Can Microsoft Survive in an Instant-On World? Time will tell…

I really enjoy watching the new Apple ads where Mac taunts PC about the money spent on marketing Vista rather than fixing Vista. I have been a PC user since the early PC-DOS days and have enjoyed the maturation process. I have to say, however, that Windows Vista and perhaps Windows itself, are approaching their expiration date. Microsoft will have to change Windows to survive.

Here is the major fact… People are tired of waiting. When you buy your new Windows Vista computer you turn it on and wait 90+ seconds for it to boot up. Then, you begin installing software – Microsoft Windows, Mozilla Firefox, Stardock ObjectDock (to imitate that cool dock on Apple’s OS X), virus software, a firewall and iTunes. That’s pretty standard fare, I think. Next thing you know, your computer that already took 90 seconds to load now takes three minutes to load and the best part of that three minutes is watching the ever increasing number of items added to your system tray. We didn’t like it in a desktop-centric world, but it really sucks in today’s everything-that-means-anything-to-me-is-on-my-laptop world. I don’t want to wait three minutes (five if on battery) to be able to create a quick note or look at a web page in a client meeting. I want to do it now.

Microsoft currently leads the pack when it comes to operating systems. Maintaining that hegemony is not a given. People are tired of its slow, bloated, do-what-I-say-the-way-I-want-you-to-do-it behavior. Already, computer manufacturers including HP, Dell and Lenovo are turning to companies like Splashtop which uses Linux to enable instant-on access to functionality on newer laptops. Windows still loads, but it’s Linux that allows you to begin using your computer immediately. And that brings me to my real point of consideration for Microsoft…

One of the best decisions ever made in Cupertino was Apple’s switch to Unix as the underlying platform for OS X. Perhaps it’s time for Microsoft to consider the same. Whether FreeBSD or Linux, Windows would undoubtedly be quicker and lighter on Unix. In my mind, this decision is a critical one. Consumers are already used to any number of operating systems because of their mobile phones. Symbian is the top mobile operating system. What’s to prevent Symbian from making a play for laptops? People already familiar with the device (millions throughout the world) would not face much of a learning curve. Far-fetched but not impossible…

Microsoft’s survival depends on creating a lighter, more nimble OS and in a sense, a lighter, more nimble Microsoft. Let’s see if they’re up to the task.