Posted on 07/06/2010 12:30:05 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Here’s the short story: Leaked NDA Microsoft slides that landed on an Italian blog site have spread like wildfire. The content of the slides shows that Microsoft is pushing some innovative technology for Windows 8, but also very much looking to Apple’s business model for inspiration. Here’s some analysis.
First, a tip of the hat to Mary Jo Foley over at ZDNet for condensing the story. She sourced the Microsoft Kitchen blog that covered the leak, and that blog, in turn sourced the Italian blog ‘Windowsette’ that scooped the leak, which in turn was picked up by most of the Apple rumors sites that I read. Bottom line? This stuff is everywhere.
But other than the plethora of new features, technology, and 2012 timeline Microsoft has laid out for the release of Windows 8, there’s one very interesting slide in particular.
No, you’re not seeing things. That’s an — allegedly — internal slide from the Microsoft Windows team, asking themselves how Apple does so damn well, and how they can mimic the results. The best part is? They’ve even focused on Apple’s mantra “It Just Works.” What’s more interesting than that is the focus on value and user experience. Windows Vista was a focus on flashier graphics, but didn’t do so hot in the UX field. Windows 7 finally started to nail that down, and my assumption is that Windows 8 will be much more fluid, futuristic and minimalistic-ly modern a-la Mac OS X.
Worth repeating: value is the focus here. Microsoft wants to create something people want to pay for, other than something people simply buy because it’s cheaper or preloaded on a PC. Apple has shown that a price tag isn’t as big of a deal when the product has a high level of worth and desirability and functionality.
Lastly, the above picture of the computer is — dare I say it — an iMac prototype clone for a “Windows” computer running Windows 8. In case you were curious, other leaked slides detail that there may be a Windows App store, plus faster start-up and shutdown time, a refocus on functionality and snappier user experience, easier recovery, restore and reset and a facial recognition system for logging in for enhanced security.
Officially, Microsoft hasn’t made a comment, but we didn’t think they would.
Here’s to Windows 8.
Or that cinnabar (mercuric oxide or mercuric sulfide) can be found all over Northern California in surface deposits.
The real solution to all these hazardous substances is to post warning signs in every delivery room in every hospital that say:
Let the kid decide then whether he wants to climb back in where it's safe, or not...
Swordmaker, my apologies, you are absolutely correct.
I scratched my head for a while, and finally figured out where I made my memory error.
When the Macintosh first appeared, my main computer at work was a DEC LSI-11/23 running RSX-11/M, with a 9600-baud line to a VT-100 terminal. The VT-100 had a keypad that was used for numeric entry by accountants, and for editing by the rest of the world.
My editor of choice was DEC's "EDT" (EDT Text Editor), which made extensive use of the editing keypad -- it was highly programmable and you did nearly everything (except enter raw text) with the keypad.
The original Macintosh had no keypad (and as stated, no cursor keys).
So for me, especially using it as a terminal emulator, not having a keypad was as bad as not having any keyboard at all. So I guess I'm not too surprised that that is the way I remembered it... :)
If I'd known Vi better at that point I'd have used it; instead I drifted towards Emacs.
I do correctly recall the pull-down menu of keys in the terminal emulator programs -- but the menu was the keypad, not the entire keyboard.
Sorry about that, and thanks for the correction!
It's an old debating technique called "muddying the waters" or more technically "obfuscation." Puget does it frequently.
OK, then I’ll make this really easy since you two seem to be easily confused:
Apple does not lead in Smartphone OR general phone markets. They are not a market leader.
Is that clear enough? I thought it was pretty obvious and easy to understand that there are two markets that apply. And that Apple leads neither.
No one consciously lists "cosmetics" as a requirement for a computer. Most people who walk into a computer store have "requirements" like "I want to surf the Web, e-mail, play Farmville, and organize the pictures from my digital camera. I was thinking about building a Web page." Folks who have a list of technical requirements are likely to order online.
Design isn't just cosmetic. It's also ergonomics, efficiency and durability. With computers, like cars, appliances, or just about any big-ticket item, how it feels, how it works, and yes, how it looks are a factor in choosing a machine you're going to be sitting at and looking at for hours on end. No one walks into a car dealership and says they're looking for a car with easy-to-reach stereo controls and large cup-holders, but they notice those during a test drive.
I know. It started with a comment that Microsoft computers were "ugly", so the reply was in that context.
“Sigh. The reason most people don’t know that is that it simply is not true!”
Sigh. See post #107, Swordmaker. I admitted my poor choice of words before you went on your rant. Happy FReeping.
I don't see anywhere in this thread where it was said the iPhone was a leader in marketshare in any market. I do see you being very dismissive of the iPhone's accomplishments, instead touting the lesser accomplishments of your preferred platform.
Microsoft has always mimicked Apple. They start off with a great product when it reaches Beta, but then they start adding Microsoft-isms to it until it turns into a boondongle you wouldn’t wish on your worst enemy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.