Dear Microsoft: too complex, MSDN, VS,Vista and so on... | The Coffeehouse

figuerres
???

Hey I really Hope this gets at least a bit of the right read.

I generaly have liked working with MSFT tools and people.

a few things that bug me:

Product names: Please let's kill the Microsoft [ten words here] naming of everything.

Developer side: MSDN and all that -- Visual STudio, and MSDN have become like a giant complex and seem to be getting worse.
less versions / SKUs would be IMHO better for the overall system.
MSDN subs have gotten nuts and same with VS sku's the xpress thing is good, but VS Pro (Pro,Team 1,2,3,4,SQL, whatever) is too many. and now it looks like part of that was in VS is now in Expression bits... Hmmm... more branches on the tree to deal with.

OS: Vista Home,Baisc,Ultimate, and x other flavors ... really it IMHO should have just been "VISTA" and when you install it you get to pick a "Profile" like:

Home User (basic)
Business User
Media user
Everything (Ultimate)
Custom (pick and chose)

MSFT: complexity is a sure way to create problems, start simplifing things....

More and more I find my self wondering if MSFT will become what some critics say it is .... cause it does seem like things have grown to big and to complex in MSFT ....

just some thoughts from the trenches...

joem83
Heading toward the future. IE8, Vista, Office12, Zune 2.0

For US we have the same about of version as we had with XP. Would you expect the user to pay more for Ultimate then for basic or should all the prices be the same? Since Europe forced MSFT to make an N version which no one wants, and Starter edition for emerging markets and to curb theft.

figuerres wrote:
Hey I really Hope this gets at least a bit of the right read.
OS: Vista Home,Baisc,Ultimate, and x other flavors ... really it IMHO should have just been "VISTA" and when you install it you get to pick a "Profile" like:

Home User (basic)
Business User
Media user
Everything (Ultimate)
Custom (pick and chose)

MSFT: complexity is a sure way to create problems, start simplifing things....

More and more I find my self wondering if MSFT will become what some critics say it is .... cause it does seem like things have grown to big and to complex in MSFT ....

just some thoughts from the trenches...

BryanF

Honestly, I thought the different editions of XP were much more intuitive. If you were a home user, chance are Home would be just fine for you; for business users, Professional. If you wanted a special type of PC, get the appropriate version--Tablet or Media Center. It wasn't perfect by any stretch, but approachable.

While it makes sense that tablet and media center should enjoy broader adoption in the Vista timeframe, Figuerres is bascially right in that what they came up with is too complicated. I would go further and say there shouldn't even be profiles--your Vista experience should be a function of your hardware.

With Win98, all you needed to know was from which previous versions you could upgrade. Now you need to know what version of XP can upgrade to which version of Vista, and since most the versions are described with nonsense words like "basic", "premium", or "ultimate", it isn't immediately obvious which version is appropriate for you. For example, Ultimate is supposedly targeted towards those who want business and full home functionality, but Extras includes things that could just as well be of interest to someone who wants one but not the other (e.g., Texas Hold'em, BitLocker managment).

This has come up before, but it still bothers me because it's spinned as "meeting various customer scenarios". But Vista Ultimate only fulfills needs insofar as lesser versions create them. As has been said by others before, to most people, the OS is the plumbing/sewer which no one wants to think about. It would be far better to have a single version under the assumption that people would use all the features--in terms of modern disk space it's not a huge burden.

My guess is that people will either go with the default with their hardware (usually Home Premium) or play it safe and get the Ultimate, and then Microsoft's press department will declare the scheme a huge success. I respect Microsoft's need to grow profits, but it bothers me when they look to marketing shell games rather than new frontiers.

</rant>

EDIT: Starter is an exception--from what I've heard about the product it seems that an extra effort has been made to make Windows accessible to those who are likely first-time PC owners; it also makes sense from a risk perspective given that a lot of the target markets are high piracy areas. Also, the EU and Korean versions really aren't a matter of debate per se.

figuerres
???

BryanF wrote:
Honestly, I thought the different editions of XP were much more intuitive. If you were a home user, chance are Home would be just fine for you; for business users, Professional. If you wanted a special type of PC, get the appropriate version--Tablet or Media Center. It wasn't perfect by any stretch, but approachable.

While it makes sense that tablet and media center should enjoy broader adoption in the Vista timeframe, Figuerres is bascially right in that what they came up with is too complicated. I would go further and say there shouldn't even be profiles--your Vista experience should be a function of your hardware.

With Win98, all you needed to know was from which previous versions you could upgrade. Now you need to know what version of XP can upgrade to which version of Vista, and since most the versions are described with nonsense words like "basic", "premium", or "ultimate", it isn't immediately obvious which version is appropriate for you. For example, Ultimate is supposedly targeted towards those who want business and full home functionality, but Extras includes things that could just as well be of interest to someone who wants one but not the other (e.g., Texas Hold'em, BitLocker managment).

This has come up before, but it still bothers me because it's spinned as "meeting various customer scenarios". But Vista Ultimate only fulfills needs insofar as lesser versions create them. As has been said by others before, to most people, the OS is the plumbing/sewer which no one wants to think about. It would be far better to have a single version under the assumption that people would use all the features--in terms of modern disk space it's not a huge burden.

My guess is that people will either go with the default with their hardware (usually Home Premium) or play it safe and get the Ultimate, and then Microsoft's press department will declare the scheme a huge success. I respect Microsoft's need to grow profits, but it bothers me when they look to marketing shell games rather than new frontiers.

</rant>

EDIT: Starter is an exception--from what I've heard about the product it seems that an extra effort has been made to make Windows accessible to those who are likely first-time PC owners; it also makes sense from a risk perspective given that a lot of the target markets are high piracy areas. Also, the EU and Korean versions really aren't a matter of debate per se.

and it's my understanding that a vista install disk has all the bits on it for all the "retail" versions, and you can "buy an upgrade" which just gives you a new code to enter to "unlock" other bits.

so they did make one disk.....

I recall a few years back doing installs with RedHatLinux where it had some "standard" installs like "network server", "workstation" and so on that you could pick or you could select "Everything"
and you could always install stuff later.

seems like that would be a nice way to load Vista....
(with a few tweaks)

and yeah with pc's pre-loaded with an OS the Mfg could pick a set and many users would just ran that.... while others could load the rest if they wanted it.

sure I can see some things like a stripped down "starter" version for some folks..... just that the main line has to many branches.