Windows 9
-
I don't think Windows 8 was a paradigm shift. Metro didn't replace the desktop, rather metro was added as a way to create fullscreen touch-centric store apps. The desktop isn't going anywhere according to MS. I think the error in Win8 was pushing the metro environment too hard when it doesn't really have the ability to replace the desktop. Perhaps great for certain devices but not something for all use cases.
I don't care what you think. The dot net framework is a paradigm shift which happened in 2003, and metro is the dot net framework as an operating system and the desktop is nothing but the old code. Get over it.
-
If windows 9 has no desktop, I'll buy a Mac and register to iCodeProject... I don't believe a second the desktop is going away! not now, not in the next 5-10 years. The desktop is where the vast majority of business softwares run. Business is where Microsoft makes more than 55% of its income! Unless Microsoft suddenly decides they want to die overnight there's not a chance they dump the desktop in the short to medium term! Windows 8 was another Vista disaster, I doubt Windows 9 will be Vista 3.0!!
Then buy a mac now.
-
They're calling it "threshold", apparently. I'll wait until they've gone all the way through the door, before I spend any time considering a purchase.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
I don't care if you purchase it
-
Valery Possoz wrote:
Windows 8 was another Vista disaster
Vista was ME 2.0 :-D
You'll never get very far if all you do is follow instructions.
Vista was longhorn 2.0 XP was ME + windows 2000 Windows 8 is XP + Vista - oh look its all of them. Go buy a mac
-
Meh. Right now and for the forseeable future, desktop is the sole reason for the PC to exist.
Said the dinosaur
-
Not according to some Mary chick or "according to my sources." she says - which is not Microsoft.
Ummmm.... most of Mary Jo's sources are inside Microsoft or very closely related (very large developers who get pre-release information). She's not always 100% accurate but she's way more accurate than some random guy on an online forum (cough... cough...).
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. ~ George Washington
-
Ummmm.... most of Mary Jo's sources are inside Microsoft or very closely related (very large developers who get pre-release information). She's not always 100% accurate but she's way more accurate than some random guy on an online forum (cough... cough...).
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. ~ George Washington
The consecutive roll out was taught in class from my teacher who works for Microsoft training me to work for Microsoft. When someone is wrong about news you should stop listening to them.
-
Vista was longhorn 2.0 XP was ME + windows 2000 Windows 8 is XP + Vista - oh look its all of them. Go buy a mac
Colborne_Greg wrote:
Vista was longhorn 2.0
Longhorn was the code name of Vista. I have the beta. :cool:
Colborne_Greg wrote:
Go buy a mac
Never! X|
You'll never get very far if all you do is follow instructions.
-
Colborne_Greg wrote:
Vista was longhorn 2.0
Longhorn was the code name of Vista. I have the beta. :cool:
Colborne_Greg wrote:
Go buy a mac
Never! X|
You'll never get very far if all you do is follow instructions.
Chicken before the egg. Longhorn is an operating system without purpose created right out of the box with the .net framework 1.1. Vista is an attempt to make money off an incomplete project, and is the only reason it failed. Windows 8 is also longhorn. I was trained by Microsoft in 2002 in .net 1.1 before it was publicly released, we used to say longhorn, in it for the long haul.
-
The consecutive roll out was taught in class from my teacher who works for Microsoft training me to work for Microsoft. When someone is wrong about news you should stop listening to them.
If he works at Microsoft, he'd be under non-disclosure. As for the update; not having more consistent roll-up updates was a big mistake in XP and Windows 7. Everything I've read indicates that Windows 9 is still on schedule for April 2015. BTW, all that said, I think Microsoft is now changing version numbers too fast! The Visual Studio situation is especially annoying.
-
Chicken before the egg. Longhorn is an operating system without purpose created right out of the box with the .net framework 1.1. Vista is an attempt to make money off an incomplete project, and is the only reason it failed. Windows 8 is also longhorn. I was trained by Microsoft in 2002 in .net 1.1 before it was publicly released, we used to say longhorn, in it for the long haul.
I don't know where you're getting your information nor why you are acting so rude. I suggest going to Paul Thurrott's http://winsupersite.com/[^] which has good information. Here is [one of] his "article[s]" on Longhorn: http://winsupersite.com/article/faqtip/windows-longhorn-faq[^]
-
I don't know where you're getting your information nor why you are acting so rude. I suggest going to Paul Thurrott's http://winsupersite.com/[^] which has good information. Here is [one of] his "article[s]" on Longhorn: http://winsupersite.com/article/faqtip/windows-longhorn-faq[^]
If you didn't notice the article does not say longhorn is vista. thanks for playing.
-
If he works at Microsoft, he'd be under non-disclosure. As for the update; not having more consistent roll-up updates was a big mistake in XP and Windows 7. Everything I've read indicates that Windows 9 is still on schedule for April 2015. BTW, all that said, I think Microsoft is now changing version numbers too fast! The Visual Studio situation is especially annoying.
He also said it in the Microsoft virtual academy videos. The whole point of continuous roll outs from 8.1 - 8.9 is to keep the concept of windows 8 while advancing the system away from the desktop. If people would adapt windows 8 faster visual studio wouldn't have been so annoying.
-
If you didn't notice the article does not say longhorn is vista. thanks for playing.
Longhorn was the development code name, Vista the commercial name. (Whistler became XP, Blackcomb became Windows 7.) One reference: http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Windows/Pushing-Forward/[^]
-
He also said it in the Microsoft virtual academy videos. The whole point of continuous roll outs from 8.1 - 8.9 is to keep the concept of windows 8 while advancing the system away from the desktop. If people would adapt windows 8 faster visual studio wouldn't have been so annoying.
What's happening with Visual Studio is independent from Windows 8. The problem is that by changing the major release name costs money where incremental updates are typically free. One point of continuous updates is to avoid this (which also has a huge impact on resellers, who usually require that a vendor rebuy or "flush" the supply when then a major version number is changed.) The other point of updates is to make it easier to "patch" a system up to the latest version.
-
I don't care what you think. The dot net framework is a paradigm shift which happened in 2003, and metro is the dot net framework as an operating system and the desktop is nothing but the old code. Get over it.
Your enthusiasm for metro is great, but I think you're just missing the fact that metro targets a fairly narrow set of devices/apps. There are many scenarios where a touch-centric fullscreen store app is a great thing. But this environment doesn't have what it takes to replace everything. This is why metro isn't a paradigm shift, its simply a new avenue for creating apps which do work well in that limited context. Also, MS has confirmed the desktop is and will continue to be a key piece of the puzzle moving forward. So, no, the desktop isn't going anywhere and isn't for "old code", its for code which doesn't fit in the rather narrow definition of fullscreen touch-centric store apps :) Additionally it sounds like they'll be bringing the start menu back and allow running store apps in a window on the desktop. So the desktop is actually getting new focus and emphasis moving forward.
-
Your enthusiasm for metro is great, but I think you're just missing the fact that metro targets a fairly narrow set of devices/apps. There are many scenarios where a touch-centric fullscreen store app is a great thing. But this environment doesn't have what it takes to replace everything. This is why metro isn't a paradigm shift, its simply a new avenue for creating apps which do work well in that limited context. Also, MS has confirmed the desktop is and will continue to be a key piece of the puzzle moving forward. So, no, the desktop isn't going anywhere and isn't for "old code", its for code which doesn't fit in the rather narrow definition of fullscreen touch-centric store apps :) Additionally it sounds like they'll be bringing the start menu back and allow running store apps in a window on the desktop. So the desktop is actually getting new focus and emphasis moving forward.
It will be a key piece in windows 8. Your opinion on the paradigm that did happen means nothing. The .NET Language Paradigm[^]
-
What's happening with Visual Studio is independent from Windows 8. The problem is that by changing the major release name costs money where incremental updates are typically free. One point of continuous updates is to avoid this (which also has a huge impact on resellers, who usually require that a vendor rebuy or "flush" the supply when then a major version number is changed.) The other point of updates is to make it easier to "patch" a system up to the latest version.
Windows 8 is fueling the changes to visual studio as windows 8 is the .net framework as an operating system, the code for visual studio and windows 8 are the exact same.
-
Longhorn was the development code name, Vista the commercial name. (Whistler became XP, Blackcomb became Windows 7.) One reference: http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Windows/Pushing-Forward/[^]
Longhorn is an incomplete operating system. Vista takes Longhorn and turns it into an operating system but vista is not longhorn, its an attempt to sell the project. Get over yourself.
-
Windows 8 is fueling the changes to visual studio as windows 8 is the .net framework as an operating system, the code for visual studio and windows 8 are the exact same.
Windows 8 is NOT "the .net framework as an operating system". I don't know where you get your information. Windows 8 RT requires you write user applications in .NET, but .NET is not the operating system. Having a Visual Studio 2012, 2013 and 2014 are about marketing, not engineering. It seems you never had a question, but are simply arguing for the sake of hearing yourself. (And it seems to have not occurred to you that many of us are well read on the history and inner workings of Windows and know people, including the actual engineers, who work on it at Microsoft.)