It seems clear that there are some differences between Microsoft's designs and implementations and Apple's. But if you compare, say, DOS, Windows 3.1, Windows 95, Windows XP, and Windows 7, it seems difficult to make the case that Microsoft's changes to Windows have not paid off positively for users on balance over the years. Certainly there have been missteps, but those missteps have, to date, always been overcome over time, and almost never by backtracking to the previous state of affairs.

Perhaps there have been sufficient missteps, though, that people feel they have both license and cause to second guess major changes.

Whether Win 8 itself ends up being successful or not is still an open question, of course. But I will be happy to wager that (A) there will be a major next successful version of Windows, and (B) it will look a lot more like the Win 8 Developer Preview than it does like Win 7.

> DOS, Windows 3.1, Windows 95, Windows XP, and Windows 7

Not that I disagree with you, but it would be fairer to include Microsoft's serious missteps like DOS 4, Windows 286, Windows ME, and Windows Vista.

In addition, it ignores Microsoft's long-standing dedication to backwards-compatibility and attention to legacy customers. Microsoft, and Windows in particular, has always been the safe haven of those unable or unwilling to change.

>In addition, it ignores Microsoft's long-standing dedication to backwards-compatibility and attention to legacy customers

Err what? All the apps still run and run natively. This not even like Apple's move to Intel. It's just the Start menu UI that's being changed. This is more like the Ribbon UI being introduced in Office 2007 replacing the traditional toolbar.

There were predictions then that companies would shift to OpenOffice because the ribbons were too jarring to users. How did that turn out?

My point was more abstract than that. The thread I was in was concerned with how when Apple makes big changes, they are called bold, while when Microsoft does it, they are called flailing.

My point was that the comparison must take into account the culture each company takes toward accommodating the needs and tastes of legacy/long-standing customers. Pulling out one example - the Ribbon in Office, which people still bitch about to this day, mind you - does very little to argue that Microsoft has a tradition of bold changes breaking existing user expectations. Such an argument would need to be much, much stronger.

>he other is to suggest that on balance, Apple’s changes pay off positively for users while Miscrosoft’s do not.

I am curious regarding MS's big changes that you consider that didn't help users, Vista? Office Ribbon? Windows Phone 7?

I’m not saying they don’t help users. I bought a Tablet PC and liked it.

I think its the former. Whether Microsoft's efforts pay off or not is yet to be seen as the OS is not even in Beta yet.