Home > Windows > Longhorn: Sure Hit or Longshot? Longhorn: Sure Hit or Longshot? Submitted by Eugenia 2005-06-26 Windows 58 Comments While enabling the next generation is one thing, getting corporate customers and consumers on the Longhorn bandwagon may take some doing, say professors at Wharton. About The Author David Adams Follow me on Twitter @david_adams 58 Comments 2005-06-26 10:39 pm I have been testing Longhorn pre-releases for weeks now and have to say Longhorn is still extremely buggy, parts of the user interface are very cumbersome and frustrating, and even trying to be as lenient of a tester as possible I can consider Longhorn only a failure. 2005-06-26 10:45 pm I’ve been testing pre-releases and its coming along great. It’ll be a winner just like all Microsoft operating systems. 2005-06-26 11:00 pm “I have been testing Longhorn pre-releases for weeks now and have to say Longhorn is still extremely buggy” A beta version of a piece of software has bugs? How shocking! 2005-06-26 11:09 pm Well, it’ll be bundled with every new system sold – which I guess makes it a “winner” by default. 2005-06-26 11:09 pm One of the companies I work with has just upgraded to Windows XP and 2003, and they’ve had NT4 and hardware in from 1996. It’s going to be a long wait. 2005-06-26 11:13 pm So many people havn’t even upgraded from Windows 2000. 2005-06-26 11:14 pm Commercially = when you have a monopoly position in a marketplace its guarenteed to be a financial hit. Technically = probably going to be more than a dud because people will be expecting some great new thing and will be disapointed when they realise its mearly yet another version of Windows 2000 like XP/2003 are. 2005-06-26 11:16 pm “A beta version of a piece of software has bugs? How shocking!” Actually, what’s available now is not even a beta version. Beta 1 is expected in July/August. 2005-06-26 11:35 pm 1. not complete 2. constantly axing features 3. GUI looks like something jetzons barfed up 4. everybody else already finished the features Longhorn started with 5. why upgrade? why not use another OS that is available? 2005-06-26 11:36 pm “So many people havn’t even upgraded from Windows 2000.” You’d be amazed how many people here haven’t upgraded from Windows 98 2005-06-26 11:44 pm It doesn’t need to be ugly either. Linux, the BSDs and OS X are a lot more secure than Windows by default. That doesn’t make them unattractive in the eyes of their users. Expecting the usual reply: “Just because they are used a lot less” 2005-06-26 11:57 pm So many people havn’t even upgraded from Windows 2000. Acording to the Swedish magazine, Computer Sweden, 48% of all companies still use win2k on their desktops. This makes win2k the dominationg desktop OS. Some of the companies have actually paid for XP licenses as part of site liecensing deals but don’t install it because it costs too much, in installaton costs, in training costs, in testing costs and upgrade costs of hardware and other software. If they upgrade to XP or Longhorn they are likely to expect that investment to last 10-15 years. I doubt that companies will continue to pay for software that is too expensive to install. No, I don’t think Longhorn will be a hit. Microsofts current offerings are far too good to make it worth while to upgrade. The same thing goes for MS-Office. Many people still use MS-Office 97 as later versions doesn’t really help in makeing more money. They may look a little more slick, but it will not make their customers to pay their bills faster, or accept higher prices. The main buyer of Longhorn will probably be a parent that have been convinced by their children that they simply need to have it or they will get behind in school. (Translated to teenageese this means: We can’t play the latest games on XP) 2005-06-27 12:24 am If longhorn is in fact what ms promised, the nt kernel with a new api on top (.NET) therefore deprecating win32 then yes, it’s a hit. If not, if after all this time they only come up with some stupid upgrade then they should go and hang themselves. 2005-06-27 12:27 am With Windows 95, I had a 486 DX 33 – Dos 6.2 & Windows 3.1 was fast, Windows 95 was slow… With Windows XP, I had a Pentium II 266 – Windows 98 was fast, didn’t even get to install Windows XP… I now have a Pentium 4 2.4 – Windows XP runs like a dream, but Longhorn??? Hardware is the problem – Why should people upgrade their software when to get resonable performance from their pc’s they’ll have to upgrade their hardware. People have been burnt before, and to justify the expense of upgrading their machines … well I’m not to sure what Microsoft can do… perhaps cut features from their upcoming OS or call things beta so that people with have time to adjust… sought of like shareware in a way, want the full package? Sure but you’ll have to pay! Want the full features of Longhorn? Sure but you’ll have to upgrade your pc. The best thing Windows could do is ride the 64 bit wave touting it as the latest thing, even though it’s been tried and tested for the last how many years (Microsoft is good at this). They did it with Windows 95 and Pentium… they – Microsft, will have to do it again with 64 bit architecture 2005-06-27 12:40 am I’m not seeing anything that’ll compel people to upgrade – And revitalising the PC industry through forced upgrades doesn’t seem to be in *my* interests as a consumer, so who are Microsoft trying to impress here? 2005-06-27 12:51 am Can Microsoft make Longhorn cool? As stated in previous posts, unless kids want their parents to purchase the new pc’s with the new Longhorn – I can’t see many people coming to the table. I know where the money will be going – on that shiney new PS3. 2005-06-27 12:59 am Microsoft owns the desktop and the channel. Every new PC in 2006+ will come with Longhorn. So everyone will end up with it. Some people are just so stupid they do not understand the PC industry and how Microsoft’s monopoly works. 2005-06-27 1:00 am Whatever happened to those little red squiggly marks? (hint, hint) 2005-06-27 1:06 am Microsoft isn’t hiding what it is up to API-wise. The plan roughly is… * Phase in .Net and CLR. * Phase in new supporting tools and architecture changes for the above. * De-emphasise older APIs (the ones used since NT). * Sandbox both new and old APIs. * Build on the above for all services and programs. * Back port as necessary, but emphasise Longhorn and later versions of Windows. This will take years and probably 3 revisions of Windows to pull off; ‘Longhorn’ + 2 more. I’d expect that the gaps between ‘Longhorn’ and the two follow on versions of Windows to be 1-1/2 to 2 years. #3 will complete the job and Microsoft will probably keep with that architechture for another 10 years. Expect doom and gloom and excessive hype from all corners of the computing world for both ‘Longhorn’ and the follow-on version. Nobody will ask these types of questions when #3 comes along. That, of course, does not mean that sucess or doom has been decided yet. 2005-06-27 1:11 am home server edition. Longhorn is gonna rock! Comming from a mixed environment — Windows, unix/Unix, and Mac — I’m struggling to understand the enthusiasm for this. I’ve heard it a few times, so there must be something people are looking for…though I can’t figure it out. Windows (non-‘server’ version) already provides services. You can add services to any version of Windows. P2P, file sharing, and print spooling are fairly traditional and sophisticated services. The question: What do you anticipate to get from a “home server edition” of Windows that you do not already have? 2005-06-27 2:16 am If OSX went as long as XP has without an update, fell as far behind the competition as XP has, and usage was still only 50%, it would count as a major commercial failure. MS has enough money in the bank to ride it out and keep supporting the old OS’s that so many people still use (though they are trying to shed them.) Longhorn’s acceptance rate may not be even that good: new machines will have it, but there’s a HUGE installed base and a lot of it won’t need to be upgraded soon. They have to move quite a few million copies just to get 10%. Except for high end games, new versions of software aren’t nearly as compelling as they were a few years ago, and most are likely to run decently on several-year-old computers w/ XP. MS quit adding much beyond bloat and incompatible file formats to Office years ago, and a fair amount of businesses seem to have figured that out. If Bill ain’t scared, he needs to get that way. People run Windows because they need specific hardware/software (which they already have) or just want the lowest possible upfront price, no matter how shoddy it is and how much it costs later: that’s a bad market to target with something as expensive as a Longhorn upgrade is likely to be. Especially when it may not be much more than an XP skin by the time they finally quit cutting features and ship it. Microsoft isn’t hiding what it is up to API-wise. The plan roughly is… * Phase in .Net and CLR. * Phase in new supporting tools and architecture changes for the above. * De-emphasise older APIs (the ones used since NT). * Sandbox both new and old APIs. * Build on the above for all services and programs. * Back port as necessary, but emphasise Longhorn and later versions of Windows. What of this is of interest to consumers? – Shipping .NET w/ the OS will finally make it usable for consumer apps, if anyone is excited by Windows-specific Java with an uncertain future. Users will never know the difference except that some new programs will take longer to start. – I don’t believe for a second that the security problems will be solved, especially in v1. Customers _will_ notice that. 2005-06-27 2:20 am My experience with MS is their products never live up to the hype. Here’s hoping it will this time. 2005-06-27 2:22 am In the article he stated: “The rule with Microsoft is that you always wait for that next release,” Werbach notes. When in actual fact, the rule of thumb has always been, wait till the first service pack or collection of updates, then upgrade – then again, that is the same for any product; be it from Microsoft, Adobe, Macromedia or any number of other vendors out there. Regarding Longhon, I agree with Uno Engborg; there are less and less compelling reasons for users to upgrade; the features being added and what users want are not marrying up; when customers decide whether to plonk down NZ$300 for a retail version of Windows, they want a pretty compelling case to justify parting with such a large sum of money. If one must also bring in MacOS, there is a less compelling case directly for customers to upgrade, but at the same time, Apple is providing a pretty compelling case for software companies to embrace the new technologies they’ve included with MacOS X, thus, by proxy, forcing users to upgrade – Microsoft has failed to do anything like this; create a set of new APIs that are compelling enough to software companies as to get them to embrace them, and thus, create a forced upgrade by proxy onto their customer base. With Longhorn as well, it was radical enough; they’re still hanging onto win32, they’re still hanging onto crufty things that should have been killed off long ago; Longhorn should have been the chance to once and for all, kill off support, and merely keep backwards compatibility, but not allow software companies to compile against it. All in all, Longhorn, quite frankly, is a great disappointment, it could have been something new, and different, but users have been basically waiting 4 years so they could get ‘more of the same’ – something that Microsoft doesn’t realise – more of the same doesn’t cut it, and won’t motivate customers to purchase their new product, no matter how many disco dancing divas they select for their new Longhorn television commercial, or bass pumping music for their hypefeast when launching their product (with the Microsoft employees roller blading around the theatre, with faces that look like they’re either been pluckerd from “children of the corn” or have taken a truck load of ‘e’). 2005-06-27 2:43 am Microsoft is a company that is fading away in the OS world. Longhorn builds that my company have tested internally while buggy which is to be expected really does not seem revolutionary in the least. One of the IT guru’s that’s a big gamer said it’s another WinME and that people will see WinXP as good enough. As many companies have adopted WinXP after limping on Win98 for years I doubt that Longhorn will catch any upgrade cycles. Apple will finally have it’s time in the light again I think with the release of leopard. 2005-06-27 2:52 am “I have been testing Longhorn pre-releases for weeks now and have to say Longhorn is still extremely buggy” Ballmer: “Extremely buggy? Not worse? Great! Sounds like we’re shipping soon!!” 2005-06-27 3:02 am What of this is of interest to consumers? None of it. Microsoft is suffering from major structural problems up and down the Windows line. They realize it and are working on a migration path that won’t spook customers. That’s what the list covered. That they can brag about some of the neat-o features and benifits is a bonus. – Shipping .NET w/ the OS will finally make it usable for consumer apps, if anyone is excited by Windows-specific Java with an uncertain future. Users will never know the difference except that some new programs will take longer to start. The plan — and I am _NOT_ saying it will work — is to replace win32 and other current/legacy APIs with .Net and CLR targeted ones. That’s everything. If Microsoft doesn’t suceed, they will be royally screwed. – I don’t believe for a second that the security problems will be solved, especially in v1. Customers _will_ notice that. The security problems will be lessened. The customers who put up with Windows security now are going to put up with ‘better’ (but not good) security later. Listen to the folks defending Microsoft here…it’s amazing how far they will go to say a security issue isn’t a problem. If you haven’t figured it out, I’m more of a *nix guy…though I grew up on DOS, Windows, and Windows NT+. People argue with me in person talking about security and other failures of Windows as if they will be fixed in the next patch. That’s entirely missing the point…and no amount of reasoned discussion gets the to the point of enlightenment. To have good security, the plan is simple. Implementation is a bitch. Security is a process not a product. Meaning: Even Windows XP can be mostly secure. It’s just a royal pain to do right. Nothing like the security extentions in use on some unix systems, though not too bad. Problem is people who think they are securing a system usually are just throwing products on the fire and not solving the problems. 2005-06-27 3:25 am Will someone *please* post a link where MS has announced plans to replace the Win32 API? Nothing could be farther from the truth, they have 20+ years invested in those API’s…it’s pure FUD. 2005-06-27 3:25 am …you forgot TCPA. This shitty technology will make us buy new laptops from the high-price class to even move a card in freecell not to speak of watching p0Rn in HDTV 🙁 2005-06-27 3:37 am Some companies are just upgrading to XP because y2k is not supported anumore not because they need XP. How sad that is… when you have to play along when somebofy else dictates it. What is this free marked called nowadays? 2005-06-27 4:36 am I can’t actually post the link or Microsoft might sue me and this site, but the information that you want can be found on MSDN TV on the microsoft website (msdn.”company”.com/msdntv). There is also a really good article on Ondotnet article on it (I think). The focus of the API will shift to .NET for application design and give Microsoft and developers a cleaner method of placing applications on many different versions of Windows concurrently. Win32 itself, however, is going no where. 2005-06-27 4:40 am Who remembers Windows ME? That’s right: almost nobody. Some of the comments above say that simply by making Longhorn, Microsoft will get it installed on every new PC on the planet. However, these comments fly in the face of the fact that nearly everyone stayed with Windows 98 until they bought a new PC with Windows XP. Windows ME was like that french fry dropped beside a car seat and forgotten for years and discovered only by an auto detailer when prepping the car for resale. 2005-06-27 4:43 am Will someone *please* post a link where MS has announced plans to replace the Win32 API? Nothing could be farther from the truth, they have 20+ years invested in those API’s…it’s pure FUD. It is an assumption based on what Microsoft has already released: 1) C++/C#/VB.NET and numerous other languages are being made available for the .NET Framework – why go to all that effort, especially C++, when its just meant to be for RAD applications? via the inclusion of C++ support, its pretty obvious that they wish to be used for than just dinky little front ends and widgets. 2) .NET extensions to DirectX as to allow a person to write a game completely in C# and have access to the DirectX technologies. 3) WinFX, the eventual successor to Win32, coupled with the much touted reduction in win32 api calls, means, what we’ll see it an out of sight win32, extremely stripped down to the bare minimum, with .NET/WinFX built upon that minimalist API, which in theory should mean a cleaner API. 4) Win32 needs to be replaced; win32 is to Windows what Carbon is to MacOS X, and the most logical successor to win32 is .NET – thats unless Microsoft is going to spontaneously rectum pluck a new api out of the behind in the next 6months. 2005-06-27 4:43 am Well yeah, that’s a given…but everyone here seems to be convinced that MS is throwing out the Win32 API in favor of .Net; I’m trying to figure out how anyone who’s programmed against Win32 for more than 5 minutes could even begin to think they’d scrap it. It will be *many* releases before the entire Win32 is wrapped up w/ managed API’s, and even then Win32 will still be fully exposed as it will always be faster than managed code. 2005-06-27 4:44 am I can’t actually post the link or Microsoft might sue me and this site, but the information that you want can be found on MSDN TV on the microsoft website (msdn.”company”.com/msdntv). There is also a really good article on Ondotnet article on it (I think). The focus of the API will shift to .NET for application design and give Microsoft and developers a cleaner method of placing applications on many different versions of Windows concurrently. Why be mysterious. Microsoft has said as much; it’s not like you are going to be sued for pointing to public information. …besides, you do it thinly anyway. Win32 itself, however, is going no where. Yes. That’s been the plan for the last year publically. You could have guessed it before then, though. No mystery. 2005-06-27 4:53 am No threat to Linux, as some have suggested. I don’t think it will expand the Windows market, and will at best hold on to the current customer base (becuase it’ll be pre-installed on a lot of new PCs) while fragmenting the Windows market even further. 2005-06-27 4:53 am Will someone *please* post a link where MS has announced plans to replace the Win32 API? Nothing could be farther from the truth, they have 20+ years invested in those API’s…it’s pure FUD. It’s been in the press for well over a year. Google query: microsoft replace api win32 dotnet First link result: http://www.ondotnet.com/pub/a/dotnet/2003/11/24/longhorn_01.htm If you want more, go look. Microsoft will not deny it, though don’t expect them to say “Win32 is dead” … they WON’T. That would be bad PR. Instead, they will talk about all the benifits of managed code under CLR and .Net and how this is the future. For Windows, it is. 2005-06-27 4:57 am Well yeah, that’s a given…but everyone here seems to be convinced that MS is throwing out the Win32 API in favor of .Net; I’m trying to figure out how anyone who’s programmed against Win32 for more than 5 minutes could even begin to think they’d scrap it. It will be *many* releases before the entire Win32 is wrapped up w/ managed API’s, and even then Win32 will still be fully exposed as it will always be faster than managed code. They AREN’T wrapping up the ENTIRE Win32 API in managed code. They are being selective. Kind of like a RISC vs. CISC arangement. .Net and CLR will use that subset. The rest of the Win32 APIs will be depreciated over time; they will exist, though you will be at a disadvantage if you use them vs. the .Net/CLR APIs. 2005-06-27 6:19 am according to wallstreet, looking at the stock price slope indicate they already decided it will not be a hit. 2005-06-27 6:36 am Corporate users still use w2k on a large scale.What could offer XP them that w2k doesn’t exept a different GUI look which will inevitably mean a hardware upgrade. Consumers will start using Longhorn if they have bought a new PC.Companies are more likely to outsource than offering their employees an PC prive project PC.I think the good old days are over and there has to be fought over every inch of marketshare.Which is a very good thing,the consumer wins.The exec’s can eat just as well cheese sandwiches as treating everybody a champagne brunch. Why be innovative? Werbach says that, in the short run, being innovative doesn’t matter much. Over several years, however, a failure to innovate translates into a brain drain They have had their opportunity but had to much champagne i guess.RSS integrated?Yes,cool but should i pay Euro 450 for it with an upgrade?Nice GUI?Cool,owh i have to buy a faster PC to,that’s less.I heard there’s something like a desktop search thingy.Well,that’s not going to be released initially.But will be included someday when we have finished drinking champagne and counting stock. 2005-06-27 6:41 am Microsoft won’t sue you or OSNews for putting up a link to something they’ve already published on the internet, what sense would there be in that? If they didn’t want people linking to content on their site then they wouldn’t have put it up where the public can get to it in the first place. 2005-06-27 6:43 am Logical fallacy. Appeal to authority. And not even good authority. Wharton is in the same class of schools as DeVry and Herzing. These “Professors” don’t even have their doctorates. 2005-06-27 6:43 am I don’t want any DRM software in my box. I want to keep control of my stuff myself, and when MS tries to force such a thing upon me, I’m not very happy about it. I think Microsoft has come to a point with Longhorn where the market will start to scatter more. Previously they had their 90+% market share, I think we’ll start looking a couple of years after longhorn for a market share of more like 70%. However it is indeed unclear what system people will choose. I know many would say Linux will steal the market but I’m frankly not so sure. There seems to be a lot of stuff cooking in the OS arena, I really wonder who it is that will manage to utilize the current situation. For some reason, I believe Google is one of the winners… 2005-06-27 7:48 am Apple and Linux will not be sitting still and wait for Longhorn. By the time Longhorn ships, Mac OS X will be well into version 10.5. Meanwhile, too many users are perfectly satisfied with Windows 2000. Microsofts own Xbox360 will eat a big chunk of the PC games market. The hardcore gamers will not wait for Longhorn to show up while the nee Xbox360 leaves gaming PC’s in the dust. 2005-06-27 9:15 am … well, we didn’t. Microsoft did… They found out that a full TCPA OS would slow down the machine so much, that even a high end system would not be able to run your low resolution p0rn movies. Even DMA transfers would not be possible in a full TCPA implementation. That, and all the negative stories arround TCPA made MS forget about it. Lucky for us, it’s one step back for MS in dominating the world 2005-06-27 9:25 am More Longhorn hype? Wake me up when they have something that works. 2005-06-27 10:25 am Leopard vs Longhorn ! it will be great, whoever wins = user wins !! i don’t see Linux in the future though. 2005-06-27 11:39 am “You’d be amazed how many people here haven’t upgraded from Windows 98” If they have to pay for the OS why would they? Win98 probably works decent so why pay for an os again. (althought quite unreliable, fat32, ..) 2005-06-27 12:08 pm both think the other will fail. truth is,both are going to be around for a while. one thing i hav noticed, a piece of software considered to be ‘beta’ in the OSS world is several times more stable then a piece of software considered ‘beta’ in the closed source world. while linux may not be for everyone, it definatly has its advantages. while windows will probably always be the gamers wet dream. other then that, anything one can do, the other can do. 2005-06-27 12:16 pm >i don’t see Linux in the future though. Me neither, but that is because I allready use Linux exclusive on my desktop and laptop for more then two years without falling back on a windows install. 2005-06-27 2:11 pm My comment got moderated down yet all these trolling comments got OKs. o_O 2005-06-27 2:27 pm I am wondering to what extent the dropping of features in Longhorn isn’t a symptom of Microsoft’s huge size. It looks like many state monopolies: they are only able to provide sub-optimal products because optimizing one product would break their “big plan”. 2005-06-27 2:39 pm I just had to downgrade (yes DOWNGRADE) from windows XP to 2000 to get any actual stability. I’m a mac / linux guy just so I don’t go insane. I have a PC for the sake of games and it has been the most unstable piece of junk I’ve used since Windows 98. UT 2004? crashed my machine. subspace? blue screen of death. world of warcraft? won’t run at my LCD screen resolution. at this point it seems like a miracle i got doom 3 and half life 2 running on it. it’s just a shame that to actually use the machine i need to be running antivirus, antispyware, and firewall right out of the bat. nevermind the (literally) 15 reboots to install win 2k, update every single windows update, and install my sound card / video card drivers. 2005-06-27 2:57 pm windows should realease the kernel. even if it was closed source. and document its API’s and protocols and all that good stuff. and let other people build on top of that. could you picture different ‘windows distros’ all geared to doing 1 thing well. instead of everything crapely. then maybe they would put a dent in linuxes momentum…depending on pricing. 2005-06-27 3:03 pm I just had to downgrade (yes DOWNGRADE) from windows XP to 2000 to get any actual stability. I’m a mac / linux guy just so I don’t go insane. I have a PC for the sake of games and it has been the most unstable piece of junk I’ve used since Windows 98. UT 2004? crashed my machine. subspace? blue screen of death. world of warcraft? won’t run at my LCD screen resolution. at this point it seems like a miracle i got doom 3 and half life 2 running on it. While I agree that Windows does indeed suck, it’s just a tool. If you want stability, try and remove as much as possible and run with a minimal number of services. Ditch any special tools such as keyboard button enhancers. Do not tweak the video driver, and use the most stable revision if you can figure it out. These steps will stabilize Windows substantially in most cases. (Yes, it is absurd that this would have any impact on the stability of Windows. No argument. It does work, though.) it’s just a shame that to actually use the machine i need to be running antivirus, antispyware, and firewall right out of the bat. nevermind the (literally) 15 reboots to install win 2k, update every single windows update, and install my sound card / video card drivers. That’s the reason for your instability; too much system-level dreck. Prune your system down to the minimum and find trustworty software — while eliminating as much as possible including antivirus, firewall, … . I’m constantly turning off NAV at work just so it doesn’t take 1/2 an hour to copy a few gigs of files around. You do not need a system-level firewall if…you go through a router that includes a firewall, you do not run Windows elsewhere, and you are on a home LAN. 2005-06-27 3:48 pm If you remember, XP was no huge success right out of the starting gate. But, as people buy new PCs that have XP pre-loaded, XP is slowly taking over. Longhorn will be exactly the same, there is nothing in longhorn that will cause people to rush to compusa and clear out the shelves. But, there doesn’t have to be. Msft owns the desktop market, and that is that. 2005-06-27 4:03 pm “I’ve been testing pre-releases and its coming along great. It’ll be a winner just like all Microsoft operating systems.” Yeah, Windows ME was a real winner. So was XP. Half of businesses are still using 2000! 2005-06-27 6:19 pm im not sure people will move to linux either. mabey in a couple years it will be ready for anyone to use. Im using it now. there are some parts i struggle with though. like drivers, and configuring things. linux drivers need to be easier to install. xorg config file is archaic. why cant you change that kind of stuff be configured from within gnome? setting up a mouse or a wacom tablet. is overly complicated. it does a good job of configuring for you, but if it doesn’t you have to go look at that text file. and thats something that you can’t expect a nooby to do. I dont like to do it. but i can. also. linux needs good multiuser support. this one user thing blows. it needs something similar to fast user switching. Also i find playing a 3d game in linux is Annoying. you can’t task out. it would be cool. if fullscreen games would start on another virtual xsession. so if your gui is on f7, it would start the game on f8. that way you could ctrl-alt-f7 to task out of the game. 2005-06-27 6:31 pm Also i find playing a 3d game in linux is Annoying. you can’t task out. it would be cool. if fullscreen games would start on another virtual xsession. so if your gui is on f7, it would start the game on f8. that way you could ctrl-alt-f7 to task out of the game. 1. Ctrl-Enter works with most of my games. 2. You can start in a seperate X session. Not typically configured to make that easy, though it is possible. 3. Ctrl-Alt-F? to a shell and X appname to run it?