Allchin on Vista: "It's Not Going to Work"

[Spartan_X]

Echoing my earlier comments about Windows Vista being a train wreck, Microsoft group vice president Jim Allchin walked into chairman Bill Gates' office in July 2004 and told him that the software project was horribly behind schedule and would never get caught up. "It's not going to work," he said, according to a report in "The Wall Street Journal." The problem was that Vista was too complicated, and Microsoft's age-old methods for developing software just weren't going to be good enough.

Despite my repeated efforts at getting Microsoft to speak on record about the events of last year, when the company halted development of Windows Vista--then codenamed Longhorn--so it could completely start over, from scratch, the software giant and its PR firm has consistently railroaded me and prevented me from sitting down with people who are knowledgeable about what happened. However, I had been briefed informally about these events, referred to internally as "the reset."

Contrary to the WSJ report, however, the reset was underway months earlier than July 2004. At the company's annual Windows Engineering Conference (WinHEC) show that April, Microsoft handed out a Longhorn build to developers that would be the last pre-reset version of the code to ship outside the company. Microsoft executives knew at that time that the development situation had spiraled way out of control, and that they would need to start over, scrapping much of the code that had already been developed.

According to the WSJ, Gates initially resisted Allchin's plan to reset Vista, sure that the company could turn things around. That resistance set back the reset--and thus, the eventual Vista release date--by several months. "There was some angst by everybody," Gates said. "It's obviously my role to ask people, 'Hey, let's not throw things out we shouldn't throw out. Let's keep things in that we can keep in.'" It was too late for that. "The ship was just crashing to the ground," Allchin said. Ship, train, whatever.

Previous to Windows Vista, Microsoft had developed new client and server versions of Windows fairly regularly, every few years. But the enormous laundry list of promised features in Windows Vista proved costly to the software giant. Originally due in 2003, Windows Vista has slipped several times and is now expected in late 2006. Microsoft first showed off the system publicly over two years ago. These time periods are vast eons in software time. And during that time period, Microsoft's competitors have come on strong. Google now dominates the Web. The open source Linux system is a viable server competitor. And Apple's technically excellent Mac OS X system, while not a threat at all to the PC desktop, remains in the game with an ever-possible sales boost from the iPod and iTunes, which dominate the consumer electronics and digital music markets, respectively.

How damaging has Windows Vista been to Microsoft? Allchin, the man mostly directly responsible for Windows development at Microsoft, will retire when the product ships. The entire Microsoft corporate structure has been reorganized to meet the company's new competitive needs, which only came to light when Vista's massive delays highlighted the company's slowness and weaknesses. And customers now doubt that Microsoft is capable of anything grand: Some of Vista's most compelling features, such as a database-backed storage engine that's been in the works for over a decade, have been scrapped so that the company can simply release Vista in a reasonable amount of time.

Much of the problems are related to corporate culture, and that won't be fixed by Microsoft's recent reorganization. Microsoft is far too big a company with far too many levels of executives, to move quickly and seize on new market trends. Windows Vista, as a result, is fighting the OS battles of the last decade, reacting rather than being proactive and innovative. Mac OS X users, for example, can point to many of Vista's features and correctly note that they appeared first on Apple's system, sometimes years ago. For Microsoft, a company that desperately wants to be seen as an innovator, this situation is untenable.

All that said, Windows Vista is now on track. Current beta builds of the system show an OS that is far more similar to Windows XP, with fewer new features and a much less elegant interface, than originally planned. But it's a solid-looking release, and some of the upcoming consumer-oriented features, which Microsoft will reveal between now and the Beta 2 release in early December, are sure to wow users. Has Microsoft gotten its groove back? Not at all, and there are still huge changes that need to be made. But righting the ship for Windows Vista was a good first step.

Source: WinInfo

[JK1150]

well, this all happened in July 2004. Who knows what happened since then?

[Steffan]

Its been posted already. But you have a better title.

https://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=377278

[Electronic Punk]

Bah, just let it go.

[shockz]

Use the existing topic.

[shockz]

Actually... use this topic.

Since its written a lot better then the other one.

This thread reopened... other one closed

[BajiRav]

Actually original article from Wall Street Journal is much better to read than Paul's version of it.

Battling Google, Microsoft

Changes How It Builds Software

Edit: :o whats wrong with URL thingy ???

[Smigit]

How damaging has Windows Vista been to Microsoft? Allchin, the man mostly directly responsible for Windows development at Microsoft, will retire when the product ships.

The author kind of makes it seem like Vistas issues are the reason for Allchin's departure. I was of the belief it was not, just him moving on, hes faily old afterall. Infact again alot of it seems pretty sensationalised, how Vista lacks innovation and even how he rants on how "Microsoft keep trying to derail me from getting info".

Anyway a much better written article

[Kaidiir]

Windows is broken and Microsoft has admitted it. In an unprecedented attempt to explain its Longhorn problems and how it abandoned its traditional way of working, the normally secretive software giant has given unparalleled access to The Wall Street Journal, even revealing how Vice President Jim Allchin, personally broke the bad news to Bill Gates......

Source

I would think that there's some sort of mistake here. Microsoft has put too much time and money into Vista to just kick the project, right?

Or maybe it really was too bloated?

[Tungsten T]

holy

[IGx89]

Of course not; Paul Thurrott has the real story:

Echoing my earlier comments about Windows Vista being a train wreck, Microsoft group vice president Jim Allchin walked into chairman Bill Gates' office in July 2004 and told him that the software project was horribly behind schedule and would never get caught up. "It's not going to work," he said, according to a report in "The Wall Street Journal." The problem was that Vista was too complicated, and Microsoft's age-old methods for developing software just weren't going to be good enough.

Despite my repeated efforts at getting Microsoft to speak on record about the events of last year, when the company halted development of Windows Vista--then codenamed Longhorn--so it could completely start over, from scratch, the software giant and its PR firm has consistently railroaded me and prevented me from sitting down with people who are knowledgeable about what happened. However, I had been briefed informally about these events, referred to internally as "the reset."

Contrary to the WSJ report, however, the reset was underway months earlier than July 2004. At the company's annual Windows Engineering Conference (WinHEC) show that April, Microsoft handed out a Longhorn build to developers that would be the last pre-reset version of the code to ship outside the company. Microsoft executives knew at that time that the development situation had spiraled way out of control, and that they would need to start over, scrapping much of the code that had already been developed.

According to the WSJ, Gates initially resisted Allchin's plan to reset Vista, sure that the company could turn things around. That resistance set back the reset--and thus, the eventual Vista release date--by several months. "There was some angst by everybody," Gates said. "It's obviously my role to ask people, 'Hey, let's not throw things out we shouldn't throw out. Let's keep things in that we can keep in.'" It was too late for that. "The ship was just crashing to the ground," Allchin said. Ship, train, whatever.

Previous to Windows Vista, Microsoft had developed new client and server versions of Windows fairly regularly, every few years. But the enormous laundry list of promised features in Windows Vista proved costly to the software giant. Originally due in 2003, Windows Vista has slipped several times and is now expected in late 2006. Microsoft first showed off the system publicly over two years ago. These time periods are vast eons in software time. And during that time period, Microsoft's competitors have come on strong. Google now dominates the Web. The open source Linux system is a viable server competitor. And Apple's technically excellent Mac OS X system, while not a threat at all to the PC desktop, remains in the game with an ever-possible sales boost from the iPod and iTunes, which dominate the consumer electronics and digital music markets, respectively.

How damaging has Windows Vista been to Microsoft? Allchin, the man mostly directly responsible for Windows development at Microsoft, will retire when the product ships. The entire Microsoft corporate structure has been reorganized to meet the company's new competitive needs, which only came to light when Vista's massive delays highlighted the company's slowness and weaknesses. And customers now doubt that Microsoft is capable of anything grand: Some of Vista's most compelling features, such as a database-backed storage engine that's been in the works for over a decade, have been scrapped so that the company can simply release Vista in a reasonable amount of time.

Much of the problems are related to corporate culture, and that won't be fixed by Microsoft's recent reorganization. Microsoft is far too big a company with far too many levels of executives, to move quickly and seize on new market trends. Windows Vista, as a result, is fighting the OS battles of the last decade, reacting rather than being proactive and innovative. Mac OS X users, for example, can point to many of Vista's features and correctly note that they appeared first on Apple's system, sometimes years ago. For Microsoft, a company that desperately wants to be seen as an innovator, this situation is untenable.

All that said, Windows Vista is now on track. Current beta builds of the system show an OS that is far more similar to Windows XP, with fewer new features and a much less elegant interface, than originally planned. But it's a solid-looking release, and some of the upcoming consumer-oriented features, which Microsoft will reveal between now and the Beta 2 release in early December, are sure to wow users. Has Microsoft gotten its groove back? Not at all, and there are still huge changes that need to be made. But righting the ship for Windows Vista was a good first step.

[k22]

yeah that article was posted on slashdot and BPN here over the weekend. if you read the whole thing it just says that they started over at some point during last year and they are back on track now. they aren't scrapping it they just redid it and that was one of the reasons for the extra delay...

[lay_forat]

WTF another lame thread :angry:

Read this :devil:

https://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=377278&hl=

[Winston]

Yeah, i think MS themselves didn't really know what they were after, there was just too much to address. All they ever anticipated was "we want the best release ever", surely you would, but there are so many features in windows that need updating and that requires alot of time.

[Kilgore Trout]

summing up: the grand plans were abandoned, and now we have Window XP second edition

[Kr0z]

Some stupid aussie web site posts a very badly copied and pasted together story full of FUD and guess what? People believe them. ROTFLMAO. Nuts!

Since that was written Microsoft reviewed Windows Longhorn and sorted the possible problems they had, the result Windows Vista.

[Kilgore Trout]

nobody is saying Vista isn't coming out. the original WSJ ariticle documents the more ambitious features being jettisoned and why

[ATLien_0]

I really dont believe this, Beta 2 is due out in November/December

[etempest]

Windows 2000 has similiar problems but not on such a grande scale.

What happened is the person that took charge of 2k froze the feature list (or they would of blown any projected release dates) and focused everything on the current feature list (or removing features) and making it stable in time.

[Jeremy1]

summing up: the grand plans were abandoned, and now we have Window XP second edition

586583560[/snapback]

No.

[NightmarE D]

Two dumb threads about something that happened a while back that is of no concern to anyone today. So they stopped and restarted, OMG who cares? It's old news now. The only good thing is that it shows that Bill Gates didn't get what he wanted this time around and now he realizes he should have done this sooner.

As a side note, I could care less what Paul Thurrott has to say anymore. He's nothing but a brown-nosing jerk that thinks he knows everything. Always has to point out info he talked about a year earlier and says he predicted it right when there's 1 little bitty thing he got right.

Microsoft announced Longhorn will now be called Vista and released in 2006

In Pauls eyes what he says a few years earlier is right

Microsoft will release longhorn in the next few years without the Longhorn codename

Paul: see people! you saw it here 1st :rolleyes:

The guy is a joke. When he does get exclusives it's awlays the day before. That's nothing exclusive. Just proves he was the last told :laugh:

[nmuibm04]

If it's true that Longhorn/Vista-Beta1/Avalon/whatever_the_he**_it_was_named was scrapped and that a rebuilt from the boot loader up is revealed in Beta2, then Kudos to Microsoft for realizing that just patching and patching a well worn quilt still leaves you holes.

If Beta2 is nothing but XP with a new color, new "ooohhh, aaaahhhh" gee-wiz effects, then *pppppbbbbbbbtttttttttttt* :p to them.

I hope they realized that they needed to do this one right. I hope the step between XP and Vista/Windows 6.0 is as dramatic, if not more, than the jump from Dos to Windows 3.1...

They don't need these special effects to create a "I NEED this now" operating system. If it looked like XP but had revolutionary coding to make it almost bulletproof, then I'd make sure I stand in line to purchase this.

Microsoft (hopefully) has taken a page from cell phone companies. Yeah people want the newest, greatest, full out features, but come the end of the day... all they want is for it to work and do what it was supposed to and will complain the loudest if they can't get the phone to even place a call...

[Jeremy1]

If Beta2 is nothing but XP with a new color, new "ooohhh, aaaahhhh" gee-wiz effects, then *pppppbbbbbbbtttttttttttt* :p  to them.

586583688[/snapback]

Well considering the fact that pre-Beta 2 build 5219 is already beyond that, I don't think you have much to worry about.

[Chadwick]

vista is to windows xp what osx was to os9.

Sure it will have bugs on initial release, and features wont all be there, but they will be added incrementally building on a solid core, just like osx and linux.

All I can say is about time, but I still prefer my powerbook.

[zachman123]

What I love about these articles is how they're written in the future

Microsoft Windows Officially Broken

David Richards & WSJ - Tuesday, 27 September 2005