There is something fundamentally wrong with the entire infrastructure of companies that do not see that they are serving customers. As if they think that the customers should rejoice in the fact that we are allowed to be customers. When did minus become plus anyway? I think I will voice you an idea on a very general level just to give you an overview...
We tend to be members of an operating system (OS) camp, which for the most part is wrong.
It is long since I parted OS and technology, but still I notice a little bias out here. Why is it so that any OS is any better than any other? It is not!
One sentence of education: Any OS which does what we expect is a good OS... for its use. I do work much with virtualization as well as security and in that respect, Windows may be too much for the overall resources available to be feasible. For many tasks, even in a Windows environment with above average traffic, splitting functions to secondary servers is typically the path of choice. Does it have to be Windows? No, but most fear each and every new OS that comes their way.
I have thought a little about that on a principal level and how come it can be that way. I do see the answer, we are accustomed to what we have... It is just the wrong answer as we, at the core of it are not doing OS, we are doing the technological aspect of it. In other words, we do know what we want to achieve, we just do not know the chain of commands in all OS to get there. This is how my holistic way of thinking IT is, when a new OS comes along, I read a little about it in the context of where to best put it to use. That is in a sharp contrast to the common sceptics (uncertain-scepticism) out there.
Personally, I think it is time to break it all apart again after collecting for 20+ years. This time to create tight OSes with only one or two functions to take care of the technological aspect we seek, no more. This way, security could be tightened and attack surface narrowed to almost zero for each and every one of the function based OSes. How big does a DNS, DHCP, User Directory or a File server OS have to be?
What we then could have on the top of that is a Control only OS which communicates with the sub-OSes and control the actuall access. I know some think this would be messy, but truth is we would get a better overview. We do that to an extent already today in the form of monitors, trouble is we are monitoring full fledged OSes all the way and I wonder howcome we don't control and monitor only specialized OSes for just one function from the OS that does just monitoring and control.
Such an approach would leave the client OS intact and only radically change the way we are servicing it.
The thought is not new, still it seems to gain ground and develop way to slow for my taste. I have done some tests using command based OSes (Unix/DOS) and the resources used for a full functional Network was less than half a Windows install. Naturally, I did not have readily access to the control OS which does not exist, but I can imagine we can decentralize it all down to process more for less for the better for all.
As of today, the Linux core in most incarnations seems to be the way to go as they can be trimmed down to almost a cut-down Unix install and still function. The ultimately best would however be to program everything from scratch - Start over so to speak... This time with security in mind from the start and not the patchwork we have.