Re: VISTA is nice!

George Graves wrote:

In article <gbu872593u9drckn3lj91j013vtbfh3unm@xxxxxxx>,
orthocross@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:


On Sun, 21 May 2006 12:52:24 -0400, ZnU <znu@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 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.


No matter WHAT you want to call Vista, it's HERE NOW.
Microsoft announced the PUBLIC availablility of Vista Beta 2 to the
general public this morning. (by the way, WHERE is the Beta for OS X
Leopard, huhhhh?) I guess Bill kind of scooped Mr. Jobs, didn't he?


Betas of Leopard have been seeded to members of the developer community. Apple doesn't usually do OS public Betas (OSX 10.0 public beta released in September of 2000 was an exception). That doesn't make either Apple or M$ superior in any way, just different.


Actually, Apple won't release Beta to the general public. M$ is just pushing an old marketing trick to create desire in the public eye and push it with a lot of hype. True Beta testing will always belong in the hands of professional developers, not neophytes.


--
Where are we going?
And why am I in this handbasket?
.

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: 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: Cannort get Radio Play Lists to Come up in WMP on any computer
    ... You are postulating that it isn't working very well because I've loaded junk and noyt a real 7057 or that at this current time with RC about to go to Beta Testers and probably already at TAP testers that 7057 is a waste of time. ... Do you think Mary Jo Foley, and Raphael from Within Windows, and Ed Bott and Paul Thurott are using jsunk 7057 that they've been blogging extensively on and screen shooting extensively because I don't. ... If the same thing happens on my Vista boots with that site in WMP 11, then I think that is very unfortunate, and it would have nothing to do with a sub beta quality build. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsmedia.player)
  • Re: VISTA is nice!
    ... have now represent Vista as it is going to be released, when Microsoft ... like previous versions of Windows. ... Microsoft announced the PUBLIC availablility of Vista Beta 2 to the ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • 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)