Read more.Quote:
Could Microsoft's next major operating system land as soon as July 2011?
Printable View
Read more.Quote:
Could Microsoft's next major operating system land as soon as July 2011?
Seems a little quick, but 95 to 98 to 2000 to xp, all only a couple of years apart, yes xp lasted much longer than anything before, but isn't that the exception?
Who else waits more than two years for a major OS version? Linux? Apple?
A good point. Even the long-term-support version of Ubuntu is released every 2 years, and the Linux kernel is updated pretty regularly, albeit incrementally. Apple usually turn things around quickly too.Quote:
Originally Posted by daniel_owen_uk
Vista was a major release,windows 7 is a minor release so 8 should be major again. a major release next year does seem a very short time imo. the normal release cycle is two years.
Actually 7 was the major, vista was released as a stop gap because 7 wasn't ready.
3.. MS aim for that in principle and arguments over what constitutes a 'major' and 'minor' release are moot - MS decide that independent of what we all think and for all intents and purposes both were 'major' in their eyes.Quote:
Originally Posted by lodore
No. 7 is a fork of the Vista codebase - without Vista there would be no 7 period.Quote:
Originally Posted by daniel_owen_uk
As for Windows 8 being out year - tosh if you ask me - though I don't doubt work started on it mid last year.
Vista and 7 were both MAJOR releases. I'm glad they are back to a shorter development cycle. The 5 and a bit years for Vista just did not work out well!Quote:
Originally Posted by lodore
Simply a case of 'project fell over cos xp codebase load of crap, so had to restart from scratch(ish)' although some now (weirdly) believe MS has always been on a 5 year cycle as a result.Quote:
Originally Posted by Singh400
Yeah, about halfway though the restarted it because it was proving too big a task to write a new OS from scratch. Some of the early builds of Longhorn were pretty cool though :)Quote:
Originally Posted by dangel
4074 was the last one I think right? And 5048 was the one built of existing code. It was Server 2003 code wasn't it? Ahhhh the memories to rush to get home from school to get the latest build. Oooo I feel all giddy thinking about it now :D
I thought Vista was a major, "best thing since the invention of the wheel" release ..... right up to the time it flopped. At that point, it became a stopgap and Win7 was the "best thing ... " etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by dangel
Cynical?
Moi?
I think I'm offended. Sniff. :D :D
Just give me a cheap OS that works and does what I want.
:mrgreen:Quote:
Originally Posted by Saracen
I'm always amused by the slating Vista gets - as essentially it was the first instance of many of the technologies that make 7 so good. Evolution baby, and sometimes it's a little painful ;)
how much of the code did they rewrite in the end for vista?
windows 7 does seem like the best windows yet but its still not as good as other os's.
takes up quite alot of disc space, dono if thats due to backwards compatibility or what.
no package management system.
hardware compatibilty is better but not as good as linux OOTB.
the thing is most people are stuck with windows because most programs are only written for windows.
so even if other operating systems are better it doesnt matter because most people cant use them.
But but but... all it needed was the service pack that is Win7 to make it awesomesauce ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by dangel
I think this is aload of tosh tbh, Windows 7 release was only rushed because of vista being so bad.. I can't find faults with win7 yet...
I just hope it doesnt cost £50/£100 .