« It only takes two to ping-pong | Main | Cheezubaagaa kudasai »
October 28, 2006
Desperately Seeking Enabling App for Vista
Reading a recent blog entry about how several developers are RSN (Real Soon Now) going to deliver "the best Windows application ever", I got to musing how we've chosen our PCs and upgraded over the years. And still can't see what real or imagined app is set to Enable Windows Vista.
Way back in the old days, it was the Apple ][. Why did the Apple ][ succeed you ask? Was it the first real home PC? It was. Was it the CGA (or worse) colour games? It was. The crunch that enabled it, however, was Visicalc. I remember a fellow civil engineer waited for computers to be supplied by the office, but could not wait any longer, so he brought his own Apple ][ to office, just for Visicalc.
Then, we drifted to CPM/80. Remember that? Wordstar, dBase II, Supercalc (or even Multiplan) were the reasons we went there. If you remember dBase II reading / writing on 143k floppy disks and double sided meant you took the disk out, punched a hole on the other edge and inserted it, you'll remember the agony of the Apple II floppies. Still, they were enabling.
Why did we go MS-DOS and the IBM-PC. Surely one primary answer - Lotus 1-2-3, followed by Word Perfect 5.1, dBase III. And the gee-whiz 10Mb hard disk.
Windows 3.1? We wanted Excel, Word. More importantly, Windows 3.1 motivated full page-at-once laser printers (or was it the other way around). We wanted to move on from mono-spaced font to proportional font and grab some of that modern layout look.
Windows 95? Well, you see Windows 3.1 kept dying and the screen display, (do you remember 640x480 pixels) was a bit on the sparse side? "Not many cells on a spreadsheet, see you can", Yoda would say.
Then Windows 98 - An evolution of Windows 98, but a whole host of technical improvements, USB support, established FAT32 support. But it wasn't a night and day impact. More importantly, it was not markedly expensive or markedly demanding of hardware upgrades - if your machine ran Windows 95 well, Windows 98 was ok. And you know what they say about Microsoft software - it takes them three attempts to get it right?
Windows NT 4 -> Windows 2000 -> Windows XP? Same deal. Three attempts.
And so we come to Windows Vista. What does it have? Well, a big ticket price. Unless they discount a lot.
It could have had a new file system (WinFS) with metadata and database sub-system. It doesn't - it still uses classic indexing of files.
It could have had XAML and Windows Presentation Foundation with all those XML things. But it doesn't. Aah, thanks to Stephen for the correction, WPF *will* be part of Vista. But it appears to be also available for Windows XP and Server 2003 - so will the Vista experience be unique enough?
It has SyncManager - to improve on the notorious ActiveSync for PocketPC / Windows Mobile. That'll do mobile phones too. That might help GTD fans. Only.
It does have the Windows sidebar (hey, but we had that in IE 4 / Windows 98).
Not all versions of Vista will fly with Aero. So you won't be able to Alt+Tab like a pack of cards shuffled sideways. Like huh?
Ok, it has Enhanced Security? Big Beef since Microsoft has an incredibly, nearly indelible bad image in that area - even amongst the general public. If you use Ubuntu, you'll note that there are huge lists of updates queued to install from time to time. But Linux hasn't got anything near the bad image. But looking through the eyes of home users, how does UAC (User Access Control) blocking nearly every worthwhile move (making Vista, Ubuntu like) endear Vista to them?
So there you go. I'll keep searching for a cause.
Posted by Anandasim at October 28, 2006 11:05 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://bleedingedge.com.au/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1106
Comments
Umm...
what happened to NT3.51???
How does it fit into Microsoft's three attempts to get it right?
I had to switch to Windows NT3.51 as Microsoft's other offerings were too unstable for serious CAD work. Unless you didn't mind rebooting several times per day.
Posted by: stretch at October 28, 2006 11:30 AM
NT 3.51? Aah. Memories. Truth be told, there was NT 3.1 as well. The more everyone forgets about versions of NT prior to 4.0, the better. I think the pre-4.0 versions were very robust and secure because the code base was small, new, unextended. They secured everywhere. Then Microsoft found that even if people say they want a secured system, they don't / can't actually use such a brick. For a comprehensive vista of Windows versions have a look at this Wikipedia entry
Posted by: anandasim
at October 28, 2006 11:55 AM
It could have had XAML and Windows Presentation Foundation with all those XML things. But it doesn't.
Oh YES IT DOES.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUBOQFvh6yI
Watch it in full screen... It showcases many of the available WPF and XAML things going around...
And XAML is amazing.... WPF is simply stunning...
I litterally have the NYTimes reader on screen and loaded 24x7....
Posted by: Stephen
at October 28, 2006 04:44 PM
Thanks Stephen for the wakeup on WPF. I had a look at the video - it looks so much like an MTV cut. I've updated the blog article.
Posted by: anandasim
at October 28, 2006 07:56 PM

