Longhorn Troubles: Does Anybody Care?

Hello all,

Microsoft is struggling with it's world-beating OS, Longhorn. Release
date 2007?

http://www.eweek.com/category2/0,4148,1391959,00.asp

Before you go out to raise a glass or two in tribute to poor, pathetic
Microsoft's woes (they're also struggling with what to do with too
much money), I'd like to ask if this is just more of the same
(whatever Microsoft OS ever shipped on time), or whether Microsoft is
losing it. One article mentions the possibility that Micrsoft isn't
very good at selling its own ideas, even the good ones. People don't
use the neat stuff in XP, as it is. Why would they ever want even
more of what they can't use?

Why ever would anyone in a hardware newsgroup care, since we all use
Linux? ;-).

Even if no one cared if they ever saw the four-colored Windows flag
floating across a computer screen again, Linux isn't going to deliver
the desktop sizzle that's needed to keep the pace of development in
desktop hardware above the weekly Rambus thread.

Hot new stuff from ISV's? If someone has a killer app, maybe they
won't wait for Longhorn. A venture capitalist trying to see which way
the wind is blowing, though, might wait to see what Longhorn can
deliver and how the public reacts to it.

The beginning of Bill Gates' worst nightmare (the end of the PC as we
know it) or just another blip in manifest destiny?

RM

"Robert Myers" <rmyers@rustuck.com> wrote in message
news:40pv309u8u888aom0q9dqgo9ekd91asnh5@4ax.com...
> Hello all,
>
> Microsoft is struggling with it's world-beating OS, Longhorn. Release
> date 2007?
>
> http://www.eweek.com/category2/0,4148,1391959,00.asp
>
> Before you go out to raise a glass or two in tribute to poor, pathetic
> Microsoft's woes (they're also struggling with what to do with too
> much money), I'd like to ask if this is just more of the same
> (whatever Microsoft OS ever shipped on time), or whether Microsoft is
> losing it. One article mentions the possibility that Micrsoft isn't
> very good at selling its own ideas, even the good ones. People don't
> use the neat stuff in XP, as it is. Why would they ever want even
> more of what they can't use?
>
> Why ever would anyone in a hardware newsgroup care, since we all use
> Linux? ;-).
>
> Even if no one cared if they ever saw the four-colored Windows flag
> floating across a computer screen again, Linux isn't going to deliver
> the desktop sizzle that's needed to keep the pace of development in
> desktop hardware above the weekly Rambus thread.
>
> Hot new stuff from ISV's? If someone has a killer app, maybe they
> won't wait for Longhorn. A venture capitalist trying to see which way
> the wind is blowing, though, might wait to see what Longhorn can
> deliver and how the public reacts to it.
>
> The beginning of Bill Gates' worst nightmare (the end of the PC as we
> know it) or just another blip in manifest destiny?
>
> RM

AND this has what to do with comp.sys.intel?

On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 21:28:36 -0600, "Sarak" <csschool@mts.net> wrote:

>
>"Robert Myers" <rmyers@rustuck.com> wrote in message
>news:40pv309u8u888aom0q9dqgo9ekd91asnh5@4ax.com...

<snip>

>>
>> The beginning of Bill Gates' worst nightmare (the end of the PC as we
>> know it) or just another blip in manifest destiny?
>>
>
>AND this has what to do with comp.sys.intel?
>

You, ah, need to have it explained to you what constant releases of
increasingly power-hungry versions of Windows has to do with the
market for Intel processors?

A market for increasingly-powerful server chips will continue with or
without a desktop market, but the economics will change dramatically.

RM

Robert Myers <rmyers@rustuck.com> wrote :

> One article mentions the possibility that
> Micrsoft isn't very good at selling its own ideas, even the good
> ones. People don't use the neat stuff in XP, as it is. Why would
> they ever want even more of what they can't use?

Just wait till you see this new hyped xrated megasupercool DX10 3D GUI.
Forget Doom 3, I'm gonna point & click all day long ... ;-)

Pozdrawiam.
--
RusH //
http://pulse.pdi.net/~rush/qv30/
Like ninjas, true hackers are shrouded in secrecy and mystery.
You may never know -- UNTIL IT'S TOO LATE.

RusH <rush@pulse.pdi.net> wrote in message news:<Xns949D85D5F61A0RusHcomputersystems@193.110.122.80>...
> Robert Myers <rmyers@rustuck.com> wrote :
>
> > One article mentions the possibility that
> > Micrsoft isn't very good at selling its own ideas, even the good
> > ones. People don't use the neat stuff in XP, as it is. Why would
> > they ever want even more of what they can't use?
>
> Just wait till you see this new hyped xrated megasupercool DX10 3D GUI.
> Forget Doom 3, I'm gonna point & click all day long ... ;-)
>
> Pozdrawiam.


I think you need to qualify that comment.

Some of us are already playing with Whidbey, XAML, and getting ready
for Yukon. Stored Procs in C# are not a trivial fluff feature. And
what's wrong with DX10? If it's what game developers and video cards
manufacturers are asking for, then why shouldn't if come to pass?

Whether you like Windows, hate Windows or are completely indifferent
to it, MS is just doing what every company does: Trying their best to
out a product.

RusH <rush@pulse.pdi.net> wrote:

>Robert Myers <rmyers@rustuck.com> wrote :
>
>> One article mentions the possibility that
>> Micrsoft isn't very good at selling its own ideas, even the good
>> ones. People don't use the neat stuff in XP, as it is. Why would
>> they ever want even more of what they can't use?
>
>Just wait till you see this new hyped xrated megasupercool DX10 3D GUI.
>Forget Doom 3, I'm gonna point & click all day long ... ;-)

Well, they need some way to bloat their OS enough to bog-down a 10GHz
CPU, you know. God forbid our computers actually work FASTER as the
years go by...

chrisv wrote:
> RusH <rush@pulse.pdi.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Robert Myers <rmyers@rustuck.com> wrote :
>>
>>
>>>One article mentions the possibility that
>>>Micrsoft isn't very good at selling its own ideas, even the good
>>>ones. People don't use the neat stuff in XP, as it is. Why would
>>>they ever want even more of what they can't use?
>>
>>Just wait till you see this new hyped xrated megasupercool DX10 3D GUI.
>>Forget Doom 3, I'm gonna point & click all day long ... ;-)
>
>
> Well, they need some way to bloat their OS enough to bog-down a 10GHz
> CPU, you know. God forbid our computers actually work FASTER as the
> years go by...
>

Actually they do work much faster - except most idiots out there
think that just because they bought new hardware they also have
to install the latest bloatware. Its like buying yourself a
Ferrari and then driving around with four flat tires. Just look
at all the idiots out there who shoot themselves in the foot by
using XP and the latest version of MS Office.

I still use NT4 at home most of the time. Whenever someone sees
this and tells me I should upgrade, they can never give a good
answer when I ask "Why?". NT and my NT-compatible apps do the
job for me - why slow things down by installing crap like
XP, IE, MS Office ... ? I have to put up with bloatware like
that everywhere else I go - its the last thing I want to see
when I come home.

On Tue, 02 Mar 2004 10:38:37 -0600, chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid>
wrote:

>Well, they need some way to bloat their OS enough to bog-down a 10GHz
>CPU, you know. God forbid our computers actually work FASTER as the
>years go by...

Somehow I don't think that would be a difficult task for M$ to
achieve... :PppP

Furthermore, if a 10Ghz P-?? processor is like the trend Intel is
taking since the P3->P4->Prescott, it might not be significantly
faster than a 7Ghz P4! :PpPP

--
L.Angel: I'm looking for web design work.
If you need basic to med complexity webpages at affordable rates, email me
Standard HTML, SHTML, MySQL + PHP or ASP, Javascript.
If you really want, FrontPage & DreamWeaver too.
But keep in mind you pay extra bandwidth for their bloated code

On Tue, 02 Mar 2004 11:08:33 -0600, Rob Stow <rob.stow@sasktel.net>
wrote:

>chrisv wrote:

<snip>

>>
>> Well, they need some way to bloat their OS enough to bog-down a 10GHz
>> CPU, you know. God forbid our computers actually work FASTER as the
>> years go by...
>>
>
>Actually they do work much faster - except most idiots out there
>think that just because they bought new hardware they also have
>to install the latest bloatware. Its like buying yourself a
>Ferrari and then driving around with four flat tires. Just look
>at all the idiots out there who shoot themselves in the foot by
>using XP and the latest version of MS Office.
>

I wouldn't characterize most of the people I know who use XP and who
(reluctantly) installed a version of MS Office to go along with it as
idiots. I have XP installed on a couple of machines for reasons I'm
not going to defend. Some machines have come with Office XP or Word
XP installed.

Open Office suits my needs just fine, but documents sometimes come up
oddly formatted, and people who do business in the real world can't
afford the risk of producing a document that looks messed up to the
rest of the world.

Many technical people won't find these arguments compelling and will
stick to the position that people who buy the latest MS bloatware are
just suckers. What technical people should care about is that the IT
industry has become more or less addicted to demands produced by
Microsoft Software.

Some of the things that Microsoft or any other software vendor wanting
to dazzle customers might pursue, like artificial intelligence, are
computationally-intensive, and AI itself could use a shot in the arm.

Microsoft has the money. They also have considerable talent. Where
they lack talent and original ideas, they have never hesitated to
spend money to buy them.

The PC-driven era could easily continue, but not without something
like Microsoft driving it. Or the PC-driven era could be coming to a
close, in which case the IT industry will need to find some other
business model to fuel growth.

RM

On Tue, 02 Mar 2004 11:08:33 -0600, Rob Stow <rob.stow@sasktel.net>
wrote:
>chrisv wrote:
>> Well, they need some way to bloat their OS enough to bog-down a 10GHz
>> CPU, you know. God forbid our computers actually work FASTER as the
>> years go by...
>
>Actually they do work much faster - except most idiots out there
>think that just because they bought new hardware they also have
>to install the latest bloatware. Its like buying yourself a
>Ferrari and then driving around with four flat tires. Just look
>at all the idiots out there who shoot themselves in the foot by
>using XP and the latest version of MS Office.
>
>I still use NT4 at home most of the time. Whenever someone sees
>this and tells me I should upgrade, they can never give a good
>answer when I ask "Why?". NT and my NT-compatible apps do the
>job for me - why slow things down by installing crap like
>XP, IE, MS Office ... ? I have to put up with bloatware like
>that everywhere else I go - its the last thing I want to see
>when I come home.

There certainly are some technical reasons to get WinXP over WinNT
4.0, though whether or not the effect you is another matter.

The biggest reason is probably that NT 4.0 is being EOLed. As of Dec.
31, 2003 there are no further non-security updates or support
available for NT 4.0. At the end of 2004 the security updates will
cease to be as well.

There is also the lack of DirectX (beyond version 3.0) issue, which
makes NT4 basically useless for games and possibly some other new
applications. A similar story exists for Windows Media Player, though
it's not quite as bad there.

Then there's the fact that NT4.0 is not really practical to run as a
non-administrator account for home users, while this is quite
practical in WinXP (I'm doing just that right now).

Lots of new hardware no longer has drivers for NT4 as well, and this
is likely to get worse from here on out.


Perhaps none of these apply to you, however there definitely ARE good
reasons for users to upgrade from NT4 to Win2K/WinXP. Personally I
just find NT4 to be a major PITA to administer, nothing is ever where
I would expect it to be. I really don't feel that I'm being an idiot
for upgrading to a newer version of NT for my home system (actually I
never ran NT4 on my home system, though I've used it extensively
through work/school).

On the other hand, I see no reason at all for me to get a newer
version of MS Office (I currently have Office 2000).

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca