Microsoft Reportedly Reorganizing the Windows Team after Redstone 5 Release

[Megalith]

According to Thurnott’s Brad Sams, big changes could be coming to Windows: Microsoft is planning to shake up the entire team after the release of Redstone 5, otherwise known as the October 2018 Windows 10 Update. While Sams doesn’t think there will be layoffs, the crowd will be “thinned out” and positions will be diminished and/or shuffled about. This would support the idea that the role of Windows within Microsoft is changing.

“I’m also hearing from somebody who’s become quite reliable lately, there might be a re-org inside the Windows world after Redstone 5 ships. This might be actually how Terry Myerson eventually exits is after that’s done, and then his role is diminished. Just people moving about, just more product lines, like Azure and Office and maybe kind of thinning out the Windows crowd. I don’t think there’s gonna be layoffs, not trying to say that, but they’re going to be just shuffling some people around.”

 

[trparky]

Here's to hoping that the pull their collective heads out of their equally collective asses and fix Windows 10. Yes, Windows 10 may work fine for me but even for those Windows 10 works fine for can say that Windows 10 needs some serious fixing.

One of the biggest issues that they need to fix is the whole twice-a-year big update thing, I wouldn't have a problem with it if it didn't feel like I was reinstalling the OS twice a year. What happened to service packs? They worked fine back in Windows XP's day, why can't they apply the same concept to Windows 10? Oh and even Apple and Google know that releasing a new OS twice a year is a complete pain in the ass, Microsoft... listen to them. Slow it down man, features are nice and all but if they also come a heaping helping of bugs it doesn't seem so great. Take a page from Google and Apple's book... slow the release schedule down to once a year.

 

[Burticus]

Here's to hoping that the pull their collective heads out of their equally collective asses and fix Windows 10. Yes, Windows 10 may work fine for me but even for those Windows 10 works fine for can say that Windows 10 needs some serious fixing.

One of the biggest issues that they need to fix is the whole twice-a-year big update thing, I wouldn't have a problem with it if it didn't feel like I was reinstalling the OS twice a year. What happened to service packs? They worked fine back in Windows XP's day, why can't they apply the same concept to Windows 10? Oh and even Apple and Google know that releasing a new OS twice a year is a complete pain in the ass, Microsoft... listen to them. Slow it down man, features are nice and all but if they also come a heaping helping of bugs it doesn't seem so great. Take a page from Google and Apple's book... slow the release schedule down to once a year.

This. One a year is OK, twice is a PITA. Also agree with the service pack comment. But I think MS dislikes the term service or feature pack for some reason.

 

[steakman1971]

I was at a dev conference a few months ago. I went to a session that talked about how Microsoft does DevOps - based on what the guy was saying, they really changed around the culture inside Microsoft. So, I wonder are they going to shift into more "maintenance" mode with once-a-year releases. (I would also think the business manager would look at revenue/growth and try to find a minimum amount of employees to support the model)

Look at Apple. macOS does get some changes, but they mostly seem to be on the minor side (my opinion). Mac computers account for about 10% of overall revenue. I'm assuming the amount of people at Apple reflect this. The major change I can think of to Mojave is a new Dark mode. I know there are lots of other features - just don't recall anything exciting. (Well, better external GPU support is a little interesting)

Another item to consider - operating systems have been mature for quite some time. We saw rapid changes going from 8->16->32->64 bit systems. This involved (in no order) protected memory, networking, ability to handle larger files/amounts of memory, multitasking, GUI's, etc. Not saying there isn't room to add new technology or make improvements, but it's been pretty stable for quite some time.

Microsoft won the OS wars for consumer and business desktops. In the 90's, you had OS/2, Netware, DOS variants, Macintosh, and a few others I'm forgetting about. Nowadays, Windows is the clear market winner. Sure, macOS is hanging around and some variants of desktop Linux. However, any other challengers left? It would be a risky business venture to get into this market.

 

[gunbust3r]

I wouldn't have a problem with it if it didn't feel like I was reinstalling the OS twice a year.

It is reinstalling the OS twice a year. That's why you end up with a big fat windows.old folder.

 

[Icon_Charlie]

I'll make a prediction. The end game for Micro$haft is to make their OS subscription based in consumer land. But first they will start in several business sections slowly consuming them into the "Dark (data) side of of the force. 10 to 15 or so years from now I think this will happen.

 

[Delicieuxz]

I hope this might result in a new UI for Windows 10, since the default one is the most ugly thing to feature in Windows since Windows 95. I hope there will also be big and Windows owner-serving changes to the data-harvesting and Windows Update regimes - as in, those things will be fully in the control of each individual system and Windows owner.

This. One a year is OK, twice is a PITA. Also agree with the service pack comment. But I think MS dislikes the term service or feature pack for some reason.

Once a year is still too much. Once every 2 years might be tolerable, though I'd still likely disable updates because I don't want to risk having to format and reinstall Windows once every 2 years. Should be once every 3 years, IMO, with the option to disable updates always readily available and reliable to use.

It's illegal for Microsoft to modify people's computer hardware against the system owners' willed authorization. There's no excuses for Windows 10's rapist update regime, in any way.

 

[Jim Kim]

There goes the windows QA department.

oh wait, nvrmnd

 

[thebufenator]

Once a year is still too much. Once every 2 years might be tolerable, though I'd still likely disable updates because I don't want to risk having to format and reinstall Windows once every 2 years. Should be once every 3 years, IMO, with the option to disable updates always readily available and reliable to use.

It's illegal for Microsoft to modify people's computer hardware against the system owners' willed authorization. There's no excuses for Windows 10's rapist update regime, in any way.

Botnet owners rejoice.

 

[raz-0]

I'll make a prediction. The end game for Micro$haft is to make their OS subscription based in consumer land. But first they will start in several business sections slowly consuming them into the "Dark (data) side of of the force. 10 to 15 or so years from now I think this will happen.

This isn't far off. If it is destined for consumer land, it will be faster than 10 years.

Remember that free office 365 for education push they did 3 years ago? GUess what? It's now OS as a subscription. They redid campus agreements and you are either getting your windows licenses bundled with you 365 licenses, or you are buying a second set of licenses over the top and paying for two sets.

Home is already essentially tossing the floating license and tying it to the user on install, so the only barrier there is lack of expiration.

They may not care about that. I think priority number on for them is that they get enterprise off activation schemes that are the source of most keys and workarounds for piracy.