Friday, April 4, 2008

Why Microsoft fails: 32 bit OS'

Windows XP is an awesome OS. After all the patchwork and upgrades they've done to it over the last 7 years, its a very stable and efficient operating system.

And then Vista came along, and it's supposedly going to be this new great thing.... Except for it isn't, because its exactly the same as XP, with a few new features, and all the same limitations, read it's 32 bit. So now the OS takes 1.5 gigs of ram to run acceptably smoothly, but still has the 3.x gb memory limit, page file limitations, etc, of a 32 bit OS.

And now they're working on Windows 7, which (to my understanding at least) will not be backwards compatible with previous windows software..... and they're still going to release a 32 bit version!?

With the gaining feasability of massive terabyte-sized SSD's, RAM prices dropping like a brick, and 64 bit quad-core processors, modern technology is leaving Microsoft in the dust.

This is not to say that Microsoft doesn't have any 64 bit OS, I'm using windows XP x64 edition, and am absolutely loving it, however they seem to have this philosophy that they NEED 32 bit OS'. Why? Why are they distributing en-masse the newest and most powerful computers seen on home desktops... with already out-of date software? And don't say compatibility, as x64 editions can run 95% of all 32 bit software.... and yet they have an opportunity for a fresh start with Windows 7 and STILL not making the switch?

Either they know something the rest of us don't, or there must be something in the Water over there in Redmond.

1 comment:

Jeff Zundel said...

When the world ends in 2012, you'll understand. Microsoft is just conserving its energy for the big Y2K12 bug -- also known as the apocalypse.

Seriously, though. Microsoft might start paying attention more if MAC OS and the various Linux distros start applying the pressure. It's the same sort of pressure as what stimulated IE development, after years of complacency. It's not criticism from users or the press that will do it; it's competition.

The people who run Microsoft aren't stupid, despite the general consensus to the contrary. It costs a ton to build an app from the ground up, and until there is somebody else infringing (significantly) on Microsoft's market share, why should they go to all the effort.

This isn't IBM we're talking about, after all.