Window's out, Midori in?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7540282.stm

anyone else seen the articles about windows coming to an end somewhat soon? I don't see any dates, but maybe windows 7 will be the last traditional Windows OS.

 

Neat. Farewell Windows

 

Great quote.

 

This is interesting, I want to see how Linus, Steve, and Stallman react to this. This might be a domino effect and bring Linux and Mac into this too or they might do something completely different and innovative. Ubuntu will still have the Netbook and MID market though. Interesting, how interesting this is.

 

There are only a few words that can welcome this move:

"Its about ****ing time!"

This will completely change the OS market. Vive la Revolutione!

 

Yea. This has been a rumor for a while now, Im very interested in seeing it happen.

 

It looks like yet another project at Microsoft. They've been dabbling with non-Windows OS techs for years. With the massive negative press about Vista things like MS researching stuff like this get more press because it furthers the belief that MS is looking to abandon Windows. OMG WINDOWS SUX SO BAD EVEN MS DOESN'T WANT ANYTHING TO DO WITH IT

:sigh:

 

Well if they don't want it then I'll take it because they still make millions of dollars on it

 

I'll believe it when I see it.

 

I've seen the sopurce code.
Much work to be done, and that's easy to tell.
However, I would expect this for..say, windows 9?
And there is no "traditional windows" Windows 2k, and XP(along with vista), have there core at the NT kernel, Windows 9xxx and ME were based around Dos.

 

I dont want to offend anyone but BOLLOCKS.
For the same reason everyone knows McDonalds makes very bad food but sells alot, its all marketing, reputation and branding. It will never end...
I am using vista now, and I am planning on never buying another windows laptop again but still, despite my feelings against windows it will always be popular

 

What's this? Don't like Windows? Why not check out Linux? Read my Linux Switcher's Guide if you're interested.

 

^ Calvin is NBR's Linux Pimp, in case you haven't noticed. We also have Lithus, the NBR janitor.

 

I don't understand this quite well, but it seems to me that this change will be in a future where your os and files is installed on a server and not on your harddrive, am I correct?

 

Microsoft is certainly gearing up for this. They are building a modular data center near Chicago and I would assume in other locations around the country. There will be a few obstacles that must be overcome in order for cloud computing to really take off. Most importantly extremely reliable and fast Internet connections. It should be pretty exciting.

 

Am I the only one a little uneasy, trusting a server to handle my os and files?

It's a cool feature, but I'd much rather have it so that this midori system, would be sort of like a shadowcopy of my os, on my harddrive.

Either way, it's too long out of the way, to predict how it will turn out. And I can't predict what kind of technology we have developed by then, that will help this feature.

 

It's going to be a while before we hear about this in practice. Your whole OS won't be on the server, it would be far to slow.

 

Also have a look at this interesting article of July 4 from THE ECONOMIST, the reputed british financial weekly, announcing that INTEL was dropping Vista and keeping XP : http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=11692316&fsrc=RSS

 

This article is a month old. Do you really need to post it in every thread?

 

Do you work for the Economist? I've seen you post about them at leat 3 or 4 times already.

 

Actually this is much older news than people think. Microsoft has floated this very same idea a few years ago when they talked subscription based software. They were hinting at the possibility of storing all of your files on a server in the future.

I personally welcome the idea. Microsoft's current (SUV Style) OS model has gotten out of control with Windows XP SP3 sitting at 4GB with no page file and that easily doubles for everyone's favorite OS Windows Vista. I shudder to think what amount of disk space Windows 7 will require.

And you know what Microsoft is capable of a lean operating system. They did it with both the Xbox and Xbox 360.

 

Same. I don't see Microsoft being in any hurry to bring amount the demise of their most profitable product - nor any other company for that matter - and I don't see any reason why desktop operating systems would become unpopular with consumers. Perhaps businesses would be interested in having terminal-and-mainframe style computing, but for the average consumer a desktop OS works well. Certainly better than being reliant on an Internet connection working to use your computer at all. I kind of like being able to use my computer away from the Internet, on an airplane or when the Internet is out or wherever.

And then there's the issue of bandwidth. I can't imagine trying to run everything off of the Internet with today's Internet speeds. There's been talk of the Internet running out of bandwidth already, which would be quite a problem even with a more slim operating system to load from the Web. And of course it would be really bad if you were stuck in an area where you could only get dial-up.

 

Personally, I don't see it will happen anytime soon. I don't think the virtualization technology is there yet. Hey, I would not run my Domain Controller, DNS, DHCP, SQL, ISA, or heavy duty application on virtual machine in production network.

Who says that Vista is bad? I am using it. My organization is moving toward it. I think it is better, faster, and more stable than XP. Did I say easier to deploy, maintain, and support too?

 

Cloud computing works out better for the consumer market than the enterprise market. The "cloud" for a company would ideally be the company's own secure servers. Considering the sensitivity of emails and memos that are passed around on company servers, I myself would be reluctant to store that on the internet.

Basically, cloud computing should be a beefed up version of VPN. Allows people to connect and work together regardless of where they are, what department they work for or what project they are working on.

 

I say it's bad, in fact it's a crap OS and deserves the bad press it's gotten. It's an overly bloated, annoying OS. I totally gave up on it recently and went back to XP SP3. My only mistake was wasting $29 to upgrade to Vista Premium.

My sympathies on your company downgrading to Vista.

 

Might as well move to Vista now. It will make it easier when you finally move to 7.

 

I was using Vista for about a year. I didn't like it for numerous reasons and recently went back to XP SP3. I find XP SP3 to be a much better computing experience.

 

I have read your posts, all of them and I dont think I can give you any more rep. I really, really, really want to swap. BUT I am constantly working or studying and cant get a break long enough to learn a new OS and still be productive at the same time... Not even at christmas, my bosses are pretty demanding. Any tips?

 

Try a LiveCD for Ubuntu. You won't have to install it, and it doesn't take a lot of time.

 

It doesn't actually take as much time as you think. An entire installation of Linux and configuration can take only 3 hours (although it may just be because of my experience). After installation it's just tweaking it to your preferences. It's a lot easier to use and set up than Windows, nothing like a clean install. After install everything you need is already there, you just need to tweak it to your preferences.

 

"Midori" is Japanese... just throwing that in.

 

And Bog the NBR Badass(jack ass) ; Zoid the distro hopper; Les the Dell/Vista Junky; Patrick, the crazy Mod; Chaz, the spammer/mod; Cin', the angel; Sam, the Apple Spammer; and Me, that random guy no one seems to like.

 

Well, can you tell me exactly what is bad in Vista? I would love to hear about the fact not opinion. I talk from the point of view of professional IT and your?

Do you know that Vista UAC alone can stop a lt of malware and rootkits. Do you know how powerful of Vista with it couples with Server 2008. GPO alone would have make 1500+ desktop management like a piece of cake.

Do you know the different between user priviledge in Vista and XP? It is a new whole story. Do you know about Vista NAP? Do you know that Vista had built-in IPv6 in the TCP/IP stack itself?

I can go on an on about the OS. Now it is your turn.

 

Now when linux has all of that on a 700MB disc and it's free....
Windows could do better.

 

First off it doesn't matter what your so-called qualifications are or the fact that i've used every Microsoft OS since MS-DOS 4.

A persons qualifications doesn't need to be brought in to the fact that this OS is a TURD. As I said it's slow, bloated and annoying.

Let's start off with Mr. Bloat. We went from a 4GB OS with XP with no page file to over 8GB with Vista and no page file and no upadtes. That's a fresh right out of the gate to the desktop after an install, WTF? I lose another 4-5GB when all is said and done with all of my updates. So with SP1 finished I have an OS with a 13GB footprint compared to a 5GB OS with XP. Now I can hear the Vista apologist already. Yeah but it's because of the restore points and all of the shadow copies created on the drive. Again total BS. System restore and shadow copies have been disabled along with indexing and i'm still stuck with a 13GB bloated OS.

Now why do I say it's bloated? I certainly didn't design this OS and if I did I would not put my name on it that's for sure. Shall I continue?

Because of the marvels of all things Windows Vista we had such new and exciting techs as Turbo Cache, Superfetch, Readyboot, and Readyboost all for the purpose of equaling the speed of Windows XP. Maybe you enjoy the fact that you can watch your hard drive thrash for minutes on end while data is preloaded into memory but I sure as hell don't. I also don't like the fact that you have to neuter Vista to get it's performance up to the speed of XP. Yes I do know about the annoying marvelous wonders of UAC and I also know that rootkits can be stopped if the user isn't stupid enough to press ok because he or she is tired of seeing that annoying pop up that constantly appears. I guess Microsoft couldn't add an exception list to UAC, nah it's so annoying that it appears if you attempt to rename an icon of the desktop.

I have no problems using Vista if it was a solid, lean mean OS but it's not. The fact of the matter it's just the opposite. I expect better better from Microsoft because I know they are capable of doing it. As I said earlier they put together a very small OS on the original Xbox and Xbox 360. But instead we have an out of control OS that requires certain graphics cards to make it look purty and at least 2GB or more as well as a current CPU.

Now if you want to apologize for Vista go ahead be my guest. I'm sure the hundreds of thousands or millions who petitioned MS and other computer makers to keep selling Windows XP can't be all wrong. I'm just glad that MS in their wisdom has decided to support WIndows XP till at least Windows 7's successor is on the market.

I just pray Windows 7 isn't a bigger turkey than Wndows Vista currently is.

Thank you

 

Except not everything you need is on that 700 mb. Plus it doesn't matter what size it is when it doesn't run half the programs most people need.

 

You can't complain about an os for how many gb it fills. XP is an old os and when I first got my xp pc, 2 years after it got out, I had a 40gb harddrive, something that was considered normal at that time. Now my harddrive is 250gb and it doesn't matter much to me. Techincal requirements are gonna be higher as the years go by and that is the os adapting to the consumers, not the other way around.

Yeah, vista is bloated for me, I don't need 60 % of the features it offers, but the os needs to appeal to everyone today and because of this, it becomes bloated.

In a business, I totally understand people would complain about the extra steep requirements, no business wants to buy all new hardware just so the system can run an os, that doesn't really give that much of an advantage over the old on.

In the end you shouldn't buy new hardware for the os, you should buy it because the old hardware just isn't cutting it anymore and you need a change. that's my two cents

 

This is what is true, but people forget this because it has been such a long time since a new Windows OS has come out. And when businesses don't immediately switch to the new OS, people claim it is a failure. Businesses and schools only have so much budget and they can't afford buy new hardware and OSes for everything. My high school was still mostly on Windows 98 when I graduated in 2005. Hell there were still a few classic Macs in the library. They still worked, why replace them?

On the other hand, if you are like my university, who seems to have unlimited funds, you'll give all your professors nice shiny Thinkpads loaded with Vista and Office 2007. Compliments the students!

 

Let's see, office program, DECENT browser, coding utilities, loads of drivers, music players(decent ones).
Hmm, Windows could do better.

 

Well if you are going to suppose the majority of the markets hardware out of the box for everyone and everybody, you are going to have a large OS. Linux has the bare essentials and that's it. Hope it works well or else hit the forums.

 

Windows isn't out of the box for anything(well, sometimes)....
I have to install like 10 drivers in Windows, 2 in linux(I do it in a single click).

 

Guys, keep the pointless chatter out of this thread and make sure not to turn it into a flame war. This thread is about Midori, I'm not sure how Vista or Linux come into this really.

 

Whoa!! This is so excited to argue about. First, did everyone complain when Windows XP came out and required 256 MB of RAM? Everyone was crying for Windows 2000 and now what? Nobody wants Windows XP. Am I right? This is called technology my friend. When hardware becomes more powerful, so does the OS.

I don’t know about you, but my Vista isn’t slow at all. It is very snappy as it learns what to cache on the memory. You lost 4-5 GB of hard drive because Vista back up your registry, so the system restore can return your OS back to its original state when you crash your OS. Just for you information, Vista System Restore is much better than XP. You rarely have unsuccessful restore when compares to XP. To justify the hard drive usage, I think it is a small price to pay since the storage technology is getting bigger and cheaper everyday. 4-5 GB on 250 GB hard drive is a small price to pay if you really need to fix your OS in no time. What wrong with indexing the file since the OS has it built-in search function. It is more like a convenient feature to me. My clients Vista don’t have hard drive trashing all the time like you have. 13 GB OS on 250 or 300 GB hard drive is small price in exchange for more stable and secure OS.

Sure you can continue to bash on UAC as long as you want. If you have to manage 4000 people environment, I think it is a small price to pay. As network security stand point, if you want security, you have to scarify some freedom. Yes, MS did add some exception list, and the feature has been rework on SP1. You can see that UAC will ask for your approval less on SP1 than non SP1 OS. You can even disable it if you want, but it isn’t a good idea because spyware and malware are evolving. You need the OS to tell you if something is going to change your system file. Even expert makes mistake, so does common user. It may irritate some people, but it can save your time and money if you computer is going to be infected with malware and spyware.

Hey, Vista comes with a lot of new feature, but people don’t like them all. It is an innovation, and it has the price to pay. You always have to have new idea, so you are moving forward. Let me tell you a simple example, How about firewall? If you think about heavy duty firewall, you are thinking about port-based firewall like Cisco PIX. You just block this port or that port. I tell you what Cisco even dump PIX for something like application layer firewall that filter the traffic based on the application layer, which is the top of OSI model. If you want the users not to use MSN or P2P file sharing on your network, I tell you what that port-base firewall doesn’t work on those applications because those software will tunnel themselves on port 80. You can’t block port 80 because it is an internet port. You see that you need smarter type firewall that can block the application signature. This is the reson why Cisco discontinued PIX and create a smarter type of firewall. It is evolution my friend. Well, just like MS security analyst sees the bi-directional firewall is a security gimmick. It is a long story, but I do agree with them.

I am not going to apologize for Vista because I think it is a good solid OS if you run on modern hardware. Deploying Vista alone is easier than using Norton Ghost. I am not talking about dozen machines. I talk about enterprise level. Have you every use GPO on Vista? I guess you never do. GPO on Vista is smart enough to distinguish administrator and user on workgroup level. For example, you don’t want your user to change the wallpaper, but you can. Vista can make it happens but not XP.
Finally, Vista is more secure than XP by having something like virtual registry. It tricks the application to write itself on the system registry, but it is not really the system registry. This way the system registry always protected, and common users are less like to screw up their PCs with the bad applications thus increasing OS reliability. Well, XP doesn’t have it. You aren’t even notice that Vista is doing this because it is so seem less. Do you know that Windows Server 2003 Datacenter Edition has the most reliable over any other enterprise server OS including Linux SUSE. MS even guarantee that the downtime for 24 hours/365 days per year is less than 5 minutes. How do I know? We have one, and I have never seen it down as long as I remember.

 

Choice of OS is largely a personal preference. I use Arch Linux on all my machines because I prefer it. I think linux is better than Windows, otherwise I'd be using Windows. At the same time I am very well aware of linux's shortcomings, but it suits my needs and technical style perfectly.

But of course, I'm not a hardcore gamer or a corporate giant.... Other people have different needs.

 

Why did this become an XP vs. Vista debate?

 

This is the Windows forum, what did you expect?

 

That sounds about right; but you're not a random guy, you're the Linux forum bum. lol

 

Say what?!?!?

 

Because the mods aren't doing their job. I have yet to see a mod delete any of these 'debates' or whatever you want to call them. I usually come here to read interesting topics and reviews of new laptops, not yet another "vista suks" topic, and another, and another, and another.

 

You have horrible grammar
j/k
This is a friendly discussion not a "vista suks" thread, I'm not saying Vista is horrible, I'm just saying it could be better.