
Windows is doomed - mcone
http://theweek.com/articles/721988/windows-doomed
======
seabird
Windows is doomed as soon as:

\- there is a _viable_ alternative to Microsoft Office on the desktop. This
doesn't mean one that gets most of the way there; LibreOffice and company,
Office on mobile, etc. don't quite cut it. Macro jockeys and VBA scripting are
huge game changers for corporate clients, especially in the finance and
accounting worlds.

\- common CAD software has been entirely ported to a new platform and has
complete feature parity. Considering how conservative
engineering/manufacturing firms can be, this will likely never happen. No
large engineering corporation will ever risk, or run the risk of ever having
to run the risk, of even the slightest of hiccups in a large software
migration. The only big swinger even making an attempt in this department is
Siemens NX, and even we're still quite far out from feature parity for even
that single package.

\- Active Directory has a viable counterpart for a competing operating system.
Some people are trying, none are truly succeeding.

Those three points alone are enough to prop up Windows for the next couple
decades. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of Windows, Microsoft, their
business practices, or many of their ideas on how things should be done.
However, it _drives me up the fucking wall_ when people make dumbass claims
that Windows will die within any reasonable timeframe (20-30 years).

EDIT: As a quick clarification, I bring up CAD not because it attracts a large
userbase (it doesn't), but because switching away from Windows means that the
manufacturing base of the entire world will undergo a massive change that
could prove fatal in many ways. This means that any company with a significant
CAD userbase will be using Windows, even if the HR, IT, etc. doesn't, in an
attempt to consolidate overhead. This also means that many companies that work
with engineering/manufacturing companies will stick with it for
compatibility's sake. Many people are commenting that CAD/manufacturing
doesn't account for many users, but that's beside the major implication.
Engineering and manufacturing customers alone could ensure at least a workable
level of Windows support, all while indoctrinating most of their employees in
to Microsoft's ecosystem.

~~~
roenxi
Just for fun; I recorded a macro in LibreOffice Basic that sets the text in a
cell.

This is a sample:

    
    
      dispatcher = createUnoService("com.sun.star.frame.DispatchHelper")
    
      dim args1(0) as new com.sun.star.beans.PropertyValue
      args1(0).Name = "ToPoint"
      args1(0).Value = "$C$7"
    
      dispatcher.executeDispatch(document, ".uno:GoToCell", "", 0, args1())
    

That first line is confusing and obsolete. Sun doesn't exist any more, it is
two generations of branding from being StarOffice, and good luck figuring out
why the service is named after a card game. Even a programmer isn't going to
figure all that out without knowing the history of the project.

Now in MS Office I'm pretty sure this would be something like
ActiveSheet.Cells(1, 5) = "foo". There is nearly no discovery for the LO Basic
equivalent 'sheet.getCellByPosition(3,16) = "foo"'.

It really is worlds apart. I don't see how a moderately sophisticated user can
learn to write LO macros without finding a reference manual and investing
hours orienting themselves. I've seen people teach themselves to a useful
standard using MS Office macro recordings.

 _EDIT_ More importantly, a novice wouldn't necessarily understand that the
recorded macro isn't the accepted way to select a cell. Even realising that a
cell can be selected with one line is hindered by the LO macro recording.

~~~
endorphone
Macro-programming Office documents is one of those things that should
immediately elicit the question "Is there a better solution?" There almost
always is. Office documents are an extremely poor workflow and a terrible
artifact for data.

Which is why replacements seldom have more than the most trivial of automation
-- the people who are making the move usually change their workflows. The
offices that built around Office 95 are, however, still doing things the way
they always do.

EDIT: What a changed world when _this_ is a contentious comment.

~~~
zdragnar
The thing is, it can be done by a "non programmer" without IT or admin
overhead. Building or buying a new solution outside of Office requires far
more buy-in and cost.

It may not be the best workflow, but it is the most accessible one for an
individual to start with.

Edit: for what it's worth, I agree that it can be a hindrance to a company
when it becomes a core operating process. However, that doesn't mean that it
is inherently wrong for many needs

~~~
endorphone
Sure, I get where it comes into play. A team usually has the "techie" guy who
decides to roll some macros, and soon it becomes embedded. In the last decade
and before this was the engine of an enormous amount of end user computing.

But in 2017, it is almost always a very bad sign. Which is why the competition
have mostly abandoned automation of the 1990s Office sort.

------
tw04
How many times are pundits going to keep repeating that cellphones/tablets are
going to kill off laptops and desktops before they realize how ridiculous that
is?

The only one that has a remote chance of killing either one at this point is
Microsoft themselves through continuum and X64 code running on ARM. Even then,
phone horsepower is still not enough to fully replace my laptop and desktop
usage. I don't see that changing anytime soon with the issues fabs are having
getting to smaller process sizes.

~~~
seanmcdirmid
Doomed and killed off don't mean the same thing. Everyone in tech who isn't
busy knocking down poorly constructed strawmen acknowledge that post-PC has
already happened. That market is no longer expected to grow.

~~~
notzorbo3
"Doomed" to me doesn't sound like "not expected to grow". It sounds more like
"expected to die off". I mean, tv sales have been dropping for the last few
years, but we're not saying the tv market is doomed because we don't expect
that market to die. I think a better word for "not expected to grow" is
"saturated".

In any case, the use of the word "doomed" is hyperbolic or at the very least
ill defined scaremongering.

~~~
seanmcdirmid
The TV market as a growing interesting market for innovation is almost dead.
If you are in the tech industry and looking for the next big thing, you aren't
look around TVs.

I really don't think many here actually read the article and instead just
focused on the byline without any context.

------
detritus
Meh, Google doesn't really offer much by way of a platform for development
(sure, I know some here code on Chromebooks) and severely risks
demonopolisation; Apple will have to pull some magic out of the bag if it
wants to stem the flow of developers and professionals leaving its platform
and Windows is still on a significant number of productive workplace desktops
(such as mine here).

Phones are not computers and are deviating ever more from being mistaken for
devices that can be used for actual productive work.

So Microsoft lost the mobile handset/OS race.. so far.

I'm not encouraged that any of the reasoning in this article represents nails
in MS's coffin.

~~~
bitL
The main argument is economical; desktop computers are stale (well, thanks AMD
for stirring it up recently a bit), most people now treat computers as home
appliances that need replacement once in 5-10 years. In mobile, market still
grows (even if showing signs of saturation), there is still a year-to-year
progress making newer models appealing and there are more mobile devices that
computers with faster replacement rate. So what MS was getting on new end user
licenses is lost; they lost mobile as well; the only move left are
subscriptions which individual users hate and businesses love.

------
diego_moita
No it isn't, this is bullshit.

As long as finance managers want to download their financial data from
SharePoint to Excel, their reports generated on Crystal Reports and edited on
Word and as long as finance managers are the ones paying for new software and
computers then both Windows and Microsoft have a bright future ahead.

It is called synergy. The same "walled garden" approach that Apple uses for
consumer market is working very well for Microsoft on the enterprise market.

------
tech2
Every time I see headlines like these (likewise regarding Mac OS etc.) I'm
left wondering if people realise where the software for these platforms come
from.

Without Mac OS there'd be no iOS apps (or at least, many fewer). And without
Windows there'd be many fewer Xbox and likely Android apps too.

Non-mobile computing is needed until (at the very least) the bulk of
development for mobile is done _on_ mobile (hint: I doubt that will happen any
time soon).

~~~
noxToken
This is what I don't understand. I understand that most consumer activities
(e.g. mail, social, search) can be achieved on mobile without missing a beat.
Static content and most dynamic content have been solved for mobile devices
for a while. What they seem to miss is that any substantive work is a hassle
to complete on mobile.

If you ignore the lag from the CPU or memory constraints, the interface is
just not conducive for working. Who wants to edit text documents or
spreadsheets, used a shell, or edit code on a 5 inch screen? Who wants to use
a soft keyboard for any non-trivial amount of work? It's not that it _can 't_
be done; there are much more attractive options readily available.

There there's the argument about connecting mobile devices to monitors, using
adapters/bluetooth for peripheral devices, and thin client setups. If that's
the case, why don't you grab a cheap laptop? Mobile is gimping you at that
point.

~~~
jhoechtl
Once you accept the fact that the meme of the dying desktop and mobile only
comes from people who are "creative" by answering mails/reacting on social
media and dragging things from A to B, you will quickly understand that the
desktop on which most of the grunt work gets still done will still be there
for a long time.

------
romanovcode
You might want to add "and 2017 is the year of Linux desktop" as long as
you're at it.

------
nunez
Windows was doomed in 2009, 2005, 2001, 1993, etc.

I think the rule is if you're marked as doomed incorrectly more than three
times over the course of a decade, then you are too big to fail and are, by
definition, not doomed.

------
DanHulton
I dunno, I'm going to keep upgrading my Windows box and version so long as it
stays the primary gaming platform. Consoles are fine and all, I even have a
couple modern ones, but there's still no replacement for mouse & keyboard for
hi-fidelity input, and the only desktop that lets you play the vast majority
of m&k games is Windows.

That'll keep it in the home, and AD & Office will keep it in the workplace.
Seems not so doomed to me.

------
rectang
As a developer, my interests are in maximizing the value of my skills. I want
my expertise to be applicable across multiple platforms; I want projects which
I develop to be portable across multiple platforms; I wish to minimize the
amount of pointless superficial interface information I must learn as
platforms rise and fall and instead focus on deepening my comprehension of
computer science fundamentals.

I hate that the platform vendors cannot ally themselves with those interests
and must instead always attempt to lock developers in, damaging us
economically and wasting our time and human potential.

When a vendor suffers because their lock-in attempts falter, I can't help but
feel schadenfreude. Now, if only their competition were consistently better...

------
madmulita
Off topic: Microsoft was not only accused of monopolistic moves, it was found
guilty.

------
jackyinger
I'd contend that the desktop OS in general is doomed. Besides a mention of
iOS's aid to MacOS's popularity all the author's arguments apply to mac (and
Linux desktop).

------
TYPE_FASTER
If Microsoft hadn't created Azure and started shifting their efforts to be an
enterprise development company a few years ago, they'd be the next RIM.

But...even if Windows goes away, there's AWS and Google Cloud, but the ability
to migrate existing legacy enterprise applications into Azure, as well as
leverage new features like machine learning and cognitive vision, will let
Microsoft stay alive.

How successful will it be in the long term is the question.

------
JackFr
It feels like Microsoft is entering the next stage of the IBM lifecycle --
technology eliminates the value of the monopoly, and they're forced to find
new ways to make money, while they coast for a few years on market inertia.

Ultimately MS (like IBM) will not to be able to sell anything outside the
C-suite, because anyone closer to the technology knows there are better
cheaper solutions.

(But Xboxes...hmmmmm...maybe my view is a little to simplistic.)

~~~
mistermann
Have you heard of Azure?

~~~
swagtricker
Yes. An compared to AWS it's been immature, buggy, unreliable, and caters to
the admin acting like a button mashing monkey that tries to solve problems by
turning things on/off in the Web UI instead of using a programmable
repeatable, scriptable "environment as source". Hopefully, others have had
better experiences, but so far I'm wanting to run away screaming.

~~~
mistermann
> instead of using a programmable repeatable, scriptable "environment as
> source".

[https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/azure-resource-
manage...](https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/azure-resource-
manager/resource-group-authoring-templates)

Thanks for the time capsule experience though, sometimes I miss the legendary
zealotry of Slashdot.

------
nikolay
No, actually. Today's Windows is more attractive than ever. As a developer, I
even prefer it - unlike macOS, it has WSL, and you see it's evolving quickly
unlike macOS, which feels dead. Also, given .NET and PowerShell run on Linux
and macOS, they are a worthy investment. I only wish Chocolately had a vibrant
community as Homebrew - it lags behind, and even for basic features, you have
to cough up money.

------
payne92
This article rehashes the well-known challenges and missteps that have made
Windows much less relevant.

It totally misses the scale and intertia around Windows in the enterprise. It
may not show up as the hot platform for new applications on HN, but it's not
remotely "doomed".

------
gh0S7
I do agree with the article, but it doesn't seems that Windows will be going
very soon. Too many applications are still dependent on it, and PC gamers,
both casual and hardcore, generally prefer using Windows and are a large
portion of the market.

------
ngold
Windows is doomed as soon as .exe is. But really how did it make it so far?

------
almonj
Mobile is not a major threat to desktops, they serve different purposes.
People who have desktop PCs aren't getting rid of them because they bought a
phone or tablet. Even though Microsoft has questionable practices they still
have the best desktop OS. This is clickbait trash journalism.

