Industry


Ads by TechWords

See your link here


Preston Gralla's picture
Preston Gralla

Seeing Through Windows

Windows 7: Let's vote for only three versions

Will Windows 7 have seven versions? A netbook-only version? How about a version for left-handed agnostics who live in Idaho and own their own businesses? In the ideal world, there would be only one version of Windows, as there was in the good old days, before niche marketing became all the rage. But I'm holding out for only three. Here's why.

As Eric Lai points out in How many flavors will Windows 7 come in?, there's evidence in the Windows 7 beta that it will have five versions, although could have as many as eight.

Here, from his article, are the versions listed by the Windows 7 beta during the installation process:

* Starter Edition, a stripped-down version for customers in developing countries running underpowered hardware that has been around since XP.

* Home Basic, the controversial low-end consumer flavor introduced with Vista that Microsoft apparently debated whether or not to release.

* Home Premium, also introduced with Vista.

* Ultimate, introduced with Vista, the loaded-with-goodies version aimed at hard-core hobbyists.

* Business, introduced with Vista as the replacement to Professional for corporate use.

He quotes a Microsoft spokesperson confirming the five versions. But the spokesperson said they were only preliminary, and that could change, depending on customer feedback.

In the ideal world, there would be only one version of Windows 7, which would do everything you needed it to. You would be able to take away or add modules as needed.

We don't live in that ideal world, of course. We live in a world of micro-targeting and niches. So multiple versions of Windows are here to stay.

Still, even in a world of micro-targeting, Microsoft should be able to reduce the number of versions of Windows 7 to only three ---  a base version just called Windows 7, an Enterprise version, and an Ultimate version. The base version would be for consumers, small business, and businesses that don't need IT-specific features. The Enterprise version would be for rolling out enteprise wide. And the Ultimate version, like now, would include everything in those two versions, plus any extras Microsoft can think of.

Given that Microsoft is still deciding which versions of Windows 7 it should create, you can let the company know your feelings about it. If you're a beta Windows 7 user, let Microsoft know what versions you would like to see. And let me know, below.

What People Are Saying

The Problem is the Lack of a Modular Design for Windows

Apple managed to scale OS X from a multi-core 64 bit x86 processor to the ARM in the iPhone in a matter of six months. But it has taken Microsoft two and a half years just to rip the unnecessary crap out of Vista to get it to run BETTER on a 64 bit multicore x86 processor. The problem is the monolithic design of Windows.

The *nix architectures are highly modular. You can switch the Linux desktop between Gnome, KDE, Xfce, Enlightenment, FluxBox, AfterStep, and a couple dozen others practically on the fly. You can't do that with Windows, and it isn't just because Microsoft wants everyone to have the same desktop. The desktop interface in Windows is not a module which can simply be unplugged and swapped out for an alternative. It is integrated into the code in ways which make other processes dependent on it. It is difficult to remove. Despite Microsoft's many claims to the contrary, Windows still has a monolithic design. This means that Windows is not very customisable to the end user (or even very customisable by Microsoft itself for specific purposes, like smart phones and netbooks).

One size really can fit all when the single product can be easily tailored to the end user's specifications. This is not possible with Windows. In fact, the various different versions of Windows are all exactly the same code. With Vista, the features which get activated (that is, which "version" you end up with) depend on what activation numbers you enter at installation. If you knew what numbers to enter, you could buy Vista Home Basic and activate it as Vista Ultimate. The point is that the monolithic program executing underneath it all is the same. All that the different versions "give" you is suppression of particular features of the OS (such as the inability to access Aero in Vista Home Basic, even though the code is actually installed and sometimes running, beneath the surface).

A modular design for Windows would enable Microsoft to release a single version for everyone, which end users could customise to taste. But that would require a complete rewrite and complete redesign of Windows from the ground up.

And that ain't gonna happen.

Not that I am a windows fan..but windows is modular

Or at least less monolithic that you would think at first.

Can I call in evidence the various "embedded" versions of windows (sold to makers of specialist hardware such as cash registers):

Starts with NT embedded, since then there has also been XP embedded, WEPOS (Windows Embedded for point of sale), Vista Embedded for Business, POSReady 2009, and CE embedded (and a few other variants in name only)

All of these have special configuration tools that allow you to build cut down install images with the services you don't need removed.

I would expect that there will be a Windows 7 Embedded (and also a POS flavour of that)

Except Windows CE is a

Except Windows CE is a different product with a separate development branch from the primary Windows OS...

The existence of WinCE doesn't imply modularity - if anything, it proves the primary OS is so hard to modularize that they had to build an entirely separate product to run on embedded devices.

How about the iTunes version?

...every time you want it to do something new, you pony up another dollar!

Two Versions FTW

What was wrong with the old model of XP, having a "Home" version and a "Professional" version?

I think this is the least confusing and most intuative way to do this it would seem.

Home version would include things like the media center component and all those tools for burning DVDs, managing pictures, etc.

Professional version would have everything including the OPTION to install those components that are available in the Home edition. Enthusiasts have always ran the Professional version anways...

Please, please, please Microsoft... don't do this to us again!

do we even need three look

do we even need three look at apple why are they advancing so fast is it because they have three they have 1 and only one that works for every one so seriously get a life microsoft and release one clean operating system that works and is stable and doesn't require the latest hardware to use (oops hardware that comes out in two years)

Would be nice...

If, as Microsoft has tacitly acknowledged, Vista was a balls-up from launch, they actually went out of their way to get some customers back on side. Simplest way? Scrub Home Premium: keep the stripped-down, full flavored and business versions. Give us another reason.

10 Versions? ( 32-bit vs 64-bit)

"evidence in the Windows 7 beta that it will have five versions"

Will there be 10 versions, a 32-bit and a 64-bit version of the above five versions?

It's time to "bit the bullet" and start phasing out 32-bit operating systems.

On the consumer side, OEMs have already started doing this. Most new consumer computers come with Vista-64 SP1 Preinstalled.

One version is plenty!

Seriously. One version is enough. You can install one version with "low hardware requirements". You can install it with home-like features, or with business features. You don't have to create 7 dvd's, 7 product packages, etc. One version. Period. Not even a full vs upgrade version - everyone pays $99 or $149. The end.

I would agree with the above

I would agree with the above posting. 3 versions of windows be ok instead of those unnecessary 5 versions in Vista. This would be easy for end users to chose the version they like.