+972 52-548-6969
On Vista's Delay
There is a good discussion in Mini Microsoft's comments about the Vista delay. Specifically, I like this, this and this in particular.
My two cents are, ship it when it's ready. The entire world is going to have to live with this system for ~5 years minimum, so I really don't want Microsoft to release something that is not ready. And yes, little stuff matter, VS.Net 2005 is ~15% slower than VS 2003, in the long term, this hurt! Check the amount of negative comments that Microsoft got on the VS.Net 2005 launch. Microsoft reputation is very much on the line here, and getting some bad publicity now will fade in a matter of days. Getting a half-baked product out the door, when it is something as important as the new OS, is likely to do it as much damage as the 9x versions.
About the feature set, no one knows what it is good until they used it. Think about it, what is so good in XP over 2000 ? It's a ton of minor improvements, but they make quite a bit of change when you take all of them into account. I find it painful to use 2000 today, mainly because a lot of the stuff that I'm used to is gone. Scoble says that he feels the same now about XP after using Vista's beta for too long.
I was at a user group last week, and I saw Vista crashing. I can accept this in beta, I will not accept it production. Sorry, I value my time way too much to deal with blue screens, that is why I refuse to use 9x systems (the not so few remaining).
And no, I don't think that Microsoft can cut features out, as a developer, I care very deeply about what stuff goes into the OS. Mainly because I need to have a baseline of stuff that I know exist on that system. (All you systems are Vista? So you got Avalon and .Net 2.0 there already, here is what I can do with those...)
Comments
Comment preview