Looking Beyond Vista To Fiji and Vienna 600
Vinit wrote in with an article that describes Microsoft's strategy for future versions of Windows. It begins: "As we all know that Microsoft Vista was originally scheduled to be released in 2003, after two years of Windows XP, but it got delayed by over five years due to various reasons. Definitely, Vista is very very improved OS over the previous versions, but the delayed in the launch has cost Microsoft, billions of dollars. Now the question at the moment is, what exactly after Vista? Microsoft can't afford to wait another five years for an operating system. People are becoming more aware of the choices they have, and Linux is no longer a hobbyist OS, and that day isn't far away when it becomes simple enough to be a viable alternative to Windows. The competition is fierce. That is why, to stay at the top, Microsoft has planned a 'Vista R2', codenamed 'Fiji' which will be released some time in 2008. And after Fiji, there will be Windows 'Vienna'. Windows Fiji, will not be a totally different OS from Vista; but it will be an add-on. Whereas Vienna will be totally different from Vista."
New OS? I Think Not... (Score:5, Insightful)
How, we all ask, will it achieve such wonders?
The answer: "Windows Fiji will feature a more powerful sidebar, Monaco, a music authoring tool similar to Apple's Garageband, default playback of HD-DVD, more advanced Speech Recognition, and new themes, icons, wallpapers, games, and minor tweaks to almost everything."
Mmmhmm. I can't be the only one sitting here thinking 'what a load of bull'. I mean, really, if I wanted to get this apparently 'new generation' of computing, I'd go out and buy a
Why did this even get posted? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Fiji (Score:4, Insightful)
Microsoft: *kicks dead horse* (Score:2, Insightful)
On the plus side, at least Vista did ship with "improved shortcut support" [slashdot.org]. Gotta give Microsoft that.
It's Windows 98 SE all over again. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Five years? (Score:1, Insightful)
But the summary says:
If it was originally scheduled for release in 2003 then it has definitely not been delayed by over five years.
Fabricated news (Score:2, Insightful)
Why not?
> The competition is fierce.
What competition?
Re:Windows: Generations (Score:4, Insightful)
Place your bets! (Score:2, Insightful)
After the fiasco that was WinFS... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:New OS? I Think Not... (Score:1, Insightful)
More chrome, bigger tailfins and silicon Double Ds on the squid.
KFG
Re:Downward spiral to continue (Score:1, Insightful)
Yes, this easy to use OS called Windows Vista will create $$$ McJobs doing license auditing and applying updates. Meanwhile as Microsoft dependent "service-sector" economies support a monopoly, other countries are going to be busy generating wealth.
Re:See Apple for details (Score:2, Insightful)
All those upgrades and updates I've been downloading, and those two Service Packs, there... they've all been some kind of HORRIBLE HALUCCINATION?
Re:New Generation? I Think So (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, he's been crazy about speech recognition, and it makes a certain sort of sense. However, the idea that speech recognition alone will replace the keyboard interface shows a lack of imagination. Part of the reason we've stuck with keyboards for as long as we have is they're efficient. They're cheap, can operate easily in noisy areas, and allow for purposeful manipulation of text. If you're a good typist, keyboards can be faster and easier, too. And can you imagine trying to play Half-Life with a speech interface? Keyboards aren't going anywhere.
So what does that leave for speech? Maybe you can say, "launch microsoft word" and then, once it's launched, you start typing. Or you could say, "next song" and iTunes would switch to the next song instead of having to click on a button. Wowwie! And what happens when you're sitting at your computer, and you say something to your friend about "the next song in my playlist..." How does it know you don't want to go to the next song?
The problem is that having computers respond naturally to speech requires an awful lot of AI that we won't have anytime soon. Even if we do have that amount of AI in a PC someday, it's still not clear that a keyboard won't be preferable for many interactions. Of course, maybe once we have that level of AI, we won't be trying to type anything up anymore anyway. I'll say, "Computer, please write a letter to my mom." and the computer will just do it. "Computer, write me a slashdot post on this topic."
There are only two groups of people I'm aware of who think that it's a good idea speech recognition for the purpose of doing away with keyboards, and have really good text-to-speech to you so you won't have to read. Those two groups are "children" and "Bill Gates". The best major applications for these technologies are accessibility for the disabled and portable devices. That's pretty much it for the foreseeable future.
timed to fail methinks (Score:3, Insightful)
Somehow I don't see this as a viable plan.
Incremental service pack based improvements to Vista? Yes indeedy, but a completely new OS? What a stupid idea. They do, after all, sell to the Corporate world, and that does not like complete change in IT infrastructure every two years
and Linux is no longer a hobbyist OS.... (Score:1, Insightful)
I think that day is still very far away and that it is still a hobbyist OS WHEN IT COMES TO THE DESKTOP. For servers, it's fabulous but it just come close to Windows or OSX for desktop usability. If you're not a geek it's just not gonna be your desktop OS. And if you are a geek you probably have Windows/OSX installed someplace for your real desktop use.
Re:Five years? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Actual article (Score:4, Insightful)
While I have no other reason to question the integrity of the blogger, or the uhm... other blogger. My bullshit detector is hovering at about '9'. I am a cynical man, and this new business of establishing credibility through a network of blogs ("gross" syndication might be too generous) instead of a genuine original credible content rubs me the wrong way. There are a lot (most?) of blogs out there with no other purpose than to serve as an adsense speed bump between you and what you actually want to read. A great many of which don't even lead you there, but to a labyrinth of plagiarism and advertisements that if you are diligent enough to follow the long trail, end at a wholly non-credible source (if they source at all).
Yes, it is the second [slashdot.org] time I posted this, but since that thread was off topic and you are addressing the issue directly... forgive me.
Re:Why did this even get posted? (Score:3, Insightful)
Not at All Informative (Score:2, Insightful)
As bad as XP is I'm sticking with it. (Score:5, Insightful)
I have no interest in an operating system designed to protect content owners, protect microsoft with horrible activation functionality and little to no benefit to myself.
If I didn't require Windows for work I'd have nothing to do with it. I've been a long time Windows user since Windows 3.1 and each release seemed to be such a major improvement over the previous. Until Vista. Vista is not a users operating system. It's more of a prison.
Re:Geared for speach recognition (Score:5, Insightful)
Another name for SP1? (Score:3, Insightful)
This sounds more like Service Pack 1 of Vista. Of course, calling it that would be admitting that maybe they didn't get everything right the first time. I'm sure the very idea that Microsoft wouldn't get something right the first time comes as a major shock to Slashdot readers. :-p
Seriously, though, announcing a new "updated" version and your next-generation OS strikes me as a really good way to tank initial sales, particularly in the business arena. A good many CIO's have finally gotten it that it's usually a good idea to wait for SP-1 of any MS OS before rolling out, and "leaking" that an SP1 (by whatever name) is being released in two years pretty much seals it for them. Not that there was tremendous enthusiasm for migration in the first place. This is actually a good time for Linux to start trying to push itself onto the business desktop. You have MS not releasing an OS on time, let alone reliable hardware requirements until the last minute, there's no compelling application which can't be run on XP, and they're hinting at a new release in two years. All of which is not calculated to be endearing to someone who's in charge of a major rollout.
The "next generation OS" sounds like a bunch of wishful thinking, more than any actual code.
Re:Fiji (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I'll agree with everything else, BUT... (Score:4, Insightful)
Question is - why Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, even AIX can provide support for IPX and AppleTalk, and Microsoft new, ohh so super new OS can't?
Re:Fabricated news (Score:3, Insightful)
Why does Microsoft need to get consumers to upgrade to their newest OS when your buy it new when you buy a new PC? If they were worried about upgrades why does my new laptop give me a free upgrade to Vista? I would like to see how much money Microsoft made from upgrades to XP versus sales of XP from new PC's.
There are still companies and people running Windows 2000!
Once you stop supporting a release with patches etc a portion of those people will be forced to upgrade also.(I'm willing to bet a sizable portion), and even if they don' upgrade the OS on their existing hardware the will when they buy new hardware.
Re:Fiji (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Fabricated news (Score:3, Insightful)
What does Vista offer that XP does not? What does Vista offer that Mac OS X does not, now that you can legally and simply run your copy of XP on your Mac, and at the same time in as well?
Microsoft can't rely on forced upgrades if you can get newer computers that don't run Windows yet can maintain full compatibility... aka Wine, Parallels, and VMWare. Linux and OS X has progressed enough that Microsoft has to compete against them, even if it is only at the fringes.
Re:Windows: Generations (Score:2, Insightful)
But honestly, if the shell is something you complain about then you probably are better off with microsoft products. Small-minded software for small-minded users.
Hate to remind you of this, but more than half of the population is equal to or less than than average intelligence. A Linux geek telling them they are small-minded for using industry standards results in IT dept's getting underfunded, and surprise, surprise, Linux going nowhere. Try explaining to your boss, and his boss, and so on that they are small-minded. Be an idealist all you want. Until you get over that attitude, you and your non-Microsoft OS's will go nowhere. You can tell me otherwise upside-down, but you clearly have no idea how businesses work. Boss: What, that dip in IT is going to tell how I want to use my computer? Well I will just tell him where to place his next paycheck. We clearly have strong ideas on both issues.
Anyway, this should have been modded flamebait.
Re:See Apple for details (Score:1, Insightful)
Remember when you became obese, not because you had put on weight, but simply because they changed the definition?
KFG
Re:As you said (Score:2, Insightful)
I've owned every generation of PC (IBM compatible) that has ever been made. The reason being is that I could pop it open at any time to reconfigure or upgrade anything that I wanted, in any way that I wanted. Forcing specific hardware on people is a step backwards in my eyes.
In addition, I don't need or want eye-candy in my UI. I want an operating system to be technically advanced internally, not externally. You can have the prettiest OS in the world, but it's still crap if it doesn't efficiently handle the demands of your applications because it's hoarding up a large chunk of system resources on its own. When I want to see something "pretty", I'll load up a game or let my screensaver kick in.
think differently (Score:5, Insightful)
In a perfect world what you said makes some sense, but think on this: In the US the population is aging. Younger folks are a minority, and guess what? You'll get old, too. With aging comes afflictions like arthritis. Once you get it, even a twinge, you'll understand how incredibly $valuable$ and how incredibly useful a voice activated system could be. The first company to really nail it will be rich beyond the dreams of avarice as the expression goes.
MY GF has it in her hands, sometimes she just sits and cries because her hands are on fire,that's how she describes it, like being on fire, and then she can't do anything, nothing that requires any dexterity at all. She used to do fine painting, a lot of intense sewing, etc, stuff like that, but can't anymore. Typing is just out, and there are many many millions like her out there now. It's like having no fingers at all, but it hurts. She can only type very slowly and painfully and because of that hardly uses her computer anymore.
Now, how abvout blind folks? Think it might be a handy option for them as well? How about folks with anything like palsy? Heck, I am thinking for me, say I am out working on some vehicle and I want to look something up. Spend 5 minutes with the degreaser before I go touch the keyboard, or just yammer at it to get to where I want to get, and print it out? Useful there too.
Accurate info? (Score:4, Insightful)
Call my math fuzzy (it's happened before) but if it was originally scheduled to be released in 2003, and it's being released in 2007, then the delay was less than five years...
I've heard similar figures thrown out before, but where do these figures come from? How has the delay cost them? One could argue it has resulted in lost revenue, but XP was still selling well during that time and Vista will be making its sales now. Delayed revenue perhaps, but lost? Are they talking perhaps money spent on developers and such? That might be a point, but billions? What would be the reference for that?
Re:See Apple for details (Score:5, Insightful)
That's because as an OS matures, the amount of new features and functionality that is required or even thought up, becomes less. Bugs get ironed out until there are litteraly no more bugs. OS X has been maturing and developing in both features and fixes since its conception. Of course, the computer industry never stands still, so an OS will always have to accomidate for new hardware, standards, and security concerns.
But here's an example:
MacOS 10.2 needed a better way of navigating individual windows, so designers created Exposé for 10.3... problem solved. From then on, there's no reason to spend a lot of time and energy into window navigation features. Little by little, every need gets satisfied, and there's less and less big new features to create.
I'm not saying that OS X is perfect, or even close to perfect; I hope it continues to grow and evolve as long as it exists. For one thing, it bewilders me why the designers have never bothered to standardize the window design in the Finder... which is still a bit clumsy. For the most part, Apple is pretty solid on creating very concise UI standards that are based on fundimental principals of grapic design and interface philosophy... but the finder is one area that they've stumbled a bit, and even though its probably more functional than OS9s, it's not as air-tight in regards to keeping with a standard Look & Feel. The original intent of brushed metal, for one, was a standardized Look & Feel for applications that simulate physical hardware: calcultors, CD players, Movie players, etc, so why it shows up in file navigation systems and web browsers is beyond me.
So, OS X has some improvements to make, but from a functional standpoint, they're small knit-picks.
Re:See Apple for details (Score:3, Insightful)
Mac OS X 10.4 "Tiger" was released on April 29, 2005. That's over 18 months after Panther (October 24, 2003). Morover, Leopard isn't due out until next year - and Tiger is already 17 months old.
Looks like Apple is on an 18-24 month release schedule, not a 12 month release schedule.
That depends on what you mean by an update. Under your terminology, IE7 and Windows Media Player 11 both qualify as "updates", if not "upgrades". So does Media Center 2005, Tablet PC 2005, Microsoft Update, WGA (not that this adds good functionality, mind you), and a whole mess of other things.
And then there's XP x64, which isn't even really based on XP at all (it's a Windows Server derivative).
Has a major upgrade (e.g. Tiger-class) been released since 2001? I would argue that SP2 at least qualifies as such. SP2 introduced tons of new functionality, such as Bluetooth, USB 2.0, and WPA support, the Security Center, a new firewall, major changes in IE, and quite a bit more. Add in WMP9, WMP10, and WMP11, Internet Explorer 7, Windows Movie Maker 2, and all of the other component upgrades, and XP starts to look very different from what it did in 2001.
Is Vista late? Absolutely. It's at least two years, if not three years, behind the ball. Search looked good in Vista in 2003, but after Tiger, suddenly Microsoft is the copycat. And the Windows Sidebar / Gadgets? Apple beat Microsoft to that one as well. 3D accelerated UI? Apple has had it for four years now.
But, you know what? I don't really care that Vista is late. I have been using RC1 on my notebook, and it has been growing on me. It's not just "not bad", it's actually the best Windows release ever (by a good margin) and a welcome update from XP. Things that used to be a crapshoot in XP now just work. The search box on the Start menu is incredibly useful. I no longer find myself trying to look for a program; if I want Photoshop, I just type "photo" and press enter. Aero Glass may be a partial ripoff of Aqua, but, frankly, it looks better than Aqua and it runs great on my GeForce Go 6400.
XP has lasted 5 years, and it will probably continue to last much longer. Businesses don't mind that Microsoft hasn't been able to push out a release - it just meant more time for them to standardize and stabilize their platform without worrying about an upgrade.
XP was good enough for 650 million people. I bet that Vista will be too.