| 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 |
 |
Do we really need a new Windows Operating System so soon? | |
|
||
| Time: 12:18 EST/17:18 GMT | News Source: ActiveWin.com | Posted By: Byron Hinson | ||
|
With Windows XP already reaching its first birthday, it is already time to start thinking about what is round the corner for the next release of the Windows operating system. While the chances of us seeing a major new release of Windows before 2005 is highly unlikely, there is a high possibility that there will be, as predicted on ActiveWin earlier in the year, a minor update to the Windows XP operating system sometime within the next 2 years. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 160 Last | Next |
The time now is
1:39:43 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 61 (65.32.170.1) at 9/27/2002 12:59:09 PM |
|
Or how about they just replace the original XP packages with ones that have SP1 integrated, then SP2, so on and so forth... kinda like what they did for Win95, however, instead of making it only available to OEMs, simply replace current XP boxes with the updated one version....
Of course that may raise other issues when trying to support someone, you ask what OS are you running, they say WinXP, but they don't know that an SP is integrated into the install, and thus has other things in it that aren't in the original WinXP, or in integrated packages. |
| #2 By 1401 (162.40.29.183) at 9/27/2002 1:16:26 PM |
| Personally - I can wait until 2004/2005. I haven't even moved from 2000 to XP yet... |
| #3 By 2960 (68.100.157.191) at 9/27/2002 1:25:38 PM |
|
No.
We need to clean up and improve the one we have. I'm tired of this featureitis stuff. TL |
| #4 By 1401 (162.40.29.183) at 9/27/2002 1:50:33 PM |
| I didn't say Win2K was more stable than XP - I think XP is great - better than 2000 in alot of ways - I just haven't move to it yet, that's all |
| #5 By 8589 (66.169.174.34) at 9/27/2002 1:51:24 PM |
|
What some people fail to understand is that Microsoft as well as Sun, and Redhat, etc... are in this to make money, not for their health. And as a business, they have to make money, for themselves, and their stock holders.
|
| #6 By 61 (65.32.170.1) at 9/27/2002 2:05:21 PM |
|
Neb: Not a lot changed from Win2k to NT4.... what the hell you are smoking?
Just because the GUI didn't change much doesn't mean not much changed... if you can't see that, I suggest you not post anything. |
| #7 By 931 (24.98.84.138) at 9/27/2002 2:05:49 PM |
|
Nah, ms should help us all by continuing support and patches for 2k, and work on stabilizing XP, and releasing .net server with a little problems as possible.... They really should not be spending much time on the "next" versions untill they've released sp1 for .net server..
Course that said i dont see a problem with them having 1-2 hundred people starting design on the next best thing... but really I dont want to see another OS from ms ( -.netserver) till at least 2005. Course this will not happen as revenue concerns are now driving releases instead of functionally and needs. -just my opinion |
| #8 By 1401 (162.40.29.183) at 9/27/2002 2:33:53 PM |
| Thanks Neb Okla - I agree - you have to continue to learn at a rapid pace - non stop. Actually, I'm studying to take the tests for MCSE on Windows 2000 - that's why I've stuck with it so far. As soon as I pass - it's Windows XP the next day :-) |
| #9 By 135 (208.50.201.48) at 9/27/2002 3:31:47 PM |
|
I don't know... the Linux vendors seem to release new OS's every six months. :)
I can't think of much they could do above and beyond what is in XP. I can see some add-on packs perhaps... |
| #10 By 2459 (24.233.39.98) at 9/27/2002 6:28:12 PM |
| The .NET Framework is included on the integrated XP SP1 discs already. It is a seperate install, however, listed in the auturun menu. |
| #11 By 2062 (68.129.23.181) at 9/28/2002 7:35:33 AM |
|
This is the first year in a long time microsoft has NOT released a new windows version. Every year going back to 1995 ms has released a new OS. Is ms releases a new os in 2004 it'll be 3 years without an os (other than .net server which is xp). I dont like all the complaining i see. If you dont want the next version of windows - dont buy it. And i dont think comparing the next version of windows to win98 as a fair comparrision. Win98se was just win98 with bug fixes and a couple new features. The next version of windows will be a LOT more than that. Windows xp is a minor update of windows 2000, and yet you cannot say that windows xp is just windows 2000 with a couple bug fixes. Windows XP has a lot of new stuff in it. And how can people complain about a OS no one knows about? There's not even a beta out and yet people are bitching about how there going to use a mac - good riddance.
I havent seen 1 person talk about the positive reasons to get the next windows OS. For one, you better believe itll be a lot more secure and locked down than XP is. For another, it'll have the updated .net server NTFS file system. When .net server is final ill probably switch to it, mainly because .net server is extremely fast compared to xp. The ntfs updates will not be seen in any xp service pack. Plus you'll have a mature wpa, system restore, things like that that will simply work better in the next os. So bottom line, dont judge something until a beta is released! -gosh |
| #12 By 3465 (68.48.197.62) at 9/29/2002 9:15:33 PM |
|
Uh, #6-w2k is more stable than XP. This post was edited by kirk26 on Sunday, September 29, 2002 at 21:15. |
| #13 By 61 (65.32.170.1) at 9/29/2002 9:53:57 PM |
|
kirk........
Stability is all relative, what is perfectly and completely stable for me on my computer may crash constantly on someone elses..... but I guess common sense is hard to find these days. |
| #14 By 282865 (94.23.244.108) at 12/19/2009 1:05:31 PM |
|
Hi everone
If you ever wanted to give your children and loved one or some one staying far from you, that special surprise christmas gift then here is the chance. If you are in USA or Canada then Just go to http://bit.ly/4Qbrs2 and you can order custom made gifts delievered to you by Santa :) Happy Christmas to you all. Have lots of fun. :) |
| #16 By 3704018 (46.161.9.24) at 1/2/2017 11:17:59 PM |
| <a href=http://buyprozac.club/>prozac</a> <a href=http://chlomid.us/>clomid purchase online</a> <a href=http://cialiscost.site/>cialis</a> <a href=http://citalopram-hydrobromide.gdn/>citalopram</a> <a href=http://mobic-7-5.science/>mobic 7.5 mg tablet</a> <a href=http://viagrasoftonline.gdn/>buy viagra soft</a> |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 160 Last | Next |
The time now is
1:39:43 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
