Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 10th Jul 2007 22:50 UTC
"Today at the Worldwide Partner Conference in San Francisco, Microsoft's chief operating officer, Kevin Turner, announced that Windows Server 2008 (previously known as Longhorn), Microsoft SQL Server 2008, and Visual Studio 2008 will be officially launched on February 27, 2008. This may come as a surprise to those following the Windows 2008 Server news closely, since most sources at Microsoft have been insisting that the next version of its server operating system will released at the very end of 2007. Apparently in Redmond there is a difference between releasing the OS and the extravagant product launches, which are more of a pep rally for the product then a technical presentation."
Thread beginning with comment 254479
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Maybe fix some bugs...
by kad77 on Wed 11th Jul 2007 08:02
in reply to "RE[3]: Maybe fix some bugs..."
Member since:2007-03-20
The API's were stable for well over a year; ATI and Nvidia chose not to allocate resources in favour of doing a cheaper thing - blame Microsoft for problems instead of taking on more engineers to share the load.
Exactly the point I was making. Users rightly blamed the video card developers for their shortcomings. Apparently they care about the current Vista userbase just a hair more than the Linux userbase. But not much (as people tell me Vista ATI/nvidia drivers are still not up to par with XPs).
"Part of their success is backward compatibility. Another is moving the ball forward. I think the majority of people that write and maintain software will update it to take advantage and/or work on the platform it is most used on. This goes for any software on any OS. Or you can run an emulator or VM I suppose.
Its pretty easy; they've got VirtualPC, bundle that with a Windows XP Image, and voila, backwards compatibility. "
With so many people developing for JVM/.NET/Web 2.0(tm), I think the number of developers bound to Win32 (blech) is on a permanent decline anyway. Beyond Vista, "legacy" software will either be rewritten, die, or become transparently VM'd as you suggest.
RE[5]: Maybe fix some bugs...
by kaiwai on Wed 11th Jul 2007 08:23
in reply to "RE[4]: Maybe fix some bugs..."
Member since:2005-07-06
With so many people developing for JVM/.NET/Web 2.0(tm), I think the number of developers bound to Win32 (blech) is on a permanent decline anyway. Beyond Vista, "legacy" software will either be rewritten, die, or become transparently VM'd as you suggest.
I would wish one thing would happen in the IT world - that the bullcrap about Java, .NET and managed code, and if you're a 'real man' you use unmanaged programming languages such as C and C++.
There is a constant reputation amoungst some programmers on this website, lying time and time again. Claiming that pointers aren't available and yet, for someone like me who has a *very* basic understanding of this, I know there is references in java, and in .NET/C#, you can use a special 'safe' pointers if you need to.
The day when these 'real men don't use managed code' die off, the sooner we'll start to see companies embrace managed code as *THE* thing to do use for developing software - multiplatform applications based on platform independent frameworks.
I'd love to see, for example, people tell Adobe and Microsoft to go take a hike in favour of JavaFX which is opensource and available for all and sundry to embrace. For vendors, they need to look at the long term rather than short term.
There is a (without over exaggarating) market out there for people who don't run Windows, who would love to purchase software - if Adobe tomorrow came out with a competely Creative Suite based on the Eclipse framework, I would pay for 3 releases up front! I know many Apple Mac users who would instantly switch to a commodity PC with *NIX if they could run alll the applications.
It makes me annoyed when I see vendors blame Microsoft when in reality, it is the vendors (software and hardware) by refusing to support alternative platforms, they by default prop up Microsofts monopoly.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2005-07-06
The API's were stable for well over a year; ATI and Nvidia chose not to allocate resources in favour of doing a cheaper thing - blame Microsoft for problems instead of taking on more engineers to share the load.
Its pretty easy; they've got VirtualPC, bundle that with a Windows XP Image, and voila, backwards compatibility.