Rumors are that Microsoft is working on the next version of Windows, internally referred to as “Windows 7”.  There is little information about Windows 7 from Microsoft, allowing a lot of speculation about its focus and features.  Some say it is based on Vista.  Others say it is a new more modular OS, enabling it to run well on existing hardware that is memory limited, and I believe that this is essential.  Let me try to explain why.

PC resource demands have been steadily growing with each new Windows version.  The pattern is that Microsoft warns us that we will need more computing resource, everyone complains, and then uses it as an excuse to buy a new PC – Corporate IT decisions tended to follow a similar pattern with politics mixed in.  Often, things ran faster and everyone loved the new features and capabilities when it was all over.

But something very different happened with XP and Vista.  More people felt that they had pretty much what they needed in their existing OS and were finding it difficult to motivate themselves to toss their existing hardware, and deal with the disruption of getting all their apps to work again.  Adding to this dilemma, applications have also been getting larger, more tightly coupled, more complex and slower in general.  The combination of OS and application trends has recently left us with the feeling that, in spite of our investment, we have not really progressed.

My observation is that each OS version has met with increasing resistance to adoption, and it is almost a certainty that a bigger and more feature rich Windows 7 will receive a weaker reception than Vista.  More importantly, it will open the door further to alternative platforms.  IT and end users alike are looking for ways to make their existing hardware and applications serve the purpose a little longer, and sometimes new hardware is not an option.  If supported versions of Windows will not run on existing hardware, more will start looking elsewhere.

Linux is the most likely alternative, because it has strong support for server-based applications – IBM, Oracle and SAP support Linux in various ways.  However, most desktops are Windows-based largely because of the popularity of Microsoft Office.  Sun’s Open Office has had minimal impact, but times are changing.  A relatively new challenge to Microsoft Office is emerging.  Web-based versions of word processors, spreadsheets, etc.  are now available from Google, ZOHO, IBM and others.  These applications are still evolving, and many are very comfortable with a Web-based use model. 

These new tools are no match for Office, but a significant portion of Microsoft’s market share – those with basic needs - is vulnerable to this new generation of web-friendly office applications.  Even large businesses are spending more time in portal environments where formatting capabilities are minimal.  It is worth noting that these Web-based applications have little or no dependency on the client operating system; Linux will do just fine.  Consequently, a larger, slower Microsoft Windows 7 could further open the door to Linux for a large segment of the Windows market.

Manufacturing systems are a different story.  They run many applications - HMI and controller configuration software for example - which are built with the Windows APIs, and there are no good alternative applications on Linux.  Consequently, manufacturers must run Windows 7, but a larger, slower Windows 7 will definitely extend the already slow adoption rates of new OS versions in manufacturing. 

The biggest risk to Microsoft in manufacturing is the potential lost market share and ISV mind-share for Operations Management software.  With SAP and Oracle moving aggressively into this market, Java becoming commonplace, and Corporate IT taking a stronger role in decisions about on-site systems, Microsoft’s dominance is likely to erode anyway, and a bigger, slower Windows 7 will only accelerate this process.

To be clear, my intent is to argue that the market requirement – even beyond manufacturing - for Microsoft 7 is to consume substantially less computing resources and result in significantly faster applications.  (Yes, there are other requirements.)  This makes sense for Microsoft in general even though it will take some time for Web-based office tools to seriously threaten Office’s dominance.  It will help Microsoft accomplish one of their important objectives, which is to enable manufacturers to keep their operating systems current and thereby mitigate many security concerns. 

Is this a good time to bring up “no re-boots” for patches as well?