The company promises that Windows 7 will be the best version of its operating system yet, and Microsoft hopes that the release will go much further than its predecessor, Windows Vista. One can only hope so since Vista was such a poor example of what could be done.
Whether Windows 7 does go down as one of Microsoft's best remains to be seen, which is why you won't see it on this list. While some of us have high hopes for the operating system the old rule that you never buy version one of any Microsoft code holds true. We have yet to see what pitfalls the new operating system has, and they will only become apparent once widespread adoption kicks in.
But in the meantime we've decided to count down the ten best products ever to come out of Redmond. This was a very tough list to come up with, since neither Shaun or I are Microsoft's biggest fans, but we think this gives a good example of some of the best that Microsoft has to offer.
Honourable mention: OneNote
Shaun Nichols: It only made honourable mention because it is largely a niche product, but if you're a student, journalist or just a tablet PC user, OneNote can be an incredibly valuable tool. Far more than just a word processor, OneNote is an application explicitly designed for note-taking.
Most importantly, OneNote allows users to link up their text notes with recorded audio. Users can click on a specific line of text or a note and hear audio from what exactly was being said while that note was typed.
For me personally, OneNote changes the way I approach covering an interview or keynote address, replacing endless typing with simple notes to sound clips, allowing me to pay much closer attention to what's actually being said rather than making sure I got that last quote right.
Iain Thomson: OK, we're perhaps a bit biased on this one because OneNote is such a great tool for journalists one almost suspects that Microsoft developed it just to get good press.
Nevertheless it's a stunningly useful application for anyone who needs to take notes in a meeting. If you are having to sit through presentations and need an accurate record of what went on then OneNote is your application. It makes the whole process much more effective and allows you to keep an accurate record of what went on.
This is useful not only for more effective work but also for a more important job. The next time management ask “which idiot decided to do this?” you have a ready-made record proving it wasn't you.
Honourable mention: Flight Simulator
Iain Thomson: It's going to date me but the Flight Simulator program was probably the first game I played on an IBM PC back in the 1980s.
Microsoft apparently started selling the game because Bill Gates was fascinated with flight simulators. Since he has yet to get a private pilot's licence I have my doubts but there's no denying that this has to be Microsoft's longest running game program, since it predates Windows.
Now as it's sold by Microsoft you'd expect the game to be pretty awful but in fact it was very, very good for its time. There were a few bugs - some of them very enjoyable. You could choose the Lear jet and take it up to maximum ceiling before switching planes to a biplane and power-diving down to its maximum altitude in a way that would rip the wings off an actual plane.
However the simulator also attracted some severely geeky fans. I know of people who actually make flights in real time – travelling from London to Barcelona for example without fast forwarding through the boring flying through France business. One former journalist, who shall remain nameless, even bought a pilot's cap to wear while he was playing. Sad? Yes, but you can't deny the power of the program.
Shaun Nichols: The devoted followers of games such as Halo and Call of Duty are well known, and here in the US the Madden NFL franchise is so popular it was given its own TV show, but flight simulators are a huge niche that doesn't often get noticed.
Perhaps it's because flight simulator addicts aren't the grungy university students or twitchy gamer types that you see with other games; they are quiet, reserved types and quite often are white-collar professionals.
That doesn't mean they aren't very, very into their game of choice. The hard core types not only spend long hours with force-feedback joysticks, many opt to go even further and set up multiple monitors, driving wheels and even foot pedals to more accurately recreate the act of taking off into the wild blue yonder.
We can't all be Richard Branson or Sergey Brin, most of us will never be able to get behind the wheel of a private jet, so flight simulator is not to bad for the next best thing.
10. Minesweeper
Iain Thomson: If there's one piece of Microsoft software that has wasted more time and crucified office productivity then Minesweeper is it.
The game gained such popularity because it was bundled into versions of Windows and when bored office workers saw a tab labelled games they immediately checked it out. After all, on a slow office day you have a choice between working and playing Minesweeper (this was pre-internet) and the decision was an easy one to make.
Minesweeper also taps into the most virulent of games playing principles - the easy to learn, hard to master quandary. You can pick up the basic rules of the game very quickly but mastering a large maze full of mines takes a mathematical mind and a certain amount of luck. It's like draughts, or checkers as we say over here, for the computer.
Shaun Nichols: Considering the wide range of products Microsoft has pumped out over the decades, having Minesweeper in the top ten is a bit of a dubious honour, but it really was a great little game.
The concept was simple enough, click on all of the boxes on a screen without uncovering the "mine" boxes that end the game. Seemingly Minesweeper was a simple little game that had only been tossed in there so that the Microsoft guys could pad the list of bundled software and features.
Like all great games, however, Minesweeper is far easier to learn than it is to master. After the first time you clear a level, you're hooked for life and can look forward to many wasted hours of productivity at the hands of this simple little decades-old computer game.
9. Internet Explorer 7
Shaun Nichols: By the time Microsoft got around to releasing Internet Explorer 7, the browser was the dominant name in the market, but it wasn't because they had a better product. Microsoft had largely taken the top spot in the browser world by more or less bullying out its opponents and leveraging the dominance of Windows to bundle the browser with new systems.
By 2006, however, there was an emerging threat from Mozilla Firefox and amidst mounting security concerns, Microsoft got into gear and produced IE7. Aside from the normal compatibility and performance boosts, IE7 also tightened up security and moved to help slow the flood of exploits targeting the ActiveX system. The result was a better browser that was much safer than its predecessors.
Unfortunately, not everyone updated, and many systems still run older versions of Internet Explorer that are considered "low-hanging fruit" to malware writers and botnet operators.
Iain Thomson: IE7 is when Microsoft got its game hat on again in the browser market.
Having seen off the opposition with a variety of dubious tactics, most notably giving the software away for free and nailing it to the operating system, Microsoft then basically stopped browser development.
It's a classic example of why competition is important. Microsoft had a de-facto monopoly of the browser market and saw no reason to innovate. It took Mozilla to force the company to start paying attention to browser development and IE7 was the result.
To a large extent IE7 did nothing new. What it did was do it better, and that was much needed. Previous versions of IE had had such shoddy security that it helped turn malware into big business. Simply get round the laughably poor security and malware writers could take complete control of your system. IE7 made that much harder.
8. Optical Mouse
Iain Thomson: An optical mouse was a Microsoft product? I can hear generations of geeks grinding their teeth in fury and sending messages our way. To be frank I was a tad sarcastic when Shaun nominated it but he won me round with argument, which beats his usual tactics of scotch and those pictures from last year's Christmas party.
In fact, the optical mouse was popularised by Logitech, who also introduced the notion of force feedback to mice, but Microsoft played a key role in popularising the optical mouse concept at a time when OEMs would have been happy for the bulk of us to use a ball mouse like some 20th century peasants.
Let's not forget that optical mice need software to make them work, and Microsoft's embrace of the optical mouse was a major boost to the technology. If some OEMs had their way we'd still be spending our work days scraping the accumulated gunk from mouse balls because they were cheaper than their optical cousins.
Shaun Nichols: Microsoft gets credit here because the optical mouse would not have caught on the way it did without Redmond's backing.
The company is notorious for being slow on the uptake of new technologies. Windows was for years (and to some still is) lagging behind the Macintosh operating system, and to this day Bill Gates still catches flack for his dismissal of the internet and web browsers.
But one area where Microsoft did do a good job of spotting potential was the optical mouse. The company saw that a lighter, more versatile and more accurate mouse could only be a good thing, and they jumped on board fairly early in the process. This was one of the rare instances in which Microsoft actually got itself ahead of the curve.
7. Office 98 for Mac
Shaun Nichols: In 1997, Steve Jobs returned to Apple and found a company that was still alive but in desperate need of both a cash infusion and solid software offerings. He solved both problems by striking a stock deal with Microsoft.
What most people remember about the deal was the scene of Jobs thanking a large-screen video feed of Bill Gates for infusing cash into Apple, a scene which many Mac faithful booed and regarded as the ultimate humiliation for the company.
What doesn't get remembered as frequently is the other part of that deal. Jobs agreement with Microsoft also brought office back to MacOS for the first time in five years. While alternative productivity suites had been around, namely ClarisWorks, the return of Office was sorely needed to lend the Mac credibility in the business and home office world.
Iain Thomson: Shaun reminds us of an episode that many Apple fans would rather forget – when Bill Gates saved Apple from going under.
This wasn't an altruistic move, Microsoft needed to show there was a competitor product out there to avoid anti-trust action so in many ways Office for the Mac was historic.
That said the software did also allow die hard Apple users to enter the world of document compatibility with Microsoft, almost. For years Apple users and PC users had been caught not being able to read each others files and Office 98 for the Mac solved some of those problems.
6. DOS 5
Iain Thomson: In the beginning was the command line wrote Neal Stephenson and he was right. For most of us the computer revolution began with a command line interface and DOS 5 was, to my mind, the best of breed in getting things done.
Geeks tend to like adages, particularly ones that seem to be true. For example, every odd numbered Star Trek film is rubbish, something which held true until the current version came out. Similarly every odd numbered James Bond was dire (David Niven, George Lazenby, Timothy Dalton) until Daniel Craig came along.
Microsoft's DOS was a similar pattern, you never buy an even numbered DOS product. DOS 2 was rubbish, DOS 4 laden with bugs and while DOS 6 was actually rather good it was very much an interim attempt until Windows came along.
But for me DOS 5 was the pinnacle of command line computing from Microsoft. It was a lean, mean operating system and would respect the geek using it. Even after Windows 95 came out I'd still resort to the DOS framework if things went wrong. That said, the message “Data error reading Drive C” still makes me flinch.
Shaun Nichols: These days command-line interfaces are stuff of IT admins and hard-core power users. The overwhelming majority of users exist in worlds far insulated from the command line layer. There are, however, some instances in which command lines can be of great use, and once in a while I do get nostalgic for a time when you could simply type in a command rather than click through endless layers of dialogue boxes and fields of folders.
To that end, DOS 5 was a pretty decent system. At a time when pretty visuals and shimmery icons were far removed from operating a computer, it provided a great way for users to navigate their systems without tons of errors or needless confirmation messages.
The transition from command-line to GUI systems didn't happen overnight either. Many users preferred the no-nonsense styling of DOS to early incarnations of Windows, and as recently as Windows 98 I remember friends who would often prefer to use the command line rather than wade through the clumsy graphical interface.
5. Windows 3.1
Shaun Nichols: For many users, Windows 3.1 was the first version of the operating system they had ever used, and its success helped established the GUI as the standard personal computer interface.
Windows 3.1 had the advantage of hitting the market just as home computers were really beginning to pick up steam, and for a number of reasons it became the dominant operating system until it was eventually succeeded by Windows 95.
Though it handed the reigns to the PC market over to later versions of Windows, 3.11 remained present in much of the market as an embedded system. To this day, one can still find isolated embedded systems and consoles that still use it. Fifteen years is an age in computer terms, and Windows 3.1 has shown amazing longevity.
Iain Thomson: Apple users will tell you that Windows 3.1 was little more than a crippled version of what they had been using for years, and they are right.
Nevertheless it was still many people's first entry into the GUI style of computing and as such deserves recognition. We all stifled smirks when Microsoft's PRs went on and on about how advanced it was but for the vast amjority of PC users it finally got rid of many of the faults that had held them back.
It's amazing but you can still find computers today that are running Windows 3.1. This is because it works, has very low hardware requirements by today's standards and it's rather stable as operating systems go. Sure, don't expect USB support (even Windows 95 didn't have that at first) or anything fancy but there are still a few back-end operations where you can see the familiar clunky interface and embarrassingly bad graphics that were the hallmark of Windows 3.1.
4. Office 2000
Iain Thomson: This was a tough one to pick. Office had to be in there but which version to choose?
In the end I forced through Office 2000. It's a personal thing in some respects; I'm still running Office 2000 on a home system and it works just fine even today. It does everything you'd need from an Office suite and, to me, represents the pinnacle of the software.
Ever since 2000 Microsoft has lost its way on the Office suite. Sure, the applications have been loaded up with XML tags and sophisticated gewgaws to justify the cost but the basic tools have remained the same. After all, how much do you really want from a word processor or spreadsheet?
The other big plus point with Office 2000 was that it was the last suite to not have copy protection built in. Now if I want Office on my system I have to put up with constant checks that it's not a duplicate loading. Back then Microsoft trusted its users a little more.
So while Office is a very useful bit of kit the 2000 version does it for me.
Shaun Nichols: Shaun Nichols: Office 2000 hit the market at a crucial time. The industry was in the thick of the dot-com saga and the Y2K issue was still considered a looming crisis to some.
It was also an important time for Microsoft, the company was transitioning from the Windows 95/98 family to Windows 2000 and the upcoming Windows XP operating system. Office 2000 was launched in June of 1999 and aside from being the first "Y2K compliant" version of Office, it was also the first to make use of web services for exchange and collaboration.
It also helped to bridge an important gap for Microsoft. Windows 2000 was the last version of Office to support Windows 95. It also was supported by the new Windows XP. And like many of the other products on our list, it enjoyed a tremendous shelf life, remaining supported by Microsoft for some ten years after its initial release.
3. Windows XP SP2
Shaun Nichols: Many people will blame the lack of take-up for Windows Vista on the operating system's shortcomings, but some of that credit should go to Windows XP and its second service pack release.
By the time SP2 came out, Windows XP was running on tens of millions of systems, and years of probing, poking and hammering by both users and developers had eventually pounded Windows XP into a comfortable, fairly reliable operating system. When Vista came out, the attitude for many users, particularly those in the enterprise was "if it isn't broken, why fix it?"
SP2 was a prime example of Microsoft's strength. They may not get everything right the first time, but they use their industry might and sheer willpower to continually patch errors and address issues until, eventually, they have a pretty solid offering.
Then of course they decide to add more stuff and screw everything up again, but that's for another list…
Iain Thomson: Windows XP is going to be one computers for many years to come for one simple reason – it works.
Microsoft has had this problem before. When XP first came out people were unwilling to change because Windows 98 and 2000 worked just fine. The company faces the same dilemma over the Windows 7 launch in that XP users may be unwilling to change, particularly as it involves a complete reinstall – something Apple has already pointed out.
As for the addition of the SP2 version to the list that was a no-brainer. Microsoft's first stab at any software is usually flawed and XP was no exception. I lost 16GB of data when I first installed a beta of XP and it permanently knackered my DSL connection, and the only advice a Microsoft employee could give me was to nuke the site from orbit.
Nevertheless the operating system has matured and is now one of my favourites. In a way I'm not looking forward to upgrading to Windows 7, it'll mean a whole new learning curve from something I've been using for many a long year.
2. Windows NT 4.0
Iain Thomson: Windows NT 4.0 was Microsoft at its best, and it's still its only system that IT administrators can talk about with genuine pleasure.
It was a system built by techies for techies. Admittedly Windows 2000 took the software to new levels but NT was the system that IT administrators of my era love to talk about, both with affection and a small amount of malice.
NT was a boon to running an office. It, for the first time, made running a large number of clients in an office easy – not as easy as some would have liked but a hell of a lot better than things had been before. Windows 2000 was flashier but for those schooled on a command line interface it was the first GUI based system that actually worked.
Shaun Nichols: One of the smartest things Microsoft ever did was fold Windows NT into the regular operating system in Windows 2000.
NT was everything other versions of Windows were not, it was far more stable, practical and easier to administer than any previous version of Windows had been. As Iain noted, it was also a darling of system administrators, and it's a safe bet that many IT departments still speak reverently of Windows NT.
NT was also Microsoft's foray into a market that had previously been occupied by Unix. It was designed to be the enterprise compliment to the Windows 9x family. To that end, you can make a solid case that NT is also a precursor to the Windows Server family.
Given that Microsoft simply isn't Microsoft without the two versions of Windows, I don't think it's a stretch to say that NT was the most important family of Windows, perhaps ever, and as the most famous edition NT 4.0 gets top billing.
1. Windows Update
Shaun Nichols: It's rare for a software vendor to get an application completely right the first time out. Errors get overlooked, vulnerabilities go unnoticed and compatibility issued get pointed out with every product. Microsoft seems to have a certain knack for putting out products that need a few revisions to really hit their stride.
Aside from that, Microsoft products are by far the most popular targets in the world for malware attacks. With the overwhelming majority of users running the company's products, a Windows or Office attack is far and away the best method for infecting a lot of users.
These two factors combined make it of vital importance that the company have an efficient method for distributing patches and updates. And with Windows 98, the company delivered what might have been the most important pieces of security software since Dr. Soloman first bundled his anti-virus tools.
Windows Update allows the company to automatically send out updates to users with minimal effort on the consumer's part. Vital updates and patches are downloaded automatically and installed quickly.
While this seems boring, imagine a world without it. Users would be forced to download updates from a web site or launch an updater application, and many systems would remain unpatched for years at a time. Malware writers would be like lions in a petting zoo.
Iain Thomson: We argued about this one a lot, and it says much about Microsoft's products that this got the number one spot. but while Windows Update is good news for consumers I wonder it IT administrators like it quite as much.
As Shaun pointed out malware writers love Windows because it's a huge target. Back in the day when malware writers worked for kudos not money Microsoft was a high value target, but the monetisation of malware has made this even more so. So now Microsoft pushes fixes down to users rather than waiting for them to be installed.
This is a great boon to the non-technical user that makes up the vast majority of Microsoft's user base. But for IT administrators it's a less clear cut option. While patching is the aim, the IT staff generally like to test out patches first to make sure they don't crash the system. I know of a couple of instances where patches have caused huge problems with legacy software.
That said Windows Update remains a really useful idea, and one that other software is also using. If you have a Mozilla browser you get sent updates automatically for example. It's a good system and something we need to see more of.