PDA

View Full Version : Longhorn - Yet another delay


Zaty
Apr 5, 2004, 12:48 PM
Apparently, MS will not start Longhorn Beta until 2005. They planned to do so later this year but want to concentrate on XP Service Pack 2 due this summer. This delay might push back Longhorn's release to 2007. This could be a good chance for Apple and Linux to gain market share. While MS will remain the market leader no matter what, some people who don't want to wait until 2007 for a secure OS from MS might consider switching to an alternative platform. Go for it, Apple!

http://www.vnunet.com/News/1154021

srobert
Apr 5, 2004, 01:00 PM
Apparently, MS will not start Longhorn Beta until 2005. They planned to do so later this year but want to concentrate on XP Service Pack 2 due this summer. This delay might push back Longhorn's release to 2007. This could be a good chance for Apple and Linux to gain market share. While MS will remain the market leader no matter what, some people who don't want to wait until 2007 for a secure OS from MS might consider switching to an alternative platform. Go for it, Apple!

http://www.vnunet.com/News/1154021

That Service Pack will be a support and servicing nightmare. Microsoft will literally be flooded with calls. Methinks it could hit them harder that the Y2K bug ^_^

G4scott
Apr 5, 2004, 01:21 PM
Any update to windoze these days is hell on earth... Microsoft just better hope that this one worked better than windows ME...

Les Kern
Apr 5, 2004, 02:09 PM
Any update to windoze these days is hell on earth... Microsoft just better hope that this one worked better than windows ME...

I't will be infinitely worse I hear. Seems they even admit a lot of things will break.
From Gartner (http://www4.gartner.com/DisplayDocument?doc_cd=118205)
Developers are scrambling to rewrite, but their not really sure what the scope of the rewrite has to be. going to be a VERY entertaining event!

BornAgainMac
Apr 5, 2004, 07:01 PM
I wonder if Microsoft will eventually scrap everything someday and create a new O/S from scratch and require people buy all new software. Perhaps they will base their next O/S on the PowerPC technology. How much longer will Windows last? 5 years? 10 years?

Longhorn was very well named for this release. Longbeard would be a better name since it is intended for humans.

Makosuke
Apr 5, 2004, 08:18 PM
I wonder if Microsoft will eventually scrap everything someday and create a new O/S from scratch and require people buy all new software.It was called NT, but it didn't end up working very well--less of a disaster than the 98 branch, but not exactly a secure OS.

Macpoops
Apr 5, 2004, 09:24 PM
i could be wrong but i was under the impression that Longhorn was a complete re-write of Windows, akin to the concept of how OS X was to OS 9. It's just microsoft doing it which means it'll probably take a while to deliver what was promised.

Fukui
Apr 5, 2004, 09:57 PM
i could be wrong but i was under the impression that Longhorn was a complete re-write of Windows, akin to the concept of how OS X was to OS 9. It's just microsoft doing it which means it'll probably take a while to deliver what was promised.
No, not at all. It would cost them wayyyy too much to just throw everything away. Then they have to redo everything that they already spent so much time building for the past 20 odd years. Its thier legacy of compatibility. Remember, OS X as great new technology it has, was an already in existance and complete OS since 1988 (NEXTSTEP), therefore, apple didn't have to rewrite much, just add on things to the already robust application frameworks/Unix/Mach etc.

What is taking MS so long is that "hairball" OS takes so long to add and alter things for new upgrades because when one component changes, it can break lots of things (thinking XP SP2 is gonna be headaches) so it requires a great deal of resources. Longhorn is adding lots things, but it isn't throwing out it all and starting from Zero. Think of it more like if apple kept OS 9 but added Cocoa, Expose, Dock, etc...

Dippo
Apr 5, 2004, 10:44 PM
What is taking MS so long is that "hairball" OS takes so long to add and alter things for new upgrades because when one component changes, it can break lots of things (thinking XP SP2 is gonna be headaches) so it requires a great deal of resources. Longhorn is adding lots things, but it isn't throwing out it all and starting from Zero. Think of it more like if apple kept OS 9 but added Cocoa, Expose, Dock, etc...

I think Microsoft just does a really bad job at writting code. They seem to make programs that are "slapped together".

It reminds me of the days in college, if it compiles and runs, then its done! :)

If I remember correctly, wasn't Longhorn supposed to be released in 2005?
At this rate it won't be released until 2009!

szark
Apr 6, 2004, 04:40 AM
No, not at all. It would cost them wayyyy too much to just throw everything away. Then they have to redo everything that they already spent so much time building for the past 20 odd years. Its thier legacy of compatibility.

Actually, I think Macpoops is right about this. Longhorn is going to be completely (or mostly) redone using the .NET architecture, and most likely will break a lot of backwards compatibility. Here's a quote from an article (http://msdn.microsoft.com/longhorn/understanding/pillars/fundamentals/default.aspx?pull=/msdnmag/issues/04/01/DevelopingAppsforLonghorn/default.aspx) on their developer site:

The next release of the Microsoft® Windows® operating system, code-named "Longhorn," is an essential milestone for many reasons. It is the first operating system built with managed code and the first to host a new storage subsystem (code-named "WinFS") that revolutionizes the concept of a file system. It is also the first operating system to support a natural search technology (Natural UI) that automatically resolves many of the ambiguities inherent in query text. In addition, Longhorn is the first operating system designed from the ground up with security and trustworthy computing at the core. These and other features suggest that Longhorn will change the way applications are built—not something that happens every day. Since the advent of Windows, I remember two similar milestones—the move to 32-bit Windows and the dawn of the managed environment of the Microsoft .NET Framework. (emphasis mine)

Supposedly that's one of the reasons why Microsoft bought the Virtual PC technology -- to have a way to run a previous version of Windows within Longhorn for backwards compatibility. (I don't know if that's actually true, though.)

Zaty
Apr 6, 2004, 06:10 AM
I think Microsoft just does a really bad job at writting code. They seem to make programs that are "slapped together".

It reminds me of the days in college, if it compiles and runs, then its done! :)

If I remember correctly, wasn't Longhorn supposed to be released in 2005?
At this rate it won't be released until 2009!

After the release of XP in 2001, MS said Longhorn would be released in 2004 :)

Edit:

As to whether Longhorn is a rewrite or not, it's essentially NT 6.0, so it's a major revision of the NT-Kernel but they didn’t rewrite it from scratch.

JFreak
Apr 6, 2004, 07:31 AM
I wonder if Microsoft will eventually scrap everything someday and create a new O/S from scratch and require people buy all new software.

do you mean that microsoft would now write their operating system themselves for the first time?

you know, they didn't write DOS (which is the operating system of win3.11/95/98/me gui:s) themselves any more than they wrote NT (which is the operating system of w2k/xp gui:s also).

microsoft is good at marketing. it sells other's crap as its own and promies great things for stupid customers who believe what they say. that's the problem: stupidity - were people wiser, microsoft were out of business.

G4scott
Apr 6, 2004, 08:58 AM
The big thing with Longhorn is going to be the new file system, WinFS. It'll make Longhorn revolve around the .Net framework, mainly. Of course, this is going to make people even more dependent on microsoft, because .Net is extremely proprietary, and it's main purpose for being the central point of the next Windows is so that they can attempt to force it as a standard upon the rest of the world, and create another monopoly. By using this filesystem to make Longhorn compatible with only .Net, they're going to lock out all competing technologies.

When it boils down to it, Microsoft isn't releasing windows updates for windows, they're doing it for their other technologies so that they can force them to become standards, and make a ton of cash off of them. Microsoft has been releasing crap OS's since 95, and everyone has been brainwashed into buying it, thinking it's actually good.

So basically, I think Longhorn is a way for Microsoft to shove .Net down our throats, and we need to do something about it. Maybe a competing company can take it to court before Longhorn is released, forcing Microsoft to make their software open for other technologies...

Chaszmyr
Apr 6, 2004, 09:09 AM
Remember, OS X as great new technology it has, was an already in existance and complete OS since 1988 (NEXTSTEP), therefore, apple didn't have to rewrite much, just add on things to the already robust application frameworks/Unix/Mach etc.

There are parts of OSX that are from the NEXTSTEP OS, but OSX is really not much more akin to NEXTSTEP than it is to OS9

Zaty
Apr 6, 2004, 09:38 AM
The big thing with Longhorn is going to be the new file system, WinFS. .

WinFS is not a file system, it's just an addition to NTFS.

Fukui
Apr 6, 2004, 10:33 AM
Actually, I think Macpoops is right about this. Longhorn is going to be completely (or mostly) redone using the .NET architecture, and most likely will break a lot of backwards compatibility. Here's a quote from an article (http://msdn.microsoft.com/longhorn/understanding/pillars/fundamentals/default.aspx?pull=/msdnmag/issues/04/01/DevelopingAppsforLonghorn/default.aspx) on their developer site:

(emphasis mine)

Supposedly that's one of the reasons why Microsoft bought the Virtual PC technology -- to have a way to run a previous version of Windows within Longhorn for backwards compatibility. (I don't know if that's actually true, though.)
I'm not so sure... .NET is run on a virtual machine of sorts (correct me if I'm wrong) and wouldn't make a good platform for an OS to be built on as its more akin to WebObjects in that .NET is more of an architecture for eCommerce. Do you actually think that MS is going to completely re-write every application that that have to run on longhorn? Its still using the NT kernel, still using NTFS, will still have Win32 (office etc. will probably make mixed use of Win32 and C# derived APIs). Like I said before, .NET is MS's Cocoa, so its more like if apple took OS9, added Quartz, the Dock, and Cocoa, and called it OS X.

Virtual PC was bought to better compete with VM Ware in Linux etc.

e-coli
Apr 6, 2004, 08:31 PM
Apple's corporate marketing ABSOLUTELY SUCKS!

They'll wait too long, or just be nonchalant about it, and not pursue corporate sectors like they should, and then Longhorn will be out.

We've seen it SO many times.

I love Apple, but Steve needs his head examined, and they need an entirely new corporate marketing department.

Sparky's
Apr 7, 2004, 04:31 PM
They sure don't make it easy for us outsiders. I tried to watch "the latest episode" but without a PC Sorrryyyy!!! Anyway if your intersted:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/theshow/episode041/default.asp

szark
Apr 7, 2004, 05:48 PM
I'm not so sure... .NET is run on a virtual machine of sorts (correct me if I'm wrong) and wouldn't make a good platform for an OS to be built on as its more akin to WebObjects in that .NET is more of an architecture for eCommerce. Do you actually think that MS is going to completely re-write every application that that have to run on longhorn? Its still using the NT kernel, still using NTFS, will still have Win32 (office etc. will probably make mixed use of Win32 and C# derived APIs). Like I said before, .NET is MS's Cocoa, so its more like if apple took OS9, added Quartz, the Dock, and Cocoa, and called it OS X.

Virtual PC was bought to better compete with VM Ware in Linux etc.

Now that I've re-read some of their articles, I think the answer is somewhere in the middle. Their new APIs are based on .NET and XAML, and they are going to try to push developers to use these APIs instead of the current ones. It still seems like they are going to rewrite a lot of their operating system interface to use the new APIs, but they will also maintain a lot of backwards compatibility.

So it's not a total rewrite of the OS, but they want you to think it is. ;)

Dippo
Apr 7, 2004, 06:15 PM
Now that I've re-read some of their articles, I think the answer is somewhere in the middle. Their new APIs are based on .NET and XAML, and they are going to try to push developers to use these APIs instead of the current ones. It still seems like they are going to rewrite a lot of their operating system interface to use the new APIs, but they will also maintain a lot of backwards compatibility.

So it's not a total rewrite of the OS, but they want you to think it is. ;)


Will the old software still work?
I am sure it would...where would I be without my text based DOS games? :p

Of course if Microsoft does break backwards compatability, then it would be a good time for other companies (esp. Apple) to jump in and snag users!

Zaty
Apr 8, 2004, 05:14 AM
Will the old software still work?
I am sure it would...where would I be without my text based DOS games? :p

Of course if Microsoft does break backwards compatability, then it would be a good time for other companies (esp. Apple) to jump in and snag users!

I'm sure old software will run in Longhorn, at least software compatible with XP. Don't forget MS releases a new Office version every two years. While I'd say it's possible that Office XP and older version won't work anymore, Office 2005 (1-2 years old by the time Longhorn is released!) will work as will (most probably) Office 2003. In case you wonder why I say Office XP might not work anymore but 2003 might, 2003 was the first version running on Win2K and WinXP only.

Secondly, unlike Apple MS cannot just break backwards compatibility because there are two many software titles around It’s therefore impossible (even for MS) to force all software makers to write new code in time for the Longhorn release as well as make all those millions of Windows user switch to Longhorn at once. Of course, MS could use a simulation layer like Classic but with all the drivers and DLLs involved, I think that’s hardly feasible. Selling dual boot systems (i.e., XP and Longhorn) is not an option, either as this would be too much for most PC users.

ingenious
Apr 8, 2004, 09:25 PM
At first glance, Microsoft's next generation of Windows adds many of the visual cues that Apple Computer used in recent versions of its OS X operating system (OS). Transparency in windows, active thumbnails and striking visual effects have been the hallmarks of Apple OSs for years. With Longhorn, Microsoft intends to take advantage of 3-D graphics processors to give the OS a more high-tech, Xbox-like look and feel.

1st- once again, M$ will majorally copy off of Apple. They do it all the time. (one question- did apple get the fast user switching idea from M$?). Can't apple patent CERTAIN parts of its OS? I thot M$ could! This is not fair!

2nd- who would want to by an OS with a "more *high tech* XBOX look and feel? Gimme a break? Xbox? HA ya right! LOL :D

AngryLawnGnome
Apr 8, 2004, 09:46 PM
I think this is a good thing - not because it's MS - but because I feel like new computer programs always come out too fast, and everything becomes outdated quickly. The longer the period between updates, the better.