“Microsoft has decided to skip a Windows server release to coincide with the Longhorn client and instead jump directly to Blackcomb, company officials confirmed Friday. Until recently, Microsoft has been talking up plans to synchronize its Windows server and client releases, starting with the next major version of Windows, code-named Longhorn.” Read the report at eWeek.
It’s Official: No Longhorn Server On Tap
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
I would have expected, from Microsoft, that they release a server OS based on Longhorn anyways as a baby cash cow. Isn’t that what they normally do? Release new versions of their products to get people to upgrade or buy ’em?
>>Isn’t that what they normally do? Release new versions of their products to get people to upgrade or buy ’em?<<
Most companies I can think of release new versions of their products so that people will buy it; that’s what companies do. If everytime I released a product people went out and bought it of course I’d continue to release new versions. That’s more the consumers fault for constantly buying the newest versions, not Microsoft’s for releasing them. Adobe comes out with new versions of Photoshop/Illustrator every year or two, same with Macromedia and Dramweaver/Flash/Director, and countless other companies. How is this different than Microsoft putting out new OS versions every couple years? When you’re in the software business you don’t just release a title and live off that title for the rest of your companies life. You make new updated versions to get repeat buyers.
It’s different because MS twists your arm into upgrading. Not even taking into consideration that that is a dirty way of doing business (bullying), it’s a pain in the ass. Microsoft OSs have a life span of what, now – 18 months? That is so unacceptable in a corporate enviorment…
Did ME really add anything useful to the OS that wasn’t available in 98SE? No. From what I’ve read and heard, it was vilified as the worst Win ever. Sounds like a good upgrade to me.
Any-hoo, back to the article… Seems like Microsoft might be planning on going the “Look, ma, we’re early this time!” route by skipping one version to start working directly on the next. Also gives them a couple years breathing room.
>>>>Microsoft OSs have a life span of what, now – 18 months? That is so unacceptable in a corporate enviorment…
Yeah — especially RedHat just announced that their Enterprise Linux edition will have a product cycle period of 12 – 18 months.
They force you to pay for upgrades, then they stop providing the upgrades.
Did ME really add anything useful to the OS that wasn’t available in 98SE? No. From what I’ve read and heard, it was vilified as the worst Win ever. Sounds like a good upgrade to me.
Yeah, we got a speech-synthesized windows installation wizard! w00t!
ME sucked donkey ballz…alot of gamers went back to 98SE.
“They force you to pay for upgrades, then they stop providing the upgrades.”
You’ve hit the nail on the head. Autodesk pulled this kind of stuff with their Mechanical Desktop (AutoCAD+Solid Modelling) “VIP” subscriptions. You paid for a year with no guarantee that there would actually be any updates within that year. At least once there was an update that conveniently fell just past the renewal date (which was the same for everyone IIRC). It is part of the reason I got out of CAD consulting. The other SW vendors in that Industry had similar schemes.
I never stated (my opinion on) redhats suitability for the corporate enviorment
What planet are you living on? IIRC, there has only been in the 9x and one case in the NT line where by the gap between releases has been that quick. Compare the NT line for example, the gap between NT 4 and 2000 was around 5 years and 6 service packs. Also, add ontop of that the life span of a product in terms of support is 5 years, meaning, on average, you’re looking at only around $AUS80 a year.
As for Windows XP, IMHO, Microsoft should never had released in, and instead, released a version that co-incided with the release of Windows.NET. Personally, I would have called it “Windows.NET Professional” or “Windows.NET Workstation”. The downside may have been a large wait for customers, but on the upswing, it would have given Microsft enough time to fix all the Win32 API problems, even if break compatibility, and given the software vendors to correct their software to work correctly with the new version.
Ms shouldn’t release software period!
Windows Me was Microsoft resort for squezing money from consumers when Microsoft couldn’t deliver Windows 2000 as a consumer OS. It was the worst mistake they made in 10 years. It hardly made any money.
However, I failed to understand why Longhorn or Blackcomb is similar to Windows Me? Because from what we know now, it would be a significant release, far more significant that Windows XP.
Why didn’t they just call Windows 2000 Pro a consumer OS once SP2 was released? in SP2 there was backwards compatibility plus alot of other stuff.
As for software incompatible, tough. It is up to the software vendors to relase updates and patches to ensure their current software works with the latest OS. If they are unwilling to do that, then they are in the wrong game.
I am personally sick and tired of the cheap skates of the world complain their 20 year old DOS 8086 game won’t work on Windows 2000, or their crusty and pointless 16bit application won’t work. Here is a hint sunshine, YOU HAVE TO UPGRADE ONCE AND A WHILE. Don’t expect the whole world to stay static because YOU don’t want to move forward. What? should I say, “stop engine development in cars because thats all I feel like learning about”? no, development moves on, and it is up to me to get over it, and update my skills. Same goes for software.
Why do people (especially Linux zealots) complain about having to upgrade Windows all the time? I just bought a brand new P4-installed my 4 year old copy of win98-installed the drivers for my hardware-and it all worked perfectly.I can play all the latest games and run all the latest software. Why the hell would i upgrade if it works?
Try installing a 4 year old distribution of Linux on a new machine with various peripherals and see how far you get.
If they named Windows 2000 as a consumer OS after SP2, it wouldn’t be enough. They would have to make a new edition without all the goodies to bring it down to a price cheap enough for consumers to buy. Plus, upgrading from Winodws 98 wasn’t that easy, and SP2 was released after Windows ME was release.
As for software compatiblity, even for Microsoft, this is extremely vital. Microsoft can’t go like Apple breaking binary compatiblity between every major release. Why? Guess what its monopoly is based on (a simple fact the DoJ didn’t get)? Third party software. Lots of them. Lose them, consumers would stick to a old version of Windows.