Originally posted by Leshrak
WHY not just give users the streamlined fucking version in the first place??? It's all about a) money and b) control over what users can and can't do on the computer... deals with record and software companies? This is one reason why there is so much "hate" for MS.
Giving people only the streamlined kernel means...

* No Internet Explorer

* No fancy graphical shell with Aero and all the other eye candy

* Probably a command line interface only, which would suit some people but not others

It'd be well suited to an embedded server, but not to an end-user desktop. Your average user wants to point and click, not run a command line. Unfortunately it's really hard to switch shells in Windows (not like you can in Linux or OS/2, where a change of one simple configuration option will give you either a command line boot or a graphical shell, with potential options for each). Microsoft is not in the business of selling kernels - they're in the business of selling entire packages, suites, turnkey solutions where you just go "Okay, I have the latest Windows, now I can use teh interwebs and teh Word". And people want - or at least, Microsoft expect that people want - eye candy. Certainly reviewers notice the "cool" factor, and that translates into a lot of popularity, ergo uptake and sales.

Would be nice if MS could make it feasible to write a replacement Explorer, but I don't think it is. Oh well.