ActiveWin.com recently had a chance to interview Dee Dee Walsh, Director of Communities for Windows Client Group. Elsewhere, Longhorn migration will be more than a technology upgrade — it will affect IT staff skills and knowledge, as well as the way employees work, says ComputerWorld.
Interview with Dee Dee Walsh of Windows Client Group
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Its a bit unclear, but do the authors really state that companies should use beta-software in the first wave of pilot tests? As admin in an end-user company this wouldn´t make any sense to me. We will perhaps load the final beta and on some machines to see what its like – not a moment before. And right now it still seems like theres a long way, before the betas even come close to the final version. Who know which features gets axed before RTM?
The only reason I can find to work with the betas, is if you are a consulting or a development shop, planning to support Longhorn.
So in the end, this article was just another attempt to hype the next version of Windows – you know, the version that is finally going to fix all the problems we had with the previous ones…
Microsoft and related system-integrators will eagerly try to convince us, that we should upgrade to Longhorn as fast as possible. But most larger companies are a conservative bunch, and so is the one I am working at. It will take a long time before we will see the first Longhorn here – probably not before SP1.
When we are getting close to the final product, we will start looking at it. And then we will see if such a fat client will really be the way to go.
It’ll get more and more people over to the Unices.
I’m a VS.NET-Developer and live in the MS world – but I won’t take part in this game in the future if MS keeps on locking in it’s customers …
And I don’t see *any* real revolutionary features in Longhorn at all – Avalon isn’t platform-independent as well as XAML, Indigo is just another try to keep up with Java app servers, the only thing I think will be getting better is the enhanced modularization of the system. But that’s all.
Why should we change?
After we migrated our 600 workstations and 1600 users to Windows2000 + Server2003 everything has been _very_ smooth.
Not viruses, no malware issues, automatic updates, program rollout with ActiveDirectory , software settings with ActiveDirectory, Kerberos with ActiveDirectory and so on. It just run so very well.
I allmost never have software problems anymore, just hardware failures. Windows2003 server is very stable and ActiveDirectory with Kerberos is a dream, much better then my OpenLdap servers with MIT Kerberos.
I really don’t want to change this, see?
So much for Windows having a lower TCO when administrative costs and training are factored in.
I have to agree with the other posters that theres absolutely no content in this article. I’ve had pasty cakes that were more filling.
Microsoft is in an odd position right now because its competing with itself, and clients are finding the old stuff still works pretty well.
We use Xp pro entirely at work but 2k workstation was pretty good.. 2003 server is excellent.. its going to be hard to generate a lot of excitement over longhorn.
But microsoft will still prevail.
Considering that Linux get like 10x as much hype than Windows does considering amount of users, talking about MS and hype has really gotten ridicilous…