for the resignation of not only operating system head honchos Brian Valentine and Jim Allchin but (gasp!) CEO and gold medalist in the chair throw, Steve Ballmer. Will Bill Gates be next? I doubt it. A few disgruntled employees does not a revolution make. In fact, there are those who defend the umpteenth Vista delay. Microsoftie Robert Scoble was reported as saying: "Yes, it's painful. Yes, it's embarrassing. But we've been through product slips before and I'd rather have a slipped date than a cruddy product." Yes, I agree. God forbid that Microsoft ship a cruddy product. So, is this the beginning of the end for Microsoft? This past week we've seen a lot of people use the word 'failure' in the same sentence with 'Microsoft'. Is this a harbinger of the end of Window's desktop dominance? We can hope, can't we? In one report, someone identified as a Microsoft "insider" expressed concern that by the time key Microsoft products ship, they will have become irrelevant. Forbes columnist Daniel Lyons writing last week in a highly critical piece about Microsoft's smoke and mirrors routine, said: "Microsoft can't afford to screw up like this. There are free alternatives to everything Microsoft sells, like the Linux operating system and the Open Office application suite." But perhaps more importantly, Lyons points out in the same piece: "Given Microsoft's delays I can't believe open-source stuff still hasn't caught on for desktop computers." Well, Dan, that's two of us. But what should we in the Linux community do about this? First, is to realize that we have a classic 'strike while the iron's hot' moment and not be slow to exploit it. To their credit, Novell seems to be doing their darnedest to fill the emerging Microsoft void. Company exec Nat Friedman recently showed off a Linux desktop that does 100% of what you want. And lately, Dell seems to be warming up to desktop Linux as well. Microsoft's just dropped the ball. It's up to us to pick it up. |
|
|
Comments (8)
Not until...
The basic functions for which people use computers should be readily at hand by default. This greatly simplifies usage by people who do not know how to customize the computer while not hindering those who do know how. IMO, this is far more logical than any other logic tree used for menu systems. You don't have to hunt for the steering wheel in a car.
'If' we were talking cars, or toasters, that would be true... but we ain't. The difference between a 'dumbed down interface' and a well designed one is very tenuous. I designed interfaces for custom machinery for a lot of years and while it is necessary to have basic functions standardized, that doesn't even begin to cut it when you get into the more complex stuff. Computer OS are certainly in that category.
The Ideal interface allows less experienced users the simple functions up front while not isolating the more sophisticated tools from the experienced user. Not an easy task at all and one that almost always ends up with a compromise one way or an other. It's my observation that most times it ends up limiting, or at least inconveniencing, the power user significantly.
Bottom line is 'there is no ideal universal interface', except, as a pie in the sky concept. The best choice, from an engineering standpoint, is to have separate interfaces for the basic and the advanced user. and yes, that basic interface is then 'dumbed down'... sorry (well not really), be offended if you want, but at least that concept will work.
Placing the common, basic functions in plain view and easy reach does not in any way hamper anyone who chooses to alter that desktop.
Guts
-------------------------------- Steve Stites
I don't care if they bundle Linux or not, but they have to give consumers a choice. If government doesn't act the what good are they?
Post a comment
A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.
Your message:Sign up and post (it is free) or Log in and post
I have spent dozens of hours in our schools and retirement communities watching people interact with PCLinuxOS. If we set it up for them, simplify the menus and taskbar/desktop, everything is fine. Present them with the desktop as is upon install, and you can see the confusion surface as they explore the menus and sub-menus..
Many have wrote us and said "if they're too stupid to figure it out, They need Windows." I wonder if these same people would allow their loved ones to struggle under such a burden. Truth be told, there are only a handful of apps and programs the casual user has a need for. The problem is, when a pop-up appears and says "your computer is not operating at full capacity, click here to fix it." Some of them do. With a Linux system, this would not lead to the disaster it usually does. Make the main apps available on the desktop and taskbar, then have the other ones in the menu bar but listed as "intermediate user" and so on. Linspire has come the closest to doing this, but letting the user run as root does not sit well with me and many others
These are only a couple of ideas...we are looking for others. http://www.lobby4linux.com. We're discussing it in the forums.