Unofficially we all knew Microsoft was going to kill it off some 5 years ago, but now, it's official...
Microsoft recommends switching to iPhone or Android as it prepares to kill off Windows phones
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/18/mic...-mobile-says-switch-to-iphone-or-android.html
I still love this quote, because it's pure, unfiltered honesty that I knew since dealing with developing embedded CE products (alongside Embedded NT, VxWorks and GNU/Linux) by the mid '00s on ARM, Power and x86, and it wasn't a secret...
NT, on the other hand, was really tied to x86, with limited liability support outside of it, so Atom heavily, which was always behind on performance/power consumption, let alone not as flexible in packaging and design.
The only more honest quote I saw from a MS head was from a short-lived Microsoft security chief over a decade ago who got up and admitted Windows needed to be rearchitected because it was never designed for the Internet. He went on to focus on the automation pieces in MS I-Office and it was just confirming all we knew, but publicly.
That said, we just had a former Microsoft Azure project manager join is this week. The company I work for originally tried going down the Hyper-V route and quickly flipped over to Red Hat.
As I even had to joke as he was reminiscing about early issues with Azure with one of our datacenter contractors, the software defined networking capabilites in NT are a joke, and always have been. And at one point, I inserted it, "Microsoft's Azure head finally caved in and went full Linux, stealing everyone he could from Red Hat, HP's crumbling mess of their Cloud, and a few others from places like Google, and the only reason he wasn't canned is because Gates had his back... even if from afar."
The Windows platform was never created for the Internet, mobile or software defined infrastructure, and Microsoft is now finally succeeding because they have admitted that and adopted the best technologies. That's why they are on their way to continuing to pick up a lot of the cloud market, especially with their Office 365 offering, where Google Docs has stumbled. Heck, the former worked better than the later on Linux notebooks that even Red Hat considered it, forcing Google to finally get semi-serious.
Although I do very much still enjoy it when Microsoft fan boys and apologists believe Azure is all Windows underneath. In one case, one guy was so bad I pulled up a few of my fellow Red Hat alumni now at Microsoft working on Azure on LinkedIn and even got a couple of them IM in real time to dispell his misguided notions that Azure is using Windows for a most of the core, critical stuff.
But people love to assume from brand names.
Finally, the world moves forward, and stupid technology and assumptions die just a little bit more. I guess that's why I loved the series 'Halt and Catch Fire.' It was a 4-season series that focused on how good technology fails, because the way things get adopted have nothing to do with what's the best.
Microsoft recommends switching to iPhone or Android as it prepares to kill off Windows phones
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/18/mic...-mobile-says-switch-to-iphone-or-android.html
I still love this quote, because it's pure, unfiltered honesty that I knew since dealing with developing embedded CE products (alongside Embedded NT, VxWorks and GNU/Linux) by the mid '00s on ARM, Power and x86, and it wasn't a secret...
"We had a differentiated experience, but it's so clear in hindsight that the disruption in business model which Android represented was enormous, and that building our early versions of Windows Phone on an incomplete Windows CE platform, designed for small embedded systems, left us too hobbled to ever catch up," Myerson said.
NT, on the other hand, was really tied to x86, with limited liability support outside of it, so Atom heavily, which was always behind on performance/power consumption, let alone not as flexible in packaging and design.
The only more honest quote I saw from a MS head was from a short-lived Microsoft security chief over a decade ago who got up and admitted Windows needed to be rearchitected because it was never designed for the Internet. He went on to focus on the automation pieces in MS I-Office and it was just confirming all we knew, but publicly.
That said, we just had a former Microsoft Azure project manager join is this week. The company I work for originally tried going down the Hyper-V route and quickly flipped over to Red Hat.
As I even had to joke as he was reminiscing about early issues with Azure with one of our datacenter contractors, the software defined networking capabilites in NT are a joke, and always have been. And at one point, I inserted it, "Microsoft's Azure head finally caved in and went full Linux, stealing everyone he could from Red Hat, HP's crumbling mess of their Cloud, and a few others from places like Google, and the only reason he wasn't canned is because Gates had his back... even if from afar."
The Windows platform was never created for the Internet, mobile or software defined infrastructure, and Microsoft is now finally succeeding because they have admitted that and adopted the best technologies. That's why they are on their way to continuing to pick up a lot of the cloud market, especially with their Office 365 offering, where Google Docs has stumbled. Heck, the former worked better than the later on Linux notebooks that even Red Hat considered it, forcing Google to finally get semi-serious.
Although I do very much still enjoy it when Microsoft fan boys and apologists believe Azure is all Windows underneath. In one case, one guy was so bad I pulled up a few of my fellow Red Hat alumni now at Microsoft working on Azure on LinkedIn and even got a couple of them IM in real time to dispell his misguided notions that Azure is using Windows for a most of the core, critical stuff.
But people love to assume from brand names.
Finally, the world moves forward, and stupid technology and assumptions die just a little bit more. I guess that's why I loved the series 'Halt and Catch Fire.' It was a 4-season series that focused on how good technology fails, because the way things get adopted have nothing to do with what's the best.
Last edited:
