Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Windows Vista Delayed Again 539

Posted by ScuttleMonkey
from the ok-for-the-business-version-to-have-security-holes dept.
Trenty writes "Ars Technica is reporting that Microsoft has delayed Windows Vista yet again. Jim Allchin told analysts that the OS would not ship in January of 2007, which is a 1-2 month delay. Oddly, even though they are citing the need for more time to tweak security, business editions will available to volume licensing customers before the close of the year."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Windows Vista Delayed Again

Comments Filter:
  • Pre Sale (Score:4, Insightful)

    by ackthpt (218170) * on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @07:52PM (#14968319) Homepage Journal

    Oddly, even though they are citing the need for more time to tweak security, business editions will available to volume licensing customers before the close of the year.

    Not really all that odd. I believe it's called a pre-sale. People do this on eBay all the time, selling items they don't yet have, but will send along when they get them.

    In the software world, we've had a vendor offer us a new product, which we may actually like, at a 75% discount if we sign up by September. The product isn't entirely finished yet and it would likely be two years before migration, but the pricebreak is clearly meant to ensure they have some income. I have no idea what their books look like, but suspect this move is the result of a dire need of revenue, so it makes us go "hmmmm..."

    Where do you suppose Microsoft would like to enter the income for these early sales? Revenue recorded early is revenue you can't record later. I rather doubt they are turning over a Special Bug-ridden Business User Version early. They'd be flayed in the Information Trade press. (Then again, it's probably happened a few times already, which could explain how little attention CIO's pay to these magazines, they just scatter them on their desks to look Connected and Managerial.)

    • Re:Pre Sale (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Feyr (449684)
      i think i remember reading they had to "ship" a version to business customers early so their support plan would be worth a damn, otherwise they feared many large businesses would not renew the support plan, and that would mean a HUGE drop in revenue
      • Re:Pre Sale (Score:3, Interesting)

        by andreMA (643885)
        If that were the case I'd think they'd find it easy enough to simply extend plans expiring in late 2006 to encompass Vista whenever released, while apologizing for "unanticipated delays" - such a move would generate a bit more customer goodwill than the risk of shipping prematurely and possibly having disastrous bugs.
    • The business version doesn't need to include that. The consumer version does.
      • Re:It's the DRM (Score:5, Insightful)

        by paugq (443696) <pgquiles AT elpauer DOT org> on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @08:23PM (#14968520) Homepage
        No DRM in the business edition? Then everybody and his brother will install Windows Vista Corporate with a Volume License Key which requires no activation, just like people did with Windows XP.
        • Re:It's the DRM (Score:5, Informative)

          by cyberformer (257332) on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @09:28PM (#14968833)
          If they install the business edition, they won't be able to play high-definition video in MS's proprietary DRM format.

          Unlike with XP, the home version isn't just the business version with some newtorking functions taken out. It has some extra (DRM-crippled) multimedia stuff that businesses don't get.
          • Re:It's the DRM (Score:5, Insightful)

            by AlterTick (665659) on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @10:53PM (#14969217)
            If they install the business edition, they won't be able to play high-definition video in MS's proprietary DRM format. Unlike with XP, the home version isn't just the business version with some newtorking functions taken out. It has some extra (DRM-crippled) multimedia stuff that businesses don't get.

            Err...so what version do people in the high-definition video business buy?

            • by HiredMan (5546) on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @11:44PM (#14969428) Journal
              Err...so what version do people in the high-definition video business buy?

              Macs, duh.

              =tkk
              • Re:It's the DRM (Score:4, Informative)

                by TheNetAvenger (624455) on Wednesday March 22, 2006 @05:42AM (#14970315)
                Macs, duh

                Of course, but if they want to watch the videos in HD format, they will have to buy a separate player or another computer with Windows Vista.

                DRM and the HD HDMI restrictions are part of the HD media formats, and have nothing to do with Microsoft. Microsoft is providing the ability for their OSes to play the media, and unless Mac or Linux also make the same concessions, they will also not be able to play the content in true High Definition.

                (Your post was funny, but since it was popular thought this would be a good place to stick these facts. People think that Windows is 'crippled' by DRM and HD HDMI standards, when the movies themselves ship with copy protections, Windows is so far the only OS offering support for them.)

                It is like this, regular DVDs have region and DVD copy protection, it is just all DVD players came from the factory supporting the decrypting of the copy protection, and even though it has been hacked and bypassed, 99.9% of the when any of us watches a DVD on a computer or a home player, we are still using the Copy decryption technologies installed in both the players and the computer software.

                Same will be for HD DVD and other media. Vista will support the new copy protection, just like the new stand alone players will. So Vista actually 'adds' in the ability to play and decrypt the newer standards. Where people are calling Vista crippled, it is actually the opposite, as it supports the new formats. PERIOD.
                • Re:It's the DRM (Score:3, Insightful)

                  by Lumpy (12016)
                  DRM and the HD HDMI restrictions are part of the HD media formats,

                  really??

                  why is there none in mpeg4? I have lots of full resolution and HD quality content in mpeg4 format, as well as Divx flavor and Xid Flavor.

                  They have no DRM in them and work perfectly for a HD media format. Hell I even have a set top box that plays them well to my HD TV.

                  Oh you must mean the NEW Hd formats they are going to shove at people to hide the fact that non DRM restricted formats already exist.

                  Kind of like the losing attempt to
        • No DRM in the business edition? Then everybody and his brother will install Windows Vista Corporate with a Volume License Key which requires no activation, just like people did with Windows XP.

          Not if they want Media Center functionality, DVD video authoring, Movie Maker HD, and other "home" features that are left out of the "business" versions of Vista.

          Apparently, the only versions of Vista that will be available with a Volume License Key ("business versions") will be missing features that most pirate

          • by StikyPad (445176) on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @10:30PM (#14969122) Homepage
            Maybe, but I think you're underestimating the ingenuity of crackers. Just because those features are "left out" of the VLK edition doesn't mean they can't be added via other means. It might even be as easy as a simple slipstream, but even if its not, it may be easier to add the missing components to a VLK edition than remove the protections from the home/ultimate editions.

            Not that it really matters either way. I predict a 99% chance that illegitimate copies will be widespread before February 2007, a 90% chance within a week from release, 75% chance within 24 hours, and 50% chance before the actual release.
        • Re:It's the DRM (Score:3, Insightful)

          by JFitzsimmons (764599)
          I thought there wasn't going to be volume licencing for Vista. That's just something I heard on Slashdot, so it is probably untrue.
          • Hey! (Score:4, Funny)

            by SuperKendall (25149) * on Wednesday March 22, 2006 @02:11AM (#14969879)
            I thought there wasn't going to be volume licencing for Vista. That's just something I heard on Slashdot, so it is probably untrue.

            Hey look everyone! There's not going to be volume licencing for Vista!

            Now you have a source - that's how the internet works my friend.
    • by Anonymous Coward
      The better explanation for the delay is that the amount of time required for testing either a new integrated circuit or a new computer program is exponentially proportional to the number of bits in the circuit or the computer program. So, for example, if a circuit had 8 bits, then testing it requires time that is O(exp(8)).

      More to the point, if a computer program is B bits in length, then testing it requires time that is O(exp(B)). If the new version of the computer program doubles the length of the ori

    • Vaporware (Score:4, Interesting)

      by ron_ivi (607351) <sdotno AT cheapcomplexdevices DOT com> on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @08:17PM (#14968484)
      It's also commonly called vaporware, and MSFT's gotten in trouble for it in the past Vaporware [computerworld.com]
      Last month, the U.S. District Court jurist in Washington suggested barring Microsoft from making vaporware announcements because doing so can allegedly freeze the market and discourage buyers from purchasing competing products.
      Seems not much has changed since 1995.
    • I am wondering if Microsoft is equating security with product activation security. Volume licenses for businesses and the corporate editions have special activation features. Based on the Window's Genuine Advantage or whatever the heck they call it, and the evolution that it has been under for the last year or so and with this, I really wonder if it has something to do with thwarting pirates. After, most pirates are going to want to pirate the Ultimate edition, not the Starter or the basic home. But if they
    • Re:Pre Sale (Score:3, Interesting)

      by MBCook (132727)
      I doubt they would give the beta version to businesses. Maybe the business version is finished and it is the special features in the home edition that need the extra testing (like the Media Center stuff).

      That said, it reminds me of an interesting story. What happens when a company doesn't want to wait for MS to ship them the final version of an OS (say... Windows 95)? The answer is in this fun little entry in The Old New Thing [msdn.com] weblog from a Microsoft employee.

    • It's equally if not more likely that they are contractually obligated to ship a version of the product to one or more major vendors by a specific date. Most such contracts specify that it must be a full RTM release, but some companies out there may be flying by the collective seats of their pants...
    • Re:Pre Sale (Score:3, Insightful)

      by drsmithy (35869)
      Not really all that odd. I believe it's called a pre-sale. People do this on eBay all the time, selling items they don't yet have, but will send along when they get them.

      The reason it's not odd is because the "security tweaks" are almost certainly going to be changes in the default configurations of things like user permissions, firewalling, workarounds for specific pieces of software, etc. Businesses are (or should be, at any rate) going to change these default settings to suit their own policies and env

    • by tokabola (771071) on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @11:05PM (#14969279) Homepage

      I think it has a lot to do with not wanting to sell before Christmas. Many people who are buying new PC's for the kids will do that at Christmas, and you'll see a lot of "Vista Ready" PC's being advertised. However, many of the new games that come out starting next year will use DirectX 10, which will only be available for Vista. This will create a lot of kids whining for an upgrade to Vista next Christmas.

      Why sell it now (at OEM pricing, around $50US) when you can sell it a few months, maybe a year, later at upgrade prices (at least $100US). They even get to keep the 50 bucks they made selling the OEM copy of XP.

      The PC makers like the idea because it will boost PC sales in the early part of the year, a traditionally slow period, but probably won't seriously impact Christmas sales.

  • Gee, go figure (Score:4, Insightful)

    by ericdano (113424) on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @07:53PM (#14968328) Homepage
    Like anyone didn't expect this. Are they too busy with Organimi or whatever? Xbox 360? Their URGE music store?

    Has Microsoft EVER released anything that was ON TIME?
    • Re:Gee, go figure (Score:2, Insightful)

      by chadamir (665725)
      Maybe they should release it now with even more bugs and security problems so you will have more stories to troll.
    • by Ucklak (755284) on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @07:56PM (#14968349)
      Windows ME
    • Re:Gee, go figure (Score:4, Insightful)

      by ackthpt (218170) * on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @07:58PM (#14968364) Homepage Journal
      Like anyone didn't expect this. Are they too busy with Organimi or whatever? Xbox 360? Their URGE music store?

      Well, these are typically different divisions and Microsoft is rather a large corporation.

      Has Microsoft EVER released anything that was ON TIME?

      Probably, but usually to everyone's mutual regret. I think the right time is when it's ready and not a moment sooner.

      Did you hear about the Wembley Stadium roof collapse yesterday? Would they rather have that thing completed on time, filled with 100,000 people and then have the roof drop 1 metre?

      Massive failure on Microsoft's part is taking a toll and they really have a lot at stake this time, after promising XP would be bug free and the best security ever, just before 1.04e7 bugs and security holes were revealed and exploited. Make Wembley look like a tempest in a teapot.

    • Has Microsoft EVER released anything that was ON TIME?

      Given how many security updates come out the first day that they do release something, would you really want them releasing any sooner?
    • Actually they hooked the computer up to the internet for the first time and within 1 minute it was already sending zombie emails and someone had already added 59 admin accounts.
    • I can't find the link now, but I remember like 6 months ago there was this big story (on slashdot actually) how the development process of Vista is the best and fastest yet. It basically said "When we first started to create vista, things got so slow we scrapped it and started over with a fresh new process. Now we are actually ahead of schedule". I love to see them eat crow. Man I wish I could find that link!!!
    • by Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @09:59PM (#14968971)
      Has Microsoft EVER released anything that was ON TIME?

      Yes, all the time.
      They are called "press releases."
  • by RunFatBoy.net (960072) on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @07:54PM (#14968331)
    Is it me, or is Vista just becoming less and less relevant?

    And the thing is, I use to be an MS fanboy but with the rapidly changing environment of security issues and such, who can wait _years_ before considering other alternatives?

    -- Jim http://www.runfatboy.net/ [runfatboy.net]
    • by Scoria (264473) <slashmailNO@SPAMinitialized.org> on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @08:02PM (#14968388) Homepage
      Is it me, or is Vista just becoming less and less relevant?

      Look at it this way. Although some may not consider Vista relevant now, they will several years after it has launched. Like Windows XP and Windows 2000 before it, Vista will be preinstalled on all new computers, and vendors will slowly deprecate their support for older Microsoft operating systems.

      As long as the executives at Microsoft are capable of maintaining their OEM agreements with the popular brand name manufacturers, Windows will always be relevant.
      • I'll go further and say Vista is even more relevant than Windows XP, and Windows 2000.

        Microsoft has had 10 very long years to think about the internet. Vista is what they've come up with as a result of it. Developer's of .NET will know that Vista is the part of a larger design. Vista is the first OS release that is part of Microsoft's .NET initiative, which is to evolve the internet into a transport for technologies designed and/or inspired by Microsoft. Vista's support of XAML [microsoft.com] is a very major featur
        • by aaronl (43811) on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @10:03PM (#14968990) Homepage
          Perhaps you just haven't been around long enough to have seen MS in action, but we've heard that before. Actually, before MS released the first version of NT. It was called "Cairo" and MS has had fifteen years to finish it, and they've failed. They borrowed things and hacked things together, but in fifteen years, they still haven't managed to do what others had done.

          Copy and paste from Wikipedia:
                  * DCE RPC
                  * An object-oriented User Interface
                  * X.500 Directory
                  * X.400 Messaging
                  * Content Indexing
                  * Object-based file system (see WinFS)

          Those are what Cairo was supposed to be, as announed in 1991. It was even demoed in 1993, but not in an even slightly usable form. They managed to accomplish the directory by taking LDAP and writing a custom schema and tools. Messaging was accomplished by their email system (Exchange), which used previously established standards. They do half-assed indexing. There has been over 10 years of security problems with their RPC implementation, and it's still not fixed. They have nothing resembling the object FS, and cancelled the attempt, as we all know.

          NT3.x brought the DCE RPC, NT4 brough the UI and messaging. Win2000 brought the directory, and eventually the indexing. XP/2003 brought nothing more than revisions to those existing components, and Vista is no different. The things that *mattered* have been cut from the platform.

          Do you really believe that Vista, something that realistically amounts to security fixes, a new and more annoying UI, and a few toolkits that exist elsewhere, is a bigger release than W2K? I hope not, because that's asinine. I can confidently say that AD was far more important than *ANYTHING* new in Vista. XAML/WPF is another MS copy of existing technology, and one that doesn't even really exist yet. Even if it doesn't suck, it would certainly be many years before it mattered. People like being able to use their computers without requiring internet access, and the entire concept would not allow that.

          Anyway, you need to think through things more, and look at past performance. You can't trust anything that MS says until you see it yourself. Every "revolutionary" technology that was so heavily pushed by MS propoganda has been dropped eventually. The current ones are DirectX and .NET. Just in their wakes are large version incompatibilities, and lack of support. When you get into something like .NET or MFC, etc, you see that MS barely uses it, and eventually drops it for their newest shiny toy that will sell more copies of new version of all their products.
          • Do you really believe that Vista, something that realistically amounts to security fixes, a new and more annoying UI, and a few toolkits that exist elsewhere, [...]

            If you really think that, then you need to do some more research. *Real* research, as well, not reading press releases. Vista has had a *lot* of work done under the hood.

            Anyway, you need to think through things more, and look at past performance. You can't trust anything that MS says until you see it yourself. Every "revolutionary" technolog

            • by aaronl (43811)
              I didn't say that Vista hasn't had a lot of internal changes, just that they don't matter in that way. They don't enable new applications or technologies; they fix shortcoming in the previous implementation.

              I'm not as much talking about vendors as technologies. MS comes up with their own versions of things, pushes everyone to use them, and then they drop it from something shinier. The non-MS part of the world has been using things called "standards", and they have been doing so far longer than Windows ha
              • by drsmithy (35869) <.moc.liamg. .ta. .yhtimsrd.> on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @11:57PM (#14969494)
                I didn't say that Vista hasn't had a lot of internal changes, just that they don't matter in that way. They don't enable new applications or technologies; they fix shortcoming in the previous implementation.

                So... Just like very other update to a mature platform, then ?

                I'm not as much talking about vendors as technologies. MS comes up with their own versions of things, pushes everyone to use them, and then they drop it from something shinier.

                So... They're just like everyone else ?

                The non-MS part of the world has been using things called "standards", and they have been doing so far longer than Windows has existed, let alone been used.

                Really ? What's the standard API for a "unix" GUI application ? How about using audio devices ? Which API should I use to make sure my hardware driver compiles on Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris and OS X without modifications or special cases ?

                We have POSIX as an API standard, and that's been around for a long time.

                And is basically useless (not to mention largely ignored) for anything except trivial command line applications.

                Heck, it's not at all uncommon to find trivial open source "unix" applications that only work on x86 Linux machines with particular versions of glibc.

                Most "cross platform" unix source code doesn't compile on a wide range of platforms because of "standards", it does so because of the amount of work done by things like autoconf and make.

                Jeez. One of the biggest hurdles to wider commercial adoption of Linux is the sheer volume of different APIs (many of which all do essentially the same thing), and you're here trying to say there's no such problem at all ?

                MS has had no less than six APIs that I can think of, just off the top of my head.

                And "unix" has dozens (if not hundreds). Your point ?

                They tried to have their own networking protocols, their own email formats, APIs, and on and on.

                So... Just like every other commercial vendor ?

                They have all been problematic, and largely dropped for the standards that were already there. In that regard, yes, I can think of "vendors" that it doesn't apply to.

                Such as ? Certainly not Apple, Novell or IBM. Maybe Sun, but the intersection of markets between Solaris and Windows is vanishingly small.

                You act like Microsoft come up with something, then run away from it the first chance they get just to screw everyone over. Yet things like Win32, MFC and DirectX have been around for over a decade, and will *still* be in legacy support 5 years down the track, if not longer. Heck, Vista will still support Win16 on 32-bit x86, an API that's around twenty years old.

      • As long as the executives at Microsoft are capable of maintaining their OEM agreements with the popular brand name manufacturers, Windows will always be relevant.

        And this may be on the decline.
        http://www.silicon.com/software/os/0,39024651,3911 7247,00.htm [silicon.com]
        http://www.oreillynet.com/onlamp/blog/2004/10/will _att_ditch_windows.html [oreillynet.com]
        http://news.softpedia.com/news/South-Korea-Could-D itch-Windows-11302.shtml [softpedia.com]
        http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,184234,00.html [foxnews.com]
    • by bloggins02 (468782) on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @08:06PM (#14968414)
      I think Microsoft is making a fundamental mistake here: they are sticking to the same release strategies and timelines they used when software was released on stacks of floppy disks ("please insert disk 37", ahhh, the memories).

      Meanwhile, we have the "release early, release often" philosophy of the Free Software Movement as well as the "release often enough to keep things interesting" tactic from Apple. These two tactics make more sense in this new era of software construction, testing, and distribution.

      Users have grown accustomed to more frequent releases by software groups and companies they respect. These releases also satisfy an obvious, common human desire: instant gratification. As more and more users grow used to and satisfied with these accelerated release timetables, these multi-year release schedules used by Microsoft (and Adobe, while we're at it) look more and more comical.

      Recently, Gates admitted the faux pas of allowing Internet Explorer to stagnate. I believe they have similarly misstepped with Windows. By the time Vista not only comes to market, but comes to be used by the majority of PC users (and don't kid yourself, you know that will happen), it will be very difficult to catch up to the psychological success of the multiple releases of Linux and Mac OS X.
      • And I dimly seem to remember back in the days when Java was brand new that the talk of .NET was to make extinct the shrink-wrapped software distribution paradigm and move it to distributing software on the Internet. The idea seemed to be to extend to all Microsoft applications, including Windows and Office. Of course, this hasn't happened. I only wonder why, because that is the direction alot of software vendors have already gone (Gentoo comes to mind), and of course the music industry is going (thanks t
    • by poopie (35416) on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @08:12PM (#14968454) Journal
      The only way I can see Microsoft being able to have Vista succeed faster than just by licenses bundled with new hardware is to cut off patches and support and upgrades from Windows XP.

      After working *so* hard to get corporations to upgrade from Windows 95,98, and Windows NT to Windows XP... It's going to be a hard sell to explain that Windows XP is no longer good enough and that corporations need to not only upgrade their OS, but also need to upgrade their *HARDWARE* to take advantage of Windows Vista.

      Regardless of how you define "thin client", a desktop running Windows XP fits that bill quite nicely. IE6 is good, Firefox is available, everything is going browser based. Even *if* Microsoft tried to withhold a future version of Internet Explorer from Windows XP users, there will be Firefox and Opera. If microsoft tries to require non-portable components on the client side of their web components, they're going to cut off mobile users, OSX users, Linux, etc.

      How exactly can Microsoft make Vista a compelling upgrade other than releasing new game titles that will not run on Windows XP?

      Certainly, they cannot cut off security updates on Windows XP at least for the next decade or so.
      • by Pharmboy (216950) on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @08:31PM (#14968563) Journal
        A desktop running XP is NOT a thin client.

        MS has made it clear they will support older operating systems with security patches for at least 5 years after they discontinue selling it.

        Businesses buy new computers on average every 4-5 years, if for no reason other than it is cheaper than maintaining the old hardware. Cost to maintain vs. new is one reason. Depreciation rules are another.

        They will cut off XP update in 6 to 8 years. They will cut off all non-critical updates (bug fixes) in 2 to 4. All of this is published on their site, their policies for End of Life products.

        My house is 50% Linux, 50% MS right now. We will not be making the transistion to Vista. By the time games won't run on XP anymore (5-6 years from now) I expect they will on Linux, or I simply won't buy the ones than don't.

        So I really don't care when Vista comes out.
      • It's going to be a hard sell to explain that Windows XP is no longer good enough and that corporations need to not only upgrade their OS, but also need to upgrade their *HARDWARE* to take advantage of Windows Vista.

        it's actually quite simple. MSFT EOL's the software, and support for XP. for a business, that means everything.

  • Dupe? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Black Parrot (19622) on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @07:55PM (#14968340)
    Wouldn't it be "news" if you posted a story when a Windows release wasn't delayed?
  • Dupe (Score:5, Funny)

    by DemingBuiltMyHotRod (836463) on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @07:58PM (#14968365)
    " Windows Vista Delayed Again"

    -1 Dupe.

  • by Cmdr-Absurd (780125) on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @08:01PM (#14968384)
    They are replacing the bundled mine sweeper with Duke Nukem Forever.
  • Vista (Score:2, Interesting)

    by InTRUHell (31974)
    While I can't imagine having to use Windows as an workstation OS going forward, is it really any surprise that MS is pushing back a release date.....again? Of course we will see the usual spiel from the Dvoraks and Cringleys about how Apple has convinced MS to make Vista EFI compatible right from launch....yadda yadda CONSPIRACY...yadda, but I think MS's reorg finally has them looking at more than $$ for once and it is starting to show.

    And if anybody asks I never said that.
  • Better (Score:5, Insightful)

    by CriminalNerd (882826) on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @08:03PM (#14968395)
    An OS with less holes is better than an OS with more holes. Let us wait patiently...
    • Re:Better Holes (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Foofoobar (318279) on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @08:28PM (#14968547)
      You assume less holes. Microsoft has not really proven that each version contains a significantly fewer number of holes. Given the same time frame as 2000, XP has proven to be equally flawed.

      Also, keep in mind that they openly admitted that they stopped development halfway through to rewrite the entire OS and still attempted to make a deadline! That to me says that they had to cut corners on development and on testing and I'm willing to bet their are GAPING holes as a result.
    • An OS with less holes is better than an OS with more holes. Let us...

      Buy OS X?

      Install Linux?

      Install BSD?

      There's all sorts of options that involve more or less instant gratification.
  • Official link (Score:5, Informative)

    by RonnyJ (651856) on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @08:04PM (#14968405)
  • by MickDownUnder (627418) on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @08:04PM (#14968407)
    Oddly, even though they are citing the need for more time to tweak security, business editions will available to volume licensing customers before the close of the year

    When a product is ready to be shipped Microsoft releases it immediately through MSDN subscriptions. It's products are always available for download to registered customers a month or more before it ends up on the shelves. Round that time of year I doubt they would be wanting to go to the expense of pushing it to the stores round Christmas.... I mean it's not like anyone out there is going to buy a copy of Vista to fill a christmas stocking.

    This doesn't surprise me at all. A staged release of a system like Vista is only sensible. I'd want to know about every little possible glitch or issue on installation of the system before, mum, dad, grandma and grandpa start installing the thing.
    • by MBCook (132727) <foobarsoft@foobarsoft.com> on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @10:17PM (#14969062) Homepage
      I agreed with most of your post until you got to Christmas.

      Wouldn't MS want to get Vista out in time for Christmas? There are two big PC shopping times... back to school (August) and Christmas (December). They'll never get it out by August, and never said they would. But getting it out in November would be just in time to make a big blitz about "Buy a new computer with Windows Vista to put under your tree this year." The OEMs would love this, and MS could get massive sales.

      Frankly, by November I don't think you should buy a new computer until Vista comes out and is pre-installed (Wintel only, if you are buying for Linux or a Mac, this doesn't apply).

      If anything, I think this would HURT MS and the OEMs.

  • Izzard (Score:5, Funny)

    by rmsmith (930507) on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @08:06PM (#14968412)
    To quote (from memory, but hopefully accurate) the wonderful Eddie Izzard regarding Microsoft's release schedules: "It'll be out tomorrow! Next week! Next month! When we're fuckin' ready, alright?!"
  • She is on a fixed income and has an older computer. Forget about Windows XP, and especially Vista. Lindows is easy and works... and it's Linux.
  • by bigberk (547360) <bigberk@users.pc9.org> on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @08:08PM (#14968425)
    Who bid up MSFT stock to its highest price in one year, probably partially on expectations that the OS was ready for release. Life is sooo unfair
  • by creimer (824291) on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @08:14PM (#14968467) Homepage
    What's being pulled out that won't be shipping? If they pull out the kitchen sink, all they got is an overworked copy of Windows XP.
  • Odd coincidence (Score:5, Informative)

    by tootlemonde (579170) on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @08:15PM (#14968473)

    The Wall Street Journal reported [wsj.com] that before the stock market opened today

    Microsoft broke the bullish news that it planned to significantly boost the distribution of its Xbox 360 videogame consoles. Xbox and Vista are handled by two different divisions of Microsoft, but did the Redmond brain trust really not know about the Vista news until this afternoon? Microsoft representatives weren't immediately available for comment.

    Microsoft shares were down as much as 3% in after-hours trading.

    You'd think that Microsoft's investor relations department would try to co-ordinate two announcements that might affect the stock price. If they deliberately staggered the announcements to reduce the effect of the second one, Microsoft might be in violation of securities regulations.

    In any case, investors should view Microsoft's future positive announcements with suspicion since they could simply be a precursor to a negative one.

  • OK, now which of us would sign up to blindly install the very first version of a totally new fabuloso ground up Vista Operating System into your company in the first month of its release, no matter HOW GOOD THE HYPE? How many headaches does a business need? Add a new OS to screw up something and have to pay for it to boot (pardon the pun). Sheesh - Bo
  • ..Dr. Watson contemplates on the lack of fecal matter.
  • Ubuntu (Score:3, Funny)

    by Beuno (740018) <argentinaNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @08:26PM (#14968534) Homepage
    I guess they heard how good the Ubuntu delay was recieved and thought the same reaction would happen.
    The only thing they might of missed is that Ubuntu was always delivered on time, but windows....
  • Not so odd (Score:4, Insightful)

    by steveha (103154) on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @08:27PM (#14968543) Homepage
    The business volume customers aren't going to roll out Vista company-wide the same day they get it. They will start installing it on their test computers, evaluating it, seeing how it runs their in-house applications, etc. Plus, they should already have a good system in place for getting patches from Microsoft; it won't bother them much if there are lots of patches for a while.

    The corporate guys will serve as an extension to the beta testing. If corporate test installs find anything, Microsoft can fix it and roll the fix into Vista before the final release.

    Even if Microsoft had not slipped the final date, the corporate customers would still spend several months before rolling it out. They will probably be happy to get Vista earlier rather than later, so they can start the evaluation process.

    The last customers who should get the OS are the home users, who want something that will Just Work right out of the box.

    steveha
  • by Coryoth (254751) on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @08:28PM (#14968545) Homepage Journal
    I remember when MacOS X 10.4 got released there were plenty of comments from MS people that Vista had similar but "better" things and would be out shortly. Now Vista has been pushed back to the point where we can expect to see MacOS X 10.5 first (scheduled for the end of this year apparently), so really all those comparisons pitting Vista against Tiger were vastly premature - the comparison is Vista with Leopard - and we don't know what that will come with yet.

    In the meantime the Linux side of things continues to move along. At the present rate I would expect it reasonable to find Xgl or AIGLX along with Beagle and similar as standard in distributions released around the end of this year, along with a more Cairo-ised GTK and a steadily improving GNOME. I don't know anticipated release dates for KDE 4.0, but I don't believe it's too far away (compared the the Vista release), and certainly promises to be impressive. A lot of Vista's claims to superiority are going to be already present in Linux distros before Vista gets released.

    Certainly this has to be a worrying trend for MS. The Linux desktop used to be well behind and playing catch-up. While it could still use some polish in some areas, as far as new features are concerned Linux has pulled up to level pegging - that implies that the Linux Desktop is improving much faster, and Linux pulling ahead is simply a matter of time. In the meantime Apple has been managing a much faster release cycle and doesn't seem to be having any problems staying ahead of MS.

    Jedidiah.
    • by ZachPruckowski (918562) <zachary.pruckowski@gmail.com> on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @08:42PM (#14968623)
      Leopard will come out "right around the time Vista does". We may see a preview of it at WWDC in August, but it may well not launch until anytime between November and January. But you're right. There are a lot of MS competitors who are upgrading in 2006. Firefox 2.0 will be out long before IE7 at this rate, and KDE, and Ubuntu will also get bumps. Exicting year in computing, for everyone but Windows fans.
    • by drinkypoo (153816) <martin.espinoza@gmail.com> on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @09:07PM (#14968743) Homepage Journal

      In the meantime Apple has been managing a much faster release cycle and doesn't seem to be having any problems staying ahead of MS.

      Pretty much every player worth noticing has been ahead of MS all along. I mean hell, GEOS did everything Windows 3.1 did and more, including scalable fonts before anyone even came up with a way to do that on windows period, and yet GEOS got clobbered - because they couldn't sell it. The problem with keeping ahead of Microsoft has never been one of technology, but mindshare, and thus market share.

    • by dbIII (701233) on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @09:35PM (#14968878)
      The Linux desktop used to be well behind and playing catch-up
      When I ran enlightenment via X on a win2k box about five years ago everyone who saw it was struck with the differences and speed - even without shaped window support and the window manager being run on a different and lower spec machine over the network. The MS Windows desktop environment has the twin advantages of being widespread and of being taught to kids in schools - but in many ways it is inferior to even CDE from many years back (KDE was inspired by CDE). Compare both to apples and they both look inferior.
  • by thatoneguy_jm (917104) on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @08:33PM (#14968575)
    ...On which will arrive in stores first:

    A) Duke Nukem Forever

    B) The Infinium Phantom Console or

    C) Windows Vista!

  • by Bourbonium (454366) on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @08:43PM (#14968627)
    I think what he meant to say was "OS would not ship *until* January of 2007". At least, that was the impression I got from other news reports hitting the internet this afternoon on this topic.
  • Opps...I mean Vista.
  • API compatibility (Score:4, Informative)

    by mr_tenor (310787) on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @09:01PM (#14968712)
    Hmmm...

    http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/2006-Ma rch/045571.html [winehq.org]

    "So there we have it - this appears to be the first release in which they simply started dropping APIs."

    "And, therefore, the first time for which we can categorically state that Wine will be more compatible with Windows applications than Windows itself."

    "Not to mention that they're handing a near-fatal blow to OpenGL support, too."

    etc.
    • Re:API compatibility (Score:3, Interesting)

      by nsayer (86181)
      "Not to mention that they're handing a near-fatal blow to OpenGL support, too."

      Uh, that's by design. DirectX is not cross-platform, at least not to the extent that OpenGL is. So this is yet another platform lock-in play by Redmond. Color me shocked.
  • by owlnation (858981) on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @09:03PM (#14968727)
    I can't help noticing that one of the marketing graphics for Vista is a picture of two people standing on a hillside searching into the far distance across an empty landscape.

    They may wish to think about changing this image. Appropriate, it may be, but not the best marketing image...
  • Since Leopard is slated to come out some time early 2007, I'm thinking that this might be another blow to Microsoft.

    OSX has released several versions since XP, and has been offering more and more of the features that Vista promises. It seems like MS has been trying to keep people hyped for the last few years, but at some point people are going to stop and realize that Apple is offering all of the features of Vista *now* and not X months from now.
    • Apple may be offering continued features, but they do so at $100 a pop every year - for a point release!

      MS is slower to release things, but they don't charge for service packs.

      -bZj
  • by Weaselmancer (533834) on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @09:07PM (#14968744)

    The date they will stop patching your copy of XP just got pushed back two months.

  • Basically MS was too ambitious in their new plans.

    As things get increasingly complex, the time to plan, develop, and test increases at an even faster rate. The code base is getting incredibly huge and complex. Unfortunately, the people at Microsoft undestimated just how complicated their plans were. In the end, they had to keep portions of legacy code they set out to irradicate, such as the registry or the boot system.

    There's a few other delays down the road that are currently being overshadowed by the OS d
  • That contest MS is running for the real release date for Vista... I guessed Dec. 11th, while most aimed closer to the November release date announced. Now I'm off a month in the other direction. If it goes to OEMs early, does it count as the real release date? Could I win? I wanna win! Yay me!

    -bZj
  • by LuminaireX (949185) on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @09:33PM (#14968863)
    Oddly, even though they are citing the need for more time to tweak security, business editions will available to volume licensing customers before the close of the year.

    I know! Let's sell the less secure version first to businesses who actually profit from their computers! What an great idea!

    *Microsoft T-shirts and Xbox games to all*
  • by Bullfish (858648) on Tuesday March 21, 2006 @10:49PM (#14969202)
    Who had March 21rst on the "Vista is delayed" announcement pool? New pool for the next announced delay date starts soon!
  • by ZOverLord (902034) on Wednesday March 22, 2006 @12:08AM (#14969527) Homepage Journal
    Top 10 Reasons Vista was delayed:

    10 - Waiting for Roswell Alien Technology .dll

    9 - Will work better when Bird Flu is World Wide

    8 - Oprah has not done the book review yet

    7 - Apple Dual Boot XP still needs work

    6 - Courtney Love needs one more rehab

    5 - Still Can't remove Sony Root-kit

    4 - Bush is still president

    3 - http://onlytherightanswers.com/ [onlytherightanswers.com] has NOT given thumbs up yet

    2 - Silva Brown said WAIT!

    1 - Moore's Law, It's too slow right now

COBOL is for morons. -- E.W. Dijkstra

Working...