10.09.09
Microsoft Adds Product Delays and Vapourware
Summary: Microsoft talks about the future rather than the present as decent products fail to come out
MICROSOFT has decided to postpone quite a few releases in the past week or two [1, 2]. Here is another new delay:
Microsoft delays Forefront business security client six months
Microsoft’s Forefront team is again delaying a piece of its next-generation “Stirling” suite of products.
This may be just a delay, but Microsoft is also killing a product almost every week or two. At the request of a reader, we have created this new list of dead products and services from Microsoft.
Microsoft loves blaming the overly-hyped Vista 7 for current delays while also announcing vapourware. Regarding the latest vapourware (128-bit pipe dream), Carla had this to say and Mary Jo Foley seems to be getting cold feet now that Steve Ballmer admits Vista 7 won't sell.
Ballmer: Testers didn’t ring Vista warning bells; Could the same happen with Windows 7
[...]
Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer has done his best over the past year-plus to try to dampen expectations around Windows 7. He’s doing it again this week during his pre-launch European tour, telling press, analysts and others there that he doesn’t expect Windows 7 to provide a sudden and miraculous boost to the PC market.
But I’m more intrigued by a related comment Ballmer made, as I’ve thought about this very scenario myself in recent months. Ballmer pointed to Vista as an example that tester feedback may not always be the best measure of the success of a new operating system release. From an October 7 Bloomberg story:
“’The test feedback (on Windows 7) has been good, but the test feedback on Vista was good,’ Ballmer, 53, said in an interview last week. ‘I am optimistic, but the proof will be in the pudding.’”
It feels like a long time ago when testers were assessing the many Longhorn/Vista builds that Microsoft issued both before and after the “reset” in 2004. Before the reset, Microsoft officials heard from testers that there were some deep-seated problems with its next planned version of Windows. As a result, the Windows team went back to the drawing board and rejiggered it. Then there were lots more builds. And finally, in the fall of 2006, Microsoft released Vista to manufacturing.
Exactly. As we’ve repeated endlessly for almost a year, everything about Vista 7 is eerily similar to Windows Vista’s timeline. Average consumers with average computers have not tried Vista 7 yet. The hype is artificial and often paid for. █
faltu said,
October 9, 2009 at 12:29 pm
Office 2010 to come in Ad-supported version
Microsoft is working on new ways to bring Office to people, including a free ad supported version to be bundled with new PCs…
LOL.
Roy Schestowitz Reply:
October 9th, 2009 at 12:39 pm
The profit margins would be too thin. Are pop-ups part of the plan?
David Gerard said,
October 9, 2009 at 1:08 pm
The difference with Windows 7 is that they’ve tried really hard to get the curious trying out the beta and RC.
And really, for Windows, it’s not bad on modern hardware. Be sure to have at least 1 GB memory and preferably 2 GB.
While they did pump up the hype machine, I will say, as no friend of Microsoft, that Windows 7 is not horrible, not the way Vista was.
David Gerard Reply:
October 9th, 2009 at 1:09 pm
Oh – and I do recommend that free software advocates download and try Windows 7, so that they know what they’re talking about. Informed advocacy always beats uninformed advocacy.
(This is of course not obligatory, for those who get the horrors at the very idea of touching Windows ever again
)
Roy Schestowitz Reply:
October 9th, 2009 at 3:26 pm
I’ve tried Vista at the airport (once). It doesn’t have the programs that I like, so it’s of little use to me. I also find it hard to work with such a limited desktop environment.
Chips B. Malroy said,
October 9, 2009 at 7:04 pm
Why Ballmer knows that Seven will not sell that well.
The acid test, is Seven better than XP. Or to ask it another way, what does Seven give of value that XP cannot with 3rd party software? This question has been asked before by many people and I have not seen one good answer yet. UAC might be the closest thing to it, except if you set up XP as a limited user account, then you are better off than Vista/Seven with UAC as Administrator, the default setup. Strike one for Seven.
So will the masses be running out to upgrade XP to Seven? Well, mostly Seven is just like Vista, and dosen’t support a lot of that old hardware that XP does, so I think not. Strike two for Seven.
So really, the only way to get Vista, whoops, I mean Seven, is to buy it already pre-installed (MS TAX) on a new computer. But wait, the USA is in a depression, even some people living in tents more and more. How many are going run out and buy a new computer with Seven on it, no matter if it was the best thing since sliced bread (and its NOT). Strike three for Seven, and they are out.
Also, lets discuss STRIKE FOUR for Seven, the fact that so many have pirated XP, and simply will not ever pay for any Operating System period. Its not about if its right or wrong for them to do so, only that is the way it is, and its going affect the bottom line now since MS has let users do this so long. Now some users expect never to pay MS. 22% in the USA, is the appox number, higher everywhere else.
Strike Five for Seven, nothing really improved on the malware issue for users. No Value.
Strike Six for Seven, did I mention that Linux is Free and compared to Windows is practically malware free, if not free.
Strike Seven for Seven, hey ARM Netbooks are coming, and they don’t do Windows.
Roy Schestowitz Reply:
October 9th, 2009 at 7:09 pm
Microsoft has already spun this last one in the press, saying that Microsoft doesn’t do ARM.
Chips B. Malroy said,
October 9, 2009 at 7:23 pm
One has to ask, “WHY MICROSOFT CANNOT FIX IT MALWARE PROBLEMS?”
Sorry if I yelled (caps) there, but I wanted to really make the point. A company with supposedly vast riches and expertise, cannot fix a simple little malware problem in windows since the days of Dos before Windows 95 even.
Now a lot of Linux users will say its because MS is afraid of breaking legacy apps and games, there just is no way. I don’t for a minute believe that, a company with their resources could have fixed the problem long ago IMO. So lets search for the answer. Here is my theory.
Microsoft actually gains some from malware, its like planned obsolescence. The malware kills the windows computer at some point, and the average user buys a new one. Also, MS is toying with security suits these days, free for now, but somehow, I would expect them to charge for it if they can run (and cause problems for other software) others out of the market. In fact, MS former OneCare was a paid antivirus. Nothing like a company that creates the problem with badly engineered software, to try to make a profit off its users, with the problem they created in the first place.