Ask HN: What do you want to tell Microsoft?

1) might hurt you more than it helps. Firefox is on Windows and Mac, and unfortunately you cannot assume that what works on one will work on the other. Same with Flash. The only way to really test what your site looks like on an OS/Browser is to just get a comp running it.

Maybe I am mistaken but wasn't windows phone there before iPhone, MSN search before Google? The same argument can be also applied to other companies. There's Googles iPhone, Google's Facebook, Google's Windows, Google's Office and what not. I personally don't think its bad to compete on those fronts. The technology is changing and so companies have to adapt to these changes. I don't really see them going after every hot trend. They are just making their offerings more complete.

Windows needs proper package management. Having each application be responsible for its own installation, uninstallation[0] and updates is so last millennium.

Debian and its derivatives have done a good job of it in the Linux world, though they haven't done as well as they could at convincing third-parties to integrate. Google Chrome is an example of how to do integration right: the download is a .deb, and installing it adds Chrome's repository, so you get automatic updates through apt. A repository containing almost every library dependency that's likely to show up along with automatic dependency resolution and updates makes life better for both users and developers.

MS could provide similar functionality for Windows. The lack of an (almost) everything is open source culture on Windows would, of course make some things harder, but it's also a huge opportunity for MS: they could integrate an app store. How best to run an app store is still being explored, but here's what I'd do if I were in charge of such a project at MS:

* Make the standardized packaging format very preferable. Make the tools for creating packages open-source and easy to use. Make the question asked of the user clear and friendly ("Do you want to install Foo app from Bar company?", not "This requires administrative privileges..."). Make verifying your identity as a developer to sign apps with a MS-issued key free and easy.

* Allow side channels: packages installed by other means could add their own repository and use the central update mechanism. Allow them to hook in to the payment mechanism too, otherwise we'll see annoying in-app payments.

* Avoid any attempt to lock in developers to your store as the sales channel: developers will prefer it because users will prefer it. If users don't prefer it, make it better.

* Allow anything non-malicious, but tag things that would offend a large percentage of users. Hide those by default.

[0] Yes, there's a centralized UI for uninstalling well-behaved applications, but that's not the point

Microsoft enabled competition in the PC market when introducing DOS. It's something like Google is doing today with Android in the smartphone market. I would like Microsoft to do that again. Today's Microsoft products are designed to vendor-lock-in the users, instead of liberating them.

Microsoft limits user freedom not only regarding its own products, but also adding DRM to its OS, for example DVD zones.

Vendor lock-in and DRM are the main reasons why I won't use Windows unless it's in a virtual machine. I don't want the OS I use to limit my freedom.

Bring back the courier. I'm not usually an early adopter of hardware but if you made it work like the demo vids, I'd buy it on day 1.