February 8, 1999
New Windows Road Map
By Bob O'Donnell
One thing that the computer industry has learned over the years is that, when it comes
to major new technologies, people don't like surprises, especially IT people. Given the
need IT managers have to make future plans and develop overall long-term strategies,
they've made it clear to major vendors that they need to know what to expect in the coming
months and years. In most cases, large technology companies have obliged with road maps
outlining their future directions and plans.
Microsoft, for example, has had a fairly clear operating system strategy for several
years now. That is, until recently. The original plan was to move NT to Version 5.0 and
then produce a combined operating system that blended elements of NT 5.0 with the more
consumer-oriented Windows 98. This single-code base would be offered in a professional
version for the business market and a simplified version for the consumer market. It was a
logical, straightforward-sounding plan.
Things started to get a bit strange when the company decided to rename NT 5.0 as
Windows 2000 Professional Edition, however. While I could certainly understand from a
marketing perspective why they went with the simpler name, the new name implied a change
to the company's previously announced road map. The logical presumption you could make was
that perhaps Microsoft was skipping a step and that Windows 2000 was to be the combined
operating system. The Professional Edition was announced first, but it only seemed logical
that a Consumer Edition (or something similar) would soon follow. With the acknowledgment
last week that the core Windows 98 base will remain the consumer option for several years
to come, however, all bets are off.
In fact, it's getting even more confusing trying to figure out exactly what all of this
means. On the one hand, I'm guessing that many consumers are going to see Windows 2000
(whenever it finally ships) as the next logical upgrade to Windows 98, despite the
Professional Edition moniker. Instead, however, Microsoft officials last week said that
Windows 98 will be upgraded for several more years, primarily with Service Packs (and
associated OEM Service Releases, or OSRs), just as Windows 95 was. (Let's hope in this
case, however, that Microsoft makes the OSR upgrades available to all existing Windows 98
users, instead of just to those who buy new machines, as they did with Windows 95.) They
didn't seem to completely rule out another version with a different name, but they did
make it clear that the operating system would still be based on the Windows 9x base.
Eventually, the company said, a major new version will appear with a kernel based
around the NT/Windows 2000 architecture, but it will be a few more years (perhaps as late
as 2003) before that happens. Of course, by then, I would presume that there will be
something like a Windows 2002 or 2003 Professional, either in the works or complete, so
will the next consumer edition be based on and named similarly to that? Of course, nobody
really knows.
Part of the problem, as I see it, is the confusing naming that the company has forced
itself into with the adoption of Windows 2000. Technologically speaking, understanding
that an operating system is based on the Win9x kernel or the NT kernel is very
straightforward, but when the products using those technologies have confusingly
overlapping names, it gets hard to figure out. Frankly, I'm surprised that the marketing
wizards at Microsoft have put themselves into such an awkward position (though I'm equally
confident that they'll eventually figure a way out as well -- eventually.)
The bottom line for IT managers looking to deploy various flavors of Windows in their
enterprise is a confusing mess. If they stick with Windows 98, which now seems like a
reasonable option, they can look forward to a steady platform with several years of
relatively minor upgrades ahead. If they choose Windows NT/2000, they'll have to deal with
the inevitable headaches involved in making the transition from 4.0 to 2000, which is
bound to be a doozy. And, if they're like many companies, and have a combination of NT and
Windows 98 (along with some good ol' Windows 95 and even 3.11 thrown in for good measure),
then their choices have become even more confusing.
Unfortunately, it seems the road ahead is not as clear as it once was.
©
Copyright 1999, by InfoWorld Publishing Corp., a
subsidiary of IDG Communications, Inc. Reprinted from InfoWorld,
155 Bovet Road, San Mateo, CA 94402. Further reproduction is prohibited.
