"Windows is too monolithic," declares Gartner, opening the door for Linux

"The Innovator's Dilemma" is finally catching up with Microsoft. As Gartner analyst Michael Silver declares (and ZDNet's Larry Dignan captures),

Microsoft's Windows juggernaut is collapsing as it tries to support 20 years of applications and becomes more complicated by the minute. Meanwhile, Windows has outgrown hardware and customers are pondering skipping Vista to wait for Windows 7. If Windows is going to remain relevant it will need radical changes...."Windows is too monolithic," says Silver.

That monolithic nature will become ever less relevant as more and more applications are written for the web...and simply won't care what OS is running on the client. Gartner figures that 2011 will represent a tipping point when developers will care more about developing for the Web than for the desktop.

Ironically, Gartner's recommendations for how Windows should change sound eerily like a recommendation to become...Linux:

• Windows should be able to be tailored to specific applications. Linux has been doing this for years, modular as it is. Linux reigns in embedded devices and scales up to the most demanding high-performance computing needs. Whatever the application, Linux has been tailored to fit it. Windows can't compete.


• Better security. Because Windows tries to be all things to all people, it ends up being a security nightmare for one key demographic: The malevolent hacker ("cracker"). Applications shouldn't be given rights they don't need. Linux has this down pat. Windows? Gartner believes a significant overhaul is required.


• Make migration to new versions easier. "Application packaging takes forever, says Silver....The fix is to reinstall everything and rebuild the PC." Not a problem on Linux.


• Simplify licensing to focus on specific devices. Again, this is a problem born of Microsoft's success. It's not an issue that plagues Linux, which has licensing that encourages widespread, disparate use, and doesn't try to manacle its developers.

It was bound to happen, and now it has. Microsoft has simply become too big for its own good or, rather, for its customers' good. It's time for application developers to start over with an operating syste that encourages customization, personalization, and (for security) isolation.

Linux, in other words. Have you heard of it?

[StargateFan]

Typo - "start over with an operating syste that ," forgot the m on system.

Secondly it is a good article. The Mac OS has been rewritten from kernel up. Linux is constantly being dissected, torn up, and rewritten. Windows needs to follow suit, the Windows dev team needs to look at a blank IDE page for the first time and start creating a New Operating System based on a new NT kernel built from scratch, one which implements the new technologies of today, and makes it easier to implement the new technologies of tomorrow.

However according to Bill Gates it will not happen he feels that an OS should be rich, and therefore would never rewrite the OS he has stated this is in an interview. I don't know how much more a rich OS people can take. I think I like slim and streamline instead of bulky, slow, yet still rich.

[geezzerr11]

Does it really matter what GAtes wants anymore. He's about to depart from active management participation and it seems Stevey boy is moving quickly to pass his best before date. I'm with you on the slim OS but more importantly I would like one that is less prone to breaking. I haven't used VISTA but I see little improvement over XP other than the cosmetics around the fringes.

[ubuwalker31]

I'd like to see Microsoft windows move to linux as well, but since they want to make a profit, that is unlikely, and will likely take Apple's lead and create a new operating system based on BSD.

[TxemiC]

If Microsoft finally goes to Windows 7 quicker than expected, they are going to find a lot of pepole who got Vista pre-installed in their new PC that might prefer to go to Linux than to be forced to pay another Microsoft upgrade.

Good opportunity for Ubuntu. Matt, would Ubuntu be acquired by Google or by Sun? what is your bet?

http://tech-talk.biz/

[boe_d]

I think there are already people who have Vista preinstalled on their system who are looking at OSX and Linux. I would say the bulk just upgrade to Windows XP. I've upgraded about 20 clients who bought systems with Vista and so far everyone has thanked me profusely for speeding up their brand new core 2 systems with 2 gigs of ram - they can't figure out why Vista doesn't run well on them. Simple I tell them Vista doesn't run as well as XP on any hardware.

[JCPayne]

Anybody who truely KNOWS- Microsoft knows that you don't run out to buy Windows 7...... You wait until Service Pack 3 or 4...... Some years down the line after all the flaws and bugs get shaked out....

[JCPayne]

Welll... Google uses Ubuntu as their in office operating system.... So they might choose to buy out them.....

[macewan_]

I've been testing Prism & Air on Ubuntu and have to say that Windows has a long way to go in justifying its worth as a preferred operating system. The few times I had to use Vista were painful experiences. Seriously, exactly what does it bring to the table for the average home user? Games?

[belovedmonster]

Why would Google buy Ubuntu? They can simply use the Ubuntu code and rebrand it as their own Google OS. As popular as Ubuntu is Google is 10X bigger in terms of brand value.

[m00g]

Yeah, 'cause Red Hat isn't making any money off a free operating system, is it??

Muppet.

[sodapop2k9]

Funny, Gartner is monolithic in it's own industry.

[msej449]

It is interesting: Unix has always been a better operating system than Windows. Dynamic run-time libraries; 64 bit since its inception; virtual memory management from day one; and so on. But to be fair to Microsoft, writing an OS for unknown target hardware; needing to allow end-users to load drivers; designing for everything from games to company accounts - all make the job of OS design and implementation very hard. The difference between 1998 and 2008 isn't really in the OS - it's in people's perception of what they need.

[geezzerr11]

As much as I dislike MS and its near monopoly in the PC OS arena, they are not the only ones to blame for some of the problems users encounter. The continuous quest for better price performance has led to a continuous change of hardware platforms and the resulting problems with moving Operating Systems and application programs. I've been dealing with operating systems since OS 360 and the aforementioned problems have been extant since then.
To proclaim that Microsoft is dying is I think a bit premature. If I remember correctly IBM was pronounced to be dying when the PC hit main street computing. They reinvented themselves and changed their management style. Most likely MS will do the same

[ajaypathak]

i have also find this story very useful
http://readerszone.com/microsoft/tracing-the-path-from-windows-success-to-impending-collapse.html