End of an era?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7540282.stm

Interesting turn of events (not unexpected).

Looks like windows as we know it -might- be dropped altogether in favor of a more virtual remote service rather than a localised system tied to the PC. Ive herd of this Midori before and assumed it was MS's emergency plan for the time when the hold on the market started slipping too much.

It will certainly take the "Personal" out of PC.

A few years away yet i suspect.

Microsoft will end Windows with their own hands like they do to DOS probably, but it's only a possibility.

Let's wait and see what'll happen.

People that use their computer only for surfing and email, would be better off using cut down operating systems like this, but I think most of us heavy users prefer fully standalone computers. I'd get outraged if I couldn't use my computer or some application just because network connection is down.

I can see the benefits of this for companies with large secure internal networks. Virtualisation is already being used in server environments so why not workstations too. It's funny how computer world is going in circles. It was about 20 years ago when dummy terminals were abandoned and now we are heading in that direction again.

That was a bloody annoying read, how many times did that article say "he said"? at least they finished off with a bit of variety :/

It's inevitable. Chances are Microsoft are going to screw it up big time tho'. I wonder if Google have something similar in the pipeline?

Yes, It appears to be a reporter these days you only need to study english as a multiple choice exam. I heard an english CNN reporter use "more good" soon after using "normalcy" the other day. Not 'cricket' at all!

I hope i'm misunderstanding a lot of that.



uh...yeah, and it's more secure that way. Not to mention most professional businesses have HD copy devices. But lets have all the most important data on a network instead. Less labour and less secure.


Yeah..in poorly written operating systems...So they create an OS that will allow them to create all the bugs and errors they can crap out without having to fix most of them? lol.

I only see this whole thing as, again, probobly pushing programming to an even more difficult stage for the future (hello poorly managed multithreading, hello vista, hello incoming Vienna), and making things even easier for the quickly growing retarded average end-users.

Not to mention, if they do split from Windows, will the PC market not spread out even more?

Well, i would assme companies (and certain individuals - if cheap enough) would use their own Midori-Server(s) of some kind, so it would certainly be more secure for companies if that was the case. I was reading about a oil company that uses a Linux based centralized server/supercomputer with remote thin clients for their more sensitive stuff. The geometry for X forwarding is so seamless and of such a high standard its almost as good as the real thing even with transport encryption - and thats about as secure as it can get as no data is stored on the client at all, and all IT support is done in one place.

Personally I would not trust a 3rd party host with MY data. I would want my OWN server/client(s) or a PC.

Think about it, if the majority of clueless PC users could email, wordprocess, use the web, listen to music etc.. through a remote desktop environment on a cheap "set-top box" thin client (something the "dreadded" linux is better at, from both server and client ends at the moment) there would be an monumental drop in windows sales. Of course many would still use/need PCs too, but not everyone would NEED one for basic tasks thus taking away this annoying need for everything to be fluffy, friendly, safe and downright patronising. (and good riddance to it too! It would return the PC to being a tool for computer oriented people rather than as a obligatory household appliance to serve the botnets. Better for the environment as well.)

This kind of thing has got MS terrified. They have been lagging in this area for a long time. People like Nomachine have been doing it for a while and offer a range of good (if expensive) Linux/xp RemotePC solutions. VMware is also way ahead technology wise. Check out the live demos on nomachine if you have a fast link and see what i mean.

... sorry, wrong topic...

Brilliant. A step towards dumb terminals and online charges for usiing applications on the server.

The BBC news website is riddled with typing errors lately. Think they must have taken on a load of "New Deal" staff.

You're not wrong. Sadly, their factual accuracy has gone all to hell too. ( I'm talking generally, not this article in particular. )

That's because they're so eager to be the first with stories, they don't even care if what they're saying is correct or not. On countless times I've read a story on there, only to go back to the same page later and the 'facts' have changed.

Its not just the BBC, CNN, FOX and ABC are all guilty too. Incorrect facts aside, when you hear reporters saying "more good" or "deader" you kind of dispair.

BBC show a strong bias misinforming in headlines etc. Having said that their non political motivated articles are usually a good read.

Adobe already said that they plan to release their tools in a similar way to this MS OS. So you pay a license and run it online somehow. Was a bunch of news about it towards the end of last year.

Here's my take on it (if I understand what they're doing correctly).

They know that PC hardware is too specific and prone to variations and that its lifetime may be limited given that there are increasing users of Mac, Linux, consoles and other operating systems. Microsoft probably wants a way to detach Windows from hardware dependency so that, for the most part, they don't need to `run windows on windows`. They probably would rather that ALL users everywhere have access to `Windows` as a kind of service that they can access through standard web browsers or whatever. Imagine Windows running in a browser on a Playstation 3 for example.

Secondly I think they are aiming to try to `take over the internet` by trying to turn Windows into a distributed/networked/grid-computing platform that's abstracted away from any specific hardware and embedded into the internet for maximum world-wide accessibility. It's obviously going to not care so much about hardware capabilities and more about abstract software. This way it can transcend the challenges posed by other platforms whose software is locked into the hardware, and thus effectively soak up the users from those platforms as well - ie Mac and Linux users for example would also be able to access Windows from their machines. They are trying to make Windows as capable of `being anywhere` as they can so that it remains bigger than all other platforms and potentially inclusive of them. More customers.

Thirdly by having their o/s be a service over a network they can have 100% absolute control over what the user has access to. Total shutdown. It would allow them to completely limit anything and everything and the user would be an entirely passive ongoing customer who would not `own` anything to do with their computer other than perhaps the hardware itself, and would not be able to pirate anything or hack anything etc. And if they don't like you, they can pull the plug and shut you out. You just know some people are going to get quite paranoid about that. This would be their answer to all security issues, since viruses would not be able to get to the server machines and nothing could happen without Microsoft's say-so. This isn't necessarily `bad` but it IS open to gross misuse.

Fourthly I'm sure it hasn't escaped their notice that by being internet based and being able to control anything means they can now offer subscription services and pay-per-hour access to not only Windows but also applications within it. Microtransactions and all that, which would probably make them even more money. They also see companies like Adobe jumping to internet applications and probably want to make sure they they get a piece of the pie by having Adobe depend on an internet-based Windows platform (just an example).

Some of this makes `business sense` but some of it is also potentially an even greater threat to freedom.

Unfortunately the Big Brother growing up. We will not have the ability for stand alone PC's in the near future. That's my opinion

Well that really is Microsofts biggest challenge. Finding new ways to expand (thus increasing the value of the stock) when they already have a defacto monopoly, and their existing products are already "good enough" for most peoples needs. This would be one way to expand their markets, although I don't think a web browser is the most ideal platform for something like this. It'll probably be .Net or Silverlight, if one has to go by existing Microsoft technology.

There is no way you can take over the Internet. This is the same point all those net neutrality people seem to be missing. The Internet is only the Internet because of net neutrality, once a single entity "owns" the Internet, be it Microsoft, Google or the telcos, it will no longer be the Internet, but more reminiscent of older on-line services, like AOL, CompuServe, MSN etc. Eventually a new Internet will arise out of the ashes.

This is also why Midori is going to have a difficult time with their breakthrough. For starters there's the resistance to chance, which Microsoft may be able to overcome simply because they're a monopoly, although if Vista is anything to go by that might not be sufficient. Something like Midori would absolutely, positively have to be an open platform or fail.

Unfortunately there are two major flaws to this plan, the most obvious one being that the world lacks the IT infrastructure to support such a vast on-line network. You would need a network connection roughly the same speed as the CPU bus, which is not going to happen on a global scale any time soon. Secondly and more importantly, Windows is the dominant platform because of videogames. No games, no Windows. Getting any games at all to work reliably on a platform like Midori, much less the more demanding games, is going to be a next to impossible challenge, never mind the massive computer that you're going to need to run some 10 million instances of World of Warcraft.

Sure. They could. But the one thing Windows has going for it is piracy. If they make a subscription based service, with impossible to pirate applications, how many people are going to think the price they're asking is going to be worth the value they're getting? Does anyone actually think Microsoft Office is 400 USD better than Open Office, or do they just not care, because their company is paying for it through their bulk licensing agreement, because they can write it off on their taxes, or alternatively because they stole it.