Microsoft: Why Longhorn Matters..

[IGBT]

Text

The doubts of naysayers aside, Longhorn is going to be a heck of a lot more than just Windows XP Service Pack 3.

That's the view of Jim Allchin, the group vice president of Microsoft Corp.'s Platforms group, who told eWEEK.com in an interview that Longhorn is a "big deal"?not just for the company, but also for the industry, as it will create a lot of opportunity, especially for new programs leveraging the peer-to-peer platform.


Microsoft first started talking publicly about Longhorn in 2003, promising that it would revolutionize information storage and retrieval; deliver vast improvements on the security front; and make huge strides in PC usability and reliability.

 

[Nothinman]

Slowly but surely they've been announing Longhorn pieces will be released for XP or skipped/trimmed down, so I'm not sure how they can call it more than SP3.

And I find it ironic that they say it'll create oppurtunity for 3rd party programs when it'll likely include more software so that less 3rd party programs are necessary. MS now has an Anti-Spyware tool, they should have an Anti-Virus soon, Longhorn should have a full firewall, etc.

 

[drag]

The main difference that I see, in terms of stuff that matters to end users (I am sure that there are technical and incremental improvements over XP like their was in XP over W2k), is going to be the DRM/Palladium/Trusted Computing/NGSCB/whatever additions.

That and the Aqua.. er... Areo GUI interface. And security options.

Otherwise all major other things that were suppose to be cool about longhorn has been put off and probably will be backported to WinXP. Avalon, WinFS, and Indigo.

Otherwise it's just the natural evolution of the NT OS... NT 4.0 ---> Windows 2000 Pro and Windows 2000 Server ---> Windows XP and Windows 2003 server ---> Windows Longhorn destop and Windows Longhorn server.

Or something like that.

It's just like Redhat 6.0 ---> Redhat 7.x ---> Redhat 8.x ---> Redhat 9.0 ---> Redhat ES/WS/AS 2.x/3.x/4.0 and Fedora Core 1/2/3/4

Or OS X 10.1 --> OS X 10.2 ---> OS X 10.3 ---> OS X 10.4

Or Windows 95 ---> Windows 98 ---> Windows 98 SE ---> Windows ME

So I wouldn't call it a 'service pack' update. It's just a newer version of the same OS.


It matters more to Microsoft themselves to anything. They need to have a reason to get those XP users to buy a new OS.

 

[bersl2]

Fortune ran an article earlier on Allchin and his division's (ahem) "new" slogan: "It Just Works".

Give me a break. It's the usual carrot-and-stick trick, and it gets you every time.

 

[drag]

hehe.

I have no doubt that Longhorn will be better then Windows XP. The GUI stuff should be interesting.

 

[hopejr]

According to Paul Thurrot, Longhorn is looking more like a train wreck. In other words, it's not going to be as good as it looked originally (this is all based on experiences with 5048). Forgot the link. Somewhere on slashdot.

 

[drag]

I visit his website time to time and when I saw that my jaw dropped. He is a huge microsoft fan (not suprising considuring his line of work).

Not that I have a problem with that or anything, but it's obvious this guy likes the stuff a lot. His website still has usefull information, of course.

So when I saw that I was suprised... but I don't think he quite ment it the same way that the slashdot blurb author interpreted it. It's a quote taken out of context.

I expect that MS has some other things up their sleaves to show off, and it better be something better then that silly PDF replacement format.

But on the other hand, those screenshots are ugly. To me they look almost exactly like Windows XP, only with a slider (!) in the start menu.

But it's only a developer preview. I think that it's much more smarter to wait till the Beta 1 gets out to make any real judgements.

Here is some links to Bill G's WinHEC 2005 keynote speech. In streaming media format...
I haven't had a chance to look at it yet (and it's doubtfull that I'd ever be able to see it due to the likelyhood of it using some horrific MS-only format)
http://www.microsoft.com/events/executives/billgates.mspx

Also they announced that MS is pushing back the proposed Longhorn release date to the end of 2006 (it was suppose to be out mid-2006 earlier.)

 

[daniel49]

some nice new features some repackaged same old stuff that we will have to learn to do a new way.

I like the parental control feature..although it won't do me much good now as my youngest is now 16

I wonder if they could bypass it by adjusting the system clock..lol kids

 

[Brent of Liquid5th]

Seriously, Longhorn is already a huge failure internally and will only be a large success in the market by default. As always, Microsoft will extort the OEMs into paying for a preloading their new machines with Longhorn and ban them from continuing to use XP.

Longhorn is an internal failure for obvious reasons. The vast majority of their 'groundbreaking new technologies' that will 'change the face of computing' have been immensely scaled back or even dropped. They just can't seem to make it happen. I don't fault Microsoft for attempting to improve the user experience, however I do fault them for not realizing what they were getting into. They take such a ridiculously big-picture approach that it is impossible for their developers to meet deadlines. Their technology roadmap for Longhorn was ambitious to the point of insanity, and they have had to eat crow every 4-6 months because of it.

At the risk of looking like a fanboy, just look at the evolution of OS X. The same technologies that Microsoft is trying to throw in all at once are being slipstreamed into the OS piece by piece. Apple has built and continues to strengthen a solid core OS that gains technologies with every new release. Using these core technologies, they build from the bottom up to eventually give the user access to the very same 'changing the face of computing' technologies.

By making it simple for developers to access the cool stuff that OS X can do, we are seeing a 'renaissance' of user-driven Applications for the Mac that just cannot be done on any other platform. The reason for this is because of Apple's piecemeal approach to new features and technologies along with their ability to make it simple for the rest of us to understand. Case in point: This image describing the hierarchy of OS X technologies.

I didn't mean this to be a Apple v. Microsoft rant. Microsoft has some lofty, impressive goals. The issue is that they just can't expect to 'change everything' in one shot. This point has been proven by Microsoft themselves on multiple occasions. Win2k, WinXP, and now Longhorn. By the way, what ever happened to Black____? I can't remember the full name of that ill-fated Microsoft OS of the future.

edit: Ahh now I remember. Blackcomb

 

[hopejr]

I was hoping that Longhorn would be some revolutionary OS. When they started backporting stuff to XP and 2k3, I started to get a little disappointed, but still thought it would be a worthy OS. But now, looking at the 5048 screenshots (which I might add, are no longer around by request of MS), I think it's just a glorified version of XP. I don't know how anyone will see a need to upgrade to Longhorn if XP is going to be virtually the same (except without the GUI niceness of Aero glass).
One reason I switched to OS X was because Longhorn was taking too long to be released, but I had determined that when Longhorn came out, I'd switch back to Windows. I don't think so any more. Microsoft has to do a lot to change my mind now.

 

[Raduque]

Brent of Liquid5th: wasn't Blackcomb, .NET which was supposed to be Longhorn, but became Server 2003 without the fancy features?

 

[Nothinman]

Apple has built and continues to strengthen a solid core OS that gains technologies with every new release

And they also charge you for every little release, MS major releases are farther apart but when they do slip little things in they're usually free.

Using these core technologies, they build from the bottom up to eventually give the user access to the very same 'changing the face of computing' technologies.

And it only costs 4x as much.

 

[drag]

Originally posted by: Raduque
Brent of Liquid5th: wasn't Blackcomb, .NET which was supposed to be Longhorn, but became Server 2003 without the fancy features?

(disclaimer) The following is 'as I understand it' type stuff:

Blackcomb is the next generation Microsoft operating system. Similar to how Windows XP/Windows 2000 was much different then Windows 95/98/ME.

Longhorn was always ment to be the 'interm' release. A sort of go-between from the NT-family of operating systems to blackcomb. Similar to how Windows ME was intended for Win98 SE and Windows XP.


.NET was a confusing marketing sceme to express the network-centric thrust of Microsofts future technology. It never realy paned out and the idea was scrapped.

So .NET ment different things at different times.

Windows 2003 may have been the .NET server or something like that, but its basicly Windows XP server. If you want to look at it that way.

I beleive it shares most of the internals and even uses the same kernel as Windows XP. I am definately not 100% on that. It's similar to the Windows 2000 Pro and Windows 2000 server series of OSes.

There will be a 'Longhorn Server' version of Windows coming out in the not to distant future.

 

[Zugzwang152]

They need to have a reason to get those XP users to buy a new OS.

Actually they really don't. When extended support for Windows XP ends in 2010, they're going to need to upgrade because they will lose security patches.

 

[hopejr]

Originally posted by: Zugzwang152

They need to have a reason to get those XP users to buy a new OS.

Actually they really don't. When extended support for Windows XP ends in 2010, they're going to need to upgrade because they will lose security patches.

ROFL!!!

 

[hopejr]

Originally posted by: Nothinman
And they also charge you for every little release, MS major releases are farther apart but when they do slip little things in they're usually free.

Tiger is as much of a major release compared to Panther as XP is to 2k, and people needed to pay more to upgrade to XP from 2k.

 

[Nothinman]

Tiger is as much of a major release compared to Panther as XP is to 2k, and people needed to pay more to upgrade to XP from 2k.

But XP to 2K is one release that they charged for, Apple has done 3 or 4?

 

[drag]

Originally posted by: Zugzwang152

They need to have a reason to get those XP users to buy a new OS.

Actually they really don't. When extended support for Windows XP ends in 2010, they're going to need to upgrade because they will lose security patches.

Ya, but Most of Microsoft's realy long term licensing deals with big companies end this year...

It's the licensing model changes that MS did.. It put some people off and they are holding out on it trying to get deals. IBM likes to tell people, big companies, that if they throw the terms 'IBM' and 'Linux' around a bit they can probably get pretty good deals on MS software.

Lots of the realy long term lucrative deals that MS has with it's software subscriptions are ending a bit. They offered big discounts for long term contracts a couple years back to boost revenue. Or something like that. I don't know the details to much.

So people want to hold out for them to start offering nice deals again.

The thing to look out for is something called 'deferrred revenue' or 'unearned income'. This is money that people paid to a company for services that are not yet delivered. Stock market people like to look at it to see how subscription-based businesses, like big software businesses, are doing.

Like if you pay monthly bills for cable TV. Instead of paying for one month, you pay for six months instead. So those 5 months of TV that you haven't had yet, but paid for, the income from that is unearned income, or deferred revenue.

The current income is nice, but the unearned income shows what is happenning in the future and thats what investors care about; the future.

So lately MS's income has increased nicely and predictably, but not the deferred income, which has dropped off from analyst's predictions.

That means more people are getting close to ending contracts are aren't renewing them.

So that's why MS realy realy needs to get Longhorn out the door. If you already own Windows XP on all your computers, and they all are fast enough, everybody has all the copies of MS Office they need, and all your servers are running fairly well, why do you need to pay for more upgrades? You'll probably pay for service contracts, but MS (I dont' think) makes much money off of that stuff.

So if people respond to Longhorn and get excited about the Beta (as oposed to the current 'developer's release') then it's likely that they will be willing to enter into new service contracts.

If Longhorn is a flop in people's minds then they will probably not renew long-term contracts and buy software on the short term to keep their options open and put presure on MS for more discounts. Which in turn increases short-terms operating costs for new licenses and makes MS competitors look more attractive.

At least that's my thinking on it.

Pay attention to this stuff around the end of July, I think that's when you'll be able to tell more about what is going on financially. The beta should be out and people should start feeling the pressure to buy new software subscriptions.

Right now it's a bit of a tough time for MS. Their stocks have been pretty much flatline for a while now and if they flop then they'll loose investor confindance.

I don't think that will happen though. MS is huge and most businesses are hooked very strongly on MS software.

All this is just my speculation. It doesn't mean much and I am probably mostly wrong.

 

[Brent of Liquid5th]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

Apple has built and continues to strengthen a solid core OS that gains technologies with every new release

And they also charge you for every little release, MS major releases are farther apart but when they do slip little things in they're usually free.

Using these core technologies, they build from the bottom up to eventually give the user access to the very same 'changing the face of computing' technologies.

And it only costs 4x as much.

You forgot to [/troll].

Calling any of the OS X major releases a 'little release' reveals your ignorance. The only .x release that could even slightly be considered minor is 10.1, which was a free upgrade. Its not even worth my time to go into the details. Then your little 4x number is amusing. You don't even qualify what the hell you are talking about. Move along newb.

 

[Nothinman]

Calling any of the OS X major releases a 'little release' reveals your ignorance.

My ignorance is by choice, Apple hardware isn't worth the price they put on it.

The only .x release that could even slightly be considered minor is 10.1, which was a free upgrade. Its not even worth my time to go into the details.

What did Apple do that was oh-so innovative? Being an outsider, I can only think of 1 or 2 things that they did that made people go "oh cool" besides nice LCD screens and pastelle cases.

Then your little 4x number is amusing. You don't even qualify what the hell you are talking about. Move along newb.

I shouldn't have to qualify it, you bought two of them so you should know how much it costs to own a Mac. After you pay for hardware and software, you could have easily gotten an x86 box that's comparable for half to quarter of the price.

 

[Brent of Liquid5th]

Lets see...I am comfortable being considered an expert with Linux, Mac OS X, and Windows from Win9x all the way through to Server 2003. 3 years ago I decided to buy a Mac and try out OS X. Now I refuse to use anything else on the desktop, being that instead of playing games all day I choose to work. Its the software stupid. Yes, I'm willing to pay a premium for a Mac. No, the premium is not 400%. For the machine I have now, its more like 5-10%. Maybe.

 

[Nothinman]

And usually when a person calls themself an expert, they're not. That may or may not apply to you, but it's not a good sign.

You got a Mac for 10% of the cost of a x86 Windows box? Wow, what dumpster did you dig it out of?

 

[kamper]

Brent likes Apple software better (understandable) and so he doesn't mind paying a premium for the hardware (10% premium he said, not 10% of the cost). Nothinman likes his software minimalistic and so has no need for Mac OS or Mac hardware. Like Brent kinda said, it's all about the software. Why argue?

And to drag: I disagree with you about the "investor confidence" stuff, kinda. Microsoft doesn't need investors, they've got all the resources they need to continue to develop software. What they need is developers to continue to want to develop applications for windows to give customers a reason to buy windows. So "investors" in the sense that Microsoft needs companies to spend resources on the windows platform, but it's not like anyone's giving money to Microsoft in return for a share in future profits. I'm guessing anyways, I don't know Microsoft's business.

 

[Brent of Liquid5th]

Originally posted by: Nothinman
And usually when a person calls themself an expert, they're not. That may or may not apply to you, but it's not a good sign.

You got a Mac for 10% of the cost of a x86 Windows box? Wow, what dumpster did you dig it out of?

usually is the operative word here. Also, 'calling oneself' an expert and mentioning the fact that one is 'considered an expert' are two different things.

As for your lack of understanding of the English language, thats been addressed.

 

[Nothinman]

usually is the operative word here. Also, 'calling oneself' an expert and mentioning the fact that one is 'considered an expert' are two different things.

Mentioning that other people consider you an expert is the same thing to me, it's just a way to do it without looking as egotistical. Maybe your mom called you an expert one day because you installed a screensaver for her. Hell I had a VMS guy at work call me a genious one day because I showed him how to change the resolution on his Win2K box, the source is more important than the compliment.

As for your lack of understanding of the English language, thats been addressed.

Your lack of a sense of humor has also been noted.