Thanks for the comments!

[…]following are a handful of hyper-links to websites which we connect to for the fact we feel they will be seriously worth visiting[…]…

Thanks for commenting Nick!

Moving forward it would seem Xbox is the MS offering for media streaming, a la set top box, so I’m not sure that MC could get pushed in that direction any time soon.

You’re definitely right about sit forward/sit back. There’s still a piece of ‘magic’ missing to change the game, not just for MS but for others as well.

I’ve used it for years on a dedicated machine that I view all my TV through. In fact that machine only switches back to “normal” windows when I need to do a quick bit of admin on it (which is very infrequently).

As well as the points already raised by others on promoting it more I think there is a huge argument for MS to fork the development of MC into a stand-alone product – perhaps even one that can be embeded. Imagine if they partnered with a TV or even better, a set top box manufacturer to make MC the default system used. This is essentially what Apple did with Apple TV – a small STB device that just plugs into the TV.

Consumers still think of computers as “sit forward” devices and TV as a “sit back” device so the idea of using a computer connected to their TV just doesn’t gel. But if they stop calling it a computer and instead put MC on some kind of small STB I’m sure it would take off.

Hi Haggy, thanks for commenting!

Two points from your comments stand out to me.

1. “..Microsoft’s implementation was wishy washy at best.”
Implementation is key and for MC I think integration with the main OS was part of the implementation error on MS’ part.

2. “..there should have been a goal of unifying Media center.”
Ultimately, I think that falls under the category of MS not understanding how users interact with their systems. However, I also believe that MS is moving in the right direction based on what we know so far about Win8. It would seem more then simple for MC to flourish in a future environment that is a reflection instead of a separation from the main OS.

If you ask any business whether they’d be wiling to give up 3 to 6% of their user base, many would respond that it would make the difference between financial viability and bankruptcy. Microsoft is in no danger of being in that position, but from a business standpoint, having an operating system that a percentage of the customer base would actively avoid is problematic.

Microsoft outdid the competition such as software bundled with tuner cards, etc. For such users who have HTPCs, upgrading to an OS without MC would make the computer useless. Furthermore, it’s not clear to me that I would have upgraded a dozen computers in my home to Windows 7 had earlier versions of the OS been compatible.

Windows Media Center has its strong proponents, but to be fair, Microsoft’s implementation was wishy washy at best. The ambiguity of having Windows Media Player as an independent Windows component, and also what’s needed to deploy features such as Play To or certain types of media streaming leaves a level of confusion. Why have two divergent solutions with active yet disparate improvements in both when releasing a new OS?

Media Center is in many ways tailored to media use in ways that arguably justify its appearance, albeit foreign to the rest of Windows. Yet it leaves out many capabilities that Windows users have taken for granted. Why can’t I do something so simple as dragging a recorded TV program to the trash can or unerasing it later? An new interface that lacks drag and drop and simple reconfiguration of the user interface seems like a short sighted decision.

Basic ability to reconfigure or make use of data is like jumping through hoops. Getting at the basic database of scheduled recordings, making use of the history, or changing attributes can’t be done in the same way as with typical Windows components. Even writing programs using class libraries can lead to brick walls for things that should be relatively minor. For example, I could easily write a program that gets a list of recorded TV programs, and get the channel numbers for them. But getting the subchannels was left off the list and even finding a hack for it proved impossible.

Instead of diverging from Windows, there should have been a goal of unifying Media center. I actually make good use of it despite any complaints, and Media Player is a far cry from what I need. But if the latter component were enhanced to support recorded TV, integrated libraries supported by Media Center, and Media Center were evolved into a skin (looking much like the current Media Center with room for improvement) with Media Player behind the scenes, then third party developers could easily obviate the need for the MS component.

Keeping it alive would still be a huge plus, but if a new Windows came out that picked up where the old one left off in terms of supported processes, and scheduled recordings and media sharing remained intact, it would make the decision to upgrade to a new Windows far less disturbing.

@Cobra: Wow, tell us how you really feel!

Kidding aside, you make some valid points. Briefly, I’d agree totally with your point #1 and would add that you’ve touched on a larger issue in that MS seems to rely on word of mouth for their best features while promoting the questionable ones.

The good news is that Media Center will still be around in Win8 so there is the possibility of making more users aware. Thanks for commenting!