Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 7th Apr 2007 20:58 UTC, submitted by rx182
Windows Paul Thurrot writes about Windows XP SP3: "If you were looking for any glimpse into the mind of Microsoft, this is it: the company has completely abandoned Windows XP, and it has absolutely no plans to ever ship an XP SP3. My guess is that Microsoft will do what it did with the final Windows 2000 Service Pack: claim years later that it's no longer needed and just ship a final security patch roll-up. This is the worst kiss-off to any Microsoft product I've ever seen, and you'd think the company would show a little more respect to its best-selling OS of all time."
Thread beginning with comment 228575
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Windows
by rx182 on Sun 8th Apr 2007 00:27 UTC
rx182
Member since:
2005-07-08

Why do people always try to plug Linux and MacOS in these threads?

Like some guy said above, you cannot compare Windows with Linux. Some people are fine with Linux but that's not the majority.

Windows Vista SP0 is a failure. Why? Because it was NOT ready for release (not because it's bad).

From a technological point of view, Vista is great (minus UAC). .NET 3.0 is a BIG thing. Look at WPF. It's BIG. With Visual Studio Orcas coming, I think Microsoft is in very good shape.

You won't find that kind of new stuff on other platforms. On Linux, you don't even have a decent IDE to write non-corporate applications (using Eclipse in a non-corporate environnement is dumb). You don't even have good (read "new generation") APIs to write full featured applications (I mean, without doing it all by hand).

I'm not saying that X is bad, that GTK is bad or that QT is bad, no, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that these things are old stuff. We moved on.

Still, Windows Vista SP0 is a failure. But hey, that's not the first mistake from Microsoft. I'm sure the future will not let us down.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Windows
by JPisini on Sun 8th Apr 2007 00:50 in reply to "Windows"
JPisini Member since:
2006-01-24


Windows Vista SP0 is a failure. Why? Because it was NOT ready for release (not because it's bad).


Dude that is bad whether you believe it or not. MS has you believing that an OS is fine if it crashes or doesn't do what you need it to. You sit there and say well it's not ready well guess what MS released it so they think it is therefore it stinks because it doesn't work.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Windows
by PlatformAgnostic on Sun 8th Apr 2007 01:07 in reply to "Windows"
PlatformAgnostic Member since:
2006-01-02

I don't think your points are fair on either side. For one, Windows Vista was ready to be released. Using my pretty much all-intel laptop, the final release has been quite stable so far and it handles some things faster than XP. Sure, drivers aren't fully there, but they weren't going to be until the OS was out. Microsoft has to essentially force the IHVs forward or they won't do it on their own. NVidia's not going to be looking too good financially if their Vista drivers don't improve post haste.

On your linux comments: I haven't done much linux coding myself, but I've seen the tools and technologies on the QT side, and there's nothing primitive about them. GTK is supposed to be a big mess, though I have no basis to confirm it, but QT has had a good environment for quite some time. The fact is, in the Windows world any "real" applications that are not relatively simple LOB tools are written "by hand" as well. People don't use the VS GUI designers to make high performance "heavy-weight" applications like Office, Acrobat, or even Paint.NET. VS is great for writing these heavier applications, but only because of intellisense and the general quality of its editor.

Edited 2007-04-08 01:26

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: Windows
by trenchsol on Sun 8th Apr 2007 13:04 in reply to "Windows"
trenchsol Member since:
2006-12-07

I am a developer, and never heard of a cathegory called "non-corporate" applications. There is very loosley defined cathegory of "enterprise" applications, and that definition does not include technology or API used to create them. Please don't make comments on something you don't understand.

You probably mean something like games and multimedia. Yes, OSX an Windows are better choice for that type of applications.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: Windows
by twenex on Sun 8th Apr 2007 13:25 in reply to "Windows"
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

Like some guy said above, you cannot compare Windows with Linux. Some people are fine with Linux but that's not the majority.

Windows Vista SP0 is a failure. Why? Because it was NOT ready for release (not because it's bad).


Ah, my favourite Windows fanboi tactic: "Windows is crap because it's not ready, and Linux is crap because it's crap".

If it hasn't been ready for 24 years, why should I believe it will EVER be?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Windows
by christianhgross on Mon 9th Apr 2007 07:47 in reply to "Windows"
christianhgross Member since:
2005-11-15

I happen to develop for .NET on both Windows and Linux. I find it odd that you now talk about how Linux is not ready for the "non-Enterprise." Eclipse can be used in a corporate or non-corporate environment. BTW if I am not mistaken you mean .NET 3.5? .NET 3.0 is released, but without an appropriate IDE it is pretty much buggered. And with Orcas distributed is .NET 3.5, but C# 3.0.

Equating good with new is also a bad idea. If you want to talk about new API's then you by comparing WPF you are in fact talking about old API's since WPF is like XUL, and XUL has been around for ages. For the other stuff like Web Services, and Communications .NET 3.5 is pretty darn complicated and I question if it is better.

Ok so if I program C# and .NET why am I dissing it? Because I write Ajax front ends with ASP.NET back ends using REST and sometimes SOAP. Wonderful architecture and it works extremely well.

BTW I also don't agree that Vista is a failure. Vista is a fine piece of software that nobody needs. XPSP2 is about what most people need, and that is the problem that Microsoft is facing.

Reply Parent Score: 1