Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Agreed. As I said, in the words immediately after those you quoted:

> but momentum and backwards compatibility are massive problems

That, and loss of face.

> Lastly they could spin off Windows OS into its own company and it would become just one of their targets for their software.

That is an option that hadn't occurred to me, and it is closer to what I was meaning with “drop Windows as-is” then “drop parts of windows and replace with GNU or Linux”: drop windows desktop full-stop, concentrate on milking Azure platform income, Office subscriptions, and SQL Server licenses. I wouldn't envisage they'd drop everything, at least not immediately, as keeping a server subset alive to support more minor products like Exchange might be more practical than quickly porting them.

> This would likely also improve Windows, as the OS' main problem is forcing ads and bloatware into it. But why would Microsoft allow that?

Not quite sure what you are meaning there, but wrt ads and bloatware that boat has already sailed and MS is actively doing it, not just allowing it.



> Not quite sure what you are meaning there, but wrt ads and bloatware that boat has already sailed and MS is actively doing it, not just allowing it.

Exactly the opposite. A standalone Windows company wouldn't have a reason to force Copilot, Cortana, a Microsoft account, etc., since their only objective is to develop an OS. "But why would Microsoft allow that?" = "Why would give up that power over the OS?"

> That, and loss of face.

Right now. But when people got used to the OS being shitty, nobody would be sad if it's gone. Maybe that's the plot with Windows 11 and why they already partially have given up with backwards compatibility. :-)




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: