Windows project long horn

Discussion in 'Computer Science & Culture' started by RickyH, Jan 5, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. RickyH Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,317
    I've been hearing on the new microsoft OS. As a project they called LongHorn, form this i heard they are making a new OS that will completely alter the way they have been making OS's by making it faster more reliable and even simplier to use. So in other words Windows might have a decent OS to use in the future
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Light Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,258
    Unless I'm badly mistaken, I believe "Longhorn" was the code name they used for XP while it was under development. The latest thing from Microsoft is called Vista which is scheduled for release later this year.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Avatar smoking revolver Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,083
    You are badly mistaken, the development codename for Vista (means "chicken" in my native language) was Longhorn.
    bwhahahaha!

    Besides I already use and have been using such an OS for 2 years now. It's called Linux.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. RickyH Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,317
    ehh google microsoft longhorn and mostly what will come up is somthing about microsoft vista.... i can only assume thats what there basic code name is for a new OS.
     
  8. RickyH Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,317

    lol notice where i said microsoft is making a good OS. Sorry to say but Linux although is better is irrelavent
     
  9. RickyH Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,317
    Stephan told conference attendees that Longhorn will:

    # launch applications 15 percent faster than Windows XP does
    # boot PCs 50 percent faster than they boot currently and will allow PCs to resume from standby in two seconds
    # allow users to patch systems with 50 percent fewer reboots required
    # reduce the number of system images required by 50 percent
    # enable companies to migrate users 75 percent faster than they can with existing versions of Windows.

    http://www.microsoft-watch.com/article2/0,2180,1838263,00.asp
     
  10. Avatar smoking revolver Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,083
    Actually it is Windows that is irrelevant to me, even if it's not to you.
     
  11. Light Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,258
    Thanks. That's what happens when someone is going strictly from memory - thus my disclaimer.
     
  12. RickyH Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,317


    Well regardless if it is irrelevant to you or not. It is irrelavent to this thread. Well I suppose it's not anymore, seeing as were talking about it now.
     
  13. Avatar smoking revolver Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,083
    It actually isn't - M$ promising vapourware that's already been available somewhere else.
     
  14. spuriousmonkey Banned Banned

    Messages:
    24,066
    All things that winxp should already have.

    Sometimes I am waiting 30 sec for an application to lauch. I am happy to learn it's almost 5 secs faster.

    I remember the days I had a psion. Applications launched instantly. That was revolutionary for me. Not that a bogged down OS that is less bogged down.

    I'll even bet it runs faster only because it has higher systems demands.

    And is it so that it needs to start up faster because it will crash more?
     
  15. Avatar smoking revolver Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,083
    3 days and 16 hours ago I restarted my desktop pc first time in 4 months, and that's only because I wanted to upgrade to the newest kernel. That's the only time when Linux has to be restarted when upgraded and is equal to upgrading to a new version of an OS, like from Win98 to WinME.
    And the restart was quite fast too.
     
    Last edited: Jan 5, 2006
  16. RickyH Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,317

    Nope actually because microsoft claims they have been worrying about the wrong thing's with there previous OS's.They said somthing like they have been worrying about the stability of the program opening and not paying much attention to process time to open and other stuff so now there incorperating stuff other OS's have been doing like linux i hardly doubt this OS will be bad and will be completly worth the money
     
  17. Mmmmm.... Cosmetically speaking I've no doubt Vistas will be a refreshing change from XP, and the file search facility Gates has been mouthing off about, although I believe Apple have had something of equal functionality and actually incorporated for a while now, seems interesting enough - but we are dealing with Microsoft here.

    Basic rule of thumb with all Windows OS's - never invest a penny until at least the first Service Pack becomes freely and widely available and ships as standard.

    The security, or should we say virtual absence of security full stop with XP's release was shameful, appalling and in no small measure verging on the completely underhand - to release the system knowing full damn well 80% of the original source code had already been pilfered, prosecutable in my book and a good many others to boot. Shame nothing ever did come of that. I bought rotten vegetables and made a thermos and everything...

    It took these fat arsed, smug faced corporate bastards 6 bladdy years after the release of Windows 95 to actually deliver a system that did half of what Windows 95 claimed it was all about for the home user and only got there by basically scrapping the entire line of Win9x development and switching to the NT kernel to do it - coining in money hand over fist from hopeful punters such as yourself and all the rest of us by doing little more than using the consumer as unpaid beta testers whilst the entire time smugly rubbing our faces, day in and day out, in the big steaming pile of what isn't actually chocolate mouse that is the Microsoft Corp we know and love today.

    Personally I'm not going to be wetting my pants at the prospect of Windows releasing anything, let alone a new OS - an operating system that actually works isn't, contrary to popular belief, actually an event comparable to the Second Coming of Christ or anything like - it's a simple requisite on the part of the software vendor the consumer has every right to expect, no a favour to be proffered or something to perhaps one day maybe look forward too in the not too distant future.

    Whatever else will happen Vistas is undoubtedly destined to become ubiquitous, of that I have not the slightest doubt - is it's imminent arrival something to be keenly anticipated though..?

    As a Windows veteran, I have some measure of misgivings about that. Not so much concerning the actual OS itself, I'm sure it will be perfectly adequate after the fist service packs release, but the self congratulatory bull-shite Microsoft are going to be pushing at us left right and centre?

    That, I could genuinely do with giving a complete miss.
     
  18. vslayer Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,969
    my brother installed the beta version on a spare comp earlier this year to check it out, so we decided to have a play with it and...:

    in order to properly run what is essentially windows XP with mac searching, windowblinds, and hydravision built in. it requires a 3ghz CPU, between 512 and 1024mb of ram, a 128mb video card(256mb if you want it to be smooth), and 4gb for the base install(not including the extra space it takes up in temp files, which usually amounts to about 3gb on an XP in 1 year)

    games run pretty much the same, while windowed applications run considerably slower, and everything takes about 30% longer to boot because of all the resources windows is hogging.

    its just a big bloated resource hog that you DONT need, and microsoft is trying to force it down your throat so that hardware manufacturers can make more money by selling us parts that we should only need to run high end games on full graphics, not for a desktop environment.
     
  19. Communist Hamster Cricetulus griseus leninus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,022
    It's still in beta, don't be so critical. I'm sure after 2 years of patches it will be roughly where XP is today.
     
  20. RickyH Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,317

    Well, in the words of my freind.

    "Windows does what users want, open source OS users always pick up on system resources, adware, viruses and anything else thats technical and
    negative, a lot of these points are things a normal user doesn't even know about.

    Linux does very little; open source OS users see an operating system no further than the kernel and other low level technical features. The rest of the world sees an operating system as the graphical features and functions built in, things
    that make life easier.

    Linux is faster and more stable because it is not useful to most people, it doesn't do as much as Microsoft products. Many businesses use Linux as a serving OS, saving money and improving speed and uptime.

    Linux has no standards. Windows is the most used OS, it makes sense for other software companies to develop software for Windows.

    Imagine a high school switching to Linux, theres no "getting used to Linux" the fact is that Linux is hard to use compared to Windows. Most people see a black screen and white writing as a problem with the computer, not a starting point to log in. "

    So basically put your self in microsoft's shoes you have to do 30+ things at one time would you be able to do all of them with minimal sources at one time? or efficiantly? I hardly doubt it... if linux had to do the exact same things as microsoft it would go just as slow...and eat up just as many resources.... it eats up so many graphics because of its new interface.... besides thats a beta version it hasn't been sized down to fit "older" computers but when its released i can only assume it will be sized down in order for it to run better. in my opinion if you want a good OS go with mac. very good OS and stop saying how much better linux is compared to microsoft... the fact is microsoft has to do alot more work to keep up then linux does... i suppose if i didnt do nearly as much as some one else and did it faster that makes me better.....
     
    Last edited: Jan 6, 2006
  21. Avatar smoking revolver Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,083
    Doesn't do anything? I clearly see now that you haven't even tried a Linux in some years, if ever.
    And you're a troll too.

    For others to look at ->

    Some screenshots of my fav. distro Mandriva:
    my desktop: http://piparmetra.net/ftp/scr01.jpg
    KDE menu: http://piparmetra.net/ftp/scr02.jpg
    My fav. cellular automation software: http://piparmetra.net/ftp/scr03.jpg

    some those of my friends:
    http://kwh.kernow-gb.com/~bvc/theme/screenshots/CL_Cairo-gP-ish-SELECTED.jpg
    http://mandrivausers.org/index.php?act=Attach&type=post&id=2143
    http://xs62.xs.to/pics/06014/snapyness.png
     
    Last edited: Jan 6, 2006
  22. RickyH Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,317
    Please tell me how any of that put's it on the level of microsoft and for the fact i don't use linux your a fool, i use linux to run several server's which is what it appears to be its best use.
     
  23. Avatar smoking revolver Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,083
    What, crash level?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    What is there that M$ could possibly give me? Excel?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    I'm doing here video editing, webdesign, all the usual office, internet and archiving tasks. And that's more than many on Windblows do.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page