In my opinion, Windows Server Load balancer (8) may end with a failure.

First of all, we must acknowledge that from the perspective of this development preview, Win8 has made great breakthroughs in both technology and interface. It can be said that it fully demonstrates Microsoft's powerful desktop technology. New development tools allow almost allProgramDevelopers develop applications for Win8, from traditional C/C ++ to C # And even Web JavaScript, moreover, programs written in C # Or javascript can run on x86 and ARM hardware platforms; the concept of "content as interface" represented by Metro is a major breakthrough since the appearance of GUI.

Microsoft's goal is obvious: to create a unified platform that is compatible with all mainstream hardware platforms and allows all developers.

However, whatever other aspects are doing well, what determines whether it can be successful is the core of it-Windows
Slate. Can Windows Server Load balancer hit the key in the market and achieve success?

My opinion is: Windows slate
Let's continue Microsoft's wrong thinking to the point where nothing can be done! The traditional success of Windows comes from its uniformity as a platform-its compatibility makes it easy to run on hardware of various specifications, the comprehensive and efficient user interface makes it popular with office and individual consumers. Because it unifies the market, developers only need to write programs for this platform (unlike Linux), and add it to the convenient development tools, the number of applications on Windows is extremely large and comprehensive, establishing the unshakable status of traditional windows.

But now the times are different. Today is the era in which the IT industry regards consumer services as the center. Before that, Windows has been trying to use Windows to unify enterprise users and consumer users, and its performance is good, however, consumers now have higher requirements on IT products, and windows, which takes into account enterprise applications, is increasingly difficult to meet the needs of consumers. The failure of Vista is a good example. enterprise users think that its interface is fancy and has poor compatibility, while consumer users do not think it has any major improvement over XP. The reality is that the current Windows system integrates too many useless things for both consumer users and enterprise users, which is too bloated and personal users complain about its traditional interface, enterprise users complain that the interface is fancy-traditional windows under the idea of "big unification" has become increasingly incompatible with this era.

Let's take a look at this preview version of Windows
8. It is the product of this idea of "big unification". It combines two different user interfaces in a very rigid way and builds them on two chips with different designs and uses. The technology it implements is indeed surprising, and people are very interested in it. But think about it. Why do tablet users need a traditional Windows interface? Why do PC users need a Metro interface? Why do enterprise users need Xbox
Live? Why do consumers need hyper-V? No matter what kind of user it seems bloated; no matter what kind of user it experience is not good enough, not efficient.

Microsoft apparently put windows
As a panacea, and strive to make windows meet all the needs of all users, but in this era of consumption computing, a single closed platform cannot meet all the needs of all users.

Windows
7
Taking a further step towards Vista's wrong path, the result is a greater failure-Microsoft missed the opportunity to reflect and did not see the changes in market demand in a timely manner, so it entered the mobile Internet field as soon as possible. What's ridiculous is that Microsoft thinks windows
7
Having achieved unprecedented success, I decided to go further in this direction without realizing that the entire company was wrong, on the surface, the success is a huge failure-the position of Microsoft's IT industry center is being replaced.

Windows
Slate
It is indeed a good operating system, but if it wants to achieve success in a "unified everything" way in the wrong way, the result can only be a failure.

If you have any questions, please criticize and correct them.