I would like to add one more.
This assumes that Microsofts future IS windows.
I don't believe that has been the case since Satya.
And once you realize that you can see the future is very bright
Regardless of some implementation gaff in a Windows feature.
It's not Xbox, they're losing that war, and it was based on Windows. It's not phones, they already lost that one and that was based on Windows anyways.
It can't be Office; there's less and less of a need for a paid office suite, and MS Office in a browser is rather bad.
It might be Azure, but IMHO the big onramp to Azure is Microsoft pushing corporations to move ActiveDirectory and Exchange into the cloud, but the end of Windows means the end of ActiveDirectory, and there's options for Cloud mail and calendar. Is Azure compelling for many if you're not already there because of Exchange?
> And once you realize that you can see the future is very bright
The future may be bright, but how will you know if there's no Windows to see it through? ;p
Microsoft's Future is Azure AI POWERED CLOUD. Their CEO explicitly said this. Windoze is just the legacy on-boarding software.
Whatever IBM and Oracle do to stay solvent in spite of being irrelevant to most people and even most software people.
This strategy would eventually let them rebuild it from the ground up.
WSL is a good bridge for now, but a larger shift to a unix OS is still needed.
Going all-in on Gamepass has also devalued their own games in many consumers' minds. Why buy it when you can just get it on Gamepass? I suspect the recurring revenue is not making up for the lost unit sales within any reasonable timeframe.
They did try it, remember? During the Xbox One launch, there was a heavy marketing blitz to position it as a living room multimedia machine and console gamers absolutely tore them to pieces for it. They gave up after that debacle.
"I got an Xbox One!" "Oh, the first one?" "No, the XBox One not the original XBox 1."
Or, looking at the .NET evolution:
.NET Framework 4.8 .NET Core .NET Core 2 .NET Core 3 .NET 5
There is no .NET Core 4 because people would get confused with .NET Framework 4 which is still getting bug fixes and has support. And they wanted people to move from .NET Framework 4 so they called it .NET 5 instead of .NET Core 5.
Now you understand Microsoft. They have no reason to care about Windows any more.
selling azure and consulting to governments and big corps.
> Is Azure compelling for many if you're not already there because of Exchange?
Most are already on Exchange, I think.
Also: I think MS wants Azure to be compelling even without Exchange. (though I am not sure if that works out)
Since when? Is the world's white collar population decreasing?
> I don't believe that has been the case since Satya.
Indeed. When MS has several multi-billion dollar streams of revenue - Office, Azure, XBox, game labels, and so on, and the "cloudy" part of computing is almost exclusively Linux, there's less compelling reasons for them to invest in Windows.
With other moves like WSL, 'winget' and 'sudo', it's clear Windows is slowly moving towards a facade that mimics Linux from the CLI.
In 2000, MS was Windows 9x, 2000, and Office.
Consider that in 2004, you'd go to a site and download a Windows-only piece of software, and in 2024, you'll now find Apple-only software, or Linux only.
Arguably, the 'year of the Linux(-like) desktop' has been MacOS for well over a decade. It's a gateway drug to full Linux, with very little friction in comparison to Windows (filesystem paths, Win32 api, etc.).
IMO the main purpose for WinGet was to kill AppGet because MS doesn't want a 3rd party to control the package repository for an easy to use distribution system.
As far as I can tell, custom WinGet repos need to be run on Azure, so MS basically has a stranglehold on distribution. If you publish anything they don't like they can label you as being malicious and ban your Azure account. Regardless, the friction to running your own repo is high and most people will capitulate and submit their apps to the official repo for approval (by MS).
Big tech has been relentlessly locking down software distribution for the last decade and killing everything but the Windows Store, WinGet, etc. has to be a long term goal for MS.
That pretty much leaves the world with a defunct operating system running om 80% of all desktop and laptops. I'm not suggesting that you're wrong, in fact I'd agree that Windows has taken a backseat at Microsoft, but that's pretty scary.
Given the new Exchange Server licensing, I think it's pretty safe to assume that Microsoft would like to exit the on-prem software business at the earliest convenient time. I just question if the world is ready for that, or that's even what we want.
Years later, that look is old. We should update the look. But what about the other stuff we have not updated yet that is still old looking? We will get to it later.
Meanwhile, you have three or four different layouts and designs and patterns throughout the system. It is crazy. They finally updated "System" to look like the rest of Windows, but if you click "Advanced System Settings", it still brings up the old System Properties. And it is crazy that the old one is still easier to navigate and find what you are trying to find.
Is Microsoft's future a smartphone OS that'll rival the iPhone or Android phones?
Microsoft had been trying, it seemed, to make their image more positive, with some positive results in recent years.
Their recent decisions have revealed that their priorities are not very aligned with their users. The future may be bright, depending on their goals, but I have no interest in being a customer of a company that makes decisions that are so user hostile and frankly, idiotic.