ZDNet: Put Windows on a diet

“Why can’t Microsoft produce a skinny operating system? The
company easily could achieve this feat if it wasn’t wedded to the
idea that more equals more money that can be exacted from OEMs
(and, occasionally, consumers).”

“Sun’s not afraid of fielding lots of technologies, many of
which are at cross-purposes, and letting customers decide which
solution best fits their needs. … Microsoft’s not afraid of
inundating the market with choices. (How many flavors of Windows
and NT are there now?) But its executives have preferred to let
competing development projects duke it out internally before the
powers-that-be choose which solution to productize.”

“…Sun does have a point when it claims that most consumers
are using their home PCs to play, mail and shop on the Net, and for
little else. If this home-computing paradigm holds true, why is
Microsoft building more and more and more features into forthcoming
versions of Windows?
If you think Windows 98 is hefty, wait
till you see Millennium and Neptune. There is no way these Consumer
Windows products will ever be mistaken for thin.

Sun believes you can never be too thin. Microsoft seems to
believe you can never be too rich. Should Microsoft leapfrog over
its fat client notions and get Windows on a diet, post-haste? Or
are there still some valid reasons that customers need fat client
operating systems?”