Well, Paul Thurrott is back embarrassing himself again in ...Fixing Windows 8, Part 6: Offer Desktop Apps in Windows Store ... For Both Windows 8 and RT ( WinSupersite 2013-01-07 )
Under the guise of improving Windows 8
by cross-pollinating the two sides of the Desktop and Metro
, he actually is just re-stating much of the nonsense he stated earlier in another infamous comment. Here he is yesterday ...
Thurrott ... Windows RT is correctly viewed as Microsoft’s chance to more quickly shed legacy deadwood than is possible with mainstream Windows, I think its mission can be more clearly stated differently. That is, Windows RT is Microsoft’s chance to change Windows into a more controlled environment, one that is safer and ultimately better for users. And one way Microsoft can ensure this is to also offer well-made desktop applications in Windows Store, for both Windows 8 and RT.
We'll get back to that "deadwood" thing again later. Anyway, from there he proceeds on a wishful magical mystery tour of band-aids to be applied on this frankenstein monster. He seems to believe that if only Microsoft would tweak the thing up all the ill-feelings would wash away and the countryside would suddenly resemble the fields of Windows XP Bliss once again. It's sad really. He mentions that the "sandboxing" is the key to the safety and security of the new model. He implies that multitasking is the root of all evil, apps cannot be allowed to interact. Uggh. He is practically begging Microsoft to lock down the platform and turn him into an iSheep. Why doesn't he just go Apple? He closes the post with this ...
Thurrott ... Some will try to pick this idea apart. But I’m challenging the assumption that Windows RT is about something as specific as the death of the desktop: I think Windows RT is about offering consistent and reliable experiences, period. And one way Microsoft could accomplish this while offering users real benefits is to curate desktop applications and offering them via Windows Store. Done right, this could eliminate the few remaining disadvantages of Windows RT in particular, but it would also benefit Windows 8 users since all apps (and applications) offered through the store are known to be reliable, safe, and well-made.
I'll bet he actually does believe that too even though it cannot be said of any software ever developed in the history of the world, yet he no doubt believes it.
He also demonstrates his failing eyesight or complete lack of taste when a very sensible commenter says: "I think that then next Fixing Windows 8 article should be about aero glass and personalization. I think the personalization settings in Windows 8 should be restored to that of the Release Preview."
, to which he replies ...
Thurrott ... Aero glass is gone for a good reason: It was killing battery life. Microsoft clearly made the right decision on that one. And while not everyone agrees with this, I think the flat new look in Windows 8 is more attractive.
Every single word he wrote was ridiculous. Microsoft made the wrong decision Paul. Aero Glass was removed for no good reason Paul. And if you think the flat, glaring, shadowless, colorless, sharp-cornered, two-dimensional Windows 1.0 look "is more attractive", can I see some pictures of your house to see if you also do without the bells and whistles to keep it "more attractive"? Aero Glass may be optional and subjective certainly, but do you deprive yourself of such things in your home? Optional decorations are a personal choice, we could always choose not to use them and some did, but they are not things that are to be removed under false pretenses or outright lies. My computer here doesn't have a battery Paul, what do you have to say about that? My laptops are plugged in Paul, what do you have to say about that? You always had the choice to disable Aero and set the computer for "best performance" and a variety of other reductive settings. Did you disable all of those Paul? Now here is the final question Paul ... Why do you think these things should be removed from my computer and not just yours?
His comment about "Deadwood" was noticed in an earlier comment ( see Post #866
) and is a reference to one of his worst displays of fanboyism ... Wednesday, August 15, 2012 - Start: The Windows 8 Era Begins
... where we dubbed him ... Paul "The Desktop Must Die" Thurrott
, and we saw him state ...
Thurrott ... Windows 8 is a mess, but it’s a glorious, wonderful mess. It's the technology equivalent of a gooey ice cream cone on a humid summer day, where half of it just drips down over your hand, and you couldn't care less because the whole experience is so wonderful. For all the whining, hand-wringing, and ivory tower opining over Microsoft's decision to wed an awesome new mobile platform with its superior desktop OS, few of these critics ever paused for a moment to consider an awesome possibility: This time, more really is more."
The real mind-bending pull-quote was this self-outing as a delusional MicroZealot ...
Thurrott ... And if Metro does take off, Windows will surely be better for it. This is a hard pill for some people to swallow, and I know that what you’re about to read will not be popular in certain circles, but please take this with the understanding that I’ve written it as a die-hard, confirmed desktop PC user. The desktop must die. And it must take all of the bad stuff that comes along with the good—the malware and viruses, sure, but also the complexities, reliability issues, and so on—with it. These types of technology changes are difficult, and often time consuming. But with each new generation change, some old, out of date technology is lopped off too. And the move to Metro/Windows RT will be the biggest exorcism of technological deadwood yet."
Exorcism? Technological deadwood? Give me a break. Malware from the "desktop"? Canned apps, no multitasking? Lunacy. Everyone knows that it does not make sense to attack your own strengths, your allies, your own history. You don't burn the bridges behind you unless you are in retreat. Severing ties to your own history is ludicrous. Microsoft was propelled to its dominant position from its pre-OS past life as a small fish in a big pond of software companies because of one platform - the x86 universe pioneered by IBM, whose coattails were long enough to drag these hicks into prominence. The x86 universe ( which now includes 64-bit also, it means 8086 family ) is one where anyone can become a programmer and directly sell their wares to anyone else without a gatekeeper like Microsoft charging a bridge toll. All the related companies including OEM hardware makers also played nice keeping the open architecture alive ( ironically it would be IBM that broke the unwritten rule with MCA, but I digress ) and thriving so this "ecosystem" flourished.
Along came Apple's business models, with a closed architecture, iron-fisted uniformity and later with private controlled stores complete with mafia-like cuts, and the mental illness of Apple-envy took root in all those jealous minds in Redmond. And here we are. It is very transparent to those of us who participated from the beginning. Microsoft wishes to morph into MicroApple
right before our lying eyes while telling us how great this Windows 8
abomination is for everyone, even though we know it is good only for Microsoft. So where does Thurrott and Bott and a few other MicroZombies fit in? Good question. I find it hard to believe that they could be this gullible. It is impossible that the entire history of the x86 universe has escaped even them. They must be willing participants in this attack on the "free world" ( a good metaphor for the x86 universe I think ). Thurrott sees the "Free World" as "Deadwood". He is either blind or a useful idi0t. When you look at the overall history and remember that Microsoft first pushed its way into the OEM assembly line with back-room deals and ultimately got the bulk of the computers on Planet Earth running their OS, and later they decide it is time to convert them into their private walled-garden slowly and by attrition, it becomes a serious matter legally, morally and ethically. It is a very easy comparison to large monopolies of the past like Railroad or Oil Barons, except for scale, because the legendary monopolists of the past never got into the customer range of holding a billion victims at their disposal the way Microsoft has.
This attack on all of us is real. This is war. There can no longer be any doubt that they want x86 and all its scab developers with their non-sanctioned, non-taxed software out of the picture. Make no mistake, they have a plan to phase out x86 by hook or by crook. Ultimately the operating system ( Windows 8
or whatever they call it ) will be the gatekeeper. Microsoft will get a cut from the software authors, advertising, streaming, developer tools and maybe even email and TV. This is a very cloudy future for freedom. The death of the x86 universe does not even mean the death of x86 chips from Intel and AMD because the OS could emulate on top of them a different target ( explains why they don't seem too worried yet ), or it could just shift to ARM architecture or even something else entirely. The problem is at the OS level, where Microsoft is making its move from selling a passive Operating System ( that sits between the hardware and applications ) to a one-stop shop of gate-keeping and control. Pretty much everything you take for granted now is on its way out the window. Yes, they cannot take away our own systems and tools and a dwindling world of x86 will probably survive, but the plan is nefarious nonetheless because as old computers die, and the new ones roll of the assembly lines with "Microsoft Gates
" installed ( get it? like Windows, but gate-keeping ) it becomes a matter of time. This is why they have turned me around, an ancient veteran Microsoft DOS and Windows tech, from a friend to a mortal enemy. This is why I believe Windows 8
and all its evil spawn must fail and fail spectacularly. There is an old saying: "You always dance with the one that brung ya
", and the x86 universe with its huge amount of companies and individual developers is "the one who brung ya
The picture isn't crystal clear yet however. They may fail spectacularly this year, but it might not be enough to put this genie back in the bottle. In a perfect world they would just say "We're getting out of the OS business
" and release something like the Windows XP or 7 source code to the community ( along with FAT and NTFS and other necessary protocols ) and let the actual experts take over. I mean they say it's dying anyway, right? Prove it by getting out, you made enough money off this thing already. Then they could move on to their Windows RT
pipe dream ( and still fail ). Alternatively we can demand from the government ( never my first choice, but ) that this company to be split in at least two parts, isolating the OS division from the rest of those children. After a thorough house-cleaning ( that means under-achievers like you Steve, Julie and Jensen ) then things might just get on track. Hey, we can still dream, right?EDIT:
Edited by CharlotteTheHarlot, 08 January 2013 - 07:44 AM.