Windows 8 will be Microsoft's 'riskiest product bet' • Hacker News Board

   1985:      Windows 1.0
   1987:      Windows 2.0
   1990:      Windows 3.0
  (1992:      Windows 3.1)
   1995:      Windows 95
   1998:      Windows 98
  (2000:      Windows ME)
   2001:      Windows XP
   2006/2007: Windows Vista
   2009:      Windows 7
   2012:      Windows 8

Nothing out of the ordinary.

Re: Windows 8 will be Microsoft's 'riskiest product bet'

#14

Post by jsz0 » Sat, Oct 23, 2010, 8:57 PM UTC

Risky in a legal sense maybe? It seems to me Microsoft has been really trigger shy about pushing forward on integrating all their various services and non-PC products closely with Windows due to their past problems with DOJ/EU. I feel like if they made a big push to integrate things like Zune Pass, Xbox Live integration, Windows Phone, cloud services, Bing search/maps, etc they would have a much more compelling platform. All their competitors are doing it so maybe they now have the cover they need with the DOJ/EU to wrap everything together.

Re: Windows 8 will be Microsoft's 'riskiest product bet'

#15

Post by mikepurvis » Sat, Oct 23, 2010, 11:22 PM UTC

I dunno. I'm kind of having a flashback to the 2003 Longhorn video. Wasn't that kind of the same message, promising all the risky and exciting things that were in a release mere months away?

Re: Windows 8 will be Microsoft's 'riskiest product bet'

#16

Post by raganwald » Sun, Oct 24, 2010, 1:15 AM UTC

Keyframe wrote: post #9

levesque wrote: post #2

Off topic: Is Steve Ballmer supposed to be a good speaker? He sounds arrogant to me.

He's a party dude at college that everybody knows. Eccentric and likable. Impulsive, yet benign (I don't want to say simple on purpose).

As a foreigner unfamiliar with US fraternity culture, may I ask: How does he differ from George W. Bush in that respect?

Re: Windows 8 will be Microsoft's 'riskiest product bet'

#17

Post by zsouthboy » Sun, Oct 24, 2010, 1:35 AM UTC

Ocho-Bits wrote: post #12

okeumeni wrote: post #3

Why Windows 8 we have barely used 7?

Windows usually has a three year cicle. Vista stopped this mostly because of the development hell that it was.

My favorite part is where they threw it all out, reset to 2003 codebase, and started from scratch basically, 18ish months before release.[1]

So from a technical standpoint, Vista took longer [5 years] and had less development time [under 2 years] actually make it into the product. (Yes, code they already had they could and did reincorporate into the final product, but still, wow.)

[1] http://blogs.msdn.com/b/michkap/archive/2005/10/16/481625.as...

This post is full of snark by the way, but it is useful to know what went wrong with Vista. (TL;DR: Management of very large software development is _hard_)

Re: Windows 8 will be Microsoft's 'riskiest product bet'

#18

Post by marcamillion » Sun, Oct 24, 2010, 2:12 AM UTC

Hrmm...people still listen to Balmer? As far as I am concerned, Microsoft would be in the exact same position today (or maybe even better off) if there was no one in top spot.

It has become a well-oiled machine that can just continue churning out Windows & Office versions.

There will be no one to drive new product innovation, granted, but there is no one there right now either.

Re: Windows 8 will be Microsoft's 'riskiest product bet'

#19

Post by mahmud » Sun, Oct 24, 2010, 3:21 AM UTC

raganwald wrote: post #16

Keyframe wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's a party dude at college that everybody knows. Eccentric and likable. Impulsive, yet benign (I don't want to say simple on purpose).

As a foreigner unfamiliar with US fraternity culture, may I ask: How does he differ from George W. Bush in that respect?

Ballmer is competent enough to manage a gas station.

Re: Windows 8 will be Microsoft's 'riskiest product bet'

#20

Post by Keyframe » Sun, Oct 24, 2010, 3:39 AM UTC

raganwald wrote: post #16

Keyframe wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's a party dude at college that everybody knows. Eccentric and likable. Impulsive, yet benign (I don't want to say simple on purpose).

As a foreigner unfamiliar with US fraternity culture, may I ask: How does he differ from George W. Bush in that respect?

I'm not from US either - replace college with school, college. And to answer your question, it doesn't differ, personality-wise.