Print 54 comment(s) - last by Wiggy Mcshades.. on Jul 23 at 11:12 AM

Microsoft's Kevin Turner
Perhaps you could say that implies that Microsoft thinks Apple will rebound from problems?

In the realm of bold statements, you might expect Microsoft's vocal and boisterous CEO Steve Ballmer to be sounding off.  But instead it was mustachioed chief operating officer Kevin Turner who was playing the axman leveling a wild statement against one of Microsoft's chief rivals.

Speaking about the Windows Phone 7 series, which will be released over the holiday season, Turner remarked, "It looks like the iPhone 4 might be their Vista, and I'm okay with that."

The remark was not first time Microsoft admitted that Vista -- which never passed its predecessor Windows XP and was swiftly passed by its successor Windows 7 -- was far from a success.  Ballmer had previously bemoaned that Vista was "not executed well."

It is also unsurprising that the iPhone 4 would be receiving criticism.  From Apple's arrogant approach to antenna issues (it's all in your head -- the phone is just drawing the signal bars wrong) which yielded a new class action suit, to proximity sensor issues, the iPhone 4 is coming under increased scrutiny.  Even the typically pro-Apple 
Consumer Reports, despite offering overall praise for the phone's hardware, said it could not recommend it because of the severe antenna problems.

What is perhaps surprising is that Microsoft would be the one to criticize Apple's phone debacle.  Microsoft just had its own phone bungle when its 2-year long Kin project (stemming from the $500M+ USD Danger acquisition) ended after two months in a train wreck.  Estimates indicate that just over 8,000 Kin phones were sold.  Much of the reason for the failure was reportedly due to Microsoft's insistence that Danger port its code to Windows CE.

Furthermore, Microsoft has even shown close to showing admiration for its rival's success in the smartphone sphere.  It has said that it is "following in Apple's line" in releasing a feature incomplete phone (in its opinion) early, and then filling in the holes.  It is also embracing Apple's approach of censoring adult materials, and even joined in the criticism of Adobe's Flash platform.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Vista?
By Solandri on 7/15/2010 6:08:01 AM , Rating: 0
Sheesh, modded to -1 for just telling things as they are? There must be some real Vista fans here.

No, hate to say it but this is one of those occasions where "everyone else" was wrong. No app developer should have designed the application to run in admin mode in the first place.

I completely agree with the security model in Vista. I come from a Unix coding background and you never use a higher privilege than you absolutely need.

However, your position totally ignores the reality of the state of the business world. There is The Way Things Should Be, and The Way Things Are. You cannot wave a magic wand and turn The Way Things Are into The Way Things Should Be. It takes time, money, and manpower to do that.

Many businesses take a "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" approach to software upgrades. They have legacy apps written 10, sometimes 15 or more years ago. Heck, some of them still have stuff written in COBOL. In many cases, there is no source code and the programmers who wrote the software under contract are long gone. They use it because it does the job and continuing to use it doesn't cost any money.

A forced software update to Vista's security model would in many cases have been prohibitively expensive. If upgrading to Vista means either bankrupting the business to pay for a software rewrite, or bankrupting the businesses because some mission-critical software will no longer run, it's pretty obvious what businesses are going to do. They're not going to upgrade to Vista. Doesn't matter if Vista is doing things The Way Things Should Be. The business reality dictated that the choice was not between doing things The Way Things Are and The Way Things Should Be. The choice as presented by Vista was between doing things The Way Things Are and filing for bankruptcy (but hey, at least your OS would be doing things The Way Things Should Be, small consolation).

Windows 7 takes the correct approach. It lets legacy apps run in an XP virtual machine, without compromising Windows 7's security. Businesses can immediately upgrade to Windows 7's improved security, while taking their time to update their legacy software as their cashflow permits. This was the same approach used for the DOS -> Windows transition. You could run legacy DOS software in a DOS box. Microsoft should have learned this lesson from the original DOS -> Windows transition (they got spanked by OS/2 for a bit because of its superior DOS emulation). Their failure to take the same virtual machine approach in Vista, and ignoring business demands that legacy software still be able to run, is what led to its failure.

RE: Vista?
By Solandri on 7/15/2010 6:23:32 AM , Rating: 2
Actually, that's kinda long so let me summarize: There's "where do we want to go?" and "how do we get there?". I completely agree with the folks here saying that Vista's security model was a good answer to "where do we want to go?". Where Vista failed was in the "how do we get there?".

"I modded down, down, down, and the flames went higher." -- Sven Olsen

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki