News Analysis. Could Microsoft possibly say less about Vista successor Windows 7?
Steven Sinofsky's motto should be, in the spirit of Memorial Day: "Loose lips sink ships." Office development proceeded with scant disclosure under his tenure. Little has changed since he assumed the role as Microsoft's senior veep for the Windows and Windows Live Engineering group. Open disclosure and dialog punctuated past Windows development—not that the process did much for Vista.
Now Steven is talking Windows 7 to CNET News.com. But he's not saying much. There's even a Microsoft "Communicating Windows 7" blog post, credited to Chris Flores, defending the say-no-more interview.
Microsoft seemingly has plenty of reasons to keep mum about Seven, starting with freezing Vista sales. The company claims 140 million Vista licenses shipped. But that number is deceptive. Based on interviews with analysts and enterprise IT managers, the majority of licenses are on new PCs where Vista is never deployed. Most businesses are stripping off Vista and using downgrade rights to install Windows XP.
By that measure, Vista is a disaster. It's the Titanic hitting the only iceberg within 1,000 kilometers and sinking in five minutes. Windows customers waited three to nearly six years for Vista (depending on when they deployed XP). There should have been a wild rush for Vista. But the Vista, ah, view, was more stinking landfill than garden. People are selling their Vista homes and moving back to the XP neighborhood. Yeah, yeah, I mixed metaphors.
With real world Vista deployments so bad, Microsoft shouldn't want to make adoption matters worse. Big talk about Seven could easily solidify IT organizational determination to skip Vista and wait for Seven. Microsoft knows there really shouldn't be any talk about Vista's successor. Yet Steven gave that interview where he didn't say much.
But he talked lots, which is the point. That he said so little may be more about his personality and the interview style of reporter Ina Fried. CBS just bought CNET. Windows 7 maybe isn't the stuff of "60 Minutes," but surely somebody at the network knows something about interviewing tight-lipped personalities.
Perhaps Steven needed a platform for explaining why there is so little information disclosure about Windows 7—why things have changed.
Chris offered some explanation about why things have changed in his credited blog post:
"Typically when Microsoft ships a new OS (like Windows Vista), we immediately start talking about the next version...What is a little different today is when and how we are talking about the next version of Windows. So, why the change in approach? We know that when we talk about our plans for the next release of Windows, people take action. As a result, we can significantly impact our partners and our customers if we broadly share information that later changes. With Windows 7, we're trying to more carefully plan how we share information with our customers and partners."
What Chris really means—and what Steven essentially says in his CNET News.com Q&A—Microsoft wants to take greater control regarding the information disclosed about Windows development. Microsoft will say what it wants when ready. Not any sooner. So why are Steven and Chris revealing tidbits today? I see two reasons: Myth busting and getting out some positive information about Windows (e.g., not talking about Vista).
Because Microsoft has been so mum about Windows 7, rumor mongers have set the agenda. Meanwhile, Vista has caught a kind of virtual leprosy; the operating system is shunned, and it's the object of ridicule. Microsoft simply can't let either circumstance continue. So today the company started a coordinated effort to take control of the messaging.
The big myth-busting information is a real shocker: Windows 7 plumbing won't be all that different from Vista. Chris' credited blog post explains:
"The long-term architectural investments we introduced in Windows Vista and then refined for Windows Vista SP1 and Windows Server 2008 will carry forward in Windows 7. Windows Vista established a very solid foundation, particularly on subsystems such as graphics, audio, and storage. Windows Server 2008 was built on that foundation and Windows 7 will be as well. Contrary to some speculation, Microsoft is not creating a new kernel for Windows 7."
Well, son of a bitch. There's no new kernel? Seven builds on Vista's "solid foundation?" Same `ol, same `ol isn't what Microsoft customers and partners need from Seven. They need different—and, please—not a pretty new user interface. The approach is great for backward compatibility, particularly hardware drivers, but not much for advancing Windows where it needs to go.
Something else holding Seven back. From Chris' credited blog: "One of our design goals for Windows 7 is that it will run on the recommended hardware we specified for Windows Vista."
In March, I strongly advocated that Microsoft start afresh with a new kernel and build up a modular operating system that could run on many devices. Clearly, Microsoft is taking no risks, which is the riskiest approach possible. Same kernel, same hardware requirements won't get Windows onto the plethora of devices it needs to be. Vista requirements are too high and best suited for PCs.
Besides myth busting, there is Microsoft's desperate need to get out something positive about Windows. That's not easy with all the negative Web chatter about Vista and the constant nitpicking of Apple "Get a Mac" TV commercials. Silence is golden only when there is no other noise. Given how bad the Vista talk is, perhaps Microsoft executives think that they can get away with talking Seven without causing too much sales harm to the current operating system.
That said, including today's reaffirmation of a ship date—"approximately three years after the general availability of Windows Vista," according to Chris' credited blog—any information risks freezing sales. I see extremes rather than middle ground. Either Microsoft executives see that even limited information disclosure can do little more harm, or they don't care—meaning they've already given up on Windows Vista.
If the latter explanation, isn't that delusional thinking, assuming Seven plumbing will be no better than Vista's?
