Announcement

Collapse

Computer Lab Guidelines

Here in the computer lab, we talk about cool tech, the newest coolest gadgets, and tackle your toughest tech questions.

If you need to refresh yourself on the decorum, now would be a good time. Forum Rules: here
See more
See less

Why Not OS Models?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Why Not OS Models?

    Why do companies put all their eggs in a given version basket?
    "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot

    "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

    My Personal Blog

    My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

    Quill Sword

  • #2
    huh?

    Comment


    • #3
      Cost...plain and simple. With a particular OS, first of all you can get a volume discount usually. Next, you now have to buy app's to run on them. If you have different versions of OS's then you now have to buy multiple versions of app's and support them. Then, you have to have support people who are multiply trained in many different OS's. Those people usually command more money. For instance, the company I work for is a BIG company. Not only do we have many "off the shelf" products we use, we also have proprietary applications that were designed in house by application developers. If we use multiple OS's, then the testing phase is now twice or three times (or more) as long to work the bugs out of them before they are deployed or updated. Even with a single OS, we often have issues with new app's and updates to older ones that cause issues, I can just imagine the issue with multiple OS's.
      "What has the Church gained if it is popular, but there is no conviction, no repentance, no power?" - A.W. Tozer

      "... there are two parties in Washington, the stupid party and the evil party, who occasionally get together and do something both stupid and evil, and this is called bipartisanship." - Everett Dirksen

      Comment


      • #4
        That makes sense, LJ, but I phrased my question badly. I had car models in mind because they are frequently less 'brand new' and more 'off the shelf' - chassis, trans, engine, etc are borrowed from other vehicles and only the body (at least in part) and interiors are significantly different. I'm really asking why the OS has to be the same outside (user interface) as under the hood (programming).Why not make Win 24 (or whatever) with options for an XP, Win 7 or for the weirdos, Vista, 'body' type? Is the interface that much of a logistical nightmare or is it more a sales thing?
        "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot

        "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

        My Personal Blog

        My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

        Quill Sword

        Comment


        • #5
          ETA: I'm assuming the bulk of the heavy lifting of programming in an OS happens well out of the view of the average user - if not, well, that would be the answer.
          "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot

          "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

          My Personal Blog

          My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

          Quill Sword

          Comment


          • #6
            Mostly it would seem to be a marketing issue.

            Microsoft wants to 'advance' the user interface in a new direction so that competitors cannot keep up with them. And Microsoft is concern with its own migration path. They want to remove features they don't think are worth the effort of maintaining or improving. Programmers tend to be lured into new tools ... and some of these development tools are dropped by Microsoft in later years.

            I'm still waiting for a 3D concept for the desktop layout where you can be visually reminded of where you left certain files.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
              That makes sense, LJ, but I phrased my question badly. I had car models in mind because they are frequently less 'brand new' and more 'off the shelf' - chassis, trans, engine, etc are borrowed from other vehicles and only the body (at least in part) and interiors are significantly different. I'm really asking why the OS has to be the same outside (user interface) as under the hood (programming).Why not make Win 24 (or whatever) with options for an XP, Win 7 or for the weirdos, Vista, 'body' type? Is the interface that much of a logistical nightmare or is it more a sales thing?
              Are you talking about from the "builder" side? Not the end user side? If so, then it's a matter of Copyright. Just like a song and melody, the writer retains all rights to the code. Using code that someone else writes is piracy and subject to lawsuit. So, they have to all write it differently to avoid that. Now, Window 7 and 10 (I believe) have Win XP emulators to allow you to run older programs in a compatibility mode

              Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
              ETA: I'm assuming the bulk of the heavy lifting of programming in an OS happens well out of the view of the average user - if not, well, that would be the answer.
              . The OS does almost all of its processing out of sight only displaying the end result to the Interface.
              "What has the Church gained if it is popular, but there is no conviction, no repentance, no power?" - A.W. Tozer

              "... there are two parties in Washington, the stupid party and the evil party, who occasionally get together and do something both stupid and evil, and this is called bipartisanship." - Everett Dirksen

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Littlejoe View Post
                Are you talking about from the "builder" side? Not the end user side? If so, then it's a matter of Copyright. Just like a song and melody, the writer retains all rights to the code. Using code that someone else writes is piracy and subject to lawsuit. So, they have to all write it differently to avoid that. Now, Window 7 and 10 (I believe) have Win XP emulators to allow you to run older programs in a compatibility mode
                Wouldn't Microsoft have those copyrights?
                Originally posted by LJ
                . The OS does almost all of its processing out of sight only displaying the end result to the Interface.
                Thanks!
                "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot

                "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

                My Personal Blog

                My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

                Quill Sword

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
                  Wouldn't Microsoft have those copyrights? Thanks!
                  Yes MS would but you do realize there are other OS's out there such as a variety of Linux OS's, Chrome now has one...etc. I didn't realize you were referring to MS only (if that is indeed what you were doing). There is another factor then, my company moved from Win XP to Win7 only when MS stopped supporting Win XP. Again, they delayed it as long as possible because buying 30,000 to 40,000 Licenses for an OS is quite a capital outlay. This was a 2 year project to get all the app's ported over where both OS's could use them until the whole company was converted to Win7.
                  "What has the Church gained if it is popular, but there is no conviction, no repentance, no power?" - A.W. Tozer

                  "... there are two parties in Washington, the stupid party and the evil party, who occasionally get together and do something both stupid and evil, and this is called bipartisanship." - Everett Dirksen

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Littlejoe View Post
                    Yes MS would but you do realize there are other OS's out there such as a variety of Linux OS's, Chrome now has one...etc. I didn't realize you were referring to MS only (if that is indeed what you were doing). There is another factor then, my company moved from Win XP to Win7 only when MS stopped supporting Win XP. Again, they delayed it as long as possible because buying 30,000 to 40,000 Licenses for an OS is quite a capital outlay. This was a 2 year project to get all the app's ported over where both OS's could use them until the whole company was converted to Win7.
                    Okay, I thought you were talking about the research copyrights and not the licensing. I don't see where the problem would be since a company would still presumably buy a single model. It could get thorny if they were to try to individualize for employees but I don't see a necessity to that.Each company should own the rights to its own product - I don't get the problem unless you mean in terms of compatibility somehow?
                    "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot

                    "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

                    My Personal Blog

                    My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

                    Quill Sword

                    Comment

                    Related Threads

                    Collapse

                    Topics Statistics Last Post
                    Started by Ronson, 03-20-2024, 07:20 PM
                    2 responses
                    28 views
                    0 likes
                    Last Post rogue06
                    by rogue06
                     
                    Started by Christian3, 03-15-2024, 10:15 AM
                    13 responses
                    64 views
                    0 likes
                    Last Post QuantaFille  
                    Working...
                    X