Slashdot Mirror
Windows 8 To Be Released In October 2012
dkd903 writes "Microsoft has been very secretive about the next version of its Windows operating system. After the success of Windows 7, everyone is very interested in the next iteration – Windows 8. A few leaks have been the only source of news about Windows 8 till now. However, a slip up from Microsoft Netherlands has put the release date in October 2012."
I wager 1,000,000 quatloos that it won't be released that month.
that can match past successes, such as Vista, Zune, or Kin.
Furthermore, Microsoft is of course the next version of Windows. But it will take about two years before “Windows 8 ‘on the market.
Yeah, this is hardly a concrete release date. It's probably one person's very rough estimate, he might not even be close to the project for all we know.
It probably will be. Windows 95 was Windows 4.0. Windows 98 was Windows 4.10, and ME was 4.90. Same basic OS with minor revisions. Windows 7 is version 6.1. This does suggest it's actually Windows Vista.1 but version numbers are pretty arbitrary. Still, Windows 8 doesn't have to be a complete rewrite. Simply an update.
everyone is very interested in the next iteration
You keep using that word but I do not think it means what you think it means.
you had me at #!
"Two years from now means October 2012. If this is correct and Windows 8 is supposed to be released In October 2010, we should see the first beta in early 2012"
From the link from the article..
Correctly translates to:
I'm dutch. The translation was engrish, i thought this might help.
Hivemind harvest in progress..
Or we can just look at the version numbers in "about"...
XP 64bit & 2003 = 5.2 ...4.0
XP = 5.1
2000 = 5.0
NT 4.0 =
One that hath name thou can not otter
will finally be the year of the Linux Desktop!
Smivs on the intertubes!
RE: What will be accomplished in Windows 8 that a simple Service Pack couldn't fix"
Profits!
Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration
I agree, this isn't a bad idea IMHO. They could use Windows 7 as a base for incremental improvements for some time. It's rare for MS to get as many things right as there after all is in Windows 7, so why not make carefully move from there?
People may say "but where's the money in that!", but if 7.1, 7.2, etc would still be paid for, and more often than the major releases, people might be *more* willing to upgrade since they'd know that they wouldn't get something huge at once, and maybe even use the old rule of wanting to wait for the first service pack. Less such risks with smaller updates. Also, smaller updates would be able to be more frequently released, and they could compensate for this somewhat by selling them for less.
If this all sounds wild & crazy -- Apple is pretty successful with their systems, and they've been doing exactly this since OS X 10.0...
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
"Liger"
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
this would be the perfect time.
Google, Apple and Oracle, their biggest competitors, are in a major shoot out.
What Microsoft needs to do is exploit the patent conflict by publicly ending its patent threats against FOSS. Completely, no exceptions.
While it does that, it should make Windows 8 the first release that breaks with the past by moving all legacy technologies into a sandbox a la what OS X originally did.
Finally, they should work on extending whatever POSIX compatibility they still have left until Windows 8 can reliably run code originally written on Linux and OS X. Why? Because it would bridge one of the last gaps between Windows 7 and OS X.
Apple is getting increasingly controversial. Microsoft could exploit by becoming the first vendor to make peace with everyone.
Try a phased roll-out to 20,000 desktops - with unknown compatibility in 4,000 departmental desktop applications.
You can see the regression issues that make a desktop roll-out of ANY new OS a suicidal risk for any IT organization of size. The answer they are grasping for? Consumerization of IT. Bring your own device, and we'll police connection/identity and document policy.
You see, people have already been bringing in their own Macs and Androids for a couple of years now - and "self servicing". This is how the IBM PC showed up next to the 5250 terminal, 25 years ago.
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
Mostly because of three things:
1) Many companies (and governments) have glacially slow approval processes for new OSes. My facility would like to move to Windows 7, but there's still no official DoD hardening and approval process for it. Since we're planning to jump over Vista straight to 7 we're on XP till we get official blessing.
2) A *staggering* number of companies still need IE6 for various internal web apps. A little hunting will turn up companies still selling solutions that require IE6 right now, as XP runs down the clock on even security support. Someone must be buying this crap, though I can't imagine who or why. I don't know which is worse, that Microsoft made IE6 so standards incompatible that this happened in the first place, or that they then immediately reversed course and left all these standard's non-compliant apps hanging. (Though at this point the companies still using them have no one to blame but themselves, XPs retirement schedule has been public for a good long time).
3) A lot of companies just don't feel the need. XP has the distinction of being probably the first Microsoft OS that really worked so well that there's not a lot of compelling reasons to upgrade it (besides its support clock running down). DirectX 10 is mostly unimportant to business, and the rest of Vista and 7's improvements can often be matched by just installing 3rd party software on XP (which many businesses did long before 7 was available). There's some really nice functions in the newest version of AD, but so far MS hasn't allowed XP-AD integration to break.
I suspect the only thing that will actually force companies to upgrade will be XP finally becoming completely unsupported. Even then I wouldn't be shocked to see a lot of companies jump to Vista instead of 7 on the theory that it's been around longer and is therefore better supported.
I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
You don't understand.
The ERP incumbents are guys like ORACLE.
They make SURE that the upgrade path for their ERP front end brings the whole stack. Ten, if not HUNDREDS of millions. So. Not the kind of IT big spend that will be driven, in a down economy, by an IT sub-department's need for Windows licensing.
Trust me, Oracle knows that Windows desktop and MS Office revenue are Microsoft's lifeblood.
By holding off IE-next or FF compatible rendering for Oracle Financials and PeopleSoft, they hit Microsoft where it hurts - core revenues. They also reinforce the perception of Microsoft as a difficult upgrade, and a general poor technology choice.
Larry likes this. There are other vendors, playing this game, too. Some are MS partners, so work th angle with more ambiguity.
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."