Is Windows Dying?

[superczar]

Sorry for misusing the edit feature, but didn't want this more interesting article languishing at the bottom:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Second post starts

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Umm, actually the article in the first post may be a bit crap-olish

but here is something that actually makes for an unusually insightful and enlightening read (esp those who belong to the cult of apple bashing - even without having used an apple product)

Here's a summary, but please do yourself a favor and read the article before flaming..it's as I said before, an unusually insightful read on a topic like this



Here is the article

15 Reasons: Read article for details first before flaming - And, oh , it'll be great if you could post an honest count of the points you agree with (after reading the article.. I absolutely loved # 13 though)

1. Reliable sleep mode

2. Extremely fast boot times

3. Apple uses good quality parts

4. Less blinking lights

5. OS X + Windows is better than just Windows

6. Easier to troubleshoot Macs

7. A culture of good quality community software

8. More useful apps out of the box

9. Neat and contained system settings

10. Apple doesn’t load the system up with crap

11. Tonnes of small reasons make Mac OS X better

12. Still no need for additional security software

13. Apple seems largely to be lameness free

14. Power of the Linux command line with Photoshop CS4

15. File sharing is much easier

Also, from the end of the article

Before anyone tries to put words into my mouth: here's what I'm not saying:

* I'm not saying a Mac is a remotely good choice if you're a career gamer, though there are enough games and adequate performance to satisfy a casual gamer (someone who likes to play a game once a week, isn't involved in the gaming scene and wouldn't know what LOLZ actually meant.)

* I'm not saying Macs 'just work' and never have problems, because like any computer, they do.

* I'm not saying hardware compatibility is the same with Macs. There are endless hardware devices that don't have Mac drivers. It's just that there's enough good ones in every category that do have Mac support for it not to be a problem.

* I'm not saying Macs are for people who like building systems from scratch, or having maximum opportunity to chop and change parts at will.

* I'm also not saying Apple is a nice company to deal with -- it's not. Its whole corporate ethos seems to be "be smug and arrogant; turn your back and pretend everything's fine, oh and also, polished plastic never gets scratched" as often as possible. (Though frankly, the superior hardware and software goes some of the way in actually allowing them to get away with this, and mostly, the front-end customer service is very good.)

* I'm not saying that Apple is always good at admitting faults. While it is generally good with warranty if it admits a problem, if it is in denial about a problem, it will sometimes make people wait a year before they will begrudgingly accept the cost of fixing it across the board.

* And finally, I'm not saying Apple's DRM (which it refuses to share with anyone else) is anything other than a repellant policy, from a company that has a monopoly position.

On balance, though, Macs just let you get stuff done, whereas Windows computers constantly find ways of annoying you.

That's my take on it. What's yours?

On a sidenote, Soggy, that cat post cracked me up

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is where the Original post starts:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Interesting (albeit a tiny bit biased) article on Arstechnica

It's faitly long, so here is an excerpt.. Read on here if you find it interesting

Making the switch

A couple of Gartner analysts have recently claimed that Windows is "collapsing"; that it's too big, too sprawling, and too old to allow rapid development and significant new features. Although organizations like Gartner depend on trolling to drum up business, I think this time they could be onto something. "Collapsing" is over-dramatic—gradual decline is a more likely outcome—but the essence of what they're saying—and why they're saying it—rings true.

Windows is dying, Windows applications suck, and Microsoft is too blinkered to fix any of it—that's the argument. The truth is that Windows is hampered by 25-year old design decisions. These decisions mean that it's clunky to use and absolutely horrible to write applications for. The applications that people do write are almost universally terrible. They're ugly, they're inconsistent, they're disorganized; there's no finesse, no care lavished on them. Microsoft—surely the company with the greatest interest in making Windows and Windows applications exude quality—is, in fact, one of the worst perpetrators.

The unfortunate thing about this is that there is a company that's not only faced similar problems but also tackled them. Apple in the mid-1990s was faced with an operating system that was going nowhere, and needed to take radical action to avoid going out of business. And so that's what Apple did. Apple's role in the industry has always been more prominent than mere sales figures would suggest, but these days even the sales numbers are on the up. There are lessons to be learned from the company in Cupertino; I only hope they will be

 

[YoGi-Sama]

Slightly biased... yes.

Over-dramatized... yes.

But to the core it does have some weight in what it says. Though large population uses windows, everyone at one point have cursed windows in their life. Hell, in fact large percentage of that same user base curses windows on daily basis. Now many tech-aware users are experimenting with other alternatives like ubuntu or osx (either apple hardware or OSX86 project).

It's true, that Microsoft need to think outside the box.. err.. or should I say "Window"?

Somewhere I had read this long time back : "In the world of Gates and Windows, things can hardly be open... " :bleh:

 

[thebanik]

^^^Its more of a ranting/viewpoint from a software developer and nothing else....Ofcourse some people do make a switch to ubuntu or osx or whatever linux version but almost 0% convert into a mac user which is what the author is emphasizing and which is where he is completely wrong.

 

[Chaos]

A rant from a mac fanboi... nothing to look at. Move on . The chap talks about OS X performance. Heh this is a simple test - run the app glxgears (available both in Windows and OS X) and check the frame rates in both operating systems . It'll shock quite a few folks.

 

[Blade_Runner]

Czar stop taking you sig too seriously

 

[stalker]

bah.. and superc actually went to the pains of finding a neutral looking paragraphs to quote here

 

[superczar]

nothing like a bit of flame bait to keep things interesting :devil2:

Now for some rebuttal

Heh this is a simple test - run the app glxgears (available both in Windows and OS X) and check the frame rates in both operating systems . It'll shock quite a few folks.

Here is a quote from the own wiki of glxgear

Debunking the Myth (fglrx updates)

Your FPS numbers went up/down after you loaded the latest version! This is not because there was a change in the driver. Since the program is so wild and sensitive to load (since it barely uses any computational power), any 100+ FPS increase or decrease can easily be attributed to a music program or OpenOffice document you have open. You can also wildy change FPS in glxgears by simply unfocusing the window. Want a 1000FPS increase?? UNFOCUS THE WINDOW! Of course this is meaningless, since you can't enjoy Doom3 if you can't see the window.

[edit] Debunking the Myth (glxgears is a benchmark)

glxgears is not a benchmark.

You can use it to show that DRI works, but it does not even test that well. There's glxinfo or your Xorg.0.log to tell you if DRI was enabled as well.

And for the people who're wondering why CPU usage is 100%, while glxgears seems to be giving quite a lot of fps: yes, this is normal, because it tries to get the max number of frames per second. Checking CPU usage for glxgears is not a way to see if direct rendering works.

Ofcourse some people do make a switch to ubuntu or osx or whatever linux version but almost 0% convert into a mac user which is what the author is emphasizing and which is where he is completely wrong.

Err, whats the basis of that 0% number... if you are referring specifically to the developer community, I am not aware of any published stats..if it is regular users, then the story is entirely different (Apple's market share in the portable market has gone up from a negligible number to 21% in the US in the past few years...That's a HUGE jump

Sigh, no more points for rebuttal

 

[Rahul]

yeah like there are options, what do i will use if no windows ?? well without windows my comp is just a box. i don't know y people cry about windows and still use it, yeah it has few flaws but just see how much of hardware does it supports and runs flawlessly, no other OS is remotely close to windows in this aspect. i don't see windows dying even if they don't release a OS in next 10 years and just support the current ones. and they are coming up with new innovative products ........

 

[superczar]

doesn't anyone like my new avatar BTW?

well without windows my comp is just a box. i don't y people cry about windows and still use it,

\

Errr, *nix? (and it's free...not that 90% of the people posting heer paid for their wondows, but still)

yeah it has few flaws but just see how much of hardware does it supports and runs flawlessly, no other OS is remotely close to windows in this aspect.

Thats true for sure, though I'll disagree on the flawlessly bit

i don't see windows dying even if they don't release a OS in next 10 years and just support the current ones. and they are coming up with new innovative products

Vista sure was innovative....The catch here is there hasn't been any serious innovation from MS since XP (and that's 8 years in the past)

It'll be great to see some mindblowingly innovative stuff coming out from there, but till that happens, I guess rants like these would keep getting more commonplace

PS, for those who missed it, just add sarcasm tags around the sentence about Vista

 

[soggy316]

^I actually pity the poor kittens & cats that are made to pose in all those weird ways ,

you would do well to read this:
How to Tell if Your Cat is Plotting to Kill You :devil2:

 

[Rahul]

doesn't anyone like my new avatar BTW?

\

Errr, *nix? (and it's free...not that 90% of the people posting heer paid for their wondows, but still)

Thats true for sure, though I'll disagree on the flawlessly bit
Vista sure was innovative....The catch here is there hasn't been any serious innovation from MS since XP (and that's 8 years in the past)

It'll be great to see some mindblowingly innovative stuff coming out from there, but till that happens, I guess rants like these would keep getting more commonplace

PS, for those who missed it, just add sarcasm tags around the sentence about Vista

haha linux, was that supposed to be a joke :bleh:

well windows does work flawlessly for me at least, i have used it for 24/7 for some 15days, i have used it with totally different setup without formatting, i have used it with unstable overclocked processor and what not still no problems

good thing is MS has given me windows for free :roflnot pirated but free )

well about vista i have seen people ranting from begining, i have vista on my main system its running for past 2 years without a format, i have done many hardware changes, installed endless list of software still never got it blue screen, yeah never, yeah few times while OCing the processor and stuff but i will not say its a OS flaw.... can anyone tell me whats wrong with vista, even in my puny lappy with 1.6ghz processor vista works better than XP, please use the OS before commenting on it .....

i have not shut down my lappy for past 15 days, i just close the lid and goes on hibernation and unlike many people says hibernation sucks on windows well i never have any problem with it, and it boots within 10secs from hibernation.

PS: i am still laughing at the title of this thread :rofl: .... lamest question i have heard in years ..... no offence to you SZ, i am talking about the person who wrote the article

 

[Aces170]

The bottomline is the enterprise segment is where M$ makes the money, does not want to tamper with anything that works fine. Hence we have organization with a global footprint in lakhs still using Win 2000 operating system...

And no Linux is not ready yet, a person like me who has used comp for like 17-18 yrs yet loses data on a "simple" ubuntu installation... which is never simple mind you.. no matter what they harp..

Apple.. hmm not used much of their products, but a company which has prospered purely due to their marketing gimmicks... And no you mac fanbois check their financials its only ipods and now iphone which is making money for them. Ipod as a product was never great it was the marketing that made Apple what it is right now....

Bottomline is atleast till next 10-15 yrs we will keep using and dissing M$ products....

 

[Lord Nemesis]

Its true that code bases become large after a point of time to the point of becoming unmanageable, but its a general problem for anyone developing Operating Systems or huge applications. In fact we face the same problem and so does companies like Adobe. I don't know where "Is Windows dying" comes from. Apple's code base will also be just as big and hard to manage as Microsoft's or Adobe's or even ours.

Microsoft has been doing a very good job of keeping it code base manageable without loosing on backward compatibility easing the developers life to a huge extent.

Anyone who extensively worked with Mac OS X SDK's knows its a royal mess. Cocca is some what better, but the thing is that other than the most newly developed applications or very small applications no one is really using Cocca. Most of the important and large applications are stuck with using the Carbon frameworks. We are talking about code bases in excess of 10000 KLOC (Kilo Lines of Code), Its not an easy task to quickly port an code base of that size to a new programming environments and frameworks just as soon as Apple decides to create a new one.

This is where all hell breaks loose. Apple is in the habit of changing their frameworks drastically and breaking backward compatibility in even minor releases. So things working in one version break down in the immediate next. When Apple introduced Tiger in the market, they deprecated a lot of frameworks, but at at the same time they broke many API instead of keeping them around for compatibility sake. Most of the applications that worked well in Panther needed patches for Tiger.

Also due to the rate at which they make changes, the reliability of the OS and the SDKs are questionable. There were a huge number of bugs in Tiger which were reported by developers like us and it took Apple 4 minor releases to iron out the major crash issues. The same has repeated with Leopard in a much higher scale. In fact we have not yet accepted Leopard as our main development platform because of the stability issues with the OS and the API. There are a huge number of bugs in Leopard of both stability and functional types.

Even if we leave aside the reliability aspect, there are other issues with Apple SDK's, old frameworks are deprecated at such a fast pace that by the time you port your app to a new framework, its already deprecated and another one is introduced in its place. The sad part is not they do not ensure that the deprecated API work fine or give a low priority to issues reported for them and in most cases they are not even fixed. Another problem is that many newly introduced frameworks are getting weaker in functionality. For example there are 4 different frameworks for working with fonts in Mac OS X and the two frameworks though which you get max functionality are deprecated. In fact in the present day, you cannot make a sizable and functional application for Leopard without using deprecated API.

So how do developers make applications for Mac OS X in spite of these problems. Developers cannot wait forever for Apple to fix in its platforms, many times they even refuse to fix bugs like they once bluntly refused to fix Leopard bugs because all the Leopard developer team was pooled in for iPhone 3G. So developers have to put hacks or workarounds in their own codebase to get things working so we they can release their software on a timely basis. Even our code base has a huge number of these hacks and workarounds for many of these OS and SDK issues. So, Its the application developers who are mostly fixing the Apple's issues in their own code bases.

The beauty of windows is the excellent SDK and faithfully maintained backward compatibility. Applications made in 1998 or even earlier run faithfully in the present day. Even MS introduces new frameworks and programming environments, but most of the time, you can work with them one step at a time and you need not worry about a misbehaving API even 10 years after it was introduced.

In my personal opinion, Apples approach to new frameworks and SDK's is highly unprofessional (By that I mean its like a programmer sitting at home writing a lib for his own use just like they did at universities in the 70's) and developer unfriendly.

Its true there are a few things that MS can learn form Apple, but there are a lot many things that Apple needs to learn from MS. currently Apples approach to SDK's is like a school kid writing a lib for his own use.

 

[superczar]

Umm, actually the article in the first post may be a bit crap-olish

but here is something that actually makes for an unusually insightful and enlightening read (esp those who belong to the cult of apple bashing - even without having used an apple product)

Here's a summary, but please do yourself a favor and read the article before flaming..it's as I said before, an unusually insightful read on a topic like this



Here is the article

15 Reasons: Read article for details first before flaming - And, oh , it'll be great if you could post an honest count of the points you agree with (after reading the article.. I absolutely loved # 13 though)

1. Reliable sleep mode

2. Extremely fast boot times

3. Apple uses good quality parts

4. Less blinking lights

5. OS X + Windows is better than just Windows

6. Easier to troubleshoot Macs

7. A culture of good quality community software

8. More useful apps out of the box

9. Neat and contained system settings

10. Apple doesn’t load the system up with crap

11. Tonnes of small reasons make Mac OS X better

12. Still no need for additional security software

13. Apple seems largely to be lameness free

14. Power of the Linux command line with Photoshop CS4

15. File sharing is much easier

Also, from the end of the article

Before anyone tries to put words into my mouth: here's what I'm not saying:

* I'm not saying a Mac is a remotely good choice if you're a career gamer, though there are enough games and adequate performance to satisfy a casual gamer (someone who likes to play a game once a week, isn't involved in the gaming scene and wouldn't know what LOLZ actually meant.)

* I'm not saying Macs 'just work' and never have problems, because like any computer, they do.

* I'm not saying hardware compatibility is the same with Macs. There are endless hardware devices that don't have Mac drivers. It's just that there's enough good ones in every category that do have Mac support for it not to be a problem.

* I'm not saying Macs are for people who like building systems from scratch, or having maximum opportunity to chop and change parts at will.

* I'm also not saying Apple is a nice company to deal with -- it's not. Its whole corporate ethos seems to be "be smug and arrogant; turn your back and pretend everything's fine, oh and also, polished plastic never gets scratched" as often as possible. (Though frankly, the superior hardware and software goes some of the way in actually allowing them to get away with this, and mostly, the front-end customer service is very good.)

* I'm not saying that Apple is always good at admitting faults. While it is generally good with warranty if it admits a problem, if it is in denial about a problem, it will sometimes make people wait a year before they will begrudgingly accept the cost of fixing it across the board.

* And finally, I'm not saying Apple's DRM (which it refuses to share with anyone else) is anything other than a repellant policy, from a company that has a monopoly position.

On balance, though, Macs just let you get stuff done, whereas Windows computers constantly find ways of annoying you.

That's my take on it. What's yours?

On a sidenote, Soggy, that article cracked me up

 

[Rahul]

1. Reliable sleep mode

tell me whats wrong with windows sleep mode :-/

2. Extremely fast boot times

no idea about it

3. Apple uses good quality parts

LOL

4. Less blinking lights





5. OS X + Windows is better than just Windows

i don't see a point here ....

6. Easier to troubleshoot Macs

yeah maybe, because they have limited no of hardware softwares

7. A culture of good quality community software





8. More useful apps out of the box

c'on many they charge for every damn app, well i never felt anything missing from windows either and there are millions of free apps

9. Neat and contained system settings

yeah maybe

10. Apple doesn’t load the system up with crap

define crap

11. Tonnes of small reasons make Mac OS X better





12. Still no need for additional security software

even i used windows without any security software for 3-4 years, if you are little aware its not really needed. and there are many free apps available, y does it bother the user, its installed and works on its own ....

13. Apple seems largely to be lameness free





14. Power of the Linux command line with Photoshop CS4

i don't need them

15. File sharing is much easier

yeah right, for windows it takes 365 days to share a file :bleh:

 

[clown_abhi]

Vista sure was innovative....The catch here is there hasn't been any serious innovation from MS since XP (and that's 8 years in the past)

BTW, what's innovative and seriously innovative???:bleh:

Apple is behind most of the innovations in the OS world, not Microsoft. Dat's right but Microsoft brings it to the general mass. Call it cheating or whatever, it does take good things off from OSX, adds some new stuff and pastes it over the vanilla Windows brand.

Who benefit is us and that's what matters. Even if its 10 years from now, Windows won't die. It occupies more than 90% of the market share and with the new superbar and usability of Windows 7 this is surely going to rise. Not to forget Aero. Someone mentioned see Ubuntu. Used it but its nowhere near to Aero.

No OS offers as much compatibility as Windows and thats not going to change any time soon.

Why we hear people crying about Windows?

Coz imagine 90%. When so many people use Windows, many are unaware of computing, and there are bound to be some people who will have complaints. Half of these are person errors and the rest would be a majority of drivers fcukups (Remember Nvidia with Vista ~70% crashes were a result of bugy Nvidia Drivers on Vista).

Add to it, more Viruses and worms for Windows coz majority of hackers and creators would be on Windows. Antivirus suites keep up but still some people who are not well protected mess it up. Dats why they say, OSX is secure...blah blah blah...

If et all, after 100 years or so, OSX gains a 90% market share then u'll start hearing same things about OSX as well. So, at the end, Windows is good for us and i won't shift base until something very very promising comes to dethrone Windows...hyeah:

 

[superczar]

BTW, what's innovative and seriously innovative???

Mate, you missed the inherent sarcasm despite the pointer to the sarcasm at the end of the post

Anyway, here is my count:

1. Reliable sleep mode - +1 - I tried standby mode on my Win lappies in the past but never really used it - Asthe article says - The killer feature of every Mac which can't be underestimated (and you don't realise how important it is until you own a Mac)

2. Extremely fast boot times - + 1

3. Apple uses good quality parts - Bleh, lame ..So does say a thinkpad

4. Less blinking lights - Partly true - Most Win lappies tend to be rather bling bling

5. OS X + Windows is better than just Windows - Rahul, what the guy is trying to say is you can legally and easily run both OSes simulataneously ona Mac

6. Easier to troubleshoot Macs - Totally

7. A culture of good quality community software - partly true

8. More useful apps out of the box - Totally

9. Neat and contained system settings - Totally

10. Apple doesn’t load the system up with crap - NA if you built your own PC..but if you bought a lappy from Sony/Dell/HP/what have you with Windows preinstalled, you'll totally agree

11. Tonnes of small reasons make Mac OS X better - Errrr

12. Still no need for additional security software - Partly true, but sadly, only a matter of time given the increasing popularity of OS X

13. Apple seems largely to be lameness free - Hahahaha-- So funny and true

14. Power of the Linux command line with Photoshop CS4 - Absolutely

15. File sharing is much easier - Partly true, partly false

And while at it, nothing beats some self deprecating humor

 

[BIKeINSTEIN]

The fact that an absolute pc-illiterate jackass like me managed to buy a computer and started using it to
listen to music
watch movies
play games
send and receive mails
posting on TE
with practically zero downtimes or BSODs or crashes
and manages to irritate one and all on msn/YIM with seemingly no partiality is a miracle in itself.

All hail the power and beauty and simplicity or rather idiot-proofness of Windows XP SP2. :cool2:

Or you may continue cursing Windows for unleashing me onto you and having to bear with me.

If not for Windows, i wouldn't have been using a comp.
A comp is a luxury for me still, it was cheaper than a Mac when i bought one and i didn't need to code and stuff to get the OS running or anything as it maybe rquired with some OSes.

It's the brainier ones of the breed who cuss at Windows i think.
I am an idiot, a total dimwit and Thank God for Windows XP SP2.
I have no issues as i don't want to use my brain to do stuff that's taken for granted as menial by the intelligent beings on this planet.
Windows is n00b choice of the millenium. :gap:

 

[Rahul]

please try using sleep/stand by in windows and you will see that its not very different from mac, even with windows lappy you can use mac with ease. there are many custom build mac os available for various lappies, with windows you get many option and with mac you have to chose whatever jobs thinks it right or better for you.

well the crap you are talking about is not loaded from windows but from the manufacturer itself, in that way everything on mac is bloatware right from OSX

what useful apps they are just regualar apps, provided in most of the operating systems. file sharing it pretty neat even on windows, and maybe you will find everything on the finder better but for some it might be annoying

to each to their own, maybe you like mac better than windows, and it works better for you but y you have to prove that mac is better than windows, for some of us mac will be nightmare, so whatever works for you. but as jobs said ones "for apple to grow its not necessary that windows should go down"

 

[BIKeINSTEIN]

but as jobs said ones "for apple to grow its not necessary that windows should go down"

I like that guy Jobs and i hope he wasn't lying when he said that and he gets his wish granted too- sincerely.