Microsoft has for the third time delayed the launch of its Windows .Net Server 2003 high-end operating system. During his Comdex keynote address on Sunday, Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates revealed that the company would launch Windows .Net Server 2003 in April, marking the third delay for the server counterpart to the company’s Windows XP OS. Read the report at News.com and the press release.
.Net Server: Three Delays a Charm?
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
I ordered the 10 dollar preview disk set a while back when they first offered it to see what the ol “next gen” was gonna be.
Tr00th(tm) is, I have yet to install it. I will get around to it one of these days. Does anyone here have any experience with it?
Yes – it’s OK. It is to Windows 2000 server as XP is to 2000 Professional. Mostly UI changes that sync with XP. Think XP with a classic theme.
The only thing new is an email server built-in that integrates somewhat with Active directory. You are (sort of) required to state a reason as to why you are rebooting the server. It is also locked down by default – you have to turn things on one by one, especially with IIS.
One caveat – MS has stripped some drivers out of .Net server since the betas. Some of your hardware may not function. After using various beta builds for some time, I was shocked when I downloaded and installed the first release candidate, only to find that my trusty old Netgear 10/100 card was no longer supported. Luckily, I was able to pull it from XP and get it up and running.
If you do decide to install it and work with it as a Domain Controller – make sure you have 2 AD servers. I had some serious issues at one point with the Infrastructure Master FSMO being on the same machine as the Global Catalog.
I hope they delay it forever.
Get a life loser…grow up.
Nah, I want to see some competition between Linux and windows.
It’s the first time that Microsoft has a competitor and it cannot be beaten because it’s not a company, it’s a community
“It’s the first time that Microsoft has a competitor and it cannot be beaten because it’s not a company, it’s a community
”
Funny you said that. I just have a scary thought: If Microsoft ‘beat’ its competitor (company), they force the competitor out of business. If Microsoft ‘beat’ the community, are we to become imprisoned with their products?
Then I remember, “Power to the people”
Ok, I followed the link to the news.com page, and what do I get? basically a long winded version of, “oh, and btw, we’ve delayed the release”.
How about go into some depth? why has it been delayed? can’t Microsoft be honest? if it is a matter that they’re facing some competition and that they really have to make it work well the first time, then sure, I have no problems. I would much rather hear Microsoft say, “We’re not releasing it at the estimated date because it is not up to our high standards, there for, we’re holding it back until it up to what we consider a enterprise quality operating system”, and yes, I did through some hype it it, to make it sound like a press release and a marketing promotion all in one.
That is what Microsoft need to do. Be open and honest with the public. If something is delayed, be honest. Don’t try to spin it in such a way that you end up with a news.com article with no meaty information.
What world do you live in? A corporation being honest. Funny…real funny.
You could be proven wrong. Years ago, the idea of social responsibility in corporate governance was seen as a load of horse crap, now every CEO and his company is out there sponsoring something. Xerox for example supports recycling of photocopiers and selling ex-lease, re-conditioned to charities. Mainfreight in New Zealand paid for a couple of school class rooms and a school hall.
Maybe in a few years/decades time CEO’s will put the niceties, and just tell things the way they are. If they’re up shit creek, they simply say that. What alot of CEO’s fail to realise is that people don’t mind bad news, as long as they come clean and let people know when it happens. It is when CEO’s and managers hide things, as with the case of Enron and WorldCom, when people get pissed off.
Sorry but it all about profits.
“now every CEO and his company is out there sponsoring something. Xerox for example supports recycling of photocopiers and selling ex-lease, re-conditioned to charities. Mainfreight in New Zealand paid for a couple of school class rooms and a school hall.”
Its all about advertising…and trying to associate a company name with a good thing that people will remember. If there wasn’t some kind of benefit for the corporation I highly dought they would be doing it.
Its all about advertising…and trying to associate a company name with a good thing that people will remember. If there wasn’t some kind of benefit for the corporation I highly dought they would be doing it.
Depends. Some do it for profit, others do it because it is the right thing todo. What ever the reason, if the end result is positive, then who cares?
“What alot of CEO’s fail to realise is that people don’t mind bad news, as long as they come clean and let people know when it happens. It is when CEO’s and managers hide things, as with the case of Enron and WorldCom, when people get pissed off.”
This is exactly what I wanted to say
This is exactly what I wanted to say
—
Sir Richard Branson (not to be confused with the rich brown pickle 😉 ) had some very direct things to say about “analysts” and people who speculate about the market.
As for Enron, imagine that many moons ago, they came clean on the first investment that went sour. There would have been a quick board re-shuffle and a new CEO is put in place. Now, IHMO, had it happened, Enron would still be here today.