A decade's worth of Windows mistakes that changed Microsoft (for better and worse)

A decade's worth of Windows mistakes that changed Microsoft (for better and worse)

Summary: As a longtime Microsoft-watcher, I’m as fascinated by the company’s missteps as I am by its successes. Anyone who worked at Microsoft in the first decade of the 21st Century knows the company made many missteps and wrong turns. How the company responded to those mistakes had an indelible impact on products that are on the market today and those that are planned for the future.They say every mistake is a teachable moment. So what has Microsoft learned from its miscues over the past decade?


 |  Image 3 of 11

  • Thumbnail 1
  • Thumbnail 2
  • Thumbnail 3
  • Thumbnail 4
  • Thumbnail 5
  • Thumbnail 6
  • Thumbnail 7
  • Thumbnail 8
  • Thumbnail 9
  • Thumbnail 10
  • Thumbnail 11
  • Throughout the 1990s, Windows users already had been targeted by a multitude of viruses, many of which attached themselves to Microsoft Office documents. By 2001, the concept of a worm that could spread over networks was already well known.

    Wisely, the designers of Windows XP included a firewall to protect users from network-based attacks. And then, in one of the great mysteries of our time, they decided to ship XP with Internet Connection Firewall turned off.

    You can imagine what happened next. I remember it vividly. On August 11, 2003, Windows XP computers worldwide began shutting down. When restarted, they displayed this error message and went into an endless reboot loop.

    That was the Blaster worm at work. Microsoft issued a rare (at that time) and extremely detailed security bulletin describing the symptoms and cleanup steps:

    On August 11, 2003, Microsoft began investigating a worm that was reported by Microsoft Product Support Services (PSS). ... Generally known as "Blaster," this new worm exploits the vulnerability that was addressed by Microsoft Security Bulletin MS03-026 (823980) to spread itself over networks by using open Remote Procedure Call (RPC) ports on computers that are running any of the products that are listed at the beginning of this article.

    The Blaster worm, along with the previous year's Code Red attacks, were aimed at code that was written before Microsoft got serious about security.

    Months after XP shipped, in January 2002, Bill Gates wrote his now-famous Trustworthy Computing memo, which included this across-the-board order:

    In the past, we've made our software and services more compelling for users by adding new features and functionality, and by making our platform richly extensible. We've done a terrific job at that, but all those great features won't matter unless customers trust our software.

    So now, when we face a choice between adding features and resolving security issues, we need to choose security. Our products should emphasize security right out of the box, and we must constantly refine and improve that security as threats evolve.

    The memo was met with scorn in some quarters. Wired characterized it as "no more than a public relations stunt" and CNET talked to a security expert who called it "a PR blitz, pure and simple." But the memo turned out to be a genuine catalyst, kicking off a retraining and reengineering effort that wasn't fully engaged until the end of 2004 and didn't begin to bear fruit for several more years.

    In fact, one could argue that the emphasis on security caused some overreaction. (See UAC, a few years later.)

  • For years, Microsoft user interface designers labored under the notion that Windows users wanted a friendly assistant to help them perform ordinary tasks. Clippy, the chirpy, googly-eyed paper clip that debuted in Office 97, became the stuff of endless parodies: “It looks like you’re writing a ransom note. Would you like some help with that?”

    Windows XP had its own set of cringingly cute cartoon characters in the form of Search Assistants: Rover the dog, Merlin the Wizard, and a pair of other forgettable characters.

    The worst part of the XP search experience was the set of tricks and corny punch lines each character would deliver as it made you go through extra steps to find files.

    Eventually, someone in Redmond came to their senses and canned the characters in favor of a simple, fast search add-on. Not coincidentally, that happened after Google delivered a simple, fast search add-on for Windows.

    Thank goodness for competition!

  • At the dawn of the commercial Internet, in the mid-1990s, Netscape represented an existential threat to Microsoft. Microsoft, which had not yet been reined in by the U.S. Department of Justice, responded aggressively to the dominance of Netscape Navigator, introducing Internet Explorer 1.0 at the same time as Windows 95 and revising it at a breakneck clip for the next six years.

    Netscape could not compete, eventually selling itself to AOL in 1998. By the time XP launched in 2001, IE's market share was in monopoly territory, hovering around 90%.

    Windows XP shipped with Internet Explorer 6, which was full of then-revolutionary ideas. This press release from 2001 almost sounds like a parody in retrospect. Seriously, "unparalleled support for industry standards"?

    Internet Explorer 6 features a new visual design as well as innovative browser capabilities, including enhanced Explorer Bars, integrated instant messaging, media playback and automatic picture resizing, as well as improved privacy for personal information on the Web and unparalleled support for Internet industry standards. In addition to being easier to customize and deploy, Internet Explorer 6 is a feature-rich platform for building Web-based applications and developing compelling content for users.

    And then, with victory assured, Microsoft decided to stop shipping new revisions of Internet Explorer. Part of the blame goes to the all-hands-on-deck focus on security, which stopped development of many Microsoft products as coders were sent for mandatory security training. But whatever the reason, it opened the door for a competitor.

    Ironically, that competitor turned out to be built on the old Netscape code base, which had been open-sourced by AOL in 1998. It was originally called Phoenix (risen from the ashes of Netscape, get it?) and by the end of 2004 it had been renamed Firefox and had nearly a 4% share of all browser usage. As Microsoft continued to ignore IE and and security issues with the browser got worse, Firefox became increasingly popular.

    Microsoft belatedly resumed development of Internet Explorer, shipping IE7 with Windows Vista in late 2006. A vastly improved IE8 shipped in 2009 with Windows 7. But those releases did little to slow the precipitous decline in market share for IE. Even worse, much of the web developer community had developed a visceral loathing for Microsoft’s browser.

    Today, Microsoft has rededicated itself to web standards—this time for real. And its efforts with IE9 have earned grudging respect from some web professionals. But it will never be able to make up the momentum it lost with five years of neglect in the middle of the last decade.

    Credit: chart data from Net Applications

Topics: Operating Systems, Microsoft, Software, Windows

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Related Stories


Log in or register to join the discussion
  • RE: A decade's worth of Windows mistakes that changed Microsoft (for better and worse)

    I still find myself annoyed at that damn search dog. Words cannot describe how much hatred I have for that dog.
    The one and only, Cylon Centurion
    • All IT people hated it...

      @Cylon Centurion ...but you wouldn't believe how many end users still ask me if there is any way I can put it back. Seriously....
      • RE: A decade's worth of Windows mistakes that changed Microsoft (for better and worse)


        A lot of users with kids tell me they found it "cute", but I for one, am glad he is gone.
        The one and only, Cylon Centurion
    • RE: A decade's worth of Windows mistakes that changed Microsoft (for better and worse)

      @Cylon Centurion Got to be better than Clippie though surely?
      • RE: A decade's worth of Windows mistakes that changed Microsoft (for better and worse)


        I'll take Clippy any day. :D
        The one and only, Cylon Centurion
    • RE: A decade's worth of Windows mistakes that changed Microsoft (for better and worse)

      @Cylon Centurion
      And to make it worse Win7 search still defaults to the dog....

      My biggest beef that keeps me from moving way from WinXP is the total lack of backwards compatibility on ALL post XP MS products. With Win7 I cannot use most of the programs I've purchased, written, or have become very proficient at without using a program like VMware. Even the Win7 XP emulator restricts to 32bit.

      MS has taken the arrogant lazy position of FORCING us to ugrade our older programs (if there is a 32/64bit product to be purchased/re-learned) or SCREW US! This is not some new MS arrogance issue --- MS has always required upgrading hardware/software each time a new OS comes out or you get bogged down with the slows or will not work syndrome. So MS I've now taken the position of SCREW YOU --- unless future MS OS's are fully backwards compatible (or free patches) to 8/16/32bit programs. [And NO Cloud crap - big brother knows enough and many places I go have no internet, I'll stick with my HD, thank you!]

      I design/build/program EE Test Stations - we do not connect to the internet due to the obvious security/mal-virus-etc issues, hence we are sticking with WinXP. If MS does not overcome their jam-it down our throat methods I'll switch to Linux!
      N6JSX, MS-EET
      • Your credibility is destroyed immediately


        This is ridiculously untrue:

        "Win7 search still defaults to the dog."

        You're either clueless or trolling. I honestly dno't care which, but it would be nice if you would cop to it.
        Ed Bott
      • RE: A decade's worth of Windows mistakes that changed Microsoft (for better and worse)

        @Kuby I don't know what you are talking about. I've never had a problem running programs that I had on XP on Windows 7. Are you still running DOS programs? Seriously, it might be time to upgrade that software.

        I run Linux on a few of my machines, and I'm not sure why you believe the experience for backward compatibility will be any better there. Every time there is a kernal update, seems like I have to go get updated versions of my software, so again, what are you talking about?

        I'm afraid, you misrepresent the Linux community with this type of babble, and frankly, we don't want you here.
      • It was probably crap to begin with

        @Kuby Honestly, I've got applications that were written in 1996 which were originally written for Windows 95 that still work fine today. The only issue I have ever had was some extra gyrations to set up 32 bit data sources for them when using 64 bit Vista or Windows 7. And those work arounds were pretty easy once we figured out what the issue was.
      • RE: A decade's worth of Windows mistakes that changed Microsoft (for better and worse)


        I *really* wish that zdnet would put a "Like" button in the comments as I would surely click it for your comment above.
      • RE: A decade's worth of Windows mistakes that changed Microsoft (for better and worse)

        @Kuby, actually not all builds include a virtual machine that allows backward compatibility. For backward compatibility with XP (unless you are a high level expert) you will need a second virtual machine loaded. I returned a new laptop purchase for this exact reason.
      • RE: A decade's worth of Windows mistakes that changed Microsoft (for better and worse)


        I fail to see your argument. In no way, shape, or form does the search dog appear in Windows Vista or Windows 7.

        Also, ALL operating systems require the purchasing of new hardware. Try running Linux on that old 8-bit processor you're running and see what happens. :)

        Progression, my friend. If you're coding your own apps, then you should have upgraded the coding. It's not Microsoft's fault your software is falling out of date. purchased or otherwise.
        The one and only, Cylon Centurion
      • RE: A decade's worth of Windows mistakes that changed Microsoft (for better and worse)


        Wow, buy an Apple and tell me how you feel. All my hardware works on XP->Win7. Don't mistake a manufacturer's unwillingness to write device drivers with windows not working on your hardware.

        Mr Jobs made sure old hardware got shut off, forever... When a new version of his apps came out, the previous ones stopped getting fixed; period! You have XP working for 10 years, without paying for any fixes or upgrades. Ask a MacOS user about that.

        Some people need to look out of their caves now and then.
      • RE: A decade's worth of Windows mistakes that changed Microsoft (for better and worse)

        @Kuby <br>Mr. Kuby, I was the same as you for about a day. I use to have (for example) this photo enhancing/manunipulation program--Picture it 2001. I thought I could not make it without this program. Then I found Photpscape, makes PI 2001 look like a kindergartner vs a PHD. Much better and about 1/4 the real estate. And the best thing, it's free, as in water and beer! There are several others to numerous to mention, including Open source and people just programing for the heck of it. You will be surprise what you can find if you "Bing" free software. You can spend months in an orgasmic frenzy! Try it--you will like it! I guarantee but will not stake my life on it!!
      • RE: A decade's worth of Windows mistakes that changed Microsoft (for better and worse)

        @Kuby :

        Very badly written XP programs have problems running on Win 7. But even badly-written ones can run if you create 'shims' that correct incompatible behaviours using MS-provided tools.
      • RE: ...FORCING us to ugrade our older programs...


        Now you know why, after reviewing our computing needs; our 1000+ employee company <b>kicked Microsoft to the curb</b> and switched to Linux.
      • RE: A decade's worth of Windows mistakes that changed Microsoft (for better and worse)

        @gomigomijunk - what Linux programs do you have to upgrade with each kernel update? I can't think of any that are required because of a kernel update. Device drivers are different, and modules that plug directly into the kernel as a kernel extension may require updates as they are usually specific to a particular version of the kernel.
      • Not fair comment.


        You say:
        " MS has always required upgrading hardware/software each time a new OS comes out or you get bogged down with the slows or will not work syndrome"

        Thats a horribly misleading statement. It makes it sound as if Microsoft creates an operating system then the hardware manufacturers have to cobble up better hardware they wouldn't have bothered with if Microsoft hadn't created a more complex operating system.

        Not an accurate depiction at all. First off, facts are facts. We know how fast hardware improves and its a fact various bits of hardware, be it memory, hard drives, CPU's or video cards have a much much faster turn around time then any MS operating system. Look at XP. By time Vista came out hardware had been upgrading for many years.

        Then let us not forget that practically every major bit of software will often take more resources to run in their most current versions as opposed to versions that are 3,4,5 years or more old.

        You have the situation entirely backward. Software manufacturers look to the state of hardware as some indication of how much load their program can reasonably put on a modern system when they are developing the program. Sure, Office 2010 for example isn't going to run as hot on 5-10 year old hardware, but then again, why would anyone develop a major program restricted by wanting to make it run on hardware thats years old? Operating systems in particular last for years and there has never been a case where 2-3 years after a Windows release that even whats considered low end modern hardware is significantly more then whats needed to run the OS.

        How would one justify that? It quite frankly makes no sense.

        Try thinking about that. Design an entire operating system with all the related costs, cut it where ever you have to to make sure it will never have a problem running on what would be hardware thats middle of the road 5 years ago. It would be considered to be junk hardware by most, but do it anyway. And the end result may be more streamlined, but in many respects its actually going to be considered to be more stripped down.

        If that was the case Windows would be a lot more like Linux has been and at that point why would one want Windows when Linux cost zero. Sure, Linux users have no issue with that but Linux enthusiasts are not of a breed that generally appreciates any of the differences Windows brings, much unlike the 90% of the world that uses Windows.

        Where is the mileage in creating an OS like that? People get used to, and love massive backward and forward compatibility with all the popular hardware and software that Windows brings along with the many user friendly aspects to the OS and the more features added, well, it makes for a more complex OS.

        Its pretty hard to justify paring down a newly designed OS because it will be sluggish or even stall on 5 year old hardware. Maybe.

        And further, its not at all unusual that someone who gets some good hardware can still get great performance out of their computer even if they install a newly released OS 4-5 years after they bought the hardware, perhaps less so agreed, as the quality of that hardware goes down.

        And I really don't know what your software complaint is about. I now run Windows 7 and everything that I have that would run under XPSP2 still runs fine on Win7. Agreed, there are likely programs out there that will not, butt if you think one huge company is going to stymie their product development due to rare issues like that you have got to be kidding.

        If you want to go with Linux, certainly be my guest. I've used Linux before and I think its alright. Impressive in many ways for an OS. But for the long term, its not for me, its no Windows thats for sure, and if thats a good thing for you then boy, you SHOULD go to Linux. Give it a go, its free, there are plenty of choices and it works well.

        The one place I can agree with you is the no cloud crap. I don't even get why some people entertain the idea. Sure, like anything there are people in this world of 7 billion that the cloud may be the better way. But for many people, they could store all the stuff they would use in the better part of a lifetime on a $100 HD. And it will be even cheaper for those buying hardware next year, and even more so as time goes by. At least then, so long as your computer can start, you always have access to your stuff. And of course, if the comp don't start, the cloud wont help with that anyway.
      • RE: A decade's worth of Windows mistakes that changed Microsoft (for better and worse)

        @Kuby AFAIK the dog doesn't exist in Windows 7. The search is either in the start menu or next to the address bar in an Explorer window. And I've never seen an option to bring the dog back either.

        To be honest, I've had no major issues with compatibility, and the minor issues I've had were easy to fix.

        If you're really having so many compatibility issues, may I suggest double checking your Data Execution Prevention settings? Older software often wasn't aware of DEP.

        Being somebody who takes security seriously enough to stay off the 'net, I wouldn't be surprised if you switched DEP to the stricter setting at one time and forgot about it.

        "And NO Cloud crap - big brother knows enough"

        Indeed. Try looking up your ham radio call sign in a search engine. You'd be surprised how much info is public.

        Former ham, Computer Science graduate, A+ Certified.
      • RE: A decade's worth of Windows mistakes that changed Microsoft (for better and worse)


        .......Can I get some of what you're smoking ???

        You have to be nuts to think that MS is forcing you to update your s/w every time there's a new Windows release......

        ......It's plainly evident you don't know what you're talking about.

        ......sort of like the one person in a particular newsgroup that STILL uses Windows98 because XP runs "too many services"

        ......or another newsgroup loser that is a full on Lintard, beyond belief, and has never personally used XP, Vista, *or* Windows7, yet claims to know all about all Windows OSs because he 'reads' about it.