While reading this "Windows Is So Slow, but Why?" piece, I had a light bulb moment that could mean a solution to many of Microsoft's hang ups and set backs during new OS releases. Not to be confused with one of those light bulb paper chase moment like the one on Slow Singing and Flower Bringing", but in general a good idea that while it might not make ME any money, it is definitely something that should be considered by the Redmond giant.
The piece basically expounded on why Microsoft is so slow in putting out newer versions of their operating systems. Microsoft announced last week that the release of its most anticipated Windows Vista will be pushed back further than was originally anticipated... again. These type of announcements are not new to Microsoft nor to the IT industry. In fact, it happens so often that in my opinion it should be seen as "the norm" when a new MS O.S is in progress. "In six months.... nah 8 months.... 12 months? Fuck it, we'll call you once it's ready". This usually sends a tsunami effect throughout the industry, especially for hardware vendors hoping to cash in on sales once the new O.S. is out. Why the delays? Why the constant changes in code? What's all the big fuss about? After all, you would think the GIANT must have nothing but top developers under its umbrella.
Backward Compatibility: In technology, especially computing, a product is said to be backward compatible (or downward compatible) when it is able to take the place of an older product, by inter-operating with other products that were designed for the older product.
Many industry experts are quick to blame Microsoft's insatiable crave for backward compatibility as the major reason behind the setbacks and bloated end-products. Ironically enough however, these same experts are the first ones to complain about the lack of backward compatibility once any new OS is released. You can't please everybody every time. Backward compatibility is a very important issue for the industry's top desktop seller. After all, if their new product doesn't support older applications, then this gives corporations, and other less important buyers, a reason not to upgrade to the "best" and latest. It also forces software vendors to develop new versions of their products every time a new Windows OS is released. This is not a good thing, but it continues to be a vicious cycle for Microsoft and other solution providers.
Virtual Machine: An environment which appears to a "guest" operating system as hardware, but is simulated in a contained software environment by the host system.
Virtual Machine is my proposed solution for the backward compatibility setback [For a virtual machine primer please visit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_machine]. Instead of spending resources on making every new version of Windows backward compatible, Microsoft could set their focus mainly on improving and innovating new technologies. Backward compatibility would be handled by a very capable virtual machine software that could be bundled, or provided as and added value option, with every new version of their operating system. Anti-trust suit? Sure, I see it, but it wouldn't be the first time. In fact, the burden from the suits might be less than the burden brought forth by delays in releases, and bloated software; which then leads to buggy software, and the current half-ass backward compatibility. Another option would be to simply purchase a major virtual machine vendor. **cough** vmware **cough**.
The Results: Newer technology, less buggy software and in return less time spent patching, new versions more often, less bloatware,
Eso es todo amigos.
