Slashdot Mirror
MS Says Longhorn To Arrive 2005
Lawrence Person writes "According to this article in PC World, Microsoft 'publicly confirmed 2005 as the release year for Longhorn, the successor to Windows XP.' And of course, we all know tha Microsoft release dates never slip..."
Will we have to activate the box before we open it this time around?
I wouldn't mind if they delay their release. The longer they wait the more chance Linux has to succeed.
It's just like IE vs Netscape - Netscape took too long with Mozilla and now IE is everywhere.
Part of me looks at this and goes "so?" and part of me thinks about the opposite extreme with where Apple doesnt say anything (or much) is coming soon and just releases it and lets people find it themselves...
But seriously, isnt this just a tad bit too far in the future to look toward? Or is this just to get people to quit emailing/speculating about when its coming out.
We don't need an "overrated" so much as we need a "you completely missed the parent's point, dumbass..."
Windows 2006
Don't believe anything I say. I crash test crack pipes for a living.
And of course, we all know tha(t) Microsoft release dates never slip...
It's fun to snipe, of course, and it's nice to feel some kind of safety/security in the fact that they've been very late on many things and/or delivered with bugs.
But don't get too comfy. If you're a competitor or someone who'd like to see them go down in flames (or at least severely humbled), the important thing is beating them to the punch, and jeers from the sideline don't help win a race.
Tweet, tweet.
Yes, just like we know that Slashdot submissions never have typos.
Forget the whales - save the babies.
Slashdot editors amended story titles and corrected blatent typos.
WinFS replaces the NTFS and FAT32 file systems used in current Windows versions.
Does anyone here know if FAT32 support will be maintained, as keeping write support from linux for many people will be important.
Actually, the code is complete. It'll take the lawyers until 2005 to write the EULA that you have to agree to before installation.
What kinds of features can we expect in Longhorn that Apple won't already have had for awhile by the time it ships?
Apple should be shipping Mac OS X 10.3 (or whatever they call it - codename Panther) running on 64-bit PowerMac G5 systems in September 2003. Two years after that, they'll have had another major release of OSX, and even the iBook should be G5-based.
How does Longhorn compare to XP and OSX for home users?
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
Does anyone know why MS chose the name Longhorn for the Windows XP successor? In Texas and Alberta, "Longhorn" is instantly recognizable as a well-known breed of cattle.
I predict that "Where's the Beef?" jokes (currently in hibernation since the 80's) will reappear on the cultural landscape in 2005, as the Longhorn release date is inevitably delayed by Microsoft...
And of course, we all know tha Microsoft release dates never slip...
Can anyone name a company as old as MS that hasn't ever slipped on a release date? A company that has released as many products as MS that hasn't ever slipped on a release date?
If you're gonna take a shot, make it a good one.
"Not knowing when the dawn will come, I open every door." - Emily Dickinson
i dunno about that. jeers from the sideline have screwed up many a race when it distracted them :-)
That places the release just after software assurance expiration.
It's really rather sad the way I have begun to look at Microsoft releases. I used to actually look forward to them because generally they were a great improvement over their predessors. Windows 98 was a great upgrade from 95. From a purely technological point of view, Windows XP had a lot to say for its stability. The licensing scheme, however, was disturbing.
As Microsoft tightens down more and more on their licensing, I begin to dread anything that comes out of Redmond. I would embrace the improvements and innovations if it weren't for that tightening sensation of the noose around my neck. I will likely not even touch Longhorn unless I absolutely must. The cost and licensing look to be far too prohibitive, and I fear to give too much control to Microsoft lest I find all of my creations suddenly removed from my control.
At current rate, Microsoft is quickly digging their own grave. My company, formerly a very Windows centric shop, is starting to talk more and more about moving to UNIX due to the cost of upgrades. Longhorn may actually prove to be the breaking point at which, due to overly restrictive licensing, the corporate world starts seeking a cheaper solution.
It is sad that we must fear technological innovation because of the abuses that seem to abound as a result, and Microsoft is doing very little to help in this regard.
I believe in de-evolution. God made the world perfect, man fell, and its been going downhill ever since!
All those poor people who bought the Licensing 6.0 crap sure will be disappointed. Anybody who paid for that 3 year license back in 2001 (up to July of 2002 actually) will be entitled to all upgrades until, um, 2004. Or July of 2005. Nice to see that MS won't be releasing their next desktop OS until after the 3-year license expires.
Congratulations! You just paid MS for three years of nothing! (Well, the servers are entitled to Windows Server 2003, but that still doesn't justify the cost of the licenses for all the desktops.)
I really hate signatures, but go to my website.
How's the HURD doing again?
Wax-Museum Fire Results In Hundreds Of New Danny DeVito Statues
Lots of companies (including my employer) don't set their upgrade watch by Microsoft. We (a PrettyBigCompany I won't name) stayed with Windows 3.1 until 1998 when we transitioned to NT4 on the desktop. We will most likely switch to XP sometime this fall. I can pretty much guarantee you that we won't be moving away from XP until 2008 or so.
Of course we're just now finishing switching from Token Ring to Ethernet and from Netware 4.11 on Pentium Pro 200's to Netware 5.1 on dual Xeon's across the company (over 300 facilities nationwide). Yeah, if you're a tech company staying up to date is a cool thing. When your company makes and sells Stuff then you don't upgrade just for the heck of it.
(oh, and if anyone knows someone at Cisco in charge of their 3500 series ethernet switches, do me a favor and smack them around - they fail regularly whereas my old token ring concentrators Just Worked)
"An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." Col. Jeff Cooper
THIS IS NOT FLAMEBAIT...
That out of the way: YOU MUST BE DREAMING! In two years Linux will probably still be a niche OS, in four, it might be a slightly better alternative OS (as in Netscape is the alternate to IE, meaning IE has 90%, and netscape 5%).
Linux has some serious flaws, which, unfortunatly, are beginning to seem inate. The thing that linux is missing is DIRECTION, there is no mass-marketing plan (marketing as in mind-share, not profit), there is no drive to get the average luser using it.
Give me ONE good reason, besides price, that the average windows person (me included) would want to use linux? What advantage is there? What advantage will there be in 2 years? The only way to make linux successful would be to make it STRUCTURED, and to make it FREINDLY. Both of which it is the antithesis of right now, and promises to be the same in the future.
My suggestions are, make some form of body to control development, and make it so market-share reflects on their possition[sic]. Meaning an EXECUTIVE. Now don't take that as meaning make Linux closed, or for-profit. To make it viable to the masses, something must be at stake, otherwise it will not move out of the developer-masterbation stage.
Also, LOOSE THE *NIX ROOTS! I don't WANT a command line. (Well *I* do, but a DOS prompt, not an archane unix interface) I want something nice, easy, and intuitive. Something I can do buisness on, without worrying overly about innards. I want ease of use, AND power. Sacraifcing ease of use for power is bad, as is visa versa. You need balance.
In otherwords, to make Linux a contender in 2 years, would require linux not to be linux anymore.
Please refute me if I'm wrong. And mind, I don't really mind linux, if someone made it nice/usable/gameable, AND powerful for my purposes, I'd use it in a heartbeat over Microsoft. But right now, MS has the superior product.
A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
But what was the point of your post? If it really bothers you, why are you on the site?
Because I generally enjoy the site. Is there something wrong with trying to improve a community that you like?
I think Slashdot could be a lot more interesting if it wasn't for all the hackneyed anti-MS posturing that is mandatory. Do we ever see stories on interesting stuff that Microsoft has done (e.g. Longhorn's database driven filesystem)? No we don't, and why not? Because we hate Microsoft.
Can you imagine how stupid Microsoft would look if every document they produced had some half-ass, unfunny, dig at Linux?
You will submit the proper documentations and proofs of identity (yourself, your family, your friends, your neighbors, your coworkers, and others to be determined by Microsoft as befits each individual activation of your New Microsoft Product)to activate your New Microsoft Product at least one year BEFORE you purchase it. Any Fraud, Attempted Fraud, Suspected Fraud or Contacts Leading To Suspicion Of Fraud discovered during Microsoft's routine vetting proceedures shall be forwarded to the Cognizant Authorities (Local, State, Federal, Trilateral Commission, Other) who shall exercise such measures as are deemed necessary to properly reeducate you and see to it that you activate your New Microsoft Product properly the next time.
Is it fascism yet?
I wouldn't say you're 100% wrong but you're not 100% right either. Point-by-point:
market share: irrelevant, it's the available software that counts
marketing: that's the job of co's like RedHat and IBM
average luser: hard to OEM Lin due to exclusivity arrangements on Win made by MS
advantages of Lin: performance, stability, security, virtually virus free
disadvantages of Lin: not much familiar commercial Win software, few native games
*NIX roots: for a *nix user, DOS is arcane. There are several "dos-like" shell setups available for Linux
ease of use: use a desktop focused distro, Mandrake or SuSE, and KDE
The only good argument that can be made for not using Linux is the lack of commercial ports of familiar Windows software and games. Some of the major Win apps do work under Crossover and several games run under WineX. However, for a boxed distro, Crossover, and WineX you're looking at about $100, not the proverbial free.
That said, you can't deny that most people use MS simply because it's what came with the PC when they purchased it. This is the same reason IE tookover, most people either didn't know how or couldn't be bothered to install NS. If a law were passed tomorrow banning the bundling of PCs with software, you'd see rapid growth in the number of Linux users. Let's be honest, without any prior knowledge, no sales-dude interference, and given the choice, would you pay $20 for a boxed Mandrake Linux (or even better, borrow it from a friend) or $200 for XP? Heck, I see people tripping all over themselves at BestBuy to save $200 through those MSN lock-in scams.
Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws-Plato