Slashdot Mirror
MS Upgrades To Be Smaller And More Frequent
duplicantk8 writes "Following the numerous delays to the Vista launch, MS is planning to have more frequent and smaller incremental upgrades, according to the Financial Times." From the article: "Those delays are set to end late next year with the simultaneous launch of new versions of Windows and the Office suite of PC applications in the company's most significant new product cycle since Windows 95. The new versions of the company's key PC software are likely to rekindle higher growth after a period that saw its growth rate slip below 10 per cent for the first time last year, according to Wall Street analysts. Mr Ballmer's comments are the most public sign yet of the dent to Microsoft's confidence in its core development process that resulted from the Vista delays."
Wonder if they have finally figured out a way to update the OS without performing a reboot.
I don't think they can get much smaller than the changes planned in Vista.
FanFictionRecs.net
We want to make life easier by giving only one update a month... then a few months later... we want to ensure timely security patches, so we will release them as soon as we make them...
;)
I think they're trying to please too many people at the same time... this is called 'impossible'...
---
Programming is like sex... Make one mistake and support it the rest of your life.
For some reason windows update will be replaced by the commands.
sudo apt-get update
sudo apt-get upgrade
These "smaller and more frequent" releases were formerly free bugfixes. Now they will be crap you have to pay for. I think we'll see things like the service pack issues where small fix #9 worked okay, but #8 and #10 had horrible issues.
"Scientists don't change their minds, they just die." -- Max Planck
It only took about a zillion years for them to invent the idea...
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Wasn't WinFS originally supposed to be out with NT 4, and they *still* can't make it?
No, this is an attempt to make you *pay* for Service Packs.
2008: Upgrade to Windows Vista version 2.0 for only $200!
2009: Upgrade to Windows Vista version 3.0 for only $225!
2010: Upgrade to Windows Vista version 4.0 for only $275!
2011: Upgrade to Windows Vista version 4.0 for only $350!
2012: Upgrade to Windows Vista version 5.0 for only $1000!
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
No, you didn't have to *pay* for service packs.
"Scientists don't change their minds, they just die." -- Max Planck
Does this mean that microsoft will have more releases than Debian Woody?
Smaller, more frequent upgrades will cost more to publish, will increase their support costs, and won't result in increased sales/upgrades. Most home users upgrade automatically when they buy a new PC, most corporate users upgrade en masse when there is good reason to do so. Trying to shorten the upgrade cycle in the corporate environment will backfire. Smart IT managers will still only upgrade when there is a compelling reason to do so, and now they might have the opportunity to cherry-pick smaller upgrades that would theoretically be less expensive.
Microsoft almost got it right with XP, but then they got greedy/stupid at the last minute and fragmented the product line (first Pro v Home, then Media). The 31 flavors of Vista is bad enough, but to compound that with multiple, more frequent upgrades will be even worse.
Basically they are saying that "Black Tuesday" becomes "Black Nine Fifteen In The Morning."
I'm sure sysdmins in MS-centric shops all over the world are rejoicing.
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
Compare to non-proprietary development where there is no rush to create features, and security issues get resolved quickly.
You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
Just change his name to Steve and call it a day.
security-enhacing and non-pain-in-the-assing?
Remember the 1997 buzzword "beleaguered"?
Does anyone else remember in the mid 1990s when Apple announced the same thing? It was around 1996, and Apple was finding it impossible to get its next generation Copland/Mac OS 8 operating system out the door. I think it was then-CEO Gil Amelio who announced after several years of delays that Apple wasn't going to do monolithic releases any longer. They would do little ones to be more manageable. Eventually, they came out with Mac OS 7.6, Mac OS 8 (what many considered to be 7.7), and Mac OS 9. That's also when they started shopping around, looking at Be and NeXT.
As Apple discovered--and now, I guess Microsoft is discovering the same thing-- it's really hard to keep backwards compatibility, drive new features, and do it within a reasonable budget when you have a big installed base. Apple's installed base was never more than a small fraction of Microsoft's, but Microsoft's resources were also proportionately more extensive.
Microsoft is having as many (or more) delays with Longhorn/Vista as Apple had with Copland/Mac OS 8. In the mean time, Apple bit the bullet with NeXT/Mac OS X back in 1997, and now they're seeing some pretty good returns on their investment. Releases have been fairly rapid, and they've introduced lots of innovative features.
So as far as coming up with their next OS, Microsoft, you can use the word now. Apple doesn't need it any more.
Insert simplistic political, ideological, or personal proselytization here.
Yes, samething, but Microsoft is going to make it a big deal this time so they can pretend they are keeping up with Apple's updates on the MAC OS. I'm sure Microsoft's updates won't be called "service packs", but we all know that's what they'll be.
Or is this talking about updates you get from Windows Update for free?
It's not as if that's a new idea though. Mac OS 10.1, 10.2, 10.3, 10.4 ...
Incremental upgrades: another Apple idea Microsoft likes and plans to borrow?
Yeah, but they better give users a more compelling reason to update than a find utility and some desktop widgets.
"Scientists don't change their minds, they just die." -- Max Planck
That way they can keep people interested, move quicker, and can spend plenty of other time improving their underlying architecture to support even more stuff later.
They could even use the incremental upgrades as trojans for installing the base libraries for other applications they're developing.
Possibilities are endless here...
My Linux boxes running yum?
it reboots your system for you. really pissed me off how many times i lost work to it.
http://www.livejournal.com/users/cixel
Wouldn't you love the be the developer who gets Ballmer or Gates as your pair programmer.
[developer]:You forgot to comment that code
[Ballmer]: (pickup chair and tosses it smashing his triple head display of Dell 2405 monitors) The code comment's itself!!!
[developer]: What about best practices? I'm suppose to be learning from you.
[Ballmer]: Well then start by getting off you ass and picking up that chair. Now with both hands on the arm rests.....NO NO NO...use you're back to lift, not your legs.
"Look Lois, the two symbols of the Republican Party: an elephant, and a fat white guy who is threatened by change."
Or that Microsoft hasn't done it already, just not as quickly
Win NT 5.0, Win NT 5.1
It is like Microsoft is really have woken up finally and started to do something. Last few years I have had that expression that all what Microsoft wants to do is bullying it's customers. Now they are trying to impress everyone with PR shock, flooding in massive with lots of info about new products.
o f-the-comics-book".
Yeah, they feel competition, and I thank any single Linux/BSD/Solaris distro, Firefox, Apple for that. Because it is all what we need to get IT really work for common crowd - to be useful, productive, etc.
If I am honest, I have seen new screenshots and well - they don't impress me. So far I have seen a habbit to even KDE guys admit that less is more, don't even talk about GNOME and OS X guys. And here comes Windows Vista with what can I call - detail overblown. Yeah, nothing in the stone yet and I hope they will get rid of that "so-much-details-that-my-destkop-looks-like-page-
p.s. I'm not Windows user, I'm Linux/OS X advocate, but still I can't ignore what happens to
Windows world as lot of my colegues and friends uses it.
p.s.s. and yes, I think GNOME/KDE guys can create
much better and more functional eye candy than that.
user@ubuntubox:~$ stfu This server is going down for shutdown NOW!
What I'm really worried about is that features that I want will be mutually exclusive between versions. In other words, I'll be forced buy the "Ultra" or "Ultimate" or whatever version to get what I need. Then again, it may just to confuse the consumer. I know a few people who bought XP Pro even though they just use their computers to surf the web and write letters. No VPN or anything like that.
Evil people don't think they're evil. - George Lucas, Making of Ep III
If I hear innovations out of MS's mouth one more time I swear...
All of the innovative features I've heard about in the up coming ms poo (read: vista) is that it will have a cleaner gui (read: like aqua) allow for icons to be representative of what they contain (like osx) and genie like effects for minimizing things (like osx)
It's such a buzz word these days.
the only innovation I see is copying other peoples stuff, and suing the pants off of anyone who even glances at theirs.
I bet all 7 versions of vista blow.
And what's worse, I'll probably still end up using it at work.
Today at work I was talking shit about vista. . . imagine that. A co-worker said "I can't wait for the new internet explorer!" and was serious.
I asked why, and he said "because it's going to be awesome!". again he was serious. I almost vomited.
I had to hear the rest, so I asked why it would be awesome. "its going to have tabbed browsing and other cool stuff!"
What other cool stuff I asked. "Stuff" was his reply.
Being excited about tabbed browsing is like getting excited because the new '06 Lexus will have a bose tape deck
i don't care
That's not funny.
...
I think the folks who suffer with Windows are used to rebooting for all sorts of reasons. E.g. IE runs too slow, my app just crashed, I need to install a new program, something is not working,
Due to their inability to admin their own machine, some resort to throwing it out and trying again, with new hardware.
I think it is the Unix admins who have the fetish for the no-reboot. Or perhaps a single, precisely done reboot, to remotely bring up a machine with an entirely new OS.
Similary, folks who use windows think they need anti-spyware, anti-virus, extra-special firewall crap --- because they think there's no way a computer can withstand the tide of crap without extra-special help. It is just impossible to imagine that an OS could withstand it all.
Lately it seems that hardware companies are in the game -- e.g. Intel processors with features designed to make up for the deficiencies of Ballmer's bunch in Redmond.
http://www.thebricktestament.com/the_law/when_to_
A very minor update to 2000 to convince people to shell out another $100 for a better looking interface, a couple of moderately usefull features little else?
Isn't that why most of the corperate and even many home users (like myself) of 2000 opted NOT to upgrade at all?
The article was sketchy, maybe smaller expense, smaller expectations make some sense. Less cost (to MS and the consumer I would think) per upgrade, less benifit, decide to upgrade every few years, but MS has part of the user base upgrading all the time, not just in the year or so after a big software release.
Some people dont even know 2003 exists!
Durrr. "Windows 2003" is only available as Windows Server 2003. It is intended for a different market than 2000 (business) or XP (home/business).
Withdrawal before climax is very ineffective and those who try this are usually called "parents."
"Those delays are set to end late next year with the simultaneous launch of new versions of Windows and the Office suite of PC applications in the company's most significant new product cycle since Windows 95."
This quote comes from the article, not Microsoft (though it might have indirectly), however this same claim is made for every single generational release. Every media outlet picks it up and repeats it like a mantra "Most important, most significant release since Windows 95". Blah.
Since each MS app you install worms its way into the operating system, every time you install something from MS, you're "upgrading" and "patching" Windows.
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
They wont make the same mistake as with Windows XP and 2000: They were so stable that there was no demand for windows 2003. Some people dont even know 2003 exists!!
...whereas some people can't tell the difference between consumer and enterprise (server) releases of software.
People who need to know about Windows 2003 know about it. My mum doesn't need to know, so she is blissfully ignorant.
Or "Instead of delaying it even longer, we'll fix it as we go along and hope no one notices we are releasing patches for stuff we should have fixed before roll-out".
Seems to me they are still using the "update" line on the public where they should be using "oops, we f***ed up", it will just be more frequent.
Those delays are set to end late next year with the simultaneous launch of new versions of Windows and the Office suite of PC applications in the company's most significant new product cycle since Windows 95.
This phrase gets dusted off for every OS release MS makes. Heard it for 98, ME, 2000, XP, 2003... and will continue to hear it for every other bloody version MS flogs.
And the version tracking for patching and application compatibility testing. Holy crap! It's like the sound of a million sysads saying "Screw you!" all at once.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
Maybe Microsoft has come to the realization that the rest of the world has - that every new version of Windows isn't as "revolutionary" as Windows 95 was. Ever since the end of the .com era when computers really just became commodity items, Microsoft has been trying to convince us that their next new OS will also be the next greatest thing in computing. Much of what I've read about Vista isn't all that interesting, and it's good to see the computer industry give Vista the coverage that it deserves. If Microsoft hopes to avoid going down in flames altogether, it has to adopt the incremental strategy that everyone else uses. What will be interesting to see is if Microsoft can manage this well. With 7 new flavors of Vista alone, throwing more versions of the OS into the mix at a rapid rate is just going to confuse the market even further. To be at all successful, the first thing that they'll have to do it switch back to a numbering system like Mac or their old year-based system (95/98/2000) so that people can keep tabs on their OS. This is good not only from a marketing standpoint where people feel like they've got an old copy of the OS that they want to upgrade, but it's also good from a patch standpoint. How are people to know whether ending the life cycle of a named OS is going to impact their version?
Personally, I think that Microsoft will continue to implode under the weight of Windows. The testing alone on all the various current and future versions of Windows will suck up a significant amount of their resources. I'd be willing to bet that just a few years after Vista is released that Microsoft starts talking about end-of-life for XP because they can't sustain all those different releases. Of course so few people will have paid to upgrade their machines from the last release that there will still be a huge number of people running old code. Then they'll need to have a discounted upgrade program, which further erodes earnings, leading to even less support, and the cycle goes on...
If you don't want crime to pay, let the government run it.
For those of us who can't tell for sure...
Are you referring to Tiger or Vista?
this isnt a troll this is the truth, Microsoft is just taking another play out of Apples book, and one that Apples been doing for well over 7 years now ever since OS 9. Everyone knows its smarter to update your software as you find problems but M$ is well known to let bugs sit around for 3-6 months before they update it in one huge chunk.
"Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."
Can you uprade from XP to 2003?
I thought 2003 was server caching n on 2000's good name, and XP was 2000 Xtra Powerful (sucky).
Except I love how XP handles folders full of photos (with built in print and order online).
Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
Or "Instead of delaying it even longer, we'll fix it as we go along and hope no one notices we are releasing patches for stuff we should have fixed before roll-out".
Well, to be fair, nearly every software company plays that game these days. It wasn't always like this... The ability to release patches via the Internet has led to a mentality that missed dates are a bigger problem than critical post-release bugs.
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
I updated several of my devices without a reboot. Those sort of patches seem rare, and likely for good reason.
The catch is that if you need to patch a critical system file, it's orders of magnitude more simple to just replace it upon reboot (since nothing's running). Otherwise you need to close down any applications and services that are using that file. Some system files are used by the GUI interface itself, at which point you're crossing your fingers and hoping it pops back to reality during the patch process.
It's probably technically possible to do certain patches without rebooting, but you'd have to have a savvy enough user to shut down and bring back dependent services. Linux admins are used to that sort of thing. For home users, it's far easier to simply reboot.
I think the mispelling of Microsoft is what did the post in. Acceptable mispellings include "M$" "Micro$oft" "MSFT" and "M$FT"... "Microsuck" is really hitting below the belt. (Well, it implies that something is happening below the belt, at any rate).
"with the simultaneous launch of new versions of Windows and the Office suite of PC applications in the company's most significant new product cycle since Windows 95"
Hasn't every product cycle that M$ has pushed supposedly been the "most significant since Winwods 95"?
And WINDOWS 95 is our measuring stick for a ground-breaking, life changing OS?
Enlightenment is a pipe dream. So where's the pipe?
Blah, blah, blah. How is this different from how most software vendors operate?
Now that we're publishing a new version, version 5.0, we're not going to jump right to 6.0. Instead, please be informed that you will have the pleasure of purchasing versions 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.31, 5.32, and 5.4. Or, if you buy our nifty support package, you can upgrade for free*!
*Free as in not out-of-pocket since you already paid for it.
And I'm not even going to get into the fact that a lot of these incremental upgrades will just be adding functionality that was to be incorporated into Vista in the first place. Assuring a future revenue stream?
"Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
Well, the sysadmins who know its easy to disable Automatic Updates using Group Policy, use some other type of update server, and know what they are doing in general are rejoicing...
As for the other 80% of the MS-centric shops all over the world, I can see them having some issues with such an ordeal.
Yuma, AZ...You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious.
Vista was a huge vision: a new metadata-based file system, a new UI shell based on secure, managed code, a new command shell, a new UI based on DirectX that supplants the aged old GDI, a new primary developer API to supplant Win32 including APIs to the new UI and the new cross-platform messaging service, an updated browser, virtual folders, a new development model (look @ MSDN for avalon express applications), just to name a few.
Some of those features just had to be cut back or removed; with all those changes, it's no wonder the OS was delayed so many times. People complained after the delays, and now MS is forced to have smaller, shorter iterations of software releases. As long as they also cut down on the price tag, this will be good for both Windows users and Microsoft itself.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit
2005: with the simultaneous launch of new versions of Windows and the Office suite of PC applications in the company's most significant new product cycle since Windows 95
IIRC, wasn't almost the very same sentence used in 2001 prior to the launch of Windows XP?
A most interesting direct comparison sir and/or maam!
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
There are some breaks release to release but Tiger had a big shift in Kernel API's - the promise is that going forward that API should be pretty settled and OK to ride of top of. Tiger was a shift of a magnitude developers should not see again for a while.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
For Linux that is.
/. users will voice complaint -- Linux on the desktop sucks. The key to break into that market is ease of use and while as /.ers we can generally 'figure it out' even if we are unfamiliar, the average Joe will not. Apple is going in the right direction there but with limited hardware and inflated prices, it's not a viable alternative for the desktop, as pretty as it is.
:)
Tell me which corporation will install a new point release of ANY Microsoft OS? Hell, remember service pack 2? That's technically speaking, a whole point release. And where I work, and countless other places, IT managers opted NOT to install it for a *very* long time until the bugs were worked out in that point release.
This idea of 'smaller' and 'more frequent' upgrades plays merely into the Linux world's hands. The problem with Windows is that there's a tie-in to everything. So if a change must be made, it affects the OS at the kernel level. With Linux, kernel updates aren't as frequent nor as impacting. However, KDE can release a new version and since it's part of x windows and not attached to the OS in a surgical manner, it really doesn't matter. People don't know that now because Linux isn't mainstream, but they will when they find themselves extensively testing for compatibility with legacy apps they have in-house, or whatever with regards to Windows.
This is the opportunity for the Linux community to come together and offer a *true* desktop competitor to Windows. As it stands right now, and I know the
If Linux as a desktop becomes EASY to use (and I mean damned near idiotproof), the server can pretty much remain as it is. Nobody cares about the server when they are using their desktop, especially as an end-user in say, Accounting. They just want to get their figures out the door without having applications crash and close on them.
Now's the time to do it though.. Microsoft is going to set themselves up badly with Vista... and sometimes you only get one good chance to whack the bad guy in the back of the head. And then kick him while he's down
The price is always right if someone else is paying.
Note that the statement does not say "a release MORE significant than Windows 95".
Windows 95 was like the major hit from an artist, where people keep buying thier music for a while because that one osng was so good. Eventually though you realize it's the same old tune and move on.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
its a terrible idea to lift with your back instead of your legs.
"Bend at the knees" is what they say
Cause there's nothing funny about back pain.
If I get modded down, someone obviously didn't get the humor.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
Is anyone here planning on buying Vista (Longhorn, whatever) when I comes out? I've being serious. I would love to finally (!) have a rock-solid OS from MS (if this is it). I worried about DRM, though. I don't want MS controlling when and how I can use software, music, whatever on my machine. I'm concerned about the things I read about Vista (with MS cozying up to movie and music corporations). I buy all my media. I do not pirate, and I don't like being treated like one (that go for you to, Valve!)
Anonymous Cowards suck.
How is Microsoft TOO ambitous. WinFS seems less ambitious than Hans Reiser's file system. How is it it that a very driven individual can out do Bill's Army? It seems that MS doesn't have as much ambition as Reiser, at least when it comes to file systems. Reiser 4 rocks and I'll bet it will be the cornerstone of some mind blowing advances in areas a s diverse as XML storage/quering & Object databases when other start making plug-ins.
Think global, act loco
If you simplify the world by definining complex ideas using buzzwords, you can draw make all sorts of ill fitting connections.
OpenDoc may have been "modular", but everything modular is not related to OpenDoc. If fact, the two ideas you link have nothing in common, and your ability to connect the two based on one buzzword is sobering. In fact, it makes Jesus cry.
MS is not copying Apple's product release strategy either; there is no "strategy" involved with releasing minor updates to product.
What Microsoft is copying is the straw-grabbing desperation of Apple from 91-96, where they announced one OS inititive after another as their development plans fell like flies in a microwave oven.
the company's most significant new product cycle since Windows 95.
Sorry, but are they saying that Vista is somehow more significant than XP? The move from XP to Vista (which sounds like just XP with different colors, and more DRM) is somehow more significant than the move from 16-bit segments to a flat 32-bit address space?Cantankerous old coot since 1957.
probably because it wants to do filmstrip view, or maybe thumbnail. The filmstrip sucks royally and thumbnail is only usefull sometimes, but I have everything open as detail view and never had that problem.
The thing that is cool is in the top of the sidebar it has a link to print or order the photos online, it is very convienient and the easiest way to print standard size photos I have found (used to drop them in quark templates, though I am told a photoshop mcro can be convenient too).
Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
You mean just repackaging bug fixes are upgrades isn't enough? Or is it buying a upgrade that is nothing but bugs?
This is interesting since usually MSFT is holding back these kinds of things BEFORE big marketing pushes( read product releases ). They do this so that they can make the public think there's a reason to upgrade...
IMO, this can only mean that there are enough MSFT customers threatening to "move on" instead of waiting for the next great thing MSFT is betting the business on.
Good luck with THAT Steve. You're gonna need it.
LoB
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
Lately it seems that hardware companies are in the game -- e.g. Intel processors with features designed to make up for the deficiencies of Ballmer's bunch in Redmond.
Back scratching at it's finest. Microsoft bloats it's OS and applications, so people have to purchase a new computer and pay the Intel and Microsoft tax.
*DrugCheese rants*
Smaller and more frequent also means less expensive and yearly. Which basically means that Microsoft is moving to the subscription model it always wanted. Windows users will pay a "small amount" e.g., 20 bucks, every year for minor and insignificant updates. In other words, we'll be paying for what we now get for free.
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
if you get Enterprise edition of MSFT Vista you are required by contract to ONLY rent software, you can't own it, for all apps from MSFT, so that they can pull the plug on all your apps all at once.
This is insidious. Kind of like "oh, my domain has expired" and then not just the site but your entire workplaces worldwide for your corporations goes dark and you can't even email MSFT.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
What? You say I'm being childish? Gee, why on earth would I go and do a thing like that?
You're implying that they will actually test all those versions before shipping them, rather than just shipping them and having the paying users do the testing... didn't they do that with WindowsME?
Worst part is, I'm not even trying to sound like a troll... it's just how it is :-(
After 3 days without programming, life becomes meaningless
- The Tao of Programming
Isn't that what "Service Packs" are?
Not really, service packs don't often release many new features. They just roll up lots of bug fixes.
It will be more like what Apple does. The changes between 10.2 to 10.3, and 10.3 to 10.4 were numerous but incremental. The changes between XP and Vista are huge, more like OS9 to OS10.
I figure in the end it's just about money. They are asking themselves whether it is best to wait 2-3 years and have a huge release, or to have feature releases every year.
I'm sure it will allow them to verify the authenticity of your copy of the software much more frequently as well.
I went to MS web site to download Direct X 9.0 for a game demo I had installed. I was quite pissed that it needed to verify my copy of XP before allowing me to download it. If Bill could see through my monitor, he would have seen me flipping him the bird. Luckily I found a previously downloaded copy buried in a directory.
As far as I'm concerned, the only verification Microsoft needs is my cash at cash register.
(tinfoilhat)
More frequent updates, so that they can slowly lay the groundwork for mandatory upgrades to Vista?
(/tinfoilhat)
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
UM... I think that's an AMD tax, not an Intel tax? The buffer overflow prevention I've heard of relates to AMD's 64-bit processors, and is enabled in XP SP2 and XP 64-bit. I have not heard of this in any Intel 32-bit processor.
Eloi are stupid, throw morlocks at them!
I think this is the wrong view to take. Buffer overflows exist on all platforms, despite being a problem that has been known about for decades. This is once case where Microsoft's use of their monopoly position was for the good of mankind.
With NX support, buffers can still be overflowed, but the attacker can't run code they've written. They can still jump to the entry point of any valid function that's in memory, and can select the arguments which will be passed to that function. In practice, non-executable page tables make a huge dent in the remote exploit due to buffer overflow problem.
Intel has had no-execute memory protection since the 386, but only offered it for segments, not pages. But, nobody (ok, practically nobody) designs a segmented OS these days. Everyone uses paging. Segmentation is one of those legacy things in the x86 architecture which should be taken out and shot. Only they can't because it would break backwards compatibility.
So, these newer features really are designed to make up for the deficiencies of programmers. It seems programmers are not capable of writing code which is free from buffer overflows. Well, at least not in C...
you mean, more like a virus?
hmm.
-Styopa
People who need to know about Windows 2003 know about it. My mum doesn't need to know, so she is blissfully ignorant.
And there are people who do know about Windows 2003 that should have remained ignorant. We develop software for the home desktop user. Yet, we sometimes get support calls from people having trouble with our product when installed on Win2003. This basically means that they're using their Win2003 machine as a plain ol' desktop.
Probably just the type of guy that's gonna throw money around just to make sure he has the latest and the greatest of everything and then go brag about it. He just doesn't know how stupid he really looks when he uses Win2003 as a desktop...
After 3 days without programming, life becomes meaningless
- The Tao of Programming
Just like Sony Entertainment has been doing for Everquest2, don't give patches for free, charge people. Call them "Adventure Packs" and come up with fancy names so people think they are getting something extra and not something they should be getting anyway. Let's see, call the first critical patch: "The Spyware Saga" and part of the "Adventure Pack" includes a popup blocker and anti-spoofing Software. They can start advertising an Expansion Pack "Vista: The Clone Wars" and have people pay for more patches.
Hey this reminds me of another OS company that makes minor changes every year and then charges for it. Now what was that name again? Some kind of fruit I think... umm... orange... no... bannana.. hmmm not quite, kiwi? Nope. Ohhhh yea, it's Apple.
Where I work we're only now getting Office 2003 because the IT department tested thoroughly and was waiting for the worst of the (numerous) bugs to be patched by MS.
No large company is going to install any update or software without some testing first. Short-cycle incremental releases are just more to test, and most companies will probably only bother to test/roll-out when a new feature set looks compelling.
This sort of release schedule works for Apple because they do not have the huge corporate installed base that MS does--most of their customers are individuals and small businesses.
Build a man a fire, he's warm for one night. Set him on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.
Well, the sysadmins who know...
;)
As for the other 80%...
Jeez, you make it sound like all it takes to get an MCSE is cram for a bunch of multiple-choice tests in your spare time.
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
Criminy imaging the support nightmare this is going to trigger at any third party software developer, not to mention hardware compatability, testing, you name it.
I can see why MS wants to churn their user base to increase profits, but all this is going to do is piss people off.
Not only that, but software quality will go down - with SP2 Windows XP is just starting to become good. Now with flavor du jour the OS will never become old enough to be stable.
The testing alone on all the various current and future versions of Windows will suck up a significant amount of their resources. I'd be willing to bet that just a few years after Vista is released that Microsoft starts talking about end-of-life for XP because they can't sustain all those different releases.
What different releases? From what I've read so far,
XP Home is a subset of Pro, which in turn is a subset of Media Center. All they have to do is test Media Center, and they're done - the little testing to make sure that they remove the right files so they label it as Pro or Home is hardly going to be much of a strain.
I imagine it will be a similar scenario for Vista as well!
The new versions of the company's key...
So where might I find this key?
Not every argument requires reduction to absurdity.
Quoth the article: "Executives have talked of taking a more "modular" approach to Microsoft's biggest products, breaking them down into smaller elements that can be worked on independently."
So does that mean IE will become a module again?
And the standard release will be the reduced edition?
Here it is, it fixes a line feed issue with some printers:
0D 0A
Go for it!
AT&ROFLMAO
So now you can pay $200 a year for Windows XP with a new, flashier skin.
Now, if you said all commercially successful platforms, or all platforms anyone might like to use, I'd have to agree.
-- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
Really?
I was itching for windows 2000 to come out. It finally allowed an NT based system to have all the necessary features, like USB, that Windows 98 and ME had. It finally allowed the company to drop development of those products and provide a stable, standard base for all Operating systems.
What does lon^h^h^h vista have that I notice as missing that will change the OS landscape?
Somebody has been a bad boy and not been reading Slashdot lately. See here and here.
If you don't want crime to pay, let the government run it.
Yeah, I'm looking forward Windows February.
Some settling may occur during posting.
Also, obviously I wasn't talking about Harvard Architecture... The "all" I was referring to was a general "all" not an absolute. Yeah, that's it. =)
From TFA:
;-)
Executives have talked of taking a more "modular" approach to Microsoft's biggest products, breaking them down into smaller elements that can be worked on independently.
So they found out that linking Internet Exploder to each and any component is not a Good Idea.
I wonder why MS did this in the first place. Maybe to support their position in the antitrust ligitation a few years ago that IE cannot be removed without crippling the OS. So they made it that way in Windows 2000 and XP, after the same statement was proved wrong for Win9x by Shane Brooks.
Now, the intentional spaghetti code has served its purpose and can be removed
C - the footgun of programming languages
I admit I haven't been keeping up with all the various Vista flavors, but I think you missed my basic point. For XP now, we have a single version (Media Center) which is a superset of the others (dunno where Tablet PC fits in though). So, MS can just test that to make sure everything is working. Presumably if, say, a newer version of IE works in Media Center, it will also work for Pro and Home. Similarly, for Vista there may well be 10 variants; but if they're all inclusive subsets of, say, Vista Enterprise Edition then MS can just test that thoroughly, and for the others they just have to make sure they removed the right files to downsize the version. I remember some article (probably on /.) about how XP Home install cd even has all the files for Pro, all it takes is changing a few bits to get it to install the Pro-only stuff.
In short, while there may *appear* 10 different versions, I'm guessing that MS isn't really going to have 10x testing woes - more like 1x + 9y, where y is the testing to ensure the right settings are tweaked and files included/excluded etc.
I thought the whole reason that MS started sending out patches once a month (or whatever) was because people got pissed off with having to apply patches on an almost daily basis. So now they're going back to daily patches? joy.
What a long, strange trip it's been.
I believe the new versions of the MCSE tests make it a little tougher...now you have to cram in more than just your spare time (:
A really good friend of mine (who in his defense is one of the smartest guys I know, and got me hooked on FreeBSD...and just got hired by Google, the lucky dog) got his NT4 MCSE without ever...EVER...seeing/using/installing NT4, at all. I'm not saying everyone could of done that, cuz he kicks ass, but still... (;
Yuma, AZ...You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious.
Um, it works for me. In fact, I really like this setup.
Because Linux screams on a fast, cheeper AMD because of it.
Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
Then again, we here at /. just hate MS.
"Those delays are set to end late next year "
Microsoft has just announced that next year's planned end to the delays has been delayed...
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
if i'm a grammar nazi, you're an illiteracy nazi.
Why charge people $199 every 4 years, when you can charge them $199 every 12 months ?