Actually, it is more like a newer version of Windows Vista/2008, with two years worth of of bug fixes and optimizations to the core system. The interface does seem to be noticeably more responsive, perhaps even more so than Windows 2008 used as a workstation, which has already been a significant improvement over Vista. The RC version released a month ago has been very stable, I dare say more so than the RC versions of Windows 2008. From my perspective, your rant seems totally disconnected from reality.

Java does nothing to solve problems that occur with programs written in Cobol, so what does that prove? If the old architecture is flawed, then best thing you can possibly expect is for them to build a completely new architecture, with support for all the APIs that the developers used in C++, so that the need to use the obsolete architecture is eliminated. And this is what you're getting. I can't think of a single major API that doesn't have a managed replacement, either in place or rapidly emerging. Now, as much as the 15-year old COM architecture was obsolete, the Linux community never even tried to developed a proper object-oriented set of system interfaces. Why don't you propose something superior? From what I see, the Linux community has nothing to offer. The only thing comparable to .NET is Java. Remind me what part of the Linux kernel or core Linux ecosystem is written in Java...

Instead of asserting the alleged inconsistencies in my response, why don't you state what you are trying to prove because I somehow fail to see any coherent message. 1. That Windows lacks mechanisms that prevent DLL hell and should be blamed for that? I pointed to the existence of .NET as well as to the fact that Microsoft is pushing it wherever it can, on all existing and emerging platforms, and even in the driver framework. Can you respond to this? 2. That Microsoft should be blamed for the fact that many developers are still coding in C++? I've pointed to the fact that they have virtually no excuse for doing so. Microsoft is not a church that controls the minds of its followers. I'd like to see how Linux manages to maintain discipline in its developers community if it grows to the same market share. I see discipline in the developers community lacking even today. 3. That there are some problem with .NET because Microsoft is internally using C++? What does that prove? Certainly this doesn't prove in any way that developers should be doing the same. Does it prove that .NET is not usable? I fail to see that logical connection. As you yourself have pointed out, perhaps Microsoft doesn't have any problem with things like DLL hell, and since the codebase is controlled by one organization, perhaps it has no compelling reason to switch to coding everything .NET within just a few years from the introduction of this platform. Besides, what is Linux kernel internally using? Last time I checked, it was written mostly in C, a retarded programming language that lacks any modern features. Microsoft introduced things like COM some 15 years ago, and even if it's C++, its internal structure is much more object-oriented that Linux ever was with its archaic filesystem interface. Following your line of reasoning, one would argue that since Linux is not internally coded in Java, therefore Linux lacks any sort of high-level programming features and is therefore useless as a platform for developers.

The majority of people can't count to 10 and believe the universe started 6000 years ago, but that's not the problem with modern science, that's just their inertia. Windows has been aggressively moving into .NET on all fronts, and is introducing .NET all over the place: as a way to interface the OS (does Linux come with a consistent set of interfaces like this for all parts of the platform, or is it still all based on the archaic filesystem interface), as a way to interface all their applications, in Windows Mobile, in XBOX, in Zune, in Silverlight, and you're also recently getting driver kits that let you write managed code in user-mode. Sure, much of Windows itself is still written mostly in C++, but this process can't happen instantly with a large software organization such as this, eat your own dog food is not always easy. External developers don't have much excuse for not moving into .NET, other than their reluctance to learn new technologies.

You must be mentally still in the 1980s because I haven't seen a single instance of DLL hell for the last 15 years. In case you missed that, there has been this thing called ".NET" evolving for, like, the past 7 years, which had essentially solved the problem once and for good. Are you still running Windows 1.0, on a steam-powered, 3-bit CPU, or are you just watching a lot of porn these days. If the latter is the case, then you might consider avoid that "premium" content that requires additional "codecs".

I think the fact that there are people out there who aspire to do mundane jobs is a blessing, we should thank them for being there and not insult them for no reason. From my perspective, I see around myself all kinds of primadonnas that don't know anything and won't get their hands dirty because of their fucking princessdom. Just about every M.Eng. student at my school (no offense to M.Eng. students) believes it is below his dignity to do anything less than reinventing polymorphic tensor models for quantum strangelet algebras over functional operating system kernel manifolds in Banach spaces, but they can't write a 50-line program or burn a fucking CD. People whom I could ask to install stuff, run those damned experiment for me, fix my crappy website, or grpah my data for me without showing attitude, and be happy that they could be useful, I praise such people and I wish there could be more of those. Instead, all I get is guys who live in some kind of virtual reality and just can't honestly get in touch with their skill set.

Wrong, MS matches 1:1 donations of its employees. What do Google or Google's founders do, beyond being in vogue?