Hello,

I thought that, when Windows 10 was released, Microsoft claimed it was the ultimate Windows ever.

Is it that big a change? It seems to be things like abetter UI for the new terminal app, UI improvements to file explorer, new icons etc.

I thought that, when Windows 10 was released, Microsoft claimed it was the ultimate Windows ever.

This one is ultimiter. Because it will go to 11. Imagine Nigel Tuffnel doing the commercials- "It's like, how much more ultimate could this be and the answer is none. None more ultimate."

Reading into this much more, Microsoft is talking about greater support and options for developers.

Compare this TikTok level announcement with the way Steve Jobs and Tim Cook announced developments. Where Apple focuses on the end-user and is able to build a brand and easily ask premium prices for it, Microsoft is focusing again on the developers and creators. After 45 year, they still don't know who their customers are.

After 45 year, they still don't know who their customers are.

I think they do, but it's just that they have a corporate mentality towards everything.

Hello,

I meant that, when Windows 10 was released, Microsoft said there will be no more need of "new" Windows, and that from now on, there will just be "updates"...

Reading into this much more, Microsoft is talking about greater support and options for developers.

That seems to me to be the thrust of the announcement, and that also describes his audience at the time.

engine... do you know more about where this was presented? Why is there a suggestion of Windows 11 in the OP?

Beyond the explicit mention of Windows 11, I should add that, a while back there was a previous announcement (and sorry, no time to find it now), discussed on WebmasterWorld, that Microsoft was going to be looking into a new chip architecture, with security built into it. Perhaps some hubris built into that goal, but I do remember that the flawed chip architecture discussion from some while back now had gotten swept under the rug (I assume by MS and the chip makers).

As I imperfectly understood the chip architecture issues, there are certain kinds of attacks that can essentially melt the present chips. If that's the case, then a new operating system might not be backwardsly (sp?) compatible. That is what I'd read into the Windows 11 comment when I saw it. Now that I've re-viewed the video, though, this announcement doesn't sound like it's about chip architecture. It does sound like it's talking to (software) developers... but one never knows, and it could be about software for the new architecture.

@ JorgeV if my understanding is correct they will continue to roll out updates and you would only pay for major upgrades, perhaps this is one of them. The benefit to MS is they only need to support one code base. Those that hold onto old machines at the very least will continue to get security patches. Most people that "upgrade" do so when they buy new machine anyway so it's unlikely this would affect their bottom line.

@Robert Charlton

do you know more about where this was presented? Why is there a suggestion of Windows 11 in the OP?

This was presented at Microsoft's Build 2021 event on 25 May, 2021, and there was a hint that there may be a separate announcement about Windows. It was just my thought it could be Win 11, but MS could just stop at 10 and just provide updates.

It was just my thought it could be Win 11, but MS could just stop at 10 and just provide updates.

engine... thanks. They'll then call the next one 10+, to be followed by 10++plus, etc? ;)

The dilemma, I think, is that if there's a different architecture to the hardware, that will naturally cause a fork in the software, with probably no way of keeping the OS backwardly compatible. In my prior fields of photography and motion pictures, with video kind of sandwiched in there... there came to be so many forks, first in analogue standards, then in digital standards... so many forks that folks began eating with their hands.

Each standard required different machinery, training, work-flow, and infrastructure.

In some "stardards", there are so many options that no one ever implemented them all in one machine, so compatibility couldnt be tested. I remember the first time I had video "authored" to a DVD... not a machine conversion, which looks crappy, but instead an artful and expensive conversion... that before the studio made release copies, they ushered me into a "machine room", literally stacked to the ceiling with DVD players, and invited me to spend as long as I'd like checking it out. There was no way that the company could economically guarantee their product would work on all hardware. And it was often the expensive machinery that gave the most problems.

With software, Adobe couldn't keep up with the "codec" variants on different cameras and video systems, and decided on a subscription model for its software, which shifted the cost of "progress" to the customer.

I certainly hope this doesn't happen in computing... more so than there has been... because there's truly no end to it. Each version becomes a beta version for the next version, and they never get things working right. It's a bottomless pit.

This could be either (or both) the ‘Sun Valley’ upgrade to Win10 interface and file explorer or the new 10X, which is supposed to move legacy code apps to the cloud and be a lighter modern code base very ‘mobile’ in look and feel.

Regardless, as always with MSFT, I recommend waiting for service pack 1 :)

which is supposed to move legacy code apps to the cloud and be a lighter modern code base very ‘mobile’ in look and feel.

Do you mean chromebook-esq?

Windows 10x is dead, abandoned...
[theverge.com ]

There is no formal Win 11 yet, however here's a "concept" version of 11.1 (so I would guess there's something in production behind the scenes)
[youtube.com ]

After 45 year, they still don't know who their customers are.

I think they know what they are doing.

The biggest comeptitive advantage Windows has are specialist desktop applications, especially things like industry vertical ones. Keeping that advantage depends on keeping developers happy.

And it was often the expensive machinery that gave the most problems.

Not sure if you are referencing burned disc but that was a problem. It wasn't related to the authoring standards but backwards compatibility of the disc itself. Some players would only play +R, some only -R, and some neither. Why the cheaper players managed better I have no idea but perhaps they simply weren't as picky about minor errors. Almost any DVD player in a computer could easily manage any disc but it's slightly different animal.

As far as Windows goes it's slightly different situation. If you want to play a record, cassette, VHS tape or whatnot you need the physical device to do that. On the other hand as long as I have compatible physical connection I can still connect a floppy drive to a windows machine. Obviously it's much more of a problem with mobo's, CPU's etc. but certainly it could be done.

The following message was cut out to new thread by engine. New thread at: microsoft_windows_os/5038560.htm [webmasterworld.com]
11:09 am on Jun 3, 2021 (utc +1)