• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

What is the ETA of the next Windows OS release?

BentValve

BentValve

Diamond Member
I am ready for a new OS, I am currently running XP Pro with SP2 and I like it but I am just ready for a new OS.

I suppose I could install the 64 bit version just to try something new...frankly though I have been hoping MS would come out with something totally different than XP.


 
The next MS OS 'Longhaul' isn't due out till sometime in 2006.

The only new stuff from MS this coming year will be the 64bit variations of XP and Server 2003, although you could try out media centre 2005 as well.

The only way you'll get a new OS to play with is to check out one of the open source alternatives.
 
Windows Server 2003 and MCE 2004 and 2005 have already come out, built on the XP core no-less. There is no hardware or software demand for a rewrite of the core OS, and it's still running nice an stable.

Longhorn screeners look atrocious. 😀 imho.
 
Best thing for you to do maybe would be to install Win95 or Win98 again and after about a week of remembering how bad it was, you will find peace with XP 🙂

64bit Windows is still very raw driver wise. Not ready for prime time.
 
Originally posted by: skreet
Windows Server 2003 and MCE 2004 and 2005 have already come out, built on the XP core no-less. There is no hardware or software demand for a rewrite of the core OS, and it's still running nice an stable.

Longhorn screeners look atrocious. 😀 imho.
Click to expand...

No need to be humble. You're right. It's just one more case of Microsoft cramming ten pounds of useless sh*t into a five-pound bag, but you KNOW that the thing will still not be rock-solid. Hopefully they're at least rewriting the entire age-old codebase from scratch, but don't bet on it.
 
Originally posted by: jvarszegi
Originally posted by: skreet
Windows Server 2003 and MCE 2004 and 2005 have already come out, built on the XP core no-less. There is no hardware or software demand for a rewrite of the core OS, and it's still running nice an stable.

Longhorn screeners look atrocious. 😀 imho.
Click to expand...

No need to be humble. You're right. It's just one more case of Microsoft cramming ten pounds of useless sh*t into a five-pound bag, but you KNOW that the thing will still not be rock-solid. Hopefully they're at least rewriting the entire age-old codebase from scratch, but don't bet on it.
Click to expand...

Longhorn looks to be another NT OS like WinXP and Windows 2000. Just updated and incorporating new features and such.

I know that longhorn was ment to be a interm release between current NT operatingsystems and the mythical "Blackcomb" OS that is suppose to be the next realy big change.

MS got a bit happy with the feature creep and it started looking like Longhorn was going to be something completely new with stuff like Avalon and WinFS and the death of the Win9x-originated Win32 API. But it now looks like longhorn was scaled back by a large amount in a attempt to get it out in a resonable time frame.

They say it will be released in 2006, of course if MS released it in 2006 it would be the first time in history that MS has released a OS on time.

However I give MS a 60% chance of getting it out on time in 2006, since shareholders are expecting MS to start generating new sources of income, and so far they've only done it realy well with Windows and Office. Of course it's difficult to sell new licenses of WinXP when everybody who wants WinXP, has WinXP and has had it for a couple years now.

( in realistic terms Win2k and WinXP are mostly the same OS... NT server was NT 4.0 then that would make W2k NT 5.0 and WinXP as NT 5.2 or something like that. Longhorn may be NT 6.0, I am guessing)
 
Originally posted by: drag
Originally posted by: jvarszegi
Originally posted by: skreet
MS got a bit happy with the feature creep and it started looking like Longhorn was going to be something completely new with stuff like Avalon and WinFS and the death of the Win9x-originated Win32 API. But it now looks like longhorn was scaled back by a large amount in a attempt to get it out in a resonable time frame.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Yep....Windows XP SP3...just what we need to be paying hundreds of dollars to upgrade to. :roll:

I realize Microsoft "needs to make money", but what is the point if they already have a good, stable OS? What at this point is supposed to be better about Longhorn than Windows XP anyway?....
 
HL2 took 5 years to develope, and this is just a game. If MS would rush into creating a new OS (the MAIN software on the pc) every couple years, it would be the buggiest POS every time. There would be alot more holes in it then they already tend to find in all their OS's, and other software developers wouldn't have enough time to develope their software for any specific OS because it would change too often. Granted it would be nice to have, but it's just not possible. I'd rather have a stable OS than a new and prettier one every couple years.
 
Originally posted by: Geforcer
HL2 took 5 years to develope, and this is just a game. If MS would rush into creating a new OS (the MAIN software on the pc) every couple years, it would be the buggiest POS every time. There would be alot more holes in it then they already tend to find in all their OS's, and other software developers wouldn't have enough time to develope their software for any specific OS because it would change too often. Granted it would be nice to have, but it's just not possible. I'd rather have a stable OS than a new and prettier one every couple years.
Click to expand...

I wish people had that attitude about cars. I have to learn a whole new line almost every year. About the time we get the quirks ironed out, its history.

 
If MS would rush into creating a new OS (the MAIN software on the pc) every couple years, it would be the buggiest POS every time
Click to expand...

Which is why they almost never start over every time, Longhorn is just a newer version of XP which is just a newer version of Win2K which is just a newer version of NT4, etc.
 
They say it will be released in 2006, of course if MS released it in 2006 it would be the first time in history that MS has released a OS on time.
Click to expand...

Well, considering it was originally targetted for 04 then 05, I think they already blew that...

 
Originally posted by: drag
( in realistic terms Win2k and WinXP are mostly the same OS... NT server was NT 4.0 then that would make W2k NT 5.0 and WinXP as NT 5.2 or something like that. Longhorn may be NT 6.0, I am guessing)
Click to expand...
XP = NT 5.1
Server 2k3 = NT 5.2
Longhorn = NT 6.0 (which you got right)

Apparently, Blackcomb is coming out in 2010.
 
I know XP is considered 2002.. But wasn't it released in 2001?


Thats going to be over 5 years. it BETTER be good. I am very happy with XP but when you look at the overall timeline.. They need to pick up the pace.

Win 95 -> 98-> ->2k ->XP -> 2006???? Longhorn..

 
my guess we'll see a windows me style rehash in late 05 or early 06 and won't see longhorn in any shape or form till 07, 08
 
My point was that an OS is an extremely complicated piece of software and MS always sets their sights way too high (WinFS for example) so they end up cutting back projects one by one until they're only a year or two behind schedule. I think it took 2 years for Linux to go from 2.4.0 ->2.6.0 and that's just the kernel, MS has a lot more to work on since they bundle so much with their OS.
 
Originally posted by: Nothinman
My point was that an OS is an extremely complicated piece of software and MS always sets their sights way too high (WinFS for example) so they end up cutting back projects one by one until they're only a year or two behind schedule. I think it took 2 years for Linux to go from 2.4.0 ->2.6.0 and that's just the kernel, MS has a lot more to work on since they bundle so much with their OS.
Click to expand...

I understand what your saying..

My point was just that if they are cutting back certain features and options then it should also speed up production...

I don't want them to rush, i was just pointing out the timeline of previous Win. releases.

XP being out for OVER 5 years when it's all said and done?

That being said though, i do like XP.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top