Comments on: The Windows Desktop Cycle

By: Scott Alan Miller

Scott Alan Miller — Thu, 28 Feb 2013 10:21:13 +0000

This is a great graphical depiction of the cycle:

By: Scott Alan Miller

Scott Alan Miller — Mon, 27 Aug 2012 15:19:27 +0000

Servers do not have the same cycle for various reasons. The big difference is that on the desktop there is experimentation with new interface features – this is purely a desktop thing. Windows 8 is groundbreaking because of its interface, not because of its code. So Server 2012, which matches Windows 8, doesn’t put users through the same changes.

Servers are a very different type of product. If server admins were faced with too much change or what felt like a broken system, they would jump ship. Server admins can’t risk “waiting out” the next version.

By: Bernardw

Bernardw — Sun, 26 Aug 2012 16:19:07 +0000

How does the server OS cycle compare to the desktop OS cycle?

By: Diarmuid Quirke

Diarmuid Quirke — Tue, 21 Aug 2012 14:48:40 +0000

A great read. It seems obvious now that you’ve stated it, but I never did spot this pattern.
From what I’ve seen, Windows 7 is well liked and popular on home PCs. Many companies like it but are still on XP. With the XP support ending in 2014, their upgrade will probably take place in 2013 – meaning such companies will probably have to take Windows 8. Then sob when the polished version comes out!

By: Alex Scheidel

Alex Scheidel — Tue, 14 Aug 2012 01:53:15 +0000

I don’t know though, other than the introduction of an App store for 8 and the metro interface my experience thus far has felt like i am using Windows 7 with the Metro interface as my primary interface. I might also add that while I don’t mind the Metro interface, I don’t feel it is as fluent to use as the previous desktop model on a non touch screen interface.

I don’t mean to start an argument but essentially it feels more like a stable release in this cycle than anything else. Although I suppose since you mention Windows 2000 in the NT family this could be very much like Windows 2000. That OS was very stable itself, but certainly was a departure from the NT 4 people knew. Regardless I am a firm believer that MS is taking a huge gamble on standardizing this interface on all devices.

By: Scott Alan Miller

Scott Alan Miller — Sat, 04 Aug 2012 16:48:22 +0000

Thanks. Well it has been something that I’ve been talking about for years. Back when XP first came out I used to explain this cycle to show why Windows 2000 had been so lackluster but that that wasn’t a bad thing.

Most people switched to Windows NT at XP and so didn’t see the cycle firsthand until Vista came out and it was far too little data to pick out the pattern. Now that Windows 8 is coming out and everyone already knows how much they dislike it, it was a perfect time to write about how Windows 8’s job is not to be loved, but to introduce new concepts to get everyone ready for the follow up product coming, likely, just a year or two away.

By: Carlton Jones

Carlton Jones — Wed, 01 Aug 2012 04:53:26 +0000

Very good insight and explanation into the life cycle of Microsoft OS. What gave you the idea into writing this article?