http://www.osnews.com/story/11428/The_Whys_Whats_and_Whens_of_Vista Exploring the Future of Computing en-us Copyright 2001-2013, David Adams adam+nospam@osnews.com Sat, 18 May 2013 10:00:52 GMT http://www.osnews.com/images/osnews.gif http://www.osnews.com http://www.osnews.com/thread?12214 http://www.osnews.com/thread?12214 Well the first half of the "article" (which is only a page long) is bragging about Microsoft releasing the beta one week earlier than they said they would.
Then the second half is about lowering our expectations for the first beta.
Since there were already at least 10 stories about the Windows Vista release here on OS News (count them: http://www.osnews.com/topic.php?icon=37 ), I don't consider this very newsworthy. Mon, 01 Aug 2005 19:05:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (doug) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread?12218 http://www.osnews.com/thread?12218 Well the first half of the "article" (which is only a page long)

I read several pages, all about Vista, privacy, security, conceptual changes, Longhorn Server and WinFS beta release. Did you not catch the "Next Page" link?

All in all, Vista will be an improvement over XP. How well that improvement is received is a completely different kettle of fish. With Vista, Microsoft have shifted their focus to security and a more minimal, simplistic approach. I for one feel this change is too much of a reduction, as users are becoming more and more competent with the black/beige box they use for surfing and email.

With regards security, its great they're finally taking the "sudo" approach. This is one thing I have always admired about Linux - the not running as root issue is obvious (why cause more damage than you need to) - but transferring the concept of a limited user for day-to-day tasks in Vista must have been very difficult; Windows apps are just not built for that. I look forward to seeing how well this LUA approach a) is met by the Joe User public, and b) improves the worms and virii situation that plagues an otherwise powerful and useful OS.

I've had chance to use the beta, and for what its worth, I can't see or "feel" any difference to XP over and above the marketed new "features". I look forward to the beta 2 release, which (if the pundits are correct about the amount of money spent) should be a step towards a very competitive Windows release. Mon, 01 Aug 2005 19:14:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (JCooper) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread?12223 http://www.osnews.com/thread?12223 "virtual folders", renaming My Photos to "Photos" and "sudo"? And this make a 'new' release? It's amazing that people would 'buy' this crap. What other OS's don't have those features - looks like a 'catchup' patch release. Mon, 01 Aug 2005 19:21:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread?12231 http://www.osnews.com/thread?12231 Wow, Microsoft is really working out their pre-release hype muscles, eh? Wow, all this coverage, all this "Wow we're gonna have so many cool new features!" followed by "Oh except that, we couldn't do that in time, but look, we got ...!". This is probably how they got away with releasing Windows 95 as well. "Hey look, it's so much more stabler than Windows 3.11! And all this stuff is integrated!" while there were much better alternatives out there that did so much more so much better. Mon, 01 Aug 2005 19:35:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Ronald Vos) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread?12245 http://www.osnews.com/thread?12245 ... Windows XP ME Mon, 01 Aug 2005 20:00:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread?12251 http://www.osnews.com/thread?12251 Yet again, I have to explain to some ignorant poster that MS has not cut any features except for not releasing WinFS with Vista, but after. Mon, 01 Aug 2005 20:04:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (sappyvcv) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread?12272 http://www.osnews.com/thread?12272 At least Vista Beta 1 does not have many of the features that Microsoft was hyping so much. As far as I know Microsoft is already battling several lawsuits over the IP rights of a number of the features they were planning to integrate into Vista. That means any possible release date of a "final" version of Vista will be push even further away if they are able to release it at all. In any case it better be not as buggy and slow as Vista Beta 1. Mon, 01 Aug 2005 20:33:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread?12282 http://www.osnews.com/thread?12282 The Vista/Longhorn IP issues will either be resolved or be big news in the next couple months.

On one extreme, we could see a settlement out of court and "business as usual" for Microsoft. On the other extreme we could see possible prison time for many Microsoft executives.

Obviously if the IP issues end up in court, it may be 5-10 years before Vista/Longhorn would be able to ship. And that is just the smallest effect of a court case -- the shockwaves would be felt throughout the industry. If Microsoft were to lose the court case, it would likely be the end of the company.

And this does not take into account the additional IP issues beyond Longhorn/Vista. Microsoft -- thousands of stolen/fake patents aside -- is a house of cards propped up only by extremely criminal behavior. Mon, 01 Aug 2005 20:46:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (pravda) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread?12298 http://www.osnews.com/thread?12298 Would MS settle for ANY amount in order to get Vista out on time? Yes. Any IP issues will essentially amount to money-grabbing by smaller software companies looking to capitalize on their IP portfolios. This is why MS applies for so many patents (3,000 per year): so that they minimize their IP settlement payouts whenever they want to release new software.

It's like Bill says all the time: he does not support the current software patent system, but he has to enact a patent-happy strategy to defend the company against the torrents of lawsuits. The reality of the software patent game today is that there are more losers than winners, and the surest way to lose is by not playing. Mon, 01 Aug 2005 21:07:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (butters) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread?12306 http://www.osnews.com/thread?12306 "We have to steal to protect ourselves from ... uhh... innovation". "I mean, we are the ones innovating... by stealing. You see how we have to steal to protect ourselves from ... stealing". "You know, it's just like the US foreign policy... we have to destroy the village to save it..."

As I said before, the next couple months will prove to be very interesting. The karma of Microsoft's lifetime policy of stealing IP will be landing soon. Mon, 01 Aug 2005 21:14:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (pravda) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread?12307 http://www.osnews.com/thread?12307 It depends on when you take the snapshot of "promised features." The original plans called for a subscription model for desktop applications, aggressive posturing of managed code (.NET) throughout the OS, and a focus on collaboration and distributed storage. None of these things actually happened.

In essence, Longhorn was an operating system with a focus on the internet and on what kinds of relationships it can drive, whereas Vista is an operating system with a focus on how to protect users and content from the kinds of relationships the internet allows. Very different. Mon, 01 Aug 2005 21:16:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (butters) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread?12316 http://www.osnews.com/thread?12316 Instead of innovation and getting your stuff done on time as planned within a reasonable amount of time they seem to have more fauth in gathering patents for the final street-fight.


Amongst some other questionable (such as white space) patents whas this one:

MS want to patent smiley
http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HIT... Mon, 01 Aug 2005 21:31:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread?12321 http://www.osnews.com/thread?12321 Microsoft stole the inventions but not the inventor. So their implementation of Longhorn/Vista has had a lot of problems. If the IP issues end up going to court, it will be the biggest court case in the history of computers. Mon, 01 Aug 2005 21:37:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (pravda) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread?12328 http://www.osnews.com/thread?12328 it is all too little too late
windows has fallen behind linux as a desktop and vista will not help it get back

btw - that was NOT sarcasm, if you don't believe me, have a try with a recent linux desktop... and I don't mean look at a screenshot Mon, 01 Aug 2005 21:46:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (raver31) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread?12336 http://www.osnews.com/thread?12336 The original plan, yes, which was a long time ago. What they're doing now has been the plan for quite a while now. Mon, 01 Aug 2005 22:03:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (sappyvcv) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread?12339 http://www.osnews.com/thread?12339 Yes, Windows has fallen behind Linux a little on the desktop. But Vista will put it back ahead for the most part.

Where's hardware accelerated composited desktop on linux that doesn't require you to set it up yourself and is stable? Does it support pixel shaders like Avalon does (hence the frosted glass look) or just per-pixel transparency?

Does linux have anything like XAML? Assuming you even know the capabilities of XAML.

Can linux do object piping on the console instead of just text piping?

Built in DVD recording that is as easy as drag and drop?

http://weakmind.org/upload/files/LonghornFeatures.html Again, a nice list of Vista features. Mon, 01 Aug 2005 22:07:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (sappyvcv) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread?12354 http://www.osnews.com/thread?12354 "Yes, Windows has fallen behind Linux a little on the desktop. But Vista will put it back ahead for the most part."

Vista hasn't been released yet. Do you think Linux will stay stagnant for (+-)2 years?

"Where's hardware accelerated composited desktop on linux that doesn't require you to set it up yourself and is stable? Does it support pixel shaders like Avalon does (hence the frosted glass look) or just per-pixel transparency?"

Can't you just wait 2 years? Anyway, do we really need to see special effects on our desktops too? I want a simple to use desktop environment, I don't need it to make me go blind.

"Does linux have anything like XAML? Assuming you even know the capabilities of XAML."

XUL. But do you really think that XAML will get developers support? There are still a lot of developers using VB5, VB6 and the ones that are just getting into .NET, how much more tech. will they learn to satisfy MS ego and marketing policies?

"Can linux do object piping on the console instead of just text piping?"

No, but I don't find it usefull. Unix/Linux had the best available console for so many years. Abruptly, MS comes in with that *console wannabe* superhyperhichtech with objects and all that shit that no one will know how to use it. Best stuff are just plain text with some perl parsers and bash scripts. Keep it simple, stupid.

"Built in DVD recording that is as easy as drag and drop?"

I can write DVD from my GNOME with drag&drop right now. Don't need to wait countless years. Mon, 01 Aug 2005 22:31:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (sbenitezb) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread?12362 http://www.osnews.com/thread?12362 In response to http://weakmind.org/upload/files/LonghornFeatures.html

1. Deployment/Servicing: Monad
Bash

2. Deployment/Servicing: Faster Installation
Any LiveCD installer

3. Deployment/Servicing: ClickOnce
Linux has this, though the name escapes me

4. Filesystem: Transactional File Transfers
Not sure, but Reiser4 is quite robust

5. Filesystem: File Virtualization
Symlinks

6. Hardware: Built-in DVD Recording
apt/emerge/yum dvd tools, run DVD author script

7. Hardware: Auxiliary Devices
As long as there are drivers, linux supports them

8. Hardware: Microphone Arrays
Not to sure about this, but doesn't sound too useful for Joe User

9. Hardware: Touch-screen support (maybe?)
See 7.

10. Hardware: Hybrid Hard-drive support
This is a hardware improvement not limited to one OS

11. Hardware: Stealth Modding
Hotplug/Coldplug/knowing your modprobe

12. Interface: Faster Search Engine
Beagle/pyBeagle

13. Interface: Start Menu Program Searching
Gnome Launch Box

14. Interface: Virtual Folders
Beagle-Nautilus integration

15. Interface: Word Document Thumbnails
Anything is scriptable in linux

16. Interface: Avalon
GTK#/PyGTK/QT4/Glade

17. Interface: Theming Unlocked
Part of the U - KDE/Gnome/XFCE - and no limits on what can be "themed"

18. Interface: Native RSS Support
libRSS?

19. Interface: Aero
Linux is currently behind on a stable feature like this - but Glitz/Cairo/Luminocity will bring fantastic UI

20. Internet: Indigo
Too many to mention

21. Internet Explorer: Tabs
Firefox

22. Internet Explorer: RSS
Firefox

23. Internet Explorer: Search Bar
Firefox / Panel bar search applets / Other browsers (Opera etc)

24. Kernel: Improved Hardware Scalability
Implicit in linux 2.6.x

25. Kernel: Application Resource Management
Don't know about this one

26. Kernel: Graphics Display Driver Model Improvements
Graphics is a contentious issue, though Luminocity can provide a Vista quality UI on an intel i810 chipset...

27. Kernel: TCP/IP Offloading
Again, not too sure

28. Maintenance: Windows Assessment Tool
It already does run "to its full potential"

29. Miscellaneous: Metro
PDF

30. Programming: WinFX (ties to Avalon, Indigo, WinFS when released, and XAML)
Mono/Python/Ruby/etc

31. Registry: Transactional Registry Handling
Transactional text file handling

32. Registry: Registry Virtualization
No need

33. Security: full-volume encryption
If this is EFS "Advanced", god help us

34. Security: Full NX (No Execute) Support
Don't know

35. Security: Least-privilege User Access
Users / Sudo

36. Security: Protected Administrator
Sudo

37. Security: Secure Startup
Bit too big brother for my liking

38. Security: Optional Automation of Anti-Virus Subscription Renewals.
No major virii - no need for active scanner

39. Security: Proactive Firewall
Nothing like this

40. Miscellaneous: Instant On
Linux support improving but still not a patch on Windows

41. Media: Glitch-free Audio and Video Playback
GStreamer

42. Networking: Castle
SMB/CIFS/NFS

43. Security: Parental controls
chmod

44. Deployment/Servicing: Error Data Transmission
Linux Logging

45. Interface: Device Manager Improvements
HAL

46. Deployment/Servicing: Driver Protection
No need

47. Interface: Help and Support Headlines
Endlessly useful people in community forums / email support / paid for support

48. Deployment/Servicing: Language Independence
Ditto any decent linux distribution, in fact I think more languages are supported through .po files Mon, 01 Aug 2005 22:46:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread?12384 http://www.osnews.com/thread?12384 The special effects isn't what it's about. It's about offloading the GUI to the graphics card to get faster, more responsive interface. As well, we can use special effects better as visual cues without being so costly.

XUL is not like XAML. XAML will get support from some major developers, because it is a great thing.

You can say object piping isn't useful, but it is. You don't have to parse the text yourself and hope it's formatted how you expect it. The data is already structured for you. Not only that, if you change one thing, suddenly $4 becomes $5 in your awk script. With Monad, it's still $_.blah.

I didn't know GNOME did DVD recording so simply, that's why I asked. That's pretty cool though.

But anyone that thinks Vista won't "catch up" to Linux is kidding themselves. Mon, 01 Aug 2005 23:14:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (sappyvcv) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread?12392 http://www.osnews.com/thread?12392 "The special effects isn't what it's about. It's about offloading the GUI to the graphics card to get faster, more responsive interface. As well, we can use special effects better as visual cues without being so costly."

Yeah, but why? I have no 3D card, 128MB ram and a 600Mhz processor and it just works nice. Why do you have such a need of a 3Ghz CPU and a GPU just to open some windows? Sure offloading some work to the GPU is good, Linux will have that one too. It's not a Vista thing, all desktops will have that in the end. Right now, only Mac OS X has that.

"XUL is not like XAML. XAML will get support from some major developers, because it is a great thing."

XUL is a great thing too, without argueing about it. But in this new FOSS world, why do you think major players will opt for a closed/monoplatform technology?

"But anyone that thinks Vista won't "catch up" to Linux is kidding themselves."

You're just saying that current Windows XP lags behind Linux and it will need 2 years for Windows to catch it. If that is really true, then you must assume Linux won't get stagnant those 2 years and will make a lot of great steps towards innovation and desktop integration. Mon, 01 Aug 2005 23:24:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (sbenitezb) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread?12397 http://www.osnews.com/thread?12397 "Yeah, but why? I have no 3D card, 128MB ram and a 600Mhz processor and it just works nice. Why do you have such a need of a 3Ghz CPU and a GPU just to open some windows?"

You don't. But it helps with efficiency, and it's called evolution. Things evolve. If you don't like it, you're welcome to continue using your 600mhz computer with no hardware accelerated desktop. Some of us will enjoy using it though.

"XUL is a great thing too, without argueing about it. But in this new FOSS world, why do you think major players will opt for a closed/monoplatform technology?"

What? What does FOSS have to do with what I said? I pointed out than XAML and XUL are quite different (they are), and that XAML will be used by big developers (if you saw the same demos I did, you'd agree).

"You're just saying that current Windows XP lags behind Linux and it will need 2 years for Windows to catch it. If that is really true, then you must assume Linux won't get stagnant those 2 years and will make a lot of great steps towards innovation and desktop integration."

Yes it does lag behind Linux in some aspects. Vista will [should] be out by the end of 2006, that's not 2 years. I didn't say Linux will stay stagnant either. But you're assuming that whatever Vista does, linux will have matched it by the time it's released. I don't think that's true. Linux will make some great steps by then, by I think Vista will be ahead for a little while. Mon, 01 Aug 2005 23:41:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (sappyvcv) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread?12401 http://www.osnews.com/thread?12401 3. Deployment/Servicing: ClickOnce
Linux has this, though the name escapes me

You're probably thinking of ZeroInstall. Mon, 01 Aug 2005 23:56:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Ronald Vos) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread?12407 http://www.osnews.com/thread?12407 "You don't. But it helps with efficiency, and it's called evolution. Things evolve. If you don't like it, you're welcome to continue using your 600mhz computer with no hardware accelerated desktop. Some of us will enjoy using it though."

Well, that depends on what do you expect about evolution. I don't expect to buy new hardware just because they want to sell more Windows copies. Of course I would enjoy an accelerated desktop, but I don't think title bar transparency, shadows, glare and all that stuff is evolution. I would expect integration, stability, speed, security better than eye-tricks. Not so useful in the end. Sure you will look at it and say: wonderful. But that's not a computer for. It's meant to use it, not to watch it make the tricks.

"What? What does FOSS have to do with what I said? I pointed out than XAML and XUL are quite different (they are), and that XAML will be used by big developers (if you saw the same demos I did, you'd agree)."

Right now, what matters is enterprise development. Enterprise development is headed towards Java, EJBs, LAMP, and .NET.
Businesses don't need to have all that FX-loaded applications. They need simple, easy to use, efficient business applications. That's the way it is. You won't need XAML in the enterprise. Sure you will get tons of XAML applications in download.com, but for desktop use and time wasting.

Big companies, won't get into the only-windows trap. They develop multiplatform applications. XAML won't fit them.


"Yes it does lag behind Linux in some aspects. Vista will [should] be out by the end of 2006, that's not 2 years. I didn't say Linux will stay stagnant either. But you're assuming that whatever Vista does, linux will have matched it by the time it's released. I don't think that's true. Linux will make some great steps by then, by I think Vista will be ahead for a little while."

Well, I don't think Linux should match every thing Vista will/would (who knows, actually) have by the time it's released (if it ever is). What's interesting about your view is that you're talking cheap about Vista, and it just doesn't exist at all. It's a bunch of copied&pasted XP code with some patches and additions and a lot of things left off. It's not and OS right now, it's just another service pack to XP with a different theme and some minor tweaks in UI plus a roadmap of things it will have by then. Yeah, because we all know that MS promises are God's word. How much time did they spent putting all this together? How many years? Tue, 02 Aug 2005 00:07:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (sbenitezb) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread?12446 http://www.osnews.com/thread?12446 Why? ..... who cares ...... switch to Linux baby!
What? .... load of crap ... switch to Linux baby!
When? .... never .......... switch to Linux baby! Tue, 02 Aug 2005 01:07:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread?12453 http://www.osnews.com/thread?12453 Microsoft spent a long time with Longhorn/Vista because of a decision at the executive level to use a number of technologies that Microsoft stole from outside the company. The list of outside technologies was quite extensive, so Microsoft has had a lot of work to do.

In a way it is a good thing as the valuation of these technologies over 10-20 years of use by Microsoft will be rather high. This will drive up the price Microsoft will pay via licensing or pay via court-decided damages. Tue, 02 Aug 2005 01:18:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (pravda) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread?12472 http://www.osnews.com/thread?12472 I agree with everything. Tue, 02 Aug 2005 02:01:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread?12486 http://www.osnews.com/thread?12486 Of course I would enjoy an accelerated desktop, but I don't think title bar transparency, shadows, glare and all that stuff is evolution.

That's possible BECAUSE of the evolution. It's not the evolution itself.

I would expect integration, stability, speed, security better than eye-tricks.

It will have all of that. Different departments work on different areas. Face it, if they didn't make it look pretty, people would bitch that it still looks the same and they didn't even change anything. They would bitch that they're just trying to make more money by changing one or two things, and you know it.

But that's not a computer for. It's meant to use it, not to watch it make the tricks.

Some of the tricks make the user experience better. Some make good visual cues for usability purposes. And some are just to keep people from complaining that they didn't change anything.

Businesses don't need to have all that FX-loaded applications. They need simple, easy to use, efficient business applications. That's the way it is. You won't need XAML in the enterprise. Sure you will get tons of XAML applications in download.com, but for desktop use and time wasting.

You don't know anything about XAML do you? What you're talking about is RAD. Businesses need to be able to develop and deploy applications quickly. XAML will empower them to develop the GUI for these apps MUCH faster than they can now AND to make it look and work better. If you want, I'll link you to a bunch of demos of XAML and show you what I mean. XAML is NOT about making things look pretty. It's about seperating the code and the GUI, making it flexible, and quick to develop.

Well, I don't think Linux should match every thing Vista will/would (who knows, actually) have by the time it's released (if it ever is). What's interesting about your view is that you're talking cheap about Vista, and it just doesn't exist at all. It's a bunch of copied&pasted XP code with some patches and additions and a lot of things left off. It's not and OS right now, it's just another service pack to XP with a different theme and some minor tweaks in UI plus a roadmap of things it will have by then. Yeah, because we all know that MS promises are God's word. How much time did they spent putting all this together? How many years?

That's the most ignorant thing I have read today.

Avalon is just a minor tweak? (In beta1)
Indigo (which is in Beta1 as almost feature complete) is just a minor tweak?
WinFX is a minor tweak?

Read the freakin' list I gave you. Some of those things are pretty freaking big.

If you actually paid attention, you'd know they restarted with the 2003 SP1 core last year, and that's what pushed them back. And that is what they are sticking with now, because they already have a beta out. Tue, 02 Aug 2005 02:45:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (sappyvcv) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread?12547 http://www.osnews.com/thread?12547 I don't know what you are talking about. I have a modern P4 and a nice video card, and I want my desktop to look nice as possible. I mean.....eye candy is cool. It is what attracts people. I'll say that eye candy in Linux right now is much better than eye candy in XP, and in two years it will be easier to use (biggest problem now) and more stable.

I use Enlightenment 17 inside of Gnome. I run xcompmgr for as much as I can stand it (its bugginess is pretty big now) and I love the ride. To even get Xp eye candy it costs money. My ride costs my time.....

In two years Vista will surge ahead. And it will be neat. Its will just because it has better drivers. But then...a year will go by....and .....then two...and two till next release..... Tue, 02 Aug 2005 06:07:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread?12586 http://www.osnews.com/thread?12586 In tradition of the frequent "enough about Ubuntu already" ports I feel compelled to say:
Enough about Windows Lonhorn/Vista already, ok? Tue, 02 Aug 2005 09:04:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread?12604 http://www.osnews.com/thread?12604 yes in did ...

we know but 90% don't know and that's why MS make so much money ...

pure propaganda. Tue, 02 Aug 2005 10:34:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread?12631 http://www.osnews.com/thread?12631 "Beta 1 is not what I would call deeply interesting unless you are a real bithead". Well, I would say unlesss you are a bughead. It is the most raw and unstable piece of code I've ever seen. Oh, and it is slow as hell. Tue, 02 Aug 2005 12:46:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread?12661 http://www.osnews.com/thread?12661 Does anyone know if the new windows will still be using the same naming convention for the hard drives i.e. c: d: etc.
I remember this convention dating back all the way to the DOS days. Tue, 02 Aug 2005 13:36:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread?12762 http://www.osnews.com/thread?12762 read it here...

http://radsoft.net/news/20050729,00.html Tue, 02 Aug 2005 16:22:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread?12777 http://www.osnews.com/thread?12777 Virus Infected Spyware Transmission Architecture...
Very Innocuous Small and Trivial Additions... Tue, 02 Aug 2005 17:12:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread?12921 http://www.osnews.com/thread?12921 MS has made some cool things that very few developers are going to ever use. They were conceived, designed, and implemented with the assumption that developers still program applications for a target platform.

Microsoft grew by providing a platform that is easy to program. This is how they beat OS/2, this is how they conquered the PC. Then they stopped innovating for a while. In fact, for just long enough that standards were developed such that all platforms are now relatively easy to target simultaenously, either via the web browser or virtual machine.

MS could have created something like Java, but they waited too long and .NET can't catch up. MS could have taken their win in the browser war and ran with it, creating open standards for the web that far exceed what we have established today, but they rested on their laurels.

The rest of the software world releases software for multiple platforms or is headed in that direction. The only way that MS can drive wide acceptance of "WinFX" is to provide ports for Linux and MacOSX. Tue, 02 Aug 2005 22:15:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (butters) Comments