I know this is not specifically to do with Windows (other OSes are the same) but it has always been a thought of mine that it would be a good idea to provide Windows on a form of Read Only Memory instead of the HD. Before I explain why I think this would be a good idea, I have to say I appreciate why they do not do this. Older OSes were released in ROM, one that springs to mind (and is still currently developed) is RISC OS - a fully functional GUI based system which comes complete with a web browser, email client, paint package, editor and even a programming language (Basic) - actually if you ignore all the extra applications developed for Windows I would argue that there is very little if anything which Windows does that ROS can not...... anyway I digress. My point is that if a relatively small software company can create a "modern" OS and place it into ROM, why can not the largest software company in the world? Of course it is a fact of life that patches and updates will be made, but ROS allows these (and there are not a huge number of blatent bug fixes) to be softloaded on top, and the same for OS updates.
The benefits of making Windows ROM based as I can see it :
1) More idiot proof - if it is in ROM it's very hard to break it (ROS is almost unbreakable, which is why it was so popular in UK schools for so long)
2) Faster (probably)
3) It would enforce a more stringent development process on MS - not only would they need to work to tight space constraints, they also would not be able to ship with millions of known bugs
4) You would have more free HD space
Sorry, but you are not allowed to view signatures , please Register or Login