Chapter 321

The disadvantages of the system itself cannot be made up for.

This is not a question of how advanced technology is. If it's just a technological gap, it's easy to say.

Both systems and software are building blocks based on basic programming language and logic.

Small program software, and perhaps the individual IQ of programmers, can be called the technology gap.

However, in the research and development of large software and even systems, hundreds or even thousands of programmers work together. The collective power is greater than the individual, and the individual creativity and brilliance are basically buried.

The rest, details and experience, are purely multiple-choice questions.

For one detail, there are two schemes, which is better, and make a choice.

Therefore, for the system alone, there is no gap in technology. The real gap is the feedback of user experience and vulnerabilities.

This is the most terrible thing.

Microsoft's windows system is a world-wide software. There are countless users as experimenters to improve the software itself.

Moreover, Microsoft has more than ten years and nearly 20 years of system operation experience, which can not be compared.

For example, the release of Microsoft's next-generation system is basically a variety of problems in the early stage, which can not be avoided by any manufacturer.

However, the same new product problem is a small problem in Microsoft, but it must be a big problem in Sanshi, and may affect survival.

Microsoft's huge user base means faster and more likely to find errors and user experience feedback.

Microsoft not only has the advantage of time, but also has the advantage of space by finding problems from a large number of error reports and user feedback, and then organizing forces to tackle key problems.

Their long-term experience in handling similar events can enable them to quickly organize human and material resources to tackle key problems.

With more than ten years of experience, they can complete the update iteration as quickly as possible.

The new system only takes about half a year to update and iterate an original system with many loopholes and poor experience into a mature user satisfied system.

Look at the three stone company.

Pangu 2.0, if you encounter the same number of problems, the same number of vulnerabilities and error experience

Because the user base is there, hundreds of thousands of users and tens of millions of users of others give problem feedback at the same time.

Therefore, just reporting errors and experience feedback must be slower than Microsoft.

This cycle may be one year or even several years.

In addition, the experience in solving problems in the later stage is insufficient, the scheme is more immature, and the overall ability is not in the same order of magnitude.

People tend to mature in half a year, Pangu 2.0

It may be in an immature state for a year or two, or even for a long time.

In terms of user experience, Pangu 2.0 technology is not good.

Word of mouth will come down.

What's more, when you reach a mature system and operate almost perfectly, let alone Windows 2000 and windows xp are almost mature, and people are several versions ahead of you.

How do you compete with others for the market?

And this is only possible. After twelve o'clock, I haven't started writing yet.

You can see it tomorrow morning.

[monthly ticket slot]

[recommended slot]