AT MICROSOFT, NO OS IS ISSUED BEFORE ITS TIME
At my company, we rejoice at Windows problems-- that's because we render tech support to a variety of customers, and it has been a goldmine, of sorts, for all us Windows "camp followers".
That said, however, I heartily endorse the notion of "appropriate technology"-- that is, XP seems to fill the bill for almost all Windows customers (leaving aside the issue of whether they should be on Windows, in the first place).
Microsoft designed XP to deal with widespread and growing dissatisfaction with both the W9x kernel and what seemed an overly complex address of security and other issues in W2000. If the mass of Windows users were to be corraled, however, the strength of NT had to be made friendlier.
So, rather than "dumb down" W2000, Microsoft reinvented it, down to the almost cartoon-casual graphic style of its icons, folders and the Little Search Dog that survived even the rage about Clippy. And, as is occasionally the case, Microsoft hit a home run with users.
Most were glad to be free of W9x, and found, to their astonishment, even the BSOD had disappeared-- replaced by a polite reminder Windows has fallen apart in this session, but not to worry. (Prepare for a forced reboot.)
After some nine years of trial and error, Windows XP emerged a field-proven Windows that actually permitted people to get some work done-- marvelous as it might seem. Coupled with SP2 and SP3 makeovers, XP now need apologize for no shortcoming, in the near future.
The rest of the story is intellectual property and hardware-driven, and very murky at this point. For example, a Microsoft obsession with turning Windows into a vending machine for Hollywood delayed Vista for an entire year, for negligible gain on any front. By the time it was unceremoniously pushed onto the market, it met a very critical, impatient user base which expected much more than it found.
But while Windows 7 has made many users at least as happy as XP, has bitten nobody very badly, and seems worth keeping-- especially if "pre-installed" (aka forced upgrade)-- it is not necessarily worth struggling to acquire. Particularly with its greater hardware requirements.
So, uncharacteristically, Microsoft has done the right thing for users of Windows XP, who want to continue using XP even if Microsoft needs them (for the sake of its cash flow) to "move along", as one user put it.
But there is also hidden self-interest in the Microsoft move-- so long as even XP users remain in the Microsoft fold, Microsoft's Ballmer can continue to pump up the Windows tent for developers, year after year, as "the greatest show on earth"-- and developers will still come running for the cash, if nothing else.
So, for the sake of an established market foothold, Microsoft will not kill off Windows XP prematurely. This is the same thinking that led Microsoft to continue with security updates for years with the surprising cohort still using W98SE. Presumably, Microsoft will build upon its XP user base, not attempt to force anything.
If Microsoft has learned anything over the years as America's Official Predatory Monopoly, it is The Microsoft Customer Is Nearly Always Right.
.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram