Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 24th Mar 2006 23:36 UTC, submitted by ma_d
Windows Ars is contradicting the 60% claim made earlier today, stating: "Reportedly, the Media Center code in the OS is in shambles, and needs to be saved by the Xbox code team. Curiosity piqued, I contacted my usual sources. In short, the story is an extreme exaggeration. I suppose this much is obvious from the mere fact that what was once a late November shipping date has now moved to January 2007: would the revelation that more than half of the code is in need of repair only translate into a two month delay? Of course not. I suppose the cynic could still invest in this rumor by arguing that the delay will stretch into 2007, but that has yet to be seen, and it really amounts to FUD at this point."
Order by: Score:
figures
by poundsmack on Fri 24th Mar 2006 23:53 UTC
poundsmack
Member since:
2005-07-13

it was kind of a given that this was a bunch of FUD... I am glad it is clearded up though

Reply Score: 2

According
by dylansmrjones on Sat 25th Mar 2006 00:06 UTC
dylansmrjones
Member since:
2005-10-02

to the former story it was primarily the media center which was affected. It's probably 60% of that code which needs rewriting. But that's only a minor part of all the code.

Considering MS earlier went back to the Win2003 codebase, nobody can believe that they would have screwed up so fast.

But funny stories none-the-less.

Reply Score: 3

Huh?
by youknowmewell on Sat 25th Mar 2006 00:10 UTC
youknowmewell
Member since:
2005-07-08

All it said was, "My sources say that's an exaggeration." The author doesn't go into any details. However, the claim that 60% needs to be rewritten is also unsubstantiated. So the rumor is not dispelled, but is still rumor.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Huh?
by ma_d on Sat 25th Mar 2006 00:40 UTC in reply to "Huh?"
ma_d Member since:
2005-06-29

I'll take Ken Fisher's published word for it ;) .

Reply Score: 1

RE: Huh?
by Jody on Sat 25th Mar 2006 01:41 UTC in reply to "Huh?"
Jody Member since:
2005-06-30

It has taken forever to get Vista as far as it is now and you think it is possible for MS to redisign, plan, rewrite, and test 60% of the entire Vista product inside of 2 months? lets not forget Vista was not a ground up rewrite of Windows in the first place, I dont know the % but I can assure you that a great deal of it is likely reused code.

A 60% rewite would be delayed in years, not months.

edit:

This would mean rewriting nearly 30 million lines of code in 2 months.

Edited 2006-03-25 01:46

Reply Score: 2

RE: Huh?
by kaiwai on Sat 25th Mar 2006 09:16 UTC in reply to "Huh?"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

All it said was, "My sources say that's an exaggeration." The author doesn't go into any details. However, the claim that 60% needs to be rewritten is also unsubstantiated. So the rumor is not dispelled, but is still rumor.

Aye? he has already dismissed it; 60% doesn't need to be re-written, and the issue has to do with security and third party vendors, and for obvious reasons, the sources aren't going to release the specfic information relating to the problem as it would reveal what development group the source is - thus, compromising that individuals employment.

Lets remember that third parties also work with Microsoft on Window as well, so for all we know, the third party or parties could have found a security issue, and thus, they need time to possibly re-write how something is handled; what ever the case, it appears that things are going well in development circles, but at the same time, the stakes are high as there is alot riding on the success of this product when compared to others.

Windows XP was a no-brainer, it was the move from 9x to Windows NT, the stability argument alone was enough to make people move - now that we're in the Windows NT zone, its going to be alot harder for Microsoft to sell Windows Vista, sure, there are some great technical enhancements, but its about marketing those advancements in such a way that actually gets the end user interested in upgrading to it without daunting them with the overly complex ideas that tend to come with information technology.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Huh?
by druiloor on Sat 25th Mar 2006 10:00 UTC in reply to "RE: Huh?"
druiloor Member since:
2006-02-01

> Windows XP was a no-brainer, it was the move from 9x
> to Windows NT,

Well, maybe for home-desktop users it was. It certainly wasn't for a bunch of companys i know about (as they migrated from NT to 2000, and from Unix and Netware to Linux.)

Gratest problem with XP is the unacceptable conditions in the EULA.TXT it ships with, similar to:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/home/eula.mspx

> the stability argument alone was enough to make
> people move -

No, i think, people want to keep up with the Johnsons.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Huh?
by kaiwai on Sat 25th Mar 2006 10:33 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Huh?"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

No, i think, people want to keep up with the Johnsons.

How so? Most people I know, heard from their computer geek friend that Windows XP was more stable, and wouldn't crash all the time - so they thought, "ooh, thats gonna fix my problems' so they upgrade.

Gratest problem with XP is the unacceptable conditions in the EULA.TXT it ships with, similar to:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/home/eula.mspx


And what is in unacceptable in that licence? please outline those parts you have issues with.

Well, maybe for home-desktop users it was. It certainly wasn't for a bunch of companys i know about (as they migrated from NT to 2000, and from Unix and Netware to Linux.)

Nice to see that you have comprehension issues; I clearny stated that the move from 9x to Windows NT was a no-brainer; no where did I mention a move from NT to 2000, or UNIX to Linux - btw, the context of Windows NT is in relation to migrating from the 9x line to the NT code base (Windows XP being the latest).

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Huh?
by dylansmrjones on Sat 25th Mar 2006 10:57 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Huh?"
dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

Most people I know, heard from their computer geek friend that Windows XP was more stable, and wouldn't crash all the time - so they thought, "ooh, thats gonna fix my problems' so they upgrade.

I cannot imagine ever having heard a geek recommending XP.

However, many geeks have been recommending Win2K, or other platforms than Windows.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Huh?
by kaiwai on Sat 25th Mar 2006 12:02 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Huh?"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

However, many geeks have been recommending Win2K, or other platforms than Windows.

Oh pulease; so you go into a mates house and say 'throw away all those games and applications you like and start using Linux!"

Yeah, great way to lose friends recommending stupid things like that.

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: Huh?
by dylansmrjones on Sat 25th Mar 2006 12:09 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Huh?"
dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

Huh?

What are you smoking?

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: Huh?
by kaiwai on Sat 25th Mar 2006 12:13 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Huh?"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Nothing, maybe you should join me breathing fresh air rather than smoking that Mary Jane.

Want to dance the Linux advocate dance, start backing it up with some cold hard facts - the end user runs Windows because it allows them to run the games and applications they want; plain and simple.

Want that end user to convert to your favourite operating system (why the hell someone could care over what another person runs, god only knows), then get those applications and games running on it.

Reply Score: 0

RE[5]: Huh?
by sappyvcv on Sat 25th Mar 2006 15:37 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Huh?"
sappyvcv Member since:
2005-07-06

I recommended installing some extra memory (was 64MB) and XP to my Aunt. She had me do it for her, but she was and is very very happy with the results. Her computer no longer randomly crashes.

I installed XP w/slipstreamed SP2, Windows AntiSpyware (at the time) and Firefox (even though I personally use Opera, it wasn't as friendly at the time).

She's stopped calling me to come fix some random crap every other week.

edit: Oh yeah, and she was very excited when she plugged in my Uncle's camera and it just worked. She was able to browse the pictures right away without any special software.

Edited 2006-03-25 15:38

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Huh?
by druiloor on Sat 25th Mar 2006 11:04 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Huh?"
druiloor Member since:
2006-02-01

>> No, i think, people want to keep up with the Johnsons.
> How so?

They buy a mp3 player, camera, or whatever that happens to only work with XP. Or they get a shiny new PC via some home-computer from work (with tax reduction) project.

> And what is in unacceptable in that licence? please
> outline those parts you have issues with.

Please just read it yourself. Maybe this helps:
http://www.macobserver.com/article/2002/10/23.13.shtml

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Huh?
by kaiwai on Sat 25th Mar 2006 12:10 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Huh?"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

They buy a mp3 player, camera, or whatever that happens to only work with XP. Or they get a shiny new PC via some home-computer from work (with tax reduction) project.

Which has nothing to do with 'keeping up with the johnsons' - its the job of the operating system to support the hardware, not the end user to specially look for hardware that works with their OS; do I need to repeat this again, "people want the computers to work for them, not the other way around".

Please just read it yourself. Maybe this helps:
http://www.macobserver.com/article/2002/10/23.13.shtml


Which is dated 2002, they've since updated their EULA based on customer feedback; if you look at the EULA on points 2.4 and 6.0 - they collect generic information in regards to what is required for updating - no different to Apple providing the necessary information as to which version of MacOS X you are running, and which packages you have installed and may require updating.

Please, lets stick to facts and avoid the fud; you may hate Microsoft with some sort of religious zealotry, but facts go that there are over 220million satisfied Windows XP customers, and growing.

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: Huh?
by druiloor on Sat 25th Mar 2006 13:00 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Huh?"
druiloor Member since:
2006-02-01

[Snip: Divice driver support. ]

> Which has nothing to do with 'keeping up with the johnsons' -

For me personally it did. For instance my MiniDisk Walkman work(ed) fine, yet i got an MP3 player aswell.

> Please, lets stick to facts and avoid the fud;

Do you happen to have a link handy, where its explained how say hospitals can use MS-Windows XP without them having to have any fear they might have given MS (or 3th party affiliates) consent to looking at patient data, if only by accident? TIA

> you may hate Microsoft [...]

Well thanks for allowing me that freedom. I don't however hate them (or any other) company per se, nor do i care whether or not anyone else does. It just doesn't surprise me thier next OS release got delayed, as it looked to me an incredible lot of effort was spent designing and implementing (unwelcome?) DRM features.

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: Huh?
by kaiwai on Sat 25th Mar 2006 13:17 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Huh?"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

For me personally it did. For instance my MiniDisk Walkman work(ed) fine, yet i got an MP3 player aswell.

What? you looked over at your 'neighbour' (the neighbour being used, could be regarded as friend, uncle or aunty) and upgraded just because they had one? I bought an iPod for my own use and the fact it was the cheapest player on offer at the time, not to be like everyone else, just convenience of having 9gigs worth of music on me at all times.

Do you happen to have a link handy, where its explained how say hospitals can use MS-Windows XP without them having to have any fear they might have given MS (or 3th party affiliates) consent to looking at patient data, if only by accident? TIA

[shakes head in fustration] here are the three quotations (assuming no EULA differences between HOME and Professional):

1.2 Mandatory Activation. Microsoft will not collect any personally identifiable information from your Workstation Computer during this process.

2.4 Internet Gaming/Update Features. Microsoft may use this information solely to improve our software or to provide customized services or technologies to you. Microsoft may disclose this information to others, but not in a form that personally identifies you.

6. CONSENT TO USE OF DATA. You agree that Microsoft and its affiliates may collect and use technical information gathered as part of the product support services provided to you, if any, related to the Software. Microsoft may use this information solely to improve our products or to provide customized services or technologies to you and will not disclose this information in a form that personally identifies you.

In each and EVERY one of those parts, NO personal information is being shipped off to Microsoft.

You keep up your tinfoil hat conspiracies, they provide great ammusement to me.

Edited 2006-03-25 13:18

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: Huh?
by bn-7bc on Sat 25th Mar 2006 17:26 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Huh?"
bn-7bc Member since:
2005-09-04

Well the OS can't do it's job if the hw manufacturers does not make yhe drivers (or release the spcs), so don't blame Linux (ehm the distro) for not supporting dev x. Ate least RH/Fedora does not requier payment for drifers to be included unlike MS does.

Reply Score: 1

Can't apply to the whole OS
by PlatformAgnostic on Sat 25th Mar 2006 01:17 UTC
PlatformAgnostic
Member since:
2006-01-02

The Windows Team has been actively working on modularizing this release so that problems in any one area would not affect large parts of the OS (this has always been true between User and Kernel Space but certain parts of the Shell and the Win32 libraries have not been so modular). There is no way that anyone outside of Microsoft can know enough about all of the little, relatively separated, pieces to say that 60% of the whole product needs to be rewritten.

Media Center, on the other hand, does sound like the kind of project that could require a large rewrite. (For those who complain about MS not using C# in their own products:) Media Center is a .NET application which probably could use some cleaning out because it was probably written to a platform that was changing rather rapidly. Also, since it wasn't a central product and doesn't have comparable security implications, the devs on that team were probably not the Hotshots of MSFT.

Regardless, the Vista slip is pretty disheartening to me, because it would have been a great excuse to upgrade from my 6 year old P4 with 256 MB of RAM (that runs XP and VS 2005 with IIS and tons of other stuff like a charm).

Reply Score: 3

RE: Can't apply to the whole OS
by kaiwai on Sat 25th Mar 2006 09:22 UTC in reply to "Can't apply to the whole OS"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Regardless, the Vista slip is pretty disheartening to me, because it would have been a great excuse to upgrade from my 6 year old P4 with 256 MB of RAM (that runs XP and VS 2005 with IIS and tons of other stuff like a charm).

Meh, I'd throw another 512MB onto the thing, and wait it out a little - given how things are going, why not wait till the 64bit version of Intels processors come out and grab a Dell? or if Alienware stays with AMD, grab one of those.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Can't apply to the whole OS
by raver31 on Sat 25th Mar 2006 10:34 UTC in reply to "RE: Can't apply to the whole OS"
raver31 Member since:
2005-07-06

I have asked before... but can you give me an honest answer as to why people should upgrade to Vista ?

Reply Score: 0

kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Question is; why not? I'm happy with Windows XP right now, and I'll probably wait till I need to upgrade to Vista - for example, an application or game I want, explicitly states that I have to have Windows Vista to run it - then I'll upgrade.

Windows Vista vs. Windows XP will have improved security, stability and reliability - or so claimed by Microsoft; but at the same time, what are the alternatives? the alternatives are looking pretty shit right now.

One corner you have Apple - which is a good alternative only IF you're going to upgrade your hardware, then sure, no worries its a good move, but for those of us who purchased a computer in the last year, what alternatives do we have?

There is Linux, which lacks decent hardware support (ATI saga anyone) and lacking decent software in the forms of applications and Games - not OSS crap, I'm talking about big name games and applications.

The other corner, Windows, which, for all intensive purposes does the job ok (emphasise on the ok), but as I've said, given that the alternatives are so shit for the x86, the only true alternative is to wait till your hardware needs upgrading and make the jump to MacOS X.

Reply Score: 1

Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

I'm in agreement here but maybe Vista will pull something out from under it's sleeves and impress us all..or it could just go like the XP Beta->Release from Good to Ugly.

I still however maintain an open mind when thinking about Vista given Microsoft's past and what they're doing now. I really can't say theres anything I find horrible about it, just some things could be implemented better.

Reply Score: 0

kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

I still however maintain an open mind when thinking about Vista given Microsoft's past and what they're doing now. I really can't say theres anything I find horrible about it, just some things could be implemented better.

True; but I get the feeling that they're rushing it - just the way that they're putting so much emphasise on the release date rather than trying to get it right.

Now sure, one can't produce a mass produced product such as Windows, that is completely bug free, but at the same time, there were some STUPID bugs in Windows XP - installation, clicked enter on the disk to install, and the setup assigned the letter D to the drive; the themeing in Windows XP is quirky - download a theme off the Microsoft website, and you'll find that the application of that theme is all mishmashed.

I'm downloading Fedora Core 5.0 to see what it is like - I'm optimistic, but realistic at the same time.

Reply Score: 1

raver31 Member since:
2005-07-06

so you are saying there is actually no reason for people to upgrade RIGHT NOW ?

Reply Score: 0

kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

so you are saying there is actually no reason for people to upgrade RIGHT NOW ?

Depends on what you want from your computer - for some people, its more than adequate, whilst others, they may feel that the 'improved security' (deliberately put in quotations) and other features could be worth the upgrade price - its a case by case basis, not something you can give a blanket yes or no reply to.

But then again, that would be the same issue for migrating to Linux or any other operating system - is there a justification? atleast with Windows, when upgrading, you can still use all your applications and worse case scenario, you'll find that the improvements aren't noticeable - move to another operating system, you have to find new software, migrate your data accross then pray that all your hardware is supported.

Hence end users are stuck on the Windows cycle; the alternatives are shit, what Microsoft offers, although not the best possible product that could be produced by them (Microsoft), but does the job adequately, so they remain with Windows.

Edited 2006-03-25 12:59

Reply Score: 1

Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Unless you can't read it's been stated already that Vista holds MANY improvements over XP including performance and security. Additionally it's impossible to update RIGHT NOW as it isn't released yet..

When it comes out the improved stability and new things like multimedia applications, audio stack, per application sound settings, parental controls, aero, networking stack, and overall ease to use will have people flocking to Vista.

Reply Score: 1

raver31 Member since:
2005-07-06

nope... remember I have been a Vista beta tester since the beginning, and there is marked performance degradation. The security model is nowhere near as strong as *nix, It is about on par with XP SP2.

And as you say, it is not released yet. So the majority of people who have not tried it, should have no idea why they want to upgrade. Other than the fact that they think newer is automatically better.

but then, people are sheep, camera makers are currently pushing 7m pixel cameras when 4m pixel are more than adequate for everyones day to day use. We do not all make A1 posters !

Reply Score: 1

captain_knobjockey Member since:
2005-08-23

dont talk crap. I have a 3mp camera and a 5mp camera and the pictures on the 5mp camera are clearer and brighter, just like it said on the adverts.

stop come on here and lying, newer is always better as the bugs are always fixed

Reply Score: 1

Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

I'd blame your hardware mostly but remember, Vista hasn't been finetuned yet since it is still deep in it's development. Unless you've been in a hole for the last 5 years you'd know how much performance is to be gained.

Reply Score: 1

silicon Member since:
2005-07-30

In the strict sense I would say that you expect too much for free.

First of all, Supporting devices is not the work of the OS. Linux provides an excellent device driver framework. It's the manufacturer's job to provide specs or to write a good driver themselves.

Secondly Linux has quality applications. It can be used in everywhere between Airplane entertainment systems to high end servers. All applications do have an OpenSource counterpart ( Well almost all ). Probably if Linux had a wider userbase some software manufacturer would port their commercial applications to Linux.

So ultimately see who is to blame: People like you who go whining about indecent applications and(or) device support. I think Linux is quite usable already. Even you know about all benefits of using OSS in the long run. So you can make a difference today by voting with your wallet and also using Linux as your primary OS.

Reply Score: 1

kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

In the strict sense I would say that you expect too much for free.

I don't expect anything for free; I do expect that the likes of Red Hat and Novell would get off their fat chuffs and start pumping out drivers for Linux rather than sitting back and simply diddling with the GUI with each release.

First of all, Supporting devices is not the work of the OS. Linux provides an excellent device driver framework. It's the manufacturer's job to provide specs or to write a good driver themselves.

No it isn't, its shit; it forces hardware manufacturers to either opensource their driver (which some don't like doing - personally, I think their arguments are stupid, but hey, its their IP, their choice) and merge it into the mainline kernel OR forever and a day, try to chase the release cycles of distribution kernels that are out there as each release will require a recompile.

Linux had the opportunity years ago to work on the UDK - a universal driver API that sat onto of Linux, and provided a stable driver API for companies to devlop against; it never took off because of the fundamentalist opensource factions demanded that all drivers should be opensource - a big 'screw you' to the end user as I see it.

Secondly Linux has quality applications. It can be used in everywhere between Airplane entertainment systems to high end servers. All applications do have an OpenSource counterpart ( Well almost all ). Probably if Linux had a wider userbase some software manufacturer would port their commercial applications to Linux.

For YOU they have quality applications, for ME I want the applications *I* like; as I said, I can do without Office 2003, there isn't enough features in Office 2003 that I use, which OpenOffice.org doesn't have, but with the same breath, I'm certainly not going to give up my CS2 or Painter IX simply so I get the fuzzy feel goods about running an OSS operating system.

So ultimately see who is to blame: People like you who go whining about indecent applications and(or) device support. I think Linux is quite usable already. Even you know about all benefits of using OSS in the long run. So you can make a difference today by voting with your wallet and also using Linux as your primary OS.

Why am I to blame? I'm an end user, I expect that the computer and operating system to work for me - it isn't up to me to cut down my expectations simply in some altruistic ideal that if I put up with mediocrity, then some day Adobe or Corel might deliver a product for Linux.

If you can't see that, then you're clearly out of touch with reality, and some how think that we should be all bending over backwards for OSS because its of its nice fuzzy feel good ideals, neglecting fact that certain OSS applications are just not up to the task - GIMP and its shit house UI is one example; f*cking mennus everywhere, lack of consistancy - its a big hosh-posh of crap pushed into a box and pushed off as a product; little has been done on the quality whilst most of the emphasise as far as I see has been put on hyping the fact that it is OSS, the only thing actually going for it!

Edited 2006-03-26 01:34

Reply Score: 0

RE: Can't apply to the whole OS
by ma_d on Sat 25th Mar 2006 18:17 UTC in reply to "Can't apply to the whole OS"
ma_d Member since:
2005-06-29

Better than that, they've been working on making it more orthogonal. TMK, it was already modular, but not orthogonal.

I suppose one could argue that closely tied together modules are hardly modules anymore, but I'd disagree.

Reply Score: 1

Some responses to it from Microsoft employees
by Janus on Sat 25th Mar 2006 01:28 UTC
Janus
Member since:
2005-07-20

Here's a few blog posts by Microsoft insiders on the 60% rewrite thing. (Scoble being a technical evangelist and Osterman being a veteran Microsoft developer)

http://scobleizer.wordpress.com/

http://blogs.msdn.com/larryosterman/archive/2006/03/24/560147.aspx

Their reactions to the issue pretty much takes away any credibility to the 60% claim, if it even had any in the first place.

Reply Score: 3

v Vista vs linux
by 2501 on Sat 25th Mar 2006 01:47 UTC
RE: Vista vs linux
by helf on Sat 25th Mar 2006 02:23 UTC in reply to "Vista vs linux"
helf Member since:
2005-07-06

I really hope this isnt a serious post.

Reply Score: 0

v RE[2]: Vista vs linux
by cozby on Sat 25th Mar 2006 05:23 UTC in reply to "Vista vs linux"
Well..
by Nelson on Sat 25th Mar 2006 02:34 UTC
Nelson
Member since:
2005-11-29

I'm also pretty sure it was misinterpreted and simply meant, 60% of the media code. Just another example of people not listening and/or twisting words to be able to take a jab at windows, nothing to see here.

Additionally, that 5 years to get to where we are is bull, they rewrote it once (for the better) so I'd say the time spent actually working on the Vista we see now is more like 2-3.

I wish them the best of luck with this and it will probably turn out nice seeing they have the XBox developers on the job.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Well..
by kaiwai on Sat 25th Mar 2006 09:24 UTC in reply to "Well.."
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Additionally, that 5 years to get to where we are is bull, they rewrote it once (for the better) so I'd say the time spent actually working on the Vista we see now is more like 2-3.

True; when you consider that worked was haulted on Vista to retrain programmers (aka, the grunters in the trenches), audit, and get Service Pack 2 out, plus the move to using Windows 2003 SP1 as the basis of Windows Vista.

Reply Score: 2

Milo_Hoffman
Member since:
2005-07-06

InfoWorld: Vista problems might be bigger than admitted

http://www.infoworld.com/article/06/03/24/76795_HNvista...staprobsw...
Beta testers familiar with plans to release Vista test versions contradict Microsoft, saying the ship date has been pushed back two months, not weeks.

More delays in the release schedule for Windows Vista revealed Friday hint that problems with getting the OS out the door may be broader than Microsoft has articulated.

eta testers familiar with Microsoft's (Profile, Products, Articles) plans to release test versions of the OS said that although Microsoft has said Vista development has been delayed a few weeks, the date the OS will be released to manufacturers has been pushed back two months.

Allchin characterized the delay in development as "a few weeks" on Tuesday's call. But a two-month change in the RTM of the product clearly suggests development is off track by more than that. Moreover, analysts said missing its target date for the holiday season gives Microsoft breathing room to push back Vista's release even further into 2007.

Reply Score: 1

its all garbage speculation....
by jakesdad on Sat 25th Mar 2006 02:59 UTC
jakesdad
Member since:
2005-12-28

Until it is released. All any of this does is generate buzz around the new release. 60% or not, who cares.. Remember there is no bad publicity, as long as it is on your mind its doing its part.

Reply Score: 2

Whatever
by ApproachingZero on Sat 25th Mar 2006 03:59 UTC
ApproachingZero
Member since:
2005-11-10

Yeah I totally believe Vista will be released in January 2007. This is like the fifth delay, but they really really mean it this time!

Reply Score: 4

RE: Whatever
by Yogurth on Sat 25th Mar 2006 04:14 UTC in reply to "Whatever"
Yogurth Member since:
2005-07-20

lol! ^^

Reply Score: 0

Cynics!
by Brendan on Sat 25th Mar 2006 05:52 UTC
Brendan
Member since:
2005-11-16

Of course not. I suppose the cynic could still invest in this rumor by arguing that the delay will stretch into 2007, but that has yet to be seen, and it really amounts to FUD at this point.

Surely we can find better cynics than this!

What if 60% of Vista needs to be rewritten, but Microsoft is planning to release it after only rewriting 1% of it? The remaining 59% could be rewritten and released as "service packs" later on.

Of course this post is not meant to be taken seriously - I just like playing "devil's advocate" now and then...

Reply Score: 1

RE: Cynics!
by Nelson on Sat 25th Mar 2006 06:11 UTC in reply to "Cynics!"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Ahahah that's good.

I seriously hope they dont delay further, but whatever if they have to do it to make a stable OS then so be it. The last thing I'd want is a rushed release.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Cynics!
by l3v1 on Sat 25th Mar 2006 09:44 UTC in reply to "RE: Cynics!"
l3v1 Member since:
2005-07-06

"rushed" ? ;)

Reply Score: 1

"amounts to FUD"
by l3v1 on Sat 25th Mar 2006 09:42 UTC
l3v1
Member since:
2005-07-06

Now come on, the words uncertainty and doubt in one context with MS, this is unimaginable and incomprehensible ;)

Other than that, as the betas show, they still have some more way to go on that yellow developer's road.

Reply Score: 1

MS-DRMOS
by druiloor on Sat 25th Mar 2006 10:11 UTC
druiloor
Member since:
2006-02-01

AKA Palladium, ofcource what is left of that in MS-Vista is the NGSCB (next generation secure computing base), however the idee was to run some audited kernel by the name of Nexus allong the NT. I'd suspect the R&D of this stuff to have been huge - http://cryptome.org/ms-drm-os.htm - Only for the whole thing to be canceled.

Reply Score: 1

on purpose
by djangoxl on Sat 25th Mar 2006 10:30 UTC
djangoxl
Member since:
2006-03-10

Whatif this whole thing was done "on purpose" by Microsoft? Think of it, what would happen if the suddenly announce in december that Vista WILL ship "on time"...but that people have to be FAST because there might be a shortage....

People will be fighting over themseelves to get a copy, and Vista will be the next best thing since sliced bread.

Here in Holland they always tell this story about how old people who even didn't have a computer were hyped about the forthcoming Windows 95 and were buying copies...

Marketing:-)

Reply Score: 1

100%
by Matt24 on Sat 25th Mar 2006 11:32 UTC
Matt24
Member since:
2005-07-23

MS have been busy since 2001 to make XP (sequel-) somewhat secure, wouldn't that be a code crisis? I would have preferred if they did a 100% rewrite.

Reply Score: 1

Computer Makers
by gary1979 on Sat 25th Mar 2006 11:40 UTC
gary1979
Member since:
2006-01-31

I wonder how Dell, HP, Leveno, etc. react to this news? I know a lot of people who will use Vista as an opportunity to upgrade their machines. But, if MS keeps long release dates with "constant" delays, how do they intice people to upgrade their machines? I can now see why IBM got out of the desktop market. Servers running AIX and Linux can be pumped out faster because they will have a newer, "better" OS. Does anybody know what these companies will do/are doing to keep profits up?

Reply Score: 1

Please don't rush it!!!
by Bonus on Sat 25th Mar 2006 12:14 UTC
Bonus
Member since:
2005-12-23

Yes I can confidently say I would like to wait at least 20 years for it to ship for extra polish as I dont want it rushed.

Reply Score: 2

OSnews is still around?
by Lumbergh on Sat 25th Mar 2006 13:23 UTC
Lumbergh
Member since:
2005-06-29

Anyway, it's good to see osnews is barely chugling along.

what's new? idiots that think that linux on the desktop will somehow make a "comeback". hehe.

Nobody cares about Vista as far as it'll arrive and dominate as all windows does. For us that have been using Unix workstations at work and Windows XP at home it means nothing.

For losers that hang out here, it'll mean another year where Linux loses on all counts.

Reply Score: 0

hire apple!
by sp29 on Sat 25th Mar 2006 14:16 UTC
sp29
Member since:
2006-01-04

It will be delayed again,.

Reply Score: 1

Almost there
by diskinetic on Sat 25th Mar 2006 15:06 UTC
diskinetic
Member since:
2005-12-09

If we can generate about 28 more responses to this story that refutes the other story, the two stories will have mathmatically eliminated each other, of course, we can't really count this one, since there probably isn't a response to that story that says, "I sure hope there's enough responses to the story refuting this story to cancel it out mathmatically." Wait... okay, we're cool now. Carry on, guys! Best of luck!

Reply Score: 1

remains to be seen
by netpython on Sat 25th Mar 2006 15:15 UTC
netpython
Member since:
2005-07-06

Ars:"My contacts are reticent to reveal additional details,"

Doesn't make you a trustworthy source either.

Fact is as MS stated itself,there're some code problems.So this will at least not decrease the development cycle,that's for sure.The rest is likely all rumours and speculation and remains to be seen.

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: Huh?
by archiesteel on Sat 25th Mar 2006 19:08 UTC
archiesteel
Member since:
2005-07-02

Please, lets stick to facts and avoid the fud; you may hate Microsoft with some sort of religious zealotry, but facts go that there are over 220million satisfied Windows XP customers, and growing.

Virtually all Windows users I know complain about it. All the time. That's not what I would call "satisfied customers"! In fact, the majority of them are victims of lock-in.

PS: careful about throwing around accusations of religious zealotry, because you could very well be the target of such yourself.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Huh?
by vitae on Sat 25th Mar 2006 20:19 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Huh?"
vitae Member since:
2006-02-20

Precisely. How many people actually use Windows because they thoroughly enjoy it, simply that think that it's a marvelous operating system? They use it because it comes with the machine. If Linux (or Solaris for that matter) came with the machine, they'd use that. They might or might not switch to Windows based on how bad they needed it. Certainly that price tag for a non-upgrade version of Windows would be a factor. Most people wouldn't shell out that kind of money. They would make do with open source apps, and that free-as-in-beer thing would go a long way with them.

Reply Score: 2

RE[8]: Huh?
by archiesteel on Sat 25th Mar 2006 19:13 UTC
archiesteel
Member since:
2005-07-02

the end user runs Windows because it allows them to run the games and applications they want; plain and simple.

Applications, perhaps, but games? The PC is dying as a gaming platform - there are about 10x more games available for game consoles.

As far as games are concerned, Linux is to Windows what Windows is to consoles, therefore any argument based on games against Linux can also be used in a wider context against Windows.

And that's not taking into account the fact that many the most popular Windows games are in fact playable under Linux.

Reply Score: 1

RE[10]: Huh?
by archiesteel on Sat 25th Mar 2006 23:46 UTC
archiesteel
Member since:
2005-07-02

Boy ... you are daft. *MILLIONS* of people use Windows machines *PRIMARILY* because they play games. Or maybe you *don't* realize that PC gaming is a US $2 BILLION industry?

Insults aside, your numbers are wrong. PC game sales dipped below $1 billion in 2004, and they haven't moved much since. Compare that to the video game industry, which has reached over $10 billion in the U.S., and was at $31 billion worldwide in 2004 (analysts expect it to hit $55 billion in 2007).

What this tells me is that PC gaming is getting quite marginalized by console gaming, and that games is no longer a compelling argument to justify using Windows over Linux (unless you're an Evercrack addict...)

Reply Score: 1

RE[11]: Huh?
by kaiwai on Sun 26th Mar 2006 01:28 UTC in reply to "RE[10]: Huh?"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

What this tells me is that PC gaming is getting quite marginalized by console gaming, and that games is no longer a compelling argument to justify using Windows over Linux (unless you're an Evercrack addict...)

1) The price of these games have actually gone DOWN - I remember just over 6 years ago, it wasn't all that uncommon to end up spending $100 or more for a game; I head down to the computer shop now, and you can purchase them for around $60. I would say that the price decreases haven't kept pace with the change in volume.

2) I never mentioned that games were THE deciding factor; the deciding factor still sits heavily in the hardware support and applications avilability camp; if end users can't get the applications they want - not replacements, the actual application from the same vendor in a native Linux format, then they are not going to bend over backwards simply to feel nice and fuzzy because they're running an OSS application over a commercial one.

You can have the nicest, and most stable operating system in the world, with the best stability and ease of use on the planet, but if you don't have the backing of ISV's and IHV's, then you're screwed.

Reply Score: 1

sigh
by historyb on Sun 26th Mar 2006 01:02 UTC
historyb
Member since:
2005-07-06

No 'Code Crisis' for Vista

There's always hope that someday MS will die. *sigh*

Reply Score: 1

proforma
Member since:
2005-08-27

I would rather vote with my wallet and pay for a quality product than to get something that I have to work hard at to make things work. Linux isn't there yet and I feel that it will never be there.

As Windows raises the bar on what is already out there, linux is going to have a hard time getting people to switch after Desktop and Server versions of Vista is on the market.

Over the next couple of years more Linux apps are going to head towards windows as the days of linux hype is going to go down more and more.

I am not a troll, I am just telling you what will probably happen as long as windows is Stable and Secure and just works. Why would you need anything else?

This isn't the days of Windows 98 where a lot of linux folks are used to. This is quality in and out and they have extra time to get it right.

Reply Score: 0

:)
by proforma on Sun 26th Mar 2006 01:42 UTC
proforma
Member since:
2005-08-27

You have Windows Vista Desktop, Windows Vista Server, and Microsoft Office 2007 due out in 2007.

As long as all of them have stability and security and are easy to use and bring in new features that were promised I really don't see an issue of Linux hype anymore.

Microsoft should now be faster at future releases of Windows and I don't see anything of five years happening ever again.

Linux and MacOS has made Windows better due to competition, but Microsoft has woken up and I think they are more dangerous in 2007 than any time before.

If you are a linux fanboy, I think you are going to have your work cut out for you in 2007. ;)

Reply Score: 0

farfrompuken
Member since:
2006-03-26

I am ready to match someones salary at Microsucks that vista DOES NOT come out in 2 months.



Friends don't let friends use Windows

Edited 2006-03-26 01:52

Reply Score: 2

RE[12]: Huh?
by archiesteel on Sun 26th Mar 2006 04:22 UTC
archiesteel
Member since:
2005-07-02

1) The price of these games have actually gone DOWN - I remember just over 6 years ago, it wasn't all that uncommon to end up spending $100 or more for a game; I head down to the computer shop now, and you can purchase

True, and also there has been an upward pression on the price of video games.

However, you also have to consider that a lot of the PC game sales belong to a few franchises (Quake/Doom, Half-Life, Warcraft/Starcraft, Everquest...). The market has changed with a smaller number of bigger companies. These companies can offer lower prices due to the higher volume of these succesful franchises (and by publishing expansions, which cost less to develop).

In any case, that still doesn't change the fact that the PC games market is being increasingly marginalized.

2) I never mentioned that games were THE deciding factor; the deciding factor still sits heavily in the hardware support and applications avilability camp; if end users can't get the applications they want - not replacements, the actual application from the same vendor in a native Linux format, then they are not going to bend over backwards simply to feel nice and fuzzy because they're running an OSS application over a commercial one.

It's not a question of feeling nice and fuzzy. That's a reductive view and is irrelevant to the subject at hand.

Also, it's not to Linux advocates you should complain about the lack of availability of certain specialized applications under Linux, but the ISVs. That doesn't really matter, however. The fact is that, with virtualization software such as VMWare, what you say isn't much of an issue for most applications. For example, I recently purchased Tax Software that doesn't run on Linux (like pretty much all tax software). I simply double-clicked on the Virtual Machine icon I've made for myself on the desktop, and a few seconds late a XP desktop appeared in a window (when maximized, it is undistinguishible from any other XP desktop, but I prefer to run it in a window myself).

I then installed the tax software, ran it safely from within its own virtual network, itself connected to the Internet from behind a virtual NAT router. Problem solved.

The application I use the most on my Linux laptop is Microsoft Word, running flawlessly with Crossover Office.

Of course, I'm sure there are a few highly specialized applications that cannot run under an API translation layer or in a virtual machine (though I can't think of any one right now), but that's also true of Windows. Where is Piranha or Final Cut Pro for Windows?

I'd rather have the stability, security, customizability and IMO better user interface of Linux as my main OS, with the few Windows programs I really can't do without running under API translation or in a virtual machine, than the other way way around.

Why settle for less when you can have the best of both worlds?

Reply Score: 1

archiesteel
Member since:
2005-07-02

I am just telling you what will probably happen as long as windows is Stable and Secure and just works.

What I hear from anti-Linux critics is that the reason why there is so much more malware for Windows is that it's the dominant OS out there.

Thus, according to this logic, Windows will always be less secure than Linux if - as you suggest - it keeps its aberrant market share.

Do as I do. Run Linux, with API translation and virtualization (the wave of the future) for the few apps for which there are no equivalent/better Linux alternatives. That whay you'll have the best of both world: the quality and safety of Linux, with those apps that still lock you into Window.

BTW you are a troll: just look at the subject of your post. If you can't understand how such a dramatic statement is trolling, then you don't really know what trolling is.

2007 is the year where the Microsoft hype can no longer hide the fact that Linux continues to grow

Reply Score: 1