ITNews

(Credit: Business Week)

A number of companies are opting not to embrace Redmond’s latest operating system and, like GM, are waiting for Windows 7 instead, so reports the Business Week posting Closing the Door to Microsoft Vista.

Unfortunately some decision makers are still buying and drinking the Microsoft Kool-Aid, and hoping for a better outcome. More of them are joining the chorus saying “I’m mad as hell, and I’m not going to take it anymore.”

General Motors (GM) may take a detour around Vista, the latest computer operating system from Microsoft (MSFT). The automaker has encountered so many speed bumps getting Vista to work on its machines that it may just wait for the next version of Windows, due in 2010 or 2011. “We’re considering bypassing Vista and going straight to Windows 7,” says GM’s Chief Systems & Technology Officer Fred Killeen.

Vista taxes all but the most modern PCs with hefty processing and memory requirements. Many of GM’s PCs can’t even run the system. “By the time we’d replace them, Windows 7 might be ready anyway,” Killeen says. Then there are compatibility problems with all the software that needs to run on Windows. GM’s software vendors still haven’t ensured all their programs will run on Vista trouble-free. So the company is sticking with Windows XP for now. Killeen figures GM could install Windows 7 in three or four years.

Many of Killeen’s counterparts across Corporate America are finding themselves similarly vexed by Vista. The resulting delay or rejection of Microsoft’s flagship product is stepping up pressure on the company to expand other areas of its business, including online software. Vista was first released in late 2006, but the dismay with it has come into sharper focus as slower-than-expected uptake affects Microsoft’s bottom line, Google (GOOG) spiffs up its own free versions of competing software, and corporate tech managers move to put more Apple Macs on employee desks.

Microsoft looks to have been masters of selling visions and eye candy to most decision makers for years.

My posting Microsoft Twelve Step Recovery Programs may need a bit of revision.

It seems to me, Microsoft is continuely plastering do-everything and over featured user interfaces on troubled code. It’s like heaping more layers of frosting on a cake that’s molding on the inside. The cake may have marketing flash and sizzle, but customers are getting sick eating it. For what ever reason, they keep coming back and paying, and paying, for more sugar highs from the frosting.

Looks to me like denial and addiction behavior. Maybe Microsoft Twelve Step Recovery programs are the next big thing.

The seemingly rejection of Vista by corporate America may be signaling Microsoft is going south from its zenith.

…John

The Microsoft Watch posting 10 Ways Microsoft Can Make Windows 7 Lucky lays out a 10 step Vista recovery program for Microsoft. Here are my reactions to the 10 steps.

1. Windows 7 has to be a whole lot better than Windows Vista.

Better doesn’t mean tons more features.

Any process requiring more than two mouse clicks is too complicated. Every Wizard is unnecessary. Windows 7 must wring the complexity out of the user interface. Microsoft can make Windows 7 more compelling by radically—and I mean RADICALLY—changing the UI. The old motif has got to go, and its replacement shouldn’t be one motif but several.

Featureitus seems to be a Microsoft marketing mainstay. Deviating from it will require changing the culture, and we all know how extremely difficult that is.

2. Windows 7 must generate a compelling hardware refresh cycle.

Microsoft’s fundamental development philosophy should be: one operating system to rule them all. If Apple can put Mac OS X derivatives on other hardware, such as iPhone, surely Microsoft can do something similar with Windows 7 (I’m not referring to a separate, embedded product).

Mac OS X is built on an a venerable UNIX architecture that has morphed countless times in the last 39 years to meet the needs of countless products, while still retaining its core designs and philosophies. I think history tells us the design of Microsoft Windows lacks this ability.

3. Windows 7 should go back to basics.

The browser has got to come out of the operating system. Internet Explorer has caused usability and security problems for far too long.

Fat chance. Doing so would be admitting to a major faux pas. Something that seems to be alien to Microsoft culture.

4. Call it Windows 7 Core.

The starting point must be the core, the kernel. Supposedly, Microsoft has made a fresh start with the Windows 7 kernel. From a usability and security perspective, that’s exactly what Microsoft should do. But Windows 7 has to be more by being less: It has to be the kernel, and to developers and other partners almost nothing more. Microsoft should even consider separately branding the Windows 7 kernel.

I think backwards compatibility hacks are the bane of Windows. On one hand Microsoft marketing seems to demand them, even though black hats use them as avenues of exploitation. Taking them out or drastically munging them raises customer hackles, as witnessed by some customer reactions to Vista.

If Microsoft does decide to start fresh, my advice would be to build on something that works, like a UNIX thingy. Don’t even think about doing it yourself, ever again. Operating systems are the most difficult things to program, and take a very long time to get “right.”

5. Windows 7 should be familiar.

Windows Vista was too much like the disastrous Windows Me II.

Learn from Max OS X.

6. One Windows 7 version is enough.

From the Windows 7 Core, OEMs should be able to customize the operating system for specific hardware and usage roles.

Gee, just like a UNIX thingy.

8. Windows 7 must give much, through sync.

Synchronization is the other killer UI, and it’s essential to fulfilling Ozzie’s mesh vision. Windows 7 needs a synchronization engine bound to the IP stack. This sync platform would become the hub for data exchange regardless of format or service. It’s a tough challenge and maybe even beyond Microsoft resources for Windows 7.

O.K. to what ever this mesh vision thing is. Wouldn’t want to stop someone from being “innovative.”

9. Windows Vista Capable means backward compatibility.

I’ve suggested some radical changes to Windows that simply are unworkable because of backward compatibility considerations. It’s time Microsoft put all that virtualization technology to good use. The company should radically rearchitect the operating system, while using virtualization to provide backward compatibility to Windows Vista and XP. Then the company can put all those Windows Vista Capable stickers to good use, on Windows 7 PCs.

Cool idea. Who knows, maybe building on a UNIX thingy and virtualizing sins of the past, may be a way for Microsoft to get back on its horse.

10. Windows 7 security features must increase usability by decreasing complexity.

Microsoft’s approach to security is fundamentally flawed.

I think the black hat underworld would whole heartedly agree.

Bottom Line

The author of the posting, Joe Wilcox, is making some intelligent suggestions. I doubt Microsoft will listen to such things until it is in really deep yogurt and hurting. Until then, marketing weenie greed will continue guiding the good ship Microsoft.

…John