| 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 |
 |
Windows Vista Beta 2 Milestone Build 5381 Released | |
|
||
| Time: 18:53 EST/23:53 GMT | News Source: *Linked Within Post* | Posted By: Brian Kvalheim | ||
|
Shockingly, Windows Vista Beta 2 has already went into escrow as build 5381 and will be recompiled and rebuilt as build 5381 until it is ready to be released later on this month at the annual 2006 WinHEC. The build is currently in QFE Testing as 5381.3. Due to Beta 2 entering escrow last week, the RC1 branch was created and began with build 5420.0 (winmain.060427-1900) to allow the Vista Labs to continue pressing on with their work. With that being said, the MSDN UACBlog recently posted a shot of build 5421.0 (winmain.060428-1900) publically along with another shot of build 5372.0 (winmain.060418-1800).Now, on to whats important here. As much as I hate to be the bearer of bad news, it appears that today I will bring somewhat bad news to the community. Desktop Aurora, Vector Glass and several other small UI bits are still not yet there as of 5381.3. Does this mean they won't be in Beta 2? Nothing is ever 100% certain with Microsoft, but sources of mine tend to believe nothing else is coming in 5381. Does this mean they are definitely not coming in the Beta 2 Milestone? No, because it's possible they could drop the bits in two recompiles and rebuilds before they declare it Beta 2. However, I will say that many sources of mine tell me this is quite unlikely at this point. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 165 Last | Next |
The time now is
3:01:37 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 3653 (68.52.143.149) at 5/5/2006 9:35:03 PM |
|
while vista becomes trim and fit... linux is suffering from a spare tire around the gut...
http://news.com.com/2100-7344_3-6069363.html?part=rss&tag=6069363&subj=news and you just gotta LOL at the "sophisticated" process of development... "Linus is fairly random at patches at the best of times. Generally, Linus will cc: it to me because he knows I'll pick it up" |
| #2 By 12071 (203.206.253.53) at 5/6/2006 3:25:53 AM |
|
There's no need to continually be pissed that everyone but Microsoft releases upgrades and new versions in a timely manner so that their customers aren't left wondering when/if a new version is coming. I'm suprised you didn't have a stab at Apple too!
As for process of development... you need to look no further than Vista. Originally mentioned in July 2001 to be shipped in 2003 (between Windows XP and "Blackcomb"). They then decided to push several of "Blackcomb's" features into it pushing the dates further and further into the future eventually announcing in August 2004 that they were going to start "fresh" with the Windows Server 2003 source code (the .net 2.0 code that they wrote to replace the old systems was obviously a HUGE success!), re-incorporating only the features that would be intended for an actual operating system release and dropping WinFS etc. And here you are in almost mid-2006 still waiting for a stable release with the current final estimation date of anywhere between end of 2006 and mid 2007. If that's the process of development in a company as large as Microsoft, with as stringent processes (testing, QA etc.) as Microsoft and with as many employees and budget as Microsoft... then I cannot see how you can possibly complain about anyone else's process and not come off sounding like a hypocrite! Unless of course, as I stated above, you're simply pissed at the fact that you've been waiting for Vista since 2001 and 5 years on you're still no closer to having the final version in your hands. |
| #3 By 3 (62.253.128.12) at 5/6/2006 5:04:29 AM |
| #2, get used to it, they only come out and post about Apple, Linux and anything else that isn't Windows when a delay, bug, security risk comes about to try and make themselves feel better. Never know, one day they may comment on the actual story. |
| #4 By 2459 (24.175.137.39) at 5/6/2006 9:13:20 AM |
|
...announcing in August 2004 that they were going to start "fresh" with the Windows Server 2003 source code (the .net 2.0 code that they wrote to replace the old systems was obviously a HUGE success!), re-incorporating only the features that would be intended for an actual operating system release and dropping WinFS etc.
The .NET 2.0 code they wrote is still there. WinFX (WPF - pka Avalon, WCF - pka Indigo, Workflow Foundation) is still managed code, as is Windows PowerShell - pka MSH which is shipping prior to Vista, and WinFS, which is currently in beta. MMC is also managed in Vista.. Anybody developing a Vista application (i.e., one that takes advantage of WinFX) is directly dependent on .NET 2.0. This post was edited by n4cer on Saturday, May 06, 2006 at 09:18. |
| #5 By 32132 (64.180.219.241) at 5/6/2006 10:03:31 AM |
|
#2 As we start to roll out Windows Server 2003 R2 Enterprise Edition in some sites to take advantage of the new DFS and replication features, and we are getting ready to roll out x64 Terminal Servers, I wonder why I'm not "pissed" about not having a new version of Windows.
I'm glad Microsoft started the Vista process all over again once the Windows 2003 SP1 codebase was finished. It was a smart move. If Longhorn takes a little while longer to show up, I'm ok with that. I'll take solace in the fact that Microsoft extended the support phase for XP Pro so that we'll get 10 years out of it we want to. What a bargain compared to Apple (who charges you 129$ every 11 - 18 months) or Linux (who dumps suppoert for old versions after 12 months, or charges you an annual fee that is outrageous - 2500$. This post was edited by NotParker on Saturday, May 06, 2006 at 10:04. |
| #6 By 3 (62.253.128.12) at 5/6/2006 1:59:18 PM |
| #5 - most apple OS users are happy to have a newer updated operating system every 1.5 years though, they don't get delayed liked Vista does, they don't give out false aims, don't lose features that they knew would never make the final build, I could go on ;o) |
| #7 By 46122 (68.237.225.212) at 5/6/2006 2:47:30 PM |
| #6 You do realize that MSFT has to make sure hundred of thousands of programs and drivers that have to work, multiple OEMS they have to work with. Apple only has to deal with themselves as an OEM, only a few drivers, and not that many customers (compaired to Windows). So yes apple can get for updates out since they don't have to test as much. |
| #8 By 3 (62.253.128.12) at 5/6/2006 3:28:55 PM |
|
yeah of course i do, but just because they release regular updates to an OS that do actually add new features (though a few will come here and say they don't without knowing much about them) doesn't mean that most bias microsoft lovers won't lambast them for doing so, Apple do it not only because they can with more ease, but also because of better management behind the scenes than Vista has had.
I agree with you 100% though - but while you are right in what you say, you'll see a load of comments on the way now you've made that statement saying that the releases Apple come up with are just bug fixes, but regular real unbias computer users know different. The reality is that Vista has had a very difficult birth that is far from being over. They made a big mistake adding new sets of developer technologies into vista, then having to backtrack and release them for versions of XP too. No lessons were learnt from the mistakes of tying the entire Visual Studio 2005 suite and the bad release of SQL Server 2005. Apple released upgrades to its OS every year for the past five years, smaller bits, more realistic deliverables and a set of customers who are happier for it. Maybe people shouldn't be so quick to jump at other OS's who have a better planning, maybe they should actually see what goes on behind the scenes and comment on why Vista is 2 years behind the original time frame already. Don't get me wrong, I'm looking forward to Vista as much as anyone, I'm testing it and can see the improvements coming (and the mass of problems it still has), but once again I'm not blind or stupid enough to criticise other companies for doing more realistic release dates and coming out with regular releases. I personally would have been pleased with another less feature packed release of Windows 2 years ago, but that hasn't happened. This post was edited by Byron_Hinson[AW] on Saturday, May 06, 2006 at 16:19. |
| #9 By 3746 (71.19.43.237) at 5/6/2006 6:08:41 PM |
|
os x was late and had dropped features that they said were going to be in it by the final version ( sound familiar?). OS X 10 was basically beta when it shipped and buggy. They supplied the upgrade 10.1 for free to anyone who had purcased 10 in response to this. Many who were using the early versions will say that it wasn't until 10.2 or 10.3 that they finally got a version of OS X that was what it should have been with 10.0. This is while charging people for the upgrades and making them paying beta testers.
Point is lots of major software developments run into problems. But to say that Apple is immune from these things or the process was better then Vista is false. I agree that Vista's development has been a complete mess. Lets hope when it is finally released the wait is justified. |
| #10 By 3 (62.253.128.12) at 5/6/2006 6:22:30 PM |
| Don't disagree with you about OS 10.0 - it was poor compared to the rest, but then it was a massive step up in technology terms from OS 9, where as Vista isn't as big a step up, once you strip away the unfancy and poor looking (currently) new UI in Vista, its still not the major step we hoped from XP. |
| #11 By 2459 (24.175.137.39) at 5/6/2006 7:52:33 PM |
|
All new presentation layer, new networking stack, new audio stack, new print path, new workflow engine, new managed code API replacement for Win32/64, kernel enhancements, transactional file system, etc., isn't a major step beyond XP?
Sorry, but that's one of the more ignorant statements I've seen. They've rewritten a major portion of the OS, leaving the Win32/64 APIs for compatibility. This post was edited by n4cer on Saturday, May 06, 2006 at 19:53. |
| #12 By 3746 (71.19.43.237) at 5/6/2006 8:30:18 PM |
|
#11
Also, don't leave out that those things that have been dropped (WinFS for example) will be added free of charge once they are ready. You won't have to drop 129.00 on an upgrade like OS X in order to get what should have been in the OS to begin with. #10 Sure it was a big change but you have to admit that Vista is a huge undertaking even for a company with the resources of MS. I am not making excused for them at all - the development has been a mess. But OS X was in development for as long or longer (work started in 1996 and was released in 2001) and this was when they only had to make it work on the hardware that they built. MS install base is huge and the varied harware makes the task completely different. It is funny when people all see the new fancy interface (which i would turn off anyways). I think there is a lot more there, like n4cer described, then just that. |
| #13 By 3653 (68.52.143.149) at 5/6/2006 11:43:56 PM |
| This comment has been removed due to a violation of the Active Network Terms of Use. |
| #14 By 3 (62.253.128.12) at 5/7/2006 4:58:25 AM |
|
#11 - I'm only winding you guys up as its so easy to do on the boards as you always try to do to anyone who disagrees with you. Yes Vista is a big step up from Win Xp, still not as major as I personally hoped but thats just me. Just take some chill pills when people have different opinions to you guys.
#12 - No doubt OS X was in developement for a lot longer, a lot less people working on it too compared to Vista. Try and step back a bit and see how far advanced OS X was though 5 years ago technically, yes it had a shed load of bugs (doesn't now apart from the security risks that hit it, that Parker will tell you only effect Apple users now ignoring Windows security risks) but it was a massive step forward. Again my view is of disappointment right now in terms of the new UI in vista anyway, we were shown so much of what it was "Going" to be like in presentations, users here said how much of a step ahead compared to how OS X looked (5 years ago), sadly it doesn't look that good at the moment, I really hope they improve it though. Really hoping they do something to improve Flip 3D too its a waste of development time right now as it doesn't speed things up, it justs adds a fancy 3D style to it...oh wait, Parker will respond with saying isn't that all OS X does...no Expose was a fantastic feature that sped up general tasks, Flip 3d slows you down, thankfully you can go back to the old ALT-Tab mode at the moment. Believe me I love Windows as much as any of you, its my main OS, but you guys do get tinted glasses when anyone ever comes along and says something against it and there is a lot to say against it at the moment. If things were the other way around I can picture you guys saying how pleased you were that MS released yearly payable updates. #13 - I'm not sure why you would be paying out over $2000 for each new point release of OS X, I'm still on my original iMac 17" from 4 years ago gone from OS X 10.2, 10.3 and now 10.4. No new hardware added apart from Memory. This post was edited by Byron_Hinson[AW] on Sunday, May 07, 2006 at 05:01. |
| #15 By 2459 (24.175.137.39) at 5/7/2006 8:34:08 AM |
|
#11 - I'm only winding you guys up as its so easy to do on the boards as you always try to do to anyone who disagrees with you. Yes Vista is a big step up from Win Xp, still not as major as I personally hoped but thats just me. Just take some chill pills when people have different opinions to you guys.
I'm not wound up at all. However, when people make clearly false or misleading statements, I'm going to respond most of the time just so people that aren't familliar with or don't bother to research this stuff don't get the wrong idea. There's enough bad information put out about Vista, MS in general, and to some degree, other platforms, by the tech "press" that quickly gets repeated as fact without adding more just to wind people up. |
| #16 By 1896 (24.51.233.64) at 5/7/2006 4:58:28 PM |
|
#15 while I agree with your statement about Vista as it is today against XP it is also true that Vista 5XXX releases are a much smaller step ahead compared with what Vista 4XXXX ones were. IMO the biggest problem is that MS made so many statements about what Longhorn/ vista was going to be that a lot of people will have a feeling that something is missed. Well, let us hope that "Vienna" will deliver what we saw in Vista 4XXX releases and more. Personally while I, like many other people, will definitely upgrade all our clients boxes to Vista and servers to Longhorn the real big hit for MS this year will be Office 12 and not the OS.
Just my humble opinion of course. :-) |
| #17 By 3746 (71.19.43.237) at 5/7/2006 6:26:58 PM |
|
#14
Interesting that you would post misleading and false information to wind people up as you say. Just because there are a few zealots on here doesn't mean we all are. Some of us want to see the proper information posted and discussed. This has nothing to do with different opinions as what you said was misleading and factually wrong. Shouldn't you as a moderator and site admin be more worried more about disseminating proper information then winding people up? |
| #18 By 3653 (68.52.143.149) at 5/8/2006 12:13:53 AM |
| This comment has been removed due to a violation of the Active Network Terms of Use. |
| #19 By 46122 (68.237.249.230) at 5/8/2006 12:55:57 PM |
| You guys sure take a great product and really make a mess out of it. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 165 Last | Next |
The time now is
3:01:37 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
