Posted on 02/13/2009 11:47:25 PM PST by Swordmaker
Microsoft announced plans to open retail stores, hoping to boost visibility of many of its products and its brand. The move seems to be an effort to mimic the success that Apple has had with its retail stores. The news is just too tempting not to have some fun with. So here are some yet-to-be-officially-revealed details about the Microsoft stores.
1. Instead of Apple's sheer walls of glass, Microsoft's stores will have brushed steel walls dotted with holes—reminiscent of Windows security.2. The store will have six different entrances: Starter, Basic, Premium, Professional, Enterprise, and Ultimate. While all six doors will lead into the same store, the Ultimate door requires a fee of US$100 for no apparent reason.
3. Instead of a Genius Bar (as Apple provides) Microsoft will offer an Excuse Bar. It will be staffed by Microsofties trained in the art of evading questions, directing you to complicated and obscure fixes, and explaining it's a problem with the hardware—not a software bug.
4. The Windows Genuine Advantage team will run storefront security, assuming everybody is a thief until they can prove otherwise.
5. Store hours are undetermined. At any given time the store mysteriously shuts down instantaneously for no apparent reason. (No word yet on what happens to customers inside).
6. Stores will be named Microsoft Live Retail Store with PC Services for Digital Lifestyle Enthusiasts.
7. Fashioned after Microsoft's User Account Control (UAC) in Vista, sales personnel will ask you whether you're positive you want to purchase something at least twice.
8. Xbox 360 section of the store will be organized in a ring—which will inexplicably go red occasionally.
9. DreamWorks will design a scary in-store theme park ride called "blue screen of death."
10. Store emergency exits will be unlocked at all times so people can get in anytime they want even if the front doors are locked.
Do you know something we don't about the Microsoft stores? Please let us know in the comments.
11. I might be able to afford something in the Microsoft store.
I’ve got a Mac. I use it to play iTunes songs while I do work with my PC.
15: You can only make purchases using Microsoft Points, which you have to buy in advance of purchasing your selection... in quantities that never match the sale price of anything being sold.
To leave the store, push on the door that says "Entrance".
???...Ummm....hate to break it to you Swordmaker, but most people use Microsoft Office. Your sentence doesn't make too much sense.
Keep touting Apple. They remind me of a little boy that wants to wear Daddy's coat and tie - pretending to be an adult.
Wake me when Apple reaches 20% market share on their computers or OS.
</yawn>
I’d buy a Mac, but I’m not gay.
So your PC cannot multitask well?
Microsoft Office IS the leading software... so why are there multiple other offerings out there that don't work as well?
Wake me when Apple reaches 20% market share on their computers or OS.
The amazing moving goal posts. It wasn't too long ago that PC apologists were saying "Wake me when Apple reaches 10% market share on the computers or OS." Well, they're at 10% and rapidly climbing. In the notebook market, they are at 20%. WAKE UP.
> With all respect it looks to me like you're relying on some decade old stereotypes yourself.
Well, I admit my characterization was kinda harsh.
> About the only folks who get infected these days are the ones who aren't even smart enough to turn on automoatic updates, which thankfully isn't very many folks.
Well, unfortunately, recent surveys of user machines (that hit websites that participate in such surveys) indicate that something like 50% of those machines aren't patched up to date, and around 30% don't even have the most recent Service Pack, much less later updates.
Give the fact that those poorly-protected folks represent hundreds of millions of machines, I don't think "not very many" is quite accurate. But all things are relative -- that's many times the TOTAL number of Mac's out there, for example, and I'm sure not all of those are up to date either.
> Hopefully Microsoft will use these stores to help teach these losers the basics, and why wouldn't that be a good thing?
I completely agree, that would indeed be terrific, and I hope the stores take a proactive approach to educating their customers in that regard.
“So your PC cannot multitask well?”
It doesn’t have a remote control.
Most recent one I recall was in connection with Conficker; I'll find the article on the worm, and who they gave as a reference. I've seen similar figures quoted elsewhere in recent months as well.
> Another interesting metric would be how many are pirated copies of Windows and therefore not qualified to setup auto updates at all.
Probably quite a few, especially overseas copies.
> In a perfect world their ISP’s would cut their connections off, but rather than seeing this as a positive step the Microsoft haters would just start screaming about collusion between ISP’s and the evil Microsoft.
No collusion accusations here -- IMO, it's not the ISP's responsibility, but it could be their option. ISPs are providing a connection service, not a screening/filtering service. I no more want them forcibly held accountable for pirated/viral machine operators, than for machines with MPAA/RIAA file-sharing violators.
Of course, if an ISP -voluntarily- does such screening or filtering, that's their business, and they should put it in the contract their customers sign at hook-up.
> They should learn to focus on the big picture first, and not their fixated disdain for all things MS, who isn't ALWAYS the primary one in the wrong.
Given the need in -all- software to address security flaws, Microsoft sets a high standard. IMO, Microsoft has generally been exemplary about issuing patches. With a few notable exceptions, updates have been timely, readily available, and correct.
IMO, the truly BIG picture is the security-by-design of the software. The better that is, the better the system being patched. In that regard, I hope Microsoft sees the light and (as I mentioned the other day) rewrites Windows as a GUI/apps package over UNIX, as Apple did. But that would require MS eating some crow, so I don't expect it anytime soon.
Here’s the most important difference: 91 out of 100 people will stop at the Microsoft Store whereas 7 out of 100 will stop at Mac Store.
What'cha smoking? Did you bring enough for everybody?
With the exception of the first week, when curiosity will be a factor, I'll wager that the actual number of people per day in a given Microsoft store will be about half the number in the nearby Apple store. Not >10 times. Half.
The reason Microsoft is starting up the stores is to sell the next Zune, or a Microsoft phone, or whatever they try next. Good luck to 'em, it's a free country.
But if you think their marketshare in such devices will reflect their marketshare in personal computers, you're hallucinating and in need of urgent medical attention.
Except in the EU where the EU will ban explorers from its stores allowing only browsers!
I have the beta 7 running as well in 64 bit and all I got to say is...if handled right, it could be a windows 95 revolution all over again. It does not crash and even the
prototype ATI video drivers(from the ATI site) for my 4850hd
card seemed mature right off the bat. I’m running with amd 5400 dual core processor tweaked to 3gigs and 4 gigs of 800 dual channel ddr2 memory. What a performance booster beta 7 is. Microsoft finally has a winner if they can get the security features right!
While I understand there is concern the ISP's might abuse their privilege, I think some verification that systems meet minimum standards of safety before being allowed to connect could, again in a perfect world, be a good thing. This is a totally separate issue as to what they may be carrying on their airwaves, let's use another highway analogy: they need a license on their vehicle, if not inspection sticker, just to legally get on the road. The requirements are put in place not to be draconian, but to ensure the safety of all who travel, and have nothing to do with what they may be carrying, legally or illegally, inside the vehicle once they got on the road. Yes I realize that any sort of regulation can be a slippery slope, but saying none is ever needed whatsoever would be equivalent to saying whatever piece of junk that is capable of poking down the road at 10 MPH simultaneously leaking gas and sparking sparks should be allowed on the Interstate. And if someone needs to regulate internet access somewhat, I'd rather see the ISP's do something proactively than the US government come stick its nose in there to do it later, which is where we're unfortunately eventually headed.
Given the need in -all- software to address security flaws, Microsoft sets a high standard. IMO, Microsoft has generally been exemplary about issuing patches. With a few notable exceptions, updates have been timely, readily available, and correct.
Actually if you look at security vulnerability tracker sites like Secunia what you'll notice is, starting about the time since Vista was released, Microsoft has gotten much better at providing a secure product "out of the box", but their ability to provide security patches for vulnerabilities AFTER they are reported has gotten weaker. For example, Vista has much fewer known holes than XP did at this point in its lifecycle, but it also has more currently unpatched holes than XP did at this point in its lifecycle. Obviously they need to be able to combine the two, provide something fairly secure out of the box, and patch holes as soon as they're reported, which they seem be having trouble doing. Some of this could be the fact that their products are being tested to a much higher standard than other products, and what's listed as unpatched isn't necessarily a practical attack vector, but they still shouldn't be left ignored whatever they are.
I hope Microsoft sees the light and (as I mentioned the other day) rewrites Windows as a GUI/apps package over UNIX, as Apple did.
There's more than enough NIX in the world already in my opinion. And Microsoft will never turn their back on backwards compatibility like many of the NIX companies have at one point in their history, abandoning customers in the process, that's exactly what turned me from being an Apple salesman to being against them back in the mid 80's, and they did it again when OSX came out. I'd much rather see a new next generation O/S than another NIX rehash. Someone will come up with it, it may even already exist, the hard part will be getting the hardware companies to package it up with their product, as existing apps are what drive sales, not "the most secure O/S in history".
Unfortunately the beta they released didn't have the new IE8 that the final release will have, hopefully they'll make it available to users of the current beta through Windows Update. Other than that I like it a lot.
Your analogy is apt, and I think it's a very interesting discussion point. Here's a related thought: I've always felt (as one with good eyesight and reaction time, and a desire to travel quickly when just going point A-B) that driver's licenses should require retesting (like vehicle inspections). Don't let people who can't negotiate fast roads get on 'em. Get some of these doddering, half-blind slowpokes the hell out of my way. ;-)
Anyway, the difficulty is that the internet is essentially a global "roadway", not just USA, or State, or County, or individual business. The appropriate level at which "safety/security" regulations are determined and imposed does not jump out at me -- there seem to be good and bad arguments at all levels. My usual penchant for Federalism suggests state level, but what good is it if my state requires tight security, but a neighboring state is lax? Those neighboring computers are effectively in my network area anyway, just like the ones in China and Romania. Yet I hardly would propose a federal requirement, much less a global one (shudder).
But I agree with you that if one could work that out to some satisfactory level, it would improve things considerably.
> There's more than enough NIX in the world already in my opinion... I'd much rather see a new next generation O/S than another NIX rehash. Someone will come up with it, it may even already exist, the hard part will be getting the hardware companies to package it up with their product, as existing apps are what drive sales, not "the most secure O/S in history".
Your point about app compatibility is indeed good. But in this context I view the underlying OS (not the GUI or apps) much the same way as I see the hardware -- it really shouldn't matter what it is as long as it works properly and supports the GUI and apps stably and securely. We don't bitch about there being "more than enough x86 architecture in the world already"; in fact it's been very convenient for most companies to take the nature of the hardware for granted and concentrate on differentiation elsewhere.
I suggested Microsoft consider Unix for their lower level OS because it's secure, and it's free, and it's accepted by nearly everybody as a good way to do things. But that doesn't mean it's the only way to do things securely, if they're intent on spending huge amounts of R&D reinventing the wheel.
Remember that Microsoft's OS is a historical mishmash of MSDOS (actually, CPM-86), Pascal calls, C calls, intertwined with kernel-level drivers for nearly everything. But long ago in the 80's, UNIX calls and conventions were supported -- in fact most system calls accepted '/' as well as '\' for directory paths for that reason.
Before MSDOS, Microsoft was a Unix company. Restructuring Windows as a GUI + apps over UNIX would in fact be a return to Microsoft's own roots.
But I'll grant your point that a new unlying OS doesn't have to be UNIX. It just has to be designed and written with stability and security in mind, rather than a host of "cool" features at the OS level. Operating systems should be simple, strong, regular, and as transparent as possible. They don't have to derive from UNIX; that's just the easiest way to get there without reinventing the wheel, as Apple demonstrated.
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.