Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft To Switch Focus To Windows 8 In July 2010

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the someday-they'll-fix-xp dept.

An anonymous reader noted a bit from Ars saying Microsoft will be switching internal focus from Windows 7 to Windows 8 in fiscal year 2010. Microsoft's fiscal year starts in July, which is only eight months away. According to Microsoft's roadmaps, the release of Windows 8 is scheduled for 2012."

27 of 374 comments (clear)

  1. Windows 8.. by headhot · · Score: 5, Funny

    The Ocho!

    1. Re:Windows 8.. by sdnoob · · Score: 5, Funny

      ... my data

    2. Re:Windows 8.. by sopssa · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A company is planning ahead for their next version. News at 11.

    3. Re:Windows 8.. by sopssa · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'd think that constantly creating new versions of windows to create an income stream is getting
      ridiculous now. What can Windows 8 do that can't be done with Windows 7? I guess the trend may be
      that the consumer/customer will update on every 2nd or 3rd windows version that comes out instead
      of every year. The same goes for the browsers and office too. I think that it should be v7.1 and v7.2
      etc to add additional functionalities for free vs. buying functionalities in increments. Also just
      changing the GUI interface to look new improved shouldn't count either.

      The only new version that should come out that would drastically be new that one can purchase
      is the artificial intelligence version. That is, one that can improve itself!

      Tell that to most of the linux distros, who have a written rule to release new major version every 6 months.

    4. Re:Windows 8.. by FTWinston · · Score: 3, Informative

      What can Windows 8 do that can't be done with Windows 7?

      128 bit, I think we heard previously.

    5. Re:Windows 8.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
      You must be new to Slashdot. Here's an overview of how users tend to respond to the more common types of articles posted:

      Windows Article
      • Windows, moar liek WINDOZE!
      • stfu n00b, ms > all
      • Hi, I'm a very enlightened intellectual, and for some inexplicable reason I prefer to troll these boards and post insightful responses to increase my already massive and throbbing store of karma (that's a metaphor, by the way, did you get it?), and here is my humble-but-not-really $0.02 on the subject...

      Apple Article

      • DIAF FANBOIZ!!11
      • Hey os x is better than winsucks because it just workz
      • Hello again, you might remember me and my insightful, faux-humble posts in that Windows article, so you'll know I'm worth a few more karma points by virtue of my username, and if you like what I post feel free to toss in a few more. At any rate, regarding the article...

      Linux Article

      • LINUX RULEZ TEH w0RLD!!11
      • lol, butts.
      • Hey there, me again...I really have nothing to add. Can you give me karma points anyway?

      Any other Article

      • First!
      • I agree with the parent.
      • I know I'm going to be modded down for this, but I'm going to give you my opinion anyway, because clearly if I preface my comment that way, it'll be a REVERSE PSYCHOLOGY PLOY that will entice you into modding me up. WINNAR!
      • How is this news for nerds? Man, I remember back in the day when Slashdot was actually cool.
      • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0
    6. Re:Windows 8.. by jhoegl · · Score: 3, Funny

      you are right.. Linux distros are getting SOOOO rich off of free releases.

    7. Re:Windows 8.. by Richard_at_work · · Score: 4, Informative

      No, we heard that someone was ensuring the Windows codebase was 128bit safe, not that Microsoft was targetting 128bit architectures. People made the same mistake in that story as well...

    8. Re:Windows 8.. by Enderandrew · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They should have been working on Windows 8 nine months ago, or whever they basically put Windows 7 into freeze. It was over a year ago that they decided certain major features weren't making it into 7.

      The team that develops the OS should be focused on the new version right away.

      Surely Microsoft is a well-run corporation with long term planning. Surely they have a future roadmap of where they want Windows to go over the next 5 years. Surely Vista and 7 were intentional stepping stones along their master plan.

      I can't fathom the possibility that Microsoft has become this un-agile behemoth that no longer innovates, but rather has knee-jerk reactions to the OS market.

      --
      http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    9. Re:Windows 8.. by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 3, Funny

      192GB is going to be the minimum needed to run Win 8, so it will have to address more than that ;)

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    10. Re:Windows 8.. by default+luser · · Score: 4, Informative

      So going to 128 bits wouldn't help?

      Addressing DRAM is not the problem 128-bits is being considered for.

      128-bit addressing is being considered right now for the off chance that a technology like PRAM catches-on. Once you have non-volatile RAM at much higher densities than typical DRAM, you can ditch the hard drive altogether.

      This poses a problem, because disks and SSDs are currently I/O mapped and accessed via an SATA controller, which adds latency. But what people don't realize is how much memory-map space this arrangement saves us: consider that you can access TERABYTES of data in a device that requires less than 100MB of your memory map. And you don't typically care about the added latency, because the speed of disks is many orders of magnitude slower than DRAM.

      Now, imagine the disk is replaced by something just as capacious, but also just as fast as DRAM. PRAM in the capacities to rival a hard disk would likely need to be direct memory-mapped I/O to achieve good performance, and for that we really need to consider 128-bit addressing, because current hard disks (single disk and storage arrays) are already pushing those respective 40 and 52-bit limits.

      --

      Man is the animal that laughs.
      And occasionally whores for Karma.

  2. 2012 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    2012 OMG.... Always kinda knew it would be Microsoft to end the world...

  3. And? by Rogerborg · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Hey, I heard that Ubuntu going to be switching focus to 10.x next year as well! STOP TEH PRESSES!!!1!

    Do we actually have anything to talk about regarding Windows 8, or is this just another thread where we trot out all the usual "ZOMG evil Micro$oft abandonware bloated faked figures blah blah blah"? Because that's getting kind of old.

    --
    If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    1. Re:And? by Mongoose+Disciple · · Score: 4, Insightful

      When people get fed up with crippled "home" versions and paying more for "ultimate" versions, Linux will surely take off. If Microsoft is unwilling to provide all the features in one simple install, 2010 will be the year of Linux on the Desktop.

      We need something like Poe's Law for Linux zealotry, because I think you're being facetious, but I'm really not sure.

  4. End-of-the-world-screen-of-death by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Yeah - you were thinking it.

  5. Price Appropriately by areusche · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I feel like I have been spoiled by the solid 6 years of time XP was on the market. I literally remember using XP in 8th grade and running it well up to my sophomore year of college. That is a HUGE amount of time. Microsoft can make huge gains by keeping the price of upgrades cheap. Cheap meaning 30-50$. They will have a happy pirate free user if they did that.

    1. Re:Price Appropriately by bmajik · · Score: 5, Insightful

      $30 is about what the os, in its MAX config, is worth. any os.

      When you discover Austrian economics, you'll learn that there is no such concept as intrinsic value. So this statement is meaningless about any good or service. It might be meaningful for YOU for RIGHT NOW, but the notion of value is time and observer dependant.

      linux, freebsd, opensolaris: all free and all way more stable.

      And all miss certain desktop scenarios that windows nails, which is why everyone on the planet hasn't simultaneously said "OMG -- why do i keep paying money for windows when *nix does EVERYTHING I NEED EXACTLY THE WAY I WANT"

      paying $100+ for an o/s is so 1990's.

      Given the amount of inflation between now and then, even paying $250 for an OS today is "so 1990s".

      The idea that the operating system on your computer -- the thing that actually lets it do useful things -- isn't worth dinner for 2 at a national-chain resturant (your $30 figure) is completely hillarious. You honestly would rather forego the last 30 years of personal computer history and instead have 1 dinner for two?

      I think "an" OS is easily worth $100 or more per year to me. I'd skip dining out 4 times a year to have one. It's nice that there are free choices available, and in some cases I use those free choices since the marginal utility benefits of pay-ware doesn't justify the marginal cost increase for my scenarios.

      I think it must be a common fallacy amongst f/oss zealouts that they feel like the only people that must be clued-in, and that if only the rest of the planet would "discover" that there are free operating systems out there, Windows and other commercial operating systems would vanish.

      I suspect that the major vendors and Fortune 500 companies are very well aware of free software and what its advantages and disadvantages are, and have conciously chosen to continue using Windows for the majority of what they do based on a value analysis. I also suspect that they continually re-visit this analysis [and this accounts for things like the Wal-Mart and Dell linux machines..]

      I think it's fair to guess that most people paying for windows figure it is worth 75% or more [to them] of what they're paying for it.

      So I don't find your post insightful at all. You don't understand economics, and your assessment of value seems very contrived to me... based on ideology rather than reality.

      --
      My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
    2. Re:Price Appropriately by rantingkitten · · Score: 4, Insightful
      And all miss certain desktop scenarios that windows nails, which is why everyone on the planet hasn't simultaneously said "OMG -- why do i keep paying money for windows when *nix does EVERYTHING I NEED EXACTLY THE WAY I WANT"

      That's kind of a foolish statement. Windows doesn't do things the way people want either, which is why the average user can emit an impressive stream of complaints about their computer if you let on that you're in any IT-related field. The reason people don't switch is a combination of some or all of these factors:
      • They don't know there are options. Some are aware that there are Macs, and a few have vaguely heard of this Linux thing, but they don't really know what either one is.
      • Windows "came with the computer" so that's what they use. Much like people who continue using whatever crap-ass stereo came with the car. It's "good enough" to them, and there's no pressing reason to switch as far as they are concerned.
      • Of those that are aware of options, they're scared about "compatibility". In an era of Firefox, Openoffice, and practically everything users do being web-based, this is rather silly, but they don't realise that and no one bothers educating them. Their views are often reinforced by those around them who also don't know any better.
      • Familiarity. Most users flip out if you so much as move their desktop icons around, because they don't really know how to use a computer or even figure out menus and such. They do what they do through rote memorisation of where shortcuts are located. Ergo, even if (say) the Gnome desktop is vastly superior to anything Microsoft has ever offered (and I believe it is), it's not what they're used to and people hate that.

      The idea that the operating system on your computer -- the thing that actually lets it do useful things -- isn't worth dinner for 2 at a national-chain resturant (your $30 figure) is completely hillarious. You honestly would rather forego the last 30 years of personal computer history and instead have 1 dinner for two?

      What are you talking about? Linux and others have been around forever. In the past five years or so Linux, particularly desktop-focussed distros like Ubuntu, have gotten to the point where you could give one to Your Mom and she'd be able to install it. These are free operating systems. They're also completely gratis. There's no law that says an OS has to cost money, and there's not that much support in the history books for such a notion either.

      You say that for you, an OS is worth about a hundred dollars. That's fine, but understand that's your perception of value, something about which you just finished lecturing that other guy. Neither history nor economics support the idea that an OS must have a pricetag.

      Finally,

      I think it's fair to guess that most people paying for windows figure it is worth 75% or more [to them] of what they're paying for it.

      That's patently absurd. Most people don't realise they're paying for Windows at all. Remember, to them, "it came with the computer". To an extent they are paying very little for it since OEMs subsidise the cost with the idiotic crapware they also pre-install. But the point is that most people do not go out and buy a Windows disc. They use whatever the hell is on the computer and give zero thought to the price or value of the OS.

      A more realistic scenario would be to talk to a real user. You know, that nice lady next door who has been pulling her hair out for the past two weeks because Windows has getting less and less stable. At first it was just throwing Dr Watson stuff in her face she didn't understand. Then Explorer would crash practically every time she booted the thing and she's had to learn to reboot seven or eight times before it would come up and stay. Then McAffee started throwing a hissy fit, often crashing and taking down Windows with it. IE is taking forever to open and half the time, when sh

      --
      mirrorshades radio -- darkwave, industrial, futurepop, ebm.
  6. Odd - even cycle by Hognoxious · · Score: 4, Funny

    Is it going to be like the Star Trek movies, where whether it sucks or not depends on whether it's odd or even?

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  7. If so by FTWinston · · Score: 4, Funny

    Win8's new critical stop sound:
    GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAATES!!!!
    Sorry.

  8. Re:Timed with corporate PC replacement cycles... by Culture20 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Most large corporations have 3-year PC replacement cycle, and get pissed when the new thing is the same as the old thing except for the hardware.

    Most large corporations have a staggered, consistently employed 3-year PC replacement cycle, couldn't care less about what software is installed since they're all imaged in-house, and prefer hardware to remain consistent as long as possible.

  9. Summary fiscal year incorrect by JD-1027 · · Score: 3, Informative
    There is a minor error in the summary. Next July starts fiscal year 2011. The article actually has it correct...

    The sixth job posting arrived on November 20, 2009, requesting a Sr. Manager, Partner Skills Development - Launch Lead who is to change business focus from Windows 7 to Windows 8 in fiscal year 2011. Microsoft's fiscal year starts in July, which is only eight months away.

  10. Which version will Windows 8 be? by TimSSG · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Which version will Windows 8 be?

    Windows 7 is Windows version 6.1
    Microsoft Windows [Version 6.1.7600] Copyright (c) 2009 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
    Tim S.

  11. Re:Scheduled for release in 2012? by mister_playboy · · Score: 5, Funny

    Isn't this late 2009? How is late 2012 four years later?

    Are you doing math on a Pentium?

    Isn't this late 2009? Are you still telling jokes about the original Pentium?

    --
    Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law ::: Love is the law, love under will
  12. I see no reason for Vista or 7. We'll see about 8. by Antiocheian · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I started with a home computer in the 80s. Quite fun but cassettes were slow, so I got a PC with MS DOS 3.3

    I upgraded to DOS 5 because of its memory management. I then installed Windows 3.1 upon DOS 5 because of the truetype fonts and word processing. It made me more productive.

    (I also started using Linux because it allowed me to have a Unix at home without suffering that asshole sysadmin at the university, but this posting is not about Linux)

    I upgraded DOS5+Win3 to Win95OSR because it was more stable and easier to use than 3.1, it had font smoothing, native TCP/IP and it was generally an OS vs DOS and a windowed shell. It made me more productive.

    I skipped Win98 and WinMe because they offered nothing new.

    I started using Win2000 because it was a real OS, much more stable and secure than Win95. It made me more productive.

    I started using XP when nLite matured because I could remove the useless crap and XP is optimized for speed and supports network bridges and, most importantly, cleartype. It made me more productive

    I've tried Vista and 7 but they have not made me more productive. I wonder if Microsoft can change that with 8.

  13. You about 10 years out of date by walterbyrd · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Ten years ago, I would have completely agreed with this post. Today, if anything, the Microsoft shills have taken over slashdot.

  14. Missed something by maugle · · Score: 3, Informative

    Well, I skimmed the replies and found an important point missing, concerning how Windows 8 will be marketed: If Windows 8 is going to be released in 2012, that means that sometime in late 2011, Microsoft will start telling us that Windows 7 is, in fact, dog shit.

    But Windows 8 will solve all those problems, and be faster and more secure!