Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Windows XP SP2 Delayed Until Late 2004

Posted by michael on from the day-late-and-dollar-short dept.

Aiua writes "BetaNews is reporting that Microsoft has pushed back the release date for the second Windows XP service pack to the third quarter of 2004 without giving any reasons." Update: 08/19 12:52 GMT by M : Another article claims it will be out three months earlier, no later than June 2004.

4 of 261 comments (clear)

  1. calendar? or fiscal? by David+E.+Smith · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Since the article doesn't include sources or citations or anything, we can't even be sure if they're referring to calendar year 2004, or fiscal year 2004 (which, for MSFT, I believe runs from July 2003 through June 2004).


    If they're referring to fiscal year 2004, that's between January and March of next year, which isn't nearly so bad.

  2. Re:Microsoft doesn't need to have reason.... by Mr_Silver · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Reasons... who needs reasons? When you're Microsoft, you don't have to give reasons for anything.

    When you're pretty much any company, you don't have to give reasons to everything you do. At least not publically.

    Even Apple is perfectly entitled to do the same.

    --
    Avantslash - View Slashdot cleanly on your mobile phone.
  3. Re:The press release has a typo in it by the_pooh_experience · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Then why hasn't Microsoft changed the typo on this page
    Does msblast.exe, Chinese gov't outlawing internal use of MS software, MS losing German gov't contracts to linux distributers, and court cases mean anything? MS has plenty on their plate, and I think an html typo is the least of their worries.
  4. Re:Microsoft doesn't need to have reason.... by cioxx · · Score: 4, Insightful
    When you're pretty much any company, you don't have to give reasons to everything you do. At least not publically.

    Not entirely. You need to figure the "software industry factor" into the equation before making such a blanket statement. If Ford Motor Co. decided to implement considerably radical changes to their automobile line, they'd list the reasons why it was necessary, which in turn would have to come under public and government scrutiny. Same with any other company that doesn't deal with software.

    Somehow software industry is a banana republic that gets off the hook in respect to accountability. If Microsoft was in a business of producing pharmaceuticals, I doubt they would be in a business long enough if Bill Gates didn't go on morning shows personally to assure the public that their drugs are safe, despite the major problems surrounding their product line.

    Even Apple is perfectly entitled to do the same.

    While I'm a very big Apple fan, and advocate their product use at every given opportunity, at the same time I understand how this corporation is known to employ predatory practices from time to time. Killing off smaller competitors, pushing their own standards forward, etc. The paradox lies in Apple's ability to get it right most of the time. But that doesn't mean that Apple would be better than Microsoft have they had 90% market share. When AAPL breaks the 50% market share (hypothetically speaking that is), you'd see far worse anti-user practices than that of Microsoft. I can guarantee that.

    Software industry doesn't abide by rules of accepted business practices. "Any company" cannot act like Microsoft, otherwise they'd be out of business.