Чего все возмутились?
Берется статья этого "редактора" с простым американским именем Serdar Yegulalp (не могу быстро выговорить, ну да ладно), в ней заменяется Linux и X11 на Windows (а также Ubuntu на XP, Red Hat на Vista, Open Source на proprietary и т.д.), и получаем совершенно замечательную статью на прямо противоположную тему:
* Fixing Windows: What's Broken And What To Do About It *
The proprietary operating system still has major problems that need immediate attention. Our expert recommends configuration, versioning, and GUI enhancements, to name a few.
(Not by Serdar Yegulalp)
Despite the fact that it's been around since 1985, Windows remains a work in progress. It's not perfect, nor does anyone pretend it is. The places where it needs the most immediate improvement are also a matter of debate: what's crucially important to some is only marginally important to others.
Still, there's no question that there are key areas where Windows is lacking -- not just missing individual features, but things that are actively dysfunctional and which need immediate attention. I'm going to run down several major areas where Windows, as an operating system and as a platform, needs work.
The software that goes into a Windows distribution is dealt with in chunks called "installation packages" -- whole applications, support libraries for apps, programmer's tools, and so on. Microsoft Office and Visual Studio, for instance, are present in most every Windows distribution's software repository as package sets.
The way packages are managed within any individual distribution is entirely up to the maintainers of that distribution. XP uses its own way to install and deinstall software, Vista introduced new way of dealing with; and so on.
Any given Windows distribution is an agglomeration of components from thousands of different programmers, projects, and architectural initiatives. To that end, there's little or no centralized configuration: everything in the system is controlled through a welter of files or registry hives, and there's no guarantee that the syntax of any one configuration file or registry value will apply to any other.
The problem is not as pronounced if you limit your exposure to only a few settings and follow their internal formatting, but that's not a sustainable solution.
Kernel Application Binary Interfaces
If there is one complaint that comes up more often than any other about developing for Windows, it is the way the kernel application binary interfaces are a moving target.
Audio Application Programming Interfaces
Look no further than Windows's implementations, plural, of audio for an example of how too many cooks can spoil the broth. The diversity of audio APIs and subsystems means that, yes, you can pick and choose one that suits your needs best -- but it also means a rat's nest of incompatibilities.
Integration of System GUI With Apps
Most people who have used Windows for some time have probably encountered this problem: an Widows application, or the whole of Widows GUI itself, freezes, and the only way to get things back is to kill the application or Explorer itself and restart it. The good news: it isn't hard to do that. The bad news: killing Windows application, problematic or not, means that all of your entered data dies along with it.
Most of what's wrong with Windows isn't fatal: if it was, Windows would scarcely have achieved the degree of adoption it now enjoys (with the general exception of consumer computing). But there's little question these problems need to be fixed, and that doing so may require some challenges to the conventional Windows way of doing things and defending the results.