Re: VISTA is nice!

In article <1148327564.991906.10420@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"Edwin" <thorne25@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

ZnU wrote:
In article <1148150862.272770.14880@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"Super Spinner" <Pepe.Smythe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Mitch wrote:
In article <me-349D1E.21020319052006@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Mike
<me@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

How can it be vaporware? I have it here. Public, widespread
Beta 2
in about 2 weeks.

Agreed -- vaporware is too strong a classification. There apparently is
something that could be released
If we assume Microsoft is not run by fools, then why would what you
have now represent Vista as it is going to be released, when Microsoft
doesn't think it's going to be ready before about November?
It's just too hopeful for me to accept -- I can't see this 'public
preview' as really representing Vista.

If Vista is vaporware, then so is OS X 10.5.

Agreed.
But since Apple has provided regular improvements to it's OS, in a much
more timely manner, and has not removed major components promised, it's
not very informative to recognize that fact.

To be fair, Apple doesn't promise anything. We have no idea how many
features have been cut from each of the 0.1 incremental updates. It
could be that many of 10.5's features were supposed to be in 10.4, but
were cut and delayed to 10.5. And since 10.0 was released, Apple
started on itncremetal update strategy, which makes it easier to
release "in a timely manner", since the changes are relatively minor.

Read what Brad Wardell has to say regarding this:
http://www.wincustomize.com/articles.aspx?aid=117896&c=1
"However, where Leopard will be the 5th revision of a very modern OS
architecture, Windows Vista will be a brand new OS designed to look
like previous versions of Windows. Windows Vista is a major change
from Windows XP. It is not as much of a departure as MacOS X was from
OS9, but it is a much bigger change than Windows XP was from say
Windows 2000."

Um. What? This is just incredibly wrong. The major Windows rewrite
(re-implementing a big chunk of the system on top of .NET and replacing
the UI model first introduced with Windows 95) was supposed to come with
a system code-named Blackcomb, in 2002-2003. Blackcomb was pushed back
several years, and Microsoft inserted an intermediate release called
Longhorn (Vista's codename) between XP and Blackcomb, originally set to
ship in 2002. Vista itself was never supposed to be a major re-write,
and has, in fact, turned out to be even less than what Microsoft was
originally planning, as significant features have been cut to try to
stop the release date from slipping further.

In January, Blackcomb was renamed "Vienna", and its estimated release is
2009-2012. Microsoft had added an additional interim release, codenamed
"Fiji".

Vista is Windows XP with a new graphics engine, a new skin, some new
security-related features, and .NET bundled, instead of only available
as a separate download. It is *not* in any sense a brand new operating
system. The difference between XP and Vista is more like the difference
between OS X 10.2 and 10.4.

"Microsoft first talked about "Longhorn" in July 2001, even before
Windows XP's release in October of that year. It was originally
expected to ship sometime late in 2003 as a minor step between Windows
XP and "Blackcomb" (now known as Windows "Vienna").[3] Gradually,
"Longhorn" assimilated many important new features and technologies of
"Blackcomb", and so the date of release was pushed back a few times.
Faced with ongoing delays and concerns about feature creep, Microsoft
announced on August 27, 2004 that it was making significant changes.
"Longhorn" development basically started afresh, building on the
Windows Server 2003 codebase, and re-incorporating only the features
that would be intended for an actual operating system release. Some
previously-announced features, such as WinFS, were dropped."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Vista

The bottom line is...

... Znu is wrong...

... Again! <G>

Please explain how anything you just posted conflicts with anything I
posted.

--
"Those who enter the country illegally violate the law."
-- George W. Bush in Tucson, Ariz., Nov. 28, 2005
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Microsoft allows bypass of Vista activation
    ... activation was required before you could update windows... ... need to "activate" Vista indefinitely. ... Microsoft has required "product activation" ... Right-click the Registry key named SkipRearm and click Edit. ...
    (alt.sys.pc-clone.dell)
  • Re: spyware question
    ... If one has immunzation features, the entry it puts in might be considered ... Microsoft has these suggestions for Protecting your computer from the ... More full function applications for CD/DVD burning would be: ... using Windows XP "prettifications". ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics)
  • Re: VISTA is nice!
    ... widespread Beta 2 in about 2 weeks. ... Microsoft is not run by fools, then why would what you have now ... represent Vista as it is going to be released, ... look like previous versions of Windows. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: Installing WSH on Vista
    ... Windows is legitimate, what would make it not legitimate the next day? ... Microsoft is entitled to protect itself from theft. ... Vista WGA: SPP ... far with their adding of new hardware-intensive features, ...
    (microsoft.public.scripting.wsh)
  • Re: What About Antivirus on Vista?
    ... It even needs protection from Microsoft... ... device driver updates causing Vista to deactivate - by James Bannan ... Then a few days ago I got a Windows Activation prompt - I had three days to ... information as reported by device drivers. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
Loading