Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×
Microsoft

Microsoft Longhorn Delayed 736

skreuzer writes "Microsoft has once again shifted the schedule for the release of "Longhorn," the company's next major version of Windows. The product was originally expected to ship next year. Then in May of this year, officials pushed back the release date to 2005. But now executives are declining to say when they expect the software to ship."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft Longhorn Delayed

Comments Filter:
  • Hmmm... (Score:4, Funny)

    by Durin_Deathless ( 668544 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @07:34PM (#6846600) Homepage
    And people say BSD is dying?

    It <b>should</b> be:
    Windows is dying.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 01, 2003 @07:34PM (#6846604)
    They're up to something.

    Microsoft aren't regular 'deadline'-missers - opting to release sub-par software instead just to reach the deadline.

    I'm guessing hardware and licensing deals myself.
    • by GuyMannDude ( 574364 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @07:38PM (#6846628) Journal

      Maybe they're just waiting for the economy to get a little bit better. A lot of companies aren't doing so hot right now and probably aren't excited about the prospect of shelling out tens of thousands of dollars to get a new OS for each of their computers.

      GMD

    • by jtroutman ( 121577 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @07:41PM (#6846650)

      Consider the delays in 2003 though. It was delayed repeatedly because, they said, they were getting as many bugs out as possible. I think they were stung pretty bad after the release of XP which was worse than previous Microsoft OS's beta versions. Maybe, for once, they are just trying to do it right. It's not like a Linux disro where they can release version .0001b7 and then update it every month as they get the code finished.

      • by TheNetAvenger ( 624455 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @09:21PM (#6847207)
        I think they were stung pretty bad after the release of XP which was worse than previous Microsoft OS's beta versions. Maybe, for once, they are just trying to do it right.

        We were in the XP and 2003 beta, and you are off base. XP was more solid of a release than 2000 even, there were several updates in the first few months but they were based on 'application compatibility' more than anything. (Because of the errors generated when a poorly written app crashed and sent a 'bug report' to Microsoft)

        So with these fixes, Microsoft made XP aware of the bugs in the programs instead of forcing the third party manufacturers to rewrite or rerelease fixes to their broken software.

        That is why the error reporting tool in XP works so well, is that the OS can be made stronger by fixing and working around bugs in poorly written third party applications.

        Windows Server 2003 took longer to release because of the re-written IIS and .NET layers. Security was also a main concern, but not because XP or 2000 were insecure.
        • Indeed. (Score:5, Informative)

          by Faust7 ( 314817 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @11:27PM (#6847753) Homepage
          Windows Server 2003 took longer to release because of the re-written IIS and .NET layers. Security was also a main concern, but not because XP or 2000 were insecure.

          They had plenty of vulnerabilities and many exploits that could have been prevented by patching and such... however, with SQL Slammer, Code Red, and others that had come out, Gates decided, this is it, we have to change some process somewhere. So he overhauled their development process one more time to focus around security in EVERY decision. So they halted development for 6 months, sent every single developer to a school in developing secure code, purchased 200 million in books on secure programming for their developers, and then went back to work. That right there delayed things 6 months alone.

          Then, as part of Gates' orders, their next job was a line by line review of every single coded product Microsoft makes. Everything from Windows Server 2003 to the IntelliPoint software. While analyzing that code for common security mistakes, they also founded a new security organization for companies to join to exchange common coding conventions for secure code and publish common mistakes and to allow joint development knowledge to be shared, and hired on 500 people at the company to develop tools that do nothing but scan code. Those tools go out and look at code to find buffer overrun issues (the most common security flaw in existence), and to look for other common security mishaps in code.

          After the review, they implemented the changes found therein. Then ran the new tools that by that time were done being developed, then implemented those changes, then got back on track with development and yes, rewrote the IIS layers to be partially built directly into the kernel for substantial performance increase. So with all that happening, the review, the tool development, the changes, the security education and reorganization, there were delays, yes. They got it out and look what it has... Two known vulnerabilities of which BOTH of them are a non-issue out of the box and are in areas that are rarely used.
    • "Microsoft aren't regular 'deadline'-missers - opting to release sub-par software instead just to reach the deadline."

      The Blaster worm probably lit a fire under Microsoft to rethink their security practices. At least I hope that's the case.
    • by narrowhouse ( 1949 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @07:43PM (#6846675) Homepage
      Actually Microsoft is the only company I have ever seen that can delay a product 5 or 6 times and THEN rush it out the door ready or not. Don't get me wrong I'm not saying your theory about hardware and licensing are wrong, I'm just saying this delay is classic Microsoft.
    • by Drishmung ( 458368 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @07:52PM (#6846732)
      Depends what you mean. The product that became "Windows 95" slipped so many times that it was renamed "Windows 95" in order to force it to ship in 1995.

      Windows and Windows NT were supposed to converge after 98/NT 4. They didn't. Finally we have Windows XP, how many years later?

      Agreed, latterly they have shipped something on time, rather than delay, but the something more often than not has been another interim release, rather than the product actually PowerPointed several years earlier.

    • What? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Overly Critical Guy ( 663429 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @07:56PM (#6846755)
      The complete opposite is true. Microsoft is well-known for missing release dates. At least three of the previous releases of Windows were at least two years late.

      The whole .NET was announced at least three years ago. Instead of complaining, lets take solace in the fact that they're at least trying to get it right, instead of some "release early, release often" schedule...
      • Re:What? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 01, 2003 @08:16PM (#6846868)
        Except the problem is this Microsoft vaporware is a huge problem in the computer world. Microsoft can announce virtually any product as a response to some competitor, promise it'll be better, and then get around to actually writing it months later. In the mean time, a lot of people end up not buying the competitor's product simply because they either know the MS version will eventually be widely used, or they can't explain to the PHB why they want to buy one thing now instead of buying a non-existant product from MS. If it weren't for the fact that MS had such a stronghold over revenue gathering on every PC sold, they wouldn't have the money to weather the period to actually produce every single vaporware product they've made (let alone the one's they've not made and instead watched the competitor die from customers expecting an MS offering any day or MS seemingly preparing to buy out the company). Breaking MS's stronghold over Windows sales is the beginning of real competition in the computer industry.

        (Note: I'm obviously using a loose definition of vaporware, as often enough MS does actually eventually produce the product they stated. Usually, it's less than expected, later than expected, and really not worth having waited for. Thankfully games don't interoperate with the OS much or MS would have crushed the PC gaming industry a long time ago.)
  • by gokubi ( 413425 ) * on Monday September 01, 2003 @07:35PM (#6846607) Homepage
    What will it mean to have no new IE [slashdot.org] till 2008?
  • Ship date (Score:5, Funny)

    by Paradise Pete ( 33184 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @07:35PM (#6846608) Journal
    Microsoft has once again shifted the schedule for the release of "Longhorn"...now executives are declining to say when they expect the software to ship.

    When the cows come home, obviously.

  • Theory #1 (Score:5, Funny)

    by Kappelmeister ( 464986 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @07:35PM (#6846611)
    They decided to bundle Duke Nukem Forever.

    • Theory #2 (Score:4, Funny)

      by gnu-sucks ( 561404 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @07:43PM (#6846677) Journal

      They decided to perfect their work

      Well, of course thats why.

      From back in the day:

      "I guess this is why we haven't released windows 98 yet..." Thats Bill Gates at the Windows 98 Preview party back in the day, right after it crashed on him, on stage, for plugging in a scanner.
    • by DickBreath ( 207180 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @07:52PM (#6846731) Homepage
      Maybe we should observe what has happened in the past.

      Windows gets delayed, and delayed. Finally, someone from on high decrees that the next version will be named something like...
      • Windows 95
      • Windows 98
      • Windows 00
      • Windows Millenium Edition
      thus sending a signal as to a timeframe when this release is expected to ship, lest heads roll.

      Here's looking forward to the release of Windows 21st Century Edition.
  • by bersl2 ( 689221 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @07:36PM (#6846614) Journal
    Unfortunately, they were from Duke Nukem Forever.
  • by Luxviaest ( 625801 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @07:36PM (#6846615)
    They just want to make sure they can steal every new feature Apple is putting into Mac OS X.3
  • by anonymous coword ( 615639 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @07:37PM (#6846625) Homepage Journal
    It happens all the time. Even in the Opensource community it does. KDE 3.1, Debian 3.0 and Linux 2.4 are prime examples of when software gets delayed to make sure it works properly.
    • software gets delayed to make sure it works properly.

      You realize we're talking about Microsoft here?
    • That's Not The Point (Score:5, Interesting)

      by weston ( 16146 ) <westonsd@canncentra[ ]rg ['l.o' in gap]> on Monday September 01, 2003 @07:54PM (#6846747) Homepage
      That's not the point here. The "when it's ready" release schedule in the open source world is a great thing. If MS has learned that lesson, we should all be clapping. MS may never give us open source/libre software, but if they produce good software vs "good enough" software, the world will be that much better.

      However... the point here is that Microsoft is creating an incredible window of opportunity here for their competitors. OS X is a better desktop system than Win XP. The open source desktops, perpetually behind, may well have time to catch up. Perhaps more importantly, with no new release of Internet Explorer in the works for the next two or more years, people might start to learn to look for alternatives and download browsers again. We could see a resurgence of competition and innovation in the web browser space -- and we'll probably get more standards compliant browsers in the mix.

      In short, yeah, it's great to pillory Microsoft, but the big news here is not the egg on their face. It's the chance to show them up, and take part of their marketshare again, while their product line is aging, their reputation for security is trashed, their licensing policies are painful, I/T budgets are tight, and really, who has actual *affection* left for them anymore?

  • by killermal ( 545771 ) * on Monday September 01, 2003 @07:37PM (#6846627)
    "When I'm writing code at home or rendering something, why does it have to happen on my home machine? Why can't it seamlessly run those tasks on the dozen or so machines I have access to that are just sitting there?" he asked.

    What he really means... "When I'm having my network exploited by obvious vulnerabilities, why does it have to happen on my home machine? Why can't it seamlessly run that vulnerability on the dozen or so machines I have access to that are just sitting there? That's what we hope to bring you in the type of innovation we hope to bring you in the new 'Longhorn' OS."

    • by Plugh ( 27537 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @09:53PM (#6847337) Homepage
      "why does it have to happen on my home machine? Why can't it seamlessly run those tasks on the dozen or so machines I have access to that are just sitting there?"

      Looks like Microsoft is trying to get on the "Grid Computing" bandwagon, which has been gathering steam ever since the economist [economist.com] ran an article about it. Oracle [oracle.com] and IBM [ibm.com] both have major Grid Computing initiatives, and Microsoft wants to pretend they can play with the Big Dogs in the Server Room.

      Imagine once the Microsofties dumb the concept down to the Windows level... the 'My Grid' and 'Grids Close To Me' icons on an ostensibly well-trained admin's desktop... aaaaarrrggghh!

  • I know (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Malicious ( 567158 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @07:38PM (#6846634)
    Perhaps they're going to perfect one of the operating systems they already have available, before they release a new one.

    !

  • My thoughts (Score:4, Funny)

    by W32.Klez.A ( 656478 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @07:40PM (#6846642) Homepage
    Delays in the release of the release date of Windows Longhorn are caused by Windows Bonghorn.
  • Less Patches (Score:5, Interesting)

    by DarkBlackFox ( 643814 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @07:40PM (#6846649)
    But according to IDC's Gillen, there are other possible reasons for the delay, including the fact that Microsoft's ability to rapidly introduce change into its products is becoming increasingly difficult.

    Maybe the "ability to rapidly introduce changes" can be read "ability to patch." I hope they use the extra time to test the security and operability extensively, to patch holes and problems before they reach the consumer.

    It's general knowledge that one should not introduce a broken product to market, nevermind try to cover it with patches. Lets hope they release a fully stitched quilt, rather than rely on customers to make a run to the local fabric store.
  • Fine with me. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Faust7 ( 314817 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @07:41PM (#6846653) Homepage
    Common sense says this is a good thing. I'd rather they took more time, and developed a better product (not sarcasm -- what do you think Microsoft, of all companies, is doing all this time?) rather than released something buggy early.
  • Just A Coincidence? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by MBCook ( 132727 ) <foobarsoft@foobarsoft.com> on Monday September 01, 2003 @07:42PM (#6846660) Homepage
    The important part:

    As for the reasons Microsoft is further delaying Longhorn, one theory is that the company could be postponing the release of the next wave of its flagship products until the remedy order issued last year by Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly to settle the antitrust case against Microsoft expires.

    That agreement, valid for five years, forces Microsoft to make available for license the protocols between its client and server environments.

    "Once they get beyond the time frame of the remedy, they will be free to change the client and server protocols, which could make it more difficult to emulate a Windows server or client, as was the case prior to the remedy order," Al Gillen, an analyst with International Data Corp., in Framingham, Mass., told eWEEK.

    Does this fact seem to just a little to much of a conincidence? It would make perfect sense for MS to wait untill they can go back to their "old" ways again. That said, it will be a LONG time between product releases, which makes me want to agree with some other posters who have said that this suggests we'll see a Windows XP: Second Edition or something like that.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 01, 2003 @07:44PM (#6846684)
    In a shocking Labor Day announcement, Microsoft Chairman and Co-Founder Bill Gates announced the end of Windows development. Gates stated that "Windows XP is pretty darn good" and "efforts to make it better have failed because it's impossible." Windows 2003 will also mark the final server version of Windows. This announcement comes after similar announcements regarding the future of Internet Explorer and Outlook Express. Susan Ortega, Microsoft VP in charge of public relations, spoke to reporters a bit more about the development. "The fact is, Microsoft has more money than it needs, and we'll be able to pay thousands employees on interest alone. We don't really need Windows for a revenue stream, and we already have 95% of the market. We don't think anything else will be able to top Windows as it stands now, and computers really don't need to advance anymore. The 80's and 90's were exciting, but so far, the 00's have just been boring for Microsoft. It's time to quit." Speculation is running rampant that the next version of Office may be the last, and all other Microsoft development could stop in the near future.
  • by Shamashmuddamiq ( 588220 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @07:51PM (#6846728)
    Microsoft's Breyer also made clear that the company does not guarantee any upgrades during the term of customers' contracts.

    We made them think they would, but the fine print said they probably wouldn't.

    "This is an important consideration that Microsoft's customers take into account when purchasing Software Assurance,

    We try to steer around the topic.

    which is a long-term, ongoing relationship between Microsoft and its customers, and a great deal of value comes from staying on SA long-term," she said.

    As the chef Elzar would say (in an Australian accent): "Try the Microsoft Software Assurance program. It has the biggest profit margin." The great deal of value comes when you give Microsoft money.

  • by Kjella ( 173770 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @07:51PM (#6846729) Homepage
    ...I can't really say this really bothers me at all (yeah yeah, then just move on to next article, right?). But come on, what do I really expect? More eyecandy. More "protection from myself". More Messenger, WMP and goodness what else providing "integrated Windows features that can't be removed and keep nagging you".

    Btw, is anyone else having the problem that burning CDs, and opening CDs without autorun, it never seems to remember the non-MS default that I select (Nero and "do nothing", respectively), even if I check the appropriate box? I'm sure that wouldn't happen if I went down the One Microsoft Way... The question is, will Longhorn finally annoy me enough to make me jump ship? Oh well maybe I'll have to wait a year longer for the answer. Boo-hoo.

    Kjella
    • by Overly Critical Guy ( 663429 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @08:07PM (#6846813)
      ...I can't really say this really bothers me at all (yeah yeah, then just move on to next article, right?). But come on, what do I really expect? More eyecandy.

      The desktop will be hardware accelerated DirectX, so eyecandy won't slow things down.

      More "protection from myself".

      People always play this card without citing a single example in XP. Can you?

      More Messenger, WMP and goodness what else providing "integrated Windows features that can't be removed and keep nagging you".

      How do they keep nagging you? I don't ever use WMP, and I removed Messenger at least a year ago.

      I'm not having your CD problem at all. I'm using the latest Nero 6.
      • by gad_zuki! ( 70830 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @08:54PM (#6847056)
        >The desktop will be hardware accelerated DirectX, so eyecandy won't slow things down.

        That's not his point, he's suggesting that the new version is eyecandy - not extra functionability. When I use XP I immediatly goto the "classic" theme and make it show the standard desktop icons just to be able to use the damn thing. I certainly am not alone in that regard.

        >People always play this card without citing a single example in XP. Can you?

        The above. The "are you sure you want to view these system folders" screen. The crippled search option until you change folder options to show "hidden" and system files. The hiding of tray icons, some of the 'inactive' ones are pretty important.

        >How do they keep nagging you?

        Here's a default Dell computer with Office. Try to just close, let alone remove, messenger. "Sorry, another program is using this." Umm, who? Its outlook, but it won't tell you that. So for millions of people it sits there wasting RAM because they can't close it. More WMP means more browser intgration and DRM. Some people don't like that.

        >I'm not having your CD problem at all.

        This problem is fairly common and a few good google searches brings up a few solutions.

        Regardless, I have yet to see a good reason to move from 2000 to XP. System restore is tempting but not needed. When technophobes ask me why they can't just get Windows 2000, which they know pretty well, on their new computer I tell them its because Microsoft doesn't want them to. Learn XP or find your old 2K CD.

        The same could be true for Longhorn, the desktop model of computing is actually pretty simple and more bloat and pretty colors doesn't help - it hinders. I'd rather see effort put into the applications than the OS. Ideally, the OS shouldn't be the selling point, the apps should be. Pretty colors and 3D shouldn't be applauded, good HCI practices should be.
        • by nathanh ( 1214 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @10:46PM (#6847573) Homepage
          That's not his point, he's suggesting that the new version is eyecandy - not extra functionability. When I use XP I immediatly goto the "classic" theme and make it show the standard desktop icons just to be able to use the damn thing. I certainly am not alone in that regard.

          Sure, and there were people who said the same thing about Windows 95 and the "Windows 3.1 look" option that it offered. "I'll never change" they declared. But eventually Microsoft will deprecate the old look and you'll be forced to change.

          Every generation goes through the same phases. New and shiny. I'll never change. Remember the good old days. You're in stage 2.

  • Software Assurance (Score:5, Insightful)

    by VikingBrad ( 525098 ) <brad.thurkettle@com> on Monday September 01, 2003 @07:54PM (#6846749) Homepage
    Isn't it strange now that MS have migrated most of their customers to Software Assurance that gives customers rights to new versions of the software that new releases are coming out more slowly.

    XP came out within 2 years of 2K but now they look like 4 years from XP to the next version. I remember some analysts at the time were saying that Software Assurance only was good value if upgrades came out more often than once every 3 years. Now it looks like it would have been cheaper to not buy Software Assurance and just re-buy a new license when the new version becomes available. Or use an OS with less restrictive licensing ;-)

    Cheers

    VikingBrad

  • by handy_vandal ( 606174 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @07:56PM (#6846753) Homepage Journal

    Instead of calling it "Longhorn",
    I think they should call it "Shorthair",
    as in the phrase,
    "We've got you by the short hairs now."
  • by mao che minh ( 611166 ) * on Monday September 01, 2003 @07:56PM (#6846754) Journal
    This means that Microsoft's marketing division hasn't figured out how to get businesses to upgrade next year, especially when you factor in the less than avid response to Windows XP and their recent security problems. In addition, Linux shows no signs of slowing up, and Novell may even be making a small come back (emphasis on the word "small"). This means that Microsoft will seek revenue from licences and Office while spending the real money on figuring out how to stop IBM.

    Expect to see a lot of other smaller, less significant Microsoft software hitting shelves in the next two years (at least twice as much as usual) while Microsoft targets the datacenter with their R&D budget, and outfits like SCO with their legal purse.

  • by winkydink ( 650484 ) * <sv.dude@gmail.com> on Monday September 01, 2003 @07:56PM (#6846757) Homepage Journal
    As long as you keep extending support for Win2k, I don't care if Longhorn ever ships.

    IMHO, Win2k is the best OS that Microsoft has ever made.

    not that that is saying much ;)

  • That's fine but... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by insecuritiez ( 606865 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @08:00PM (#6846781)
    We really need a service pack 2 for XP. There's a million updates on windowsupdate, too many for most modem users. So let's see MS bring out sp2 and get working on sp3 so that we don't have more and more security updates to download.
  • by foo fighter ( 151863 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @08:01PM (#6846787) Homepage
    I think the problem Microsoft is running into is one of finding areas that need so much improvement they can get away with charging for it.

    I personally think Windows 2000 Professional is a damn fine operating system. I run it at home and my workplace has standardized with 2K.

    XP Pro added nothing of note except more onerous licensing conditions and a confusing UI change. Everyone I've met who uses XP changed the UI back to Windows 2000. Also, the only reason they use XP over 2K is because XP came with their new, name brand computer.

    Really, what does Microsoft add to, change about, or remove from its desktop operating system to make it worth upgrading?
    • by erikharrison ( 633719 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @08:18PM (#6846878)
      I hate XP with a passion. That aside XP offers these things over 2k:
      • Integrated PPPoE client
      • The only feature worth having in ME - System Restore
      • Built in CD burning capabilities
      • Built in firewall
      • Virtual directories - browse archives like directories, and consequently perform extractions from file manager
      • Windows 95 compatibility mode
      • Faster searching, with ability to search based on type (more sopisticated than *.txt searches)
      • Lots of random, minor cleanups - privacy controls in IE, primitive (and I do mean primitive) virus checking in OE, tools from the 2k administration pack included by default, etc
    • by Overly Critical Guy ( 663429 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @09:22PM (#6847212)
      The big deal with XP was getting all the home users off the 9x/DOS codebase. Sure, you corporate clients were barely affected--we were already running NT/2k.

      XP is geared for home users, though they offer Professional because it does lend improvements over 2k that warrant it being used for workstations.
  • by jerryasher ( 151512 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @08:05PM (#6846802)
    With a futures market on software shipments we could easily determine when software ship date is., just as I can predict next years weather by looking at the price of orange juice futures.

    And please don't tell me yet again about how economists point out that markets can't predict anything. Nattering nabobs indeed.

    Moreover, if we had a futures market on software shipments, then we, as users and managers could lessen risk of software delay or software bugs by buying hedging options.

    A futures market in software would also let unemployed, overly expensive, middle-aged with families, but otherwise wise programmers leverage the outsourcing trend. Whether the software is made here or there, certain factors creating delays, etc. will be present and us older and wiser programmers would be able to use our years of experience to arbitrage the market.

    Futures markets -- why must our overlords keep us from them?
  • by G4from128k ( 686170 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @08:12PM (#6846840)
    Longhorn sounds like an OS development effort that is spinning out of control. Microsoft could always copy the strategy that Apple used when Apple's Copland effort blew up in 1996 -- buy a company with a Unix-based OS and switch everyone to that.

    Should Microsoft call it Visual Linux#.NET or OS XP?
  • by erroneus ( 253617 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @08:15PM (#6846863) Homepage
    ...they will actually try to write something secure.

    They will find a significant drop in sales afterward though... people will be unwilling to upgrade if their systems are stable, bug free and secure. It is against their business model to write secure code.

    They'll have to come up with a new way to keep people buying Microsoft... who knows what it will be.

    Longhorn's probably not vaporware though... more likely they realize after all the crap MS OSs have been through lately... what with being on the top news for being vulnerable, unreliable and close to being the weak point of civilization itself, I guess they are rethinking that "business as usual isn't the play to make this time around."

    Do you know what makes people stop using WinNT 4.0? NOTHING. It works well for businesses. Active directory? People STILL don't know what it is or what it's for or how it can improve the way they do business. MS drops support for it and people will STILL continue using it. What terrible thing will happen to Microsoft when they create a secure and stable OS? We know they can -- they have the money to throw at it and if they are willing to delay release of their newest OS project, then I'd take that as a sign they intend to make it secure and stable.

    I'd say that CAN do it and they WILL do it. But the question that rings in my mind is what doom it will spell to Microsoft when they do. No more upgrades for a long time... people won't want it or care about it. That's a huge chunk of income for them.
    • by naelurec ( 552384 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @10:27PM (#6847480) Homepage
      I have to agree with you. I think this next OS will be "the best OS Microsoft has ever released" .. it will be "more secure", "more scalable", "more productive" *insert previously used MS marketing claim here.

      So what will be the kicker? Perhaps they will push a subscription based model? You can only rent the software, no buying allowed?

      Perhaps with Bill & Co selling stock (according to Yahoo [yahoo.com], it looks like Bill dumped ~$309 million worth of MSFT in August) with Bill's plans of being completely sold out by 2006 (or 2008? forgot which..) he is planning on "doing the right thing" and releasing a solid, secure operating system.

      Or perhaps the feeling is that quite frankly, the PC in its current form is well umm.. too overly complex and cumbersome. Perhaps with things like tablet PC, wireless broadband, etc, there will be a shift toward application specific embedded platforms and desktop PCs as they exist now are on their way out (I doubt by 2008 .. but I really don't see these kludgely things around in 2020+..)
  • by gilesjuk ( 604902 ) <giles.jonesNO@SPAMzen.co.uk> on Monday September 01, 2003 @08:30PM (#6846932)
    2k/XP are stable (in Windows terms), they run apps well. I can't see any drastic changes, improvements or features coming along and I think Microsoft knows this.

    They can't integrate much more for risk of annoying the DOJ, all I can see them improving on is the security side of things.
    • by ratfynk ( 456467 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @08:53PM (#6847046) Journal
      Integration is not the issue, the security features are the problem. They will have to introduce the features in MS office, which they have done. Then the processor encoded content locks they want are giving Intel fits. Microsoft has now got to go it alone with their version of trusted computing. What the implimentation is trying to do is make it so business can send .docs, xls, in a read receipt form. This will be set so that unless you have the security key to read the document you will not be able to decode it. MS is trying to impliment its own encription that will only alow other MS based systems to comunicate. The same old shit but with the twist that it is for your security that you must only use MS encript locks and keys. Intel is getting some kind of pissed at Microsoft because they need the high end server and scientific multiprocessor market to make their current Itanium processor line pay. So far Unix and Linux is kicking the shit out of MS at this, so the 3 billion Intel invested in 64 bit multiprocessing is not paying off. That is why MS licensed SMP protocols from SCO, they are trying to catch up to IBM and Linux but are having one hell of a time because the Intel 64 bit implimentation sucks.
  • by spress ( 584556 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @09:28PM (#6847234)
    They're still waiting on returns from the testing team code named "Script Kiddies"
  • by spazoid12 ( 525450 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @09:41PM (#6847295)
    What? Has George Broussard joined MS? "It'll ship when it's ready!" My were'd I put my DN4ever CD??? It's gotta be around here somewhere...
  • Delay is good (Score:4, Interesting)

    by cpuenvy ( 544708 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @09:54PM (#6847339) Homepage
    I am not alone when I say this: Windows 2000 is the best Microsoft OS since DOS 6.22. I had to get that off my chest.

    I think that the reason they are delaying Longhorn is because of all the bad hype they have received this past week. They are beginning to realize that people now are concerned about security. When they have to pay someone like myself $45.00 an hour to remove a stupid worm from their computers, they are pissed. They want to know why this is happening to them, and it is getting easier to explain to them that the Windows code is swiss cheese, since they hear it being confirmed on the 6 o'clock news.

    Microsoft is obviously delaying the release due to the fact that they had shit for security in the code they posses now, and they are bringing it to the table to clean it up.

    A man can have dreams, can't he?
  • by drinkypoo ( 153816 ) <martin.espinoza@gmail.com> on Monday September 01, 2003 @09:55PM (#6847350) Homepage Journal

    1. Windows XP might live long enough to get enough patches to become stable and for all the software to catch up.
    2. When Longhorn comes out, it might be stable.

    Of course this is just wishful thinking. I'm sure they'll do something diabolical in the meantime. Maybe they feel like there's enough money to be made yet by the use of licensing press gangs. "You WILL sign up, or we'll sue you into the ground, you dirty corporate pirates!"

  • by gelfling ( 6534 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @10:26PM (#6847472) Homepage Journal
    MS has a microincrmental approach to actual new feature inclusion, a glacial pace for real UI changes and an invisible, it will work when it works if it works at all approach to under the covers patches and design fixes.

    So what could possibly be Major? Yet more restrictive DRM?, A new driver model that sends all the HW vendors to hit the bottle? Eh?

    If I were deeply cynical which of course I'm not I'd say that 'delays' such as they are are keyed to the symbiotic relationship they have to Intel. When/if Intel bakes a new batch of chips they need to sell suddenly a 'new' version of Windows will come along to 'need' them.
  • by melted ( 227442 ) on Monday September 01, 2003 @11:05PM (#6847667) Homepage
    Longhorn will be to previous versions of windows what Windows 95 was back in the day - a radical change. Old apps will be supported, but only in compatibility mode (like 16-bit win. 3.11 apps are supported in windows right now). All the new APIs will be managed which means fast, secure and componentized. There will be new security model. There will be new UI library very different from what you can use now, and, again managed. GDI will only be supported in compatibility mode - graphics engine will change as well. This coupled with a shitload of other technologies will make it a worthy target for developers and businesses.

    Do not underestimate the power of several thousand quality developers fueled by several billions of dollars. They've hired out creme of the crop in the dotcom bust phase and now their workforce is better and more dedicated than ever.

    If they're willing to adjust the schedules on top of that, the resulting product may really be scary good.

Bus error -- please leave by the rear door.

Working...