Reply With QuoteI'd say 2006 is their tentative release date (one that has already been pushed back many times). It will be out eventually and until then, who cares?
...
Anyways I'm searching throughout Microsoft's site and the only release date information I find is that it will be ready for "Broad Avaliability" come 2006. Would that be what I could specify as an actual release date? Because the term itself has me confused. Even better, the server software comes out 2007, so we've got a quite of ways till it comes out...
Anyone have any more in depth information I may be overlooking about this product?
Ice
I'd say 2006 is their tentative release date (one that has already been pushed back many times). It will be out eventually and until then, who cares?
...
Oh my teacher just needed to know for our Lab. Because switching over to a new operating system for 14 computers always yields some trouble. Just seeing how much time I guess, for school policy reasons etc. Planning ahead.
Sausage-in-Training
Why do they need to switch OS? It's school; its not like they're running any programs which need all the stability and extras longhorn will have, and besides, by then, 90% of the computers we have will be too crap to use it. I reckon it'll be wanting 1gb of ram at least.
project.d
Worst operating system name ever.
Unashamed Sink Urinator.
Its a codename, IIRC XP's was Memphis.
It will be called something different at retail.
“The very existence of flame-throwers proves that some time, somewhere, someone said to themselves, you know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm just not close enough to get the job done.” -George Carlin
Sausage-in-Training
Yeh, but Memphis has some style about it.
Longhorn just sounds like the name of a rhino.
All eye seeing
Theoretical things that may happen before it's released:
1) (Longshot) MacOS X ported to PC and runs at 90% or better. Most people will be all over that one.
2) (More likely) Linux gets more centralized and user friendly. A couple of things piss me off here: The GPL license which says all software has to be free(or release your source code)(even the GUI is under a fucking license), MS is license free. There are a gazillion versions of Linux and it's impossible to choose.
3) Google creates an OS. Can't comment on this yet but I know they're making one. I hope that the kernel will be Linux, but not much else.
4) Mobile devices will have a revolution and will become the new PC, ie huge white boxes go bye bye. Personal data migrates from your hard drive to your private server account somewhere. You can then access it from any device. Desktop apps become web services run from servers. Example: running an MPEG2 -> DivX conversion on a clustered server. With parallel processing it will take a few minutes, on your PC and couple of hours. Internet becomes completely wireless with extremely high speeds(16mbit or above would be great) and dare I say it FREE(Philly is already working on Wifi access).
The future's so bright I gotta wear shades.
I don't know how to get rid of the huge space here.
Unashamed Sink Urinator.
Originally Posted by seen
I said for a while linux's core problem is its too god damn hard to install anything. If you ever, ever, have to drop to a command line to do anything You wont gain mainstream approval. End of story.
Id love to see OSX on a platform that doesn't require me to become some sort of techno-hippie and go into more debt. Yeah, yeah your G5 is great, but I'D like to be able to buy groceries this week.
“The very existence of flame-throwers proves that some time, somewhere, someone said to themselves, you know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm just not close enough to get the job done.” -George Carlin
All eye seeing
Actually, a lot of people right now are itching to run OS X on their x86s. I guess they're getting sick of all the MS mumbo jumbo. I can't blame them, I program for both systems and MacOS is more friendly towards users.
It's a hot topic right now. Apple are being bitches and won't release their system on x86, I guess they know that if they do they'll have to deal with all the cheap unstable hardware. They are also afraid of MS and want to push their hardware even if it is in extremely small numbers.
I know that a while ago Apple was working on an x86 port of the Darwin OS but I guess they killed it.
Here's the reason why Apple doesn't want to run on cheap boxes: Back in the early 90's they licensed their hardware to companies like UMAX and quickly found that they were priced cheaper than the comparable Apple models, therefore they killed the licensing program and that was the end of that. Actually an Apple board is just a power PC chip with some custom Apple chips on the motherboard. I would venture to say that pirates in China would make a lot of money if they were to Clone the macs again and sell them(this time with a G4 / G5 processor) and they would make a lot of people happy, except for Apple of course.
Another reason is that they don't like people opening their boxes. They'd rather make Notebook type desktop PCs so no one could fuck with them.
A side note: I like how in the early days Macs used to keep some of their OS in the ROMS on the board.
I don't know how to get rid of the huge space here.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks