“Microsoft has reshuffled its roadmaps once again, and begun briefing partners and customers to expect an interim upgrade to Windows XP, dubbed XP “SE”, in the first quarter of next year. This buys more time for the Longhorn team to complete the complex task of implementing a native database file store, which Jon Honeyball first revealed to the world at The Register here, last August. In January we exclusively confirmed that the native, SQL Server-derived database would go in Longhorn, with the Blackcomb release – originally earmarked for the transition – pushed out to 2004.” Read the exclusive report at TheRegister.
WinXP SE: Microsoft Reshuffles Roadmaps, Again
2002-03-22 Windows 18 Comments
This is pathetic. At what point did the MS staff feel the need to crank out a new OS every year? I suppose that it started with Windows 98SE. But XPSE? What the fu-c-k is that? Windows XP is already the most stable OS the ever produced (not saying much for microsoft), so why would tey want to make a second release that is less stable than the first release? did they forget about Widnows ME? Obvioulsy not. Just a refresher MS, WinME was the worst product you produced. it was worse in stability than Windows 3.11. It ate up so much resourses that I had to restart my machine every half hour. please do not do it again. YOu will lose customers that way. If an edition of “Windows ME 2” ever comes out, I will forever stay with the older OS’s. there is no point in upgrading to an OS that will just crash on you as much as an Iraqi airliner. Here is what MS needs to learn: Biuld a stable product and improve upon it. Do not re-invent the wheel just because your wheelwells are too small. Also What possible new bugs and flaws will IE 7.0 have that IE 6.0 does not alreasy have? Is MS actually paying the virri writers so MS can release so-called fixes to make thier customers think that they actually care? Why dosent MS simply come out and say “buy from us and get fucked out of your money, and life.”
I can’t believe some of the posts I see on here lately. Come on people say something worth while.
How do you know XPSE will be less stable?
Why don’t you not use IE and use something else.
Also if you hate MS so much switch to FreeBSD or Linux.
The cure to your frustration is in your own hands. 🙂
http://www.linuxiso.org should help you out.
Look at linux, they redo the kernel every 8 seconds and most the distros update so often you need a damn abacus to keep track (lets see mandrake 8.1 came out 7 months ago now 8.2 is out minus suse 7.8, no wait make that 7.9 err 8.0, screw it). What about mac for that matter, what was it a week after the launch of X that they realized it sucked so out came a major revision? Granted they did the upgrade for free (admirable) but it came out so soon after they were just covering their own asses. besides wow (man I feel foolish typing that) is right, if you don’t like ie use opera or netscape or something else, and if you don’t want to use xpse stick with xp, or another windows version, or linux or bsd, etc.
Interesting, I am amazed how some people will make a big deal and hail linux as so good cause of continous developement and how new releases are allways coming out, and will bust on MS for taking so much time to fix something. But then when MS does make more often updates/new releases they complain about them putting out one a year and always having people upgrade so soon after the last release. If your going to bitch you have to be consistant in your bitching. I think the pace they do new releases or updates seams about right. If your updating something everyday with a patch that gives me the feeling your have a very shaking product. If you update once in a blue moon, that tends to cause you to fall behind. So windows has a new realease once a year now. Lets see BeOS was a new release around every 8 months, Mac every few months a update for OSX, freeBSD every few months, linux every few hours. They all release to there own beat but mostly about the same. As long as they keap working on it and it keaps getting better I don’t care when a new release comes out, I don’t drool to get the latest features, i don’t sit here paranoid over security, I don’t feel compelled when the latest release comes to run out and get it. But I do update/grade in good time. MS could accelerate their releases or slow them down and I would probly not even notice.
Linux update/upgrade/new release doesn’t cost so much. Interesting how much will they charge for XPSE?
Linux update/upgrade/new release doesn’t cost so much. Interesting how much will they charge for XPSE?
> Look at linux, they redo the kernel every 8 seconds and most
> the distros update so often you need a damn abacus to keep
> track (lets see mandrake 8.1 came out 7 months ago now 8.2
> is out minus suse 7.8, no wait make that 7.9 err 8.0,
> screw it).
GNU/Linux upgrades are free, so nobody cares about the frequent releases. Compatibility is not broken in updates (except on the very rare occasion, so there is no harm in not updating at all. There are many systems out there still running on 2.0.x kernels. People don’t want to pay $$$ to fix bugs that should’ve been fixed anyway.
> What about mac for that matter, what was it a week after
> the launch of X that they realized it sucked so out came a
> major revision?
What do you have against non-MS platforms, anyway? The first few OSX updates were planned well in advance of the initial release of the OS, and they were well-publicised at the time. This was deliberate.
> Granted they did the upgrade for free (admirable)
Yes, so why don’t MS do this? This “SE” version is nothing but a marketing ploy to make more money.
> but it came out so soon after they were just covering
> their own asses.
As I mentioned above, this was premeditated. Everyone knew about it in advance.
> if you don’t like ie use opera or netscape or something
No Windows user has a choice whether to use IE or not. It’s always there, sucking up system resources and making the system more vulnerable and unstable. IE bugs are Windows bugs.
> if you don’t want to use xpse stick with xp, or another
> windows version, or linux or bsd, etc.
You have a point, except for the fact that people pay good money to get a working relatively bug-free system. They shouldn’t be forced to pay extra money for a simple bugfix release.
I second that motion. MS makes every OS, and they release “fixed” versions of the already unstable OS. (Windows XP crashes too MS!), If I were running that fucked up company of MS, I would release the bug fixes for free. I would also give the user the option to install IE. I would not make t a requirement. The intigration may be good for iditots/nimrods, but for the people who can tell thier ass from a hole in the ground, about half of the so-called “advancements” could simply not be installed, instad of finding the items you do not want and removcing them. When I installed XP, it did not give me the otpion to leave out anything. Great for people who do not know what the hell they are doing and expect the installer to do all the work, but for me, it is just a pain in the ass. I wold rather have a choice on what i install on my computer. If I took out all of the items I did not need, I could probly cut the footprint of the OS by half. Why dosen’t micorsoft realize this? All they would have to do is to add an option like the one that was in Win 3.11, have an express install option, and a custom install option. In an effort to better thier products, they make it a pain in the ass for people who do not want all of that bullshit on thier computer. XP is as far as Im going to go. (legally anyway) MS will not get one more dime from me. I have almost evey version of their windows ever released, so why should I upgrade again? there’s no point in it, if you ask me.
<<GNU/Linux upgrades are free, so nobody cares about the frequent releases. Compatibility is not broken in updates (except on the very rare occasion, so there is no harm in not updating at all. There are many systems out there still running on 2.0.x kernels. People don’t want to pay $$$ to fix bugs that should’ve been fixed anyway.>>
The only argument I have against this point is the fact that because windows is a much wider relase unknown bugs are found. Put linux on 100 million desktops (or however many) and see if a bunch of unknown bugs don’t turn up.
<<What do you have against non-MS platforms, anyway? The first few OSX updates were planned well in advance of the initial release of the OS, and they were well-publicised at the time. This was deliberate.>>
I have nothing against non ms platforms, I just like to remind people that while ms is far from perfect so are the other guys. As for os X upgrades being planned in advance all I’m gonna say is every single person I knew who went with X right away bitch about how slow it was, and followed that up with (the new version should fix it, it’ll be out in a couple weeks). Also apple had originally planned on charging for x.1 but since x was pretty much still beta stage they thought better of the idea (anyone who says x worked fine and was totally polished is lying their their mac lovin teeth).
<<> Granted they did the upgrade for free (admirable)
Yes, so why don’t MS do this? This “SE” version is nothing but a marketing ploy to make more money>>
Because it’ll have been a full year of development, not a couple of weeks. Giving away a years worth of code would be the same as mac giving away the next major os X upgrade.
<<No Windows user has a choice whether to use IE or not. It’s always there, sucking up system resources and making the system more vulnerable and unstable. IE bugs are Windows bugs.>>
And linux’s gui isn’t tied to a browser? Then how come I couldn’t get rid of konquer in kde then (since I didn’t like it and wanted to use opera)?
<<You have a point, except for the fact that people pay good money to get a working relatively bug-free system. They shouldn’t be forced to pay extra money for a simple bugfix release.>>
Newsflash Xp is relatively bug free. And I don’t know if you’ve heard of this free feature in windows called windows update, it lets you download free bug fixes as they become available. What se is (I’m basing this off what 98se was compared to regular 98 since xpse isn’t out yet) is the whole package, bug fixes, updates and most likely new features (like 95osr2, or whatever it was called, added some usb support to 95). Think of it in gaming terms, a game sells well, wins awards, bugs are found, fixes are offered free via the web, then later a package with all the fixes, some mods and the game itself as a package. Its called a gold edition (or platinum if it includes multiple expansions) think of se as xp gold edition. It also goes back to the days before 40% of the net population had high speed access (could you imagine downloading 200 megs worth of patches and new features over a 28.8?).
btw wtf?? I agree, I didn’t like xp’s default look/install at all, thats why I stuck with 2k. See even a windows fan can decide not to upgrade. Damn this freedom thing is pretty nice.
> And linux’s gui isn’t tied to a browser? Then how come I
> couldn’t get rid of konquer in kde then (since I didn’t like
> it and wanted to use opera)?
What is the “linux’s gui” that you are referring to? There are many window managers, shells and environments, almost all of which don’t have their own browser. If one doesn’t like KDE, they can use any of the others.
GNOME allows Nautilus to be completely turned off. Konqueror can be removed from KDE — just change the source code. How it differs from IE is that it is integrated into KDE (i.e. the GUI level), not the OS itself. IE vulnerabilities often give root access to malicious code, because it does not run as a proper user process as it should. The same goes for other MS applications (e.g. Outlook and Office). This is poor design.
Microsoft most certainly DOES NOT charge for bug fixes… how dumb can you people possibly be?
Have you ever heard of a service pack? These are bug fixes, and in some cases, they even introduce minor new features (and on less occasion, major ones).
Sometimes I wonder if you people are bashing just to bash, or if you are REALLY that daft.
is joe user gonna be able to remove kde from the source code? No, so it might as well be tied directly into the system. I do agree about office digging its claws in too deeply though, but it does produce a very minor performance boost (lame excuse though, I’d rather have the security).
> is joe user gonna be able to remove kde from the source code?
They don’t need to. If there’s enough demand for making Konqueror an optional extra, some developer (e.g. from a distribution) will change the code. I’m sure there are plenty of people who don’t want MS apps to be tied directly to the OS. Will Microsoft listen to them? I don’t think so.
I think a more apt question would be “is there any reason for joe user to want Konqueror removed from KDE?” As I mentioned in my previous post, I would argue that there isn’t much point, since Konqueror is tied to the GUI, not the OS, and it runs totally in user mode. Because it’s open source, people know exactly what’s in it. Security holes can be quickly spotted by anyone, and there won’t be any spyware.
to paraphrase you is there any real reason people want ie removed from windows? No, its a great free browser (with the only other “free” options being an ad filled opera, a buggy and slow netscape, or some perpetually beta mozilla. As for plenty of people I agree that, but is it plenty of people from ms’s pov? Prolly not, if it was they would’ve take the time and effort to make the changes. but if say 10,000 people (a large % of them using pirated windows most likely) want them to is it worth their time? Prolly not. That would be like asking chevy to sells cars with your choice of engine in it instead of theirs (wait thats a bad analogy, its easy to download and install a new browser, hard to get an engine and put it in your car). Your right security holes can be quickly spotted and fixed, but if linux tomorrow becomes the main desktop with say 30 million installed copies then how will joe user patch his distro? Enough people are too lazy to use windows update, let alone follow the new releases, download them and get them to install right. Besides what would ms bundle instead of ie? Netscape (great money for an even larger and further reaching monopoly) or opera (ads are bad) or mozilla (too many updates, still a beta imo). I forgot to mention the main reason is because Konqueror isn’t nearly as good as opera (or mozilla for that matter, even though mo is only a beta). If it was up to me I would’ve gone with gnome, but caldera only had kde so I was stuck with that slow pos (yes it was so slow I couldn’t get their version of the start button to work, yet here I am in windows 2k burning a cd, browsing, running seti, anti virus software, a temperatur prog, a proxy, zonealarm, mynetwatchman, a time updater and my dsl software, all faster than I could in kde, and my win2k install, minus games and personal files, is smaller then mandrake (or I assume caldera, but I couldn’t even get the file browser to load it was so slow)).
> to paraphrase you is there any real reason people want ie
> removed from windows? No, its a great free browser
IE doesn’t have to removed, but does it have to be tied into the OS in such an insecure fashion? It could’ve been designed to run as a user process, but MS cut some corners to gain extra speed. Does it have to load at boot without giving the user a choice? It could’ve been designed better. I’m not asking for Netscape, Opera, Mozilla or any other browser to be included with Windows.
> perpetually beta mozilla
The Mozilla developers are being honest about their code, which is far more than I can say about Microsoft. Unlike MS, Mozilla developers can’t hide anything. The code is open, and Bugzilla is browsable by anyone. They are not coding for deadlines, they are coding for quality. As a matter of fact, Mozilla has be very usable for over a year now. Most remaining bugs are minor. Open source developers tend to be very conservative when it comes to version numbering. This by no means indicates that the code quality is poor.
Win2K had the largest official beta-testing cycle of any OS up to that point. Nevertheless, when it shipped it still had around 65,000 open bugs (that’s not a typo). That was the official number; the unofficial number would be much more.
ICQ client releases have always been tagged “beta” but they have worked fine in most cases.
> Enough people are too lazy to use windows update, let alone
> follow the new releases, download them and get them to
> install right.
Some kind of automated update process might be useful for those people. MS have considered such measures, but I don’t think they have implemented them. Mandrake has a MandrakeUpdateRobot utility that can do this, but it isn’t supported at this time (it was developed outside of Mandrake). Automatic updates can be a security risk, but some of these concerns can be alleviated if the code is open and GnuPG keys are used.
> Konqueror isn’t nearly as good as opera
Well, that’s a matter of taste. I like them both, for different reasons. My favourite browser (on any platform) is Galeon, though.
> If it was up to me I would’ve gone with gnome, but caldera
> only had kde so I was stuck with that slow pos (yes it was
> so slow I couldn’t get their version of the start button to
> work, yet here I am in windows 2k burning a cd, browsing,
> running seti, anti virus software, a temperatur prog, a
> proxy, zonealarm, mynetwatchman, a time updater and my dsl
> software, all faster than I could in kde, and my win2k
> install, minus games and personal files, is smaller then
> mandrake (or I assume caldera, but I couldn’t even get the
> file browser to load it was so slow)).
Caldera doesn’t make a very good desktop distro. Their target market is business, not the home. I myself use Mandrake with GNOME, which I find to be much faster than KDE. It can be very fast if you don’t use Nautilus to manage your desktop (launch it with the –no-desktop tag if you need it), and if you don’t use any overly-fancy themes (pixmap themes can be very slow).
“Does it have to load at boot without giving the user a choice”
What other choices would you give them?
I do agree if a distro of linux came with an auto-update (which ms has had pretty much for years with autoupdate notifacation) or a windows update style web page to update by (I know mandrake has something like it, but its a tad unwieldy and unstable as hell, of the times times I tried it I couldn’t get a single full file downloaded, it would get half way done and freeze). Galeon was pretty good, seemed slow to me (not at the rendering but the opening of new windows). I also didn’t like that you couldn’t change the user string so it identified as a windows machine so every download webiste I went to (hotfiles, download.com, etc.) would show the windows page (granted its one click to change, but a couple of late nights I was halfway through downloading a program before realizing I was looking at windows apps). Mandrake with gnome was my favorite linux setup, it was still much too slow (although I had nautilus as my desktop manager so that might’ve been part of the problem, I used the most basic layout and everything still felt like I was under water). You point about spyware is wrong. Spyware would be a problem on linux if it ever became a major desktop. Sure cause its open source people will find a way to stop a certain spyware, as soon as they do a new one comes out. Its the same way on windows now, and just because linux is opensource wouldn’t make it different. As long as a buck is to be had by advertisers they’ll get it. As for security holes, ie does have a lot of them, but when that many people are running any application security problems and bugs are bound to turn up.
> What other choices would you give them?
I don’t think IE should get special treatment over any other application or library. If an app needs to use it, it should be loaded on demand, and fully in user space. Users should have the option of whether to load IE at startup or not. This would put it on par with Mozilla/Netscape’s Quickstart/Turbo mode. Apps like RealPlayer and GetRight use a similar method.
> (I know mandrake has something like it, but its a tad
> unwieldy and unstable as hell, of the times times I tried
> it I couldn’t get a single full file downloaded, it would
> get half way done and freeze)
MandrakeUpdate has had problems over the years. They’ve been continually tweaking it, and it has been getting better with every release. In the meanwhile, we have urpmi (the backend for MandrakeUpdate), apt for RPM and rpm-get.
> Galeon was pretty good, seemed slow to me (not at the
> rendering but the opening of new windows).
This can really depend on your window manager and GTK+ theme. Choose something fast — some of them are awful on older machines! Galeon also has tabbed browsing (it had it before Mozilla), and that is faster than windowed browsing.
> I also didn’t like that you couldn’t change the user
> string so it identified as a windows machine
Galeon is exceptionally powerful, but a lot of options have been hidden to make things simple for the end user. Many things can be changed via the gconf settings or the prefs.js file.
I love the mdi interface (its the main reason I ever tried opera), but even opening new tabs in it seemed slow as hell to me. As for tweaking the gconf I never got around to doing that (I didn’t enjoy linux enough to spend excessive amounts of time in it, I mostly booted it up occasionally just to dink around).