Windows: Microsoft Beating on a Dead Horse


Recommended Posts

NeoSmart Technologies has released an objective research article delving into the reasons why Microsoft 's Windows Operating system isn't coming along as well as it should in the market and isn't accomplishing what it set out to do. For a change however, the research is objective and reinforces the criticism with suggestions and solutions - instead of just flame.

But Vista is the end of line. I?m not saying Microsoft won?t make another Windows, they probably will, but it?ll be a mistake. Even Vista was a mistake. Technology just doesn?t work that way, and it can be a treacherous beast to tame and fatal to maiMicrosoft has two things going against it; two things that make Windows dead; and two things that could mean the end of line for everything Microsoft: Microsoft?s insistence on backwards compatibility, and ultimately, their failure to recognize change and move on ahead.

ead.

Source: NeoSmart Technologies

Story: Microsoft Beating on a Dead Horse

People would go nuts if MS cut backwards compatability with Windows.

The article doesn't suggest no backwards compatibilty - just a different way of doing it (no compatibility in the kernel, but via native emulation - just like OS X)

People would go nuts if MS cut backwards compatability with Windows.

Care to explain why? They already own VirtualPC...why couldn't they use that as a basis and create an emulation layer for backwards compatibility (like Rosetta, but for the same architecture) until apps are updated or brought up to speed. I mean, hell, they already have a half-assed "compatibilty mode", why not go full-blown and do it right? If it would legitimately make Windows better, who wouldn't be all for it?

Microsoft has two things going against it; two things that make Windows dead; and two things that could mean the end of line for everything Microsoft: Microsoft’s insistence on backwards compatibility, and ultimately, their failure to recognize change and move on ahead.

I find that with a lot of things, not just Windows, but it is so very true. Problem is that people WILL moan if they just cut-off backwards compatibility. I would like to see a COMPLETE re-work of Windows and (as somewhat mentioned in the article), for them to include a "lite" Windows version that you can boot to for running old things that won't run in the new Windows.

Maybe we will see this kind of change from Ray Ozzie?

the way applications are installed and uninstalled in Windows sucks

No idea what Mac is like, but I tried Linux a few days ago, and it was good and bad. If you selected something that was in the list of available programs it was easy - it automatically downloaded the files and installed it. But if you wanted something that wasn't... It wasn't as easy.

People would go nuts if MS cut backwards compatability with Windows.

Then create a Classic environment - like Mac OS X has for Mac OS 9 and below support - to make the transition less harsh and give people and companies time to adapt:

picture15si.png

I find that with a lot of things, not just Windows, but it is so very true. Problem is that people WILL moan if they just cut-off backwards compatibility. I would like to see a COMPLETE re-work of Windows and (as somewhat mentioned in the article), for them to include a "lite" Windows version that you can boot to for running old things that won't run in the new Windows.

Maybe we will see this kind of change from Ray Ozzie?

Is it a management thing?

MS needs to transition. Make Windows and another OS. Slowly --> the other OS and let Windows die out.

Then create a Classic environment - like Mac OS X has for Mac OS 9 and below support - to make the transition less harsh and give people and companies time to adapt.

That's exactly what the article says :) :D

That's exactly what the article says :) :D

I think it's an absolutely ingenious solution Apple came up with to ensure that they could start over and leave the old Mac OS behind, yet to ensure that most Mac OS 9.2.2 users could continue to use their applications.

But I guess Microsoft doesn't really feel the need to fundamentally improve things.

Edited by Neowave

Neowave, could enlighten me on this? I don't understand how Apple did it or how it works for Mac OSX, but I am looking at getting a MacBook so explain with a bit more detail ?

In OSX, if you try to start an OS9 app, it will load up OS9 from inside of OSX, and run that app.

Neowave, could enlighten me on this? I don't understand how Apple did it or how it works for Mac OSX, but I am looking at getting a MacBook so explain with a bit more detail ?

The MacBook does not support OS 9 emulation, nor does any Intel-based Mac.

Also, it does load up a full OS 9 OS in an emulation layer, you can watch the whole boot up if you want.

Neowave, could enlighten me on this? I don't understand how Apple did it or how it works for Mac OSX, but I am looking at getting a MacBook so explain with a bit more detail ?

Classic is basically running two OSs - in this case Mac OS X and Mac OS 9.2.2 - at the same time without the need to actually dual boot. It's a transparent layer that enables you to run Classic applications right from the desktop, so not inside a window like Virtual PC or VMWare Workstation.

Here are some shots:

Preference pane:

picture20hc.png

Mac OS X and 9.2.2 (Classic) system folders on the same partition:

picture53jd.png

Boot/Loading screen:

picture47zn.png

Mac OS 9 application running on Mac OS X desktop:

picture33dt.png

Mac OS 9 application in the background:

picture42oq.png

As you can see both Mac OS 9 and Mac OS X applications retain their own native interface without compromising one another in any way.

So for Mac OS 9 applications that means: No Aqua interface or any other Mac OS X technologies/enhancements.

For Mac OS X it means: No legacy icons outside the Classic system folder, no Aqua interface being cluttered with old graphics, no bloat from legacy support (files, drivers etc.) inside the system's core (so basically everything we don't see in Windows XP/Vista today).

However, after 5 years of service Classic mode will become extinct mostly due to the Intel transition as Mac OS 9 is unable to run on x86 based CPUs.

Edited by Neowave

Yes the way Microsoft has choosen to handle backwards compatibility is a problem with the 32-bit OS family. But I can't believe that they wouldn't have thought about it with all the programmers within MS, there must have been another reason.... Or does this mean that it's time to replace a few managers/designers?

Edited by Evolution

Yes the way Microsoft has choosen to handle backwards compatibility is a problem with the 32-bit OS family. But I can't believe that they wouldn't have thought about with all the programmers within MS, there must have been another reason.... Or does this mean that it's time to replace a few managers/designers?

I think the drive for Microsoft to fundamentally change things isn't big enough. In order for that to happen more users and developers need to loose faith in their OS.

Is it a management thing?

MS needs to transition. Make Windows and another OS. Slowly --> the other OS and let Windows die out.

That's exactly what the article says :) :D

I agree... MS needs to cut ties, emulation seems the best bet, IMO. Windows needs to leap forward in technology.

i hope Vista is a HUGE success, and people just eat it up with a spoon. So we can turn back, and spit in all these haters faces.

im so sick of these articles, if you don't like Vista, Microsoft isn't forcing it down your throat.

i hope Vista is a HUGE success, and people just eat it up with a spoon. So we can turn back, and spit in all these haters faces.

im so sick of these articles, if you don't like Vista, Microsoft isn't forcing it down your throat.

ditto, just not that harshly.

people are consumers, and they have a choice. If you dont like it, then go off and get/do your own thing.

Then create a Classic environment - like Mac OS X has for Mac OS 9 and below support - to make the transition less harsh and give people and companies time to adapt:

Emulating a 'classic' Windows XP and before environment in an upcoming Windows OS may sound like a good idea - but as much as an advantage it may be, there's the problem of a speed hit in the emulated OS. At least for now, the compatibility settings in XP/Vista are nothing more than changing a few settings instead of emulating an older core.

for some reason i just cant see microsoft windows suddenly dying. perhaps slipping in market share (which wouldnt be a bad thing) but not dying. they do have an exceptional product and yes improving it.

do i see others coming up. yes. i think thats good to. i think mac should have more market share and it would be nice to see linux jump leaps and bounds as well so it could be decently used more commonplace.

mac is good in that respect, but not common place. also windows should improve more on security.

none is perfect. most of all the death of ANY competitor is bad for the consumer. :yes:

Compatibility modes—also referred to as " layers"—are essentially collections of compatibility fixes that serve to emulate a specific operating system environment for an application. For example, the Windows 95 Compatibility Mode contains approximately 50 of the most common fixes applied to older Windows 95 applications so they can function properly on Windows XP. Some of the fixes include: returning Windows 95 version credentials; precise emulation of the Windows 95/Windows 98/Windows Me heap manager; file path fixes to redirect Windows 95/Windows 98/Windows Me desktop and start menu folders to their Windows XP equivalents in the Documents and Settings folder; and registry virtualization to emulate Windows 95/Windows 98/Windows Me registry data.

How well do XP's Application Compatibility modes work, anyway?

I think this is a better way to do it anyway...

You'd rather use WINE in 'nix than VMWare if you could, right? Hopefully, it'll just get better with Vista....

Edited by MioTheGreat

Uhh, is there any sort of proof anywhere that Windows' backwards compatibility causes problems? Because I sure haven't read any articles to that effect. Seriously though, if someone can link up some technical documents for me to read that'd be great.

I've noticed that throughout the years Microsoft has been doing exactly what this article wants, albeit at a slow, controlled pace. They transitioned to the NT kernel, and as they add support for newer things the older stuff tends to drop off. A lot of old hardware is covered by Windows generic drivers now, it's not like Windows has a billion different old drivers included.

Personally, I would guess that backwards compatibility is not a very big deal for Microsoft. It's not like there's 10 different versions of the Win32 API or something like that. I also think it's ironic how people want things like this and then whine when DirectX 10 won't be backported to XP...

i hope Vista is a HUGE success, and people just eat it up with a spoon. So we can turn back, and spit in all these haters faces.

im so sick of these articles, if you don't like Vista, Microsoft isn't forcing it down your throat.

And I'm so sick of people who don't have a bloody clue about software development in general let alone issues involving backward compatibility making such fanboy comments.

Vista has major issues with resource usage. Just ask Brad Wardell or any other IT professional actually testing out Vista trying to see how it will handle "real work". If you cannot see the problems, then I'm afraid that you are blinded by being an overly optimistic fanboy.

What are you going to say when it comes out and it is a total letdown? Are you going to ignore the problems and say it is better than XP? Because right now, Vista is a lot worse than XP.

The problems with Vista have nothing to do with backwards compatibility. That is just an excuse apologists use to defend MSFT. The problems with the Vista project go much deeper than minor issues with preserving backwards compatibility. I would say that maintaining backwards compatibility only contributes to more potential security flaws and bugs than anything else.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Trailer park trash “sport “, fits the current White House
    • KataLib 5.3.0.0 by Razvan Serea KataLib is more than just a music player — it's a complete audio suite designed for music lovers and creators alike. It combines a powerful audio player, a flexible metadata editor, a capable audio converter, and a music library manager into one streamlined application. Core Features: Audio Player Enjoy seamless playback of virtually any audio format or even streaming video files. DJ Mode lets you mix tracks with manual or automatic crossfades. You can also load and save WinAmp-style playlists for quick access to your favorite sets. Audio Converter Convert between a wide range of audio formats effortlessly. Trim or normalize your output automatically, and even extract audio from streaming video sources. Ideal for preparing files for different devices or platforms. Metadata Editor View and edit ID3v2 tags and other metadata. Batch edit multiple files at once, and fetch missing information directly from the MusicBrainz database. You can also apply or update album art with ease. Music Library Manager Organize your entire audio collection, search across tracks instantly, and download cover images from the internet — or use your own custom artwork. KataLib makes it easy to keep your library tidy and enriched with useful info. Supported Formats: KataLib supports a wide range of both lossy and lossless audio formats: Input: OPUS, AAC, FLAC, M4A, MP3, MP4, MPC, APE, AIF, MKV, AVI, MOV, FLV, WEBM, Ogg Vorbis, WAV, WAVPack, WMA, AC3, OGA, MP2, MPGA, MPEG, DTS, M4B, DSD (DFS) Output: OPUS, FLAC, M4A, MP3, Ogg Vorbis, WAV Under the hood, KataLib uses the trusted FFmpeg engine for audio conversion and media playback, ensuring compatibility with virtually all mainstream media formats. KataLib 5.3.0.0 changelog: Added Option to select the Zoom level of the Oscilloscope visualizer. The taskbar button of the app now displays the progress of its processing tasks. The metadata text of the Visualization Video can now be aligned by the user. We can now reorder the order of the Visualizers and Metadata, in the Visualization Video Setup dialog, by removing any item and adding it again. It will be added at the end. Changed The font size of the Visualization Video can now be more than 30 points. Updated yt-dlp library to version 2026... Fixed Opening the Visualization Video Setup dialog could fail if the settings were wrong. Sometimes there were false duplicates in the Rename Tracks dialog. Tracks without metadata appeared without title in the Recent menu. Download: KataLib 5.3.0.0 | 90.0 MB (Open Source) Links: KataLib Home Page | Github | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • EA Sports UFC 6 review: Brutal, satisfying, and surprisingly accessible to newcomers by Pulasthi Ariyasinghe EA’s UFC series of fighting games has been putting out games for over 10 years now, but it’s a series I have never spent any time with. As a PC guy, the series being console-exclusive is the primary reason for that. The latest entry to the series, EA Sports UFC 6, is still not coming to PC, but I have an Xbox now. When EA reached out to see if I could have a crack at the game and give my opinion about it, I finally got the chance to see what this franchise is about. I have spent about a week playing UFC 6 on the Xbox Series X. Despite my lackluster skill with fighting games, I still have fun with entries like Street Fighter and Tekken. I quickly came to realize this is a different kind of fighting game, not the arcade titles I am usually dabbling with. Most of the week that I spent playing UFC 6 was in the career mode, trying not to get knocked out while slowly improving my combos and reactions. The review below will be from the perspective of a newcomer to the series and an amateur fighting game fan, so please forgive any mistyped lingo or series-staple mechanics I am not comprehending. In the Ring Getting a solid hit in UFC 6 is satisfying. It’s probably the most satisfying impact reaction I have seen in a fighting game. The ripples in the muscles, the spray of sweat (and blood), the meaty sound, and the subsequent stumble all carry a lot of weight. If I miss a heavy swing like that, though, I already know that I'm in for a world of hurt from the incoming counters. The fighting is a real treat. The actions aren’t as snappy as arcade titles, so a miss feels like a much bigger mistake here. This slowness did take some getting used to, but I felt the improvement in my abilities even after a few drills with basic punch and kick combos. If I’m not deliberate with my actions in the ring, whether it be a hasty retreat or a flying punch, the possibility of getting instantly knocked out is always there. The head, chest, and legs all come with their own health bars, so guarding just one area is just asking for trouble. A few hits to the head, and it's game over. Meanwhile, you won’t even be able to stay on your feet if they get damaged enough, drastically lowering the total amount of stamina available for the rest of the match. I was also encountering a large range of fighting styles to customize my own fighter with. There are a huge number of real-life superstars here from multiple eras. It’s not as exaggerated as Street Fighter or Tekken, but the way they move, evade, throw punches, or even take steps is based on their real-life counterparts. I can see this being a big draw for any mixed martial arts fan. One feature I was surprised to see here was the 'Flow State' ability. As rounds progress, a power-up meter can give a temporary boost to the unique fighting style of the selected fighter, essentially boosting what they are good at. There is an entire visual effect that kicks in when activating this, too. The surprising part was seeing something like this in a game that feels like it’s aiming to be more of a simulator than an arcade fighter. My skill level is too low to use this exactly how the game wants me to, so I ended up triggering it whenever the opponent did it as well. Streamlined vs Authentic When I first started it up, UFC 6 asked me about my experience with the series. Being genuinely new, I took its advice and opted for a lowered difficulty level and 'Streamlined' controls. Quickly, I realized that this wasn’t for me. My chosen fighters were throwing random attacks, no matter what combination the game was trying to teach me. Win streaks were happening, and I was already getting bored out of my mind just a few matches in. Turning off this mode and switching to 'Authentic' controls fixed everything right up. I was now able to control my fighter with more precision than I expected. I could control each arm and leg, which body part my attacks would aim at, and the fully customizable controls for setting up unorthodox moves were a cherry on top. None of these made me an expert at the game, but at least I was being beaten up fairly. This is not a point against UFC 6, though. Giving the option for anyone to enjoy the game is always a good thing in my eyes. There is a lot of customizability in the difficulty, with everything from slow-motion reactions to specific assists being offered as toggles. If I had a friend coming over and wanted to try a quick 1v1, the streamlined controls option is one I’d consider to make it a light and fun fight. The one part of the fighting that did not click with me was the grappling. Being taken to the ground brings in an entirely new control mechanism involving mounts and submissions that feel more like quick-time events than the heavy, tactical fighting I had seen so far while standing. The game wants me to hold sticks in certain directions to change the position or pull off submissions, trying to do the opposite actions of the opponent. Even though I tried to get used to this gameplay, it just felt like a momentum killer, and I eventually just wanted to get back on my feet to get back into the action. Legacy and Career It was UFC 6’s career mode that I wanted to play the most when I started it up. I grew up with EA Sports games, and taking my team from the ground to the top has always been my favorite task. UFC 6 has that same option but also offers a more cinematic entrance to the career experience than I expected with ‘The Legacy’ mode. This mini-campaign follows an up-and-coming fighter, Chris Carter, who is attempting to reach the heights his father had reached in the sport. Starting with a small-time gym and coach, the story follows both his growth in the space as well as the growing rivalry with a friend and fighter, Danny Lopez. The fights in this mode are very good at introducing a newcomer like me to the sport and its varying techniques. Cinematics land between the major fights, showing the growing tension between the two fighters as the years go by, feeling the pressure to not miss out on the hard-earned chances. The dialogue can be a little corny at times, especially when the bar fights kick off, but I largely enjoyed the storyline. At the end of it, I was pretty much familiar with all the mechanics of the career mode, unlocking new skills and moves, and how I needed to approach fights, both outside and inside the ring. This story mode isn’t a very lengthy one, so don’t expect an hour-long campaign. Once the conclusion is reached, Carter’s journey continues as if it’s a normal career playthrough, though I decided to start over from scratch now that I have some know-how about the basics. The career mode is very streamlined, which is to be expected considering there isn’t a team to manage like in other EA Sports games. It’s the journey of one fighter. When a fight comes up in the calendar, I could choose how many weeks I dedicate to preparing for it at the gym. A longer prep time gives the opportunity to get my fighter’s fitness up (giving a bonus during fights), earn more money and points for unlocking new skills, and gain more fans to fast-track the rise to stardom. While that sounds like a lot of things to manage, it’s more like a few clicks. There is a social media menu that sometimes pops up with canned replies I can send to fans, and the sponsors are once again a single click away from being assigned as finished. It’s the training aspect that adds a gameplay angle. Using the money from winnings and sponsorships, I was hiring different types of trainers and learning fancier moves to use in the ring. One small thing I appreciated was that it was possible to injure each other during these training sessions. If a trainer goes down in a bad way while sparring, they won’t be available for the remainder of training. If my fighter is injured, it takes valuable time and resources to heal and recuperate. Just like in real life, it makes sense not to go so hard during training sessions and save that energy for the main event. Every training or sponsorship activity I took part in used up the days and weeks I had before the next fight, bringing a balancing element to the whole ordeal. There were times I simulated most of these to just get to the next fight, but the grind for gaining even the slightest bit of advantage while trying not to overdo it is an enjoyable one. Outside of quick fights and career modes, UFC 6 also introduces an almost museum-like mode to explore a trio of fighters considered to be legends of the sport: Max Holloway, Alex Pereira, and Zhang Weili. The aptly named Hall of Legends mode is unlike everything else seen in the game. Each of these fighters has entire levels dedicated to them that I could walk around in and explore their journey into the UFC. This includes footage from real-life fights and interviews about their original inspirations and training methods. Each of these spaces is almost like an interactive documentary. Once the highlights are done, the mode offers the opportunity to take over a deciding fight from the superstars. It’s an impressive transition. Going from the real-life televised event with crowds and commentary to immediately taking over in the game has some real hype behind it. Performance and visuals It’s clear to see that UFC 6 is going for a photo-realism look with its visuals compared to any other fighting game. The fighters don’t look great in selection screens. But inside the arenas, under the flood lights, surrounded by crowds, and facing an opponent, the visuals are more than impressive. As ghastly as it is to witness, things like blood spraying into the mat and muscles reddening as they get pummeled keep improving the immersion. The fluid animations help sell the illusion even further. A missed kick carries the momentum to require a corrective step. Hard punches that glance off blocks give off the air of a hit that still took some wind off the opponent’s guard. The special moves with flips and spins look mega awkward when missing, just as they do in real life. Suffice to say, the Frostbite Engine powering this game is one of the biggest strengths of EA development studios. Playing on the Xbox Series X, the 60 FPS gameplay did not miss the mark or cause any slowdowns that I could detect. I still wish this series were on PC to see just how far the developer can push the engine. One area I continue to have issues with, surprisingly enough, is the menus. The game has fast loading screens, but almost every menu I click through has a large amount of noticeable lag before it registers. This is immensely painful in the career mode, since I have to go through multiple menus between fights to train and do sponsorships, and having a 3-second pause when selecting a simple move between pages is the only time that made me quit the game. Thanks to Xbox’s quick resume, though, I was able to instantly jump back in the next day to the same point (and wade through more laggy menus). Conclusion My primary mission going into this EA Sports UFC 6 review as a newcomer to the series was to find out if this is a good jumping-in point for someone like me. Suffice it to say, the game passed that test with flying colors. Despite the high skill ceiling, the legacy mode introduction campaign, multiple types of accessible controls, and streamlined career had me picking up the basics and fighting styles much faster than I expected. I wish I had gotten to try out competitive multiplayer during my time with the game, too, but the lack of players in the pre-release version prevented this. The impressive visuals and animations, coupled with the impact physics that let me feel every punch and kick easily, made this the most immersive fighting game I have played. The only part that gave me pause was the grappling gameplay, which killed the momentum in most fights. The Flow State amplifying system didn’t hamper the experience, but I also felt like it made more sense for an arcade fighter, not this. Easily the most annoying thing about UFC 6 was its laggy menus, which I hope get some sort of fix later. Returning series veterans might have a completely different experience from me. But for a new fan like me looking to climb ranks and see fighters get floored in spectacular ways, UFC 6 doesn’t miss a step. EA Sports UFC 6 is releasing on June 19 across Xbox Series X|S and PlayStation 5 for $69.99. Ultimate Edition owners can already jump in via advanced access. This review was conducted on the Xbox Series X version of the game provided by EA.
    • No, Microsoft is obviously just spending money on maintaining a product with 0 users.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      ssd21345 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Contributor
      MarkHughes4096 went up a rank
      Contributor
    • Dedicated
      jordanspringer earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Rookie
      Rimplesnort went up a rank
      Rookie
    • One Year In
      Markus94287 earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      486
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      173
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      138
    4. 4
      ATLien_0
      94
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      79
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!