Talk: Windows Longhorn

From open-encyclopedia.com - the free encyclopedia.

How could WinFS be the new filesystem if Longhorn will still use NTFS? SD6-Agent 05:50, 28 Oct 2003 (UTC)

WinFS is not a file system, but a service running on top of NTFS, using existing features in that file system for its functionality. The article correctly states this as well. - unsigned

Um, actually, where did you get that information from? I've just rewritten that section of the article because it didn't seem to reflect Microsoft's own descriptions - yes, it incorporates NTFS, but it kind of replaces all access to it, so sort of subsumes it. All the articles on Microsoft's website seem to happily refer to it as a "file system" (although they also refer to it as a "storage platform" and a "storage subsystem", among other buzzwords - as it gets closer to existence, I expect they'll settle down on which buzzwords they prefer).

Also, it is most definitely "Microsoft® Windows® Code Name "WinFS" (Windows File System)..." [1] (not "FutureSystem", as the article previously stated; I don't know where that came from...) - IMSoP 14:34, 11 May 2004

(UTC)

Humph, I think "Future Storage" must have been an earlier expansion: there are some references to it (now it has the space in the right place), even on Microsoft's site... - IMSoP 22:20, 24 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Just a correction (I don't exactly know what to put in place of it though).. "Lonestar" is not Longhorn's TabletPC. It is an update to XP Tablet PC Edition, and is now called XP Tablet PC Edition 2004. Just thought I'd clear that up. --DX 02:01, Apr 4, 2004 (UTC)

Incorrect. "Lonestar" is officially called Tablet PC Edition 2005. --Betaguy9000

Right, whatever it's going to be released as, Microsoft's website definitely associates Lonestar with XP, not Longhorn.

"Lonestar is still in development, but when it releases, it will be a must-have upgrade for all Tablet PC users. Currently, it is slated to be released as part of Windows XP Service Pack 2 (SP2)." [2]

I'll unlist it from here. - IMSoP 14:45, 11 May 2004 (UTC)

On a related note, I can't find any references to "codenamed symphony" re: a Longhorn Media Center edition, so I'll take that out as well. In fact, according to an interview dated 4th March:

"Q: How true is the fact that MCE is going to be incorporated into Longhorn proper and it won't be just a special edition of it?"

"A: We have not yet announced plans around Media Center and Longhorn."

Which rather belies that whole paragraph about intending to have multiple editions. Shall we just cut it out? - IMSoP 15:08, 11 May 2004 (UTC)

And on yet another note, does this list of "Known Longhorn Builds" actually provide any kind of useful information for anybody? If nobody justifies it's inclusion, I shall rip it out, as it is currently just a screen and a half of meaningless numbers as far as I can see.

In fact, the more I read of this article, the more I suspect it needs a complete rewrite - does Microsoft really refer to anything other than Windows using the Longhorn codename, as stated in the introductory paragraph? - IMSoP 15:08, 11 May 2004 (UTC)

Bah, lucky for you all I'm procrastinating right now, so I went ahead and rewrote. If you think anything's gone from the last version that shouldn't have, feel free to rip it out from the revision prior to my big edit and restore it. - IMSoP 16:10, 11 May 2004 (UTC)

Terabyte

Up to this moment, Gigabyte is the highest name I've seen outside the tables and Wikipedia articles of groups of bytes. However, you are saying that terabyte will become more common outside tables and Wikipedia articles by the year 2006. If we continue at the current rate, what time will we have a:

• Petabyte??
• Exabyte??
• Zettabyte??
• Yottabyte??
• 1000 yottabytes?? (Don't worry about the name; SI hasn't coined a name.) 66.245.30.110 19:34, 25 May 2004 (UTC)

Funnily enough, I just saw an article in this week's Computer Weekly mentioning that the Human Genome Project is having to invest in storage for around a petabyte of data, since they are generating 2 terabytes a week! [By the way, I'm not sure who you were referring to as "you" there - the only connection I see is a quote attributed to Bill Gates; but whatever...] - IMSoP 18:06, 26 May 2004 (UTC)

QWERTY vs. DVORAK (True or false??)

QWERTY still gains popularity. But, by the time Windows Longhorn comes out, do you think there will be any keyboard options of switching from QWERTY to DVORAK in the Control Panel?? (Answer as if it were a "True or false" quiz. 66.245.102.102 00:59, 31 May 2004 (UTC)

There already is in XP and W2K. ElBenevolente 01:03, 31 May 2004 (UTC)

And I'm pretty sure there was in 98, maybe even 95. While since I'v used Windows though. Does anonymous know of any version of windows which didn't support this? Boffy b 16:42, 2004 Aug 28 (UTC)

Reworked System requirements

I rewrote the system requirements section since the previous version was alluding to rumor and speculation (before any facts were known). Microsoft has since provided information regarding sys reqs and that is what I've updated with. ERN 03:54, Jun 11, 2004 (UTC)

I changed "Aero Pure Glass" back to "Aero Glass" as the document referenced in the article (which is at Microsoft.com) refers to the experience as "Aero Glass". I also reverted back the memory requirements and bpp as per the reference. If someone has found an updated reference (later than April 30, 2004) with updated graphics requirements please provide it. ERN 15:04, Jul 18, 2004 (UTC)

Pirated software?

Should we really have explanations about how to "get Longhorn" by searching a Torrent search engine? Is that really any different than putting a "how to get Photoshop" line at the bottom of a Photoshop article ("download the trial, then find a crack!")? I don't think this is really very Wikipedic, personally... but I'll leave that to others to figure out. (I also think telling people to search for torrents or to use other p2p sharing services -- aside from being potentially illegal -- is a bad idea because they are so rife with viruses, and if whomever is looking for this doesn't know that they should look for illegitimate copies in a p2p service, then they might not know how commonly things like this on said services are actually viruses, but I digress) --Fastfission 01:14, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I totally agree with you - Wikipedia is not meant for distributing pirated software. It's ok to have a page about Torrent Search (I believe we have one :), but I feel that clearly pointing out where to find Longhorn is ridiculous. I removed that part, hope I didn't make a terrible mistake :>

Removed "getting hold of" section and link

I've just removed the following text:

==Getting Hold of Longhorn== For information on what's happening with Windows Longhorn, visit [http://www.microbeta.net MicroBeta.net].

Firstly, the heading seemed rather misleading; secondly, the site appeared to be severely broken under Mozilla (although fine under IE). It may be a decent enough site, for all I know, but since we've got ones that are navigable with more than one browser, I thought I'd just leave the link out. - IMSoP 17:51, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)

True or false??

True or false: Like Windows XP, Windows Longhorn will have a home and a professional version. 66.245.3.165 15:07, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

True or false??

True or false: there are several Americans who are not expecting 2006 to be the release year of this version of Windows. 66.245.18.193 15:00, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Extensive?

This isn't really extensive. My system isn't the newest system in the world, and it's got a 128MB graphics card and DX9 full-support. The only thing I have missing is AGP 8x (I use 4x for now). — Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 21:51, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Windows Graphic System or something like that

I read in the latest issue of Maximum PC that Longhorn will use something like windows graphics foundation to replace DirectX. Shouldn't this be included? — Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 21:53, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Advertising, not facts

There is, today, no available product called "Windows Longhorn". Nobody can expect that the fictional product described in this article will be available on the "expected" (i.e. advertised) timetable or any other. Microsoft will continue to change its marketing strategy towards "Windows Longhorn", by touting new features ascribed to it, and dropping others — as they have done already. The currently advertised features are not assured; Microsoft would not be violating a contract if they shipped a product called "Windows Longhorn" without some of them.

Today, therefore, Longhorn is not a product that can be described objectively; it is rather a brand name for "whatever clever things Microsoft wants to talk about doing in the next two years." In the computing business this is often called vaporware. And while I won't go so far as to say that Wikipedia should not include articles about vaporware (since a marketing campaign can be historically important and can be described from a reasonably NPOV) — I think that Wikipedia should report upon the claims made about this brand as advertising, not as facts. —FOo 13:21, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I disagree. The article makes clear that the described product is in the future, but it is still a product - in fact, it is an odd kind of brand, if one at all, since it is unlikely that a product will ever ship with the name "Windows Longhorn", just as none shipped as "Microsoft Whistler".

As for whether these are "facts", they are facts to the extent that anyone knows them. Maybe we should make clearer that they are just expectations, by adding phrases like "is expected to" and "Microsoft claims" all over the place, but I don't see this as purely marketing. This information reflects the development of a product that doesn't exist yet; as the details of that product change, the article can change too, just like Microsoft Windows will change as the current version of that software changes. And one of the great things about doing things this way, is that as soon as the actual product is released, this article can be moved to its final name, and the content will already be there!

And, of course, if it is indeed vaporware, we can just make the article a historical one, as you say. - IMSoP 16:59, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

First, a very minor point: I am not sure what you mean to say that Windows Longhorn is a "product in the future". It is the nature of the future that it has not happened yet. Your description implies a degree of certainty that nobody can have about the future. Nothing is in the future; it might become.

Second, on Longhorn as a brand rather than a product: The name "Windows Longhorn" is being extensively promoted in the IT trade press, in the same fashion that other software vendors have promoted various code-names for unreleased or even undeveloped products. This "buzz" is intended for consumption e.g. by IT managers and developers, as well as for Microsoft stockholders -- not for the general public. This is relatively common practice, for Microsoft and other IT companies. (Compare Taligent.) Thus, "Windows Longhorn" is not a particularly "odd kind of brand" for the IT business.

By "vaporware" I mean just this -- the term doesn't mean that no such product ever will exist, just that there isn't a product today except in the advertising materials of the company promoting it, and the childlike excitement of the trade press. (One role of vaporware is to draw attention away from competing products which are available today; Wikipedia's vaporware article discusses this.) Thus, the term "vaporware" can be used to describe a current promotional campaign; it is not purely a retrospective label for products that never came to be (like Taligent).

Naturally, Microsoft does have developers working on something it internally calls "Longhorn" -- or rather, working on the various software components that it is promoting to the IT industry under the "Longhorn" rubric. This doesn't change the fact that this rubric is just a brand name (and organizational label) at present. We cannot describe what will happen in the future; we can describe what is in existence today.

My concern here is threefold: First, if there is nothing there there, then Wikipedia should be silent. Second, Wikipedia should not participate in "buzz", because to do so violates NPOV. Third, insofar as Wikipedia is discussing a campaign of advertisement and promotion (albeit one within the IT industry and investment community -- not the general public) it should represent its subject as just that. --FOo 20:06, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Its not just talk, or just a marketing campaign, all of the discussed features of Longhorn have been under development in Microsoft for a while, many of them substantially operable. Certain subsystems like Indigo according to some, could potentially be released now, and Avalon is far in development. Some features, like Monad, are available for download. This is known because people outside of Microsoft do get to see periodically what is being done, either privately or at conferences/conventions. Its true that nobody knows how the final OS will be, as parts like WinFS have been postponed (though Microsoft commits to releasing it later). But regardless, its valid to chronicle development of applications and OSs. In the article on Windows XP for instance it would be valid to have a history of pre-release (even pre-beta) development. Its the same with Longhorn. A lot of people think the ideas behind the development of Longhorn are substantial, even if they don't all bear out. To be fair the article should note that all the features are just what Microsoft is working on, but I don't see why its necessary to pound readers over the head with it, its really self-evident. --Brianshapiro

Size in terabytes

I remember a time in Wikipedia history when this article said something about having a computer size being in terabytes, but it no longer does. What happened?? 66.245.2.212 21:28, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

In this edit. Edward 23:38, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

But why?? 66.245.89.19 23:40, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Official name??

At Windows 98, it says that the version was originally called Memphis. Will this version of Windows similarly be renamed when it is released?? 66.245.71.17 01:56, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Almost certainly yes. Most software uses a codename during development, because the programmers need something to refer to the project as, but the public relations department won't yet have decided how to "brand" the product. For instance, Windows 98 was originally expected in 1997, but wasn't ready in time, so officially publicising the name "Windows 97" wouldn't have been a very good idea. But even Windows XP had a codename ("Whistler") and individual releases of something like Mozilla Firefox generally have a name to go with each version number, as it's easier to remember and refer to. It seems we even have an article on Microsoft codenames... - IMSoP 20:28, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

The Pillars of Longhorn

I thought that Indigo is ready now, that Avalon is nearly ready and that both of these will be released for Windows XP some time before "Windows Longhorn" is released. Brianjd 06:09, 2004 Nov 30 (UTC)

Aero - Security

It is my understanding that there is an unprecedented security surrounding Aero with only a few developers having access - is this correct? If so, there ought to be some mention in the article. Brianjd 06:11, 2004 Nov 30 (UTC)