Category: Windows Vista

Metro is not a PDF-killer

Following up on the news that Office 12 will directly output documents in PDF format, Mary Jo Foley writes:

[Office program manager Brian] Jones’ disclosure was somewhat surprising, given Microsoft’s announcement earlier this year of plans to incorporate “Metro,” Microsoft’s PDF/PostScript alternative, into Windows Vista. (Microsoft currently is using the XML Paper Specification (XPS) to refer to many of its Metro components.)

And Microsoft’s Metro announcement was seen by industry watchers just one of a growing number of direct shots by Microsoft at Adobe’s PDF/PhotoShop/Illustrator empire.

This is probably going to be the single biggest misconception you read this week. Only trouble is, it’s based on a fundamental misunderstanding. As I posted last April from the Windows Hardware Engineering Conference:

I also got a chance to look more closely at the “Metro” technology. It looks like there will still be room in the world for PDF files. The real impact is to replace the old Enhanced Metafile (EMF) format with a new, smarter native format for printed output. There’s a big overlap with PDF files, but it’s not as direct a competitor as early reports, including mine, might suggest.

Microsoft did a poor job when they initially talked about the Metro technology, leading lots of people to speculate that it was a PDF-killer. A closer look reveals it’s no such thing, but the original flawed description has already spread far and wide.

Update: Read more technical details on the XML Paper Specification (XPS) here. XPS is first and foremost a container specification for application data. It’s true that the XPS Document format is very PDF-like, but I don’t think anyone has any illusions that it will replace PDFs. If you use Office 12, it probably will allow you to edit XPS Documents in the same way that Acrobat (the full product) allows you to edit PDF files, without having to leave Office or buy a separate program.

Where’s the Office 12 code?

Joe Wilcox was at the PDC and had these post-show thoughts:

Much of the [Office] stuff Microsoft showed off seemed very insubstantial, like works in progress. Early works in progress. The forms stuff demoed well, yet felt very surface area. Maybe the breakout sessions got down to business (I simply couldn’t go to them all). But I talked to some other people checking out the Office breakouts and most had more questions than answers.

Maybe the Office folks are holding back–and that would be pretty reasonable this far from launch–but I don’t think so. Office gave out no code at the show, not even rough, preliminary stuff. Unlike the Windows team. Sure Windows Vista is rough, but developers for the platform have early code. If Office System also is a development platform and developers are supposed to be preparing now for Office 12 release, where’s the code?

Joe, that’s the way the Office team has been for as long as I can remember. The Windows team puts out lots of beta releases. After Windows Vista Build 5219, which was handed out to PDC attendees, they should release Beta 2 to a very wide audience, with monthly builds for technical beta testers and several release candidates. Knowledgeable product people are all over the beta newsgroups to answer questions in most areas.

This is the pattern the Windows team has followed on previous betas as well. If you’re a technical tester, you better have a high-speed connection, because you’ll be downloading lots and lots of bits.

By contrast, Office usually drops two betas, period. Interim builds are practically unheard of, and the level of information sharing in the beta newsgroups is similarly sparse. Testers talk to one another, but they don’t get much feedback from the product team.

Maybe I’m wrong and this will all change on this cycle, but I certainly wouldn’t bet on it.

The original Widget/Gadget/Gizmo

In a comment to my earlier post on the Widget- Gadget food fight, PB reminded me about Active Desktop. The linked page from Microsoft’s, dated August 2001, includes this text:

The Microsoft Investor Ticker below is just one example of Active Desktop items—live content that Internet Explorer 4.0 lets you bring from the Web to your Active Desktop. Check out the list below. You’ll find cool items that deliver regularly updated news, entertainment, tools, and more.

I remember writing about Active Desktop in 1997, when I was working on a beta copy of Windows 98 and Internet Explorer 4.0.

And sure enough, a little poking around found this October 1997 article from Microsoft Systems Journal. It contains the first reference I can remember to Dynamic HTML, plus discussions of the Channel Definition Format (a very early use of XML that was a precursor to RSS), an Information Delivery API, support for Broadcast TV, and a bunch of other stuff that today we take for granted.

The Wikipedia entry for Active Desktop notes:

Active Desktop works much like desktop widget technology in that it allows users to place customized information on their desktop. [emphasis added]

Splat!

The Widget-Gadget food fight

Oh lordy, I hate getting in the middle of Mac v. Windows food fights. I am not a Mac user, so I can’t speak from a position of authority, and the religious nature of the debate brings out trolls on both sides. But I really have to step into this one.

Yesterday, Microsoft announced the introduction of Windows Gadgets. The Gadgets Blog explains what they are:

What are Gadgets? Gadgets are a new category of mini-application designed to provide information, useful lookup, or enhance an application or service on your Windows PC or the Web. Examples might include a weather gadget running on your desktop or on your homepage, an RSS Gadget that pulls in your favorite feeds, or an extension of a business application providing just-in-time status on the pulse of your business.

This, of course, inspired guffaws, chortles, and snorts of derision from Mac experts like Dori Smith, who point out that this stuff was old news when Mac Widgets appeared in 2004. In fact, this page from Apple’s site sounds awfully familiar:

Dashboard is home to widgets: mini-applications that let you perform common tasks and provide you with fast access to information. With a single click, Dashboard appears, complete with widgets that bring you a world of information — real-time weather, stock tickers, flight information and more — instantly. Dashboard disappears just as easily, so you can get back to what you were doing.

Of course, Konfabulator fans could point out that this stuff has been available on the Windows desktop for some time.

And I could point out that I was running SideKick widgets (or whatever they were called then) on my MS-DOS PC in, like, 1987.

Now, to be fair, there are some things about the Microsoft implementation of gadgets that are genuinely new. It’s a unified development platform, not just an add-on. You can write Web-based gadgets for Start.com, which apparently will then work in any modern browser through the miracles of DHTML and Ajax. And gadgets can also be written for auxiliary displays, which will allow these mini-programs to pop up alerts in a tiny window on the outside of a notebook, or perhaps on a Bluetooth-enabled mobile phone that’s in range of a Windows Vista computer, or even over a network connection.

But still…

Microsoft, would it kill you to actually mention the source of some of these ideas? Wouldn’t it actually help people understand how this new thing is different if you acknowledged the similarities to other things that have been around for a while? I’m just sayin’.

(And by the way, Mike, pointing out the Windows Vista Sidebar was announced years ago and that Apple stole the idea is probably not the strongest argument you could make. You have to ship it before it counts.)

I will now duck as the inevitable food fight breaks out in the comments section. Please be nice.

Dear Microsoft, why not sell Starter Edition everywhere?

I originally wrote this post about six months ago and never published it. Given the current discussion about different editions of Windows Vista, and especially the contention from Robert McLaws that Microsoft still hasn’t decided on the product mix for Windows Vista, I thought it made sense to update it.

The Internet has a big problem: People continue to use old, insecure versions of Windows. I can’t find any up-to-date statistics, but my WAG is that between 10 and 20% of people on the Internet today are running operating systems from the Windows 9X family. These old computers are less reliable and far less secure than they would be if they were running Windows XP, and they aren’t able to install many modern programs.

Why don’t these people upgrade? Because upgrading is expensive. The upgrade package is $90-100 if you’re a good shopper. A new PC is going to run between $400 and $500. That’s a lot of money for people who are on a fixed income or who are struggling to make ends meet.

Microsoft already has a solution: Windows XP Starter Edition. It was designed for use in emerging markets where the average annual income can’t justify the cost of a full Windows XP license. First released in Thailand, Malaysia, and Indonesia, it soon spread to Russia, India, and Brazil, and it’s now available in 22 countries and in six languages. (There are some interesting details in this article from Microsoft Watch and a very Microsoft-friendly profile, with screen shots, at Paul Thurrott’s site.)

Well, we have plenty of people in this country who can’t afford the cost of a new PC or an expensive upgrade. But they might pay $30, especially if they got some bonuses kicked in with the deal, like a six-month subscription to Microsoft’s OneCare security software, or a limited version of MSN.

Would Starter Edition cannibalize sales of existing Windows versions? I don’t think so. The operating system has some serious limitations that would rule out its use by any computer enthusiast:

  • Only three programs run at a time. (Hey… You can’t reliably run more than a handful of programs on Windows 9X anyway.)
  • The display runs only at 800 X 600 resolution. Most people who are stuck with old hardware and an old version of Windows are probably running at this resolution anyway.
  • No home networking or multiple user accounts.
  • Settings are preconfigured for novices.

But think of the serious advantages. Upgraders would have all the security fixes of Service Pack 2. They’d be able to run IE7 when it’s available later this year. They could run Windows AntiSpyware. They’d have an easier time with digital cameras and portable music players.

So why not make Windows XP Starter Edition (and the Windows Vista equivalent, when its time comes) available here? Sell it for $29.99. Make it available only as an upgrade to Windows 98 or Windows Me. Maybe the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation could set up a program with clinics in low-income neighborhoods that could offer upgrade services or low-cost, Starter Edition-powered computers for families with school-age kids and seniors.

I suggested this back in January, but the more I think about the idea, the more I like it. Windows 98 and Windows Me are long overdue for retirement, and a move like this would help make the Internet a better, safer place.

More on Vista editions

An update on my last post. Robert McLaws at Longhorn Blogs says Paul’s got it all wrong.

Robert says there are at least 20 possible editions still up for consideration: “Confirmed information from Microsoft official sources tell me that editions are not locked down yet. There is only one edition that is confirmed, but I can’t talk about that until Tuesday morning.”

We’ll see.

Vista versions

Update, 25-Apr-2006: For an important follow-up to this post, see Vista versions: Maybe not so confusing after all

Apparently, someone at Microsoft decided to leak the upcoming mix of SKUs for Windows Vista. There are seven Vista versions in all, if Paul Thurrott’s report is to be believed.

And the reaction from the blogosphere is predictable:

The J-Walk Blog: Vista Confusion

Apparently, Microsoft’s new tactic is to confuse the marketplace as much as possible, and hope that people will buy a more expensive version than they really need.

Peter Near: Ready, Aim, Shoot self in foot

How do you confuse end-users and make it so that your customers never know if applications will work?

Confusing? Maybe not. Let’s break down those seven versions:

  • Windows Vista Starter Edition. Already exists in Windows XP. Available in “emerging markets” where the average income is too low to support sales of full versions – Thailand, Malaysia, and Brazil, for instance. Will not be sold in the U.S., Canada, Europe and other developed economies.
  • Windows Vista Home Basic Edition. The dirt-cheap, no-frills version for single-PC households.
  • Windows Vista Home Premium Edition. Power user version, with Media Center features and home networking support. (Paul says it even supports DVD ripping. Really?)
  • Windows Vista Professional Edition. The baseline business version that will go on corporate PCs that don’t need special features.
  • Windows Vista Small Business Edition. Vista Pro with some extra online services for businesses that don’t have a full-time IT staff.
  • Windows Vista Enterprise Edition. Includes Virtual PC and some extra features for high-end corporate PCs.
  • Windows Vista Ultimate Edition. Includes everything in the high-end Home and Pro editions, with some ill-defined goodies like free downloads and online services.

So, if you’re buying a home PC, you can get the Home Basic, Home Premium, or Ultimate version. Most people will probably make the decision on price, rather than features.

If you’re configuring a corporate network, you can get the Pro or Enterprise version. Some of your really picky users might get the Ultimate version for their home PCs. Most buyers will make the decision based on IT budgets.

If you have a small business, you might want the features in that version. You’ll probably be considering Windows 2003 Small Business Server too.

That’s three choices, at most, after you decide whether you’re buying for a home, a corporation, or a small business. Is that really so confusing?

Update: Ars Technica piles on with the “confusing” meme and gets its facts all wrong:

Ars Technica:

The one thing I will say is that I fear that this may cause a great deal of confusion on behalf of your average consumer. Two versions of XP were enough to cause confusion, and now Joe Blow has four choices that may fit the bill.

Two versions of Windows XP? Try five: Starter (not available in North America), Home, Pro, Tablet, and Media Center.

Update 2: Add Dwight Silverman to the list of those picking up on the “confusing” meme:

TechBlog: Seven versions of Windows Vista??

Can you say “market confusion,” boys and girls? Microsoft certainly can!

To his credit, Dwight does note that “after reading [the details about each version], you’ll understand Microsoft’s thinking.”

And here’s Engadget:

Windows Vista to come in seven (or more) versions

We won’t tell you all the goodies each version’s supposed to have, but the next time we see him we will definitely tell Bill that staggered pricepoints and confusing upgrade feature sets are no way to ensure people buy (or like) your OS.

More details on the PDC build of Windows Vista

Paul Thurrott has more details on the upcoming PDC build of Windows Vista:

The Windows Vista code tree was recently forked between the version Microsoft will give out at the PDC (Professional Developers Conference) 2005 conference and the version that will become Beta 2. The current PDC build–build 5219–could very likely make it into the greedy little hands of attendees, and it’s got a couple of interesting surprises: It includes the infamous and once-missing Sidebar and has the Tablet PC and Media Center functionality enabled. And fear not, people. You’ve been waiting to hear which product editions Microsoft will ship in the Vista time frame, right? That announcement is coming next week.

(via Peter Near)