Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Longhorn Delayed
skreuzer writes "Microsoft has once again shifted the schedule for the release of "Longhorn," the company's next major version of Windows. The product was originally expected to ship next year. Then in May of this year, officials pushed back the release date to 2005. But now executives are declining to say when they expect the software to ship."
And people say BSD is dying?
It <b>should</b> be:
Windows is dying.
You should use AdiumX on your Mac.
They're up to something.
Microsoft aren't regular 'deadline'-missers - opting to release sub-par software instead just to reach the deadline.
I'm guessing hardware and licensing deals myself.
What will it mean to have no new IE till 2008?
I'm much funnier now that I'm a subscriber.
When the cows come home, obviously.
They decided to bundle Duke Nukem Forever.
Unfortunately, they were from Duke Nukem Forever.
They just want to make sure they can steal every new feature Apple is putting into Mac OS X.3
I recently reinstalled Windows XP. There were 47 "critical" updates. Installed service pack 1. Then there were 29 critical updates left. About time for Service pack 2.
It happens all the time. Even in the Opensource community it does. KDE 3.1, Debian 3.0 and Linux 2.4 are prime examples of when software gets delayed to make sure it works properly.
Nero-burning ROM for Linux!
What he really means... "When I'm having my network exploited by obvious vulnerabilities, why does it have to happen on my home machine? Why can't it seamlessly run that vulnerability on the dozen or so machines I have access to that are just sitting there? That's what we hope to bring you in the type of innovation we hope to bring you in the new 'Longhorn' OS."
the end of 2005 is over 2 years away, that's a long time anyway. I would actually prefer that a company didn't say a release date, other than "When it's done."
The only real relevence this has (that I see, anyway) is that it affects Licensing 6.0 or whatever it's called, and that wasn't even mentioned in the post...
Don't get me wrong though, I hate Microsoft.
Now Longhorn is the one that's supposed to be as good as Mac OS X Panther that comes out this fall, right?
!
0110100100100000011000010110110100100000011000100
Delays in the release of the release date of Windows Longhorn are caused by Windows Bonghorn.
They're just trying to patch all the security holes before they release the OS.
You know that that type of paradigm shift isn't easy.
Insert end sarcasm tag here.
The simple truth is that interstellar distances will not fit into the human imagination
- Douglas Adams
Longhorn is the one that's supposed to add support for hardware based denial to your files when a media company says so.
But according to IDC's Gillen, there are other possible reasons for the delay, including the fact that Microsoft's ability to rapidly introduce change into its products is becoming increasingly difficult.
Maybe the "ability to rapidly introduce changes" can be read "ability to patch." I hope they use the extra time to test the security and operability extensively, to patch holes and problems before they reach the consumer.
It's general knowledge that one should not introduce a broken product to market, nevermind try to cover it with patches. Lets hope they release a fully stitched quilt, rather than rely on customers to make a run to the local fabric store.
Common sense says this is a good thing. I'd rather they took more time, and developed a better product (not sarcasm -- what do you think Microsoft, of all companies, is doing all this time?) rather than released something buggy early.
The coolest voice ever.
Nowhere in this article does it say that Longhorn has been pushed back. Not saying when it's going to be released doesn't mean it's being pushed back any more than it means it will be out earlier.
Come on guys...
Does this fact seem to just a little to much of a conincidence? It would make perfect sense for MS to wait untill they can go back to their "old" ways again. That said, it will be a LONG time between product releases, which makes me want to agree with some other posters who have said that this suggests we'll see a Windows XP: Second Edition or something like that.
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
They decided to perfect their work
Well, of course thats why.
From back in the day:
"I guess this is why we haven't released windows 98 yet..." Thats Bill Gates at the Windows 98 Preview party back in the day, right after it crashed on him, on stage, for plugging in a scanner.In a shocking Labor Day announcement, Microsoft Chairman and Co-Founder Bill Gates announced the end of Windows development. Gates stated that "Windows XP is pretty darn good" and "efforts to make it better have failed because it's impossible." Windows 2003 will also mark the final server version of Windows. This announcement comes after similar announcements regarding the future of Internet Explorer and Outlook Express. Susan Ortega, Microsoft VP in charge of public relations, spoke to reporters a bit more about the development. "The fact is, Microsoft has more money than it needs, and we'll be able to pay thousands employees on interest alone. We don't really need Windows for a revenue stream, and we already have 95% of the market. We don't think anything else will be able to top Windows as it stands now, and computers really don't need to advance anymore. The 80's and 90's were exciting, but so far, the 00's have just been boring for Microsoft. It's time to quit." Speculation is running rampant that the next version of Office may be the last, and all other Microsoft development could stop in the near future.
or perhaps after their little DCOM buffer overflow that enabled SoBig etc to flourish and cost buisness (m|b)illions the goverment gave them a quite word in their ears behind at the back of the office car park and "persuaded" them to concentrate harder on security and less on TTM (time to market)
not that i would know, or i would of logged in
I agree on the USB thing, but hyperthreading, like, SFW?
Perhaps the problem they are having is there is no nice piece of tech *to* hold back.
Dave
I write a blog now, you should be afraid.
No Longhorn, no Duke Nukem Forever... what will drive their sales? :)
I wonder what kind of quantifiable effect this has on the tech economy...
Uh, no security in XP? And how many times can they get away with the marketing claim that "You need to buy our new OS because frankly our old OS sucks!" before consumers catch on?
"Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney
Maybe that's what they really bought from SCO.
We made them think they would, but the fine print said they probably wouldn't.
"This is an important consideration that Microsoft's customers take into account when purchasing Software Assurance,
We try to steer around the topic.
which is a long-term, ongoing relationship between Microsoft and its customers, and a great deal of value comes from staying on SA long-term," she said.
As the chef Elzar would say (in an Australian accent): "Try the Microsoft Software Assurance program. It has the biggest profit margin." The great deal of value comes when you give Microsoft money.
...just my 2 gil.
...I can't really say this really bothers me at all (yeah yeah, then just move on to next article, right?). But come on, what do I really expect? More eyecandy. More "protection from myself". More Messenger, WMP and goodness what else providing "integrated Windows features that can't be removed and keep nagging you".
Btw, is anyone else having the problem that burning CDs, and opening CDs without autorun, it never seems to remember the non-MS default that I select (Nero and "do nothing", respectively), even if I check the appropriate box? I'm sure that wouldn't happen if I went down the One Microsoft Way... The question is, will Longhorn finally annoy me enough to make me jump ship? Oh well maybe I'll have to wait a year longer for the answer. Boo-hoo.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Could it be that Microsoft is now taking a page the Linux kernel development model?
My rights don't need management.
Don't worry that you can't fill out ??? now - you will be able to replace ??? with some new technology in two or three years when it appears, and blame MS for not supporting it in OS which was released 3-5 years before the technology.
After all, NT was released long before first USB devices appeared on the market, and Windows 2000 released long before first HT-enabled processors appeared (although contrary to the parent HT works under W2K - after all it is hardware feature, not software. Lack of special optimization for HT does not prevent it from working). Since all this does not stop you, it should not prevent you from blaming MS for not supporting ??? .
MSDOS: 20+ years without remote hole in the default install
That's not the point here. The "when it's ready" release schedule in the open source world is a great thing. If MS has learned that lesson, we should all be clapping. MS may never give us open source/libre software, but if they produce good software vs "good enough" software, the world will be that much better.
However... the point here is that Microsoft is creating an incredible window of opportunity here for their competitors. OS X is a better desktop system than Win XP. The open source desktops, perpetually behind, may well have time to catch up. Perhaps more importantly, with no new release of Internet Explorer in the works for the next two or more years, people might start to learn to look for alternatives and download browsers again. We could see a resurgence of competition and innovation in the web browser space -- and we'll probably get more standards compliant browsers in the mix.
In short, yeah, it's great to pillory Microsoft, but the big news here is not the egg on their face. It's the chance to show them up, and take part of their marketshare again, while their product line is aging, their reputation for security is trashed, their licensing policies are painful, I/T budgets are tight, and really, who has actual *affection* left for them anymore?
Tweet, tweet.
XP came out within 2 years of 2K but now they look like 4 years from XP to the next version. I remember some analysts at the time were saying that Software Assurance only was good value if upgrades came out more often than once every 3 years. Now it looks like it would have been cheaper to not buy Software Assurance and just re-buy a new license when the new version becomes available. Or use an OS with less restrictive licensing ;-)
Cheers
VikingBrad
Instead of calling it "Longhorn",
I think they should call it "Shorthair",
as in the phrase,
"We've got you by the short hairs now."
-kgj
Expect to see a lot of other smaller, less significant Microsoft software hitting shelves in the next two years (at least twice as much as usual) while Microsoft targets the datacenter with their R&D budget, and outfits like SCO with their legal purse.
The complete opposite is true. Microsoft is well-known for missing release dates. At least three of the previous releases of Windows were at least two years late.
.NET was announced at least three years ago. Instead of complaining, lets take solace in the fact that they're at least trying to get it right, instead of some "release early, release often" schedule...
The whole
"Sufferin' succotash."
IMHO, Win2k is the best OS that Microsoft has ever made.
not that that is saying much ;)
"I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey
How about Windows XP Media Center Edition?
RH, any distro for that matter updates so many packages. with windows updates and fixes, it is for the OS itself. pertiod. when you consider that even rh comes with well over 1000 packages, most are third party apps, open source sure, but not rh apps. there is no double standard.
My problem? I was perfectly gruntled, until some numbnuts came by and dissed me.
hopefully they'll do a good job this time so we won't need as many service packs.
Religion is a gateway psychosis. -- Dave Foley
They're basing it on the next release of Debian.
GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
We really need a service pack 2 for XP. There's a million updates on windowsupdate, too many for most modem users. So let's see MS bring out sp2 and get working on sp3 so that we don't have more and more security updates to download.
Did microsoft employ debian develoeprs in their management? Only the debian developers know how to delay stuff this bad.
Nero-burning ROM for Linux!
You honestly think Microsoft is going to let Windows XP sit for six years? They've already said there won't be a Windows XP: Second Edition and that SP2 will be out next year.
Microsoft would stagnate with no new Windows release. 2006 at the latest, guaranteed. This is already a pretty big stretch.
"Sufferin' succotash."
Perhaps they will succeed (In fact, I'd be surprised if they weren't able to roll-out a decent product...You'd think they would have learned from their past mistakes by now!) So, all in all, I'm pretty excited about all the developments, though I do think that a later release date is both better for Linux desktop users and for Microsoft as a whole; it'll mean Linux will have more time to penetrate, and Microsoft will not release such a product riddled with exploitable code (*cough* RPC *cough*). It's better to set a standard of slow-and-steady than fast-and-inaccurate.
Am I alone in thinking that maybe if Microsoft takes more time to develop their product, it will benefit everyone, Windows users and Linux users alike?
I think the problem Microsoft is running into is one of finding areas that need so much improvement they can get away with charging for it.
I personally think Windows 2000 Professional is a damn fine operating system. I run it at home and my workplace has standardized with 2K.
XP Pro added nothing of note except more onerous licensing conditions and a confusing UI change. Everyone I've met who uses XP changed the UI back to Windows 2000. Also, the only reason they use XP over 2K is because XP came with their new, name brand computer.
Really, what does Microsoft add to, change about, or remove from its desktop operating system to make it worth upgrading?
obviously no deficiencies vs. no obvious deficiencies
If MS includes distributed-computing features in Longhorn, I predict a slew of viruses and worms that take advantage of that to spread. They'll inevitably fail to segregate the client and server code sufficiently and they'll provide for automated loading of the code to be executed to the server that'll execute it, and that'd be all I'd need to create a really nasty self-spreading worm.
Well, I bought my copy of Windows XP for a bluetooth stack about a year ago. Apparently there are no plans for releasing one for Windows 2000. I expect something similar will happen to XP when Longhorn comes out.
Come on, you can troll better than this. DCOM didn't allow SoBig, it allowed MSBLASTER. But it was patched a whole month before. Slashdot reported on it, and the government even announced it twice. SoBig is a user e-mail attachment thing. Microsoft can't go door to door holding people's hands. It's not their fault users are stupidly running the attachments.
"Sufferin' succotash."
Probably when processors can support that filesystem of theirs without making it look too terribly slow ;-)
With a futures market on software shipments we could easily determine when software ship date is., just as I can predict next years weather by looking at the price of orange juice futures.
And please don't tell me yet again about how economists point out that markets can't predict anything. Nattering nabobs indeed.
Moreover, if we had a futures market on software shipments, then we, as users and managers could lessen risk of software delay or software bugs by buying hedging options.
A futures market in software would also let unemployed, overly expensive, middle-aged with families, but otherwise wise programmers leverage the outsourcing trend. Whether the software is made here or there, certain factors creating delays, etc. will be present and us older and wiser programmers would be able to use our years of experience to arbitrage the market.
Futures markets -- why must our overlords keep us from them?
How many times? ALL of them!
They'll never get brighter consumers. Ever ever ever. People like following the trend, and people like shiny new things.
"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
It now comes preinstalled with a 'Bill Gates' personality...
Security does not make money let the worms be free!!
Don't Tread on OpenSource
To show that they're better than Open Source MS would like to keep Longhorn as vaporware longer than Mozilla was.
No electrons were harmed creating this post, though some may have been subjected to electrical and/or magnetic fields.
Mark me down for GNU/Linux dominance on the desktop by december of 2004.
Sig:Why copyright isn't a fundamental human right
I would guess that they will use this time to prepare users to new technologies, tools, and concepts, and further embed newer technologies into users machines with their "service packs" and "fixes" (as they have done before). This will help ease the fear and trepidation of something new, which is paramount in business. They know from experience that business users mostly choose to NOT be early adopters.
Longhorn sounds like an OS development effort that is spinning out of control. Microsoft could always copy the strategy that Apple used when Apple's Copland effort blew up in 1996 -- buy a company with a Unix-based OS and switch everyone to that.
Should Microsoft call it Visual Linux#.NET or OS XP?
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
Stage 1 - No USB in Windows NT.
Stage 2 - No Hyperthreading in Windows 2000.
Stage 3 - No ??? in Windows XP.
Does that mean
Stage 4 = No Profit in Longhorn??
X
...they will actually try to write something secure.
They will find a significant drop in sales afterward though... people will be unwilling to upgrade if their systems are stable, bug free and secure. It is against their business model to write secure code.
They'll have to come up with a new way to keep people buying Microsoft... who knows what it will be.
Longhorn's probably not vaporware though... more likely they realize after all the crap MS OSs have been through lately... what with being on the top news for being vulnerable, unreliable and close to being the weak point of civilization itself, I guess they are rethinking that "business as usual isn't the play to make this time around."
Do you know what makes people stop using WinNT 4.0? NOTHING. It works well for businesses. Active directory? People STILL don't know what it is or what it's for or how it can improve the way they do business. MS drops support for it and people will STILL continue using it. What terrible thing will happen to Microsoft when they create a secure and stable OS? We know they can -- they have the money to throw at it and if they are willing to delay release of their newest OS project, then I'd take that as a sign they intend to make it secure and stable.
I'd say that CAN do it and they WILL do it. But the question that rings in my mind is what doom it will spell to Microsoft when they do. No more upgrades for a long time... people won't want it or care about it. That's a huge chunk of income for them.
Next move is to never again announce a release date untill the product is in the "final polish" stage.
I don't actually exist.
If they wait too long to ship, what are they going to give the people who are on the golden upgrade path? Another service pack?
Kind of funny that Microsoft shows signs of waiting until its right AFTER they get their customers to pay for the lesson...
Blogging because I can...
I agree. I tried Linux on the desktop last summer, but just wasn't able to stick with it because it didn't do what I needed. I'm currently typing this on Debian 3.0R1/Gnome 2.2 (I've made this my primary computer) and I'm amazed by the lack of things that I can't do on it. gFTP, Gimp 1.3, Evolution, Gaim, Totem/xine, RhythmBox, AbiWord, Gnumeric, XChat 2.0, and Anjuta have entirely eliminated any need for Windows. Hell, it's even got an RDP client so I can connect to my Windows 2000 servers at work. The only complaint I still have is with Gnome's system-level configuration tools compared to KDE's excellent control panel -- however, I hear these are on the way.
No I totally agree with you. I think it's clear that the competitive threat of Linux has forced MS to respond with a complete overhaul of not only their products but also their business practices (well, from a technology perspective, at least). They have started to take software quality and security issues more seriously for example (recent hiccups not withstanding).
.NET framework, and the .NET CLR integrated with the system scheduler and memory management code at the lowest levels of the platform (just above the HAL). This opens up new technical possibilities in terms of scheduling, resource allocation and management etc, and will the monolithic UNIX-like architecture of Linux a real run for its money, performance-wise.
;)
I am not sure I agree that "Microsoft is trying to be everything". I think they have a clear idea of their market (desktop machines running productivity tools e.g. office, and the server machine space responsible for document management, collaboration and file and web serving). This sounds pretty focussed to me.
I have had my ear to the ground and I gather there is some eyebrow-raising new technology within longhorn. For example, I think you'll see a complete re-architecting of the Windows API internals to use the
In turn, this may spurn some re-architecting of the Linux internals, as competition for high performance heats up.
I have been using both Windows and Linux for over 10 years (started with 3.1 and 0.99pl13 respectively) and I think this represents a very good thing for *both* Windows and Linux alike
Regards
koro
They have to make extra special sure that the RPC features work just as well under 2K/XP before release!
There exists no way of exchanging information without making judgments. --Bene Gesserit Axiom
What incentive is there to write something other than an internally-used app to .NET? One incentive would be if they came out with a Mac .NET and maybe even used it so the same code base to Office could run on PC and Mac. Don't see that happening.
Am I missing something? Is .NET really meant as a server-side thingy? Is .NET really not meant for the desktop since MS has not made a big push to put .NET on a lot of desktops?
Tell me where in Windows XP I can find:
- C compiler
- Email server
- Office suite
- SQL database server
- C++ IDE
These are all included in redhat, but not in Windows XP.so he can use the $$$$ from the sales of Longhorn on a trip into space.
How we know is more important than what we know.
2k/XP are stable (in Windows terms), they run apps well. I can't see any drastic changes, improvements or features coming along and I think Microsoft knows this.
They can't integrate much more for risk of annoying the DOJ, all I can see them improving on is the security side of things.
I did the same thing and I couldn't find a decent media player alternative. Despite that pain in the ass DRM, WMP is the best I've used because it catagorizes everything and is easy to use. This make a huge difference when you have thousands of mp3s and even when you catagorize every album into subdirectories. The best I could find for linux were clones of wmp that looked and worked like the one from windows 3.1 and about as usable.
Again, the only drawback is the drm and all that does is slow the adoption of wma's because mp3s sound just as good to me.
One good media player would do a lot to convert those regular people into using linux than most open source people think.
What's bad is windows 3.11 they havn't updated that in forever, no usb, 3d video, directx, fat32, support for more then 16 megs of ram, ms should support my copy of win3.11 till the end of time. I dont care if the os doesn't have the ablity to support these things, I want them damn it
Your main point is valid, but only if Linux seizes the opportunity to make strategic improvements. New Desktops, however pretty, will not be sufficient.
There have already been a number of extraordinarily complacent posts assuring us that there will be little worth having in Longhorn, that delays are being caused by minor security fixes, that features will be "borrowed" from OSX etc.
This is grossly misleading and potentially very damaging to Linux.
Right now, in 2003, Linux has no equivalent to Dotnet or WinFS nor any plan for such features . Such VMs and DBs that do exist are completely unexploited (and often impossible to exploit) from the kernel, the core tools and the popular desktops and office applcations.
WinFS and Dotnet do represent significant advances to the consumer platform and Linux is likely to have its 30 year heritage all too visible unless its different development groups start talking and planning.
Maybe they are rewriting the whole OS in Ada?
Whenever the offence inspires less horror than the punishment, the rigour of penal law is obliged to give way...
I was just playing with the new google toolbar and it more or less turns IE into something that can compete with the features of Moz/Firebird. It provides a search box, intelligent pop-up blocking, and a right-click option to search Google for outlined text. Google now offers a spyware free version too.
One of the big advanatages for OSS was being able to push through needed features at a fairly quick timetable. Now IE has caught up thanks to google. Still, there's no tabs, the stability is nothing to write home about, and the security holes/ActiveX crap is still there.
I don't see much incentive for MS to improve their browser, it has the marketshare of the gods and the web is maturing technology. I'm sure many people and companies are more interested in seeing if RSS syndication hits critical mass and what's going on in the mobile market. Computers arent selling like hotcakes anymore, uber-phones and PDAs are.
Maybe google can improve some other MS toys. How about the Google PGP toolbar for Outlook/OE? Google holds your public key after you install it and anyone who wants to email you can simply point and click their way to encrypted email with Google branding.
So Microsoft is going to copy Mosix and/or grid computing.
I wish someone would make sure that journalists ask "You mean like Mosix or grid computing already available for some time in the world of open source?"
Microsoft says that they plan to release their new OS as part of package which shall include "Dukem Forever."
microsoft is waiting for Apple to release next OS...
because they need something to copy off of.
No 3D Desktop in Windows XP.
I'll bet this is what the holdout is. The problem is waiting on the majority of machines out there to gain 3D capability. Or more precisely...enough time for companies to justify replacement of thousands of existing desktops so that all new machines will have 3D built-in. You would be surprised that a large percentage of desktops still do not have the level of 3D capability that Microsoft needs to pull off Longhorn. Apple has it easy, just get the users to buy-in to a brand new machine...a.k.a the G5 and Panther.
It's called resource-shift-delay. They've done it before, many times.
+1
What did you expect from
A: Slashdot
B: Timmy
For my MP3s, I use RhythmBox. My real complaint with this software is that it uses ludicrous amounts of memory (60+ MB!) when dealing with collections of MP3s my size (5,500+). It's slow for this reason, but I'm onl a 500 MHz Pentium III, in all fairness. It does a nice job of emulating the functionality of iTunes while adding a few neat features of its own. They all get organized by artist/album/genre, et cetera. It has a faster equivalent for KDE but its name escapes me at the moment.
Xine/Totem have been able to handle every DivX/XviD-AVI, every QuickTime and every RealPlayer file that I've thrown at it. My only complaint is being unable to play encrypted DVDs, since I can't seem to get the d4d/d5d plugins working.
me love you longhorn...
The article alludes to a prior 2005 prospective ship date announcement.
Cite a historical example of a non-trivial software product achieving early delivery.
Assuming ( answer != null ), name a few big projects that shipped on time.
Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
MS could release versions that have the new technology enabled, like Win95-C came with USB support, but they do tend to have a policy of not allowing for retroactive upgrade to the latest technology. I can't blame them for this, since they do have to make money of their software.
"God, root, what is difference?" - Pitr, userfriendly
Cite a source and prove it.
Oh, that's right, you can disable Palladium. But it's fun to forget that, isn't it?
"Sufferin' succotash."
You obviously don't write software for a living. The MS practice of "partner, learn, announce competing version" is well known by many developers. Ask anyone at Pivotal.
.NET will be all over Longhorn. Longhorn itself will be .NET based. The latest betas have explorer.exe running as .NET managed code.
.NET. The big push will be then, and you can bet the new version of Office will help that push, as well as a new Server product.
.NET managed code, it'll be a lot of work.
They're leaving Win32 behind and going full
There are a lot of very major changes going on with Longhorn. I don't blame them for taking their time with this. From hardware acceleration on the desktop to SQL engine integration to revamping everything to run as
"Sufferin' succotash."
I just update every so often so I've got all the latest and greatest of the 100s of apps I've got on this machine. I guess there's a few security fixes in one or another of the updates from time to time.
One thing I know. SoBig.F was only a pain because the network sucked for days.
Big Brother Bush is doubleplus ungood.
And how many times can they get away with the marketing claim that "You need to buy our new OS because frankly our old OS sucks!" before consumers catch on?
Hmmm...let's see:
Win3.1->win95
win95->win98
win98->win98se
win98se->winme
winnt4->win2k
win->winxp
So far 6 times!
The same goes for 1394 stack, WinMe and XP shipped with TC/IP network stack for firewire and Win2K did not. It is available from third party vendor though$$$(from unibrain)
The big deal with XP was getting all the home users off the 9x/DOS codebase. Sure, you corporate clients were barely affected--we were already running NT/2k.
XP is geared for home users, though they offer Professional because it does lend improvements over 2k that warrant it being used for workstations.
"Sufferin' succotash."
They're still waiting on returns from the testing team code named "Script Kiddies"
Subverting the meta-moderating system since 2003
Right now, in 2003, Linux has no equivalent to Dotnet or WinFS nor any plan for such features . Such VMs and DBs that do exist are completely unexploited (and often impossible to exploit) from the kernel, the core tools and the popular desktops and office applications.
.NET is a development framework and WinFS is a database driven file system. That said, the equivalents for .NET would be Mono / dotGNU and for WinFS you could use Oracle's IFS , not free but then neither is Windows.
I'm assuming that your referring to a Linux system as a whole and not explicitly the kernel. The reason why these shouldn't be part of the kernel are pretty straightforward,
Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws-Plato
They are actually going to get it right this time?
or they need the time to get enough bugs in it to live down to there normal standards.
When you buy MS you are paying to be a beta tester.
Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.
that's gotta be a damn loooong horn then!
~
~
:wq
What? Has George Broussard joined MS? "It'll ship when it's ready!" My were'd I put my DN4ever CD??? It's gotta be around here somewhere...
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20030828. html
That's why.
The parent post is hardly "Insightful".
Windows 3.1 was released in April 1992.
Windows for Workgroups 3.1 and 3.11 were MAJOR versions, they were released in Oct 1992 and Nov 1993, respectively. Where are the Windows NT entries? v3.51 and v4 certainly major versions (released during 1994).
Windows 98 and 98SE can be considered MAJOR versions (maybe not under the hood, but still...).
http://jesus.everdense.com/
Looks like Microsoft is trying to get on the "Grid Computing" bandwagon, which has been gathering steam ever since the economist ran an article about it. Oracle and IBM both have major Grid Computing initiatives, and Microsoft wants to pretend they can play with the Big Dogs in the Server Room.
Imagine once the Microsofties dumb the concept down to the Windows level... the 'My Grid' and 'Grids Close To Me' icons on an ostensibly well-trained admin's desktop... aaaaarrrggghh!
Part of the Second American Revolution!
I am not alone when I say this: Windows 2000 is the best Microsoft OS since DOS 6.22. I had to get that off my chest.
I think that the reason they are delaying Longhorn is because of all the bad hype they have received this past week. They are beginning to realize that people now are concerned about security. When they have to pay someone like myself $45.00 an hour to remove a stupid worm from their computers, they are pissed. They want to know why this is happening to them, and it is getting easier to explain to them that the Windows code is swiss cheese, since they hear it being confirmed on the 6 o'clock news.
Microsoft is obviously delaying the release due to the fact that they had shit for security in the code they posses now, and they are bringing it to the table to clean it up.
A man can have dreams, can't he?
DISCLAIMER:
I don't believe what I write, and neither should you.
So is Duke.
Technology? Hah! They already have all the customer's data. All the documents. All the databases. That should be sufficient to make the customer do their part and fork over more cash.
because so-called "web standards" are specifications of policy, not technical merit or need.
I agree that many W3C standards are not well designed and are often for things nobody wants. But Microsoft is a participant in the W3C. That means Microsoft is partly responsible for the bloat and redundancy of those standards.
If Microsoft realizes the problems with W3C standards, they should (and could) throw their weight around to change things. For Microsoft to encourage the development of bad standards on the part of the W3C and then not implement it themselves amounts to sabotage.
Of course this is just wishful thinking. I'm sure they'll do something diabolical in the meantime. Maybe they feel like there's enough money to be made yet by the use of licensing press gangs. "You WILL sign up, or we'll sue you into the ground, you dirty corporate pirates!"
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Justice Dept. to Microsoft: Put Java back in Windows.
Microsoft to JD: Okay, no problem. We'll put it in the next major release.
Bill to MS: Delay the release until Java is forgotten.
"will KDE finally be capable of actually getting viruses? "
When it has a couple of interesting features to use, then yes.
"Derp de derp."
In the meantime, perhaps they should re-codename it to "LongWait"....
Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
Of course I'm biased. I have to install all this crap when they spew it out.
I only have XP because I get it free from the Uni.
MS is going to have to come out with something pretty spectacular to get me to move from 2K.
Millenium was more of a downgrade from 98. I got it since it was only $50 and completed my upgrade path so I could continue to avoid paying for full versions.
XP is basically the same way for 2K users. It's not a very valuable upgrade. But for those who have 98 and aren't comfortable with an OS like 2000, it's an excellent upgrade option.
Ben
Work Safe Porn
It's a good time to be a Mac user...
MS has a microincrmental approach to actual new feature inclusion, a glacial pace for real UI changes and an invisible, it will work when it works if it works at all approach to under the covers patches and design fixes.
So what could possibly be Major? Yet more restrictive DRM?, A new driver model that sends all the HW vendors to hit the bottle? Eh?
If I were deeply cynical which of course I'm not I'd say that 'delays' such as they are are keyed to the symbiotic relationship they have to Intel. When/if Intel bakes a new batch of chips they need to sell suddenly a 'new' version of Windows will come along to 'need' them.
1985: Windows 1.0 (the first windows) 1990: Windows 3.1 (the first windows that had enough flare to get widespread useage) 1996: Win95 (the first windows for the desktop with 32 bit code and memory protection) 1999: Win98 (Introduces USB support) 2001: Windows 2000 (the first 32 bit windows for the desktop) 200?: Longhorn
"Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
--Dr.W.Edwards Deming
Link.
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
Microsoft Windows Forever.
hey!
has Windows XP been out in comparison to say RH9. Of course there are going to be more updates available for XP. If there weren't that many out everyone would be complaining they dont patch their bugs. For fucks sake give MS a break. Don't get me wrong, I HATE MS. I have used LINUX exclusively since Windows 98 came out, before that, OS/2 Warp. I am no friend of Microsoft or thier business practices but give some credit where credit is due. As for Longhorn being delayed again.... Does it really surprise anyone? MS has been tooting the (Long)horn about Longhorn for years now to make people "Wait and see" (TM) what Microsoft has to take on LINUX and others (Rumors of longhorn made MY boss decide to not take a serious look at LINUX), Just another case of Vaporware. Don't tell me it isnt vaporware because until there is a shrinkwrapped version of it that I can buy, it is nothing more. I have no doubt it will come out eventually and probably be fairly nice for the general public, but until then, Longhorn is an urban legend.
It's perfectly possible to run just linux as a router and only use the kernel.
Hmmm, I'm certainly not a Linux guru, but with no shell support how do you control it or shut it down?
Something tells me it's not possible to run a system with just a kernel (-how you bootstrap with no-bootloader app?)
The posts where I say Linux is great I get +5 mods. And the posts where I say make some inteeligent argument and conculde Well MS is going to challenge Linux on this or that I get this amazing battle of the mods taking place with ten or more points all told being exchanges +3 informative +2 interesting -5 overated.
slashdot is just got too many kiddies or immature dolts. I've got to find a greener pasture where linux and Mac OSX are still welcome but the moderations is more discerning. anyone have any suggestions
Longhorn will have a tiered approach. There will be the full-on 3D configuration, the middle-level, and so on. You can scale all the way back to normal 2D operations like now, and they are even including the Windows 2000 theme like XP has.
This is all covered at WinSuperSite, by the way, in the "Road To Longhorn" articles. Whether or not you like Paul Thurrott, he has the sources in Microsoft to get actual information on future versions of Windows.
"Sufferin' succotash."
would take a big dose of EX-LAX. Then they would shortly give birth to their latest brainchild..
See, that wasn't too hard was it??
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
You must have missed that whole Software Assurance mess I was referring to. Companies were practically extorted to buy annual licensing that amounted to replacing Windows every three years, even if they didn't want to. This makes what they paid for is patches instead of a Windows upgrade. Software Assurance must be being rethought even as we speak.
rd
Sure, it would have been cheaper IF Microsoft had not threatened to "audit" those companies who were on their shit-list if they did not sign up for Software Assurance.
Companies that could pass an official audit with less than a bank-breaking settlement are few and far between.
Stewed
Squirrel
There are 10 kinds of people in the world. Those who understand binary and those who don't.
They're smarter than that, I think. You're average non-geek doesn't purchase new hardware because it's 1337; he purchases new hardware because the new software he's running is stomping his old hardware into a flaming mass. Whenever they put out a 3D-accelerated desktop, people will flock to get new boxes.
All's true that is mistrusted
i bet the plug in patent forced this delay.
This is my sig.
Longhorn will be to previous versions of windows what Windows 95 was back in the day - a radical change. Old apps will be supported, but only in compatibility mode (like 16-bit win. 3.11 apps are supported in windows right now). All the new APIs will be managed which means fast, secure and componentized. There will be new security model. There will be new UI library very different from what you can use now, and, again managed. GDI will only be supported in compatibility mode - graphics engine will change as well. This coupled with a shitload of other technologies will make it a worthy target for developers and businesses.
Do not underestimate the power of several thousand quality developers fueled by several billions of dollars. They've hired out creme of the crop in the dotcom bust phase and now their workforce is better and more dedicated than ever.
If they're willing to adjust the schedules on top of that, the resulting product may really be scary good.
New and improved faster boot times
All your applications will crash at startup even before the OS is loaded, just like with XP! See how ICQ can't connect because the firewall/network isnt connected yet and still loading!
I love XP but thats my #1 gripe. I hope LH takes care of this.
Trolls dont like to be Flamebait, because they burn so well. Protect our Troll heritage!
Windows Server 2003 took longer to release because of the re-written IIS and .NET layers. Security was also a main concern, but not because XP or 2000 were insecure.
They had plenty of vulnerabilities and many exploits that could have been prevented by patching and such... however, with SQL Slammer, Code Red, and others that had come out, Gates decided, this is it, we have to change some process somewhere. So he overhauled their development process one more time to focus around security in EVERY decision. So they halted development for 6 months, sent every single developer to a school in developing secure code, purchased 200 million in books on secure programming for their developers, and then went back to work. That right there delayed things 6 months alone.
Then, as part of Gates' orders, their next job was a line by line review of every single coded product Microsoft makes. Everything from Windows Server 2003 to the IntelliPoint software. While analyzing that code for common security mistakes, they also founded a new security organization for companies to join to exchange common coding conventions for secure code and publish common mistakes and to allow joint development knowledge to be shared, and hired on 500 people at the company to develop tools that do nothing but scan code. Those tools go out and look at code to find buffer overrun issues (the most common security flaw in existence), and to look for other common security mishaps in code.
After the review, they implemented the changes found therein. Then ran the new tools that by that time were done being developed, then implemented those changes, then got back on track with development and yes, rewrote the IIS layers to be partially built directly into the kernel for substantial performance increase. So with all that happening, the review, the tool development, the changes, the security education and reorganization, there were delays, yes. They got it out and look what it has... Two known vulnerabilities of which BOTH of them are a non-issue out of the box and are in areas that are rarely used.
The coolest voice ever.
They CAN dump existing software by sandboxing it within compatibility mode. Like for example win16 apps that can't crash each other anymore and have to obey security restrictions in Win NT/2000/XP. Remember, there was no security whatsoever in Win 3.11. In my opinion, making Windows secure just requires a lot of education of users and developers. Apps should not require admin accounts to run, every user should know how to run a piece of software under another account (aka runas). Their security model kicks ass, only nobody's using it that's the problem.
Wheee, I thought Fresco (fka Berlin) had had trouble. ;)
While this may be good news for Cairo) and Fresco, in giving them more time, it may also indicate something else, that Microsoft found out that the hardware is not and will not be good enough (even if I doubt that idea).
Is it just me or does it seem like there are more browsers out there? I use Opera pretty much exclusively, but I switch to Mozilla because some pages render better in Mozilla. If I have to use an IE-based browser, I go with MyIE2 which has the tabbed browsing, mouse gestures, etc. that Opera has made me addicted to. It just seems like there's more choices out there simply because IE is doing nothing new. Works for me.
This is my digital signature. 10011011001
DEAR SIR/MADAM:
I AM MR. DARL MCBRIDE CURRENTLY SERVING AS THE PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF THE SCO GROUP, FORMERLY KNOWN AS CALDERA SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL, IN LINDON, UTAH, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. I KNOW THIS LETTER MIGHT SURPRISE YOUR BECAUSE WE HAVE HAD NO PREVIOUS COMMUNICATIONS OR BUSINESS DEALINGS BEFORE NOW.
MY ASSOCIATES HAVE RECENTLY MADE CLAIM TO COMPUTER SOFTWARES WORTH AN ESTIMATED $1 BILLION U.S. DOLLARS. I AM WRITING TO YOU IN CONFIDENCE BECAUSE WE URGENTLY REQUIRE YOUR ASSISTANCE TO OBTAIN THESE FUNDS. IN THE EARLY 1970S THE AMERICAN TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH CORPORATION DEVELOPED AT GREAT EXPENSE THE COMPUTER OPERATING SYSTEM SOFTWARE KNOWN AS UNIX. UNFORTUNATELY THE LAWS OF MY COUNTRY PROHIBITED THEM FROM SELLING THESE SOFTWARES AND SO THEIR VALUABLE SOURCE CODES REMAINED PRIVATELY HELD. UNDER A SPECIAL ARRANGEMENT SOME PROGRAMMERS FROM THE CALIFORNIA UNIVERSITY OF BERKELEY DID ADD MORE CODES TO THIS OPERATING SYSTEM, INCREASING ITS VALUE, BUT NOT IN ANY WAY TO DILUTE OR DISPARAGE OUR FULL AND RIGHTFUL OWNERSHIP OF THESE CODES, DESPITE ANY AGREEMENT BETWEEN AMERICAN TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH AND THE CALIFORNIA UNIVERSITY OF BERKELEY, WHICH AGREEMENT WE DENY AND DISAVOW. IN THE YEAR 1984 A CHANGE OF REGIME IN MY COUNTRY ALLOWED THE AMERICAN TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH CORPORATION TO MAKE PROFITS FROM THESE SOFTWARES. IN THE YEAR 1990 OWNERSHIP OF THESE SOFTWARES WAS TRANSFERRED TO THE CORPORATION UNIX SYSTEM LABORATORIES. IN THE YEAR 1993 THIS CORPORATION WAS SOLD TO THE CORPORATION NOVELL. IN THE YEAR 1994 SOME EMPLOYEES OF NOVELL FORMED THE CORPORATION CALDERA SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL, WHICH BEGAN TO DISTRIBUTE AN UPSTART OPERATING SYSTEM KNOWN AS LINUX. IN THE YEAR 1995 NOVELL SOLD THE UNIX SOFTWARE CODES TO SCO. IN THE YEAR 2001 OCCURRED A SEPARATION OF SCO, AND THE SCO BRAND NAME AND UNIX CODES WERE ACQUIRED BY THE CALDERA SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL, AND IN THE FOLLOWING YEAR THE CALDERA SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL WAS RENAMED SCO GROUP, OF WHICH I CURRENTLY SERVE AS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER.
MY ASSOCIATES AND I OF THE SCO GROUP ARE THEREFORE THE FULL AND RIGHTFUL OWNERS OF THE OPERATING SYSTEM SOFTWARES KNOWN AS UNIX. OUR ENGINEERS HAVE DISCOVERED THAT NO FEWER THAN SEVENTY (70) LINES OF OUR VALUABLE AND PROPRIETARY SOURCE CODES HAVE APPEARED IN THE UPSTART OPERATING SYSTEM LINUX. AS YOU CAN PLAINLY SEE, THIS GIVES US A CLAIM ON THE MILLIONS OF LINES OF VALUABLE SOFTWARE CODES WHICH COMPRISE THIS LINUX AND WHICH HAS BEEN SOLD AT GREAT PROFIT TO VERY MANY BUSINESS ENTERPRISES. OUR LEGAL EXPERTS HAVE ADVISED US THAT OUR CONTRIBUTION TO THESE CODES IS WORTH AN ESTIMATED ONE (1) BILLION U.S. DOLLARS.
UNFORTUNATELY WE ARE HAVING DIFFICULTY EXTRACTING OUR FUNDS FROM THESE COMPUTER SOFTWARES. TO THIS EFFECT I HAVE BEEN GIVEN THE MANDATE BY MY COLLEAGUES TO CONTACT YOU AND ASK FOR YOUR ASSISTANCE. WE ARE PREPARED TO SELL YOU A SHARE IN THIS ENTERPRISE, WHICH WILL SOON BE VERY PROFITABLE, THAT WILL GRANT YOU THE RIGHTS TO USE THESE VALUABLE SOFTWARES IN YOUR BUSINESS ENTERPRISE. UNFORTUNATELY WE ARE NOT ABLE AT THIS TIME TO SET A PRICE ON THESE RIGHTS. THEREFORE IT IS OUR RESPECTFUL SUGGESTION, THAT YOU MAY BE IMMEDIATELY A PARTY TO THIS ENTERPRISE, BEFORE OTHERS ACCEPT THESE LUCRATIVE TERMS, THAT YOU SEND US THE NUMBER OF A BANKING ACCOUNT WHERE WE CAN WITHDRAW FUNDS OF A SUITABLE AMOUNT TO GUARANTEE YOUR PARTICIPATION IN THIS ENTERPRISE. AS AN ALTERNATIVE YOU MAY SEND US THE NUMBER AND EXPIRATION DATE OF YOUR MAJOR CREDIT CARD, OR YOU MAY SEND TO US A SIGNED CHECK FROM YOUR BANKING ACCOUNT PAYABLE TO "SCO GROUP" AND WITH THE AMOUNT LEFT BLANK FOR US TO CONVENIENTLY SUPPLY.
KINDLY TREAT THIS REQUEST AS VERY IMPORTANT AND STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL. I HONESTLY ASSURE YOU THAT THIS TRANSACTION IS 100% LEGAL AND RISK-FREE.
http://saveie6.com/
Even if it may be fun with Microsoft bashing, you forget something more serious and really, really scary - this may delay the lastet and greatest ATi and nVidia hardware. So, quit whining and try to help those poor buggers instead.
Redmond spews vaporware at about the same rate that SCO spews litigation and threats. Both only serve to keep the market in turmoil.
Such a strange coincidence! Two closed sopurce companies that have both adopted the strategy of, "If you can't dazzle 'em with your brilliance, baffle 'em with your bullshit." Its a great way for a company with a technologically inferior product to keep people from seeing their piece of junk for what it really is.
Unfortunately, it frequently works.
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty.
Ben
ehhh. Ya but this means Windows users won't really get any major new features for the next 1.5 to 2 years.
"Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
The bunny ... the bunny ... oooh, I love the bunny ...
This isn't as much "normalization" as it is "don't take so many drugs when you're designing tables."
it will ship when it's ready? watch out MS! it's a slippery slope... next thing you know you're going opensource!
erik
...all excited, don't know why...
It's always funny that a bunch of ignorant people mod up an ignorant post. As of XP, you are not required to use drive letters. Mountvol.exe lets you mount any disk volume to any valid NTFS path.
Am I the only one not giving a shit about Longhorn being delayed?
"I used to have that really cool,funny sig
You know, how many users do you know actually use Windows-F? Therefore, how useful is WinFS to 'consumers' compared to power users?
:)
I think it just makes intrusive datamining from spyware easier.
-- dieman - Scott Dier
And the reason why it is delayed is that because of a bug in Longhorn they were denied access to the Longhorn source.
"Wait for us we're the leader!"
-- To dream a dream is grand, but to live it is divine. -- Leto ][
Wasn't there supposed to be this little bothersome thingie called PALADIUM in Longhorn?
This thing that, coupled with a Fritz chip (or worse, Fritz functionality in an Intel CPU) won't let "sec[cough]ure" apps (read: apps that play unencrypted mp3's such as winamp, and that don't make you pay-per-play) run? or worse, delete your "illegal" (read: what you ripped from your own CD) mp3's? Hardware that enables remote policy to be dictated to your machine by Herr senator Fritz? An attempt to spread the sick DMCA concept worldwide (courtesy of RIAA/MPAA-bribed US lawmakers)?
I can't say I'm losing more sleep over it than I did over CSS, and it took very little time for CSS to get broken, and yet somehow I'm just not looking forward to Longhorn as much as I would have had I not known about Paladium...
-
By the time Longhorn is released in 2007 it will be dubbed Longtooth.
"I tend to think of OS X as Linux with QA and Taste", James Gosling, creator of Java
They did not copy everything from OS X. They copied none of the Mac's elegance or ease of use, and the instability, OS-level insecurity, and sheer counterintuitiveness of the interface are innovations Microsoft came up with all on their own.
Could it be that Bill & co. just realized they were trying to glue their UI abortion on top of a rewrite of IBM's AS400 concept of a database [i]system[/i]?
Perhaps they realized that doing so would break all the games that are responsible for a huge chunk of Wintendo sales.
Maybe they've decided to wait for the SCO mess to settle out. After all, if the pressure from Linux were taken off, you can bet Microsoft would stretch out the features from Longhorn over a couple intermediate releases. What better way to pick the pockets of the community again?
Or perhaps it's the second coming and Bill just realized it'd be easier to port the entire suite of Microsoft applications to Linux than to finish Longhorn in this century.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
or Sendo
or Burst.com
I think i'm recognizing some sort of pattern here.
"Taligent is still pure vapor. Maybe they'll be the last who jumps up on Openstep... "
Palladium (or whatever they're calling it today) is available? Or until they can buy some more laws to ensure that they can enforce their licensed-not-owned view of hardware? Giving up on the PC altogether and just aiming at Son/Grandson of X Box as the replacement for home PCs? Working out exactly how they can lease rather than sell software and content to Suzy Homemaker and Carrie Cubicle?
Tune in next year when these and other exciting questions will be ducked by Microsoft marketdroids.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
My heart bleedeth.
...and he grinned, like a fox eating shit out of a wire brush.
Windows will become 10 times easier to program for. Apps will need much less debugging because there will be no such thing as memory management problems. There also will be rich API like nothing you've seen before. A school boy will be able to develop shit that only a qualified developer can handle these days, and good developers will put out tons more quality code than they possibly can today. This thing will be like an explosion. Imagine being able to deploy ONLY managed software on multiple architectures simultaneously and being able to rely on full-blown OS support for such software!
I've heard somewhere that Windows division at MS has FIVE THOUSAND programmers. Sure, the kernel team must be very small, but for everything else it's manageable if everything is sufficiently componentized.
Their entire company is at stake. They can't afford it to tank, and this is why it never will tank. Sorry, but that's just Microsoft, they've done this in the past multiple times (the latest one was .NET effort - four friggin' years, amazing quality delivered), they will do it again.
On this scale you've only hear this once - when Win 95 was released. So shut up and write some code - hard times are coming for desktop Linux.
Speaking as someone who is not quite a fan of Microsoft, I do find it interesting that the mention of a release (or its delay) of a new MS 'Operating System' is generally simply used in this place as yet another excuse to kick the crap out of them.
Compare this with the usual reaction to a release announcement of an open software product.
Sure, there are always people who will take the opportunity to show just how much they hate the world and everything in it, but there is certainly a lot more MS bashing (to which I do not *totally* object) around when they (MS) announce a product or make an announcement that they are delaying the release of same.
Isn't it just possible that they are starting to get the message?
Now that I read back over this, I feel so ashamed...
Betas and technology demos are given regularly.
Leaving aside the humorous notion of a plurality of betas, the existence of betas and technology demos are no gaurantee that the project is not getting out of hand. Multiple major slippages of the schedule are a really bad sign. And if the time between versions grows too large, the development team spends too much of the latter part of the effort fixing the obsolete parts created in the early part of the effort.
Also, betas and demos are no substitute for widespread adoption and usage of the OS because the people that look at betas & demos are markedly different from the mainstream computer-using public. Being wrapped in a cocoon of its own coders and developer devotees is likely to create code that is geek-approved and user-hated. Four years between OS versions is a long way to go without true feedback from the average user.
I'm not necessarily saying that MS does not know what they are doing or that they don't have good reasons for changing the release date. They just need to be careful that Longhorn does not turn into something like Apple's Copland.
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
Wait, maybe that's because the two companies actually have little in common and your comment was just typical "us and them" Slashdot tripe.
NT4 was widely used outside of a server role. I've seen many large (10,000+) sites that used NT4 workstations, and many that still do, and I've also seen large amounts of number crunching and general purpose software still running on NT4. I'd say NT4 penetrated well in both the file/print server role and the workstation role, and pretty well in the application server role. Maybe the story is different at little companies, but it also seemed to take on the role of standard Excel platform in most places, and that alone is a big role.
.NET and forget about the whole Windows history.
The importance of NT4 really shouldn't be underestimated; it's one of those things people are going to be supporting forever, because the upgrade path since then has been less than clear. I wish we could all just use
Whence? Hence. Whither? Thither.
And it looks like an iMac! ;-)
While putting aside the bugs, it's always odd when MS works on a new OS:
Slashdotters will always laugh/complain about delays in releasing it, even though they constantly preach on the values of Linux and OSS, whereas Windows should technically hold no interest for them.
When MS (mainly to keep their bottom line) rushes out a product (such as Windows ME, and allow a raft of flaws/bugs to make it into the release, Slashdotters will laugh/complain about them releasing it to begin with.
Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
Putting the desktop client and the web service on the same PC means I don't have to lug a server to demos or try to get Win 2K Server to run on a laptop.
I trust you've been so good as to inform Microsoft that their attempts to make Dotnet part of the OS are doomed to failure? I'm sure that they would be interested in your "straightforward" explanation, as would we.
Your equally valuable insight regarding the nature of WinFS appears not to address its potential value to consumers, or the consequences of the lack of an equivalent in Linux. I would not myself care to make predictions regarding the number of Linux systems that will be developed for an obscure and very expensive database file system from Oracle, but if you would care to keep us informed of progress in this area I'm sure nobody would object.
Regarding Mono and dotGNU, the first thing that should be said is that are both highly dubious attempts at a dumb clone of Dotnet and, given its proprietary nature, represent a commercial risk that most corporations and many individuals are unlikely to find worthwhile.
The most successful VM on Linux both by number of available applications and (by several orders of magnitude) commercial investment is Java. Therefore embracing Java or, at minimum, developing an unencumbered and solution like the Perl VM is the only credible way for Linux to progress and thereby offer a competitive alternative to Longhorn.
...Man, I miss Microsoft Bob... I mean, MAN, THAT MICROSOFT BOB SURE WAS A PIECE OF CRAP!! (adjusts inner monologue to [inner-only])
A most interesting contribution to the debate, and one which I find myself quite unable to respond to adequately. My only hope is that there are others here more qualified than I that can rise to the challenge that you have set.
I think it'll be shipping with a tie-in promotional product, like a bottle of KC Masterpiece BBQ Sauce."
If they rename the product "Shorthair", maybe it will ship with a promotional bottle of BBQ flavor K-Y jelly.
-kgj
Theory #3:
They need to get people to actually start buying their current releases, since most businesses still run Windows 98 or Win2k, and their surveys of IT managers indicated that they wouldn't be purchasing XP simply because Longhorn was coming out so soon.
I am imagining that MS is doing some heavy closed-door scrambling to bring security to a level where it will pass the sniff test.
.Net/applications (not that I know anything about this matter, but it don't stop me from blathering)
;-)
However, in the next few years, I can see the following possibility playing out:
2004: Next Windows iteration released with minor UI changes, possibly new licensing terms;
2005-2008: MS licenses a *nix variant to do the heavy lifting under the UI (a la Apple/OSX), coupled with the next major UI overhaul (new flashy GUI w/.Net/subscription-based application delivery). This would lend stability at less cost, allow programmers to move towards non-kernel programming projects in support of
2006-2008: Also about this time, if MS licenses a *nix for core services, I would expect Apple to release Marklar on the world. I'll let someone else pick up the fantasy from there.
This is simply my own fantasizing. Your mileage may vary.
Mmmmmm... Bold, yet refreshing!
...Apple adds a new feature to the OS, MS has to go back to the drawing board and figure a way to work it into their latest offering.
:D
"Fast user switching? Damnit! Call in the coders."
"Expose? Damnit! Call in the coders."
"Quartz Extreme? Damnit! Call in the coders...and the pastel-loving artists!"
haha
Slashdotters complain about Microsoft releasing products that have serious security flaws and bugs. But then when Microsoft slips a release date, does the Slashdot crowd applaud Microsoft for not rushing the product to market prematureley? Nope. The Slashdot forums are filled with posts speculating about the delay being due to technical incompetence or some kind of nefarious scheme.
Would it really kill people to be fair and balanced? As it now stands, it's a lot closer to the Fox News standard of "Fair and Balanced."
Once the driver is WHQL Certified. Quite often, when drivers are first released by nVidia (or anyone else for that matter), they are not WHQL Certified, and you'll get the warning message about installing non-certified drivers. So it's quite likely you installed the non-WHQL driver direct from nVidia, and then Windows Update had the WHQL Version available a month later.
Name some.
Almost without exception, every single high profile Windows exploit in recent memory has either had a patch available for it before there was an exploit active in the wild, or it exploited the user (getting people to activate an attachment).
Where are all these problems that are exploited for 6 months before Microsoft releases a stealth patch?
Yeah, if they bought SCO, their software would suck and we would hate them...
(Waiaminite...)
is that when you're a sharecropper, at least you know your rights before you get screwed! with m$ you're just a slave to the monopoly.
the only ongoing relationship is slavery to their shitty insecure expensive proprietary system. /end rant
"You never want a serious crisis to go to waste." - Rahm Emanuel
It's SCO's fault; Microsoft is delayed removing all the code they stole from Linux, that Linux stole from SCO.
For those companies who paid (or were extorted) the SA6 licenses, aren't they guaranteed a new upgrade in 2004? That was one of of the major selling points. Reduced upgrades in 3 years or does my memory fail me? What is MS going to do if they fall behind schedule? Offer them their money back?
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Magrathea caused the market crash..
Vehicle Stars used car search is my current project
I betcha this has to do with the upgrade protection program.
Lets say you buy Office XP and Windows XP and purchase upgrade protection. I believe you can buy it in 2 and 4 year increments.
Well most people will probably purchase the 2 year plan just to save money.
So Microshaft says "hey look at all the recent customers" They only bought 2 year protection programs!" "Ok" says the bean counters we just push back the release of our latest offering 2 years.
TaDA! revenue protection program for us!
Now my wife can get that tummy tuck.
>WinFS--SQL integration into the filesystem. >You'll be able to search gigabytes of data >and metadata.
.NET based. Though >Win32-compatibility will no doubt be offered, >everything including explorer.exe will all be >running as .NET managed code.
With a decent filesystem layout you can do this anyway. Plus Windows has an indexing service. Also this feature isn't in the home version.
>* DirectX desktop. Gorgeous visual cues with >no slowdown.
Gimmic
>* Scalable desktop. Vector-based is a way to >put it. If you have a really high-resolution >monitor, things will be correctly scaled for >you so you can see. Things will be the same >size onscreen going from a 1024x768 to >1280x1024 resolution. You can also change >he scale manually.
Waste of time changing resolution then, plus this is already possible.
> Entirely
And the benefit to me is? more slowdown.
>* New, "photorealistic" interface called >Aereo. We'll have to wait and see.
Gimmic, playing catch up to OSX.
It's 2003 and we still use keyboards, have Mice/trackballs and use 2D flat screens. We need new input devices and displays for anything radical to happen.
The last time Microsoft got behind in developing a consumer edition of Windows (XP), they brought out another edition of the previous OS (Win9x), that having been the failure known as WinME. With Longhorn delayed again, this is going to present Microsoft with a challenge in convincing Joe Blow to buy a new PC with a shiny "new" OS. I think this means we'll see shrink-wrapped editions of XP Media Center Edition with some other cosmetic changes hitting the stores shelves in Q4 2004... I guess that means Earthlink will once again blame Microsoft for not giving them ample enough time to rewrite their software so it works with the new edition (Earthlink's software, especially for DSL users, wouldn't work with WinME for weeks after the release - they blamed Microsoft for that - yet AOL was patched up quickly in comparison)...That is, if Earthlink is still in business by then...
"Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
I'll probably butcher it, but you should get the gist:
Long ago, Horse was troubled by Wolf, in the sense that Wolf wanted to eat him. Horse knew he could not best Wolf, so he came to Man and said: "Wolf is our common enemy. Let us join forces to defeat him." Man said: "Very well. Let me put this saddle and bridle on you, so I may ride while we hunt Wolf." Horse agreed, and using his speed and Man's spear, they hunted down and killed Wolf. Horse then said: "Wolf is defeated! Now that the danger has past, you can remove the saddle and bridle." Man laughed and said "But I like it up here! Now giddyap!"
The lessons of this story are twofold: Horses are gullible idiots, and Man can't be trusted to relinquish power once given it.
So the question is, are you Horse or Man?
Let me be more direct: You do realize that once you have a Palladium-based system, the ability to turn it on and off is a feature which can be disabled, right? Oh, but I'm sure they won't, right? *Whinny!*
The enemies of Democracy are
When OLE2 was launched in 1994, Cairo was the Next Big Thing after NT. Compound files would be implemented natively, distributed everything, and so on. Cairo was due within two years.
Replace "Cairo" with "Longhorn" in the above paragraph (and "1994" by "2003") and you get the picture.
When we're discussing this in 2012, what will "Longhorn" (ready in two years) be called then?
User's don't buy Windows because of pretty graphics. The reason they buy it is because there's a shitload of relatively cheap software available for it. And this is about to increase three-fold.
There is hype and there is delivery. You should learn to recognize the cases where Microsoft can not afford to fail. There were quite a few of those. In these cases they always deliver. They burn people and tons of cash in process, but if they really have to - they'll be there.
Don't forget that Intel, everyone's darling AMD, and all the hard drive manufacturers are also in on this one. All of those companies came together to do this, and they are all at blame if it comes to pass. The implications of mandatory hardware-based DRM are pretty fuckin' scary.
Actually, that is just someone who wants to see what people said in response to him, it has nothing to do with geekiness.
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
What else do you need that you can't get right now ? what does the 'three-fold' increase stand for ? and all these new 'apps' will use the same libraries anyway...they will be different wrappers around the .NET libs.
Hardly innovating.
Maybe microsoft decided to actually make a stable OS this time, and take the time it needs to not make it full of security holes... With all the MSBlaster and SoBig.* contraverse, perhaps they decided instead of rushing to get a new windows on the market and make a few million or billion bucks, they might actually be spending time to take care of security precautions.... I once read a white paper from a microsoft exec saying that the original windows(98 and pre) were not developed with security in mind... and 2k and NT and post it was taken into consideration (as security being an omnipresent factor of importance when business and etc choose and OS) but my point being, the document I read (which i assure you was from a microsoft exec, which more than a few of live within a mile of me) said that The new windows (longhorn and post) are/were/have been developed from scratch becuase the previous ones were full of shotty errors, horrible programming conventions, etc, creating a working but generally (and unpubliclly 'flawed' OS) labeled as "stable"(we all know how 'stable' windows really is ;X ) but any word can be used ambigiously, 'stable' by what terms, as in it works, works without any flaw, works without possible flaw, works with flaws, or maybe even just 'runs on a pc'....
Thats way too much babble from me, but my point is, I assume that the MSBlaster and SoBig Scares have cuased microsoft to take as many precautions as they can to make windows shake away its rep as a 'blatently insecure operating system'...
But if one has already developed a set of ActiveX controls and is comfortable with a set of tools for writing them, they are far and away the most cross-language thing around -- at least in the Windows world. Not only do they work with VB 6 and with the Borland languages (and with Eclipse SWT, although with some restrictions), they work in Visual Studio .NET as seemlessly as they do in VB 6.
What I mean is that for developing software components for resale, it seems that ActiveX offers the biggest market because it is usable from VB 6 as well as VB .NET, and it is better to have the ActiveX in unmanaged code because you don't have to worry about customers installing the CLR.
Right now, porting perfectly good ActiveX components to .NET seems like a waste of time. Microsoft already had an ActiveX/COM compatibility layer in J++ (the RCW/CCW thingy), and there would have been peasants with pitchforks at the gate of .NET broke compatibility with the mass of legacy ActiveX/COM components, but the support for ActiveX/COM in .NET is too good -- it is the WINE of Windows (only .NET ActiveX/COM compability actually works while I hear WINE is a work in progress).
I say it won't tank, and I bet you $1K it won't. It may be delayed a little, but it will be delivered.
... Imagine a world where you didn't have to upgrade as often as you change your mind. I now upgrade only every second version or so. I went from Win95 to Win2k and I'll change after Longhorn. Linux is especially frustrating this way because by the time I had my purchased copy of Suse 6.3 perking along nicely, 7.3 was already out! Enough already!
"Consensus" in science is _always_ a political construct.