It’s semi-official: the next major update to Windows, which has already had its release slip from 2004 to 2005, will likely be even later. Microsoft executives are now reluctant to even discuss a release date. “We do not yet know the time frame for Longhorn, but it will involve a lot of innovative and exciting work,” said Bill Gates at a recent financial analyst meeting.
Microsoft’s monopoly by that expected date (Desktop and server wise).
I think we all expected this.
>but it will involve a lot of innovative and exciting work
i hope so, but please … focus in security and stability.
every time Bill Gates uses the word “Innovation”, it sounds like Bush or Ashcroft using the word “Patriotism”. Baby Jesus cries every time they do that.
Cool don’t ya love software subscription? Every 4-5 years new software
I really wonder how companies will react on this news.
I wonder if it’ll end up being vaporware
I still do not understand why the world stops everytime Microsoft comes advertising what they plan to do in 2-3-4 years.
They only advertise (hype) “future projects” (vaporware)to stop other people from developing.
That longhorn rubbish will only innovate the desktop about having more stupid animation effects. to make windows confortable for work one needs to stop window animations, so figure how awfull is going to be having to use longshit.
And security will be improved only making every exe requirinf a digital certificate, this won’t enforce anything else but Microsoft hold on the industry.
The rest will be the same bloody OS since NT4 with the same bloody holes, rubbish and bloatware.
I pray for something else eatable by next year, I do not mind even if it is Linux with all of its problems.
It is unheard of.;)
Windows Server 2003 has only one year in market, and next server would be due in the next 2 years (or an upgraded version of WS2003, as Service Packs “does not include new features”). IT deparments: 1. will not switch to a new server on the next 4-5 years if they bough WS2003 2. will not change to WS2003 and will wait for the first service pack of “Longhorn Server” to change.
Delaying Longhorn is a way to do not cannibalize WS2003 sales and loose all the investment in “security” already made on it.
Also, as Longhorn have high system requirements. The new composition engine requires DX9 class hardware (at least $200-$300, as sub $100 lack any good DX9 perfomance) which still is expensive. Processor requirement is high, and not everyone in the world will have a 3GHz 1 computer next year (remember that US is not the only market for MS). Imagine MS going to Germany to offer this new OS for free (yeah sure) but asking to upgrade all their machines just to be able to have a transparent calculator (I know these features can be turned off, and that Longhorn have other probably more interesting features, but it’s just for the dramatic effect). Also remember that Palladium (or whatever is called now) would require hardware changes too. Also PCI-Express due next year, Serial-ATA and other technologies just being somehow deployed makes next year a very dinamical environment for a not-yet-needed OS.
It’s not even semi-official. It’s just FUD right now.
Just because they don’t say 2005 in every sentence regarding Longhorn means it must be delayed now? Gimme a break people.
When they actually say “Longhorn won’t ship until 2006,” then it will be news.
Would be nice if they delayed it another 50 years.
Newer versions of Linux are not delayed, fixes binary distribution issues in the x86 platform and makes Xfree behave like a decent GFX environmet.
Note I’m not saying Xfree is slow or bloated I simply want it to improve.
• Tier 1 experience—Delivers the minimum hardware acceleration and desktop composition for the Windows Longhorn user experience. It requires, at a minimum, earlier versions of mainstream 3D graphics hardware, with 3D capabilities equivalent to what was commonly available under Microsoft DirectX® 7
http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/hwdev/tech/display/graphics-reqs.mspx
These cards are CURRENTLY available for less than $100. I know, i have a $89 one right now. And when this is released, possibly up to THREE YEARS from now, I’m sure they will be even cheaper. So take your FUD elsewhere.
… you don’t clean up you operating-system fpr more than 10 years.
I hope they do it right this time!
If you read what I said, you’ll see that I said that there are sub $100 cards (and their perfomance, from my personal POV, is disappointing). Now, what you are saying was exactly my point, that they are delaying the release to have wide availability of DX9 cards, among other hardware.
Discuss on current minimum requirements are worthless, as they are based on an un-finished product. Minimim requirements for Win95 where a 486 with 4MB … sure the OS could be installed, but it didn’t run, it crawled. For example, DX7 era cards just to have around 16MB RAM… clearly not enough to handle high resolutions screens (I expect you would like to run a slow low resolution interface?).
Anyone who is surprised by this doesn’t remember MS hyping Windows 95 three years early (“Chicago”, anyone?), and DOS 6 three years early, just to keep competition from entering the market and to keep its existing customers from migrating to a superior technology available right now.
And anyone who believes MS press releases when they talk about what features will be in Longhorn probably still believes what MS said in 1993…that “Windows Chicago” would be out in 1994 and it would not require DOS to run. Microsoft is the king of BS.
Off topic: Ever notice how Apple under Jobs’ leadership never talks about projects-in-progress until their release is at maximum 3 or 4 months away? Jobs would have to suffer a stroke before he’d even consider talking about what OS X is going to include in 2006.
And anyone who believes MS press releases when they talk about what features will be in Longhorn probably still believes what MS said in 1993…that “Windows Chicago” would be out in 1994 and it would not require DOS to run. Microsoft is the king of BS.
They meant that you wouldn’t have to already own DOS to install Windows 95, and that’s not BS.
Will it really takes Gates another 3 years to copy the features that Apple has put into Jaguar and Panther? Apple does all the R&D for Microsloth. It shouldn’t take 3 whole years to churn out an ugly Panther clone.
“When I’m writing code at home or rendering something, why does it have to happen on my home machine? Why can’t it seamlessly run those tasks on the dozen or so machines I have access to that are just sitting there?” he asked.”
rendering farm, the unix family and clones have had that since forever.
“A partner with a Midwest company who works closely on Windows and who requested anonymity said he wants to see more distributed computing features, which is a logical path for Microsoft’s .Net initiative to take.”
yes, we call that “DistCC” , so what people are demanding can be found on the unices and unix clones..
allright, now we only need someone to package it neatly…
If they would copy what OS X is then they it end up with more GUI than Features, realy OS X isn’t as advanced as you think. It just has a hyped GUI which is from my point of view as muched copied from Windows like the Windows Gui copied from OS X.
“allright, now we only need someone to package it neatly…”
I can apt-get install distcc, so someone has packaged it cleany.
but but but RPM!
that we can now expect a Windows XP Second Edition
1. Linux/*bsd/*nix Users: “MS always delays!!!! Aaaarghhh! They’s the devil! They seeketh world domination!”
2. Mac OS X Users: “Hmpf! Mac OS X is superior. No matter how Bill tries, he’ll always run three years behind Mac OS X. Mac OS X is god.”
3. BeOS Users: “Does it matter? We can still use an OS that can compete with anything else, and it’s three years old!”
4. REAL Computer Users: “What’s the commotion all about? Longhorn delayed? Is THAT news??”
I’m 3 and 4!
Just kidding, all
Good perspective, Thom. Most of these OS bigots would also complain if MS released their product early for a change. It’s all ego, wrapped in ridiculous ideological clothing.
oooh so they are waiting for OS XI to come out so they can rip off more of Apple’s ideas?
“If they would copy what OS X is then they it end up with more GUI than Features, realy OS X isn’t as advanced as you think. It just has a hyped GUI which is from my point of view as muched copied from Windows like the Windows Gui copied from OS X.”
This comment coming from a person that still thinks; if it looks pretty then it doesn’t have anything under the hood. I’m sorry buddy, but Apple’s OS X is as advanced operating system as anything else on the market. True the GUI aspect is too advanced, it’s what you can do in the UNIX shell that is amazing. The GUI is just for looks, if you know what you’re doing in command line then this is a very advanced operating system. You got to think outside of the shell man. OS X gives you far more freedom than Windows OS.
As for Longhorn, I think everyone has it right. This action is expected from Microsoft. Heck, how many times did they push back the relase date for Windows Server 2003. Microsoft shot themselves in the foot on this one, they did a horrible job of keeping it quiet. So news was out before the OS hit alpha!!! Because of that, Microsoft is force to keep people informed so they’ll get them off their back.
People just need to take it like a grain of salt. It the product will come out when it comes out. So let the little childern run around the internet searching for those alpha and beta version of an OS that just doesn’t work at that level of development. Personally, I like to work on a final copy.
“This comment coming from a person that still thinks; if it looks pretty then it doesn’t have anything under the hood.”
Well I have to disappoint you, I know whats working under the GUI of an OS. What I meant is that if you you take the gui away from the OS X you get an BSD-Thing. Sure Apple did some work it, but what makes OS X so “powerful” is that it is easy to use, and thats all through the GUI. Besides Windows, BSD, Linux have all their special abilities, but basicly they are the same.
Trashcan, the article to wich you linked is very nice. I’m looking forward to buildin security and interruptable graphic rendering in the GPU. But it’s funny to see how Microsoft is demanding all kinds of features from graphiccard companies for technologies that can already be found in Apple’s Quartz and in Linux’s DRM without those companies help.
Who cares when MS releases it. WinXP is very nice. I don’t care when they get done as long as it means they in the end have a very nice system, which i expect it to be.
MS is not worried about the timeframe and Linux. Linux is to busy chasing it’s own tail to every get it’s act together and do something to take on MS. Linux has been praised as ready for desktop since 1999 or so, and isn’t there, its no where near winXP or OSX.
MS doesn’t have to rush longhorn out. XP is very stable and pretty dang secure, even if you don’t think so. It does what most people want. It’s not like when they were trying to get XP out and people were running 98/ME and needed to get away from that turd.
Stop with the MS copies Apple BS to, there is few things one can say were a copy and not just obvious ideas being implemented at the same time. Apple can/will take just as much from WinXP in that time as MS does from OSX.
I wish people would just stop all the longhorn nonsense and just let MS go and do their thing and when it’s ready let them show it. Instead of coming up with wild ideas on features. Or going nuts everytime the launch date moves forward or backwards.
I don’t have much love for MS but give them a chance to show what they got before you attack something that hasn’t been seen yet.
I did read it. This is not the “minimum requirements” in the traditional manner. This is a set of requirements for an experience. There will be less features yes, but it will run adequately on a DX7 era card. And I also mentioned that this product is not going to be released for a very long time. I’m sure DX9 cards will be in the $50 range as well when Longhorn is released. Yes there will be a new $300 card, but it will definitely not be required. And no, I don’t believe that it is being delayed simply because of not enough compliant cards being available /cheap enough. Radeon 9000’s are available NOW for $80.
As for low resolutions, I think you overestimate the resource usage. 1400×1050@32bit 70hz runs just fine on my mobile Radeon with 8mb of memory. The Radeon 9000 I mentioned has 128mb.
>>They meant that you wouldn’t have to already own DOS to install Windows 95, and that’s not BS.
That is not even close to what they said. They said Windows Chicago would not run on top of DOS so that IBM and Novell and Digital Research would stop development on their flavors of DOS, which they did. Of course, “We welded MS DOS into the installation process of Windows 95 so other makers of DOS don’t have a chance” is what they meant.
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/network/2000/02/07/schulman.html
“Well I have to disappoint you, I know whats working under the GUI of an OS. What I meant is that if you you take the gui away from the OS X you get an BSD-Thing.”
Well then I have to dissapoint you, but you know shit. If you take the GUI away, then you get darwin which is an OS based on the Mach microkernel and which runs a BSD personality in kernel space (so it’s something between a “real” microkernel and monolithic Unix variant). You can even install Mac OS X without the BSD userland. (Oops what do you get if you take BSD away from OS X?). Well you might want to call it “OpenStep – the next generation” or so 😉
“Sure Apple did some work it, but what makes OS X so “powerful” is that it is easy to use, and thats all through the GUI.”
So you mean being powerful through a GUI is not “really” as powerful as being powerful through the CLI? What utter nonsense.
Let’s just ignore Rendezvous, Quartz Extreme the superior multimedia capabilities (compared to any OS), the extremely low latency when doing audio (>= 1ms), the ingenious applications bundles and drag-and-drop installation, superior multi-language support (switching OS languages + language of all applications + language of user folder names on the fly) and all the other cool stuff in OS X. why?
Because these are features you can best access via the GUI and that’s not powerful, as you BIG GURU OF CLI have enlightened us!
DUH, when I talked audio latency I of course meant
<= 1 ms
In the late ’80s IBM tried to leave their competitors in the dust by introducing the PS/2 line of PCs with a slew of new features, APIs, and proprietary interfaces. They even included a brand new operating system that was only partially compatible with MS-DOS. And they protected their new bus architecture with a wall of patents.
We saw how that story ended… few people crossed the river to get to IBM’s promised land. Instead, they banded together and extended the previous architecture. They saw that they were wriggling free of IBM’s PC monopoly and weren’t about to give it back.
This looks like a similar attempt on Microsoft’s part to package an irresistible combination of new technology AND create a clean break with the past, one which will lock out Linux and other OS competitors with the DRM stuff. XP will be likely be end-of-lifed shortly after Longhorn is released. Microsoft should’ve learned from the PS/2 experience. Instead they learned the wrong lesson: “IBM’s executives are slow-footed bozos, we’re the smart ones”.
Some of us are still using Windows 2000 Professional, Windows 2000 Server and Office 2000 because it works and we don’t need to, or want to, pay Microsoft pointless $$$ for the latest version of software that doesn’t give us anything more than what we already have or need…!
“Well then I have to dissapoint you, but you know shit. If you take the GUI away, then you get darwin which is an OS based on the Mach microkernel and which runs a BSD personality in kernel space (so it’s something between a “real” microkernel and monolithic Unix variant).”
Your on the right track, but xnu (the Darwin kernel) *is* a monolithic kernel. See the following page for an official staement of this fact. (it’s in the very first paragraph even
http://www.apple.com/macosx/technologies/darwin.html
From comparing xnu’s source to that of vanilla Mach 3.0 code, I can tell you that Darwin still has all of the Mach microkernel goodness in there, but it is not used to communicate with the BSD layer. BSD code (from all three free, open source BSDs) is built right into xnu, as if it were a natural extention of Mach. It is not just a BSD layer running in kernel space.
“You can even install Mac OS X without the BSD userland. (Oops what do you get if you take BSD away from OS X?). Well you might want to call it “OpenStep – the next generation” or so ;-)”
In fairness, you could call it either and both would be true. The BSD kernel stuff is still in there, and lets not forget that NeXTStep (the code) is based on BSD itself. While OpenStep (the standard) has nothing to do with BSD, the NeXTStep implementation that evolved into Mac OS X most certainly has BSD written all over it. It is inextricable.
“So you mean being powerful through a GUI is not “really” as powerful as being powerful through the CLI? What utter nonsense.”
I think that what our misguided friend was getting at is that while often not as intuitive as a GUI, the ability to string together countless commands and to be able to script them allows for much more powerful and efficient use of a computer. I believe that both GUIs and CLIs have their place, but when I need to do things fast, CLIs usually (not always) let me get things done faster.
“Let’s just ignore Rendezvous, Quartz Extreme the superior multimedia capabilities (compared to any OS), the extremely low latency when doing audio (>= 1ms), the ingenious applications bundles and drag-and-drop installation, superior multi-language support (switching OS languages + language of all applications + language of user folder names on the fly) and all the other cool stuff in OS X. why? Because these are features you can best access via the GUI and that’s not powerful, as you BIG GURU OF CLI have enlightened us!”
Uhm, where to begin. Rendezvous works independantly of the UI, and so it does not exactly strengthen your argument. The ” superior multimedia capabilities” also largely fall under this UI independant category, graphics excepted. Drag and drop installation is cool, but there are still things in Mac OS X that require installers, so I’d let that one go too.
OT: Quartz Extreme is definately very cool.
I think they should’ve called their OS “long-haul”. No intentions on repurchasing 90% of that which they already overcharged me for XP plus more bloatware to slow down my machine. What’ll they add in this time? a new screensaver that uses half my RAM scanning my HDD for MP3 files to bolt their nightmarish DRM onto?
Anyone who is surprised by this doesn’t remember MS hyping Windows 95 three years early (“Chicago”, anyone?), and DOS 6 three years early, just to keep competition from entering the market and to keep its existing customers from migrating to a superior technology available right now.
And anyone who believes MS press releases when they talk about what features will be in Longhorn probably still believes what MS said in 1993…that “Windows Chicago” would be out in 1994 and it would not require DOS to run. Microsoft is the king of BS.
Off topic: Ever notice how Apple under Jobs’ leadership never talks about projects-in-progress until their release is at maximum 3 or 4 months away? Jobs would have to suffer a stroke before he’d even consider talking about what OS X is going to include in 2006.
Umm, remember OS 8.x? it was hyped about 5 years in advance…as was OS-X. When OS 8 was first hyped the most powerful mac cpu you could get was a PPC 601.
By the time longhorn is out, ReactOS will be an extremely useable lightweight xp compatible operating system. Why downgrade to longhorn?
Can you spell “Cairo”? 🙂
Richard,
Which part of “Apple under Jobs’ leadership you did not understand?
cheers
Phil
No no no. Sure OS X is powerful through the cli, but tell this the “normal” user. I personally run a linux server without a GUI and I get my result pretty fast. But I am not a normal User. If I’d tell my collegue to open a console window and work without his OS X gui he would get nuts… What I meant is that all if you take the user friendliness (GUI) away from OS X you get an os like the other ones (Windows, Linux, Unix. Ok Windows hasn’t got any console base software).
Amazing, isn’t it, that Panther already has a database-drive file system, a security (or whatver) system similar to Palladium, etc. Amazing, no?
What?
They don’t have that?
Oh, poor thing, because other than screenshot junkies, those are the two main features of Longhorn, not a Direct3D-driven UI.