Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 4th Apr 2008 21:51 UTC
Windows Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates said on Friday he expected the new version of Windows operating software, code-named Windows 7, to be released "sometime in the next year or so". The software giant has been aiming to issue more regular updates of the operating system software that powers the majority of the world's personal computers. Nevertheless, Gates' comments suggested that a successor to the Vista program might be released sooner than was generally expected.
Order by: Score:
This is new
by Michael on Fri 4th Apr 2008 22:11 UTC
Michael
Member since:
2005-07-01

If Microsoft is really serious about releasing new Windowses more often, it's got to completely change the way they handle the OS on a commercial level.

Until now it's always been a case of saying "The new Windows is an amazingly awesome revolution in computing that you simly have to have!". And, of course, we all know that if we want to run the latest software, sooner or later we'll need to upgrade Windows.

Now I'm sitting here thinking "Great, I don't have to bother with Vista at all." What will happen to Microsoft's reatil OS sales when people discover it's something they may not have to buy at all?

Reply Score: 5

RE: This is new
by UglyKidBill on Fri 4th Apr 2008 22:24 UTC in reply to "This is new"
UglyKidBill Member since:
2005-07-27

Now I'm sitting here thinking "Great, I don't have to bother with Vista at all." What will happen to Microsoft's reatil OS sales when people discover it's something they may not have to buy at all?

My thoughts exactly....
Maybe they feel Vista is not going take off high enough (worldwide at least) and they rather have people thinking about the next-best-ever-fancy-windows-to-come than looking for any other alternatives?...

Reply Score: 2

RE: This is new
by DigitalAxis on Fri 4th Apr 2008 23:26 UTC in reply to "This is new"
DigitalAxis Member since:
2005-08-28

This isn't new. If I recall my computer lore correctly, Osbourne was killed (and went down in history for) promising that their next model was right around the corner, such that nobody bought the current version.

Oops...

Reply Score: 2

RE: This is new
by RGCook on Fri 4th Apr 2008 23:46 UTC in reply to "This is new"
RGCook Member since:
2005-07-12

I've had the same thought. Vista's failure says to me that it's not about the OS, but the apps. Functionality and performance is more important than looks. Not to go off on a tangent but i think this is part of the reason why no matter how many folks chime in with the OS X is more polished/elegant/etc. than XP, it just doesn't matter. Folks use computers to get things done. They can ignore the quirks and oddities when it works.

Reply Score: 4

RE: This is new
by elsewhere on Sat 5th Apr 2008 04:55 UTC in reply to "This is new"
elsewhere Member since:
2005-07-13

What will happen to Microsoft's reatil OS sales when people discover it's something they may not have to buy at all?


Microsoft's retail sales for Windows are a very, very tiny drop in the bucket, relatively speaking. They care most about commercial adoption, almost as much about OEM adoption, and everything else is an afterthought.

Basically, won't matter one iota in the overall scheme of things.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: This is new
by Earl Colby pottinger on Sat 5th Apr 2008 19:11 UTC in reply to "RE: This is new"
Earl Colby pottinger Member since:
2005-07-06

Yes, it does matter.

Too many people and companies are doing just fine with Windows XP and are looking very carefully at the costs of both hardware and software if they upgrade to Vista.

(Why do you think Vista sales started out so slow?)

Now they see that anything they buy will be old tech again in less than two(2) years. Many of them will look at their present set-up and ask if they can squeeze another year or two out of them before upgrading.

It does not hurt that they also know that waiting two years will give them more bang for the buck on the hardware side (8 core machines anybody?), and in the case of businesses deferring an expense for two years is good for the bottom line too.

Reply Score: 2

....
by poundsmack on Fri 4th Apr 2008 22:12 UTC
poundsmack
Member since:
2005-07-13

now did he actualy saw windows 7? i wouldnt be suprised if they released something like "windows workstation 2008" bassed on 2008 but s stripped down desktop version for people who dont need all the fancy stuff in vista.

but if windows 7 is trule based on MinWin i would be shocked to see it out so early. take your time MS, we dont need a 3rd windows ME (i actualy liked ME once you configured it all the way you wanted but you get the point.)

Reply Score: 3

RE: ....
by daedliusswartz on Fri 4th Apr 2008 22:46 UTC in reply to "...."
daedliusswartz Member since:
2007-05-28

It does seem excessively optimistic doesn't it? I think the proof is in their history - it'll be late.. unless of coarse they've been directing significant development resources at it whilst building Vista.

That might explain some of the Vista problems - a lack of resources to work on it.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: ....
by 1c3d0g on Fri 4th Apr 2008 23:12 UTC in reply to "RE: ...."
1c3d0g Member since:
2005-07-06

Yeah, but I strongly believe that Windows 7 is going to be vastly different. They're most probably going to create a more modular-type O.S. on top of MinWin. Remember, just a few weeks ago Microsoft was talking about how they loved to go to a subscription-based system where you'd only pay for what you need? My guess is that, if you wanted to, you could have a totally stripped-down O.S. and only pay for additional "modules" (like Audio Entertainment, Video Creation, Gaming Extras, Security Additions, etc.).

This way they can also completely avoid all the costly legal battles that they're fighting against the world + dog (I know, shameless Inquirer reference...boohoo! :-P) regarding monopolist practices, by rightfully claiming that these capabilities are not tied-into the O.S. but are sold as an option. Whatever their intentions may be with Windows 7, it'll be interesting to see what they'll come up with.

Edited 2008-04-04 23:17 UTC

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: ....
by aliquis on Sat 5th Apr 2008 10:21 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: ...."
aliquis Member since:
2005-07-23

And Mr Jobs will keep on saying how you get all the features in the basic small package ;)

Reply Score: 1

Platform Suicide
by Pro-Competition on Sat 5th Apr 2008 18:35 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: ...."
Pro-Competition Member since:
2007-08-20

Regarding Windows 7 being sold modularly...

Although I greatly wish they would do what you are proposing, IMHO it would be suicide. Microsoft is many things, but stupid isn't one of them.

One of the main reasons Microsoft has been able to dominate the market so thoroughly is that they have bundled "optional" modules into the main OS package. And one of the main ways they pad their bottom line is by making customers pay for features they don't want/need.

I would love it if they allowed this option, and the EU would love it, too. But the shareholders would hate it.

My guess is that the modularity is for their internal code maintenance reasons, and they probably want to be able to package customized versions for special situations (e.g., the Asus EEE). But they will always decide what is included - never the customer.

And they will never let you save money by bypassing one of their "standards".

Edited 2008-04-05 18:39 UTC

Reply Score: 2

So are there huge changes or not?
by leos on Fri 4th Apr 2008 22:12 UTC
leos
Member since:
2005-09-21

So on the one hand we head that Windows 7 will feature huge changes, and dumping all the cruft ( http://thebetaguy.com/exclusives/?postid=1029344029&title=microsoft... ), and yet it will be released next year? Not really possible given their track record. Either it's an incremental update on Vista or Server 2008 and it will be released next year, or its a major break, and it will definitely not be released next year.

Reply Score: 3

PlatformAgnostic Member since:
2006-01-02

Hmm... that article you linked is totally imaginary.

Reply Score: 3

aliquis Member since:
2005-07-23

Well, isn't it more like what Vista was supposed to be? And Vista still took years extra. So I don't find it impossible, it's not like they started development of it after the Vista release.

Reply Score: 2

...
by Hiev on Fri 4th Apr 2008 22:14 UTC
Hiev
Member since:
2005-09-27

He said:

"Some time next year or so"

The "or so" could be:

"Some time next year or so in a couple or more years"

I think is to soon to get conclutions.

Edited 2008-04-04 22:14 UTC

Reply Score: 6

2 year or so life cycle
by motang on Fri 4th Apr 2008 22:26 UTC
motang
Member since:
2008-03-27

Well that looks like Microsoft is back to their original OS life cycle. 2 or a bit more years for Vista replacement.

Reply Score: 2

Windows Vista
by thecwin on Fri 4th Apr 2008 22:28 UTC
thecwin
Member since:
2006-01-04

If this is true, Vista seems even more like Windows Me than before. Me was almost like a test-bed for a number new UI/OS features that got rolled into XP a year later but with a far better kernel supporting it. From what I've seen about Vista/7, that seems to be the case here too (except Windows 7 is being released somewhat more than a year later).

Does make you wonder though, if Windows 7 was planned to be released some time soon, why did they spend so much effort messing around with Vista's internals instead of focussing the infrastructure developers on Windows 7? Except for where it was necessary for integrating the new UI into the existing kernel, it seems a bit of a waste of time.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Windows Vista
by sakeniwefu on Fri 4th Apr 2008 22:39 UTC in reply to "Windows Vista"
sakeniwefu Member since:
2008-02-26

I think Win 7 isn't intended to be Windows without Vista, but Vista without Windows, if you understand what I mean. New Vista and intended-for-vista features will be kept while old Windows support will be dropped, sort of like MacOS X. You can expect to see .NET, Powershell, GDI+, WinFS(if it is even possible), etc.
Microsoft has an advantage over pre-MacOSX Apple in that it has a working powerful and scalable kernel.

Reply Score: 2

v RE[2]: Windows Vista
by modmans2ndcoming on Sat 5th Apr 2008 02:30 UTC in reply to "RE: Windows Vista"
RE[3]: Windows Vista
by s_groening on Sat 5th Apr 2008 11:07 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Windows Vista"
s_groening Member since:
2005-12-13

Why anyone would want that is beyond me ... Microsoft has never been able to play completely nice even when implementing open standards, so why anyone would be able to rest assured that ZFS in a Microsoft wrapping would still maintain full compatibility with Sun's version is way beyond any reasonable sense!

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Windows Vista
by Earl Colby pottinger on Sat 5th Apr 2008 19:19 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Windows Vista"
Earl Colby pottinger Member since:
2005-07-06

Infact to rebrand it as WinFS they would have to make a large number of changes to avoid the lawsuits.

However in making the changes I expect they will lose sight about what made the original ZFS great.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Windows Vista
by steverez1 on Sat 5th Apr 2008 15:08 UTC in reply to "Windows Vista"
steverez1 Member since:
2006-12-06

Vista is more like Windows 2000 setting up the foundation of what became Windows XP.

If you remember back Windows 2000 had almost zilch for driver support because it switched from the NT 4 driver model and then when XP was launched it had a decent amount of supported devices because 2000 drivers were supported if no XP driver was availible.

Microsoft says that Vista is the foundation for the next couple versions of Windows now what this means for example is WPF is in Vista but nothing really is making good use of it because they couldnt wait for what they wanted developed for it (if they launched windows when it was perfect it would never be released) Windows 7 will have stuff probally similar to how the PDC Video from Longhorn looked as they (MS) has had time to work with the new technology and understand its quirks and or fix them.

On another note I think if touch is in 7 it will take 3 - 5 years before we start seeing a decent amount of devices (remember we are still waiting for sideshow displays to become common place. I think there are a total of 10 devices now after a year)If we set ourselfs up with high expectations we are doomed to a another Me, Vista stigma in the media and personally in two years I don't want to even think about having to work on a XP pc or have to deal with customers new PC's that have 512MB ram and 30 start up applications.

Edited 2008-04-05 15:16 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Windows Vista
by renhoek on Sat 5th Apr 2008 15:36 UTC in reply to "RE: Windows Vista"
renhoek Member since:
2007-04-29

> If you remember back Windows 2000 had almost zilch for driver support because it switched from the NT 4 driver mode

which is completely not the case with vista. if a driver does not work in vista it because microsoft broke it (most of the time for good reasons).

vista is like windows me, it delivers things which the user did not ask for or needs.

Reply Score: 0

Different
by Sodapop on Sat 5th Apr 2008 00:05 UTC
Sodapop
Member since:
2005-07-06

I strongly believe if it's too different and requires a new learning experience, it will give the perfect opportunity for people to jump ship to another OS (Linux, Mac, BSD).

Even right now is a great time to just start thinking whether or not you want to try out a different Operating System.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Different
by Anonymous Penguin on Sat 5th Apr 2008 00:21 UTC in reply to "Different"
Anonymous Penguin Member since:
2005-07-06

"I strongly believe if it's too different and requires a new learning experience, it will give the perfect opportunity for people to jump ship to another OS (Linux, Mac, BSD)"

I did it a long time ago (moving to Linux, even if right now I am in XP x64)
However we keep hoping that the majority of users move to another OS, but it simply doesn't happen.
Why? Macs are far too expensive outside the USA.
As to Linux the large computer manufacturers should be serious about offering it as an option, but a few token gestures is all we have had so far. As we know, people will use the OS they get with their computer, they are too lazy or simply not geek enough.

Edited 2008-04-05 00:25 UTC

Reply Score: 1

I like the last part of the news ...
by autumnlover on Sat 5th Apr 2008 00:17 UTC
autumnlover
Member since:
2007-04-12

He said new versions of Windows would help revolutionize mobile phones and run the desk of the future, which would have a touch surface display allowing users to call up items using their hands.


Being myself a Startrek fan I always found myself fascinated with the idea of "touch where you work" LCARS-type interface. I also know that idea of "MS Surface" is substantially different from LCARS but the analogy between LCARS and "Surface" is - at least in its visual aspect - somehow viable, just like it was between TOS-type communicators and clamshell cellphones.

Reply Score: 2

elsewhere Member since:
2005-07-13

Being myself a Startrek fan I always found myself fascinated with the idea of "touch where you work" LCARS-type interface. I also know that idea of "MS Surface" is substantially different from LCARS but the analogy between LCARS and "Surface" is - at least in its visual aspect - somehow viable, just like it was between TOS-type communicators and clamshell cellphones.


It's not that far fetched. LCARS was just a visual interface that was contextually linked to whatever the user wanted to accomplish or the station was inteded for. Touch this, touch that, switch to what you want. And it had it's limitations, since most of the "serious" workstations on the Enterprise had "keyboard" panels, too.

IIRC, the tech specs for LCARS were based on the idea that discrete ship functions were relegated to modules that could be linked and built upon for specific user requirements. Combined with the adaptable user interface, it's basically KDE with Plasma, but version 150.1. ;)

edit: forgot to capitalize Enterprise... ;)

Edited 2008-04-05 05:11 UTC

Reply Score: 4

helf Member since:
2005-07-06

LCARS is the most awesome interface ever. I would LOVE to have it ;)

Edited 2008-04-05 16:03 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Gates
by djames on Sat 5th Apr 2008 03:14 UTC
djames
Member since:
2006-04-18

Gates, who is due to leave his day-to-day functions at Microsoft and dedicate himself to the philanthropic efforts of the Gates Foundation in June, said the company aimed through its $6 billion annual research and development budget to take the products running on its software to "the next level."

In 4 years someone will ask Microsoft 'Where's Windows 7? Bill Gates said it was going to be out like...a couple of years ago.'

Microsoft PR will respond with 'Bill who?'.

Reply Score: 5

Who does that???
by siraf72 on Sat 5th Apr 2008 06:40 UTC
siraf72
Member since:
2006-02-22

Why would you put unnecessary pressure on yourself for the next release cycle when you have such bad track record in delivering on time??

it boggles the mind. It really does.

Reply Score: 2

casuto
Member since:
2007-02-27

Windows 7 is just the codename of Windows Vista SP2

Reply Score: 5

RE
by Kroc on Sat 5th Apr 2008 09:19 UTC
Kroc
Member since:
2005-11-10

People are just lapping this up.
It's a complete non-committal statement, with zero content, and people are drawing all sorts of conclusions about Win 7, and how great it'll be.

Seriously, do you not see the wall-clock spinning backwards? We've been and done this all before with Vista. I would stop talking about the product until it's actually done and in our hands.

Reply Score: 8

RE
by Al2001 on Sat 5th Apr 2008 16:14 UTC in reply to "RE"
Al2001 Member since:
2005-07-06

I agree. In fact the article does make it perfectly clear he is talking about a test release not RTM.

Reply Score: 1

v i talks gud
by ride01 on Sat 5th Apr 2008 10:41 UTC
RE: i talks gud
by Googol on Sat 5th Apr 2008 12:32 UTC in reply to "i talks gud"
Googol Member since:
2006-11-24

Inability to spell is actually rather a sign of being British... read this on the tube yesterday - how convenient ;)

http://www.metro.co.uk/news/article.html?in_article_id=133855&in_pa...

Seriously, any German's spelling who learned English from grade 5 - 13 beats that "achievement" hands down. My last colleague was an English lawyer and she had me check her spelling all the time... omg. So, how about your German then? Is it any good..?

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: i talks gud
by WereCatf on Sat 5th Apr 2008 12:54 UTC in reply to "RE: i talks gud"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

Inability to spell is actually rather a sign of being British... read this on the tube yesterday - how convenient ;)

That was a rather interesting link you provided there, just had to read it through ;) But that is scary! People who naturally speak english as their native language can't even spell "embarrass"? Wow. I am not a native english speaker and I do think it's pretty clear from how I write sentences, but even then I don't make such glaring mistakes.. Funny thing is that actually most finns I know can speak and write pretty good english even though it's not even one of the national languages here. It's just so....baffling ;)

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: i talks gud
by Michael on Sat 5th Apr 2008 17:10 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: i talks gud"
Michael Member since:
2005-07-01

People who learn to speak English as a second language are taught proper pronunciation. In Britain there are endless regional dialects. The slurring of words can change one vowel to another and drop letters entirely from a word. Add to that the fact that the use of double letters in English is essentially random and it becomes very easy for people to get confused. Especially now that spell checkers are ubiquitous. Spelling's just not the important skill it once was.

Anyway, if spelling mistakes on Internet forums irritate you, you will go mad!

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: i talks gud
by WereCatf on Sat 5th Apr 2008 17:47 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: i talks gud"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

People who learn to speak English as a second language are taught proper pronunciation. In Britain there are endless regional dialects

You should just know how many dialects there are in finnish language, not to mention the overall complexity of the whole language (it is often cited as one of the most difficult languages in the world, though not the most difficult) yet people still can write proper finnish. I don't really know why there is such a difference though, are our school systems so different? Do finnish schools give more importance to proper finnish skills than the british schools to british language skills? I can only speculate and even then I'd rather not to. I just find the difference in skills rather interesting and odd.

Anyway, if spelling mistakes on Internet forums irritate you, you will go mad!

They do irritate me ;) I am often correcting spelling mistakes or translational mistakes in f.ex. subtitles if I notice such while watching movies ;) And, I have been mad for years already ;)

PS. No, I am not trying to pretend I have mastered the english language either. I am pretty sure people could complain of quite a lot of mistakes when it comes to my english, too ;) But atleast I can usually make myself pretty well understood and that's the most important thing for any language.

Reply Score: 2

grizzleduser
Member since:
2008-04-06

Boy, I hope MS doesn't have another repeat of the convoluted journey of Vista! Vista may end up being the same position and perception in 5 years as XP is now. Microsoft can't afford another difficult transition to the next version of Windows........

Reply Score: 2

Vista R2
by REM2000 on Sun 6th Apr 2008 13:42 UTC
REM2000
Member since:
2006-07-25

I remember attending a microsoft event where they gave an overview of where they were going. They did say they were gonna release Client OS more regular, with major releases every so many years like 4 odd and small sub releases every two years odd. These two year odd releases were gonna be called R2 a la Windows 2003.

I wouldn't be suprised if the next OS bill was talking about was Vista R2 with a whole new marketing push behind it, similar to the reloaded marketing push for Windows XP SP2.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by dsuse
by dsuse on Mon 7th Apr 2008 00:59 UTC
dsuse
Member since:
2007-09-04

Vista development cost = $10B USD
Vista profits to date = (very poor)
MS profits from all sources (2007) = $4.7B USD

Potential cost of Yahoo to MS = $44B USD
Less annual income of Yahoo = $660 M USD

Annual loss of market share to Apple = 5% (guess at $1B)
Annual loss of market share to Linux = 5% (guess at $1B)

Estimated development cost of "Windows 7" ~ $8B USD
(assuming they recycle some of the very popular Vista code)
_________________________________________________
MS balance sheet = -58B USD for 2009 or so (not including the possible devaluation and abandonment of Yahoo after any MS acquisition, and further multi-billion dollar lawsuits from the E.U. re: the usual MS antics and blatant OOXML ISO manipulation/bribery)

Recommendation: sell your MS shares NOW, and invest in open source technology that has a future.

Reply Score: 1