I hope I am not breaking Microsoft NDA here but I was a Windows 95 beta tester. I am going to even go more out on the edge and share another tidbit, I also tested the original MSN as a part of Windows 95.
Now that we have that out of the way, I want to feel 10 years ago. No, not physically, nor mentally but OS wise. I want Microsoft to make Windows Vista strike a chord like Windows 95 did. Lets face it, when was the last time people lined up and declared "This is the Woodstock of the '90s," when going to buy an operating system? How about, "I probably won't install it for a couple of weeks, but (I need it) just to have it in the house, to hold the box, something fun like that." That sounds pretty funny doesn't it? But people really were excited about the launch of Windows 95. I was excited! Just looking at the new user interface was exciting. The start button was even new! It was an exciting time. The Internet was just becoming mainstream, Netscape was newly founded, multimedia was becoming more common on the PC, Visual Basic/ Delphi made programming Windows apps easy... Encarta seamlessly tied the online world to the PC... There was a lot going on, many new things to many people. When was the last time the computer industry has felt like that at the PC operating system level?
I am certainly not saying there are no exciting things right now - there are too many to list (wireless, VoIP, search, RSS, web services etc.). But when was the last time the most fundamental part of the computing experience was exciting for the mainstream (I find the tablet exciting but it is still just XP)? Since Windows 95 was launched 10 years ago (August 24, 1995), every Microsoft OS launch since then has been measured against Launch 95. Windows 98, ME, 2000, XP... they all compete against and bow to Windows 95. Why? Because the Windows 95 launch experience was just that, an experience. It was like an opening for Star Wars. It was a distinct change in direction for the world of the PC, from the look, to the use of, and back. All of that change drove the industry to the new heights, new inventions and the computing world we have today. Yes, the Mac was around and pretty, but the PC had the numbers. Just like the BBS before the Internet, a few people knew the power of the GUI but the masses had not yet realized it. Enter Windows 95.
Was Windows 95 about security? No. Obviously security needs are different today than in 1995, but security is not a feature (at least it shouldn't be for the mainstream); it is a requirement but not a feature, as in selling point. What message does it send, when security is a selling point, what does that say about your current products? It sends the message "our current products are junk and not secure." Is that a good reason to buy a product? Is that why people flocked to stores at midnight 10 years ago? To me, marketing a product as secure is good if security is my job; as a home user, or an average business user, it makes me think "If they have sold me junk for x years, why would I trust them now? Why would I pay only to find out later it was trash? They always say it is the best, but apparently it is not!?!?!". It makes the consumer feel like they were duped. Security is now a requirement but it does not sell like a whole new GUI. When was the last time the Start button did not look boring or even cliche? It was a new thing once.
I recently installed Windows Vista beta 1. I know it is beta, but after using it I really hope it is beta in the old school sense and not the more modern Google sense (where the product is live for years as beta). Why? After using it, I was saddened. I was saddened by the fact that I saw no 2 second glance "wow" for the common person. The Aero glass is nice, but it still just looks like Windows XP with some translucency. Again, I know it is beta, but will Windows Vista look that much different when it launches? I am not so concerned about application compatibility or bugs right now (it is beta), what I am concerned about is the immediate "boom" of the product; the one-look-pitch it provides customers.
The one-look-pitch is what draws in even the casual user to play with the system. The one-look-pitch is what drives someone to the store to get the product, just to have it. The one-look-pitch is what makes the person delve in, commit and want to get products that utilize the system. Why do I care? Because every cog in the computing ecosystem gains from a successful one-look-pitch. Hardware vendors get sales via system upgrades, computer manufacturers get new sales (and hopefully provide better support) and software companies have an easier job selling their software. All of these sales trickle through the whole industry, from training, to book publishers, to consultants. A good one-look-pitch can provide the oomph to launch it all and grease the machine of the computing industry.
Software is my passion, so that is where I am keenly interested. With Windows 95, as noted, a whole new slew of applications were launched. How would you like to use DOS and view the web, ala Lynx? An exciting new one-look-pitch will make people want to get new software that takes advantage of the new look/ features. This is great for an ISV, especially a small ISV, because the software in a sense sells itself. If an ISV has a product complying to and exploiting the new features, people clamor to have it; there is a rush to find products that take advantage. Compare this to trying to sell the same software for the same old OS? Or worst yet, selling the same software but the software looks like it was made for Windows 95 or XP? Which is going to sell more? But it all depends on people wanting to upgrade the OS in the first place!
Windows Vista has a lot to offer from a development standpoint; the security is also supposedly much improved but that point has been covered. There are a lot of techie things that make it an interesting release but where is the must have piece for the end user? I do not know. I do not know what will not only call out to the average user, but drive them to a buy cycle. In beta 1 I do not see it. What I do see is a set of development technologies that give software makers the tool to make nifty applications, but that places the OS sales onus onto the ISV (which is a much tougher sell). It means ISVs need to come up with a product that sells two (2) things: their product and Windows Vista. If Windows Vista is not driving its own sales, then the ISV has to convince the customer to plop down $39.99 for the nifty little application and another $89+ for a Windows Vista upgrade. I would argue that unless this new app is a huge improvement, most people will just wait or stick with what they have. Conversely, when Windows 95 was in beta, I was excited. I was excited to get not just my hands on it, but to see others do the same - that makes a huge difference.
It has been 10 years and times have changed; but we need a new Windows 95. When you think about all of the advances since Windows 95 was released, why does it feel like we are still getting Windows 95 redressed, over and over again? Doesn't that explain why people do not upgrade? Rather than running to the store, people upgrade when they throw away their old systems, and get the new OS on the new system. For a moment, when I installed the Windows Vista, I had the anticipation of 1995 but at least in beta 1, it quickly evaporated. I just hope that Scoble and others at Microsoft are right when they talk about not showing all of their cards yet. I just hope they are holding the high cards close for a RTM one-view-pitch. Perhaps we can then party like its 1995.
Ben
__________________________
site: http://www.techthoughts.com
feed: http://feeds.techthoughts.com/ttfeed.xml
Comments