Coffeehouse Thread

23 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

Paul review Longhorn 5048

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    ACT10Npack

    Paul just review Longhorn 5048 and it's not good for Microsoft that's for sure. He give it a 1 out of 5. There is no Avalon and other stuff and he says that its for like XP and 2003 combine.

    http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/longhorn_5048.asp

  • User profile image
    Manip

    XP looked poor until the last few betas before release. Microsoft has a way of pulling it all together at the last minute, until then anything you see is just not what Longhorn will become.

  • User profile image
    Tom Servo

    He asserts that this build is targetted at the hardware folks, then he goes on to whine that the UI sucks, then again acknowledges that it's a developer build. Geez. Also, I thought the point of componentized build is to stuff things into winmain only when it's ready/necessary, and a lot of the planned stuff isn't necessary to write device drivers. Keeping their new stuff under wraps as long as possible is not unexpected, considering how they shot themselves into their feet, remember "Redmond, start your photocopiers"?

  • User profile image
    Manip

    And because they have no legal right to...

  • User profile image
    Andre Da Costa

    I think that review is unfair, and Paul is thinking too much with the end user mind set. Microsoft made it specifically clear this is for developing device drivers not for looking at and critiquing.

    Shame on Paul, I expected better.

  • User profile image
    dnrfan

    At WinHEC, they said MS has removed the 'My' prefix from Longhorn.  Eg:  My Documents, My Pictures etc

    His screenys show the prefix.  Maybe MS removed it after that build?

  • User profile image
    harumscarum

    Did someone mention something about a suicidal rampage? It would be nice to get a review about this build by the people it was intended for.

  • User profile image
    irascian

    Andre Da Costa wrote:
    I think that review is unfair, and Paul is thinking too much with the end user mind set. Microsoft made it specifically clear this is for developing device drivers not for looking at and critiquing.

    Shame on Paul, I expected better.


    I keep reading this "defence" from Microsoft about how this build was aimed at hardware developers etc etc.

    I haven't looked at Longhorn since a brief look at the PDC release WHICH WAS 18 MONTHS AGO!

    In that 18 months timeframe Apple wrote and delivered Tiger while Microsoft seem to have done very little other than descope functionality. The much-hyped Longhorn blogs were set up but have been VERY quiet and one hoped it was because for the last 18 months people have been knuckling down to write something that's a big advance over XP. 

    Given the long gap and the lack of any real news over the last 18 months it's hardly surprising that the lastest CTP release is getting so many negative reviews.

    By all means disagree about how long it takes to write a good operating system, but simply repeating the Microsoft mantra "It was never meant to be a release you looked at" sounds kind of lame. Maybe I'm wrong but have there been any rave reviews from those hardware folks the release WAS supposedly targeted at?

  • User profile image
    Manip

    <Troll> Also Microsoft needed to wait until the new Mac OS X is out before they could create an original GUI for Longhorn </Troll>

  • User profile image
    Manip

    Go back though the C9 threads, find every feature you've requested and that someone at Microsoft said is in Longhorn... And it isn't any kind of mantra it is the truth.Believe it or not Windows operating systems are built upof components, some optional. To write a version of the OS just for drive developers to use you don't need to includeany of those components. All they need to play with isthe NT 6.0 kernel and new driver interfaces. Do you not see that having a (I need to watch my language) about how the new Explore isn't pretty enough when you know full well that the explorer your looking at isn't the final one is just silly? You can (I need to watch my language) and complain all you want, nobody is forcing you to buy Longhorn so if you think it looks so (I need to watch my language) then simply don't.

  • User profile image
    KarelDonk

    I read the article and I don't (I need to watch my language) understand why Thurrott can't (I need to seriously watch my language) understand that this (Boy do I need to watch my language) build is just a (I'm currently trying to watch my language) developer preview, and if he can't (I need to watch several of my languages) (I need to watch my language) (Trying to watch my language... failed.)

    just kidding.

    But I do wonder why the "press" can't understand what a pre-beta release is.

    http://www.miraesoft.com/karel/?p=20

  • User profile image
    eagle

    It's just bits not yet a beta, I think Paul needs to take vacation and spend more time with his family.

  • User profile image
    HellSnoopy

    KarelDonk wrote:
    I read the article and I don't (I need to watch my language) understand why Thurrott can't (I need to seriously watch my language) understand that this (Boy do I need to watch my language) build is just a (I'm currently trying to watch my language) developer preview, and if he can't (I need to watch several of my languages) (I need to watch my language) (Trying to watch my language... failed.)

    just kidding.

    But I do wonder why the "press" can't understand what a pre-beta release is.

    http://www.miraesoft.com/karel/?p=20


    Because that is the "press" job .. piss people off.

  • User profile image
    androidi

    harumscarum wrote:
    Did someone mention something about a suicidal rampage? It would be nice to get a review about this build by the people it was intended for.


    You read my mind.

  • User profile image
    jamie

    irascian wrote:
    Andre Da Costa wrote: I think that review is unfair, and Paul is thinking too much with the end user mind set. Microsoft made it specifically clear this is for developing device drivers not for looking at and critiquing.

    Shame on Paul, I expected better.


    I keep reading this "defence" from Microsoft about how this build was aimed at hardware developers etc etc.

    I haven't looked at Longhorn since a brief look at the PDC release WHICH WAS 18 MONTHS AGO!

    In that 18 months timeframe Apple wrote and delivered Tiger while Microsoft seem to have done very little other than descope functionality. The much-hyped Longhorn blogs were set up but have been VERY quiet and one hoped it was because for the last 18 months people have been knuckling down to write something that's a big advance over XP. 

    Given the long gap and the lack of any real news over the last 18 months it's hardly surprising that the lastest CTP release is getting so many negative reviews.

    By all means disagree about how long it takes to write a good operating system, but simply repeating the Microsoft mantra "It was never meant to be a release you looked at" sounds kind of lame. Maybe I'm wrong but have there been any rave reviews from those hardware folks the release WAS supposedly targeted at?



    i agree completely

    this goes well beyond the "label" of hardware release only

    4 years of secrecy and promises ... then this.

    What dont people understand about being letdown? It's an emotional thing to be sure

    longhorn does seem very very behind, late, unfinished, unthought out and more.

    IF it was business as usual - it would be no big deal. But Allchin made a big fuss about being secret so people would buy windows - then we hear all the great stuff LH will be - YEARS go by - and we get this.  (*hooray for secrecy!)

    To all hardware developers: - please forgive us Win enthusiasts for being let down - even if "technically" we have no right to be. (on a release like this)

    ..bugs..bugs...security...bugs..bugs...sp2...bugs...bugs...security...
    4 years


  • User profile image
    AndyC

    jamie wrote:


    i agree completely

    this goes well beyond the "label" of hardware release only

    4 years of secrecy and promises ... then this.

    What dont people understand about being letdown? It's an emotional thing to be sure



    Your assuming that everything they currently have for Longhorn has been included in that build - it hasn't. I should imagine pretty much everyone here has played with the Avalon stuff, but that's not there. IE7 is approaching beta stage and that's also not there.

    Complaining that bits are missing is a fundamental misunderstanding about what this build was intended for. Microsoft were handing it out to device driver developers so that they can try their code out on it. All the bits that aren't finalised or aren't stable are deliberately left out to provide the most reliable platform for testing drivers on.

    Paul really ought to know better.

  • User profile image
    jamie

    well if you read what paul wrote - he explains that the 4000 build series was dumped - and the new 5000 was a re-write using 2003 sp1 - but due to all the secrecy no one mentioned this...leading everyone to believe the last year was spent on building new stuff - not re-tooling

    We know stuff wasnt included. We know its a hardware only release. We know we know we know.

    some of us just expected this to be a lot further along.. and that's ok

  • User profile image
    Andre Da Costa

    irascian wrote:
    Andre Da Costa wrote: I think that review is unfair, and Paul is thinking too much with the end user mind set. Microsoft made it specifically clear this is for developing device drivers not for looking at and critiquing.

    Shame on Paul, I expected better.


    I keep reading this "defence" from Microsoft about how this build was aimed at hardware developers etc etc.

    I haven't looked at Longhorn since a brief look at the PDC release WHICH WAS 18 MONTHS AGO!

    In that 18 months timeframe Apple wrote and delivered Tiger while Microsoft seem to have done very little other than descope functionality. The much-hyped Longhorn blogs were set up but have been VERY quiet and one hoped it was because for the last 18 months people have been knuckling down to write something that's a big advance over XP. 

    Given the long gap and the lack of any real news over the last 18 months it's hardly surprising that the lastest CTP release is getting so many negative reviews.

    By all means disagree about how long it takes to write a good operating system, but simply repeating the Microsoft mantra "It was never meant to be a release you looked at" sounds kind of lame. Maybe I'm wrong but have there been any rave reviews from those hardware folks the release WAS supposedly targeted at?


    But the point remains, its for hardware developers, beta 1 is for the persons who want to start critquing the interface. I wouldn't even put too much faith in beta 1, since beta 2 will be release that defines what Longhorn will look like by RTM.

    Apple does not have a plethora of OEMs using different hardware configurations. Remember Apple only has 1% of the market and 2 hardware configurations, so they can deliver much quicker. So there are many factors that affects the long development time for Windows Longhorn. You just have to be patient and let them make a great release.

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.