| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Microsoft: Longhorn goes to pieces | |
|
||
| Time: 14:37 EST/19:37 GMT | News Source: ZDNet | Posted By: Brian Kvalheim | ||
|
Microsoft is designing its ever-present Windows operating system to streamline and lower the cost of building and distributing the software. The next major client version of Windows, code-named Longhorn, will be designed as a series of components that Microsoft can easily combine and tailor for different markets and computing hardware, according to company executives. That's a break from the company's long-held strategy of building several similar, yet distinct, operating systems positioned for specific purposes and geographic areas. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 233 Last | Next |
The time now is
7:36:36 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 5/27/2003 5:40:55 PM |
| No, that part is still "IMPOSSIBLE", Montana. |
| #2 By 37 (24.196.70.204) at 5/27/2003 6:11:53 PM |
| Care to elaborate Soda JERK? Or are you just spreading more FUD? |
| #3 By 7390 (63.211.44.114) at 5/27/2003 6:19:52 PM |
| I am guessing that he is spreading FUD as usual. |
| #4 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 5/27/2003 6:46:23 PM |
|
I'm just repeating MS's federal testimony.
Boy, you boys are whiny, intolerant little spoilsports. I thought montana's post was a joke, and I posted a joke in turn. I thought he was setting that one up. A LA "features" which have gotten MS in trouble CANNOT be componentized, it's impossible. How can it be FUD anyway, boys? When it is exactly what MS wants you to believe? I wish the truth was different, and do agree: it's a bunch of FUD! (Just not against MS, against others.) This post was edited by sodajerk on Tuesday, May 27, 2003 at 18:48. |
| #5 By 37 (24.196.70.204) at 5/27/2003 7:03:36 PM |
| Nice spin SodaJerk. |
| #6 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 5/27/2003 7:16:14 PM |
|
Brian, you are simple acting retarded as far as I can tell. MS said that it is IMPOSSIBLE to componentize windows such that what Montana mentions is in fact not facilitated by this change.
He was making a joke--knowing that this wasn't in fact the case, but the joke was directed at the complaining competition anyway. My joke contains both the TRUTH and a bit of reparte with Montana. So what the FCK do you mean by spin? Are you telling me that MS doesn't think Windows can't be componentized? Or that this new componentization does IN FACT faciliatate the removal of IE, WMP, Address Book, DRM, etc...? Spin what, Brian? Please explain your retarded post, please. |
| #7 By 61 (131.247.115.64) at 5/27/2003 7:40:47 PM |
|
They said it would be impossible to take it out because too many applications rely on it, even the Explorer shell relies too much on IE to take it out. They did not say it would be physically impossible to remove it due to complexity or the like.
Quit spreading FUD. |
| #8 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 5/27/2003 7:58:35 PM |
|
Hippie, forget wasting your breath on these boys--they don't understand jokes.
(By the way, that's the way I wanted to post it in the first place. But being a bit familiar with the intellects here, I knew it was too risky to be making TWO references at ONCE. Oh my.) CPU, when did I say what MS said there reason was? Oh, I didn't. I just said they said it was impossible--which they did say. (But I'm spinning again.) And, seriously, don't you get jokes? This post was edited by sodajerk on Tuesday, May 27, 2003 at 20:05. |
| #9 By 2459 (69.22.78.22) at 5/27/2003 8:09:41 PM |
|
AFAIK, this changes nothing RE: removal of "Internet Explorer" from Windows. This is to make it easier for OEMs (mostly) to configure systems for different versions of Windows. The base install will likely include the net-centric rendering components because the GUI and applications will be built around XML/HTML. These are still required components for that as well as legacy support. What this does is make it easier to maintain and mix/match market-specific SKUs such as MCE and TabletPC Editions. This won't be like embedded versions of Windows where you can remove anything to the point of incompatability, and doesn't contradict MS' testimony.
BTW, the Multi-Lingual User Interface (MUI) isn't a new feature of Longhorn, as it exists today in current Windows versions. |
| #10 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 5/27/2003 8:18:53 PM |
|
"AFAIK, this changes nothing RE: removal of "Internet Explorer" from Windows."
No?!!! You're freakin' kiddin' me? Wew had no idea! As Linuxhippie/Ralph has already explained and we should all know: "That's unpossible." (enforcer, maybe I should point out that I have actually been consistent with MS's position in my postings and haven't claimed it was inconsistent. As I pointed out--despite claims of FUD--I was more truthful and consistent with MS's own views than montana... But I got the softie FUD patrol prowling up my ass for som reason.) |
| #11 By 2459 (69.22.78.22) at 5/27/2003 8:31:37 PM |
| I didn't accuse you of FUD. I'm just stating the facts as I know them. I think people accused you of spreading FUD because it appeared that you were being sarcastic by placing quotes around the word, impossible, and implying that it really wasn't impossible under the current circumstances. I didn't really see this as significant enough to acccuse you of FUD just yet. I think it gets to be a knee-jerk reaction sometimes. I would have waited for further clarification. I posted my response to try to clear any apparent confusion about the topic and its affects on Windows. |
| #12 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 5/27/2003 8:50:07 PM |
|
"I think people accused you of spreading FUD because it appeared that you were being sarcastic by placing quotes around the word, impossible, and implying that it really wasn't impossible under the current circumstances."
No, I was using quotation marks as... well, I'll be... as quotation marks. Montana said it was now possible (as a joke--which I got). I made a joke by quoting MS's own position. And, I wasn't suggesting you were accusing me either--I was directing my post to you, but my intention was to indirectly address the couple of d!psh!ts who have no sense of humor and no freakin' clue, to let them understand that they should get off my ass. So, yeah! Now everything is cleared up! This post was edited by sodajerk on Tuesday, May 27, 2003 at 20:51. |
| #13 By 2459 (69.22.78.22) at 5/27/2003 8:54:59 PM |
|
#15, No, just featureset additions on top of one base. The same as now, only easier for OEMs to configure systems as needed. Instead of loading a full Windows install of a certain SKU on to the harddrive at the time of receiving an order, an OEM, like Dell for example, can preload their drives with the platform base, then upon receiving an order, install the added components that make up a certain SKU. This saves time and makes configurations like a Media Center TabletPC easier. This post was edited by n4cer on Tuesday, May 27, 2003 at 20:55. |
| #14 By 37 (24.196.70.204) at 5/27/2003 9:21:50 PM |
| SodaJerk, you REALLY don't have a clue, do you? |
| #15 By 1845 (12.209.152.69) at 5/27/2003 11:37:56 PM |
|
No, Brian, Mr. MVP, sounds like you are liabling Mr. Jerk.
I support Jim Alchin's statements in the anti-trust case, but even I am wise enough to understand why Mr. Jerk was saying. A person obviousaly as wise as you, you are a MS MVP afterall, should have caught on much more quickly than one as mortal as myself. Let me spell it out to you. Presupposing Mr. Grizzly spoke literally, we can assume he was referring to such whining money-hungry sharks that the US Department of Justice, 19 states, Oracle, Sun Microsoftsystems, and AOL TimeWarner employ. Those parties posited that Microsoft welded certain components, namely Internet Explorer, into Windows. Taken literally, Mr. Grizzly's statment refers to Internet Explorer and other previously non removable components of Windows. Now that we correctly understand the state of the thread when Mr. Jerk first posted his comment, let's examine his statement. sodajerk: No, that part is still "IMPOSSIBLE", Montana. Taken literally, Mr. Jerk states that it is impossible to remove components from Windows like Internet Explorer. The fact that he added quotation marks around the word impossible might either indicate that he was directly quoting Mr. Alchin or that he was mocking Mr. Alchin. Either way, I see no FUD. So, what does Mr. Jerk believe at this point? Perhaps he understands the "Longhorn goes to pieces" to mean that all Windows components will be independent and fully removable including Internet Explorer. In this senario, it seems likely that he was simply mocking Mr. Alchin. Clearly if it is possible to remove Internet Explorer now, it was also possible two years ago when Alchin testified it was not. No FUD yet. Perhaps Mr. Jerk correctly understand that the pieces of Longhorn don't refer to Internet Explorer or similar components. They refer to the addon funtionalities to the base operating system for a Pro edition, a Tablet edition, a Media Center edition, and so on. If Mr. Jerk understood this, then his post should be understood on two levels - one literal, one subtle. Literally, it will still be impossible to remove Internet Explorer from Longhorn. Subtly, Mr. Jerk mocks Microsoft because he still believes that Internet Explorer can be removed from Windows but Microsoft simply refuses to make it so. Once again, I still see no FUD. Perhaps this site with be worth visiting more often if people like you, Mr. MVP, avoided personal attacks on other posters (I'm really one to talk, aren't I?) and took a bit more time to understand their posts. Whatever power of analysis and critical thinking earned you MVP status, you should use it here more often, it might increase the respect other users on this forum have for your opinion. This post was edited by BobSmith on Tuesday, May 27, 2003 at 23:38. |
| #16 By 37 (66.82.20.150) at 5/28/2003 11:30:10 AM |
|
BobSmith,
Actually, no I am not liabling SodaJerk. As I quote him "No, that part is still "IMPOSSIBLE"", which was directed to Montana. Montana stated "Well, this will make it easier to pull out any pieces that victimized by whiney-arse lawsuits brought about by money-hungy sharks." SodaJerk says that it's "impossible", and is "apparently" quoting a statement or comment made by Microsoft previously. SodaJerks *obvious* intentions were to distort facts and spread FUD. Why do I say that? Because the litigations with Microsoft stated that the current versions of Windows made it "IMPOSSIBLE", but with the quoted exception, Windows XP Embedded. Now this article is talking about Windows LONGHORN, not Windows 3.1, 95, 98, ME, NT4, 2000 or XP. Longhorn is a new operating system, with a new interface and a new file system. *Anything* is *POSSIBLE with Longhorn, as for one, it's in it's Alpha stages, and NOBODY, including SodaJerk knows the final outcome, nor does he/she know whether or not it will be POSSIBLE OR IMPOSSIBLE to component the OS to make it easier to pull out any pieces that victimized by whiney-arse lawsuits brought about by money-hungy sharks. Whether or not SodaJerk understands the level of components in Longhorn is irrelevant. The majority of the article itself stems from the Internationalization of the components, offering NO specifics on any other components that might be interchangeable or removeable. If you missed Montana's tongue and cheek comment (which was easily noticed), then you missed the whole premise of the comments, as did SodaJerk. I have followed SodaJerks comments, and he is very consistent with his intentions, so his drivel is easy to pick apart. As for my MVP status, that is none of your concern. I choose to use it in my signature, and that is the extent of it. There are many people here that highly regard my opinions, well before you even started visiting here. This post was edited by Brian_MS_MVP on Wednesday, May 28, 2003 at 11:32. |
| #17 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 5/28/2003 1:52:44 PM |
|
Brian, why won't you give up. Montana says he was being tongue in cheek. I understood that. I don't know how you presume I didn't for the reason that I also made a joke? Whatever. I was being tongue in cheek as well. I did not state anything incorrect. I was making a joke--something that apparently Montana, hippie, myself, and maybe some bystanders can appreciate. (I appreciate the support Bob, but you seem to be taking everything too seriously too.)
Where and what is the FUD I am suggesting? The fact that people have interpreted it so many ways-- doesn't that trigger in your mind the possibility that I was making an OPEN reference that could lead some to laugh for whatever personal interpretation they make of it? Why can Montana make a joke and I cannot? Why can someone else's comments have possible interpretations but mine only can have one, not the one I intended but the one you prescribe for me? And I love your defense. You actually think that I am suggesting certain things are "IMPOSSIBLE" in Longhorn? That I am suggesting MS is facing finite limitations in programming? Are you retarded? The crazy thing is: you actually believe that there were "impossibilities" in prior versions of Windows. If I am suggesting anything besides a quote by using quotation marks, it's that nothing is ever impossible in any programming--whether its Windows 3.0 or Windows 2010. Am I making a comment on feasibility (in terms of support or economics)? No. Got it? "I have followed SodaJerks comments, and he is very consistent with his intentions, so his drivel is easy to pick apart." And you hold me to a different standard and jump on me for having a sense of humor which makes you look retarded, uptight, and arrogant. "As for my MVP status, that is none of your concern. I choose to use it in my signature, and that is the extent of it. There are many people here that highly regard my opinions, well before you even started visiting here." As I said, you look arrogant. It's the internet, man, no one regards anyone's opinion all that highly. (This statement will provoke retarded responses as well--it's an exaggeration: it's meant as humor and insult (directed at anyone who regards their own opinions so highly that they think they are providing some necessary service). (I guess I will have to provide interpretations of every comment I make in parentheses.)) By the way, you say it's just your sig and that's that. We (some of us, but definitely me) say it makes you look like an uptight d!psh!t loser, and that's that. If you want to be perceived that way, that's your prerogative. But it's also our prerogative to have that perception and let you know it. Ignore that perception or take it to heart, we (or rather I should say: I) don't care. But our lack of caring doesn't change the perception either. Particularly with your interpretation of Longhorn as a "new operating system." And guess what, Bri, you aren't much of an MVP if you think Longhorn is all that different from XP. The kernel isn't much different, the filesystem is the same with a database indexing service, and the UI has virtually no effect on most of the compontentization that we could be referring to. To think that ANYTHING is possible in LH but not in other versions is retarded. Everything is always possible based on your silly interpretation (which I agree with by the way). And we do know what componentization this involves--it DOES NOT involve the elemets like IE and media apps and it does largely concern itself with internalization and current Windows classifications (media PC, tablet PC, etc...). This is a simple fact for an MVP to grasp. Sorry if mine, Montana's, hippies, and other comments PRESUMED that everyone understood what was involved here. |
| #18 By 37 (66.82.20.150) at 5/28/2003 2:13:21 PM |
|
SodaJerk,
It's rather unfortunate that you have absolutely NO idea what you are talking about. Further evidenced by this most recent post of yours, your drivel is just that, drivel. Having been awarded the MVP Status for my support in the Microsoft Publisher newsgroups is something that I am proud of. Not to mention the other 1000+ MVP's who wear their signature where ever they can. It's an award that I am proud of, my family is proud of, as well as millions of other internet users respect (not only in the Publisher PUBLIC newsgroups and communities. No different than a Dr. who is proud of their title and continue to boast such title when making a reservation at a hotel for example). Not only that, but I can name many more names than the ones you mentioned (LINUXhippie, SodaJERK are your only 2 that seem to support your drivel) that support my ideas, opinions and comments. Dare I take you to that current thread? Let me know if you would like me to do so. I will post the thread here for your embarassement. I find it also rewarding that the ActiveWin staff made me a part of their staff. Their decision was based on my MVP status, my participation at this site for the entirety of it's existence, and the information and opinions that I provide here in the comments area. If you don't like it, just ignore me ;-) |
| #19 By 61 (24.92.223.112) at 5/28/2003 2:25:49 PM |
|
Could we PLEASE end the petty personal disputes?
The past week or two has been nothing but, and I'm getting tired of it, as I'm sure many others are as well. Get over yourselves and stay on topic. |
| #20 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 5/28/2003 2:28:55 PM |
|
Ha, ha, ha!
As I said, I don't give a sh!t about approval, recognition, providing proof that people like me, etc... In fact, I don't believe I've said any of these other people agree with me. Simply that I presumed and can detect a level of comprehension, competency and sense of humor. Something I can't presume when talking to you. |
| #21 By 37 (66.82.20.150) at 5/28/2003 2:42:35 PM |
| LOL@SodaJerk. |
| #22 By 37 (66.82.20.150) at 5/28/2003 2:43:42 PM |
| CPU, I agree it's petty. I am just responding to SodaJerk, who continues to follow behind me. I suppose I could stop feeding the troll and just ignore him. ;-) |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 233 Last | Next |
The time now is
7:36:36 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
