Pretty Apple inspired though; as someone said in the comments above maybe Microsoft does need to have separate public entities much like the way telecomms up here in Canada are doing (Koodo/Wind etc.)
The Next Microsoft
51–60 of 355 posts
Re: The Next Microsoft
#52I can look at new symbols all day, and it's not going to change my opinion of Microsoft or their products. Not one whit.
And not that it matters, but I think the slash is too stark, and, frankly, ugly. It might be liked in some boardroom, but it's not consumer friendly, and it's nothing like the touch-feely trend that is the metro interface.
Re: The Next Microsoft
#53[deleted]
What is so wrong with Windows? Seriously. It's not perfect, but I'm yet to find an OS that is.
Others - you can't use select(..) on files. Nasty file-locking model. No good remote filesystem solution out of the box (CIFS is slow and unstable) and the third party solutions are nasty. No native workspaces and the third party attempts are nasty. You can't reflect against the system API (all current mainstream OSs suffer from this). The API is particularly thick with legacy overhead.
Re: The Next Microsoft
#54Re: The Next Microsoft
#55Re: The Next Microsoft
#56Re: The Next Microsoft
#57Re: The Next Microsoft
#58Re: The Next Microsoft
#59It's pretty good, but it's a bit cold, impersonal and corporate. Almost alienating. It has a masculine minimalist bent that reminds me of hard stone floors, benches and the alienation of 2001: A Space Odyssey.
Re: The Next Microsoft
#60This is great. It will never work. A brand has to reflect the culture of how a product is made, sold, experienced, etc... Microsoft is not about simplicity, it's about feature creep. Microsoft sells software and licenses to big companies. Big companies don't want simple, they want value for their money - features! A better brand promise would be Microsoft - It Does Everything! Look at Windows 8. Is it going metro onl…
That's an interesting perspective that I'd never considered before. If you're right, and you sound it, then Microsoft clearly has an internal struggle. Metro is all about simple. It's fast, it's fluid, it's simple, it's "alive with activity". But it's not complex, packed with features. This is the image Microsoft wants to present to consumers. On the other hand, Microsoft's Business division is all about things packe…
I suppose the different versions of Vista and 7 speak to them re-exploring this business-consumer partitioning. I don't have the information to comment on how effective this split was for Microsoft.