D
David Maynard
Charlie said:I'm mostly interested in where things will go from here. Yes, there
have always been other computer platforms, but for consumers, the main
choice has been Windows or Mac.
And Linux and, if you go back a bit into the past, IBM's OS2, BeOS and if
you go back further GEM, Desqview and others.
The reason that's what consumers see is the main consumer item has been
desktop PCs.
Now lots of gadgets are full-fledged
computers. Each requires an OS. Is Windows going to dominate them
all? I think developers will find it easier to start with an
open-source kernel.
It depends on what the 'gadget' is and what it needs. MS's desktop strength
isn't 'an O.S.', it's the GUI and attendant bells and whistles. MS should,
or might, have some strength where the consumer wants their 'gadget' to
'look like their desktop' but that doesn't necessarily 'fit' in small
devices. They might also have an advantage by providing a 'light' whatever
with (semi) compatible APIs to leverage existing Windows programming. WinCE
is something like that as calling the full screen display 'windows' begs
the issue.
At the same time, the desktop has matured. In the 1990s, every
upgrade brought important new capabilities. But why should the
average person upgrade to Vista?
I don't know but I disagree with your premise as my memory recalls that
each version past Win95 has been panned as nothing really 'new'. It's only
in hindsight, after people are used to it, that they suddenly see
"important new capabilities."
The OS market is becoming fragmented. We'll see what that does to
Microsoft's market position and profits.
I repeat my point, the market has always been 'fragmented'. It only looks
monolithic to the 'consumer' who sees little but their desktop.