Slashdot Mirror
Windows XP To Get Longhorn Technologies
SilentChris writes "According to CNet, Microsoft is revising their plan for Longhorn. In addition to scaling back WinFS, they will also have separate releases of Avalon (the new graphical system) and Indigo (a new network architecture) for Windows XP and 2003. If most of the updates will be available for current versions of Windows, what is the incentive to upgrade?"
Wasn't Win98SE support to be discontinued? Maybe there was a stay of execution -- I seem to recall Microsoft trying to shead the image of a leech requiring blood too often by stating 7 years would be the support period.
By the way, you were supposed to upgrade to Win2K then WinXP. Didn't you get the memo?
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
I loved how the bangboy submitter called it a "new networking architecture". Indigo is a SOA stack that will bring .NET more into J2EE territory. It has less to do with "networking" than building distributed applications.
I hope this... ah... helps and all that =)
you shouldn't, unless you plan to upgrade your hardware too.
Actually, my next computer will probably be running it too. There's a hack to get around the 768MB limit, and my understanding is that 98SE will simply ignore any CPUs beyond the first, so I shouldn't have any trouble.
"They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
Nothing's forcing you not to use Vegas, Cleaner, and Combustion. All 3 blow the doors off the Adobe equivalent. Vote with your wallet.
If con is the opposite of pro, is congress the opposite of progress?
On a few web pages I'm credited with the creation of that line (or close to it).
I however stole it in 1995...
Just some trivia. ("Informative" right?)
Get your Unix fortune now!
Will Microsoft use activation to force me to upgrade? In other words, will Microsoft ever stop giving out activation codes for any of the products that require activation?
No, Microsoft will not use activation as a tool to force people to upgrade. Activation is merely an anti-piracy tool, nothing else.
Microsoft will also support the activation of Windows XP throughout its life and will likely provide an update that turns activation off at the end of the product's lifecycle so users would no longer be required to activate the product.
In fact we got better memory management. New kernel, faster system, and some aditional services and management (think for system administrators) capabilities. Oh, and it looks the same and runs faster when you apply few *.reg files on it. XP is quite cool, and I write it using Fedora Core? Sick?
You forgot integrated support for scanners, digital cameras and video cameras. Integrated support for cd burning (though not very good). A slightly less broken implementation of the network stack (though it really wasn't fixed until 2k3). Um, some other stuff too that I can't think of. Maybe none of it mattered to you but there were some decent and usable changes in xp. Oh, appcompat for one and better support of directX.
"You can now flame me, I am full of love,"
Windows XP took the stability of Windows 2000 and polished it for consumer use.
Thanks for getting that tidy response in early.
Another item behind the pre-release is it's clear Longhorn will take too long to appear; Microsoft is trying to convince corporate players that they're the DRM choice. They've got to move on that front faster than god-knows-when-now Longhorn will come out. (We'll get dribs and drabs, but real lock-down requires a whole OS.)
Consider: MS may lose the the OS market to Linux, but does it matter if they gain control of the interface between data and app? Think way ahead here and watch that one.
They're not scaling back WinFS. There's no where in the article it even states this. All it says is that it will be available in beta form upon the client release.
For some reason, Slashdot has trouble reporting anything accurately on WinfS. Anyone remember the previous case where Microsoft decided not to include some of the more esoteric features (like some networking functions). Slashdot, of course, picked it up and reported it as "WinFS cancelled," and other tech news sites picked it up. For months, people on Slashdot continued to refer to WinFS as cancelled, when they were blissfully ignorant to the fact it wasn't. Sigh. All it takes is a little basic research first.
Windows 2000 was the NT4 successor geared toward corporate users.
I don't know if you noticed, but XP was geared toward consumers. It got people off of 9x kernels, and for that I am eternally grateful! Not to mention System Restore, increased application compatibility, and various other minor features.
yo shuga lipz... im liek all about da grammaz and ur sig's semicolon iz like total impropz. it shood be a colon, n' the b in bittah needz to be cased lower. ya look dumb usin a semicolon... leik u cant type er somthin.
I upgraded to XP primarily because I got sick of having to run Server to use Terminal Services. That said, I can get a Windows 2000 installation acting the way I want it to in just under ten minutes. To get Windows XP to work the way I want it to it takes me three hours minimum. Since my computer is limping along in need of a rebuild, I'm seriously considering blowing away XP and installing Linux or BSD.
My username does not make me Apathetic. It's irony, get it?
What is easy to do is turn on automatic update so Microsoft can install and run anything they want on my machines anytime they want. No, thanks.
/., why don't you check your facts first? Aparently you missed options 2-4.
You're kidding right? The very first time automatic update tries to turn on, it asks you if you want to:
1. Have it download and install updates automatically (great for grandma)
2. Just download, but ask me before installing
3. Notify me, but don't download or install anything.
4. Totally turn off automatic updates
Before you join the, "windows sucks no matter what" group on
Examples bug comment
It was checked into the trunk codebase after Firefox had branched, so it won't show up in Firefox until the 1.1 builds.
I don't understand what is so bad about NT GDI.
Scaling? World transformations that provide scaling, rotation and shearing have always (since NT3.1) existed. Why isn't it used more often? IDK, but I'm sure they could start using it without a complete rewrite.
Acceleration? Driver capability negotiation has always been implemented. DirectX also supports many optimizations.
Possible movement of the window manager into user mode? I'm sure that win32k.sys could be moved back into winsrv.dll like it was before NT4.
Graphics composition (IE caching of window data to avoid application refresh)? Trivial redirection of video ops to a memory DC and the fact that transparency is already supported without refreshing the lower window, tell me that this could be accomplished without a rewrite too. Besides, I don't know if I like the idea of spending all that memory on storing large bitmaps of how each window looks.
Vector based drawing? Enhanced Metafiles have always been supported in NT. You can easily redirect the output (all GDI commands can be recorded) of a progam into a EMF, view/edit the records and play it back any time, even with a world transformation.
Use 3d polygons instead of a 2d frame buffer? This would require considerable modification but only to the way that regions are computed; you can already put direct3d objects in a window with a polygonal region around the edges. One way or the other, you are still outputting to a 2d surface. And really, what is the point? Woo 3d icons.
Really, what is so broken about GDI that it needs to be replaced? IMO, there are far more important things to be overhauled in Windows than the video system. Rewriting a major component to provide eye candy should be a very low priority.
Another thing is that Avalon does not fill the same role as GDI does; Avalon also does what USER does and some shell stuff too. I'm saying that the important things in Avalon could be implemented using GDI.