clearly they do not wish to discuss features too much, too early and suffer the consequences of what happened to Longhorn/Vista
The bit that really chaffed was the dig at Jim <we have to do the right thing> Allchin - whom he credits for damaging Windows... the opposite is true... the decision to focus on XP SP2 and deliver it as an SP vice a release and take the delay it brought on Vista should be viewed as among the most necessary, appropriate and courageous business decisions in corporate history. There is no doubt that XP SP2 was critical and contrary to what the article suggests, Mr. Allchin very likely saved Windows. Similarly, the leaders and board at Microsoft should share in this credit - they supported the decision and dealt with the consequences.
The code reset and the technical and operational achievement of getting an entirely new OS out the door from late 2004 and shipping to business in late 2006 was to me, astounding.
I maintain that the "open letter" is indeed, ridiculous - juvenile and utterly useless as it stands. "IF" the authors wanted more openness around Windows 7 development, they should ask for it and state their case. This piece of garbage insults all of us - very, naive and foolish, as well as they very old and everyone in between. Someone needs to set these young people down, box their ears and teach them how to communicate appropriately.
We are not well serving young people at all if we do not shape them and that includes delivering sharp messages when they are appropriate. It isn't just our right as older people, it is our responsibility and if we truly respect their potential, we won't insulate them from that.
|