What about Windows

So, everybody’s excited for Windows 10. And with good reason; after all – this is the Windows that’s supposed to get it right, isn’t it?

What do I mean by that?

Well, Windows flip-flops between good and bad (at least, with the non-server, non-NT versions).

Windows 98 – good.

Windows ME – bad.

Windows XP – good.

Windows Vista – bad.

Windows 7 – good.

Windows 8 – bad.

(We have to remember that Windows 8.1 is essentially just a service pack update and not a full version.)

Now, why is this? Some would say it’s because they are trying to be too radical for their customers – that customers don’t really like change – they accept change when they can’t see it happening or if they feel it a choice they are making, but they don’t otherwise like losing what is familiar. That Windows changes are “not glacial” enough I don’t think works. This is technology and people still get excited by what is new; even when it is technology for the masses. It’s why most of us upgrade our phones every two years.

The reason seems to be more simple – they forget what Windows is about. They lose track and then they get reminded and go back to what they do best.

I’m going to ignore Windows ME here firstly because I didn’t use it (hardly anyone did) so have little understanding of the problems.

So we’ll kick off with Vista. How did Microsoft get it so wrong? Well, what they did was they looked at the competitors. You know how I love a good analogy? Well, let’s go running. When you’re running, when you’re at the front, you don’t look back. Sure, you need to be aware of where your competitors are, what they are doing, but you don’t do so by looking back. Otherwise you trip up.

And Microsoft was looking back at Apple.

When it launched Vista, everything was about the look, the design. Windows were animated – they popped, swished, wooshed, pinged – and they were translucent. Gone were the simple stylings of previous, everything was 3D rendered. It was a bit of a backlash over the Apple = cool, PC = boring adverts that had been around. But in doing so they forgot a couple of key things.

The vast majority of PCs were (indeed, still are) used for business purposes. This meant two things – they needed security and they needed performance. People didn’t really care how they were styled, so long as they did what you needed them to do. People didn’t care if the window wooshed out of the bottom left corner, so long as it didn’t crash the PC. People didn’t care if it popped as it dissolved into the bottom right corner (they actually didn’t want it to, it’s actually quite irritating in an open-plan office if everyone’s computer keeps popping) so long as the system didn’t get attacked by trojans. And that was the problem – they had concentrated so much on the styling they had forgotten about security and performance.

So, they went back to the drawing board, and created XP – styled very similarly to 98 actually.

Once bitten twice shy?

No. Because the markets were watching, chattering. Investors needed innovation; dynamism. Actually they didn’t – what investors wanted was for Microsoft to be more Apple. Apple was raking it in (it still is), Apple was the darling, Apple was mobile whilst Windows wasn’t. But as well as Apple, there was another runner – Google. Whilst Apple was popular hardware, Android is a far more popular OS. So, Microsoft looked over its should at what Android was doing – how it was doing touchscreen. Because tablets were going to be the next big thing – tablets were going to rule all, weren’t they?

I remember a lot of people getting very excited about iPads, although the few people that I know that still use them, either do so because either they feel a duty to get some use out of these very expensive little trays, or simple because the size makes them a little more portable. Anyhow, I think I’ve had a rant on tablets before.

Now, touchscreen works very well for certain things, but not for others – typing for example. I believe that with enough refinement, touchscreen could replace the mouse as an input device. However, unless there is a stratospheric improvement in handwriting recognition technology, it won’t replace a keyboard (even with handwriting recognition, there are many circumstances where a keyboard is quicker, or reduces the use of the screen ‘estate’).

And so it was that Microsoft got distracted by Google. Or Android, more particularly. And just as Android had apps, so Microsoft suddenly had apps. And widgets (cf. “Windows Live Tiles”) which were apps that told you a little bit of info (or maybe even allowed you to control basic functions). Android had a regulated grid layout, with apps or widgets allowed to occupy any combination so long as it was rectangular – Windows is ever-so-slightly more prescriptive of its Tiles and Live Tiles, but the logic is identical.

So, mobiles and tablets are challengers when you don’t need to write an essay – when all you need text-input for is to type a URL or enter a search term in Spotify. For anything more significant than that you need text input for a number of reasons: tactile feedback; how much of the screen estate keyboards take up; comfort of screen/keyboard separate manoeuvrability and visibility; and screen-smear being just a few.

Only, Microsoft forgot: most of its users are business users, people still feverently gripping their mouses – the people who made Blackberry big because it had a hardware keyboard. People who only tap the tile to open Word and Outlook and Internet Explorer. And they couldn’t find where they were. It was too flash, too radical, too Android for people. Fine – change our icons into Tiles, just remember that a lot of people still use the Start button to find things, just remember that on a laptop or a desktop, the screen is often further out of reach that the keyboard.

But just as the markets were chattering, so the critics were desperate to report the death of Microsoft. They missed out on predicting the death of Myspace, so were eager to have their c.v. emblazoned with the words “First analyst to predict the collapse of …”. Microsoft was – if you look at certain figures – losing market share. It still held the desktop and business OS crowns as well as for email clients (note, clients not services) and Office-type applications; but if you took Internet Explorer, Media Player, and its late entry into mobile, it was not the dominant force that the analysts were used to. And Microsoft had to respond to that – it had to follow.

And this is the thing – Microsoft is neither a follower nor a disrupter. It’s lovely, it sits quietly in the corner telling you that you want a ham sandwich and then offering you a ham sandwich. And this isn’t an organically-reared prosciutto with Andalusian gerkin and carefully-caressed jalapeno pepper piccalilli on seventeen-grain-yet-gluten-free-bloomer sanwich. It’s a ham sandwich – it does what it needs to very well whether it’s sat in your lounge or on your business buffet.

People have always needed Windows to be everything; but now they (and particularly the analysts and investors) need Windows 10 to be even more of everything. It needs to be 5 inches as much as 55 inches. It needs to be touch and type. Most of all, it needs to be a brand – a unique identity.

From what I’ve seen, the see-saw has correctly rocked back to a “good” product.