Microsoft gives an early look at next Windows

The Financial Times ^ | October 27 2003 | Richard Waters

[Wacka]

By time MS comes out with their version of Mac OSX (2006-hah try 2007), the Mac OS will again be light years ahead.

Get a Mac. Virus free since 1987.

[saint]

The company also said Longhorn would be more secure and reliable.

Well you have to give them credit for their sense of humor. But I have to ask, more secure and reliable than what?

[Strider]

Microsoft's success depends heavily on expanding the loose community of developers who produce code that runs on its operating system, rather than defecting to the rival Java community, which is supported by IBM, Sun and others.

I think MS went in the right direction with .NET for developers. I love it.

I'm betting on MS. I always do.

[Mr. K]

The only version of Windows I use is Win2000- it is the single best OS MS ever made (XP bites in so many ways- despite some of the 'good things' about it)

Longhorn better be as good as Win2000 or no one will buy it.

Remember the hype over WinNT? OS/2 was killed because Microsoft kept telling everyone Wait for NT - and after 3 YEARS it was released- as a $700 SERVER

[SengirV]

If you want to see the future of Longhorn just look at panther -

http://www.apple.com/macosx/

[Ogmios]

I run Win2K pro, I will never change again, it is reliable, it stays up, it is fairly fast booting, and the security is acceptable.

Now, if Longhorn is as steady as Win2K, and faster, and the security is there, I might look into it, but that will be 3 years after it is on the market.

I always wait 12-36 months before changing to a new OS, I want to make sure that the bugs are worked out of it before I change over.

Win2K has me sold, so I will stay with it.

[observer5]

"Microsoft's success depends heavily on expanding the loose community of... mindless consumer who will pay faithfully for any piece of garbage the company has ripped of from other innovators and never works.

[Gorzaloon]

Anyway, my point is, is there a RedHat trick or shortcut to get all the drives automounted quickly and simply?

Not that I have found, but then, I am a recent convert. I have gotten the books, and am slowly wading through them. But I have faith in that someone is probably writing just what we need right now.

I think RedHat 9 is _just about_ ready for Prime Time, but in order to win over the Windows Masses, it has to run with less tweaking. It certainly has a lot of applications, though, so the potential is there.

For the mundane browsing, e-mail, Wordprocessing, FTP, etc. I think it is there right now. But faster, easier drive mounting/directories will make things a lot less confusing to the convert, at first.

[freedomcrusader]

The issue of mounting drives in RedHat 9.0 interests me. To copy a file to a floppy, I had to insert a disk, "mount" the drive, copy the file, then "unmount" the drive. Only when I "unmounted" the drive did the system finally write the file to the disk.

That's probably going to be an obstacle to most users.

Is what I've described related to what you are talking about?

[ArrogantBustard]

The next version of the ubiquitous PC software will come with a new "sidebar" running down one side of the screen.

What a steaming pile of used food. Do y'all suppose the poor user will have the option of turning the blasted "sidebar" off?

[birbear]

I like RedHat a lot, but it needs a feature that Mandrake calls 'supermount.' I don't want the torture of trying to get Samba and fstab to see my windows drives, network and local. I just want it to work, and Mandrake does that. Anyway, my point is, is there a RedHat trick or shortcut to get all the drives automounted quickly and simply?

This is part of the problem that Linux has. To most of the average computer using population what you just said makes about as much sense as "Smells Like Teen Spirit" by Nirvana.

That's not saying that the average computer user is dumb or ignorant... they just want a package that works out of the box, and they dont want to have to worry about file subsystems and whether or not their drives work.

If Apple didn't think themselves out of the price range of most people, they'd be the dominate force for the next decade or two.

[Izzy Dunne]

Put a Panther in the ring with a Longhorn.
Beef.
It's what's for dinner.

On the other hand, have you seen Windows RG?

[So Cal Rocket]

Here's a screen shot of the next Windows software:

[dogbyte12]

Windows should change the screen of death to a non blue color as long as they are upgrading their software.

[Petronski]

Is what I've described related to what you are talking about?

Absolutely. If the user edits a file called fstab, he can list there the attributes of various local drives which he can also therein indicate are to be 'automounted.'

The problem redhat has is that Mandrake runs a utility on install called 'supermount' that interrogates all drives and sets up fstab automatically--the drives are just there, like a mac or windows.

[jude24]

I've seen the Blue Screen of Death in XP a few times on my new notebook.

Friggin' wireless card had a buffer overrun that caused the whole machine to crash.

That's not MS's fault. It's Dell's.

[Strider]

... mindless consumer who will pay faithfully for any piece of garbage the company has ripped of from other innovators and never works.

Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated.

[Paul C. Jesup]

I am currently happy with Window 2000 Pro, but I someday plan to move to Lunix in a couple of years after it matures a little more and the SCO mess has cleared up.

[Prime Choice]

Well, at least they're trying to make the Bluescreen a little more enjoyable with the new Windows...

[freedomcrusader]

Thanks!