Slashdot Mirror
Longhorn Server Scrapped
punkass writes "Microsoft announced Tuesday that plans for .Net Server, aka "Longhorn" have been scrapped and they will instead focus on the the release after that, code-named Blackcomb. NT4 came out in 96, 2k in 2000, and Longhorn was due out in 2005-06...Blackcomb seems to be a long time between releases."
Plans have been scraped?? Ow! That must hurt!
In which case I'm suprised it took this long.
Cunning linguists
off of what? The drawingboard, I suppose.......
The longer Microsoft has between releases, the longer Linux has to come up with great releases. Just think how many security patches there will be between 2000 and blackcomb... that's not fun and sysadmins know it.
"And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the World"
1 John 4:14
Oof, I hate it when they scrape MY server plans...
"In a 32-bit world, you're a 2-bit user. You've got your own newsgroup, alt.total.loser." -Weird Al
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but Longhorn is the codename for the next general Windows release, ie meant for the desktop, it's not .NET Server which is something entirely different and without any of the SQL based filing system stuff
Microsoft announced Tuesday that plans for .Net Server, aka "Longhorn" have been scraped and they will instead focus on the the release after that, code-named "Foghorn".
My studio - www.graylands.ca
Microsoft usually has extremely ambitious plans for its "next" release. These always seem to get watered down as time goes on. In fact, they only time they manage to get a release on schedule is when it is little more than a service pack, eg win98se et al.
Of course, now with the new licensing plan, I suppose we (or rather, you) should be lucky you're getting a new release at all.
None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free. Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
Some people are still implementing NT 4.0 Servers
Longhorn = Windows.NET Server? The one thats currently into Release Candidate stage? And they are scrapping despite it being so near to release?
That cannot be right, surely.. unless Longhorn is the one AFTER the first Windows.NET server releases..
"Hey! Unless this is a nude love-in, get the hell off my property!!"
Good! They should call it "Aggie" cuz it's
evil.
Longhorn is the "codename" for the release *after* Windows .NET Server.
.NET Server is already at the Release Candidate stages, I highly doubt they're scrapping it...heck, I already received my free Leatherman Pulse tool engraved with the OS' name for trying out the software. :)
Windows
... even Debian releases faster. HeHe
Life sucks.
<ob_editor_bitching>How about a little fact checking, eh?</ob_editor_bitching>
Corporate Jenga: You take a blockhead from the bottom and you put him on top...
If this is in hexadecimal, it is much better.
So, let's look at some interesting facts:
1. MS Puts back the release of its latest Server OS.
2. MS is pushing a new licensing model where companies pay annual fees regardless of upgrades, but then get "discounts" on future upgrades.
So, does the new licensing plan allow them to basically, delay new technologies? It seems that, with their latest scheme, it reduces their motivation to release newer/better products.
Moderation: Put your hand inside the puppet head!
Now what am I gonna do with my Beta copy?
X(7): A program for managing terminal windows. See also screen(1).
Ouch, that's gotta hurt for people who bought into the new license scheme.
Hopefully they'll both come through okay.
With reasonable men I will reason; with humane men I will plead; but to tyrants I will give no quarter. -- William Lloyd
I'm not one to celebrate at others' misfortune, but this is great. "Longhorn" (anyone find that name a little, uh, suggestive? Yikes, Bill, stay away from my longhorn!) was to be the Microsoft OS that finally integrated Palladium, dot.net, Passport and other DRM technologies. The fact that MS has abandoned this OS may mean that they've realized how evil DRM is. Kazza users, rejoice!
Karma: Good (despite my invention of the Karma: sig)
Longhorn refers to the next version of the Windows Server OS. I sometimes wonder whether the editors do any fact checking or even read the articles...
Mother is the best bet and don't let Satan draw you too fast.
Luckily no one signed up for their upgrade plan. They'd all be paying annual fees to upgrade their software while there weren't any upgrades at all.
I read Slashdot for the
The Register pointed out: The Longhorn hype has got the the headlines required. Got the New York Times interview. Got the MS fanboys slobbering over vaporware.
Now it's time to cancel it; Move the goalposts; and release a small update called Longhorn with a price increase and an obnoxious new license. Result!
It keeps working for them, so why change it.
With the latest change, Microsoft may have to grapple with customer confusion as it works to get its operating system release schedule back on track.
I was actually just thinking about this the other day. With Windows 2000, you had desktop and server versions, and there was a clear line between the two. Now, you have WinXP Home and Professional, but they're both desktop versions and the line gets a little muddled.
I suspect that it's things like this, these little marketing snafus, that push more people into the Linux and *BSD camp--more so than the Halloween Memorandum and other leaked documents. If I were a company executive or an IT director, I'd certainly be more concerned about what's on the horizon for a product I'm using, rather than their way of competing with others.
After all, we have auto-updating now, and since Microsoft is completely dedicated to battling Linux, et. al, with the lower Windows TCO, no one will need to pay for an upgrade cycle for years! In fact, all of the Windows administrators who've installed SP3 can now rest easy knowing that the boys and girls in Redmond are diligently uploading security patches, bug fixes and feature enhancements to your machine when-ever and where-ever it needs it.
...
Isn't life great, MCSEs? No more staying up all night reconstructing servers, praying that the tape backups were current, etc.
I wouldn't know, though. I changed my systems over to Red Hat, and keep up with the errata, and amuse myself by opening a sessions and typing in "uptime"
The release of new Microsoft operating system is about as exciting as watching CSPAN on a Fridy night. Should the course hold, and with a little luck, by 2005-2006 Microsoft will have been forced into about 3 other directions due to some real restrictions, Linux, and companies like IBM. News slated for 4 years into the future in the computer world means nothing.
It's what you do with it that counts!
Given that linux has only added some eye candy and a few hardware compatilbity points in six years, having a rock stable, powerful Win2K platform as the standard for at least another four years is great for companies... they won't have to upgrade their code for a while, which means more expertise all around and reduced prices. Good stuff, and it lets MS really focus in on their original goal with Blackcomb, which no linux OS will be able to touch.
The bigger they are, the harder they fall. Is it possible that MS is starting to lose control of it's own software? Maybe we are seeing the boundaries of what can be accomplished in a restrictive, closed source development environment.
-73, de n1ywb
www.n1ywb.com
If you read the article, it is the version AFTER .Net Server that has been scrapped--code name Longhorn. .Net server has already shipped Release Candidate 1 and RC2 should be out shortly. The final .Net Server should be out next year. Longhorn server and desktop versions were due out in 2004. Since it take corporate environments a couple of years to roll out a server upgrade, MS figured .Net Server would never get implemented by most IT departments(i.e. they wouldn't sell many copies of .Net Server).
Now, MS is just going to skip the Longhorn release in 2004 and instead go to the Blackcomb release.
Didn't all those people who signed up for the subscription did so on the premise of a new upgrade every 2 years or so? So now MS gets to take their money and no product to show for it.
Maybe not enough people signed up?
Quote from the article:
I really like how C|Net only quotes an analyst who has something positive to say.
This is utterly bizarre - only MSFT can get away with cancelling a major release and not undergoing a hailstorm of criticism in the trade press. Things haven't changed in the computer trade press since at least 1992, when MSFT released a particularly weak, non-standards-compliant, single-CPU-architecture operating system called "NT" without a network-transparent window system, No other company could have gotten away with that in 1992, but the trade press kissed up on MSFT back then, just like they do now.
Quit playing Monopoly with Bill. Switch to one of many non-Microsoft products today.
All the more reason to help out with ReactOS development IMHO...
So, does the new licensing plan allow them to basically, delay new technologies? It seems that, with their latest scheme, it reduces their motivation to release newer/better products.
You think that removing MS's "release it now" catch is a BAD thing?
Whatever happened to "it's done when it's done"?
In order for anything Microsoft writes to have value, it must be in some way better than the free programs that do the same thing. Their server OSs hae to beat Linux, ASP has to beat PHP and Perl, IIS has to beat Apache.
With open source software in the state that is is now, is there anything that Microsoft can develop that would make any new server operating system do something open source can't easily replicate?
What's with all the code names? Does it make MS feel like they are in a cool spy movie?
Seriously, what's wrong with Windows 2005 Server or Windows 2006 Home Edition? I thought Windows ME and XP were stupid and I think Blackcomb and Longhorn are too.
sig
Or gives them a motivation to get it right the first time so they don't release something semi-broken and force people to upgrade to a piece of crap. Cuts both ways.
One of the key paragraphs says:
.Net Server, to take off slowly because many businesses have either recently moved to Windows 2000 or are in the process of doing so. A majority of customers, then, would begin introducing .Net Server in late 2004--around the same time as the planned release of the Longhorn desktop and server software versions.
Analysts expect the company's upcoming server software,
And that about covers my experience, too. Server overhauls take much longer intervals then changes in the desktop segment, where they install a new Windows every 3 years or so (doesn't matter, they are largely compatible versions, anyway... no admins, don't kill me, aaarrrghh).
So it actually makes sense to come out with a new server only if the changes are really signifcant and if the interval since the last major roll-out was more than, say, 5-6 years ago. Besides, nobody has money to throw at a new unproven technology right now (and in 2 years all the same), anyway.
I think I believe a little of the spin on this ones. Many companies hate frequent updates because it prevents their computers from doing useful work. As for sysadmining the computers, it should make it easier as problems in Windows 2000 server gradually get solved, so there should be fewer patches needed in 2004 than now, assuming the operating system is removeing more bugs than it is adding.
Now that Microsoft is selling its 'Software Subscription' model to businesses, every year that goes by without a new software release is money in microsoft's pocket.
I metamoderate, therefore I am
I remember reading a couple of years ago, that Blackcomb was indeed going to be the next version of Windows, (i.e. the successor to windows .net server). But then they decided to add an intermediate release because Blackcomb was too far away. Now they've decided to again scrap Longhorn?
On another note, all the Windows codenames (Whistler, Longhorn, Blackcomb), are all cities in BC, Canada.
"Knowledge makes us accountable." - Che Guevara
It has been awhile since MS released Win2k indeed. Win2k, for my use, has turned out to be fastest, and most stable MS operating system available. Sure it has a few bugs, but I don't really feel affected by them. It's gonna be hard for MS to throw togehter their next gen server OS, since most sysadmins won't be fooled by a new interface and lots of colors. ;)
-judging another only defines yourself
"Although the desktop version of Longhorn is still expected within this time frame, a server version is not expected until 2005 or 2006, the company said."
It's in the first paragraph of the article.
For great justice.
to end any confusion: there will be a .NET Server in 2003 as planned.
Longhorn, which was supposed to be out in 2005, will now be rushed to the desktop in 2003/2004.
The Longhorn Server is now gone.
Blackcomb will be the next server release.
>Whatever happened to "it's done when it's done"?
How much money has that made for the publishers of Duke Nukem Forever?
There is a similar article here [pcmag.com].
.NET server release back farther into 2003.
It seems that Microsoft may be seeing that making a sound, secure server take more than just slapping a fresh GUI on top of a very tired, 8 year old foundation.
Since RC2 has not even shipped yet, they are even talking about pushing the
These MS naming schemes remind me of 80's porno actor that had prosthetic body parts.
Longhorn
Blackcomb
BigLongBlackHorn
I might agree with you, but remember the biggest complaint in the previous scheme was unecessary upgrades? MS can't seem to win, first they catch fire for too many upgrades with little value, now they are critized for not upgrading.
I bet there are a lot of sysadmins out there who would prefer to pay MS not to release "upgrades."
The delay "is a response to what our customers are asking for."
I want to have customers like that..
but I noticed that with the last longhorn story (the one about the pictures) no one seemed to have the longhorn client video, so I'm posting it now as a sort of follow up type thing... get it here
If anyone can make a mirror with cheaper bandwidth, I'd appreciate it - my wallet is starting to regret posting the URL already!
They just finalized the settlement. So now they have to go and re-design everything to hide middleware behind security protocols.
Especially with the new licensing schemes and with everyone else in the tech industry being pinched by the economy, they back off an re-trench to continue their anti-competitive business practices.
Bill: "Nah, nah. Catch us if you can, judge!"
Also I wonder if BlackCombe won't intentially be another 5 years in development, just about the time they are let out from the settlement restrictions.
We still have a number of NT4 servers. Whine as might about Windows security and stability, our servers run fine. Microsoft needs to push this off so they can actually come up with a compelling reason for anyone to want to upgrade. When their licensing is set up so you pay thousands of dollars for the software and thousands more for the seats, coming up with a reason to buy should be somewhere on their priority list. If what I read is true, they're planning on building a database filesystem off of the SQL engine. That's something that might be useful, as opposed to .WHOTHEHELLCARES
XeoMage
Seeing that many companies, especially the mid-large corporations, don't move to new server releases quickly, this may play right into the hands of M$. By the time, Blackcomb or what comes out, many corporations would have upgraded to Win 2K. Then again, this may work against M$ also, seeing that companies would have finally move to Win 2K and are not ready to move again that quickly. I guess we will wait and see.
Guess this means the script kiddies will never get the chance to jump up, kick back, and chow down on Longhorn.
Good judgment comes from experience.
Experience comes from bad judgment.
Enquiring minds must know...
Let's build a virtual folder driver for Windows 98 and upward, to allow APPLICATIONS to virtualize the information they manage. It would be nice to have an email manager than presents emails as a list of files, or folders. Sending could be as easy as copying files to a folder, and then specifying an address. (To.txt?)
A virtualized database would present a list of folders in place of a table, with the fields being individual files, some read only (sequence numbers, keys, etc). To update the data, you just write to the file containing the appopriate field. If you wanted to add a field, you just copy a new file into the folder.
There is great power in letting an APPLICATION control the virutalization of the OS, this is why the idea of GNU/HURD is important for the future.
If APPLICATIONS can virtualize, then you get a freedom to innovate that would give Bill nightmares.
Virtualizing the address space for existing millions of users and applications could do more to help freedom to innovate than pretty much anything it's going to take Microsoft years to come up with.
Who's with me?
--Mike--
It was easier to explain when the NT releases were not related to the 9x releases. Any server OS is far more important than desktop, the release schedule should not be rushed (think Debian stable).
"Another major Windows server release in the Longhorn time frame does not meet the needs of most of our customers," the representative said. The delay "is a response to what our customers are asking for."
Apparently, M$ has finally realized that one thing customers really need is less extortion in pricing and forced upgrades for patches between one Server OS and the next. Unfortunately, it appears that practice will continue in the desktop space. Makes me wonder, though, if part of this move isn't based on technical spending. Businesses just can't afford to upgrade their servers so frequently. Perhaps they're a bit concerned about how many customers would skip the upgrade to Longhorn, given that a still newer version is just a few years down the road.
Buy the President
On the other hand, it works great for baked goods companies.
"Whatever happened to "it's done when it's done"?"
It got overcooked.
Hokey statistics and ancient misconceptions are no match for a good thought in your head, kid!
People bitch that they release new operating systems too often, just to squeeze more money out of consumers.
.NET server is going to be 4 years away instead of 2. Now people bitch because they're not releasing them fast enough. Huh?
Then they announce the next server release after this year's
Microsoft just can't win!
What's that you say, they dominate the desktop OS market and have a large portion of the server market as well?
OK, maybe they can win. Nevermind.
"And like that
Amen.
There is a god after all.
Now, if only Linus could release 2.6 as soon as possible, I would be a happy man.
The right to offend is far more important than the right not to be offended. (Rowan Atkinson)
Any copyright or other agreements that may be violated by discussion of codenames, tradenames, and any related data are not the responsibility of Slashdot. In case of dispute, individual users take full responsibility for their comments.
Slashdot's Attorney
...if it doesn't force an unwelcomed paradigm shift in computing. Nobody needs to buy a new server OS from MS in order to do trendy things like "serve files" or "spool files to a printer". Longhorn probably just wasn't a big enough step forward on their Anti-Consumer initiative. It is plain to see that MS Windows as we know it allows consumers to do too much of what they want to do, so what would be the point of selling an accompanying Microsoft server product?
This comes just after the US government says "Monopoly enterprise: do whatever you want!". Microsoft isn't just engineering marketable products, their also engineering the market environment.
I don't think it reduces their motivation. Actually, I think it might increase it now.
Think about it, with a guaranteed upgrade revenue stream, the pressure is off of them to release a new version every other year to keep profits up. It might actually allow them to focus on quality (yeah right) and actually put features in the OS people really want.
Of course, pigs could fly too.
--WooooHoooo--
Personally, I don't know why Microsoft would have released .NET server next year, and then followed a year later with Longhorn. It doesn't make any sense. Every shop I've ever worked in or worked with as a consultant had a general rule of never upgrading Microsoft's server platform until it had been out for at least 6 months, if not a year. By the time these guys finished doing a deployment of .NET, Longhorn would be hitting the streets. At least by pushing the schedule back to Blackcomb, they are getting to a more reasonable timeline.
Personally, I think Microsoft should maintain a 4 year release cycle on their server OS, and a 2 year cycle on the desktop OS/productivity suite. Anything shorter and you are going to outrun your customers. I mean, if you are running a big, multisite network with 2000+ users, do you really want to deploy an OS upgrade every year or two? Hell, I know of at least one large, multinational company that is still standardized on NT 4.0 Server and Windows 95 (and as far as I know, they are going to milk it as long as they can). Besides, a 4/2 cycle is pretty close to your average lease times on hardware, which simplifies deployment since you can time your OS upgrades with your hardware upgrades (at least, on the desktop).
The only thing Microsoft gets by releasing a new OS every year is a lot of people skipping versions. Maybe they finally clued in to that fact?
I think what they caught flak for was too many upgrades which either broke compatibility, or added uneccessary features. It was the nature of the upgrades, the interface was different but you had to use it to open the latest document, that pissed people off.
Spencer Ogden
Comment removed based on user account deletion
So, does the new licensing plan allow them to basically, delay new technologies? It seems that, with their latest scheme, it reduces their motivation to release newer/better products.
Actually, having a monopoly reduces their motivation to release new/better products even more. This is just a symptom.
Actually, Windows NT 3.1 (the first release) was a multi-cpu architecture operating system that ran on Intel, Mips, Alpha and eventually the PPC platform. It was Posix compatible and compatible with most well behaved Windows 3.1 apps. It had a version of Office for it and even a TCP/IP stack before the Internet was popular.
.net server is Windows NT 5.11, expect to see it in about 6 weeks.)
I'm not sure what OS you're talking about, but it wasn't Windows NT.
I won't even begin to get into the fact that longhorn was supposed to be a point release and not a new revision. (This would be Windows NT 5.2 if MS marketing didn't ruin a perfectly good version numbering scheme) (BTW,
It does, but I'm not sure that is what's happening here. I'm certainly no big Microsoft fan, but I suspect it's more likely that there are other forces at work here.
- There are some serious changes promised in Longhorn. They may be taking longer to work some of the kinks out.
- Court approval of the settlement with DOJ may give them incentive to retool their business plan to find ways around the contraints, or achieve their goals while working within those constraints.
- EU pressure may be giving them pause to consider just what they will be releases in the next version. If I recall, the EU investigation was more concerned with the server side of things.
- Security and stability -- maybe after getting slapped around so much lately about security and stability, they are taking the time to nail down some of the problems. I think given the current security-frenzy that the United States is going through that security holes will matter much more in the next release than it has in the past.
- Linux -- it's entirely possible that Microsoft is taking the time to make roll out something that has a better chance of removing this thorn in their side.
Or, I could just be grasping at straws.GreyPoopon
--
Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?
The article says that the follow on to .Net Server will be skipped, not .Net Server.
The complaint is twofold:
There are people who want a new OS every two years or so. By skipping this release, they're screwing those people who paid for a subscription, as they don't get anything out of it
There are people who want to keep using an OS as long as it suits their needs. But since the new Office won't run on legacy systems, and the old Office won't read the new Office's documents, these people have no choice but to upgrade.
The right thing to do is to release a new OS every two years or so, but continue supporting legacy systems.
--
Mod up a post Rob doesn't like and you'll never mod again
An Interesting Article
Longhorn isn't a software release; it's Microsoft code for "We're leaving Washington State and moving to Texas". That reference to "scraped" probably has something to do with cow manure.
Microsoft employees will soon be putting bumper stickers on their cars that say, "Don't mess with Bill".
--
When in doubt, f*ck it. When not in doubt, get in doubt!
It's not as if MS has made it easy to figure out what their goddamn products are named. Actually, their convoluted naming strategies reflect their whole approach. I'm sure if you asked Ballmer to explain it, he'd go on for forty minutes trying to convince you that it made sense.
"Internet Explorer." Ok. Explains what it does. "NT". Ok, it's an acronym of sorts. People like those. "XP," same thing except it uses the letter "x" which people just adore in acronyms. "Intellimouse." Sounds nice and maybe people will think they become brighter when they use it, good call.
"Blackcomb"?
Marketroid #1: "Ooo! Bob! I have it! We'll combine the word 'black' -- dark and insidious -- with the word 'comb,' which is something that most of the people using our services pine longingly for the use of!"
Marketroid #2: "Jesus, Tim, you're a !@#$ing genius! I love you!"
My
Limekiller
Doesn't this suck for all those people that bought the yearly license plan just to find out that it's not going to get them as much as they had hoped! Perhaps a new version of Office, maybe .NET server, but no new desktop, and Office and .NET server haven't been promised any time soon.
...or should that be "Foghorn? Rocks!"
Longhorn was the first Microsoft product ever (at least that I've heard of) that was rumored to include a useful innovation. The innovation in question wasn't invented by Microsoft, of course, but Microsoft would have "mainstreamed" it, so that other parties (ahem) who play the penis-size-comparison game with them, would have had to jump on the bandwagon.
Now that Longhorn's delayed, it will be that much longer before Linux gets a modern Beos-like approach to filesystems. Oh well.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
Good for them, because then they can deliver something worth waiting for, if you're an MS user.
Good for us so to speak, beause we can come up with counterstrategies.
Win/Win!
So, let's look at some interesting facts:
1. MS Puts back the release of its latest Server OS.
If you want to look at facts, then post facts. MS is pushing back the successor to their latest Server OS. Their latest server OS is in RC1 and should be out by Q1 of next year.
There is no longer anything that can be done with computers that is nontrivial and clearly legal. -- Paul Phillips
I'm not exactly an anti MS zealot, but I really have to wonder if the expiration date on upgradeing to the MS "Open licencing" upgrade type plan, and then a few months later find out that the next version of MS Office won't run on win9x, NT, or Win2k below SP3* was a coincedence.
* I put this star there because there are some of use who don't like the EULA on SP3. Others such as myself cannot upgrade to SP3. I have no idea why, but every time I've attempted to upgrade to SP3 on my computer Win2k completely dies and has to be re-installed, so I won't be able to run the next version of office despite the fact that I have Win2k (like I care).
Slashdot knows nothing??? Have you ever read the FAQ! --------- How do you verify the accuracy of Slashdot stories? We don't. You do. :) If something seems outrageous, we might look for some corroboration, but as a rule, we regard this as the responsibility of the submitter and the audience. This is why it's important to read comments. You might find something that refutes, or supports, the story in the main.
-------------
So slashdot is not just the story, it all the comments! Many people before your comment said the say thing and got moded up. So the story got told right, unless you're clueless.
So by posting, *YOU* are part of Slashdot.
-Jeff
Can we please get a correction for this article?
MS can win...if they were under the previous scheme then indeed they should only release major new versions. However, now that they are under the subscription pay model, the "right" thing to do would be to release more upgrades.
All those that have signed on must be livid.
Wheres the link to the wArez'ed version??
Virtual directories, while cool, doesn't make me want to migrate. .Net interoperability with all new gizmos doesn't make me want to migrate.
Have business needs changed remarkably in the past four years to necessitate changing something as fundamental as your server/desktop OS? No. If anything, my business needs for cheaper, more open software are greater because of the cash crunch brought on by the tech sector. Why do I want to feed them any more cash?
I just don't get it.
Somewhat unrelated... my needs for at home are simple...
- Home budgeting/accounts - Kapital/GnuCash...
- CD Burning software - K has this.
- Browsing capability - Mozilla/Opera/Konqueror..
- Program development - Python + Qt (or any number of desktop managers and languages).
- Gaming - The big ones are available in Linux - Wine works for some other ones.
Put another way....
When I was in college in '91, I was eying buying a computer and SimCity 2000 was out. I still play that game. Anyhow, I had no money for it. I bought the game. I even bought a mouse pad. The girlfriend at the time knew it was a matter of time before I'd buy the box to run it. She was right, naturally. I put the buggy in front of the horse to buy what I eventually wanted.
I refuse to do that if my needs (business or consumer) are already satisfied with a more affordable, customizable, nonlicensed alternative. If I want to purchase a quality product for Linux, I am more than willing to...
I purchased Kapital, Komodo, and still buy open source books for programming even though they are available to help the cause.
MS cannot create demand that does not exist in perpetuity. They also can't screw people over forever. I have VB5/6 standard at home and a paid version of Office on my own which runs on Windows 98. My setup has done me well for years and my needs have not changed. Why should I be forced to upgrade if what I'm using my PC for does not change.
I shouldn't. Businesses realize this and if users didn't go around chasing butterflies all day, they'd see through the haze and either not buy (which I suspect might happen if OEM's exercise their options in the settlement) or abandon.
I'm off the soap box now.
This space for rent.
Microsoft puts Longhorn on the desktop, Blackcomb on the server
.NET Server 2003, we have determined that another major release of Windows Server in the Longhorn client timeframe does not meet the needs of most of our customers.
.NET Server 2003; it is code named Blackcomb. We do not have a firm release date at this time, [but] Microsoft will determine a release timeframe based on what customers tell us they require."
By Paul Thurrott, Windows for Professionals
Wednesday, 13 November 2002
Microsoft has confirmed rumours that its next Windows release, code-named Longhorn, will be a desktop OS only, and not a synchronized release including both desktop and server versions as originally planned.
advertisement
Likewise, the Windows release following Longhorn, code-named Blackcomb, will be server-only. While the company has not announced an official release date for Longhorn, the time table for its release hasn't changed, Microsoft said. This means Longhorn will arrive in 2004 or 2005, depending on which Microsoft official you believe.
"Customer requirements dictate our release strategies and timing for Windows products," a Microsoft spokesperson said.
"Customers have asked that we map our server releases more closely to how they can consume and implement advances and innovations we deliver. Given the deployment cycles and budgeting that customers work through, and given the significant customer interest in our upcoming release of Windows
âoeAnother major release of Windows Server will follow Windows
Though details are still unclear, Longhorn will include a new 3D-based user interface with interactive video, a SQL Server-based file system called Windows Future Storage (WinFS), and a MSN 8-like Start Menu addition called the Sidebar.
You say things that offend me and I can deal with it. Can you?
Actually, I'd have said half-baked.
Note, by the way, that Microsoft officially pulls the plug on DOS, Windows 3.x, NT 3.x, and Windows 95 at the end of this year. Support for those ended last year, and "final end of life" is at the end of 2002.
Also note that support for NT 4.x, which is still widely used, ends in the middle of next year, so corporate sites need to upgrade to Windows 2000 or Linux.
Because either way they've done what's in their financial interest, to the detriment of the customer.
To simplify Liscensing 6.0, you pay half of the cost of an upgrade now, then pay half when you upgrade. But since their will be no new OS to upgrade to, I think many of their customers will feel like they've been tricked by a bait and switch tatic. Particularly since Microsoft has a history of questionable business/marketing tatics.
Never pay a software company in advance, release dates slip, and/or software may not be suitable to you in the future.
as blackBOMB?
The delay "is a response to what our customers are asking for."
MS's customers have been belly-aching so much about all the endless chain of "upgrades" and premature forced obsolescence of existing MS products, that MS is finally listening to the customers and slowing down the "upgrade train".... especially now that they've got their customers renting the software year by year instead of paying once for a "use in perpetuity" license.
But the spokesperson then added, "However, beta copies will be available for download by 2003 through our usual leaks."
"I bet I'll get blamed for this." --Mayor Quimby
dear slashdot, .NET server (formerly known as whistler) is shipping next year. it was longhorn server that was scrapped, leaving the traditional 3-4 years in between server releases.
please moderate the comments you post on your main site to ensure accuracy. Did 'punkass' even read the article?
-sara
-------------------------------------------------
Longhorn is the successor to .NET Server [microsoft.com]. .NET Server is currently at release candidate 1
.NET Server.
Longhorn is the successor to Windows XP.
Blackhorn is the successor to Windows
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
Sucks be to everyone who bought a MS License subscription and was hoping to get an upgrade for the extra money they paid.
Either way, it's got way too much crust.
Hokey statistics and ancient misconceptions are no match for a good thought in your head, kid!
Longhorn Server crashed and burned ?
The idea is for example, viewing a picture would use the same user interface as listening to a music source.
That way, when I need to figure out how to zoom in on the picture I'm viewing, I'll remember the UI from zooming in on the music... er, no...
Well, anyway, when I need to know how to pause the music I'm listening to, it will be the same as pausing the picture... no, that can't be right either...
Well, at least it will simplify the needlessly complex interface of current music players and picture viewers, which make it very hard for new users to... er...
Why was this a good idea again?
This delay is probably for the better as far as stability/quality of the next OS and longevity of 2K. Maybe MS learned from XP that releasing an OS to early is a pain in the butt (fixes, bad publicity, and all) and that their time would be better spent polishing up their finnished products a little more. After all, they do have a lot of work to do to catch up with their open-source competitors.
I'd rather have one good OS every six years from them than one crappy one every two years.
-jcpii
Hi all I'm a tester for Microsoft to the Windows .net Server.
They can see it on http://win2003.dnip.net
So I don't like lies news. If they want to give some information , first they have to be sure !!!!
Thanks
OS X.
.NET Server) were that it would have a fully DirectX rendered desktop for hardware acceleration of fancy graphical features (OS X already has this in 10.2 using OpenGL, and it's really hot), and a database-like filesystem based on SQL Server allowing arbitrary attributes and indexes on files (OS X will be incorporating a BeFS-like FS in a release in the near future).
The two big features touted for Longhorn (Microsoft's new DESKTOP OS, !=
Long story short, all the hype Microsoft had left for Longhorn has been done already by Apple. What's the use of developing to a feature set that will be 3-4 years behind the nearest competitor?
Microsoft feels Apple's breath on the back of their necks.
For a moment I thought microsoft had a fit of honesty and named it "Blackbomb"!
The story seems to indivate that .Net is still going to come out...however the release after .Net has been cancelled in favor of concentration on the release orginally planned to follow....
Power Corrupts,Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely, leaving one person(group)in charge is absolutely corrupt.
I just migrated all of our NT4 servers to windows 2000 advanced server in February, a good TWO years after the introduction of the Windows 2000 server products.
.Net server was released tomorrow, I wouldn't touch it for about 5 years.
Since then i've had to apply countless service-packs, security patches, fixes....some of which made some servers unbootable. Lots of organizations still run Windows NT 4 server....why?
Two reasons:
1. It suits their needs just fine.
2. They want to wait until service packs and security fixes slow to a trickle before committing lots of time and resources to the upgrade.
Does Microsoft think that adding a new product to the mix will make IT managers less gun-shy about a newly released server OS? Gimme a break.
I won't be moving from windows 2000 server for AT LEAST 3 more years. Even if
-ted
That thing with the screenshots of all the eye candy like transparent docs and big beutiful clocks was supposed to be a SERVER?!?!???
NR
The most depressing thing is Simms is gone next year. I guess Texas might have a chance at beating OU (doubtful).
Novell was dying (effectively dead) before NDS came out.
It died, quite nicely, when Microsoft aquired the ability to include IPX into their software (and to act as IPX servers). Once that happened, Novell was dead meat. I remember it and it was just after Novell 4.0 came out. (3.11/3.12 was THE standard.)
Since then, everyone moved away from IPX and went to TCP/IP with the Internet.
But NDS was almost a savior for Novell. Microsoft promised AD in NT5 and people waited and WAITED for it. (The comparisons between NDS and AD were incredible annoying, since NDS was a shipping product and AD was in beta (at best)).
Many companies, mine included, have no interest to go release hopping. Once something works, lord help us, leave it alone.
And for those who got suckered into buying a Win2k Server license with 2 years of free upgrades... chuckle, what were you thinking? We won't be upgrading (to a new MS OS) until we have to. My unrealistic hope is that in a couple of years I'll be able to replace Win2k, one server at a time, with Linux or BSD. In any case, who wants to be the first to put a new MS server OS into production?
.sigs are for post^Hers.
My company started a datacenter and web server farm before Win2K came out. Most of the equipment leases completed their three years and are finally only just being replaced and upgraded to Win2K. At the end of the new lease cycle we could have expected to have completely jumped .Net server, which of course isn't in MSFT's interests. I'm sure other people are in the same boat.
Microsoft is actually trying quite hard to make more secure products.
This sounds funny, but it's the real 'bet the business' project going on at MSFT.
It means going through all the code looking for buffer vulnerabilities, etc.
Microsoft want to be more secure than OpenBSD.
Besides, which, today's market is kinda tired of new gadgets.
I'm just wondering what this will do to MSFT's business model. Where will their new sales come from?
Or are they going to live off their cash pile for a while?
Sig for sale or rent. One previous user. Inquire within.
I guess you all remember the settlement that was just approved. I remember "windows" being defined in there as "Windows NT, Winodws XP and systems based on that" (or something similar). Would this move be made to make sure they can avoid the consequences of the settlement even more than they already can? After this move they can claim it is a totally independant and "new" system (as they say every few years, usually after something visual has changed).
Just a thought....
Blackcomb??
Is that a typo? Did they mean Clank-bomb?
There is no sig for you here.
if you look at what you said- 'we still have a number of NT servers.' you would only have ONE unix boxen for all your services, that would cost less than the aggregate cost of your 'servers' (which are most likely little more than glorified desktops), perform better, have less downtime, need less admin's, etc.
so while it makes sense to you, it makes very little sense to anyone WHO ACTUALLY HAS A CLUE.
www.christopherlewis.com
If you plan and design right (and then release a metric shitload of service packs and miscellaneous patches) you don't need to buy a new operating system every 18 months.
Funny, I thought MSFT was the leader in the forced upgrade path market.
You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
--my best knee jerk reaction guess is, they are waiting for the mandated hardware "security" applications to be codified into law, and for millions of these cpu's and devices to be shipped first. And seeing as how they have the leg up in advance on what these do to software(they are dictating the specifics now I bet), and what the requirements will be, they'll have the only "authorised and stamped officially 'secure' server" then.
The fix has been in for a long time, that's why they got the wrist slapping seemingly almost toothless "judgement". It won't be microsoft violating any terms of their "punishment", nope, they'll be cooperating with it and following "the law".
Has anyone else noticed how "blackcomb" is one letter different from "blackbomb"? I wonder how much someone got paid for that one?
Does anyone else find it strange that MICROSOFT LONGHORN is an anagram for CHLOROFORMING NT OS and would have coensided with their planned no-longer supporting NT date?
I'm a little foggy going back that far but I'm pretty sure NT didn't add TCP/IP support until 3.5. It was a much better product than Windows for Workgroups, if you had a 12 - 16MB 486 machine to run it on.
-- I wanna decide who lives and who dies - Crow T. Robot, MST3K
Imagine a Beowolf Cluster of THESE!!!
Your argument sound like:
Company: Hey Microsoft, stop the upgrade cycle
Microsoft: Ok, we'll stop updating, but you must pay us a regular fee not to
unfinished: (adj.)
It is no different to AMD having called the Athlon K7, Nvidia having called the Geforce 4 the NV25 (I think) etc. etc. etc. It is not really a novelty in the industry.
Mother is the best bet and don't let Satan draw you too fast.
.NET server is at RC2, and still on schedule, THEN Longhorn (client).
Bill Gates didn't know about the McMainerberry whupin'.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
come on...."longhorn" was used as a name to curry favor with the bush/texas crowd during the "penalty phase", now that they've utterly defeated the "justice" department, there is not need for a "longhorn" product. time to use decent, honorable, non-idiotic pacific northwest names again...
</huh?>
http://microsoft.com/windows.netserver/default.msp x
Windows.NET Server 2003 is in Release Candidate right now. Look for it in April.
After Windows 2000, in late 2000 and 2001, you used to get "Whistler Beta 1" &c. builds. This code base was forked to become Windows XP and Windows.NET Server. Windows XPSP1 essentially merges the trees again.
They're just going to do the same thing for Longhorn and Blackcombe.
More $$ for me, no new products or features for you.
Not for nothing but... We need to look inward before tossing stones around here. Since Feb 2000, the release date of Windows 2000, there have been a significant number of Linux version releases. If you simply count commercial releases, both RH and SuSE have had 6 major releases (6.2, 6.3, 7.0, 7.1, 7.2, 8.0). Okay, you say, but that's not how I keep up with releases - I download and compile patches or full source and keep up-to-the minute accurate with my releases... Well in Feb 2000 the Kernel stood at about version 2.2.20 (give or take a few). Kernel 2.4 came out about 12 months later (some 10 or so versions of 2.2 later), 2.5 was release November last year after 15 releases of 2.4, and there have now been 47 releases of the 2.5 beta.
.NET servers look to be fairly good upgrades. Microsoft has had a history of cancelling versions and releases, delaying new products and generally being slow about getting stuff on the shelves for years. If you remember everyone was commenting that Windows 95 (the first version with a year instead of a version number) only just got in under the wire before they were going to have to rename it Windows 96. Windows NT 4.0 was itself over 18 months late if you take an optimistic view of it. Closer to home was that Windows ME should never have been released and instead should have skipped straight to an XP like version, but that got canned. This is not new, not something to worry about. It's just how these things work, the future is unpredictable, getting there from here is not simply a release every 6 months.
So to keep up with the Joneses, in Linux terms, you would have compiled and installed about 72 kernels. Not to mention all the Apache (et al) releases.
And people are complaining that 3 Win2K Service Packs in 2 years is too much!!! And that the feature change rate is too uneven!
Get a life!
The
I don't remember any motivation to release better products.
Does a Christian soccer team even need a goalkeeper?
The remedy in the DoJ case mentioned Longhorn by name. Did anyone think Microsoft wouldn't just invent some reason to say of their next product, "This is not the Longhorn you are looking for"?
Nope, no sig
A folder (fake) view of email is passe, and keeps the data locked in the email program.
I want to be able to run notepad, Word, VI, Emacs, Teco, Pascal, or any other damned thing against a file sitting in my inbox. I want to do it directly, without programming, doing API's, routines that fake it by doing copies to temporary folders, etc.
Once I have that in place, it's trivial to write some program to scan for the word "viagara" and delete the file, move it elsewhere, etc. Right now, to do that, first I have to interface to Microsoft Exchange 5.5 (undocumented), or Outlook 97 (almost as bad), and then do the work... which is just plain stupid. I want to have transparent access to my email, from the old dos command line, or any other application.
If I can get an IFS that can map URLS to folders, a lot of things become easy. (Especially if it supports WebDAV, and is bidirectional)
I know that I could load the libraries, and do it in code, but that costs too much in terms of time, energy, and lost abstraction.
We can build a better way, it's a pain in the ass to get there, bit I'm sure it will be worth it.
--Mike--
Guybrush: Hi, my name is Guybrush Threepwood. I'm a mighty pirate.
Pirate: Guybrush Threepwood, what a stupid name!
Guybrush: Well, what's youre name?
Pirate: Mancomb Sheepgood.
A programmer is a machine for converting coffee into code.
who would pay MS *not* to get it wrong in the first place!
One might think that the very fact that you pay for the software product implies that you are paying them to get it right.
Wrong; read an MS EULA sometime; they absolve themselves of all negligence and incompetence.
(not that other software manufacturers don't similarly refuse to stand by their products)
In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
Is Longhorn the release that was supposed to integrate SQL Server with the file system? Kind of back to Pick?
If so will the open source movement have had time to do something interesting with ReiserFS by then?
Software Assurance and Volume Licensing 6.0 Programsf ault.asp
o lsleacompare.asp
http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/programs/sa/de
Volume Licensing Program Comparison Chart
http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/programs/sa/sa
Drill down on Select Licensing 6.0 (one option)
http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/programs/sel/
Crap, middle one has space. Correct link:o lsleacompare.asp
http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/programs/sa/sa
Perhaps they read the release about GNU/HURD's delay and didn't want to be left out?
"Considering it regrowth of underlying flora."
In other words:
1- waiting for someone else to come up withe a breath-takingly good idea
2- waiting for that idea/product to flounder due to lack of funds/development
3- hireing the people who came up with this idea
4- ???
5- Teh pr0phet!!!1
ok, serously. Besides providing a broad, 'stable' OS platform for application development, what has Micro$oft EVER contributed to the world of PCs.
The more I learn about Microsoft products, the more I see 'similarities' with other products that predated the MS ones.
DOS is a ghetto low-octane version of Unix. 9x is Mac, only harder to use. NT server gave Novell a GUI.
Ok, even the venerable *nix is based on previous works of xerox, IBM, US govt., etc, but it contributed to the industry... it made new things possible... it inovated. What has MS given us other than service packs, digital rights management, BSODs, and per seat/per server licences?!
I'm very new to the IT field, so maybe I'm just ignorant... but I can't think of a single MS product that features an original idea.
"Prediction: within 10 years, Windows will be a Linux distribution." Me, 7-6-2016
Crap. Do it yourself. You get the gist.
...Longhorn has been scrapped...
...in favor of a better name with better recognition, The Texas A&M Aggie Server.
Spread the RC luvin'
Have you ever programmed anything in Delphi? Something really math intensive?
It's just as fast as C++, just not quite as portable. But you are 100x less likely to fuck something up when you are tired.
Anytime you want, pop out an app in C++, give me the same spec you built it to, and me and my Delphi will give you an ass whomping.
Please do not lump Delphi in with VB.
This is no surprise really. Longhorn was due to be the first OS that was released as a server and workstation version at the same time. Unfortunately, this put a huge load on the M$ resources, so they have decided to go with only the Longhorn workstation version at this stage, and delay the server version until Blackcomb (ie. roll up all of the new features into that).
.NET server is due for release Q1 2003. Longhorn on the workstation is due late 2003/2004. Titanium (new exchange) late 2003/2004. Office 10 - 2003 sometime.
This means that we still won't see a server and workstation version being released at the same time, but we WILL see Longhorn on the desktop.
I've been playing with a very early alpha of this, and it's even pretty impressive now. Match that with Titanium (Exchange) and the new office (10?) and you've got a pretty cool system.
SO, to confirm. Windows
Obviously not what you've been smoking.
Let me let you in on a little secret: Microsoft is not interested in maintaining or incrementally improving the status quo. Microsoft is trying to change the game. And .NET is the lever they will try to use.
Delaying the next release of a server OS could be a good move for them. It will give customers time to roll out .NET before MS releases a fully .NET OS. Some major players (Like Robert Half) are already rolling out .NET.
I have never seen a work environment where the in house software was not going through constant changes. What will MS customers be looking at when it's time to upgrade? .NET, anyone?
They are going to look at .NET components, with their prepackaged remoting and serialization interfaces, language neutrality, etc as replacements for COM components.
They are going to look at ASP.NET, with its automatic browser detection and code generation, tightly integrated XML binding, cleaner setup, and performance enhancements.
They are going to look at ADO.NET, with its native XML handling, simplified programming model, true UDA, and its own performance enhancements - not to mention its custom drivers for MS SQL.NET.
Make no mistake. MS has bet everything on .NET. If is successful, all MS has to do is make sure that Windows runs .NET better than any other OS.
How hard will that be?
I'm not a Windows person, so please correct me if I'm wrong, but how does thew MS plan to license Windows play into this?
Traditionally quick releases were common when you paid for each new release. The more new releases, the more money in your pocket. The last thing you want to do is delay a new release by years. Of course the new releases also introduced more bugs. which can really hurt your image.
If you go too quick customers may want skip releases. That is really bad from a revenue point. If you market two products but only sell one, you're really cut into your profits.
If you go by a subscription model, you can delay releases. You still get a revenue stream because the license fees keep comming. You can also focus your devopers on fixing the existing bugs and making sure the new release is stable which helps with customer satisfaction.
This can be good for your customers because their software may be more stable, but it may also cause them pain if they need to wait 2-5 years between releases to get a badly needed feature.
The catch is that your competition may not be as slow and may slowly chip away at your market if you remain stagnant too long.
My question is: Can MS do this because of their license strategy, or because the current US economy is slow and IS spending is slow in many companies?
Microsoft turns good ideas into profitable ones. Profitable for Microsoft, that is... maybe not so profitable for you if you dreamed up the idea (unless you now work for Microsoft). To paraphrase Auron, "That's what Microsoft does."
N4st0r, trixx0r h0bb1tz0rz! Th3y st0l3 0ur pr3c10uzz!
Last i checked MS was still go for .Net which is XP not Longhorn...
now, i have little experience with m$ servers, so i might be asking a really stupid question, but
are each of these servers a whole new way of doing things? i mean, did win2k totally change evrything from nt4, and with each server version, are they doing something totally different?
since i have been using/admin'ing linux from about 97/98 where i first set up a samba file/print server at my school (only to be removed later by district IT, who then screwed up everything with novell...) and built firewalls, inter/intra nets for people, done networking jobs for different small firms, etc., each time using linux(which i ended up getting to know well) and they just knew "it worked".
anyways, my first server was a RH5.2 setup, and since then, i have used and setup servers as recently as an 8.0 setup. and you know what? nothing has changed. performance has improved, features have been added, but the exaact same smb.conf file still works.
i guess i have an idea why m$ plans obsolesence, breaks backwards compatibility, and now forces upgrades. but,
why haven't people just said f*** it?
My problem? I was perfectly gruntled, until some numbnuts came by and dissed me.
The codename for the next ms operating system is
Blacktomb with a "t" not "c".
This is the perfect time for MS to announce a slowdown in releases. They've already shifted most enterprises to Licensing 6.0, which requires a periodic subscription fee, but provides automatic updates. Now, they've managed to collect revenue without providing any product.
> Whatever happened to "it's done when it's done"
The difference is that the Microsoft licensing scheme mentioned charges a set price for a set time (e.g. 2 years). During that time, you get free upgrades, but at the end of it you must pay again.
So if Microsoft delays releases, it conceivably could get the same money for less work. Of course, presumably the coding work is the same, but remember that a release includes lots of non-coding work that service packs and hotfixes don't (advertising, marketing, GUI revisions, distribution negotiations with OEMs, etc.).
Of course, the problem is that, from the customer's point of view, fewer releases means less value for the money. So the customer has greater incentive to just blow Microsoft off and choose the *other* licensing scheme (one time fee for perpetual license with no upgrade rights at all). Microsoft sales people themselves have said that customers should not purchase Software Assurance (the upgrade path) if they are upgrading less than about once every two years.
So delaying the new server could have very interesting effects in the acceptance of Software Assurance. If not this time around, certainly next time (financial people have long memories regarding being screwed).
And if this does shift people from Software Assurance, this is good for OSS (and Apple) as it removes one of the hurdles to ditching Microsoft.
Thinking of the name of the company, Micro*SOFT*, and considering the laws about truth in advertising, I propose that the OS "Longhorn" be renamed to "Shorthorn".
this is so funny. In fact, Im tempted to think the article is a troll.
/.ers predicting the fall of the sky, the ceiling, microsoft, the internet, and life, the world, and everythink.
.NET server. according to all credible (i.e. non-slashdot) sources of information, it is still on its projected release schedule.
its so funny seeing
1. MS is NOT cancelling
2. This is not a sign that MS is going out of business. I think Bill can still pay his rent, and Steve Balmer says his 15th vacation this year is going fine (and he wishes you could be there with him).
3. This is also not a sign that linux is
a. more secure
b. starting to make more money or a bigger market than MS
c. interesting
So guys, go back to class, and quit posting about adult things, like what goes on in the IT world. We are doing just fine w/o you.
Manipulate the moderator system! Mod someone as "overrated" today.
...I dont think that story headline read right.
Longhorn is the next Sql server version
Not the next OS
lick the cancle button (at least thats what our Chinese QA says)
Blackcomb seems to be a long time between releases Looks like they will be concentrating all the evil energies againist Linux ;)
http://www.ajaygautam.com
Ah! for the good old days when people who didn't know what an OS was, lined up around the block at 4 am on a cold day to buy the first Windows 95!
They just don't make suckers like they used to!!! The ungrateful youngsters these days just don't want to play patsy anymore!!!
last time it was whistler, longhorn has been scrapped, now blackcomb...wait, isn't there a mountain (www.whistler-blackcomb.com) in british columbia? either these ppl are great fans of skiing, or they are just stealing names out of the blue!!
BSD is for people who love UNIX. Linux is for those who hate Microsoft.
Longhorn != .NET Server?
Rebooting for a patch?!?!?!? What the hell kind of lunacy is that!?!?!?!
;)
If it's not the kernel you don't reboot
> Name me one useful invention / innovation done
> by OSS in the past fifteen years (since 1987)
You are joking, right?
I'll only list very few:
1- Heaps of new, useful languages. To name a few:
- Perl (born in 12/87)
- Python
- Java (is open-source, if not Free).
2- Operating systems
- Linux (certainly an amazing innovation, if not an outright invention)
- Mach (concepts date back from 1985 though)
- all the free BSDs. Lots of innovation there
3- Compiler technology
- Gcc (1988). Gcc is the only truly portable C/C++ compiler (and now Java, Ada, etc) usable for production work. Nothing else touches it.
4- Parallel computation technology
- MPI
- OpenMP
These a minuscule portion of free software inventions and innovations. If you know anything about IT you will acknowledge the importance of the above software packages.
The parent post was just trying to say that *Microsoft* has a tendency not to invent. It has been cheaper for them to let other companies invent new concepts and technologies and buy them outright rather than finance the R&D. This has been true from the very beginning of MS. They did not invent DOS, Gates bought it from someone else.
For more recent examples think of internet explorer, hotmail. Many people contend that MS implemented their TCP stack from the BSD sources (as they were allowed to do).
There is nothing inherently wrong with that, except you have to worry being in a world where no one can challenged the huge behemoth MS has become. If you are a small innovative company with a successful and popular closed-source product, three things can happen to you:
1 - Microsoft ignores you for a while until you become a menace,
2 - Microsoft buys you outright,
3 - Microsoft releases a competing product and more or less destroys you.
For an example of (1) think Adobe. Apparently now Microsoft is interested in taking over PDF, I wonder what will happen. (2) Think hotmail. (3) Netscape, Borland.
Uh, what about known exploits, bugs, etc. that leave the system insecure and have no fixes?
That would be reason to upgrade. Or at least change systems.
Computer displays are always actually 2D, but they're sometimes used to depict 3D environments. As you point out, all windowing systems already do this. As you fail to infer, using 3D-rendering hardware allows them to do it better.
The primary thing for which it's used in osx is compositing, which allows you to do proper layering of semiopaque objects. In addition to the obvious draw of simple prettiness, this really is a functional feature. Things like subtle drop shadows and opacity changes give very strong focus recognition, and transparent windows allows one to focus on multiple sets of data more quickly.
However for customers that are purchasing Software Assurance (SA) from Microsoft, this delay between server versions will pose monetary drawbacks because the delay will heighten the total cost of ownership of the server software. The longer you have to wait between releases, the less software you are getting for your constant payment into SA.
It's understandable that customers are overwhelmed by the short timeframes between server releases, and this concern is what Microsoft is refrencing in the aforementioned quote. Money should not be a factor because most customers are already paying for future software releases, no matter when they are released.
One final thought: Do you think Linux has taken enough server market share that it might have actually contributed towards slowing down Microsoft's server timeline? If so then the virtues of competition are evident.
I used to always hear about it like 5-6 years ago. What version is it at now ? Is it more of a server thing or what ? I have run about every *nix out there but never have run across one of those yet.
Maybe I should download it and try it out. Will it run on my Mac ?
All the MS products are piece of crap. It is time that we all bought and used other products that actually work . MS servers are a joke and .Not is a piece of shit. We move all our Java development to Linux and now our dev time and cost has reduced to half. All we had was memory leaks and security issues from Windoze with every freeking patch and dont talk about piece of shit IIs. Its been a year we have moved all our Java J2EE apps to linux and we have never looked back. Scalability of Java and Linux has helped us and our vendors reduce expenses. Thanks Linux.
The worst thing about havin rapid fire releases from MS is that
it takes until SP2-3 before it's actually ready to be a product.
If MS puts out a new server release every few years, then that
means they are spending their time on architecture overhalls.
If they spend time on Service Packs, then its bug fixing and
security fixups with less radical feature changes -- this
means more stability for the Win2000 platform, more knowledge
about the Win2k platform, more comfort. -> less pain, less reason
to switch.
Heck Linux can't even get basic Common Criteria auditing -- something
most major vendors have had (or C2 by old system) for a decade
or more.
Linux is secure? Without an audit record, exactly how can that be
proven? Companies aren't trusted without regular outside audits. And
even then they are not trusted. If something is broken with the
process, it is fixed.
All of that work by the Linux Secure Module project and they still
can't support CC auditing. Maybe the Open Source Community should
focus more attention on BSD. Seems to have its security act a bit
more together.
In the longer time they can make technically a lot heavier and more complex drm technologies. They can bloat your boat and make up systems preventing you from actually using your computer. They WILL make systems to spy and gather data on you.
And know what? They WILL do their best thinking ways to prevent you from debugging the internals of the system. Check-mate.
If they did it gradually, people could fight it easier. When they release at once a system with 10x the disturbing systems and features, they will simply run over you.
Beautiful plan. You should be damn SCARED.
Actually talking about DNS (Digital Nervous System), the idea is marvelous but he entered the wrong "gate"... if the technology was not Microsoft.. he will be hero. Read his book called "Business at the speed of light" by William Gates (Bill). He is a fallen angel...
Thanks
Neo Gigs
"Follow the white rabbit..."
IT departments HATE non-stop tiny changes, each of which requires new testing, and likely breaks several of their applications. This can be seen in the reality that many shops still use NT 4.0 even with its successor 2000, and its successor XP, available. Hell, most IT departments shun at even installing service packs.
Well...yeah, which I think was the previous point: service packs = annoying.
Microsoft has oft been berated for doing what Apple now is the champion of, which is pushing minor changes as new versions (see 95, 98, 98SE, Me) and getting people to pay up. People don't like being "behind" when applications start using some esoteric feature of XP that adds little value, but suddenly renders obsolete their 2000 base.
This is your big mistake. Yeah, people have traditionally skipped out on MS's upgrade path because it wasn't worth the money or energy. But now software assurance really changes the game: now that MS has forced these people to keep paying, they up and decide to wait a decade between releases (for real...if longhorn is 6 years behind 2k). Suddenly the businesses are paying an annual fee that they calculated as only moderately unreasonable, because they were figuring on MS's usual 1-2 year upgrade cycle, and they are going to feel royally screwed. Why? Because they *were* screwed! Pay us every year for a decade for one piece of software! It's unbelievable.
Those businesses who didn't go with SA won out, and this isn't too terrible for them...they can keep running 2k and thumbing their nose at the SA sheep. But still, in 2012 win2k sure will seem a bit out of date. Can you imagine where Linux will be by the time Blackcomb comes out? Wow.
Given a choice between free speech and free beer, most people will take the beer.
We have not discontinued Windows .NET Server 2003--it will be in customers hands by the first half of next year. The correct point is there not be a release of Windows server in the Longhorn timeframe. The next major release of Windows server will be Blackcomb. Bob O'Brien, group product manager, Windows .NET Server group at Microsoft
Audience: What will become of Linux when the Hurd is ready?
Eric Youngdale: Err... is Richard Stallman here?
-- From the Linux conference in spring '95, Berlin
- this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...