Microsoft is designing its ever-present Windows operating system to streamline and lower the cost of building and distributing the software. Read the article at C|Net.
Microsoft: Longhorn Goes to Pieces
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
…from the same piece of code, just look at how different are the prices for the various windwos 2003 server versions. The kernel is basically identical in each version and of Windows XP one.
Yes, but they also come with different software….
I don’t see what your point is, but then again, you are probably just some mindless troll.
why oh why do people/corporations buy this pile of insecure, overpriced and buggy excuse for a OS when there are superiour alternatives freely available???
No, i am not a troll and i do ask because i really want an answer!! please enlighten me
regards /jens
I thought I understand what he wants to say.
Take Windows Server, you must buy different license if you take your server from 2 cpu to 8 cpu… It’s the same version of Windows…
And between the home and the pro version of XP, there is not much difference. Except home can’t join a domain, it’s the same thing…
I know they want to make price for everybody but when you buy a license for 2 cpu, it make sense to not buy another license just for 2 more cpu…
No you don’t get it. And you probably will never understand how someone could have a different opinion than you, or understand anyone else in life. This is why you will grow to be an old, lonely computer geek, with no one to turn to but your latest linux kernel and your stuffed penguins.
>This is why you will grow to be an old, lonely computer >geek, with no one to turn to but your latest linux kernel >and your stuffed penguins.
Of course, when you go ad hominom, then you lose all credibility on a debate.
Jeff Ford, manager of software development in IBM’s personal client division:
“We haven’t had time to evaluate it yet,” said Ford. Language switching could also create problems, he added. If someone switches the operating system from English to German, the applications might still be in English. Also, keyboards vary by geography.
Looks like the user is in for hell, as usual. It will be interested to see Microsoft get this technology to work with all the DRM/TCPA/NGFTUT/etc in Longhorn.
Oh wait, I get it. It’s like that truck that converts from a pickup to a sedan. Microsoft can use the same name so people will understand it.
Microsoft Avalanche.
buy this pile of insecure, overpriced and buggy excuse for a OS
Of course, when you go ad hominom, then you lose all credibility on a debate.
Yes this is quite the debate. Maybe that’s how you debate operating systems merit though.
Jeff: I hate to tell you this, but MOST server software is licensed per CPU, Windows is actually very flexible with this.
There are many things in Pro that are not in Home.
Remote Desktop, Encrypted File System, support for domains, support for more CPU’s, support for more RAM, System Restore, IIS, multi-lingual support… I’m sure there are more that I can’t think of.
why oh why do people/corporations buy this pile of insecure, overpriced and buggy excuse for a OS when there are superiour alternatives freely available???
No, i am not a troll and i do ask because i really want an answer!! please enlighten me
I can’t answer for everyone else, but I can answer for me.
So far, I’ve not been able to find any ‘superior alternatives’ (on the PC platform) that runs this or something like it:
http://www.propellerheads.se/products/reason/frame.html
Any other questions?
Darius Thats a shame really, reason is really nice to play around with!!
But that was not really mt point here. I still doubt that corporations need Remote desktop on their servers – that is probably good for the poor admin who has to log on and kill the frozen word app…
Encrypted File System – Im not sure if this is about DRM (Digital Restrictions Management) or more about security. In the first case it makes me sad, for security, try by stopping the intruders earlier on..
support for domains I would that a win os has support for win domains… duh
support for more CPU’s pay extra for this?
support for more RAM give me a break
System Restore didn’t we just read about some huge security flaws in this(?)
IIS apache anyone?
… and so forth
If you have 2 CPU’s, or 8 CPU’s then you are technically running 2 or 8 versions of windows concurrently. Each of those CPU’s can be running the same code at the same time.
It is not that different from having 2 single CPU machines running windows at the same time sitting next to each other – it is just they dont share the same memory.
Look at it the other way – technically, you should have to buy 2 seperate Windows licenses for a 2 CPU machine – think of it as them giving you a discount for running them both in the same memory space.
Is the glass half full, or half empty?
*cough* do you mean Digital Rights Management?
Throwing around out-of-context buzzwords to attempt to make a weakly supported point seems to be a popular thing around here.
Dunring the anti-trust trail MS said that this sort of modularization would take them massive amounts of time and effort. Most people thought they were nuts and just trying to weasle out of trouble. It looks like it will take 10+ years to make a microkernel OS modular.
why oh why do people/corporations buy this pile of insecure, overpriced and buggy excuse for a OS when there are superiour alternatives freely available???
No, i am not a troll and i do ask because i really want an answer!! please enlighten me
regards /jens
How can you not call yourself a troll when I see repeated uses of ?? and !! for no particular reason.
How about this sunshine, companies have spent millions developing custom applications and that they’re not going to suddenly throw out years of investment because Linux happens to be the “flavour of the month”.
Businesses want to see a real case for moving from Windows to something else. Atleast with Apple the possibility is actually real vs. the fatancy many pro-Linux people try to make out.
As for re-training, the average person, contry to most linux fanboys, cannot pick up skills as easily as you claim and most of these users who use spreadsheets and other office tools use a little more than just the auto-sum and graphing functions. A large portion know and quite happy to use Excel. That is what they’re used to and unless you can provide a drop in replacement for Excel or what ever, Office is going to hang around for another 10years whether you like it or not.
But that was not really mt point here. I still doubt that corporations need Remote desktop on their servers – that is probably good for the poor admin who has to log on and kill the frozen word app…
How do you think these servers are going to be managed? have hundreds of monitors hooked up and admistrate each of them individually?
Encrypted File System – Im not sure if this is about DRM (Digital Restrictions Management) or more about security. In the first case it makes me sad, for security, try by stopping the intruders earlier on..
What has encrypted filesystems have to do with DRM? the idea of encrypted filesystems has been around for a long time, heck, I remember back in 1998 a tool from Network Associates which created a drive image on you harddrive and mounted it in My Computer which allowed drag ‘n Drop encryption. This allowed people to encrypt sensitive information and keep is separate from their regular data.
As for DRM, what is wrong with it? essentially it is a technology that allows the transferring of files with their attributes being maintained. If the person only wants the user Joe Bloggs to read it but can’t modify it, then DRM makes it possible. If the original person wants it to be passed along to someone else, the DRM encoding will ensure that the document has remained in the same state as it was created in by the original author thus ensuring that it has not been tampered with.
support for domains I would that a win os has support for win domains… duh
Why include a feature into an operating system that doesn’t require it? Windows XP home is specifically designed for home use, and unless you can show me someone who needs to use Activedirectory for their 2 PC home network, your point is pretty much pointless.
support for more CPU’s pay extra for this? support for more RAM give me a break
Show me a commercial operating system that doesn’t do this? heck, just look at Redhat Enterprise Server and SuSE Enterprise Linux which both have those limitations. Btw, if you are running a webserver and only a webserver, why would you need more than 2gigs? Heck, I’ve seen busy webservers running on machines with 512MB RAM without any issues.
System Restore didn’t we just read about some huge security flaws in this(?)
And Windows would never had needed that if companies wrote their installation scripts properly, or better yet, actually used the builtin MSI setup scripts that are made available for developers. Users would never need to use this had they stuck to the stable drivers. 99% of the time, when I hear people use this, it is because they’ve downloaded the latest gee-wizz-bang driver and found that their computer keeps continuously crashing because the driver isn’t WHQL compliant.
IIS apache anyone?
You are comparing IIS to Apache? what a joke. Look at the number of patches and updates released for Apache 2.0.*, the one they (Apache foundation) claim as “stable” and worse still, since the API is a moving target and has yet to be stablised, the likelihood of getting third party plugin developers on board is highly unlikely.
As for the security, goodness gracious me, anyone who claims Apache 2.0.* is more secure than IIS really need to get their brain examined very closely. If you compared IIS to say, iPlanet, then I would agree, however, comparing IIS to Apache? nice try.
Hahaha, it’s the first time I read that iis is more secure than apache.. Haha, thx a lot man !
You need to break this up into smaller sentences instead of using commas in a screwed up manner.
“You are comparing IIS to Apache? what a joke. Look at the number of patches and updates released for Apache 2.0.*, the one they (Apache foundation) claim as “stable” and worse still, since the API is a moving target and has yet to be stablised, the likelihood of getting third party plugin developers on board is highly unlikely.”
I’ll have what you are smoking if you think IIS is more secure then Apache. Apache’s constant updates on a work in progress and patches are better then Microsoft’s denials and patches that are several months over-due on a so-called final product.
>You are comparing IIS to Apache? what a joke. Look at the >number of patches and updates released for Apache 2.0.*, >the one they (Apache foundation) claim as “stable” and >worse still, since the API is a moving target and has yet >to be stablised, the likelihood of getting third party >plugin developers on board is highly unlikely.
>As for the security, goodness gracious me, anyone who >claims Apache 2.0.* is more secure than IIS really need to >get their brain examined very closely. If you compared IIS >to say, iPlanet, then I would agree, however, comparing IIS >to Apache? nice try.
Hmm, http://news.netcraft.com/archives/web_server_survey.html
67% of the Internet doesn’t seem to think so.
Anyway, patching is the Apache way of life. Ever wonder why it’s called “Apache”?
“Apache”—-> “a patchy” —-> a patchy server.
This is because Apache started life as a series of patches passed along between sysadmins/webmasters. Why should it stop patching now?
tsk, apache is superior than iis period. nt based windows are good desktop oses, again period. licensing? commercial linux distros’ licenses are far better than MS’ licenses, again period.
and btw NT on Server? Nice Try!
The whole modularity thing is this.
You basically have a basic system “SKU”, then you can load a Professional SKU on top of that with a Spanish SKU to give you a Windows Professional system in Spanish.
The same sort of thing for Media Center Edition, TabletPC, etc….
It just makes things easier on the OEMs.
__POINT 1__
“How do you think these servers are going to be managed? have hundreds of monitors hooked up and admistrate each of them individually?”
Of course not! That’s obsurd…’course there should be a far better implemented (read, less bandwidth intensive) method of complete administration provided by M$.
__POINT 2__
“As for DRM, what is wrong with it? essentially it is a technology that allows the transferring of files with their attributes being maintained. If the person only wants the user Joe Bloggs to read it but can’t modify it, then DRM makes it possible. If the original person wants it to be passed along to someone else, the DRM encoding will ensure that the document has remained in the same state as it was created in by the original author thus ensuring that it has not been tampered with.”
You absolute assuredness of this being the case, make me smile at the thought of the day that DRM comes into its own. You jockeys who think this is not an issue to be up in arms against have not been relevant thinkers in computing for terribly long. In brief, the idea behind DRM is valid; do I need to draw examples to prove that ideas very rarely (especially in this business, this day and age) follow original form in implementation?
__POINT 3__
“Why include a feature into an operating system that doesn’t require it? Windows XP home is specifically designed for home use, and unless you can show me someone who needs to use Activedirectory for their 2 PC home network, your point is pretty much pointless.”
I’m a college student. Needless to say, I care nothing about M$, and rarely use it, unless when it is called upon me. Furthermore, I have worked Linux datacenters since I was 15. I would not have been able to learn the crucial administration skills I currently have, had it not been for Linux’s ability to take on many forms at once (i.e., it can be a wonderfully function server and workstation, simultaneously). To speak truthfully, I’m thankful M$ doesn’t provide full functionality in all models of its system, for if they did, the MSCE realm of administration would be even more strained than it currently is.
__POINT 4__
“Show me a commercial operating system that doesn’t do this? heck, just look at Redhat Enterprise Server and SuSE Enterprise Linux which both have those limitations. Btw, if you are running a webserver and only a webserver, why would you need more than 2gigs? Heck, I’ve seen busy webservers running on machines with 512MB RAM without any issues. ”
This is bad, my friend…reall bad, as your argument breaks down severly here. Firstly, a commercial operating system that doesn’t do this: Slackware, Debian, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD…to go on would be highly repetetive. Now, I have worked with many, many a webserver. There is not way in this fair, green Earth, you are running a viable webserver hitting 1Million hits (hell, lets even say .5Million) with 512MB. If you serve less pages per day, you could run fucking Amiga with 512Mb no problem, so what are you trying to say?
__POINT 5__
“And Windows would never had needed that if companies wrote their installation scripts properly, or better yet, actually used the builtin MSI setup scripts that are made available for developers. Users would never need to use this had they stuck to the stable drivers. 99% of the time, when I hear people use this, it is because they’ve downloaded the latest gee-wizz-bang driver and found that their computer keeps continuously crashing because the driver isn’t WHQL compliant.”
Common man. I mean, you are an M$ fanboy I presuppose, but don’t show your Aces like that.
__POINT 6__
“You are comparing IIS to Apache? what a joke. Look at the number of patches and updates released for Apache 2.0.*, the one they (Apache foundation) claim as “stable” and worse still, since the API is a moving target and has yet to be stablised, the likelihood of getting third party plugin developers on board is highly unlikely.”
You had me going to a degree. Some of your opinions were valid. This is sour. Terrible. I run Apache on no less than, shit, I’ll say 5 servers, and haven’t ONCE had a break-in. Hey, you talk down to general OSS that’s fine. You speak poorly about Apache, you get yourself into trouble. Two of my servers have in excess of 1200 days uptime, running nothing but apache and mysql (and SLACKWARE, thanks guys 🙂 TO EVEN REMOTELY, FLIRTINGLY< COMPARE M$ IIS SERVER TO APACHE WEBSERVER is an enormous farce.
Listen, Windows provides a relatively intuitive, easy, and consistent graphical interface to computing. To those of us of understand, these elements are absolutely irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.
I dont have the energy to continue the discussion on ‘remote desktops’ on servers, DRM and what-not.
There is however one good and valid point brought up here:
How about this sunshine, companies have spent millions developing custom applications and that they’re not going to suddenly throw out years of investment because Linux happens to be the “flavour of the month”.
This is true and i am not trying to promote the flavour of the month here. But i truly belive that for many many of these corporations a MS OS is not the best bet. Often what they just need a file server or a simple www, and by setting up just about anything else than ms they would benfit in the areas of security, economy and maintenance instead of getting tied down with ms in license issues, poor security management and a big hole in their wallet.
Eugina wrote a good article touching the ‘flavour of the month’ syndrom just recently –> http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=2650
I for one am glad to see M$ taking a modular aproach.
This will be great for OEM’s.