|
I have the feeling than Microsoft is dropping lots of projects lately.
I am thinking of OSLO, WINCE, OLEDB, Silverlight, Visual Studio Install projects, Hotmail, Live Messenger.
I have been hit quite hardly by some of those.
Each time it did upset quite a bit of the customer base.
Is it that recently they have become more financially driven or has it always been like that?
|
|
|
|
|
I see it as nothing more than evolution of whole technology stack.
It will continue over the decades to come.
|
|
|
|
|
In windows, they have supported legacy stuff for a long, long time. They have added new stuff on top, or along side, but the underlying framework/API is usually still supported.
In some ways they are hampered by the requirement to do so. It's not something their competitors face (Android, Apple) and it is something that Linux tends to handle very well.
Perhaps our current expectations of Microsoft are influenced by this history with windows.
Is it sign of new Microsoft focus and is Windows RT is their attempt to break from legacy windows? Is their vision that all client devices end up being RT?
That is a future that scares me - the closed windows platform.
|
|
|
|
|
It's no secret that they would just love to kill Win32 once and for all, but they did not dare to do so yet. It would probably be even more disruptive than killing DOS and 16 bit Windows many years ago. But they have done it before and their behavior leaves little doubt that they are going to do it again. The really sad thing is, that the .Net framework was once intended to insulate us from the underlying OS API and now we need insulation from their constant changes in the framework as well.
|
|
|
|
|
If they kill Win32 - I'm betting you'll see a mass migration/ports to Wine.
|
|
|
|
|
Never tried it. Does it work well?
|
|
|
|
|
I haven't looked at it for a couple of years now - so I'm not sure how it's held up or the progress.
|
|
|
|
|
If I know Microsoft well, they will first create a mapping layer that will translate Win32 calls to the new architecture for backwards compatibility's sake.
Then, once legacy Win32 application are history, Win32 will be killed.
To alcohol! The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems - Homer Simpson
----
Our heads are round so our thoughts can change direction - Francis Picabia
|
|
|
|
|
IMO it is a sign of two things:
1. They had a very bad architeture with Windows
2. They haven't learned anything
The bad architeture of Windows is IMO responsible for lots of their APIs being tied into the guts of the OS, causing all sorts of problems, not just problems with maintaining an API over various generations of a product.
The fact that they haven't evolved a minimalist, modular architecture, where various APIs aren't built into the OS anymore, but stay on top of a small number of high level abstractions is what tells me they haven't learned anything.
Bottom line is they'll continue to introduce new APIs, deprecate them after just a few years, and annoy programmers. That's one of the reasons why I don't like programming to Windows/microsoft APIs - if I take a break of half a year, chances are I'll need to learn a new API.
|
|
|
|
|
Florin Jurcovici wrote: a minimalist, modular architecture, where various APIs aren't built into the OS anymore, but stay on top of a small number of high level abstractions is what tells me they haven't learned anything.
Hi Florin, I am very curious to know if you think there is an operating system today (or, in the past) whose architecture matches what you described ?
This is a "sincere" question, and, I am not asking this to, in any way, "challenge" you, or deprecate your opinions.
thanks, Bill
~
Confused by Windows 8 ? This may help: [ ^] !
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Pascal,
I don't doubt the accuracy of your statements, but I wonder what specifically gave you this "feeling" today.
You might have mentioned the recent demise of WPF; although there are different ways of looking at that: including the view that WPF has not become "extinct," but is "reincarnated" by newer Win 8 facilities/dev tools, while WPF's "skeleton," XAML, is central to the new order of things post-Win 7.
OSLO, I think, was always a technology initiative, and "probe;" did it ever "bear fruit," for SQL Server's current and future versions ? Was it ever of actual value in your software projects/products ?
Visual Studio Install projects, Web Deployment, etc. are taking new forms in Visual Studio 2012, I read. Would I like the ability to do incremental, and/or automatic, bug fixes, upgrades, and service-packs based in the Cloud: yes: is that where dev tools post Win are headed ? I hope so.
Looks like HotMail is going to become part of a multi-headed beast in Win 8's future, integrated with Messenger, and Skype ?
I do have empathy for you and other developers whose incomes and lives have been disrupted by changes in languages, tools, key inter-operation API's, but isn't that the way it has always been, and always will be, in an industry where the pace of software tools and facilities for developers can barely keep up with the pace of hardware innovation ?
Personally, I'm still "hanging-on" to WinForms, which I think will last me a while, given my current (lack of) software development activities.
If only, instead of WPF, MS could have ramped-up the graphic-model in WinForms, implemented some combination of the letters "M," "V," and "C," there, improved the facilities for binding between objects. But, isn't it typical of the software business that the "Titans" (Apple, MS, even Adobe) are always in a feature race, and always want to make the "next great thing," rather than do a valve-job, and restoration, on the ancient jalopies, no matter how widely they are used ?
And, from the "cup is half-full" viewpoint, isn't the integration of JavaScript and jQuery into Visual Studio 2012, and its evolution rather awesome ?
best, Bill
~
Confused by Windows 8 ? This may help: [ ^] !
|
|
|
|
|
BillWoodruff wrote: I do have empathy for you and other developers whose incomes and lives have been
disrupted by changes in languages, tools, key inter-operation API's, but isn't
that the way it has always been, and always will be, in an industry where the
pace of software tools and facilities for developers can barely keep up with the
pace of hardware innovation ?
Strange. I still do the same thing I have been doing since 1978: Fill a computer's memory with machine code instructions and make it execute them. To do that, I need a stable basis, ne it an OS API or something like the .Net framework. And let's be honest, how many of those changes were intended to shepherd us into going along with their grand plans and not forced by fundamental technical requirements? I would say about all of them.
BillWoodruff wrote: And, from the "cup is half-full" viewpoint, isn't the integration of JavaScript
and jQuery into Visual Studio 2012, and its evolution rather awesome ?
Call me conservative, but those things should go to the Code Horrors, not into Visual Studio.
|
|
|
|
|
CDP1802 wrote: And let's be honest, how many of those changes were intended to shepherd us into
going along with their grand plans and not forced by fundamental technical
requirements?
Exactly which technological environment were you fostered in which that did not occur?
Certainly has been the case for years at Microsoft, Apple and various commercial unixes.
I would say it is likely the case in most open source stuff since it is primarily the subjective predilections that drive the direction of innovation of such projects.
And it is certainly the way I write code. I write for the market place and not my own idealized preferences.
|
|
|
|
|
jschell wrote: And it is certainly the way I write code. I write for the market place and not
my own idealized preferences.
My greatest preference is to write code that can be used again. Thanks to Microsoft I spend more and more time rewriting and adapting existing code. I can think of better things to do and my time is to precious for such games. Much less would I even think of trying to run any kind of business under such conditions. The only hope may be that your market place will reflect this, but even then I would not put much trust in Microsoft anymore.
|
|
|
|
|
Lol, if only my business environment move as slow as Microsoft. I agree the constant retooling is annoying. Oddly enough they usually have good timing; right when some monolithic monster is collapsing under the weight of constant voracious change requests. The new feature set can be a good business case to upgrade to a version 2 (aka a rewrite).
|
|
|
|
|
CDP1802 wrote: Strange. I still do the same thing I have been doing since 1978: Fill a computer's memory with machine code instructions and make it execute them.
Hi CDP1802, Reading these words I fantasize someone is interviewing Van Gogh, out in the fields of Arles, as he paints:
"Monsieur Van Gogh, can you tell me what led to your use of vivid, swirling, vertically raised-high-off-the-canvas, patterns, in your painting style ?"
Van Gogh: "I don't know what you are talking about; all I do is put a brush in some color, and touch it to a canvas. C'est cas."
best, Bill
~
Confused by Windows 8 ? This may help: [ ^] !
|
|
|
|
|
BillWoodruff wrote: Personally, I'm still "hanging-on" to WinForms, which I think will last me a while, given my current (lack of) software development activities.
I resemble that remark! 
I have installed Win8 onto my primary machine and am studying Metro development (XAML) but I'm anything but convinced that I'll ultimately go in that direction. I am, frankly, beginning to tire of all this constant retooling.
BillWoodruff wrote:
If only, instead of WPF, MS could have ramped-up the graphic-model in WinForms, implemented some combination of the letters "M," "V," and "C," there, improved the facilities for binding between objects. But, isn't it typical of the software business that the "Titans" (Apple, MS, even Adobe) are always in a feature race, and always want to make the "next great thing," rather than do a valve-job, and restoration, on the ancient jalopies, no matter how widely they are used ?
We can dream, can't we?
Still ... our Winforms expertise isn't going to become irrelevant for quite some time. No, we may not be out on the "bleeding edge" but, OTOH, a nice quiet job keeping a legacy system running isn't bad either. I'm keeping a system going that pays millions of people a paycheck. I'm not extremely busy but I'm paid well to do it and it's nice to know it's needed.
-CB 
|
|
|
|
|
Pascal Ganaye wrote: Is it that recently they have become more financially driven or has it always
been like that?
They have always been like that. Remember the times when they decided that we all should move on to Win32 and killed DOS and 16 bit Windows? At least it took them a few years back then and they did not change their minds now and then. All they did since Vista was just trial and error without much of a plan behind it. If Windows 8 (hopefully) turns out to be a failure, they will quickly jump in yet another direction. That's why I don't intend to bet any time, effort or money on them anymore.
|
|
|
|
|
I can see why you would get upset about most of them but Live Messenger?
Don't tell me you didn't see that one coming?
The moment they bought Skype it was obvious that one of the 2 would have to go (why maintain and support 2 chat programs) and the fact that they keep Skype is only natural since skype has a paying service (and more members I think).
Anyway that's the progress of software I guess, new stuff replaces old stuff and sometimes new stuff just doesn't cut it and gets phased out quickly.
The last couple years I find that it's no longer learning the new stuff that comes out but also trying to identify what is actually worth learning as to not lose time on some new shiny software only to find that by the time you actually know it well enough to use it, it has been dropped.
Anyway back to work for me
|
|
|
|
|
It's a giant auto-scrolling platformer.
You can keep jumping onto newer MicroSoft products and never have enough time to do any real software development, or you can take time and find yourself below the screen after a while.
So you lose either way. Thanks, MicroSoft.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm still pretty upset about the whole Bob thing.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes! I forgot Bob
Really miss him and the paper clip too.
|
|
|
|
|
Like most companies, only a few of Microsoft's product lines are profitable. Like most companies, Microsoft doesn't like spending money on things that don't generate a profit and thus tinker with them (and change the name to pretend they did more), change them into something else entirely (sometimes keeping the name) or drop them. Unfortunately, there are products, such as CE, which could have been profitable had they not been so badly bungled. Likewise, there are some products that worked just fine and already had sunk costs, which are cancelled, generally due to a lack of vision of those in charge. The worse for me are products which are just fine, but companies change them anyway (like when food companies change the recipes of successful products.)
|
|
|
|
|
And yet FrontPage lives on under a different name!
modified 20-Oct-19 21:02pm.
|
|
|
|
|
It's the wind of changes... i believe they're trying to get a hold in some emerging markets (Surface, cough, Windows Phone 8, cough) and supporting old stuff, will distract them from that purpose  , what i personally dislike is that having the opportunity to have one plataform (WinRT or the .NET Framework) to support all their plataforms (Windows 8, Phone, Xbox, whatever), they just simply play with several variants that are akin but not alike.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
