Do you think a new operating system equally as popular as Windows will emerge now that Bill Gates is gone?

Question

I believe competition balances out the market (just like walmart and verizon need some equal competitors). Bill Gates was not nearly known for producing a great operating system as he was for his ways of competing in the business world. We all know what gave him the big boost over Apple whom had a five year head start was IBM's backing. He knew that getting IBM's reputation to back him would make him what he is today.

Now that Bill gates is retiring today, I hope that his devious business ethics will go with him. As I said, Windows wasn't that great of an operating system with its bugs (aka windoze). I hope an equal operating system will emerge taking the advantages of Directx for gamers and the integration with windows needed for businesses. Remember - the idea to integrate operating systems and domains is NOT copyrighted!

Answer 1

Simply put, no. I gave a long winded history of computer OSes in the last question I answered when the guy simply wanted to know what they are used for. The truth is, what professionals, mainly unix-users, were thinking between 1968 and 1983 was more important than ever, and what they were thinking was that we need a low-cost device-independent operating system to put our infrastructure together securely. This is Unix in all its flavors and implementations, including the Linux distros and Mac OS X (incidently, not only does Apple's Safari use the same technology as the konqueror web browser on KDE but their kernel, HURD, is also available on the Linux distro I'm using, Debian, should I want to switch from Linux).



The truth is Gates and Ballmer, who are not going away, do have devious, at best ethics, but they also speak the language of Wall Street (witness Carl Icahn's support in the Yahoo! takeover and UserFriendly's making fun of his support of the ICANN reforms the last couple of days) and peoples respect for what is an outmoded model of computing of discreet desktops running operating systems and software is becoming as absurd as it was when computers were so expensive you had to time share to afford it -- except now it's just becoming so cheap.



Personally, I do see Shuttleworth and Ubuntu as subversive. Ubuntu is distinct from Debian but after all the work that's gone into them, they remain SUCH closely related distros (as opposed to Red Hat and EARLY Mandriva or Suse which forked and diverged quickly) and there are so MANY flavors of Ubuntu which are officially supported (I just saw an Ubuntu page for selinux, I've gotten information from them about fubuntu, even though that's a garage product...) I can no longer see them as anything but a vendor of the new style of UNIX services pretending to distribute "an operating system".



And that's what a new OS has to compete with. Apple doesn't: Mac OS X is UNIX, at least the same way Linux is (though I know some people who deny that). It mainly exists because Apple wants you to run Apple Software on Apple Hardware. Microsoft has too much money to just go away. There are reports they may be buying Yahoo! again, whole, reminding me of what ZDNet's Mary Jo Foley said to Wired when the original deal fell apart, "I feel like they've dodged a hand grenade" but until then they AND THEIR CHEERLEADERS ON WALL STREET will make it hard for any new proprietary system to gain traction, and the alternative, a modular operating system which goes under the name of UNIX, Linux, and several other things, is almost literally being developed in the counter-culture, which is where an amazing number of the recent innovations are coming from. The old hippies with gray beards and air force on their resume are the only ones really free to innovate these days.

Answer 2

I don't think Windows was ever "popular".



Keep in mind that Windows' outrageous market share wasn't because Windows was "popular", or "better", it was because it came preinstalled with almost all computer systems.



It was Microsoft's marketing and distribution strategies that made it so widespread. And no, it wasn't solely Bill Gates. Don't forget about crazy Steve Ballmer who runs the company day-to-day. DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS



I would say Windows is more ubiquitous than popular. It found it's way onto the majority of our computers by placement, not choice. The majority of Windows users don't even understand the concept of an operating system, let alone the reality of several different options and alternatives.



Most people won't migrate to any new OS anyway, because they're too comfortable with what they already have. They're just not ready to take the leap and "learn" something unfamiliar. It was a big hill to climb learning how to work their Windows boxes, and they don't want to do it again.



I believe this is the very principle that is plaguing the adoption of Mac OS X and desktop Linux distros. They don't want to re-learn how to work a computer. To add insult to injury, I believe these two OS's are lightyears ahead of Windows in terms of user-friendliness and intuitiveness. The exact kind of user-friendliness and intuitiveness that's keeping them committed to Windows.



True, the market has a history of revolving around the Windows platform, but this is only a byproduct of business. They will only invest the resources into the platform with the largest user-base; undoubtedly Windows. But with the steady increase in Mac and Linux adoption, the market could shift towards a more diverse strategy. As user-bases begin to even out, so will the market's extreme bias towards all things Microsoft.



All great things must come to an end. The next big thing is still on the horizon. The once-unstoppable IBM no longer produces PCs. The almighty Yahoo!, once the de facto standard for search engines, is now only one of several options. Even the wildly popular Myspace has recently been surpassed by Facebook.



Windows has, without question, finally plateaued. It's only a matter of time before we will all witness it's fall from grace.

Answer 3

I seriously doubt it. Bill Gates hasn't been controlling Microsoft on his own for quite some time. I don't expect that his leaving will make much difference at all as far as Microsoft goes. Microsoft has already got a phenomenally huge installed user base out there which will take a long, long time to diminish. And it's not like Microsoft is throwing in the towel or anything like that. You can already find bits of Windows 7 (successor to Vista) around here and there.



Boding well for non-Microsoft solutions however is the increased availability of alternative operating systems on pre-configured systems. You can get Linux pre-installed on Dell systems for example. The increasing availability of Linux software and the improved "user experience" of distros such as Ubuntu are helping as well.

Answer 4

Read on>>

http://myfinancetimes.com/2008/06/27/bill-gates-quits-microsoft-steve-ballmer-to-step-up/

The above is a detailed analysis of the way bill gates ran microsoft and helped start a culture and mechanism that will propel Microsoft to glory always.

And with "pal" Steve Ballmer around, Windows will not experience the void made by Bill Gates departure. However he shall remain Chairman of the Board.

Answer 5

There are many options already that could displace Windows off the desktop if:



There was an application that could displace MS Office

There was a browser that could displace Internet Explorer

There were popular games that ran much better on an OS other then Windows



Mac OS has a chance, but unless they go into the sub $500 market space, Windows will continue to rule.

Answer 6

Do not think for one minute that Bill Gates will abandon the company! He will still be the CEO, and he is always thinking about how things can be improved, and believe me when I say that he will keep his hand in the workings of the company. He is, giving up some of his responsibilites, but he will not be out of the picture.

Answer 7

Don't you know about Linux?