Paul Thurrott makes claims, based on “internal documentation,” that Longhorn Beta 1 will be released on February 16th 2005. However, NeoWin says that it won’t be released before May 2005.
When to Expect Longhorn Beta 1?
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
We all know that the feature will change significantly between the beta and the final release, so the beta is of little value except perhaps as a preview for developers.
*Yawn*
We can never be sure of this, I’m guessing you will see many delays due to complications and bugs.
This beta is just to distract people and make them think Longhorn is coming soon, and give people the impression that 2007’s Shorthorn release is not that far.
Remember Cairo.
I’m hoping for Aero, which should make it’s appearance in one of the two betas.
“While Windows 2000 is a great product, its development time and complexity is just too much to ask of customers. In the future, Microsoft will need to work off of a stable base, adding features on a yearly basis…”
Wow, that is exactly the approach that Apple has taken with OS X. Perhaps Microsoft is beginning to feel the heat from the rapid progress over at little ole Apple.
Nice to know it’s making progress, but isn’t XP 64-bit still in beta somewhere?
This doesn’t exactly leave one with positive expectations of seeing Longhorn soon…
Well, Apple is trying to slow down its development. It’s now moving to a more year and a half schedule. Apple kept doing the quick upgrades in the beginning because it was a new OS based off an entirely different platform and it needed it. Of course, Apple has generally been quicker with OS updates than Microsoft.
Windows XP is really starting to show its age. Microsoft had better have something amazing in Longhorn.
Longhorn is interesting from a technology standpoint, not because its new, but because its new on the Windows platform. There is nothing compelling in Windows Longhorn that would make me switch, seeing the hardware requirements (which i thought was a joke, but its not) im still laughing when i think about it. I can run MacOS X or Linux with the same features that Longhorn will supposedly have, and with fewer machine requirements.
I actually see this as a bad thing for Microsoft, is they start to entrench themselves on the webfront with their XAML technology instead of completely open standards, because Firefox and other competitive browsers will not support it, not to mention the older OSes like Windows XP etc. will not have XAML either. So it seems to me it will be still born.
Which i sincerely hope, open standards is the only thing i develop for, and i really really hope, that when my kids connect to the web in 10-15 years, they can do it with the browser of their choice.
One thing I can say for sure is that many have history lessons to pick up on. IT is VERY unadvisable to underestimate your enemies, as certainly it sounds like many of you are enemies to MSFT.
I think MSFT will actually do some very intelligent things with Longhorn which will make a big difference in how it handles things, does things and especially HW support. Now I’m not speaking about drivers, I’m speaking about features which make it able to connect to TV sets, the mobile phone will definitely play a more central role, I’d even say your coffeebrewer.
linux with gnome already requires an 1GHz cpu to be bearable. in university we have some older 450MHz workstations, some with debian/gnome some with xp and the xp maschines are still more responsive. you don’t realy believe that a major distro will require less hardwarepower in 2006, do you? not with gnome or kde anyway.
Why not? I run XFCE just fine on my workstation, its light, and it runs the apps i need, like Evolution, Firefox, Zend Studio, and XMMS. If you load gnome + load one KDE app, you already load to much stuff into ram because it loads KDE libs, but Gnome and KDE is not the best solution for most users in my opinion, they are DEs which has alot of fat, i just need a UI where my apps can reside in, i work with the apps not the environment
. I got a AMD64 3200+ and a 300mhz machine, both runs pretty snappy with XFCE. The 300mhz runs a little more snappy with IceVM though.
Ofcourse the innovative things in the linux desktop will require more, but you are not forced to run it, most apps will not start requiring some new and heavy libs unless it has an absolute advantage. And as such, there is no need to upgrade the HW when you upgrade the software, like Windows Longhorn will have to.
I don’t see where you’re requirements for GNOME come from, If I use a 2002 edition of Gnome, it just flies on a 450Mhz machine.
Trying to compare a late 2004 Gnome or KDE (which is snappier than Gnome atm if you’re interested) to a 2002 Windows is apples to oranges….
Can we please ditch the hardware specs nonsense? Longhorn WILL NOT require extra fancy hardware. The minimum for having all bells and whistles was a 16 MB video card, if I recall correctly.
In case you don’t know: that’s the same as Quartz Extreme requires in OSX.
No they split it into two tiers, all the cool stuff, or “can run, but no cool stuff”. So, still – the cool stuff wont run unless you got a pretty nice computer. I only upgrade in 3-4 year cycles because i dont need much horsepower, as i dont game, i only develop. Why should i switch from Linux to Longhorn for a 2nd degree experience?
I think MSFT will actually do some very intelligent things with Longhorn which will make a big difference in how it handles things, does things and especially HW support. Now I’m not speaking about drivers, I’m speaking about features which make it able to connect to TV sets, the mobile phone will definitely play a more central role, I’d even say your coffeebrewer.
Sure they could, but the big problem they have is that they can’t be too different. Then they will loose their advantage of having a large installed user base.
Even if it could connect to your TV set how would you convince your boss that you will make him more money if you got upgraded. Perhaps they could do something with phones but there is already many third party applications that fill that gap. Some of them cross platform and free.
Most business needs are already covered by win
XP. They were in fact covered by win2k.
They could target home users, but they tend to use what they have at work. The biggest and most dangerous competition for windows is not Linux or some other *nix
it is windows itself.
>Nice to know it’s making progress, but isn’t XP 64-bit
>still in beta somewhere?
Refer to http://www.amd.com/winxp4
well i think that MS must release Windows XP64 quickly with the apopriete 64drivers ans stuff..if i have native 64bit OS,i will have time then to wait for Longhorn..but,yes,i forgot..i can buy mandrake64 or Suse….well then i dont need microsoft..:)
No they split it into two tiers, all the cool stuff, or “can run, but no cool stuff”.
Actually, there are three tiers (that’s what I’ve been told). And the highest tier requires a 16 MB videocard– which is more than reasonable considering with what sick kind of videocards grannies get these days..
I only upgrade in 3-4 year cycles because i dont need much horsepower, as i dont game, i only develop.
I don’t upgrade. I Apple
.
Why should i switch from Linux to Longhorn for a 2nd degree experience?
Let’s not get into that
.
>Most business needs are already covered by win
>XP. They were in fact covered by win2k.
They don’t know what they need until they get that something. After Longhorn you’ll say: “Ok, they _do_ need Longhorn but _nothing_ more”. And so on.
“Currently, the Longhorn team has exited the “milestone” phase of development, denoted by releases with names like M8, M8.1, and M8.2, and has entered a pre-Beta 1 cycle known internally as D1″
Isnt this considered an Alpha or am I mistaken?
As for WinFS, I guess MS is waiting for Gnome.org to finish their file system first. Just a hunch.
I tend to find Paul is more accurate when it comes to all things Microsoft. So if he says February I believe it. As for OS upgrades, Im hoping that they make the migration routes smoother than what it has in the past. I guess we will see in february.
As for WinFS, I guess MS is waiting for Gnome.org to finish their file system first. Just a hunch.
lol! You people and your conspiracy ideas. sad..
LongHorn will be an excellent operating system. From what I have read, the security will be locked down, plus being more stable than XP Pro.
I still have P2 400mhz machine with 128 mram, running XP Professional SP2 with Office XP SP3 on it. The same machine will not even load Redhat RHEL 3.0 I received after I completed the RHCT weeklong course that I attended at work. It would not install because RHEL needs at least 256 mram to run correctly.
Say what you will, Windows still runs on less hardware than it takes for X-Windows to run. The new machine I built AMD 2800, 512 ram on a Soyo board, X is slower than XP Pro.
I am ready for LongHorn to debut in the future, most likely in 2006, but the old saying time flies by when you are having fun.
Well, it seems that way, because Windows XP x64 is still in beta, Service Pack one, still not out yet, no beta for R2 has appeared yet, plus the company is working on Windows Server Compute Cluster Edition. And lets not forget our favorite OS, Longhorn, still in Alpha and not expected in beta until May. I believe its late June though with a final release in November of 2006.
I don’t think MacOSX or Longhorn require a videocard at all given these can be used for servers. Any sane hardware and server OS don’t require a videocard for such purpose.
My Linux PC is already connected to my TV, and I can use my Ericsson phone as a remote control for it, via Bluetooth. I want it connected to my coffee brewer…why? What can Microsoft possibly add to the coffee brewing experience, except possibly to introduce the world’s first coffee making BSOD?
Erm, that would be because RHEL 3 is an enterprise-level server distro, doofus. Try installing Win2k3 server on the same box and see how well it does. I’m sure FC3 would install just fine.
BTW, to the earlier poster about GNOME, GNOME doesn’t care about CPU speed so much as RAM. It sure loves RAM. Mind you, XP does too. I have a similar machine (P2/400, 128MB RAM) and GNOME 2.x and XP are both extremely slow (though I ran it with GNOME for a couple of years and got useful work done). I use XFce4 and it’s fine as long as I don’t use heavy apps.
I don’t think MacOSX or Longhorn require a videocard at all given these can be used for servers. Any sane hardware and server OS don’t require a videocard for such purpose.
If you want Quartz Extreme (those effects in OSX) you’ll need a 16mb or more videocard. But, as you already pointed out correctly, a server won’t need this.
Same for Longhorn. The server version will simply load in tier 1 mode, the classic Win2000 interface. Which is a decent interface, IMHO.
Same for Longhorn. The server version will simply load in tier 1 mode, the classic Win2000 interface. Which is a decent interface, IMHO.
I hope they also provide their new, decent shell with it and start embracing standards such as SSH and NFS. It would make administrating much less of a pain. At least Apple embraced such standards.
M$ really should drop the NT kernal. Don’t get me wrong its not bad but they should drop it start a whole new os. Name it something like doors ^-^. While also staying with windows then slowly fase out windows. Give “doors” a classic option to run windows…. wait im thinking about osx again. sorry but really i cant wait for longhorn im hoping ill be able to do the load of nothing i do already with added security
Tons of beta bugs with Windows traditional bugs!…:P
Wrong again Adam, it is RHEL 3 WORKSTATION — NOT — Server!
It will not run unless you have 256 mram, if you knew what you were talking about to begin with and familar with
the Enterprise software you might be able to
comprehend the basics.
RHEL 3 Workstation is what I have after taking the
RHCT course, in which I passed and now have CERTIFICATION.
Gnome 2.8 runs fine on my Debian unstable 700mhz notebook. Longhorn might be cool, heaven knows it has to be flashy to get people to upgrade to it, but once you’ve got used to free software and free updates whenever you want (with Debian anyway) it just seems painful and unnecessary to go back. My free software just keeps improving every week and I can talk to developers directly if I have issues.
And it didn’t cost a dollar.
With Apple playing the flashing feature game every 12 (soon to be 18?) months with OS X releases, and Linux providing free enhancements on a continuing bases, Microsoft is going to have problems convincing people it is a valuable solution. No doubt they’ll continue to make buckets of money with their pre-loads on new systems though!
Microsoft claims that minimum requirements to run Aero is 32 MBs of video Ram, while the Aero Glass theme requires 64MBs and up, 128 MBs recommended, obviously this will change and probably go up to 64 for Aero and 128 minimum for Aero Glass, we are talking about 2006 here.
Microsoft says that old hardware, I’m guessing anything bought in the last year and the future will be able to run Longhorn and classic Windows theme. We must not also be blinded by the Alpha builds, its rough around the edges and is still meant for developers to start getting their apps at least Longhorn aware.
I am sure MS will speed up the code by Beta 1 next year.
In a big Enterpise Corporation, users cannot use some
‘free’ software when they have custom in house
written apps, that run under Windows these are:
Remedy – Ticket/Change Management software
Extra64 – Software for mainframe intersessions/supersessions
Internal auditing tools – auditing data/links ect…
Custom internal website software – payroll/peoplesoft ect…
Need I say more, these run UNDER Windows NT platform as in
Windows 2000 Pro/XP Professional in which it was rolled out
over a year ago to the entire company.
This is a sample of some of the SOLID bug free Win32 apps
that are stable, and run everyday with only updates when
the software vendor and or internal Application developers
introduce and test in a PVAL envrionment before
releasing it to Production based servers/workstations and
so on.
Home use, sure you could run linux for some basic stuff,
but when you need to get work done, as in logging in from
home, Windows XP Pro it is or Server 2000/2003 depending on
how your laptop is configured. I have several friends
that are developers and their Laptops have Win2003 Server
loaded on them with Vis/SQL ect…
Longhorn will be a success and it will be cause of
applications and critical day to day processes. The cost
of re-writing all of these applications, getting them
stable, 8-5 work day envrioment would take months if not
years, plus ALL of the money spent.
People do not like Microsoft because Bill Gates KNOWS
how to make money, heck that is what a business if for.
Microsoft has about 50,000 workers, with GOOD incomes,
better than the ‘so-called service jobs’ that pay
peanuts.
Anyways, Microsoft builds good software, no different
than someone taking a pistol and commiting a crime with it
you can’t blame the gun manufacturer for what some
criminal did. Same goes for virus writers, a criminal is a
criminal, also, goes the same for user responsibility.
If a Windows Workstation is administered correctly IT
will be set up as PowerUser with NO install rights PERIOD!
This keeps the spyware from installing, 99% of the
trojan junk because you can block it at the firewall,
it boils down to having qualified people in a qualified
position.
That out of those 57,000 thousand employees, I think only 10 to 12 thousand are actual developers.
Windows Longhorn will be a success and that is that.
Heck, Windows XP Professional is the best OS out
of MS so far.
Home use, sure you could run linux for some basic stuff,
but when you need to get work done, as in logging in from
home, Windows XP Pro it is or Server 2000/2003 depending on
how your laptop is configured.
Erm, use RDesktop to log into work as you say. Or use VMware to do Windows developoment locally. That’s what I’d personally do.
Anyways, Microsoft builds good software…
IE is not “good software”. Neither is the security design in Windows (I blame this partly on MS, partly on app. developers). Like many programs having to run with administrative rights that shouldn’t.
And no, Microsoft’s security response time isn’t anything like open source. That and you have to hope that the black box update you’re installing doesn’t break everything to pieces. If it does, you don’t have that much hope until MS fixes the problem or the vendor does (good luck). Meanwhile you’re left vulnerable.
In a big Enterpise Corporation, users cannot use some
‘free’ software when they have custom in house
written apps, that run under Windows these are:
Remedy – Ticket/Change Management software
Extra64 – Software for mainframe intersessions/supersessions
Internal auditing tools – auditing data/links ect…
Custom internal website software – payroll/peoplesoft ect…
Well either:
a) Use webbased applications when available
b) Look into what applications will work with WINE
c) Stick with Windows
There are several paths to explore if you were serious about a Linux migration. It’s not an overnight change.
Longhorn will be a success and it will be cause of
applications and critical day to day processes.
Wrong. Give me one reason why a business would want to switch from Windows 2000 or XP if it is serving their needs? That’s yet one more OS to support and what do the users (or company) gain? Nothing–especially in the enterprise. I doubt bosses want to entice their employees with a 3D version of solitaire, do you?
Linux lack of identity is whats causing the problem. I can’t see my mother or father choosing Linux because of lack standards and interoperability across the many Linux distributions.
The sense that whats different from Novell Desktop Linux might be incompatible with Redhat, Mandrake or Debian is a turn off to many users. The Open Source community needs setup a licensing model, that requires anyone who wants to make a distribution pay $10,000 first to make sure they have some standards in their distribution first.
Well, it sounds like crap, but the should just have 4 distributions out there, Novell, Redhat, Mandrake and Debian. Anything else with x in its name illegal!
I don’t think MacOSX or Longhorn require a videocard at all given these can be used for servers. Any sane hardware and server OS don’t require a videocard for such purpose.
The ’70s called, they want their OS back.
IE is not “good software”. Neither is the security design in Windows (I blame this partly on MS, partly on app. developers).
What’s wrong with it ?
Like many programs having to run with administrative rights that shouldn’t.
This is wholely and solely an application – and hence developer – problem. Try again.
And no, Microsoft’s security response time isn’t anything like open source.
Possibly because Microsoft actually do things like regression test their fixes before dumping them out into the world ?
I’m sure it warms the cockles of your heart to see software patches posted onto mailing lists by fifteen year old coders, but out here in the real world that just doesn’t fly.
That and you have to hope that the black box update you’re installing doesn’t break everything to pieces. If it does, you don’t have that much hope until MS fixes the problem or the vendor does (good luck). Meanwhile you’re left vulnerable.
Because this never happens on other platforms, right ? I mean, no RHEL update _ever_ broke existing software, did it. ? I suppose in your world software developers routinely support their products running on platforms where in-house source-code-level modification have been made as well, right ?
Wrong. Give me one reason why a business would want to switch from Windows 2000 or XP if it is serving their needs?
Maybe because it’s better ?
That’s yet one more OS to support and what do the users (or company) gain? Nothing–especially in the enterprise.
How can you say that about a product that isn’t even _available_ yet ?
I doubt bosses want to entice their employees with a 3D version of solitaire, do you?
Probably not, but if the UI improvements lead to productivity improvements and/or lower employee costs then there is a clear advantage to upgrading.
Here’s an MSDN article that outlines the basis for Longhorn’s security:
http://msdn.com/Longhorn/understanding/pillars/fundamentals/default…
Say what you will, but I think this is very encouraging. I think one of the biggest reasons Windows XP is as vulnerable as it is today is because its users are a population of about ~300 million, most of whom–particularly those at home settings–run as administrator on their machine. AIM (“application impact managment”) seems like a great way to make it easier for people to transition to a limited account without losing any functionality. Likewise, PA (“protected admin”) looks like it will mitigate the risk incurred by those that insist as running as admin.
Ah, sorry. You could have at least specified desktop, though. AFAIK when you see RHEL referred to with no qualifier it’s usual to interpret it as the server…
“People do not like Microsoft because Bill Gates KNOWS
how to make money, heck that is what a business if for.”
No, that’s what a business is for so far as *it*, the *business* is concerned. So far as *we*, the *consumers* are concerned, a business is for producing a product that fits our needs. If a business makes a large amount of money by selling crap then that’s fine for *the business* but it isn’t fine for the people buying the crap. This is a two-way street, bub. There are plenty of other companies that make money hand over fist and people don’t seem to hate them so much as Microsoft…
People hate Microsoft because they are the number one. Not per se in quality, but in success. People always envy those that are more successfull than they themselves are. If Linux would become the most succesfull operating system, Linux’d be the new one-to-hate. That’s just the way life goes.
However, it’s an inherant trait to mankind (it’s a by-product of living in social communities). So, don’t worry, we all have it.
“People hate Microsoft because they are the number one.”
Thats a pretty pathetic statement. People usually admire number ones. Also why actually Apple users love apple. And why most m$ users hate microsoft. “That’s just the way life goes.” Thats another one pathetic generalised satement when people run out of arguments. Pople hate m$ because thay dont want to use their products but have to. M$ policy is what makes people hate it. All thees “new features” that nobody wants, this lock-in strategy. Theese deaf support, it’s a pain to pay for this bloatware which didn’t improved much since latest version and costs alot. And for what? For some sh*t i dont want. That makes me really angry and makes me hate microsoft. But i have to use it because of software , which doesn’t get ported because of m$ monopoly. And everybody watches them and can’t do anything. In my opinion microsoft posesses money it didn’t earned.
Yep, that’s an absurd statement and I’m sure you know it. Do anywhere near as many people hate Nike, Macdonalds, Starbucks, EA Games, Nokia, Palm…any number of companies that are ‘number one’ in some way as hate Microsoft? No, they don’t. There are people who hate all of the above, sure. The quantities are massively different, though.
Linux lack of identity is whats causing the problem. I can’t see my mother or father choosing Linux because of lack standards and interoperability across the many Linux distributions.
The sense that whats different from Novell Desktop Linux might be incompatible with Redhat, Mandrake or Debian is a turn off to many users. The Open Source community needs setup a licensing model, that requires anyone who wants to make a distribution pay $10,000 first to make sure they have some standards in their distribution first.
This must be some kind of educational problem. In my experience most Linux distros work very well together, in fact it works well together with most flavors of Unix. Most Linux distros do follow whatever standards there are. If they don’t, they are usually built for some kind of specialized purpose and your mom and dad are not likely to have heard of them anyway.
If you are still not satified with interoperability you have to expand and evolve the standards. Having distributers pay some mony won’t help as whatever standards there are is usually closely matched anyway.
By the way, such expansion of standards is happening, and happening fast. Just look at the work of freedesktop.org. Five years ago it would be unthinkable to do cut & paste or drag & drop from an application written in toolkit X to an application written in toolkit Y. And if you filed a bug report the developer would say something like “Hey, I’m a toolkit X developer I don’t have to be compatible”. Nowdays, you seldom meet that attitude, and everybody take it for granted that things like this should work, and it usually does.
The fact if that MS got people to upgrade because they didn’t have a usable OS. From 1983 to 2001, when W2k got hardware support, there simply was no usable OS from MS. DOS was invisible and no one was ever happy with Windows.
Them first with W2k and then with desktop-oriented XP, Windows became stable. More insecure, actually, but stable. So, why upgrade? For new features? People haven’t ever upgraded for features, unless you take feature to mean operability. So, bottomline, how can people be lured into upgrading now? My guess, they can’t. Unless future releases break compatibility, and the extent to which they can do that is minimal these days.
So now MS equipped the world with an OS. So now the world is equipped. So now, all of MS’s infrastructure is just gaining dust, as there is barely no more money to be made.
So now MS equipped the world with an OS. So now the world is equipped. So now, all of MS’s infrastructure is just gaining dust, as there is barely no more money to be made.
The key lies in a strategy Microsoft has used quite skillfully in the past. Upper management at a company will get brand new machines, and Microsoft will be kind enough to include all of their latest and “greatest” software, most likely at an incredibly good price.
Now, upper management will want to communicate with middle management, but the new software will create documents which don’t quite interact right with the older software in use by middle management. No one will want to tell upper management that they have to change yet again, and certainly not “downgrading”. So the new software will be deployed to middle management.
Middle management will have to communicate with the rest of the workforce. At first they’ll try to juggle dealing with communications from both those they’re supervising and their supervisors. Eventually, though, this will be too time-consuming, so they’ll tell the IT people to deploy the new software in the trenches.
Now, even though upper management comprises a tiny portion of IT spending, a massive roll-out of software very few people want will take place because no one wants to be the one to tell the boss they have to change his or her desktop.
“People hate Microsoft because they are the number one. Not per se in quality, but in success. People always envy those that are more successfull than they themselves are. If Linux would become the most succesfull operating system, Linux’d be the new one-to-hate. That’s just the way life goes.
However, it’s an inherant trait to mankind (it’s a by-product of living in social communities). So, don’t worry, we all have it.”
Given you claim you study psychology you’re able to cite your sources, right?
Funny thing is, with a response like this, you claim thats the sole reason for ‘hating’ Microsoft, as if there are no other reasons. Or, as if those reasons are based on this one. The latter might be true, but if those are also stated it at least explains more than your current, simple rhetoric.
For the record, i don’t ‘hate’ Nokia. To be precise, i don’t give a rat about Nokia.
“Possibly because Microsoft actually do things like regression test their fixes before dumping them out into the world ?”
Actually, i never had problems with Debian GNU/Linux Woody. Patches are always quite fast, and never break anything. Don’t act like a dilweed, its known MS doesn’t give a rat about IE anymore and the fact Apache has 66% (but its not hated huh Thom?) versus ~ IIS the rest of that while Apache has less security problems proofs your theory is flawed.
When it’s not ready :p
My excitement is for 10.4 of OSX.
I’m not an Apple zealot by any stretch of the imagination, and use PC’s.
But I just see things in 10.4 that I really want, like spotlight. I just don’t feel that enthusiasm with Longhorn. From a practical perspective, what’s new there that will make me more productive or excite me? Nothing, in my opinion.
Tiger, on the other hand, has me of the edge of my seat.
“Funny thing is, with a response like this, you claim thats the sole reason for ‘hating’ Microsoft, as if there are no other reasons. Or, as if those reasons are based on this one. The latter might be true, but if those are also stated it at least explains more than your current, simple rhetoric.”
You never let an oppurtinity go by to counter me, do you?
Anyway, MS is indeed hated by a lot of people soley because they are number one (again, I wish to emphasize that beign ‘number one’ can be completely independant of offering the best solution).
Take the music industry for example (my main interest). Who’s hated the most? Exactly, names like Eminem, Britney Spears, Backstreet Boys pop up. Of course, the quality in music they produce is highly questionable, and that certainly accounts for a large proportion of the hate they recieve.
However, the more succesfull they get, the “tougher” this hatred gets. Why? Well, because people envy them. They don’t make the best music, yet they are (in some cases were) on the top of the game.
Many people hate these artists purely for the fact that they are popular. As soon as an artist becomes popular, they loose many of their early fans. A recent example is the Dutch gothic rock band Within Temptation. The same will inevitably happen if Linux were to become the dominant player in the desktop market. Suddeny, large groups of early adopters will move away from Linux, because all of a suddent hey aren’t “special” anymore. I’m not saying every early fan will, but certainly a large group will. They’ll move to BSD or whatever.
What I’m traying to say is: a lot of hatred towards MS is “fried air”, as we Dutch say. Meaning it isn’t actually based on any factual information.
I realize I stated it kind of black and white in my previous post, excuse me for that. I hope I clarified my view this way.
PS: You seem to question my honesty in me saying that I study Psychology. I can email you a copy of my Student passes from the Free University of Amsterdam, if you wish.
Could you please clarify at which the US are number one? Oh wait, this is off-topic. Nevermind.
“linux with gnome already requires an 1GHz cpu to be bearable. in university we have some older 450MHz workstations, some with debian/gnome some with xp and the xp maschines are still more responsive. you don’t realy believe that a major distro will require less hardwarepower in 2006, do you? not with gnome or kde anyway.”
That’s funny. I’m on a p3 650 here and gnome runs very nicely.
Give gnome 128(preferably 256) it will run very well….
What’s a neo-socialist and in what way does it differ from a good old socialist, then? Just because you’ve got neo-conservatives don’t go spreading the neo-‘s over on this side of the fence.
oh, and you’re clearly on crack. GNOME eats nearly all of 128MB of RAM all by itself, never mind trying to run any apps on top of it. Same as XP. Both are dogs with 128MB of RAM. Both are reasonably acceptable with 256MB.
You gotta love the Linux trolls that turn -any- Microsoft topic into yet another M$ flame war. Take a walk.
“One bit of bad news is that the oft-touted WinFS storage engine will not be included in Longhorn.”
…
WinFS will ship in beta form when Longhorn is released and will now ship simultaneously on both Longhorn client and Longhorn Server, the latter of which is due in 2007.”
http://winsupersite.com/showcase/longhorn_preview_2004.asp#nov2004
So does this mean there won’t be WinFS in any Longhorn till the 2007 scheduled release?
Can’t wait to check out the new vector graphics, however the MS-Windows UI is begging for a complete new face, the Aero UI still looks alike Win98.
It reads like there’ll be a beta WinFS as a separate download when Longhorn *client* is released in *cough* 2006, and the ‘final’ release will ship with Longhorn *server*, in (allegedly) 2007.
In a big Enterpise Corporation, users cannot use some
‘free’ software when they have custom in house
written apps, that run under Windows these are:
Remedy – Ticket/Change Management software
Extra64 – Software for mainframe intersessions/supersessions
Internal auditing tools – auditing data/links ect…
Custom internal website software – payroll/peoplesoft ect…
And when they upgrade to Longhorn many of these applications will have to be rewritten, just like if they upgraded to Linux.
By the way People soft is porting all their apps to Linux, and my guess is that most ERP systems will work on Linux in a very near future.
Need I say more, these run UNDER Windows NT platform as in
Windows 2000 Pro/XP Professional in which it was rolled out
over a year ago to the entire company.
This means that you are not likely to upgrade to Longhorn any time soon.
Longhorn will be a success and it will be cause of
applications and critical day to day processes. The cost
of re-writing all of these applications, getting them
stable, 8-5 work day envrioment would take months if not
years, plus ALL of the money spent.
You or rather Microsoft cant have it both ways. Either Longhorn have to be compatible with old software this limits what new innovations that can be made, or it can be innovative but in beeing that, it is likely to break compatibilty with old apps. If it innovative and break stuff, you won’t upgrade. If its not innovative and runs your old apps well, then there is no reason to upgrade, as your current os already does that.
People do not like Microsoft because Bill Gates KNOWS
how to make money, heck that is what a business if for.
I don’t care if Bill makes money, as long as he doesn’t force me to do pointless upgrades, just because they stop supplying security patches for older version of their software.
“One bit of bad news is that the oft-touted WinFS storage engine will not be included in Longhorn.”
…
WinFS will ship in beta form when Longhorn is released and will now ship simultaneously on both Longhorn client and Longhorn Server, the latter of which is due in 2007.”
Haha, Pot, meet Kettle. Those ‘Linux trolls’ you refer to didn’t start that marketing campaign for WinFS. That was Microsoft, but suddenly they took it all back while Apple, GNOME, KDE, ReiserFS4 are there right now. Those ‘Linux trolls’ you refer to didn’t start the marketing campaign for Avalon. That was Microsoft, but suddenly they took it all back while Apple, Freedesktop.org are there right now.
You need a reality check. Fact: Longhorn got clothed down. Its more a XP #2 than something revolutionary whereas those ‘revolutionary’ technologies will be there for competitors already are building theirs right now.
I see where you’re coming from, but i’d use Osdorp Posse as example. I’m no fan or whatever though. My essay was partly about them. What i found out is that their lyrics and style definetely changed (though that was not part of my essay).
Anyway, MS is indeed hated by a lot of people soley because they are number one (again, I wish to emphasize that beign ‘number one’ can be completely independant of offering the best solution).
Its certainly an explanation, but it doesn’t proof how much %. It ignores other (valid) arguments. That’s my beef. I can give you another sort of reasoning, which is very simplistic, and would appear to count for everything which is popular:
1) “Power corrups, absolute power couurups absolutely”
2) “Popularity leads to power”
3) “Powerful entities act like bullies because of #1”
Your rhetoric assumes that those who hate Microsoft envy and would act in similar way when they were in power whereas mine attacks the sympton, not the messenger.
Let me draw it more to the line: if IBM behaved nice in the 80s, who’d have hated them? See where Microsoft is coming from? To some, their days are numbered now.
You seem to question my honesty in me saying that I study Psychology. I can email you a copy of my Student passes from the Free University of Amsterdam, if you wish.
Its more that you appear to talk from what you study whereas i question the validity and/or completeness of that. I think we more or less agree, given you state
I realize I stated it kind of black and white in my previous post, excuse me for that. I hope I clarified my view this way.
We’d just disagree on the numbers and strongness of the arguments i think, and i don’t think we’ll be able to get consensus on that unless either of us starts to come with valid sources (and frankly i don’t have them but then again the above about power is not my only viewpoint and i did not state its mine whereas yours appeared to be yours — which was my beef).
Thurrott is a notorious shill for Microsoft, gaining favor from the king by singing Microsoft’s praises while condemning most things open source, linux, Apple, etc., so I suspect the date he is predicting is correct.
But honestly, there is nothing there I am excited about. More security? More stable? Thanks, but no thanks. Longhorn, despite all of the “technical advances” is not going to allow me to DO anything different day-to-day.
No MS tax for me. Sorry Microsoft. Sorry Thurrott.
Buy a Mac.
You gotta think twice before you say it. Do you hate microsoft? or do you hate windows? While M$ has so many other products, do you hate the company or its products?
I personally hate the products, there is nothing to do with the company because they earn their money and I stay home and use Linux
I don’t like its products just because they suck. Windows crashes, uses so much RAM and easy to get infected. Office is not too bad so even I don’t like it but I don’t hate it as well. I don’t use other M$ products except MSN, just because my friends use it, I use it since I don’t have a preference(I was a big fan of ICQ but nowadays, ICQ Lite consumes more than 14MB of memory, what’s the meaning of Lite, ICQ?).
You may say KDE/Gnome uses same or even more RAM but I am more concern about the memory/performance/stability. While they consume the same memory, Windows is unstable and very slow on some processes. KDE/Gnome are very stable comparing to Windows.
I have two reasons that I need to use windows:
1. Games, this is the major part
2. .NET courses. Even though there are ports, it is still good to develop .NET stuff in Windows cuz it’s designed for it(very funny that even it is designed for it, .NET is slow and unstable, so I am a big big fan of Java!)
After I study some Game Engine stuff, and then I will start building my own games, if I am fine with these, I will staying Linux and make games for the community.