ONE OF THE MOST understated and overall user and system integrator friendly bits of chatter at Microsoft's Worldwide Partner Conference yesterday was Microsoft CFO Tami Reller's statement on Windows 8 requirements, or more to the point, the focus on keeping hardware requirements under control.
During this speech, Reller pointed out one shocking piece of highly-quotable information, saying, "In both of our Windows 8 previews, we talked about continuing on with the important trend that we started with Windows 7, keeping system requirements either flat or reducing them over time."
Now, please re-read the last four words in that sentence. It's win-win.
This announcement by the Microsoft VP says a lot about what Windows 8 is and what Microsoft is trying to achieve. While knowing that Windows 8 will run on the same hardware as Windows 7 is great for early adopters, both upgraders and system integrators, it has to be a historic first for the company when it announces that the OS will be available for a wider range of hardware and, in fact, will become slimmer over time.
By far, the most believable implication of this is that Microsoft will release several versions of Windows 8 that will fit the bill on all sorts of hardware, but Reller then added, "And, we've also built intelligence into Windows 8 so that it can adapt to the user experience based on the hardware of the user." This doesn't sound as plain as going into Advanced System Settings and checking off a few boxes to disable eye-candy. You don't build in intelligence for that.
It does, however, sound like the next Microsoft PC operating system (OS) will have a hardware evaluation feature that will install the OS to the hardware specifications of the machine it's on. This is integrator and consumer bliss. If realised, it will also allow Microsoft to move into new, uncharted territory, without having to peel huge layers of code from the OS to have it run on lighter weight hardware. Ideally, the same copy of Windows 8 would be able to install itself on the lightest of tablets or on the most powerful workstations, and keep the same level of core functionality without feeling like you're wading in a tar-pit.
The fact is the world has been dancing to the tune of Microsoft's hardware requirements forever, really, with each successive edition of the Windows OS piling on more resource requirements at an abusively high rate - up until Windows 7, at least - and consequently favouring the hardware manufacturers' product lifecycle plans. While in the short term this will help get as many people on board with Windows 8, across all levels of computing, it will require that system integrators scrap their marketing plans altogether, and maybe that's why Reller also announced a new event called "Build".
Build will be Microsoft's 'workshop' on how to develop modern hardware and software for the new Windows OS and future developments, mostly to help developers on the new tactile interface and how to develops Apps for Windows 8.
The reality of it all will be somewhere in-between multiple versions of the OS versus an intelligent install of the OS that matches the computer's or device's specifications, we're sure, but the simple idea of having a Microsoft OS adapt itself to the hardware that's installed, instead of just imposing its bulk onto the PC no matter what, seems to be a fresh approach from the software giant. µ
Tags: Software
Windows 7 is a lot more than 'rebranded Vista'. You shoud do some research before putting your foot in your mouth. Start here: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/e7/
FYI Microsoft support each OS version for about ten years. Hardly unreasonable.
Why comment on something if you don't have a clue about it? You just make yourself look very stupid.
"Buy Windows 8! Your PC isn't good enough to run it, but it will be when we release Service Pack 1/2/3."
Oh come on, do we look like idiots? (Okay, some of us look like idiots.)
To the extent that Windows 7 isn't another step forward in using more and more computer resources, it's because it's just Windows Vista rebranded to not be Windows Vista.
Other than that, defining a new release of Windows only serves to limit the length of time that Microsoft needs to support people using the previous version that they paid for without excessive uncorrected defects - "freeloaders" as we're called. And the day that support is terminated, they also announce that due to a bug that they aren't going to fix on that version, your geriatric Windows mchine has all along been vulnerable to data loss and release if an attacker Looks At You Funny.
In Windows 98, or maybe 95, it was a malformed JPEG image that would cause your beloved old PC to betray you. Another time, I think it was to be a malicious WordPad document. Whatever. Like cattle, it's legally necessary to shoot your PC in the head when it's three years old.
Somehow they were compelled to keep XP around for longer (because Vista... well, I thought Vista wasn't so bad, actually), but XP's days are numbered like Anne Boleyn's, or the Arabian Nights lady - a thousand days and counting.
It's hard NOT to improve when you have Microsoft's legacy of disasters and resource hogs.
I don't think Microsoft has turned over a new leaf in software design strategy, rather there is simply no bloatware left to be invented and jammed into the Windows ecosystem. Of course, the fact that Microsoft has been so completely outflanked in the mobile space has finally begun to sink into its thick, thick skull, and now it may start behaving as if it actually has some competition in the marketplace.
While low hardware requirements is a good thing, there is always the danger of bad
performance and/or inferior user experience.Take a look at the hardware
requirements of a cheap DX 11 graphics card from AMD.Exactly 1GHz.And that is only for the graphics card.What about the rest of the hardware? And what about the apps? Businesses may be happy because they will save a lot of money but the rest of us will most likely
have a bad experience.And that will keep
most users from upgrading.
The whole article is premised on NOT believing M$. It's not "enthusiastic", it's mocking.
Paul Taylor has been writing here for years. Not a new guy.
I think he couldn't diss Microsoft because this time they're actually doing the right thing...
He must be knew.. and the others didn't lobotomize him yet. There's not one diss at Microsoft. Not one! An enthusiastic article without sarcasm. What joy! Promote him!