Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Windows .NET Server slips (again) to April 03
The Register ^ | 19 November 2002 | Computerwire

Posted on 11/19/2002 8:52:26 PM PST by Fractal Trader

Delivery of Microsoft Corp's latest server operating system Windows .NET Server 2003 has slipped for a second time, as the company attempts to unify developers around its .NET strategy, writes Gavin Clarke.

During his Comdex Fall 2002 opening keynote speech this week, Microsoft's chairman and chief executive Bill Gates finally pinned an official date on the release of the elusive operating system: April 2003.

That date means, though, that Windows .NET Server 2003 has now slipped twice. The operating system was initially due "by the middle" of 2002 then "by the end" of 2002, according to Microsoft. The company traditionally positions new products in a general launch timeframe as development takes place.

Gates, speaking in Las Vegas, Nevada, did not give reasons for the delay although Windows division senior vice president Brian Valentine insisted Microsoft is now "in the final countdown". "It will be rock-solid," Valentine said of the operating system in a statement.

Windows .NET Server 2003 is important landmark for Microsoft, as it is the company's first attempt to lock-step developers using its Visual Studio.NET environment to build .NET services with a server operating system via the .NET Framework.

Sources have told ComputerWire that Microsoft is unhappy with the level of uptake of .NET and hopes the next version of Visual Studio.NET, codenamed Everett, will persuade more developers to upgrade.

Some 70% of organizations are believed to have not yet adopted .NET while analyst firm Gartner Group expects a close fight between .NET and Java for enterprise development. By 2005, .NET and Java will each command around 40% of the market according to Gartner.

As such Windows .NET Server 2003 will support the .NET Framework along with other features planned for Visual Studio.NET Everett, renamed by Microsoft yesterday Visual Studio.NET 2003.

The .NET Framework, introduced with Visual Studo.NET in February, is missing from Windows 2000, the company's most current server operating system family - Windows 2000 Desktop was last year superceded by Windows XP. The .NET Framework includes features such as Microsoft's Common Language Runtime (CLR).

Other Visual Studio.NET 2003 features are designed to improve developer's efficiency. The company claimed its implementation of C++ will be 98% compliant with official International Organization for Standardization's (ISO's) C++ standards. This will enable developers to use popular C++ community libraries such as Loki, Boost and Blitz.

Windows Forms will also be supported, allowing developers to drag-and-drop controls from a pallet without manual hand coding.

Visual Studio.NET 2003 will feature Smart Device Extensions allowing developers to build client-based applications for Windows CE .NET, PocketPC and Windows cell-phone-based devices inside the suite. Gates also announced at Comdex the release of Redmond, Washington-based Microsoft's .NET Compact Framework, a cut-down version of the .NET Framework specifically for small devices.

An official release date for Windows .NET Server 2003 also brings Visual Studio.NET 2003 closer to delivery. Until now organizations have been left hanging as Microsoft said the suite is scheduled for the "first quarter" of 2003. Yesterday, Microsoft said the suite would launch jointly with the server in April. An exact launch date for both has yet to be provided.

Gates' announcement also means that an entire ecosystem of independent software developers (ISVs) can steam-ahead with Everett and Windows .NET Server 2003 editions of products. Their own product release plans had been put on hold until Microsoft had finalized details for release of the underlying suite and operating system.

The potential scale of Microsoft's success in driving Windows .NET Server 2003, among customers is less assured. Valentine said Microsoft is getting copies out to top customers and partners for final testing, with a second release candidate expected "in the next few weeks".

While uptake is expected, reduced IT spending and the unpopularity of Microsoft's recent licensing changes cloud the picture. The latter have seen customers evaluate alternatives to Microsoft products. On IT spending, the outlook is unclear with some financial analysts now predicting it will not be the second half of 2003 before confidence returns - an factor likely to impact sales of Windows .NET Server 2003 in the short term.

Economic realities aside, customers, press and analysts can expect an unashamed frenzy of hype from Microsoft over Windows .NET Server 2003 capabilities. Group vice president Jim Allchin, for example, wrongly predicted Windows XP would help revive the PC sector's fortunes late last year.

Windows .NET Server 2003 will ship with a UDDI registry and web services capabilities, through support for latest web services specifications WS-Security, WS-Routing and WS-Attachments.

The operating system will ship in four editions: Datacenter Edition, available in 32-bit and 64-bit editions for businesses, Microsoft said, running mission-critical applications; Enterprise Edition, for "high reliability, superior performance and business value"; Standard Edition, a general purpose server; and Web Edition for serving and hosting web pages.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: java; microsoftnet
Hmm...I wonder how an unreleased (and commercially unavailable) version of software can claim to be faster than Java?

I forgot! They were comparing it against an OLD version of Java!

1 posted on 11/19/2002 8:52:26 PM PST by Fractal Trader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Fractal Trader
Microsoft really has their act together. I seem them with revenues of $100,000,000,000 a year by the end of this decade.

2 posted on 11/19/2002 8:54:16 PM PST by SamAdams76
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fractal Trader
Hmm...I wonder how an unreleased (and commercially unavailable) version of software can claim to be faster than Java?

Sorry, Mr. Mandelbrot, but I am apparently missing the point: what does commercial realease have to do with tests?

3 posted on 11/19/2002 8:57:10 PM PST by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fractal Trader
It's a floor wax, a dessert topping and a Bass-o-matic!

Seriously, I think they have a bunch of stuff written for it, but will yank a lot out of it when they actually ship it. The yanked code will either be sold in a more-expensive edition, or become a "feature to be added" in the next release.

4 posted on 11/19/2002 8:58:14 PM PST by ikka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fractal Trader
Vaporware and FUD!

Heck of a way to make billions of dollars, but someone has to destroy any non-microsoft thought.

5 posted on 11/19/2002 9:10:22 PM PST by zeugma
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TopQuark
Sorry, Mr. Mandelbrot, but I am apparently missing the point: what does commercial realease have to do with tests?

Now that's a pretty uninformed question. Suppose MS discovers a security flaw before final release (hard to imagine, I know!). They might have to rewrite the microkernel, core APIs, or lots of other elements before they release the product. This could easily result in severe performance degradations.

You won't find a single commercial benchmarking outfit that would release a benchmark on prerelease hardware or software. Besides, what's the point in making a comparison against something you can't buy? And you missed my sarcasm -- Microsoft compared an unreleased product against one which was at least a generation old and substantially slower.

By the way, if Microsoft wanted to make the comparison fair, they should release an Java ODBC driver for SQL Server. The comparison was apples versus oranges in that it was SQL Server vs. Oracle. On the other hand, if they really wanted performance, they should release .Net for BSB Unix and watch it really make hay!

6 posted on 11/19/2002 9:10:40 PM PST by Fractal Trader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Bitwhacker; Utah Girl
I would say something witty here, but I don't understand geekage. I'm just a cook..... Now. ;>)

/john (label me laid-off)

7 posted on 11/19/2002 9:10:48 PM PST by JRandomFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fractal Trader
I'm by no means a fan of Micro$oft, but any competition for Sun's J2EE framework is a good thing. If MS wants to really hit J2EE & Java big, they should be focusing on performance.

The performance level of the entire Sun-driven Java community is a travesty. Naysayers will always point out how Java is so much faster these days due to better JIT compilers & the like, but the reality is that in the computer world, Sun's hardware performance SUCKS relative to the other offerings, and most implementations of software written in Java REALLY SUCKS in terms of performance. Granted, some Java code can be eventually tweaked to run reasonably fast, but most implementations by non-experts have absolutely DISMAL performance levels.

J2EE & Java are merely plots by Sun to sell more & more of their crappy low-performing systems in the never-ending quest for Java-based software that moves faster than a snail's pace. If they can deliver, the performance issue is ripe for exploitation by Micro$oft's .NET & C# counterattack, as well as for any other vendor able & willing to take them on.

8 posted on 11/19/2002 9:32:28 PM PST by MCH
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fractal Trader
Or, maybe you could learn to read?

The .NET Framework and languages have been released for more than a year now.

The .NET Server, is what is coming out next year. C# has proven in every availible benchmark to be faster than Java.

9 posted on 11/19/2002 9:37:03 PM PST by BuddhaBoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fractal Trader
When I accepted the EULA for a Media Player security patch several weeks ago, I had to agree that I would not divulge the results of any benchmark tests of the .NET framework without prior written consent from Microsoft.

If you clicked on any of Microsoft's EULA's, released in the last few months, you probably also agreed to those conditions.
10 posted on 11/19/2002 9:37:32 PM PST by Abcdefg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fractal Trader
.NET has been hyper-hyped by all the IT talking heads, but I just don't see any reson to go rushing in. I will probably be forced to start working with it on some level next year, but for now, I'd rather wait.
11 posted on 11/19/2002 9:40:34 PM PST by thedugal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zeugma
"Heck of a way to make billions of dollars, but someone has to destroy any non-microsoft thought."

If FUD can stop a product, it ain't a very good one.
12 posted on 11/19/2002 9:42:24 PM PST by PatrioticAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper
We were all snorting as we listened to Bill Gates address. Gee what a surprise, Microsoft slips a release date. Big shock.
13 posted on 11/19/2002 9:52:54 PM PST by Utah Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Abcdefg
If you clicked on any of Microsoft's EULA's, released in the last few months, you probably also agreed to those conditions.

Which makes it even more extremely suspicious when a supposedly independent third party releases performance tests on the product. Of course, they had to make thinly-veiled comparisons to BEA and IBM. Somehow, I think there will be some serious legal action on that front.

Besides, all the performance tuning of .Net was done by Microsoft employees! How can you consider that a third party comparison?

Ultimately, the suitability of any solution depends on far more factors than performance alone. Most large scale companies will not let Microsoft into the enterprise space, even over their dead bodies.

I have worked on many Java implementation, and find that it can solve some situations admirably, especially those with distributed data or code objects. But then, a lot of work can be done in C-Shell languages and PL/SQL, and have no need for Java whatsoever.

The independent advisor will look at the complete situation, analyze ALL costs as best possible, and make the most informed decision regardless of personal ideology. It can be near impossible at times to overcome the marketing hype on all sides and recommend the best solution. If you want a REAL political fight, try to deal with comparisons of DB/2 to Oracle, and throw in a mainframe option to boot. Then you will see sparks fly!

14 posted on 11/19/2002 9:59:26 PM PST by Fractal Trader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: PatrioticAmerican
THe problem is, that with the market crushing power that microsoft has, it doesn't really matter if it is a good product or not.
15 posted on 11/19/2002 10:50:48 PM PST by zeugma
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Fractal Trader
I did not miss your sarcasm. Nor did I miss what looks like a long-standing displeasure with MS.

Given that most people know the state of affairs that you described so well, they understand the announcement as what it is: "We have tested a prototype; it pergorms better than this or that existing product; subject to unforseen problems, that is what you may expect to be delivered."

No sin, thus.

16 posted on 11/20/2002 7:32:06 AM PST by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson