(note: I work for Microsoft. but I certainly don't represent them and in fact I think they'd probably rather I didn't run my mouth here :) Also just because I work for Microsoft doesn't mean I know what I'm talking about when I talk about Microsoft either, it's hard enough to even keep track of what the specific team I'm on is really doing sometimes let alone the whole company so keep that in mind :) also I'm drunk :) )

The frustrating thing about reading Daniel Dilger's articles is that he's actually a good deal more knowledgeable than most tech pundits and occasionally even insightful, but his worldview is so Apple-centric that he's blind to having any idea what his blind spots are. This article is a case in point, almost everything factual in it about Microsoft is wrong, to wit:

* Zune wasn't a low-budget project (it was actually funded fairly lavishly, in part because it was meant partly as a kind of pilot project for developing new Microsoft design aesthetics / patterns / practices)

* Zune wasn't based on web technologies (it used Yet Another Internal UI Framework). Neither is Windows 8 really (there is a web-based UI framework, along with a native one, but they both sit on top of native APIs)

Windows 8 has nothing in common with Zune codebase-wise, and UI/design-wise though there's a family lineage between them it was developed independently from the Zune->Windows Phone line (which itself has changed a lot over the years) and diverged quite a bit

* he still apparently thinks the new Windows UI is a "thin layer" on top of old Windows, which I think he still imagines as Windows XP or whatever. in previous posts he was having fun comparing it to Bob. I think that's fundamentally wrong - while the new environment isn't really separate from existing Windows it's imo misleading to think of it as a "thin upper layer", because developing it involved making deeper changes & refactorings to every layer of the system (ARM support, window hardening, MoCOM, PLM, app model, async, etc.)

* see, not only does his ignorance lead taking jabs at MSFT that don't make sense, it leads to him missing out on potential avenues of attack that WOULD make sense - he could make fun of the ridiculous UI framework fragmentation problem Microsoft has, which is an area where Apple actually has its shit together and has for some time.