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?"
What the the reason to upgrade to ME from 98? What was the reason to upgrade to XP from 2000? People like upgrades. Upgrades, no matter how small, bring features. Upgrades have the appearance of better quality and more "on-the-edge."
Plus, even if two technologies get ported, Longhorn is supposed to be a "unified" desktop with Internet, mail, etc. This is one major reason to upgrade for the tech-newbies and possibly the tech-geeks.
What was the incentive to upgrade from Windows 2000 to XP*. Let's see, we had:
- Rearranged control panel
- A new theme
- Ummm...the search puppy?
The die-hard fans will upgrade because it's the latest and greatest, everyone else will get it with their next computer, and the corporate world will wait 3 years and then take the plunge.
This is still a blow to Microsoft, but not a major one. Maybe another baby step away from the OS monoculture.
*I know there was more incentive to upgrade from Windows ME, but I'm sure many a 2000 user switched over as well.
Microsoft is adding these features to Windows XP and Windows 2003 server in order to give developers a reason to use these technologies. So they can use Avalon and Indigo in their applications and still have people on older OS's be able to use their applications. Much like how .NET was backported to Windows 98. Developers wouldn't develop applications in .NET if they knew that only a small percentage of Windows users would be able to use it.
It's a win-win IMHO, Windows developers get to use new features and develop application using more intuitive and powerful tools and Microsoft gets a larger application base for Longhorn.
-- D3X
I suppose they do this so that developers can deploy their new apps (based on Avalon and Indigo) on the XP platform as well. It makes sense - and will give a more rapid transistion. (Instead of waiting for Longhorn to get the marketshare needed to have custom Avalon/Indigo-apps written for it).
;)
But what do I know?
(The color theme for it.slashdot.org needs a revision btw)
...because MS and Adobe would work together just to screw you over.
Chances are the Adobe app is making use of features _new_ to XP. So, what you are essentially bitching about is that these new features were not back ported to whatever previous version of MS OS you used.
And of course, if MS did back port these new features, you'd be bitching how MS is always adding new fangled features to released version of OS that do nothing but add bugs, insecurity, and instability.
Just admit there is nothing MS could ever do to appease you, and quit fucking using their software. That's why god gave you Linux.
-Malakai
A Dragon Lives in my Garage
This is a smart move. First they schedule the release way ahead in the future, so the competition thinks they have plenty of time. Then, they release the new futures early, so that they are first to market. By the time Longwait is released, there will be plenty of application support already. In the meantime, the hype their technologies sky high so people will forget about looking for alternatives, let alone implement them. Wow, respect.
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
If you envied the work Apple did in the Quartz graphics layer, or are supportive of the work Keith Packard is doing for X.org, then Avalon is right up your alley. Goodbye, old GDI. (Well, almost. GDI will now be .dlls that can be called up by Avalon, to display GDI in a window for old apps.
I understand a modicum of cynicism - but claims that these changes are for arbitrary lack of compatibility betray an unalloyed ignorance.
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
Indeed, this is the facet not often considered when anyone upgrades -- beyond the announced features, what other things are creeping into my system. "Oh, I've got XML for Office! Neat!" as opposed to "Oh, I'm stuck with their bastardized and copyrighted version of XML! Shit!"
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
What are you attempting to say? That XP SP1 and SP2 cost money? That W2K sp1-4 cost money? That NT4 SP1-6 cost money? I don't get what you're saying.
;)
And SP1 broke XP machines? I've never heard of that, and I've upgraded around 20 AND read slashdot regularly
Jeez, if I had mod points I would mod you "unintelligible"
I called it "scaling back" in comparison to what it once was: a SQL-like metadatabase for every file accessible on a computer. It was actually a very cool idea, and I'm not sure why MS abandoned the networking features (where I work, anything that should be catalogued is on remote servers, not on desktops).
Then there was some confusion, because "WinFS" sounded like a new file system. Then it was called a service on top of NTFS, which wasn't as dramatic. Now it's unclear what it'll end up being.
The 3 cornerstones of Longhorn, if I remember correctly from an early webcast, was:
* More robust file system
* A better windowing system
* Better security and connectivity
One is going to be "beta" and two are going to be released for current OSes. MS *has* scaled their plans back.
I'm sick of this tripe. I don't mean to jump on you alone, but I've seen way too much of this FUD parroted around Slashdot, and you're the winner of my rant. :-)
If Microsoft doesn't innovate, then why is it that the list of improvements in the Linux 2.6 kernel reads like a feature list of NT from the early 90's?
That's just comparing the kernel, and I won't even go into the features that NT has that Linux still hasn't implemented.
You probably didn't know that NT already had those features, because most people don't seem to know much about Windows beyond the GUI. They assume that what they see on the surface is all that goes on. (And don't make the mistake that the NT kernel is the only innovative part about Windows.)
My point is that you shouldn't yell about the lack of innovation in a product just because the feature you're looking for isn't there.