Microsoft Windows 7.  The more people fail to embrace Windows Vista, the More Windows 7 gets a mention in the media.  In many ways Windows Vista has become the Windows ME of our (computer) generation.  But in some ways Windows Vista is also like Windows 2000.  This may just be the edge Microsoft needs.

Windows ME - oh how we hated it.  It was the last of the Win9x generation.  It might not have been, but in a stroke of bitness-cleansing, Microsoft tried to re-engineer the Win9x kernel from a 16-bit/ 32-bit cross-species into a purebred 32-bit kernel.  It might have even worked … had there not been so many 16-bit drivers of old still left around.  Or perhaps more accurately, had Microsoft engineered a more stable way to continue supporting such a large 16-bit world.

Microsoft knew that they had to do something.  Thanks to WinME, they had a growing wealth of unhappy Windows users.  Windows 2000 was their salvation.  It was a workstation-derived operating system, based on their Windows NT line.  The kernet was a complete rewrite, Microsoft’s transition from NT4 to NT5, Windows 2000 being their first NT5-based operating system.  It wasn’t meant to play games with.  It wasn’t meant to be pretty.  It wasn’t meant for novices.  It was meant to be a workhorse.

And it was rock solid.

It didn’t take long to see the obvious.  Home users had Win ME, a highly unstable course in anger management.  Work users had Win 2K, the most stable OS Microsoft had made to date.  Could Microsoft pretty up Win 2K and make a replacement for disgruntled home users of Win ME out of it?

The answer was yes.  The answer, was Windows XP.  It took time for drivers to catch up, but when they did, it was the miracle that Microsoft had needed.

And in a lot of ways, Microsoft made the same mistake all over again, but in all new ways.  Windows Vista was itself a complete rewrite.  Only not the NT kind of rewrite.  It had been the ME kind of rewrite.  It used more resources, but ended up less stable.  It gave better eye candy, but it also gave far more headaches.

Yet, strangely, Vista is also its own possible salvation.  Like tweaks and additions to the kernel turned Windows 2000 into Windows XP, the same can be done with Windows Vista to make it Windows 7.  With enough effort put into stability, and with enough polishing of the user interface, Vista just might become the next XP. And bring to Windows 7 all of the much needed drivers and applications needed at launch, because they weren’t written for the new Windows 7, they were written for the old Windows Vista.

At the latest Professional Developers Conference (PDC), Microsoft revealed yet more of Microsoft Windows 7 and the future of Microsoft Windows.  Admittedly, mostly to get people to stop thinking about how bad Vista is, to give people hope for the future.  But it’s a future that may be less far off than we fear, and a future that’s starting to look like it actually may be brighter.

The interface for example is being cleaned up.  Now it is more resembling something that works, that people enjoy, namely Apple’s Mac OS X.  The taskbar is becoming more, well, usable again.  Annoying pop-ups are being made more managable.  And let us not forget docking.

Multiple networks will be supported better, which will no doubt please anyone using a portable system.  As will the simple fact that Windows 7 should run noticably faster and cleaner on the same hardware.  And should even, finally, run well on, again, a portable system.  I don’t think that the actual hardware requirements will go down, so much as you’ll just actually finally be capable of doing something on a system that hovers around those dreaded minimums.

And, of course, at its heart it’s related to the same kernel as Windows Vista.  So when it comes out, Windows 7 will have much better driver support, because it’ll use the same drivers as Windows Vista.  And when it comes out, Windows 7 will have more applications designed to work specifically with the new features introduced since Windows Vista.

So all around, Windows 7 will have better 3rd party support in both apps and drivers, will run faster, will run better on low-end hardware, will network better, and will have a more refined and usable user interface.  What’s not to love?

Microsoft is learning.  From their own mistakes.  From Apple.  And from Linux.

It might be years after its release before Windows 7 is actually refined enough to no longer make Windows XP lovers pine for XP, but then, look how long it really took Windows XP to become that refined itself.  We’ve had it for so long, and seen it grow to such stability, that it’s no wonder that we’ve grown jaded to any new Microsoft OS.  But if anything is going to make Windows XP users forget the follies of Vista, Microsoft is actually doing a good job of making sure that it will be Windows 7.  It has to be.  They can’t really afford anything less.  Both Apple and Linux are all too happy to take in those weary of the battle.

Well we knew that they had to be working on it.  Microsoft Windows Vista SP1 had hardly made the operating system foolproof, so a second service pack had to be in the works.  And now Microsoft has confirmed it.  A private beta of Win Vista SP2 is getting ready for testing.

What exactly is fixed by it remains to be seen.  One can only hope that the (in)security barage of “Do you really really really want to allow this?” “Are you sure?” nuicanse questions (that could have been an actual security feature if Microsoft had only paid attention to long standing operating systems like Linux) that force you to turn the security feature off will be fixed.  For that matter, let’s hope that basics like simply deleting a file will be fixed once and for all.

You know, the little things.

Like basically the actual functionality of an operating system.

Instead of just its gee-wiz look and feel eye candy.

Let’s hope SP2 makes Windows Vista usable.

And if not, let’s hope that Windows 7 comes out quickly and is everything that Windows Vista should have been, thereby turning Windows Vista officially into Windows ME 2.

Or something like that. 

The Wine project for Linux has had the long-standing task of duplicating Windows API so that Windows programs could be run under Linux, in a way that isn’t technically an emulator so that there should be no speed loss. It’s open source, meaning many people (and tons do) can work on the development because the source code is right there for the taking. It’s released under the GNU LGPL, which means not only is it free, but it can even be used commercially. It’s a fascinating concept and an elusive dream.

How elusive? Well, after fifteen years of development, they only finally feel secure in calling their latest release version 1.0.

Yikes!

But really, is it actually ready for a 1.0 title? That part remains debatable. Even in their own words:

“To those of you whose favorite bug was not fixed, we offer our apologies; time was limited.

We expect to do a 1.0.1 release at some point (1-2 months?) with a few important and conservative bugfixes. ”

Or the much worse quote:

“1.0 bugs deferred to 1.0.1 since May 27th:

”

So it really sounds like a rush job to me. After fifteen years of development, you’d think another couple of months would be nothing to get the first official version right. You really shouldn’t go into an official release like that with known bugs. That’s just … lazy … bad form … ridiculous … and a perfect example of how piss poor things are done these days compared to the days of old.

Still, what can you really expect from an organization of developers that can’t even fix all of the 404 errors on their own webpage? Go ahead. Jump over to Wine HQ. See those navigational menus on the left? Click on the Support option under the Support section. Click on the Development option under the Development section. See my point?

I love the idea of Wine. Frankly, anything that can get us away from the Microsoft-centric world is a good thing. It’s just sad that after fifteen years of working on Wine, I’m still not convinced. Granted, a lot of the problem is that Microsoft not only doesn’t document their APIs well, but even intentionally hides some of them. And then you not only have to reproduce the Windows API, but you have to even reproduce it’s bugs so that everything works exactly the same. No doubt a daunting task.

And one which seems to still elude the Wine team.

Even though they’re claiming all is hunky-dory by releasing a version they call 1.0.

I love the concept. And I wish Wine and all of its developers the best. But I can’t say that I’m impressed. Not with the time and manpower put on it, to still release it at 1.0 with known bugs. Nothing is perfect, but when you know it’s broken you really shouldn’t push it as ready for prime time.

I’m sure Linux lovers the world over will be more than happy to rip me a new one for getting down on anything so … Linux. But it’s true. Developers should have standards. Call it version .999999. Just not 1.0. Not when you know it isn’t ready.

Still, eat, drink, and be merry. And while you’re at it, if you’re a Linux user, have a little Wine. It’s free!