Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Scales Down Palladium

bonch writes "Formerly known as Palladium, Next Generation Secure Computing Base (NGSCB) will not be fully available in Windows Longhorn after all. Instead, Longhorn will offer "the first part of NGSCB: Secure Startup," says Jim Allchin, Microsoft's group vice president for platforms. However, most hardware will not support this technology on release."

75 of 475 comments (clear)

  1. So... by madaxe42 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What, exactly, is Longhorn going to do? They seem to have dropped more features from it than there were in the first place!

    1. Re:So... by Bobvanvliet · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm guessing that despite everything it's main purpose will still be fulfilled...

      Making MS lots and lots of good old cash.

    2. Re:So... by EvilGrin666 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I suspect it wont do anything other than look slightly prettier and require a faster cpu, more disk space and twice as much memory as XP does to do the same basically thing.

      Same old story really.

    3. Re:So... by golgotha007 · · Score: 5, Funny

      When it's ready to go public, they're going to drop the cryptic development name of "Longhorn" and go with "XP Service Pack 3" instead.

    4. Re:So... by baadger · · Score: 5, Funny

      No no no. Usually you don't have to reinstall the OS to install a service pack, even if it does replace half the OS. ..this is clearly XP SE.

    5. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      IIRC Paladium can't be "fully operational" without the hardware system behind (the keys in the motherboard...) Maybe they realized it couldn't work without the whole system.

      The other possibility is that they realized too many programs and computers would stop working at once and at the same time which would "kill" (or at least stop) all the Windows machines connected to the internet.

    6. Re:So... by DigitumDei · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Longhorn will still have improved plug and play type abilities. While to the average slashdotter security and WinFS may seem like the important things, to the average joe the ability to plug his camera/cell phone/mp3 player in and have it work without them having to do anything, is the most important thing.

      That and pretty pictures...

      Microsoft can make a killing from the average joe, and then release Longhorn SE with the added features a year or two later. And make another killing...

    7. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      What, exactly, is Longhorn going to do?

      Suck. It will truly suck. Literally it will suck your system resources dry without mercy.

    8. Re:So... by rokzy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      is this supposed to be a joke?

      you don't "add on more stability, security...". either it's there from the start or not.

      all you can do later is restrict usability to give the illusion of stability, security ("you are not allowed to use that driver", "your settings do not allow you to access this page" etc.)

    9. Re:So... by mgrouchy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Seems to me that Longhorn is just reproducing many of the features that were just released in OSX like spotlight and throwing in some transparency to pretty it up.
      I only use M$ products at work, but when they first announced all the new features that Longhorn would have it looked promising. To me it looks like they bit off more they can chew in the timeframe they commited to, hence the dropped/postponed features.

    10. Re:So... by Morgahastu · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So bug fixes, rewriting functions to be less susceptible to buffer over flows, and fixing bugs is impossible?

      Right.

      I think Microsoft knows they are losing traction because of their old and messy code that they can barely update and are taking this period to clean it up and try to fix and loop hopes in security and bugs. Why is this bad?

      What else would they have been working on in the past 5 years after sending all their programmers for security training?

      This is the first release (well not counting SP2) that will break some applications, which is a good thing. It means they are finally sacrificing compatibility to fix long standing issues.

    11. Re:So... by Bush+Pig · · Score: 2, Funny

      XP Millenium Edition? So ... Longhorn will be Windows 3000.

      --
      What a long, strange trip it's been.
  2. And to think I used to worry about this... by King_of_Prussia · · Score: 4, Funny
    I used to be afraid of what Palladium could do for the computing industry. Many tried to convince me that there was nothing to fear because there was no way in heck Microsoft could ever get anything done right and on time. It appears they were correct. Now it's being partially dropped from Longhorn, which is itself being pushed back to oblivion. Now I'm left wondering why I used to be worried.

    Heck, Microsoft cannot even secure its own "proprietary" gaming console, why did we ever fear that they'd lock down all of our computers?!

    Perhaps Microsorft have finally realised that such an invasive DRM system will cause a mass exodus of people from windows to Lenix. Microsoft seems determined to play into Lonis Torvaldez's hands with issues like these and I can't say that I'm ungrateful. Now if only WINE could play more games I'd switch straight away as the rest of my pirated material already works perfectly under linix.

    --

    Making the moon less necessary since 1998.

    1. Re:And to think I used to worry about this... by 0x461FAB0BD7D2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why did we ever fear that they'd succeed?

      Because even a broken clock is right twice a day.

    2. Re:And to think I used to worry about this... by Gentlewhisper · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Heck, Microsoft cannot even secure its own "proprietary" gaming console, why did we ever fear that they'd lock down all of our computers?!

      I know it was meant to be a joke.. but who knows, all these incidents might actually spur them to *gasp* learn about their mistakes and actually make an uncrackable system.

      For all I know, the latest WMV DRM has not been cracked yet... and if Palladium were as good as that we might be in for quite a bit of trouble...

  3. Soo..... by Richard_at_work · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What exactly is Longhorn still bringing to the table at its release? I used to look forward to Longhorn when I ran Windows, because it was supposed to contain all these new and wonderful technologies, then I got tired of waiting and .... well, my .sig says it all really.

    1. Re:Soo..... by ssj_195 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Indeed - especially when you consider that some of the features that are actually worth getting vaguely excited about (except for Mac users like you, of course ;)) - i.e. WinFS and the 3D accelaration-type stuff (Aero?) are apparently going to be backported to XP. I think the upshot is that anyone with half a brain is going to stay on XP, and the only way that Longhorn will proliferate is by being included by default on new machines.

    2. Re:Soo..... by xtracto · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well, I have to tell you I really can not wait for longhorn but, (as almost all my friends) I am sure I will not be queueing outside the shop, instead I will let my Mule do the queue ;o).

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    3. Re:Soo..... by CountBrass · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The problem is that "It just works" also depends on a decent hardware platform.

      And of course there's the rather obvious question of whether Microsoft are actually capable of creating the software half of "It Just Works". History would seem to suggest not.

      I still remember Bill Gates announcing that in Windows 3.1 there would be no more UAEs (Unexpected Application Errors)! You know how this miracle was achieved? They re-named them to GPF (General Proection Fault).

      How does the saying go: "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice shame on me"?

      --
      Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
    4. Re:Soo..... by ssj_195 · · Score: 2, Funny
      How does the saying go: "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice shame on me"?
      No, no, no - you got it all wrong! The saying goes like this:

      "Fool me once... [pause] ... shame on... [pause] Shame on you... [pause] If fooled, you can't get fooled again."

      :)

    5. Re:Soo..... by 0x461FAB0BD7D2 · · Score: 2, Informative

      IIRC, WinFS will support a file existing in multiple locations or folders.

      There's more here, but it's not too detailed. It seems they're assigning folders to files rather than storing files in a folder-like hierarchy.

      This is similar to the storing your emails in folders (like in Hotmail, Yahoo, etc.) vs labeling your emails (Gmail).

    6. Re:Soo..... by stoney27 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think this is the same idea that Apple will have in 10.4, smart folders. Basically you tell the folder what type of data that should be in the folder. Say anything that has meta data for "hockey" in it and the OS/GUI will go and put "links" to that data in that one folder.

      Very cool idea and I can't wait to she how it works tomorrow. :)

      -S

      --

      It is said that a child learns wisdom from the parent,
      but the truly wise parent learns joy from the child
  4. Not about the GUI by skingers6894 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Good to see that Microsoft have not been concentrating on the frivolous activity of making the GUI sexy (obviously) and have been concentrating instead on the more serious improvements "under the hood".

    You know, super secret stuff that they don't want to talk about in case Apple steal for the "Future Cat" operating system in 2020.

  5. Reporting the obvious by MrMickS · · Score: 4, Informative
    Given that the majority of PCs out there don't have the necessary hardware to support the feature isn't this just an obvious statement. Reading the article its clear that the hardware isn't in a state to support the feature yet. It does hint that Longhorn will make use of the hardware should it be present.

    So rather than this being something pulled from Longhorn it's just being emphasised that having a system with the TPM chip isn't a requirement for running Longhorn.

    --
    You may think me a tired, old, cynic. I'd have to disagree about the tired bit.
  6. TP-M my ass. by Tuxedo+Jack · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Secure Startup protects users against offline attacks, blocking access to the computer if the content of the hard drive is compromised. This prevents a laptop thief from booting up the system from a floppy disk to circumvent security features or swapping out the hard drive."

    In other words, no more pulling out a drive to virus-scan it then replacing it or replacing a drive on an OEM machine - that won't allow it to boot.

    "The security platform depends on a TPM chip being present in the system. The chip is an industry standard governed by the Trusted Computing Group, a non-profit organisation which develops security standards."

    All nonprofits rely on donations to survive, and I can bet that a LOT of donations are going to start rolling in to them from certain organizations involved in content creation and distribution.

    Also, if it requires a custom chip, it ain't gonna go over easy - new motherboards will be required.

    --

    Striking fear in the authors of godawful fanfiction, I am here, appearing in darkness, Tuxedo Jack!
    1. Re:TP-M my ass. by Ashtead · · Score: 4, Interesting
      In other words, no more pulling out a drive to virus-scan it then replacing it or replacing a drive on an OEM machine - that won't allow it to boot.

      Probably right about the virus-scan. Outside the machine, the drive probably will look like it is full of garbage.

      However, I don't think replacement will become impossible. If the machines won't allow replacement disks, this means that a disk failure will result in a useless machine; this will probably also get in the way of people wanting to add disks -- and the people wanting to put Linux on a second-hand machine will cry foul -- so this is going to fly as well as those boat-anchors those machines would become.

      And this iteration of Longhorn at least will not require these chips... you won't have to buy new motherboards just now. But, perhaps further down the line this may become a required peripheral for Longhorn, but this will not be until most motherboards have it in place.

      It looks like mostly a way of keeping stuff on hard-drives secret. As such this is not so bad in view of how frequent notebook-theft is, or how big the security problems of second-hand equipment are.

      --
      SIGBUS @ NO-07.308
    2. Re:TP-M my ass. by NickFortune · · Score: 4, Funny

      I wonder if Secure Startup will be able to distiguish a linux installation from a hard drive "compromise". I would be sad if there was such a bug. Imagine how enthusiastically MS would leap into action to get it fixed.

      --
      Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!
    3. Re:TP-M my ass. by wintermute1974 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      no more pulling out a drive to virus-scan it then replacing it or replacing a drive on an OEM machine - that won't allow it to boot

      Exactly. From the description of Secure Startup, it sounds like the only purpose of this feature is to frustrate Sys Admins and their minions.

      Improved security is an easy sell to executives in large corporations, so expect to see mandates sent to the MIS or IT departments instructing them to only buy TPM-enabled motherboards.

      Of course, these same executives will later fire their Sys Admins just as quickly as they can walk into their offices and explain how all the data in their expensive laptops is now unrecoverable.

    4. Re:TP-M my ass. by builderbob_nz · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Probably right about the virus-scan. Outside the machine, the drive probably will look like it is full of garbage.

      Speaking as a computer tech who make money out of cleaning up viruses that would be a real bitch :(

      Also, if it relies on a chip on the motherboard, what happens if the m/b gets toasted? Would all the data be history?

      --

      Karma? Hey I just call it as I see it.
    5. Re:TP-M my ass. by GIL_Dude · · Score: 3, Informative

      Not un-recoverable. Just not recoverable by the thief who took your machine. The only folks that will be turning this feature on are enterprises (like the one I work in) where many machines are stolen (yes, even desktops - we had an entire small office in south Africa burglarized recently - took 29 desktops). We lose many notebooks per year and nobody really knows what files were in temp, etc. For us, there will be the ability to do recovery keys, and even re-install windows (using a trusted mechanizm - not something easy to do for the thief on the street). All the IBM notebooks have had TPM modules for a couple of years. The HP 7600 is shipping with one. About time we make use of this stuff.

    6. Re:TP-M my ass. by John+Hasler · · Score: 2, Informative

      > All nonprofits rely on donations to survive, and
      > I can bet that a LOT of donations are going to
      > start rolling in to them from certain
      > organizations involved in content creation and
      > distribution.

      "Nonprofit" is not a synonym for "charity". A nonprofit (or not for profit) corporation is simply one whose charter provides that it is not to distribute any profits to anyone: it exists for a purpose other than directly making money. Most charities are nonprofits, but so are trade associations, standards groups, and similar organizations. Groups such as TPM get their money from fees paid by members and are expected to act in the interests of those members.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    7. Re:TP-M my ass. by swillden · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I should say that soon the linux boot/virus scan disks will theoretically be able to read these nasty secure startup drives.

      I don't think so. It depends on exactly what Microsoft implements as "secure startup", but what I would expect is that they'll hash the kernel plus important drivers and services into the TPM, then bind an encryption key to that system state, then encrypt the rest of the disk contents with that key (well, really, with keys encrypted with that key, but whatever).

      The result will be that if you boot a different OS, even one that knows about the TPM and hashes its own state, the bound key will not be accessible (because the hash value will be different) and the disk contents will not be accessible. That's the whole point of a TPM, really.

      In Microsoft's favor (ewww, I can't believe I said that), if they do this "secure boot" thing correctly, and also have "rollback" functionality to go back to a last-known-good state (which XP already does, I think), then if you try to boot an infected machine, the OS will realize that it's in an altered state, restore the last checkpoint and reboot, thereby eliminating the virus whose installation caused the problem.

      Of course, the bad thing is that, depending on what they hash, installing an "unofficial" sound card driver could cause precisely the same thing to happen.

      I predict, however, that shortly after MS "secure boot" rolls out, you'll start seeing live CD Linux distros that feed the TPM exactly what Windows would feed it so that Linux boots up with the same TPM state and therefore has access to the bound keys, and everything else. Reverse engineering the decryption and the file system structure will be the hardest part of producing these distros, not the TPM-related stuff.

      (Note: There are some complications with the above scenario depending on how much TPM support the BIOS has, and how it's configured. Suffice it to say that I think the above will be possible, though you may have to tweak BIOS settings and then re-install Longhorn to get it in a state where it is possible.)

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  7. Secure Startup by The+New+Andy · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Secure Startup protects users against offline attacks, blocking access to the computer if the content of the hard drive is compromised. This prevents a laptop thief from booting up the system from a floppy disk to circumvent security features or swapping out the hard drive.

    Either I'm stupid or they are (for humility's sake, I'll assume the first), but doesn't file system level encryption already solve this problem?

    Also, Apple is already one step ahead by removing floppy drives from the computers.

    1. Re:Secure Startup by GIL_Dude · · Score: 2, Informative

      File system level encryption does solve this if you are talking about Pointsec, Mobile Armor or a product in that Genre. However, these products typically have a real problem: their pre-boot environments for authenticating to the encryption system lack the ability to expand the range of authentication methods (for example most of them do not work with Smart Cards today - the ones that do, work only with a limited set and maybe not with PCCard readers only USB. They also tend to not have a network connection in pre-boot so that they cant check CRL's on certificates. Decide to add biometrics and you are just out). So this will subsume the feature into windows such that the pre-boot is a thing of the past and any supported authentication method will work for the encryption as well as the OS. Long overdue.

    2. Re:Secure Startup by John+Hasler · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > Either I'm stupid or they are (for humility's
      > sake, I'll assume the first), but doesn't file
      > system level encryption already solve this
      > problem?

      But it doesn't address the much more serious Linux problem.

      > Also, Apple is already one step ahead by
      > removing floppy drives from the computers.

      Apples can't boot from a CD?

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  8. In Other News by p0 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Microsft reports today that Longhorn will not be shipped at all. Instead, it would be shipping a stripped down version of Windows XP with an all new startup screen and bundled with features from late Windows 3.11

    --
    This is my sig. There are thousands more, but this one is mine.
    1. Re:In Other News by skingers6894 · · Score: 2, Funny

      And in more other news...

      "Longhorn" will be renamed to "LongHaul" to reflect the wait users are in for. Another suggestion which was rejected by MS marketing was "ShortFeatures", said to be accurate but unwieldy in the marketplace.

  9. Microsoft is totally dropping the ball by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Microsoft is totally dropping the ball. Not that I'm complaining. But giving previews of software that's so bad that they have to threaten those that publish screenshots? Dropping important features?

    I tell you, if IBM sunk $1 billion dollars into making a single grandma-usable Linux distribution, it'd be the best $1 billion they ever spent. That's a pipe dream, but seriously, if nobody capitalizes on this, it's a total missed opportunity to break the Microsoft monopoly.

    In my opinion, the software is ready. KDE is all set to go. We've got office applications, dtp, multimedia, internet, databases... If somebody could fix CUPS, make software installation simple, and populate all the most important configurations in one area and give them easy-to-use and consistently-designed wizards (that the experienced users could of course ignore), this thing would be ready. Not World of Warcraft ready, maybe, but ready enough. Hell, I'd buy it in two seconds.

    The problem is, you need someone with deep pockets to finance all the boring aspects of making a unified-feeling distribution and fixing all the intricate bits (like CUPS or whatnot), but if they did, and slapped a big old IBM on the cover, it'd be dynamite. And having IBM on it would probably add a center juggernaut quality that might make hardware companies more interested in doing proper driver support.

    1. Re:Microsoft is totally dropping the ball by Yaztromo · · Score: 4, Insightful
      That's a pipe dream, but seriously, if nobody capitalizes on this, it's a total missed opportunity to break the Microsoft monopoly.

      One could argue that Apple has indeed capitalized upon this with Mac OS X Tiger, coming out tomorrow, which contains a lot of Open Source code in it (Darwin/FreeBSD, Apache, CUPS with an excellent interface, etc). And guess what? People are sitting up and taking notice.

      The problem is, you need someone with deep pockets to finance all the boring aspects of making a unified-feeling distribution and fixing all the intricate bits (like CUPS or whatnot), but if they did, and slapped a big old IBM on the cover, it'd be dynamite. And having IBM on it would probably add a center juggernaut quality that might make hardware companies more interested in doing proper driver support.

      No, no, and no. While IBM may have the deep pockets to do something like this, they are absolutely the WRONG company to do it. And I say this having previously been a long time IBM OS customer and as a former IBM employee.

      First off, hardware companies have traditionally been afraid of IBM, because IBM has traditionally been a competitor (a view which probably hasn't changed much with the sale to Lenovo). Just take a look at how many hardware companies stepped up and supported IBM's previous consumer OS attempt, OS/2: support was often half-hearted, pathetic, or nil. The fact that IBM was behind it scared off potential hardware vendors (who, BTW, don't make their money off writing device drivers anyhow, and thus tend to like to keep driver development costs low by targeting as few platforms as possible).

      Secondly, as anyone who bought in to IBM's OS/2 WARP v3 push and needed support probably knows, IBM just isn't set-up to provide end-user support. They have no experience nor expertise in consumer software support, and didn't do a terribly good job of it.

      Sorry, but IBM creating their own consumer Linux would be the touch of death. IBM seems to know this themselves -- they have always expressed that they have no interest in creating their own Linux distribution, instead relying on partners to do this for them (like RedHat). There are much better options for such a company to produce such a Linux distro (and based on what I saw at LinuxWorld Canada last week, there are certainly some companies out there who are interested in trying).

      Yaz.

  10. Jack-off security.... by Patchw0rk+F0g · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Secure Startup protects users against offline attacks

    Gimme a break. Who needs security from offline attacks more than security from online ones? If that were such a stretch, there are products http://www.computersecurity.com/laptop/cables.htm? PHPSESSID=f6bfd6ada2877cbe69e8f281ef4ca487 that will help you out with that.

    As an ACTUAL Windows user (and yes, I do use it; software investment, unfortunately) I'd love to see more ONLINE security: integrated firewall, antivirus, spyware, etc. That would more satisfy me.

    --
    When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro. ~~ Hunter S. Thompson
  11. So what *will* Longhorn offer then? by Shaper_pmp · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Is it just me, or is Longhorn increasingly beginning to resemble vapourware? We were sold the idea of a revolutionary next-gen computing platform, with all-new graphics subsystem, trusted computing (yuck, but at least different), enhanced security, relational filesystem, etc, etc, etc.

    Now Avalon's being back-ported to XP, trusted computing isn't making it into the final product, WinFS has been pushed back to god-knows-when, and general security will likely be as god-awful and insecure as ever.

    Against this background, what does Longhorn actually have to offer potential upgraders? Especially businesses?

    Pretty Aero Glass UI? "Windows theme's always worked fine for us, thanks, and requires no user-retraining - why bother upgrading?"

    But, it's all new! "Yeah, so we'll have to buy all-new hardware. And beta test it^W^W^W live with the inevitable but unfortunate 1.0 bugs.

    Increasingly the reasons are "But, but, but, it's the new operating system from MS - you have to upgrade!", which is, obviously, no reason at all.

    I was quite worried about LH when it was first announced - it sounded like a hell of a leap beyond anything Linux and Free Software had to offer (although, given time, I was sure FLOSS would catch up or surpass it).

    Now, however, I'm having trouble retaining even mild interest - Microsoft hyped it so much, and are now so publicly failing to deliver on anything they've promised, that by the time it launches I wouldn't be surprised if they've Daikatana'd the thing practically to death.

    Longhorn? Long-in-the-tooth, more like - a decrepit and crumbling shadow of it's former self that looks in danger of becoming irrelevent before it's even launched.

    Of course, I may be condemning it unfairly here - are there any killer features that will save it from this downward trajectory?

    Besides a billion-dollar marketing budget?

    --
    Everything in moderation, including moderation itself
    1. Re:So what *will* Longhorn offer then? by Shaper_pmp · · Score: 3, Interesting

      But there's so much more that we could do with ordinary computing. I can think of half-a-dozen things we could be doing, without any trouble at all. Fuck Trusted Computing and DRM, and fuck sucking up to Big Content - whatever happened to genuine developments and refinements in basic computer use?

      For just one example, where's the scriptability of compiled apps? I'm not talking about built-in VBA (hackcoughspit), but something more like Apple's system (SmallTalk? I dunno), or DCOP in KDE or GNOME (I forget which - a linux-based colleague once wowed me with how compiled, native, window-manager apps could be hooked by external scripts which received input and controlled the apps' behaviour.

      Sure, ActiveX was a step in that direction, but it's not a "default" part of any Windows app - you have to code for it specifically and it's a nightmare. It's also a pile of shite, and insecure to boot.

      I want to be able to write a script to hook when a certain colleague comes on-line in MSN Messenger, and automatically MSN him a file (fuck, I'd settle for only being alerted when someone from a certain group came on-line, but no-go). I want to be able to hook the end of a CD-burn and shutdown my machine. Or play a sound. I want to be able to script additional user-actions tied to a specific menu item in a specific program, or tied to a single menu item in every program that offers that menu item.

      I know all these things can be done, either using kludgy workarounds, different apps or using VB/WSH/JS and ActiveX objects, but every solution is different. Nothing works the same. Most programs are entirely unscriptable, unless the programmer specifically tries to offer that functionality.

      I want Visual Studio to expose DCOP-style scripting hooks for every app, unless you specifically turn it off (and even then, that shouldn't be easy). I want a proper, documented, sensible scripting language (or languages). .NET would look vaguely interesting, if it wasn't now an empty marketing catch-all buzzword for vendor lock-in. They could have done it right and created a genuinely next-generation interface, but instead it's late, buggy, ill-designed and ultimately just one more attempt to tie you to MS.

      Sure, I can hear the calls now - "but users won't use those features - who even understands scripting apart from a few hackers, sysadmins and power users?"

      But that's your fucking answer right there - the early adopters and pioneers, the people who advise on business-systems upgrades, and the people who bridge the gap and educate their fellow "ordinary users" so the skills trickle-down until everyone understands it. Fifteen years ago, who used and understood e-mail, or the internet? Hackers and sysadmins. And now?

      Linux is successful because it's designed for hackers. Sure, it can be retrofitted for normal users too, but the reason it's still around is the thousands of hackers who tinker and play with it.

      Microsoft is successful because of their enormous marketing budget, and their canny (and, to be fair, illegal) business practices. I'd even go so far as to say MS is successful in spite of their technology - it's generally inferior to FOSS, in my opinion, because they'll compromise on The Right Thing for marketing and vendor lock-in reasons.

      If I were MS I'd be making my UI as scriptable and hackable as possible in an attempt to steal Linux's thunder. They've currently got the basic-user-desktop sewn up, although it's under attack from FLOSS. If they had any sense at all they'd be courting the hackers and power-users, to actually attack FLOSS where it hurt.

      Build it and they will come.

      --
      Everything in moderation, including moderation itself
  12. What a surprise - NOT! by $RANDOMLUSER · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Longhorn is going to have a hard enough time getting adopted without the Orwellian DRM on both entertainment and software.

    Rest assured that the first service pack will consist almost entirely of draconian DRM "enhancements".

    (You did read the EULA, didn't you?)

    --
    No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
  13. Re:Nothing to see here move along by nkh · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This feature was one of the most important and most scary "improvement" in the history of computers a few years ago: removing the control of the machine from the hands of the user, censorship controlled by Redmond. The fact that they removed this "feature" is an improvement by itself.

  14. Steve Jobs - Balls of steel by skingers6894 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Is anyone else amused at the timing of the release of Tiger? By all accounts it was ready to go a month ago.

    WINHEC finishes and then Tiger is released. Longhorn is shown to be an investment in distant future mediocrity and Tiger is released tomorrow.

    1. Re:Steve Jobs - Balls of steel by michaeldot · · Score: 3, Interesting
      WINHEC finishes and then Tiger is released. Longhorn is shown to be an investment in distant future mediocrity and Tiger is released tomorrow.

      Interesting point. It's a possibility, but is there much crossover though?

      The sort of people WinHEC is for are very committed Win32 API developers. They aren't necessarily interested in anything else, Linux, OS X, or any other *nix, whether its tech is inviting or not.

      These folk have years invested in the Windows architecture and WinHEC helps them prepare for the future of THEIR platform.

      If the timing had been a more general consumer or business focussed conference, where it was important to grab the hearts and minds of potentially swinging technology pundits, then the deliberate timing theory might have more weight.

      I think the so-called "looks over the shoulder" the Windows camp gives OS X are largely mythical. Apple's relevance is very small in the grander scheme of things, is it not?

      Maybe you've got a point though. The topics of WinHEC itself did seem to address future developments in Windows that are currently strengths of OS X.

    2. Re:Steve Jobs - Balls of steel by skingers6894 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yeah, I hear what you are saying regards the real relevance of OS X to hardened Windows developers.

      The more I think about it the more I like the timing of it though. Apple have used their own WWDC as the platform for showcasing OS upgrades and I guess it would fit Jobs sense of timing to actually release Tiger around WINHEC time.

      Not so much to hit developers but the rest of the potential users (and IT press) who have increasingly become watchers of those events.

  15. Trusted Computing Group by wintermute1974 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    The security platform depends on a TPM chip being present in the system. The chip is an industry standard governed by the Trusted Computing Group, a non-profit organization which develops security standards.
    Why should users trust the Trusted Computing Group?

    Who backs them? What is their official reason for existing? What is their real reason for existing? (This last question cannot be answered by merely reading this groups home page; you need to consider the motives of those directing or controlling this group.)

    My guess is that their official reason this group exists is "to promote safe environments by protecting users from various malicious computer exploits" or similar sounding goodness.

    In contrast, my guess is that their real reason for existing is "to strip users of their existing rights to use the programs and data on their computers so that copyright holders can dictate if, when, and how users may access them".
  16. "world peace and cheap antigravity"! by NZheretic · · Score: 4, Interesting
    1994 : Cairo Takes OLE to New Levels
    The next version of Windows NT, code-named Cairo and targeted for release sometime in 1995, will be built around the concepts of objects and component software. It will have a native OFS (Object File System) and distributed system support.
    1995 : Signs to Cairo
    Cairo, Microsoft's object-oriented successor to Windows NT, will begin beta testing in early 1996 for release in 1997. Although Microsoft is not revealing the full details of Cairo yet, there are enough clues within current Microsoft OSes to yield a good idea of how it might work.
    1996 : Unearthing Cairo
    At the first NT developers conference in 1992, Bill Gates announced that Cairo would arrive in three years and would incorporate object-oriented technologies, especially an object file system. Since then, we've seen Windows NT 3.1, NT 3.5, NT 3.51, and most recently NT 4.0. None is object oriented, none has an object file system, none is Cairo. It seems that Cairo is Microsoft's sly way of promising the world. "Will we see Plug and Play in NT?" "Oh yes, of course, in Cairo." "Will NT ever produce world peace and cheap antigravity?" "You bet -- in Cairo."
  17. Truth in Advertising? by argent · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If Microsoft was going to start naming operating systems consistently, then... let's see...

    Windows 2000 -> Windows NT 5.0
    Windows XP -> Windows NT 5.1
    Longhorn -> Windows NT 6.0 or Windows NT 5.2?

    Or maybe even Windows NT 5.11?

    1. Re:Truth in Advertising? by godlike · · Score: 2

      it will be windows nt 6.0 microsoft alread said that.

    2. Re:Truth in Advertising? by mcbridematt · · Score: 5, Interesting

      True. Leaked builds have had NT 6.0 for ages. NT 5.2 is WinServer2003 AFAIK.

      DEVELOPER RANT: don't use if (win_version == nt5.1) use if (win_version >= nt51). It sucks, when I played around with the LH Alpha leaks, a lot of software didn't work out of the box because they didn't know what NT 6.0 is. Your firm may go bankrupt long before the LH release but don't go screwing your customers of any forwards compatibility.

      But congrats to the Mozilla devs for having good native UI integration - Mozilla looks really good under LH 3653 and LH 4008 and the plex theme.

      And among all the talk about LH being souped up XP in the past few days, isn't this feature called Aero still under lock and key? Or have M$ Shafted that too?

    3. Re:Truth in Advertising? by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 2, Funny

      What I did in humour, you were an asshole about, so wrap your drug-addled, pea-brained, useless as goatse mind around this:

      I've seen a retail box copy of Windows NT 3.01, you dumb shit.

      If you're coherent enough to comprehend it, look at http://www.ekta.ee/html/e741.htm, which was the third result in my supposed "garbage" Google search. Under the System Software section, it references....how about that? Windows NT 3.01.

      Next, check this tech reference from AMD (Google PDF-to-HTML version, since you're probably too useless to even know what to do with a .pdf file, scum-sucker):
      http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:mJgOcysWfHYJ: www.amd.com/epd/desiging/evalboards/14.elansc400/b ios/phoenix/manual/picobios.pdf+%22windows+nt+3.01 %22&hl=en&client=firefox-a

      Read page 117. The function it's describing supports Big Memory under Windows NT 3.01.

      Just because you've never heard of it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Some of us have been around a little longer than you stupid fuck script kiddie assholes, and before you go spewing shit out your mouth as well as your ass, you might want to stop and consider that we know what we're talking about.

      Go back to your porn collection, AC. (Yeah, I noticed you didn't even let anybody know who your stupid ass was.)

      --
      "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
  18. For those wondering what Microsoft HAS been doing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    For those wondering what Microsoft has been "doing" for the last 12 months, and how they are spending their billions in revenue. since it's clearly not about "product development", one hint was given by Eben Moglen, who says they have been hiring lawyers for the last 12 months and using them to shake down companies for cash in advance who use free software over "potential" patent disputes. In other words extorcion and racketeering. But you can read about this .

  19. Stripped? by dJOEK · · Score: 4, Interesting



    Is anyone here keeping a list of things that were supposed to be in Longhorn but aren't gonna be?

    --
    Exercise caution when modding this message up: the author acts like a jerk when his karma is excellent.
  20. Secure Startup by Timo_UK · · Score: 2, Funny

    The MS guarantee: Your Machine will be safe for the first 35 nanoseconds.

    --
    Timo's Audio Software http://www.esseraudio.com
  21. Longhorn = Concept OS? by DigiShaman · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Just as automobile manufactures develop a concept car in hopes to bring all ideas togeather, I can't help but wondering if Longhorn is offically an OS. Rather, it sounds like Longhorn is nothing more then a pet project of verious concepts microsoft is playing with.

    I'm willing to bet the next version of Microsoft Windows will not be as dramatic as we see in Longhorn. I think they know that consumers are tired of being "feature shocked" with a different and reorginized GUI. Hell, I love computers. But I must admit, it does get aggravating having to reaquire reacquire your bearings on any new OS revision.

    --
    Life is not for the lazy.
  22. What does this button doooo? by krajo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    From TFA: "A chip, the Trusted Platform Module (TPM), is used to encrypt data streams between the operating system and applications."
    One question: why ?
    I thought modern processors (like the 386) already kept processes from reading each others data. So it's not for separation.
    It certainly won't keep an application from hacking the operating system, cause I don't think the TPM could possibly figure out if the data it encrypts is harmfull or not. So if the system call is buggy, it will be hacked TPM or not.
    One use could be to only let digitaly signed/unmodified application to run ... hmm, why do I think that this coming from Microsoft is not good ?
    Feel free to add more ideas...
    bye, krajo

    --
    Learn to separate truth from illusion. Because in this world, it's the hardest thing to do.
  23. Wrong security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You are probably hearing "security" and "trust" and falsely assuming this means YOUR security, or YOU being able to trust your computer.

    In fact you, the user, are not the intended beneficiary of "trusted computing" at all.

    The problem now is that people have too much control over their computers. From the perspective of somebody trying to limit what other people do, this is insecurity. If you write a computer program and sell it to someone, why, there's no guarantee at all that people will use it the way you wanted. People may find ways to trick your program into doing things it didn't intend, or even start to fiddle around with it and its innards, or use the files they made in your program in competing applications. It's as almost as if these people believe that just because they bought a copy of your software means they [i]own[/i] that copy. Something must be done about this. Vendors, like Microsoft, want to be able to "trust" your computer not to let you do things with it Microsoft doesn't want you to do. Hence, palladium.

    Trusted boot is the first step in that. It convinces people that a piece of hardware in your computer that when switched on limits the ability to write to your hard drive to "trusted" pieces of code (and not scary things like Knoppix rescue cds) is a good idea. Somehow.

    1. Re:Wrong security by cowscows · · Score: 2, Insightful

      While I would never want something like you described running on my home machine, there's certainly places where this would be reasonable and useful. Take corporations and government institutions. If I'm hiring a bunch of people to work for me on a bunch of computers that I paid for and have to maintain, I'm certainly going to be interested in limiting the ways that they can mess up those machines, and also limiting the amount of info lost if a machine is stolen. That all seems very reasonable to me, and not evil. Consider the fact that corporate/government sales are a huge part of microsoft's sales, and it looks pretty intelligent on their part.

      --

      One time I threw a brick at a duck.

  24. Six years for Microsoft to implement my solution by NZheretic · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Google Usenet for "Trusted boot sequence" and the earliest recorded instance is in the thread on About Hybris and all worms:
    >further, don't count on that system being able to stop all code from
    >executing - it won't stop bootsectors,

    Solution - Trusted boot sequence
    (This would, to be truly secure, require a jumber on motherboard to be shorted for Flash-BIOS to be upgraded ) Flash-Bios checksums MBR bootsector, booting a rescue system on fail. MBR bootsector ( lilo etc ) checksums selected OS's required boot files, booting a rescue system on fail. OS boot system checksums ... well you get the drift.

    A rescue system could be netbooting from a trusted server, signed rescue partition/file or signed bootable cd-rom/DVD.

    Yes, NZheretic is David Mohring
  25. The features I want in Longhorn by KrisCowboy · · Score: 2, Funny

    1. Regular crashes (couple of times every hour would do) accompanied by "You want to submit a bloody report?" messages.
    2. No support for *any* multimedia format except for WMA, WMV and ASF. Who cares for MP3 anyway.
    3. It would be really nice to get a "Keyboard not detected - press enter ton continue" message for real in Longhorn :-)

  26. DEVELOPER RANT - Version checking. by argent · · Score: 5, Interesting

    DEVELOPER RANT: don't use if (win_version == nt5.1) use if (win_version >= nt51).

    DEVELOP RANT: don't use OS version tests if you can use feature tests instead.

    Not a comment specifically directed at you, I don't know if you do this, but I keep running into software on all platforms that doesn't run on older versions even when patches, service packs, hotfixes, software updates, backported libraries, or compatibility fixes have removed the dependency on the specific OS version they hardcoded into the application.

    One of the nice things about the Amiga is that all the developer documentation showed code checking library versions instead. Not perfect, but much better than OS version checks. Palm provided hooks to do functional checks down to the entry point level, but then spoiled it by shipping example code doing OS version checking.

  27. It's all marketing spin to keep it in the news by nietsch · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This program is to be released next year, and will probably be delayed a few more times. MS' spinmeisters are just trying to keep it in the news, so they create 'news events' that are no events at all. Even negative attention is better than no attention at all. But is it worth the attention? No, not for me, I use Linux exclusively since 2001, and so can you.

    Not only MS is guilty of using this vaporware tactics. All the media are lapping it up too, without even a single note of critisism. It seems we not only need the icbm adress of MS, but those of it's minion news outlets too ;-)

    --
    This space is intentionally staring blankly at you
    1. Re:It's all marketing spin to keep it in the news by AKAImBatman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It strikes me that Microsoft is feeling the pressure. While they're over there taking their sweet time on Longhorn, Apple has been slowly claiming their market with all the features that Longhorn is going to promise. As a result, Microsoft is trying to scale back the beast into something that can be released sooner rather than later. (Cue: Queen - Under Pressure)

      What I find interesting, however, is that Linux is not pulling ahead in the same time. Microsoft set their dates far into the future, and many people predicted that Linux would eclipse it in features by then. Instead, we're not really seeing any revolutionary features out of the Linux developers, and Apple is starting to eat everyone's lunch. What happened?

    2. Re:It's all marketing spin to keep it in the news by dmaxwell · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Reiser4 seems to have most or maybe even more than what is being touted for WinFS. The bravest among us even run their desktops on it.

      Things like SELinux and Xen promise various ways of locking things down that aren't evil and are also here right now. For that matter, support for motherboard crypto will also be here in a month or two. The way that is done will likewise be evil free.

      The X.Org people and various projects are also working on 3D accellerated, eyecandylicious, vector desktops even as we speak. KDE4, GNOME, E, and other users of video infrastructure are incorporating these things.

      Linux is already faster with new ideas in security and filesystems. As far as desktops go, Linux is developing at least as fast as Windows. Apple is bringing out new desktops faster but they are still riding on a maintained old version of BSD for their infrastructure. They aren't outpacing Linux there.

    3. Re:It's all marketing spin to keep it in the news by AKAImBatman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Are you really going to claim that is not a flexible enough solution?

      Umm... yeah. Spotlight not only searches documents, it searches mail, photo, contacts, and other databases. And it does it *way* faster than the "wait a half hour for your entire drive to be searched" command line method.

      Advanced in what fashion? Multimedia handling has been mature for ages. The only thing new in Multimedia handling that I am aware of is a couple more codecs and DRM. Linux supports pretty much all the codecs.

      Windows has WMP and OS X has iTunes. Both manage your music effectively, and without issue. Both systems also have good integrated video components. No need to compile a piece of software that's illegal in this country. Both play DVDs without fuss, and both handle shakey multimedia files without crashing the video subsystem. (Although VLC and Xine seem to be much better than MPlayer on this.)

      Are you aware of a system that has more reliable plug and play? True, there is no "one true system" but the distributions I have used were extremely effective in this department.

      OS X? I just plug devices in, and they work. Period. Under Linux, I'm lucky if my mouse doesn't freeze up. (See my journal for this pet peeve of mine.)

      If you meant functional cd/dvd burning being included with the OS, Linux is quite a few steps ahead of the competition.

      The last time I used Linux CD burning, I had to run from hell and back just to configure the burner program. I ended up as a very unhappy customer, with several CDs that didn't work right on the XP machine they were intended for. (U was helping my sister with setting up her new XP machine, only to find that OpenOffice, Mozilla, and the other goodies all had 8.3 filenames on the CD.)

  28. What is secure startup ? by OeLeWaPpErKe · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Secure startup is making remote attestation of the software configuration possible.

    What does it do ?

    If a remote website asks your pc "do you run windows Longhorn ?" it will not be possible to lie. You can not give an answer at all if you choose not to, but you cannot claim you run windows longhorn without actually running windows longhorn.

    Why is this useful ? DRM. The way to avoid DRM is to (for example) run a display driver that captures images and prints them out. So now the remote website can ask you "what version/configuration of windows are you running, please specify your display driver."

    You can choose to respond in 3 ways :
    -> not at all -> access denied
    -> you can lie -> lie is detected -> access denied
    -> you can tell the truth -> access granted

    Obviously, in the last case, you are totally at the mercy of their software, which is obviously the whole point of Secure startup.

    With secure startup websites that only want microsoft browsers visiting them (your bank, your employer, ...) will be able to enforce that policy. IE-only will be enforced by the hardware inside your computer itself, and it will not be circumventeable.

  29. You are an idiot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It strikes me that Microsoft is feeling the pressure.

    MS still has over 95% of the desktop share and roughly 50% of the server market.

    You are deaming. They are taking their time becasue they can.

    1. Re:You are an idiot by AKAImBatman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Rigghhhttt. No, Microsoft would never be worried that someone is going to eat their lunch. That's why they're always so nice and polite to competing companies, right?

      Microsoft isn't stupid. They know that if they take too long on an upgrade, customers will start investigating alternatives. And if they slip a few percent in market share, there may be a high chance of them slipping a lot more.

      Remember when 3DFX owned the 3D accelerator market? Any idea how they're doing now? Oh, that's right. They got usurped by their competitors, went belly up, and got acquired by NVidia.

  30. Secure Startup is what Microsoft really wants by elronxenu · · Score: 3, Insightful
    They dropped all Palladium features except the one they want real bad.

    Secure Startup will eventually stop people running non-Microsoft OSs on computers.

    1. Re:Secure Startup is what Microsoft really wants by swillden · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Secure Startup will eventually stop people running non-Microsoft OSs on computers.

      I don't think so. It may make dual booting off of a single disk impossible, if the BIOS is configured to have the TPM hash the bootloader. If the TPM doesn't hash the bootloader then dual-booting won't be impacted, except that the non-Windows OS will be unable to read data from the Windows partition.

      I'm not sure what the effect of reducing dual booting might be. Some users will be convinced to go 100% MS, others will decide to drop Windows completely and go 100% Linux/*BSD/whatever.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  31. They need to pull an OS X by dmaxwell · · Score: 4, Insightful

    With OS X, Apple bit the bullet and made a clean break with their crufty past. They had the Carbon API for a couple of years prior to release which made quite a few apps "OS X ready" from the gitgo. There is the Classic virtual machine for the apps that haven't gotten with the program and everything else is all new and quite a bit saner.

    MS should do the same. Chuck the current hopeless mess into a virtual machine and start all over.

  32. This is a good thing, isn't it? by MikShapi · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If I remember correctly, Trusted Computing is baaad, at least as far as we /.'ers are concerned.

    Why is everyone bashing Microsoft for dropping it?

    Rejoyce!

    --
    -
  33. A minor comparison by Koolaid-COG · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm seeing alot of concern about what this OS is going to do since they seem to be stripping everything out of it. Then I read a comment that they are building a base first and then juicing it up with the features being taken out at a later date. While I do agree with this analogy, I find it good and bad at the same time. MS OS's for the most part come with features that really don't get modified too greatly after its initial release. XP SP2 is really the only update we've seen that changes OS features. Remember too that all of their updates have been FREE and I have good reason to suspect that LH's updates will be free as well. Just because they aren't included with the initial release doesn't mean squat. To you and I that is. The downfall to releasing the updates at a later date is for the average Joe Lunchbox. Those people expect to have everything ready in a turn-key fashion. Some of us do as well. But dumping OS updates on people months after an initial release may get confusing. Make no mistake - Longhorn is the stepping block of future OS's from this company. They aren't going to let it croak. If it bothers you this much then you can always go buy yourself a Mac because afterall, don't they already have the features in question?