Windows 9
-
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.
Colborne_Greg wrote:
Get over yourself.
Why are you being so rude and confrontational? You are not the only person who knows someone who works at Microsoft or knows the history of operating systems. The fact is that Longhorn was the code name for the release that was scheduled between Whistler and Blackcomb. Whoever told you otherwise has no idea what they are talking about.
-
It will be a key piece in windows 8. Your opinion on the paradigm that did happen means nothing. The .NET Language Paradigm[^]
Colborne_Greg wrote:
It will be a key piece in windows 8.
Yes, the desktop is a key piece in Windows 8. The metro start screen with its store apps is sort of a parallel environment. They're both there and they fill unique roles. But to say that metro replaces desktop or that there's a shift from desktop TO metro misses the fact that metro doesn't do everything needed by desktop apps and provides a much more narrow focus. If rumors are true, the desktop will be getting increased emphasis in Windows 9.
Colborne_Greg wrote:
Your opinion on the paradigm that did happen means nothing.
You sound very defensive regarding your position. Why did you post in the lounge if you thought any other opinion had no meaning? I'm beginning to think I've been feeding the troll :)
-
Colborne_Greg wrote:
Get over yourself.
Why are you being so rude and confrontational? You are not the only person who knows someone who works at Microsoft or knows the history of operating systems. The fact is that Longhorn was the code name for the release that was scheduled between Whistler and Blackcomb. Whoever told you otherwise has no idea what they are talking about.
I never said that it wasn't a codename, what I am saying is that it is different from vista. How do I know this because I was trained internally by Microsoft in 2002-2004 on dot net 1.1 and its attempt to turn it into an operating system. Longhorn was an operating system used by people, other code name projects only went as far as beta testing.
-
Colborne_Greg wrote:
It will be a key piece in windows 8.
Yes, the desktop is a key piece in Windows 8. The metro start screen with its store apps is sort of a parallel environment. They're both there and they fill unique roles. But to say that metro replaces desktop or that there's a shift from desktop TO metro misses the fact that metro doesn't do everything needed by desktop apps and provides a much more narrow focus. If rumors are true, the desktop will be getting increased emphasis in Windows 9.
Colborne_Greg wrote:
Your opinion on the paradigm that did happen means nothing.
You sound very defensive regarding your position. Why did you post in the lounge if you thought any other opinion had no meaning? I'm beginning to think I've been feeding the troll :)
The desktop is code based on 1960s technology, the only reason people love it is the fact is has history, its a dinosaur and we only have to wait for the world to catch up - it will be gone because it can not advance.
-
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.)
Windows 8 is the .net framework, nothing you say is going to change that.
-
The desktop is code based on 1960s technology, the only reason people love it is the fact is has history, its a dinosaur and we only have to wait for the world to catch up - it will be gone because it can not advance.
I've been using Windows since 3.1 and the desktop has advanced significantly since then. So I believe its incorrect to say that the desktop environment can not advance, since it has done just that. I get that you're enthusiastic for a new metro environment, the problem is just that the new environment doesn't do everything needed. Maybe someday something will be able to replace the desktop, but I think metro isn't it at least not in its current state. That doesn't mean it can't do a great job for what its designed for -- full screen touch-centric store apps. But its not really a replacement for the desktop.
-
I've been using Windows since 3.1 and the desktop has advanced significantly since then. So I believe its incorrect to say that the desktop environment can not advance, since it has done just that. I get that you're enthusiastic for a new metro environment, the problem is just that the new environment doesn't do everything needed. Maybe someday something will be able to replace the desktop, but I think metro isn't it at least not in its current state. That doesn't mean it can't do a great job for what its designed for -- full screen touch-centric store apps. But its not really a replacement for the desktop.
Research the 16 bit offset. The desktop has it. Metro does not. This is the paradigm shift. People can believe in god - but that doesn't make it true.
-
Research the 16 bit offset. The desktop has it. Metro does not. This is the paradigm shift. People can believe in god - but that doesn't make it true.
I'm not following you. Perhaps something more concrete to explain the point you're trying to make would help.
-
I'm not following you. Perhaps something more concrete to explain the point you're trying to make would help.
The 16-bit segment selector in the segment register is interpreted as the most significant 16 bits of a linear 20-bit address, called a segment address. This is in every 32 bit application, including the desktop, 64 bit models use a flat memory model, as long as the operating system has the desktop and compatibility for 32 bit apps it will have this offset problem. The .net framework removed the problem in 2003 and is the paradigm shift I am referring to. Windows 8 is the only modern OS without this problem, apple has it and so does android.
-
The 16-bit segment selector in the segment register is interpreted as the most significant 16 bits of a linear 20-bit address, called a segment address. This is in every 32 bit application, including the desktop, 64 bit models use a flat memory model, as long as the operating system has the desktop and compatibility for 32 bit apps it will have this offset problem. The .net framework removed the problem in 2003 and is the paradigm shift I am referring to. Windows 8 is the only modern OS without this problem, apple has it and so does android.
Colborne_Greg wrote:
as long as the operating system has the desktop and compatibility for 32 bit apps it will have this offset problem.
Colborne_Greg wrote:
Windows 8 is the only modern OS without this problem
Windows 8 has the desktop and compatibility for 32 bit code. Backwards compatibility with 32-bit code is a big part of the amd64 design and supported by 64-bit Windows including Windows 8. Having said that, 64- vs. 32-bit and backwards compatibility for 32-bit is a very different discussion than what you started with, namely to indicate that metro somehow replaces desktop and desktop is only for "old code". Seems like two completely different topics :)
-
I don't care if you purchase it
I couldn't care less that you don't care. Unless you're an illiterate American, of course, in which case I could care less.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
Said the dinosaur
Stomp. Stomp.
-
Colborne_Greg wrote:
as long as the operating system has the desktop and compatibility for 32 bit apps it will have this offset problem.
Colborne_Greg wrote:
Windows 8 is the only modern OS without this problem
Windows 8 has the desktop and compatibility for 32 bit code. Backwards compatibility with 32-bit code is a big part of the amd64 design and supported by 64-bit Windows including Windows 8. Having said that, 64- vs. 32-bit and backwards compatibility for 32-bit is a very different discussion than what you started with, namely to indicate that metro somehow replaces desktop and desktop is only for "old code". Seems like two completely different topics :)
Do we live in a 64 bit world? We don't live in a world where apps are made correctly to use 64 bits, and this compatibility which metro does not have is why the desktop is there and is the only reason. AMD is hardware as is Intel, otherwise operating systems like metro would not have a base line to advance from. The desktop can not utilize 64 bits ever as the segment problem is in the heart of every programming language for the desktop.
-
Stomp. Stomp.
7 pcs in my office, all with 50 inch screens, and Microsoft Kinect, with touchless gesture software I can stand 6 feet from the screen and use it like a touch screen. The desktop will die and the PC will rein on.
-
I couldn't care less that you don't care. Unless you're an illiterate American, of course, in which case I could care less.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
What I do or do not is a solid response as would I could or could not do is a choice at the moment the situation arises. You are not the keeper of the meaning of languages. If you were you would like windows 8.
-
I couldn't care less that you don't care. Unless you're an illiterate American, of course, in which case I could care less.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
I do not care is zero caring, I could care less, would mean to say I have caring and the possibility of me to care less is there, but what I think you mean to say is I couldn't care less, which could mean zero caring but it is also a phrase with a reference to how I currently care about something, but when I say I don't care - the amount I care is clear.
-
I do not care is zero caring, I could care less, would mean to say I have caring and the possibility of me to care less is there, but what I think you mean to say is I couldn't care less, which could mean zero caring but it is also a phrase with a reference to how I currently care about something, but when I say I don't care - the amount I care is clear.
I don't need to be told what I want to say; I know that with high precision. My comment simply indicates that illiterate Americans obviously do not know what they are saying.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
I don't need to be told what I want to say; I know that with high precision. My comment simply indicates that illiterate Americans obviously do not know what they are saying.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
If you know what you are talking about with high precision, and you were referring to myself - then indeed you do not know what you are talking about as I am not American.
-
Do we live in a 64 bit world? We don't live in a world where apps are made correctly to use 64 bits, and this compatibility which metro does not have is why the desktop is there and is the only reason. AMD is hardware as is Intel, otherwise operating systems like metro would not have a base line to advance from. The desktop can not utilize 64 bits ever as the segment problem is in the heart of every programming language for the desktop.
No, the desktop is not there solely for 32-bit support. The desktop will remain because the metro full-screen app store environment isn't sufficient to handle everything. Metro addresses a particular need but doesn't replace what the desktop environment provides. Win8 pushed metro a bit too hard and I think MS realized that which is why in 8.1 you can choose to boot directly to the desktop (and skip the start screen). It also appears with Windows 9 certain profiles (like desktop/laptop machine) will be very desktop-centric. And yes, you can create a 64-bit desktop application. 64-bit is not restricted to Metro apps :)
Colborne_Greg wrote:
The desktop can not utilize 64 bits ever as the segment problem is in the heart of every programming language for the desktop.
I think you're confused wrt programming languages and 32- vs 64- bit. Which programming languages "for the desktop" are you referring to? You can write in C++, for example, and compile that to either 32- or 64-bit code. The language itself doesn't restrict you to one or the other. Additionally, you can use C++ to create desktop applications and metro store apps. So "programming language for the desktop" doesn't really make any sense.
-
No, the desktop is not there solely for 32-bit support. The desktop will remain because the metro full-screen app store environment isn't sufficient to handle everything. Metro addresses a particular need but doesn't replace what the desktop environment provides. Win8 pushed metro a bit too hard and I think MS realized that which is why in 8.1 you can choose to boot directly to the desktop (and skip the start screen). It also appears with Windows 9 certain profiles (like desktop/laptop machine) will be very desktop-centric. And yes, you can create a 64-bit desktop application. 64-bit is not restricted to Metro apps :)
Colborne_Greg wrote:
The desktop can not utilize 64 bits ever as the segment problem is in the heart of every programming language for the desktop.
I think you're confused wrt programming languages and 32- vs 64- bit. Which programming languages "for the desktop" are you referring to? You can write in C++, for example, and compile that to either 32- or 64-bit code. The language itself doesn't restrict you to one or the other. Additionally, you can use C++ to create desktop applications and metro store apps. So "programming language for the desktop" doesn't really make any sense.
I did not say the desktop could not have 64 bit apps. I said that the desktop apps could not utilize the 64 bits, windows xp x64 edition, the best it could use was 54 bits. 32 bits can barely utilize 3.2 GB of RAM. 64 bits can handle billions of terabytes. We have yet to have a machine that can handle over 200 GB of ram, and there isn't a desktop app in history that has been able to utilize even those 200 GB. Just to keep the math simple. if 3.2 GB is 32 bit then 6.4 GB is 33 bit, and 12.8 is 34 bit, 25.6 is 35 bit, 51.2 is 36 bit, 102.4 is 37 bit, 204.8 is 38 bit. <---- no desktop app has even gotten here. n The only benefit that the desktop has had from being 64 bit is being able to manage more then 3.2 GB of ram.