Windows Longhorn

[jason69uk]

Would just like to ask a few questions about this Windows longhorn

1. Has it been released yet and completed the test or something and is sold in shops to people now to buy or are they still making it?

2. Also what is Windows Codename Longhorn build 4074, what is this build like? Isit the full version in working order?

Thank you

[bazooka]

Would just like to ask a few questions about this Windows longhorn

1. Has it been released yet and completed the test or something and is sold in shops to people now to buy or are they still making it?

2. Also what is Windows Codename Longhorn build 4074, what is this build like? Isit the full version in working order?

Thank you

No.

1. Microsoft is shooting for a 2006 release date.
2. It is still in alpha status and you have to be a microsoft tester to get ahold of a licensed version.

[Cobra]

You'll need to hang on for another while before you get a shot, I'm afraid.

[reboot]

I'll tell you one thing. Alpha 4074 is more stable than Win98 ever was

[Guest]

Isnt it true they are not planning on a 64 bit version.

[bazooka]

I'll tell you one thing. Alpha 4074 is more stable than Win98 ever was

Of course

Microsoft is moving further away from the dos core.

[BJ_M]

Isnt it true they are not planning on a 64 bit version.

not true




Also last week, Microsoft announced that it will deliver versions of Windows XP and Windows Server 2003 for 64-Bit Extended Systems in the fourth quarter. Previously, the company had said only that it would ship the software in the second half of the year.

Microsoft also plans to release versions of Longhorn for Itanium and 64-bit extended systems as well as a 32-bit edition, according to Greg Sullivan, a lead product manager for Windows.

In a keynote address, Microsoft Chairman and Chief Software Architect Bill Gates said he expects that by the end of 2005, nearly all of the processors shipped by Advanced Micro Devices Inc. and the majority of the processors Intel Corp. ships will support 64-bit computing.

Gates predicted that the move from 32 to 64 bits will be smoother and faster than previous transitions, which he said were sometimes "messy."

Microsoft executives urged hardware makers to build drivers for the upcoming 64-bit releases of Windows, lest the adoption of 64-bit computing be held back by hardware incompatibilities.

"The app compatibility is good, the OS support is comprehensive. What's the one thing we need? Sixty-four-bit drivers," Allchin said.



http://www.tunexp.com/news/windows-story-362.html
http://www.eweek.com/category2/0,1738,1391959,00.asp

[Guest]

Maybe I was getting it confused with xp.They are not planning a 64 bit version,are t6hey?

[reboot]

There already is a 64 bit version of XP.
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/64bit/evaluation/upgrade.mspx

[Cobra]

That 64-bit version of XP doens't work very well. Try installing anything on it, very few things actually work.

[Garibaldi]

Does anyone have any longhorn screenshots?

[Scottie]

I had a copy that was good for like 30 days or 180 days I can't remember where I got it from,

Looked just like XP to me but I think think the bar at the bottom and menus war dark blue or black, and ran alot slower then XP.

I didn't like it at all the copy I had. had it on for like a day and then took it off, mind you it was awhile ago might have been 2 years maybe.

[BJ_M]

I had a copy that was good for like 30 days or 180 days I can't remember where I got it from,

Looked just like XP to me but I think think the bar at the bottom and menus war dark blue or black, and ran alot slower then XP.

I didn't like it at all the copy I had. had it on for like a day and then took it off, mind you it was awhile ago might have been 2 years maybe.

that would be called a warez copy

[BJ_M]

Does anyone have any longhorn screenshots?

http://www.activewin.com/screenshots/longhorn/

[ViRaL1]

I wonder how different WinFS will be.

[rallynavvie]

I had heard Longhorn was not going to be backwards-compatable with apps written for previous versions of Windows right on up to XP and 2003. Please tell me this isn't actually true.

[ViRaL1]

There's a reason to migrate. I'd seriously doubt it. On one hand it's nice to imagine a new OS from scratch that does away with all the legacy crap. That might ALMOST be worth it. But who wants to buy new versions of all their apps? Especially things like Lightwave, AutoCad or even Office. I can't see vendors offering a dirt cheap upgrade, so users will have to foot the bill. I'd imagine an option to choose if you want 'old school' or 'new school.' Then again, maybe by then the cost of computing will have dropped even more to a level where it is feasible to just buy new and start over, even though you have a decent system already.

[vitualis]

I somewhat agree. It will be a painful change, but it has happened on the Mac scene several times and they are better for it.

Legacy support should be dropped except in some sort of emulation mode.

Regards.

[DereX888]

Microsoft almost always lied in the past, pick a subject and check online archives & libraries what their PR had to say about it, then FF and see how did it really ended. Lies, lies, lies. Always. Thats why i think the only reason holdin Microsoft from dumping Longhorn on us - are the problems with 64-bit architecture, especially when they say something like "it is/will be/ easier than before" (lol). Ditto.
And the 64-bit CPU market for Microsoft looks rather bleak too. What we have now? AMD 64 only, Itanium is flawed and only God's help can prevent it from being abandoned by Intel, thus were back to AMD 64. Home computing isn't ripe for 64 bits yet, while existing 64 bit "professional computing" doesn't use AMD chips, nor Windows.
32 bit is here to stay, and rather for long Im affraid, unless some miracle can happen that'll push us all to 64 bit.

[reboot]

DereX888, well put!

[Faustus]

On the subject of XP 64 bit. The version made for Athlon 64s will be out, but that public preview is QUITE old. Did some reseach recently because I was wondering. Here is the lowdown.

The big MSDN subsribers get new builds, A friend is one but his subscription level is not high enough to get it. (sucks, but oh well neither of us own a 64bit cpu). Until its released the only thing out there is the Public Preview which basicly is half assed so that poeple can test their drivers and stuff. I think the actual 64bit stuff in it happens though WOW. I guess you either know what I'm talking about or dont. Either way thats why the 64bit Public Preview sucks.

Longhorn is still QUITE a ways off. I wouldn't worry over it for now, also WinFS has been scaled down project wise. They basicly admit they promised more then could be delivered. I think they have decided to not focus on it. Frankly after working with a few Databases the idea of my entire file system being one scares the crap out of me.

[vitualis]

And the 64-bit CPU market for Microsoft looks rather bleak too. What we have now? AMD 64 only...

That is wrong. The 64 bit extensions used by AMD in their Athlon 64 CPUs will be (and are) also in the newest P4 Prescott CPUs. Sometime in early 2005, all new Intel CPUs will probably sport 64 bit instruction support.

There will be a problematic transition from 32-bit to 64-bit instructions though in terms of software as well as drivers.

Regards.

[mpack]

There will be a problematic transition from 32-bit to 64-bit instructions though in terms of software as well as drivers.

Then why do it? What is the benefit?

To clarify my point, I'm a programmer, and I can all too clearly remember butting my head up against the 64k data structure size limit in 16bit Windows (and in DOS before it). Especially for applications involving bitmaps or video. So, when 32bit Windows came along I was glad to jump ship right away.

... But I've never had a data structure for which the 32bit 4GB RAM limit was an issue, not by several orders of magnitude!

Windows (NT/XP) already has 64bit addressing for files and disk drives, and of course I absolutely accept that SIMD instructions (MMX, SSE etc) need large registers for vector operations. I also concede that 64bit integers (or larger) may occasionally be useful in their own right.

But there is a big difference between making 64bit operations available in a 32bit OS, and making the whole OS be optimized for 64bit operation.

In other words, what I can't see is the benefit of making a 64bit integer the native word length for the whole of Windows... a lot of pain for a pretty obscure benefit. Is that actually the intention?

[rallynavvie]

Itaniums are not consumer 64-bit processors by any means. There have been 64-bit procs on the market for a while now, just nothing that our normal OS options run on. Itaniums are supposed to see more Windows support in the future, but they'll still be limited to specific applications like they are now (medical equipment and the like). Intel does already have 64-bit extensions on their consumer chips. EMT64 was introduced last June when the Nocona-core Xeons were released (the 800 FSB Xeons). This will be the tech migrated to P4s sometime this year to compete with the A64s, and depending on how will it's implemented probably be on par with the FX chips. Opterons still have a bit of an edge in their architecture, especially for server applications. So 64-bit support in a Windows OS will certainly want to be mainstream by perhaps next year this time, two years at the latest. But we can only speculate, and I do hope they take their time with it so we don't get some half-assed implementation on the first release. I like the idea of open beta on the current XP 64-bit build. Hopefully if they do their data collection properly they can get a lot of good feedback from it.

What we need is more software companies stepping up to bat and promising 64-bit optimized applications for multimedia, office, and gaming. I think FarCry was working on a 64-bit enhanced version of that game, was it ever released? I was excited to see that at least.

I guess we could compare this change to Mac with OSX. It was able to run older apps in classic mode but classic mode wasn't much fun. However a lot of companies got on ship fast with creating OSX versions of their programs. We can only hope the millions of Windows software companies will do the same.

[ViRaL1]

I guess we could compare this change to Mac with OSX. It was able to run older apps in classic mode but classic mode wasn't much fun. However a lot of companies got on ship fast with creating OSX versions of their programs. We can only hope the millions of Windows software companies will do the same.

One of the advantages of Apples more closed system. I know I've complained about it in the past and it does have many disadvantages as well. As far as 64-Bit processors and Window$, I was pretty disappointed when M$ dropped support for the Alpha. It could have been beautiful.

[DereX888]

And the 64-bit CPU market for Microsoft looks rather bleak too. What we have now? AMD 64 only...

That is wrong. The 64 bit extensions used by AMD in their Athlon 64 CPUs will be (and are) also in the newest P4 Prescott CPUs. Sometime in early 2005, all new Intel CPUs will probably sport 64 bit instruction support.

Vitualis, heh... I said what is now, and youre talking what will be, its a big difference! Why do you say Im wrong?!
Well, guess what - Im not wrong. You are!
Youre taking future predictions as a facts
When it is on the market - then you could say "Derex, youre wrong". But it is not on the market, "it wil be"... and Im not discussing what future will bring with no one

BTW: AFAIR Prescott cores supposed to have 64 support since begining...

EDIT: and yes, i know, we will end up with 64 bit architectures sooner or later

[mrtristan]

Here's my take on it. 64bit chips are being pushed on the consumer market to keep it stirring. While we might not need 64bit computing in most desktops, people like to have the latest and greatest. Speed improvements in terms of clock frequency have slowed down. I'm not saying that there's no room for improvement, but I doubt we'll see any significant jumps in speed until one of two things happens.

1. The day comes when we actually need a processor running at 5Ghz.

2. Someone developes new technology to facilitate faster clock speeds for cheap.

To get back on track, in practical terms, the 32bit cpu has a lot more life, but status quo doesn't generate the computer industry money in the consumer market. Release a 64bit cpu and tell people that they need it. I bet thousands of people would buy one, just because the Dell guy tells them to, on a tv commercial.

Although I don't think they have no plan, I think part of the plan for the 64bit architechture is to release it and see what happens. AMD, Intel, and Microsoft are forcing the market to change and banking on hardware and software developers to follow their lead.

Basically, I'm saying that it's all marketing.

[mpack]

AMD, Intel, and Microsoft are forcing the market to change and banking on hardware and software developers to follow their lead.

You could be right, but I have my doubts... You may not be giving the great buying public enough credit. This changeover will be very painful, as everyone from software developers, businesses and home users will learn that they have to buy new software to take advantage of their new OS, and some of these are going to have difficulty getting drivers for their existing hardware, so they may have to buy new hardware too (certainly so if they don't currently have a 64bit CPU in their PC).

In short they will see the prospect of a big cash outlay on this, so I can't see how they can avoid the question - why? Unless word of mouth tells them that something really fantastic happens if they make this leap then IMHO its possible that they'll simply ignore it. After all, precisely that has already happened with some Windows versions in the past.

Someone earlier said that developers need to get on board with new apps and drivers... that is naive IMHO. Developers are just like everyone else: before devoting a lot of time and resources they need to be convinced of the benefit to them and their users, and in addition they need to believe there'll be a market for their work.

[Cobra]

Will Windows Longhorn be released in 32- and 64-bit flavours at the same time? I hope applications that are 32-bit only will run perfectly on it - not like the current Windows XP 64-bit Edition Preview....

[rallynavvie]

If what I heard is right it won't matter if it's 32- or 64-bit native, every app made for previous Windows versions will need to be remade to run on Longhorn. What I really don't like about that, if it is indeed true, is that all these hardworking folks that release freeware that many of us love to use may not be able to use their existing code and have to start over from scratch to make a Longhorn version. Since they aren't being paid to do so I can see a lot of them getting frustrated and just not attempting to rewrite their programs.

Aren't the Apple folks lucky their freeware developers and general users are mostly fanatics