Longhorn will not ship in beta form until early 2004, and will not be released to manufacturing until 2005. Also, Microsoft revealed that the company’s Blackcomb project will not be delivered as a major server upgrade as previously expected, but will instead be phased in over several years, beginning with technology that Microsoft will release this year as “out of band” upgrades to Windows Server 2003.
Microsoft Details Longhorn Roadmap
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Very cool times ahead.
dumdidumdidumdumdum…. trallala… i couldn’t care less and i sure hope i will never have to care or work with microsoft products.
I’m 28 and work in telecom as a programmer on UNIX boxes.
If It is going to take Longhorn that long to come out of the gate how far along will OSX be by then? Will Longhorn be enough?
One wonders if Microsoft is commiting virtual suicide by taking so long to release Longhorn. By then, OS X Panther will seem old and we’ll probably be using Gnome 4 and KDE 6! It seems like Microsoft’s pace for developing desktop OSes these days is glacial, which gives the competition even more time to leapfrog. Good for the competition, but I can’t imagine it will be too good for Microsoft!
Jared
MS has just released Windows Server 2003. Also, there are two service packs to be released for XP. I don’t think they will be missing much…
This’ll also give Wine and Codeweavers a couple more years to catch up. If they can get just a few more apps working (including the iTunes thing when it comes out), I predict that I’ll be running Linux by this time next year
Well, it guess the Gnome and KDE (along with the Xfree guys) are lucky that M$ next OS won’t come out till 2005. They got time to speed up development.
Heck, remember, Longhorn is still in it’s really early stages, and who knows how much more code and money will be poured into it.
They better speed it up, cause KDE and GNOME are still not at the level of WindowsXP, not to mention OSX…
The next MAC OS would also be something interesting… especially if they decide to jump achitectures between here and then…
KDE seems to be releasing on a 6-9 mo cycle for major versions. So, given 24 months or so before Lonhorn comes out, there will be between 2-4 KDE releases. Where that puts the version numbers is anybody’s guess depending on how long they continue the 3.x series and when they move to the 4 series. I can’t imagine anything higher than 4.2 being the version at longhorn’s release…..
“especially if they decide to jump achitectures between here and then… ”
They should port Xserve on x68! Its a server, it doesnt need photoshop! OSX has a more powerfull command line interface then DOS, better web services then IIS, and well designed GUI (XP wanta be GUI). All it needs is some inexpensive X86 parts and Hardware RAID!!!
Dan
Why port to x86?
The PPC970 is 64bit, NUMA, and has a 800Mhz bus. Get get anything like that in x86, you need to use AMD Hammers chips. Also, PPC970 is designed for 8-way systems.
As for inexpensive x86 parts… It’ll use the same chip set as the AMD Hammer family. So the chip set is already on the market and several servers have already been designed around them. So, the PPC970 will use standard x86 parts; just not the inexpenseive ones you want.
Also note, the xServe is cheap in it’s market. I believe the current pricing places it at about the same price as a Linux server and about half the price of a Windows server.
Ok, I looked up the pricing…
xServer $16,048.00
– Mac OS X.2 unlimited client
– Dual 1.33Ghz G4
– 2Mb L2 / cpu
– 2Gb DDR333 ram
– 60Gb HD
– CD-ROM
– Fiber Chanel
– 1G Ethernet
– 2.5TB Raid
Dell PowerEdge 2650 $21,301.00
– Red Hat AS 2.1
– 2.4GHz Xeon
– 512KB L2
– 2G DDR200 ram
– CD-ROM
– Fiber Chanel
– 2x1G Ethernet
– 1.7TB Raid
More information here:
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,3973,1061703,00.asp
Apparently, there will be many updates to XP and Server 2003 till the release of Longhorn.
Eugenia’s cited article does state:
“Will Poole, senior vice-president of the Windows Client Division, also said that there will be no interim Windows desktop client OS release before Longhorn ships, as some have speculated. “
is faster upgrades/improvements/implementing new stuff (whether developed by apple or elsewhere). MS just has a much bigger job, and many more users that don’t like change as much (well, lots of users that don’t). God only knows what apple will come up with by 2005. I’m starting ot worry apple will run out of stuff to do they are going so fast.
Since MS is the undisputed leader and more than strongly market consciences I don’t think that the crown will change owner. KDE and GNOME are just portion of what’s perceived as an OS. If both DE want to succeed it’s them who have to leapfrog riding on the back of Linux. MS with excellent desktop OSs Win 2000/XP Prof. and the freshly released Win 2003 looks and is stronger then ever. If by 2005 Linux and Mac fail to catch-up, well for these three failure is not an option.
That sets us a clear goal. Until 2005 we should try to get:
* Fast graphics rendering. Maybe forgetting about 2D performance and jumping straight to hardware accellerated OpenGL could be a chance to catch up. We don’t have to worry about visual effects, once the possibility is there, the community will jump on it like crazy. We will see loads of completely silly windowmanagers…
And the “sane” desktops will implement the useful subset of features, like smooth window scaling, minimizing windows and window shadows (probably some more).
* A way to attach arbitrary metadata to each file and finding data by metadata or other properties(fast!). Maybe Reiser 4 is the answer? Medusa is interesting, too but probably no real alternative to WinFS. This will be one of the more critical parts I assume.
* Mozilla needs to release the Gecko Runtime Environment. This will allow applications like Epiphany and Evolution to utilize the most advanced rendering engine with almost no bloat (the GRE is supposed to be around 2 MB I heard). Gecko meanwhile has shaped up to a fast and very stable engine. Unless Microsoft reinvents the web, it shouldn’t have a problem to keep up with IE around 2005.
* OpenOffice.org should finish their new toolkit and use native Gtk widgets. Not neccessary but would be great. GNOME Office and KOffice will be much advanced and maybe Gobe Office will be released?
* Cool applications like Rhythmbox (some iTunes like application) and Gaim (some Trillian like application) should be pretty much stable.
* A reliable and flexible multimedia framework (GStreamer), hopefully embraced by both KDE and GNOME applications.
* Bonobo and GStreamer plugins in Gecko should solve most plugin woes. Missing plugins should be handled more gracefully (not telling “click here to get this plugin” when it’s not available for example). Automatic installation of certain common plugins should work (Flash, Java).
* While talking about Java, they should have reached much better Gtk integration by then.
* Mono should be pretty damn solid and be useful enough to build powerful GUI applications (crossplattform or not) in much shorter time. Should also be much more attractive to VB and Delphi programmers coming from Windows (not just because of Mono Basic).
* A distribution independant but flexible and convenient method to install applications (as root and non root) should exist which developers can use if they want to support every Linux user. If autopackage doesn’t drop development, they could make it.
* Nautilus and the GNOME desktop should be cleaned up and some UI paradigms should be reconsidered. It will probably be GNOME 3 around that time and KDE 4. If both don’t break binary compatibility anymore (which is a goal) then it might even still be GNOME 2 and KDE 3. That wouldn’t be bad but great. The developer plattforms should be matured a lot and people should spend more time working on usability and sane desktop shells.
* It has to be possible to completely administrate a system without ever touching a commandline (“just” using is already completely possible this way).
* RedHat will probably be at release 12 or something.
Maybe they will target the home desktop by then. I would love to see something like a “RedHat Advanced Desktop” which is more polished and stays current for a longer time (with occasional feature upgrades), similar to their Advanced Server and Advanced Workstation lines.
This might look like a massive list but I think it’s possible, especially if Microsoft is late.
Exciting times ahead.
Mind you that I’m not speculating about “beating” Microsoft, just beeing able to provide a somewhat adequate free alternative which even excels at many points.
One wonders if Microsoft is commiting virtual suicide by taking so long to release Longhorn
Not really, new PC’s are still being sold with WinXP. If you see how long it took to upgrade from win95 in some companies getting yet another new version out won’t speed up that progress.
Linux especially their Desktop Managers are just copying microsoft’s work ( and sadly not even come close). so they’ll be waiting windows xp 2005, and then start copying from there…
MS have lost the plot since win2k. Stuffing more and more crap into thier operating systems. Ill stay with win2k until theres no longer any more third party driver support (which will be a long time). For my internet access i use Red Hat Linux. None of my windows machines are allowed to face the internet under any circumstances.
PPC970 is vaporware.
opteron is shipping.
nuff said.
i recommend apple contract with newsys and start shipping opteron servers with os x
With this big release gap with Windows, there may be more people who purchase YellowTab simply out of OS boredom.
I read somewhere that a new version of Internet Explorer will come with Longhorn. Does this mean we won’t see a new version of IE until 2005? By then, IE6 will be 4 years old!
Linux especially their Desktop Managers are just copying microsoft’s work ( and sadly not even come close). so they’ll be waiting windows xp 2005, and then start copying from there…
You ever used CDE? GNOME is more like a CDE knock-off than a Windows knockoff – as is OSX.
They said “a new version of IE” not the NEXT new version of IE. Remember we still have service packs and windows update… how do you think IE 5.0 and 6.0 came out? I seem to remember them being as part of service packs or updates.
YellowTab… the average computer user doesn’t say oh look its a rainy day why don’t I go download yellow tab? They say where is my Doom, Quake, [insert video game here]. Its about as logical as saying if we make penguins an endangered species, MS won’t be able to destroy linux.
Next[anything] knock-off yes.. CDE knock-off? uh how?
Always on top, windowshade and virtual desktops? Windows doesn’t have them (and TweakUI crap doesn’t count as real virtual desktops).
Hmmm, maybe let’s look for some customizability? For instance, keybinding editing? KDE is the only desktop environment that lets me use those stupid Winkeys for something more or less useful (in my case, switching between input languages). In Windows, they are just filler. Adjusting all the toolbars is also hard. Windows does not allow the user to put a menu subcategory button on a toolbar. They call it user-friendly?
Windows needs to copy a lot of stuff from real DEs before it can be considered at least somewhat complete.
Why do you post on this thread then? If you aren’t using Windows, there isn’t really any reason for you to post completelu utterly useless stuff on this thread.
—
Besides, guys, don’t hold your breath over the latest roadmap- this is the nth time Microsoft changed it. I wouldn’t be suprised if a couple or more months down the road, they change it again.
I think what he meant by “interim releases” is stuff like 98SE, Windows Me – useless stuff that should really be a service pack instead. In other words, expect a lot of service packs down the road.
Besides, remember when Microsoft released Windows 98SE, they said it would be the last DOS-based Windows? Then Windows 2000 came along – with no Personal Edition, and then the famously crappy, the utter failure, Windows Me came along as the last DOS-based Windows.
Re: It’s becoming more and more clear that a core part of Apple’s plan
At this point, you can see Apple trying to focus out from the Mac – with stuff like iPod and iTunes Music Store. And even if Mac OS X improves drastically by 2005, I doubt this would worry Microsoft much. No, not because they are a big gigantic abusive monopoly – but because of Apple’s business model. Unless of course Apple starts allowing some clone makers here and there, that can change the market totally…
However, on the Mac, I would think that Apple, if PPC970 is really gonna replace G4, would be more bothered on transitioning from G4 to that architecture – with stuff like optimizing, compatibility issues, etc. Sure, it wouldn’t be as dangerous a migration from 68k to PPC, but would be a migration nontheless.
All I meant was that Apple’s “problem” if you will, is that no matter how much they innovate and implement new things, people just copy it. Look at Picassa compared to iPhoto. Who wants to bet we start seeing lots of iTunes Music Store ripoffs? I think this is one reason Wall Street has little enthusiasm for apple.
But what if Apple kept moving so fast that slow motion MS really was falling behind (in the areas apple emphasizes, i.e., consumer), more and more obviously. I just think that’s what apple is trying to do. Don’t know if it will work.
There is not compatibility problem betwee G4 and powerpc970, both are powerpc, both use the powerpc ISA, both have altivec, there is no problem of compatibilty because all present applications will run on this cpu, without any change, and event any compilation. It will just work fine, and faster. Is it to difficult to understand, rajan r?
Only the os needs some changes (minor changes) to run on this cpu, and of course the os can be optimized for the 64 bit architecture, which is not difficult. Its the same for the developpers who want to optimize their applications for the 64 bits register, and so on, but i have to say that all applications doesn’t need a 64 bits optimization. And all the actual applications who use Altivec will conserve the altivec accelaration.
So i don’t see why apple will be bothered, it can not even be called migration!!!!
What a lot of people don’t realize is that most industries start out with monopolies (Telephone, railroad, electrical, telegram, etc) and have icons like Bill Gates. These first to the market monopolies try to buy out or block competition, however none of them succeed over the long term. Are AT&T, Standard Oil (Rockefeller), and General Electric still monopolies? Nope.
It’s great that people are getting the opportunity to try Linux. It makes a huge difference that people now know that they have a choice. The evil empire is dying.
I am going to dedicate my career to open source programming.
SO M$ bought out Virtual PC and now it’s making a Virtual Server ? =]
Are AT&T, Standard Oil (Rockefeller), and General Electric still monopolies?
In the case of AT&T, the government had to intervene.
SO M$ bought out Virtual PC and now it’s making a Virtual Server ? =]
Connectix Already has a Virtual Server Program for sale, thats the reason M$ bought Connectix, for Virtual Server, Virtual PC was just a bonus.
They didn’t buy Connectix. They bought the VM technology only.
Trust me, if there were some minor compatiblity problems between G3 and G4, I would be very suprised if G4 and 970 is completely compatible with each other. As for optimization for 64-bit – that isn’t the easy part. Porting to 64-bit is dead-brain easy (unless your OS is written in assembler…). Optimizing for 64-bit is harder. And besides, my point wasn’t about 64-bit.
There is obvious architectural differences between G4 and 970, while largely compatible, optimizing for a brand new architecture isn’t easy either. For example, you mention Altivec – is there any proof that Altivec is completely the same in G4 and 970? None so far.
So anyone trying to say migration would be a piece of cake for Apple is either joking themselves or completely dillusional. And I haven’t even started on the marketing aspect yet.
to the discussion about longhorn..what is interesting however, is what feature might OSX have by the time longhorn is released? If Longhorn is released in 2005 OSX should be on version..10.5 or 10.6. If you look at the leaps and Apple has made for each generation of OSX then Apple/OSX should be well ahead of anything that MS could possiblt come up with by Longhorn.
AT&T and Standard Oil were monopolies that were broken up by the government. GE had a monopoly on DC power, but there was a guy by the name of Nicola Tesla who created a competing electric power distribution system based on AC. This system ultimately proved to be more accepted in the market. Some info on Tesla can be found here http://www.school-for-champions.com/biographies/tesla.htm
Out of your examples, only one of them was stopped by normal market forces. Based on these examples, it does not look likely that Microsoft will loosen its grip on the desktop without being pushed by the Justice Dept. This would not mean that MS needs to be broken up like Standard Oil or AT&T, but requiring them to use open formats for data storage in Office, would definitly increase competition, ultimately benefiting the users.
MS may be taking their time to release an OS but i don’t see why people are expecting them to fall behind. With all the resources MS have what’s to say that Longhorn when released will be the most complete/up-to-date/stable OS ever?
I know it’s not likely but just because the development cycle is long that doesn’t mean the product won’t be as good as those pumping out something new much more often.
When Microsoft releases its much anticipate product (Windows Longhorn) with its Extreme Quartz capabilities in the Year 2005, the hardware would be much faster than it is today. 64-bits processors will become common everywhere
as 32-bit processor are seen today. So micosoft will have a clear lead or what u call as technological advantage when it releases the Longhorn 2 years later.
I would like to see more people exposed to Linux, and I’m not as concerned about Microsoft’s success or failure but I thought that it was worth drawing the parellel to technological systems and monopolies of the past. I already know that Microsoft will not remain a monopoly but I’m not sure of the exact date when the rest of the world will know.
Linux is an opportunity to join open source projects and develop new technology on a solid and maturing platform that is accessible and reusable.
Take games for example. Why should developers have to implement water or waterfalls or horses or mazes from scratch. Why can’t they reference an open source framework and reuse objects that they in turn are able to add their own specializations to. Why can’t we make designing games easier by organizing the research and development and making it accessible to beginner and intermediate developers.
I would rather see the general public as the keyholders or gatekeepers of information technology rather than a centralized monopoly or oligarchy of IT businesses in total control. A more organic and decentralized business model would probably be able to manage and distribute IT development responsibilities more efficiently and effectively, and it would also deliver resources to more complex and specialized requirement needs. Open source will allow information technology to model the real world. I think that over time, more power should be handed to the public, and efforts should be made to increase individual involvement by making technology open and accessable to various progressive levels of skills. There should be less incentive to hide or abuse knowledge, and more collaboration and basically sharing of information, because computers can be more than about which vendor is winning the OS battle, but rather what is being accomplished by people who are collaborating.