I'm a bit puzzled by two things:
1) Is it really true that Windows 7 must appeal to geeks? What if it does a really good job of offering a compelling user experience to the standard "Mom & Pop" audience, but adds no new features that impresses the geeks. Is it really doomed to failure in this case?
2) Supposing #1 is true: what (reasonable) features/improvements/changes would make Windows 7 truly appealing to geeks?
Regards #2 the article doesn't give many suggestions and I'm not sure what is suggested is all that good.
"the geeks want better security, more customization, and full compatibility."
Assuming geeks are highly tech savvy, living at the bleeding edge, is full compatibility such a big issue? It also seems to be incompatible with security, if you're going to support legacy code you're going to be left with legacy vulnerabilities as well.
I've no good suggestions for killer features but I'll know them when I see them.
I think 1 is true. A regular user has no way to evaluate is a new OS is good or not, so they'll ask a geek. An internally honest geek will answer based on if the OS is good for the questioner. But most people will not, or, are not, able to do that, and will answer based on if it's good for them. So yes, 1 is true.
#2 is tough. Really tough. But I would start with customization - make sure everything can be changed.
An OS that doesn't appeal to geeks and can't take gaining critical mass for granted (look at Vista, bet they never planned for no-one wanting it) won't have compelling applications. Applications matter. No-one (but geeks) cares about operating systems. People just want to write a letter, watch a movie, play a game.
Is it me, or does it feel like he wants microsoft to do a better job of accommodating him? (i.e. members of the media.) And he's not so concerned with the more typical, but less visible geek.
