Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

60% Of Windows Vista Code To Be Rewritten

Posted by CmdrTaco on Fri Mar 24, 2006 10:23 AM
from the do-not-collect-two-hundred-dollars dept.
Operating Systems Software Windows
Alien54 writes "Up to 60% of the code in the new consumer version of Microsoft new Vista operating system is set to be rewritten as the Company "scrambles" to fix internal problems, according to this report. In an effort to meet a deadline of the 2007 CES show in Las Vegas Microsoft has pulled programmers from the highly succesful Xbox team to help resolve many problems associated with entertainment and media centre functionality inside the OS. Much more at the link."
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Slashback: Vista Rewrite, Tuttle Travesty, Mac Botnets 269 comments
Slashback tonight brings some corrections, clarifications, and updates to previous Slashdot stories including Microsoft denies Vista rewrite, Tuttle Oklahoma city manager still doesn't get it, MS Virtual Server slips and VMWare fills the gap, Samsung execs plead guilty to price fixing charges, Tux in retail part 2, a renewed bid to register the Linux trademark in Australia, OpenSPARC.net shades of the past, and a follow up on Mac botnets -- Read on for details.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

60% Of Windows Vista Code To Be Rewritten 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Ok, we all know how the majority of Slashdot feels about Microsoft. It's not a positive feeling. I myself don't like them.

    But please don't use this 60% figure as proof that Vista will suck. Because it doesn't necessarily mean that.

    Once again, we have the Slashdot spin to deal with:
    Up to 60% of the code in the new consumer version of Microsoft new Vista operating system is set to be rewritten as the Company "scrambles" to fix internal problems, according to this report.
    Scrambling to fix problems? If they're saying their release date is sometime in 2007, I don't think they need to scramble. They actually seem pretty lax about when this is going to be released. Hell, I heard about Longhorn years ago and they sure haven't been "scrambling" to do anything with that. Stop making it sound like Microsoft is running around with their heads cut off. Because I highly doubt it.

    I interpret this to mean that Microsoft is stepping up to the plate and taking responsibility. They have identified so many problems that it needs major revision and good for them.

    Do you remember Windows 98, first edition? Do remember how much better second edition was? I do. Why the hell they didn't just wait on the release is simple. Money.

    They could release Vista prematurely but now we wait until 2007. And if you hate Windows, like I do, why do you care? We're still going to be using Linux anyways.

    So please, look at this move as a gesture to try and release a quality product and not slop out some POS OS that they are only releasing for the sake of income.
    • Heck... let's make it 95% to 100% and I will consider going back to Windows!
      • Actually I wonder which half is being re-written?
        Legacy code causing issues, so they re-write it, thus Vista is essentially a clean new windows? Or is is the new stuff not working, which means that there is even less reason to pugrade from XP? Which half is bad really does matter in this case (at least to me it does).
        -nB

      • Did anyone actually READ the article? (Score:4, Interesting)

        by lightyear4 (852813) on Friday March 24 2006, @12:37PM (#14989096) Homepage
        Now, I must preface this with the disclaimer that I myself prefer operating systems other than Windows. However, this is not an attempt to flame; by all means use what works best for you.

        With that said, did anyone actually read the entirety of the article?

        To be fair to Microsoft, this article was more than slightly misleading - and for that matter, contains little information relevant to its headline. The only mention about rewriting two thirds of Vista's codebase is in the headline and in the subheading that directly follows it. Whether informed by "an insider at Microsoft" or otherwise, there is simply not enough solid information to comment upon, let alone fill an entire slashdot thread with baseless conjecture.

        We're all hoping for an improved operating system from Microsoft. God knows it would make my job many magnitudes easier without having to deal with the joys of insecure machines.

        But please, withhold judgement until we receive a finished product.
        • How about they just use a working kernel like say linux, something from a bsd, etc.

          Generally speaking, the Windows NT Kernel is a superb piece of code. The problems come in when Microsoft abuses the kernel rather than working with it. The fact that everything runs with Administrator permissions (because all the users run as administrators) is not the original intent of the kernel. Windows Terminal Server Systems tend to be a little more on track, as they default deny administrator privleges to regular users. Unfortunately, they also feel extremely unweildly due to the lack of SUDO-type permission elevation, and the fact that individual desktops are only partly separated from each other. (e.g. Installing new programs is often just as hard as on Unix X Sessions. Many programs don't allow you to install for only one user.)

    • Re:Please Don't Interpret this Incorrectly (Score:5, Insightful)

      by spaztik (917859) on Friday March 24 2006, @10:31AM (#14987935)
      I'd rather they wait and get it right before releasing Vista rather than going through the excruciating process of installing security updates/service packs/second editions on a hastily released product. Or even better yet, having to go out and spend money on security software to fix the holes that shouldn't exist in the first place. Please get this one right Microsoft.

    • The Mythical Man Month. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by khasim (1285) <brandioch.conner@gmail.com> on Friday March 24 2006, @10:31AM (#14987945)
      A good book and it discusses how adding MORE programmers to a task means the project will take LONGER to complete.

      So, adding more programmers to a late project, and not slipping the date even more to account for them, [b]probably[/b] means that the final result [b]will[/b] suck.

      • Re:The Mythical Man Month. (Score:5, Funny)

        by 0kComputer (872064) on Friday March 24 2006, @11:06AM (#14988223)
        Hence the expression "9 women can't have a baby in 1 month."

        • Re:The Mythical Man Month. (Score:5, Insightful)

          by SeeMyNuts! (955740) on Friday March 24 2006, @11:06AM (#14988229)

          In any given project there are just so many parallel tasks. The optimum number of developers is about the same as that level of parallelism (plus a secretary and a manager). It allows compartmentalizing things, so each developer has a chance to become an expert in that area and be productive. Adding more developers just increases communication overhead, training overhead, petty squabbles, micromanagement of the mess, etc. Taking away developers leaves holes that will require additional time to complete.

          I hope the article summary is wrong and that Microsoft isn't so incompetent as to substantially re-write an operating system in the last year of its development! Talk about a death spiral.

          "That's no moon, it's the accumulated mass of all our new bugs!"

    • Re:Please Don't Interpret this Incorrectly (Score:4, Insightful)

      by TheRealBurKaZoiD (920500) on Friday March 24 2006, @10:32AM (#14987959)
      I agree with you mostly, but I swear I remember reading an article a couple of years ago where Allchin (sp?) commented that Vista was a from-scratch complete re-write of the OS, that they didn't port anything over. Of course I could be mistaken, but it just sounds really weird to remember that, and now the talk of a major re-write. 10%, 25%, 50%; does it really matter how much of a re-write it is? At 50+ million lines of code that's no small re-write. And I assume everyone here on /. has at the very least worked on small to medium-sized project development teams. You all know the difficulties and politics in teams of that size. Can you imagine the cluster-fuck in coordinating development using literally hundreds and hundreds of programmer?

      Personally, I really don't care when it comes out. I waited until sp2 to jump on the xp bandwagon anyway, and I typically wait a couple of years before adopting a new operating system, just to let the bugs shake out.

      • Re:Please Don't Interpret this Incorrectly (Score:4, Insightful)

        by EggyToast (858951) on Friday March 24 2006, @10:51AM (#14988104) Homepage
        To me, it means that Allchin was probably bending the truth a bit for PR reasons. Given how many different departments and groups there are within Microsoft, I'm sure there have been numerous instances of someone saying "we can't rewrite that from scratch; we'd have to start everything we're working on over from scratch too!" And so they port a little code here, a little code there... a big piece of code here, a bigger piece of code there...

        Given what we know is in Vista, it doesn't make much sense for the entirety to be rewritten. Why would they choose to recode the Registry and then follow through on actually including it? Similarly, look how many things are being backported to XP, and easily at that -- that doesn't sound like Vista is "all new" to me. But it appears that by NOT doing what Allchin said they were going to do, they now get to "scramble" and rewrite tons of code. I'm sure that's significantly less efficient than simply starting from scratch in the first place.

    • Re:Please Don't Interpret this Incorrectly (Score:5, Insightful)

      by bperkins (12056) on Friday March 24 2006, @10:37AM (#14987995) Homepage Journal
      I don't think they need to scramble.

      Are you kidding?

      Let's put aside the possibity that the 60% figure is probably total hogwash, because that's not what you're arguing.

      Rewriting over half the code of a project that you've spent years working on and are supposed to release in about a year is a desperate situation. It's not possible to acomplish. If they said they had to rewrite 10% of the code, I'd say they were in a bad situation, since that last 10% of the code often takes the most time.

      I don't believe the 60% figure, because if it were true, the project leaders would be looking for new jobs already.

    • Re:Please Don't Interpret this Incorrectly (Score:5, Interesting)

      by gstoddart (321705) on Friday March 24 2006, @11:06AM (#14988222) Homepage
      Hell, I heard about Longhorn years ago and they sure haven't been "scrambling" to do anything with that.

      Clearly. This was supposed to have been Longhorn by now, wasn't it?
      Stop making it sound like Microsoft is running around with their heads cut off. Because I highly doubt it.

      They've been announcing later release dates, fewer features, delays in their Office suite, and god knows what else.

      When a critical security bug is found in IE6, and then immediately found in the supposedly completely redesigned IE7, it gives one pause for concern.

      It is beiginning to seem that Microsoft is becoming a victim of their own intertia. They built a huge, overly complicated beast, based entirely off proprietary technologies of dubious value. They've been promising the moon for years, and now they're starting to promise the next county because the moon is unobtainable.
      So please, look at this move as a gesture to try and release a quality product and not slop out some POS OS that they are only releasing for the sake of income.

      I asked this yesterday in another thread, but I never got an answer ... given all of the features they've announced wouldn't be in Vista, WHAT is it, if NOT a release for the sake of income? Except for a new whiz-bang interface, I haven't really heard what compelling features Vista is supposed to have. From what I can tell, they're removing some of the suck, and a few incremental improvements, what motivates me as a consumer to want it?

      Certainly all of those shiny Longhorn features they touted have been dropped from it. It sounds like it's a minor evolutionary upgrade to Windows at best. Hardly the Earth shattering, Next New Thing they've touted it as being.

      And in the mean time, people might just decide to buy a Mac.
      • From what I can tell, they're removing some of the suck, and a few incremental improvements, what motivates me as a consumer to want it?

        The truly sad part is that it doesn't matter, because they're going to sell millions of units anyway. Every single new Dell sold in 2008+, and every computer at companies that uses Windows desktops (which is almost all of them) is going to have Vista installed on them, and Microsoft is going to be paid for every one of those copies.

        Just because no one will go out and purchase a $400 upgrade from a Best Buy shelf doesn't mean Microsoft isn't going to sell any. They have a captive audience. For the majority of the world, Microsoft Windows is inseparable from the computer. (I realise this sentiment is not true on Slashdot, but the people who read this site are of a slightly different breed.) Telling people they can buy a computer without an operating system, and that they can install their own, is like telling people they can go buy a car without an engine, and then download a free one from the internet. Even if it's technically possible, it doesn't even occur to them. And as for MacOSX: most people who buy Dells are looking for the equivalent of a Honda Civic. A Mac is like buying a BMW.

        And keep in mind that we (of the Slashdot kind) have been beating into people for years the need to keep their Windows machines all patched and updated. Well, isn't Vista just an update? Of course they will upgrade; their data needs to be protected from the evil identity thieves and hackers lurking in the intarweb!

        In short, Vista will be everywhere as soon as Microsoft releases it, whether it's better than XP or not. And they're going to make a bundle.

      • Re:Please Don't Interpret this Incorrectly (Score:5, Interesting)

        by caseih (160668) on Friday March 24 2006, @12:18PM (#14988907)
        I asked this yesterday in another thread, but I never got an answer ... given all of the features they've announced wouldn't be in Vista, WHAT is it, if NOT a release for the sake of income? Except for a new whiz-bang interface, I haven't really heard what compelling features Vista is supposed to have. From what I can tell, they're removing some of the suck, and a few incremental improvements, what motivates me as a consumer to want it?

        I've heard that MS is putting a lot of effort into the idea of running all applications as normal, restricted users. Up til now, many legacy (and not-so-legacy) applications had to be run with power user or adminstratrator on XP because they expected to be able to write to Program Files or even to the windows system directory. I understand that Vista will have a very sophisticated virtual file system layer (talk about a kludge) that will virtualize some of these areas of the disk for these bad applications so that they can still function. The app will think it is writing to the windows sytem directory or the Program Files area when if fact it is not. On one hand this seems to me to be a pretty brilliant solution to the crappy legacy app problem, but on the other hand seems to be a horrible hack.

    • Cairo? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Gr8Apes (679165) on Friday March 24 2006, @11:49AM (#14988635)
      Hell, I heard about Longhorn years ago and they sure haven't been "scrambling" to do anything with that.

      I first heard about Longhorn under another name, in the early 90s when it was called Cairo. Take a look at the "feature list" of that vaporware sometime. Then recall that the feature list was in response to OS/2's actual features, that existed in 93...

      How far we haven't come in 14 years.

      BTW, take a look at the original feature list for Longhorn, and the current list. It's interesting too. And we're now 2 years later than the original "Longhorn" date, and only 14 years past Cairo.

      • Re:Or.... (Score:4, Interesting)

        by laffer1 (701823) <luke@foGAUSSolis ... m minus math_god> on Friday March 24 2006, @11:55AM (#14988697) Homepage
        Windows 95 was the start of the tree.. many of you put down 98 gold but it was better than 95 was. 98 SE was better sometimes, but the "support" for IRQ's managing themselves caused me a lot of headaches with soundblaster 64 cards, via chipsets and ati rage graphics! Aside from Windows ME, every Windows release since 95 got better in my opinion. 95, NT4, 98, 98se, Windows 2000, Windows ME (sucked), Windows XP...

        Of course Vista will suck, they are messing with the kernel. XP was not a huge difference from Windows 2000 and so we're use to a "stable" release of windows (for windows anyway). I'll probably adopt Vista anyway when its released on my Windows machine with a dual boot or legacy install of XP so I can still game. Most likely everyone else will adopt vista as well. Which means we are stuck with it anyway. As much as most of us wish for Linux, OSX or something else to replace windows, its not happening on the desktop. Even keeping an old version of windows, helps keep windows strong. Why? Software will still be written for XP and Vista anyway. .NET 2 runs on both so you can imagine that an app may run on both. Thats how microsoft keeps going. If you hate it so much, start running another os exclusively, write software to replace everything windows has and maybe you'll get lucky. Lets face it, Linux is missing some key software areas like Tax Preperation software (finance in general), games, Itunes compatible players (even if its illegal in US), etc. End users need to migrate what they use over to a new os and if they can't, they won't switch. The Windows to Mac transition is easier but has its own problems. You can get quicken, and WoW runs fine, but if you use rhapsody, ms access, .NET apps, etc you're in for a rough ride. I'm also a mac user and I'm never able to ditch windows because I like to game, write software and websites. I need to test websites in IE, I actually like to code in .NET, and games like Half life, DODS, CSS, most star trek games, and many old games only run in windows. As long as we need windows, consumers will want it.

        In terms of stable, you need to define a baseline. I'm sure Vista will run better than Mac OS 9 ever did. It will run better than Windows 3.1 did and certainly better than 95 ever did. The standard is at least what people can remember and right now that means XP, 2000, ME, Linux 2.2-2.6, Mac OS 10.0-10.4. My opinion is that all operating systems suck right now. Read the changelog for the latest linux kernel.. time went backwards for christ sake! FreeBSD 6.1 beta's todo list is scary and most of those terrible bugs go back to at least 5.3. Mac OS 10.4 is a piece of shit even release. (all even releases of OS X are less stable than odd releases and often introduce more features) I've had to reinstall OS X several times on my laptop since it came out and on machines at work that I have to administer. People expect bugs. They don't expect blue screens anymore, but serious bugs are ok. Lets all raise our standards and then we can expect more!

      • Re:Please Don't Interpret this Incorrectly (Score:4, Insightful)

        by boingo82 (932244) on Friday March 24 2006, @12:19PM (#14988916) Homepage
        It's Slashdot spin, because people read the "up to 60%" and they hear "60%".

        In fact, you'll notice the submitter and/or editors did exactly that - they took the "up to 60%" in the article, and changed it to "60%" in the headline.

        In fact, "up to" means any number equal to or smaller than. So the actual amount of code rewritten could be 0%. It would also be accurate to say that the code is being rewritten entirely "up to 9 times", because that "up to" would include scenarios where the code was not re-written at all.

        It's spin, plain as day.

  • 60%? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by (1+-sqrt(5))*(2**-1) (868173) <1.61803phi@gmail.com> on Friday March 24 2006, @10:24AM (#14987864) Homepage
    I've scanned TFA an ungodly three times: “60%” occurs in the title and summary, but nowhere else; can anyone divine its provenance? I'd wager it hails from the statistical nether-æther of sensationalist journalism.

    That said, I think there's trouble brewing for any company that chants “innovation” like some apotropaïc mantra: you have it or you don't (and it tends to go hand in hand with testosterone).

    • Come on (Score:5, Funny)

      by Serapth (643581) on Friday March 24 2006, @10:28AM (#14987900)
      When has Smarthouse.com.au steered you wrong in the past????

      Seriously, some of the shit that gets posted on Slashdot is the geek equivelant of a tabloid.

      • Re:Come on (Score:5, Funny)

        by general_re (8883) on Friday March 24 2006, @10:31AM (#14987941) Homepage
        When has Smarthouse.com.au steered you wrong in the past????

        Never. Not one single time. Who the fuck is smarthouse.com.au?

      • Re:Come on (Score:5, Funny)

        by Dystopian Rebel (714995) on Friday March 24 2006, @10:58AM (#14988148) Journal
        Slashdot is the geek equivelant of a tabloid.


        This is simply not true.

        If Slashdot were like a tabloid, we'd have poorly written diatribes everywhere and a picture of a naked woman on Page 2.

        Cowboy Neal, I'm waiting for Page 2.

        • Re:Come on (Score:5, Funny)

          by notnAP (846325) on Friday March 24 2006, @11:08AM (#14988243)
          ...we'd have poorly written diatribes everywhere and a picture of a naked woman on Page 2.
          Cowboy Neal, I'm waiting for Page 2.

          Please Dear God may I not find a picture of a naked Cowboy Neal on page 2 tomorrow.

  • Wow! 60%??!! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 24 2006, @10:25AM (#14987872)
    That's a lot of GoTo statements!!!
  • Always add gaming programmers late in the project and to improve security and reliability.

    • Always add gaming programmers late in the project and to improve security and reliability.

      Of course. For example, the programmers of FPS games are likely good at writing AI which fights against the user. Just the thing you need for a secure OS, because you know, the biggest security problem often sits in front of the screen.
  • Wow, does it suck to be Microsoft today... just look at the homepage of Slashdot:


    The hits just keep coming... I'm no Microsoft supporter, but that's a lot of bad PR for any company in one day - makes you feel sorry for them.

    I wonder if all this negative press will affect their stock price [yahoo.com] in trading today. (Makes you feel sorry for their shareholders!)

    • Better late than broken (Score:4, Interesting)

      by phorm (591458) on Friday March 24 2006, @01:50PM (#14989689) Homepage Journal
      I wonder if all this negative press will affect their stock price [yahoo.com] in trading today

      Not as much as if Vista was released and immediately barfed and/or succumbed to massive virus infection out of the box...

      If I were waiting on Vista I'd be annoyed that it wasn't out, but then if I was such as big MS Software user then XP would still likely be doing ok for me, although lacking improved 64-bit/dual-core support. If I got a bunch of Vista machines that immediately started crashing or were infected in the new few weeks, I'd be a lot more pissed than annoyed.

      I'd say taking the time to fix things is not a bad plan, and 60% sounds like BS to me. As the article seems to focus a lot on multimedia components it could be that 60% of the multimedia core needs revamping.
  • When you run into a large issue, you don't pull people off another project to help.

    It's like getting 3 women pregnant so you can have a baby in 3 months.

    You need to define your new schedule and stick to that. otherwise you end up with a slower schedule and a different set of bugs.

  • Am I the only one...? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by BitterOak (537666) on Friday March 24 2006, @10:29AM (#14987923)
    Microsoft has pulled programmers from the highly succesful Xbox team to help resolve many problems associated with entertainment and media centre functionality inside the OS.

    Am I the only one who thinks that things like media and entertainment should not be core parts of an OS, but rather should be handled by applications that run on the OS? We're not buying a television, after all.

  • Slow news day? (Score:5, Funny)

    by paeanblack (191171) on Friday March 24 2006, @10:34AM (#14987973)
    Microsoft is pulling some staff from an finished project and assigning them to an unfinished project...targeting a similar market, no less...

    Brilliant!

  • 60% Is NOT IN THE ARTICLE (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ThinkFr33ly (902481) on Friday March 24 2006, @10:34AM (#14987978)
    Go ahead. Do a find on the page. The only place where the number 60 is even in there is in the article's title and in a link back to the SAME article at the bottom of the page.

    In fact, this 60% number is made up. Not only would this be impossible in less than a year, 60% of the code in Vista isn't even new to Vista.

    Hey Slashdot editors... I know you guys are really into MS bashing and you want to satisfy the thirst that most Slashdotters have for MS blood, but at least check to make sure that articles your posting have a shred of truth in them.

  • So what? (Score:5, Funny)

    by helix_r (134185) on Friday March 24 2006, @10:35AM (#14987986)
    Shut up, fools, 99+% of you are going to end up using Vista anyway.

  • Xbox code (Score:5, Funny)

    by Rob T Firefly (844560) on Friday March 24 2006, @10:37AM (#14987996) Homepage Journal
    Microsoft has pulled programmers from the highly succesful Xbox team to help resolve many problems associated with entertainment and media centre functionality inside the OS.

    Xbox code in Vista! Think of the possibilites!!

    When we get the Blue Screen of Death we can simply wait a few seconds and respawn somewhere nearby our original desktop.

    We can use a Gameshark to hack ourselves more time or chances to get our work done.

    We can whip out a plasma rifle from "Halo" to frag Clippy with.

  • Sounds like "Telephone" (Score:5, Insightful)

    by overshoot (39700) on Friday March 24 2006, @10:39AM (#14988011)
    Frankly, I doubt it. It sounds like something that mutated from either:
    • 60% of modules require some change (as distinct from "rewritten") or
    • 60% of <insert section> needs to be rewritten (as distinct from "Vista).

    You can think as little as you like of Microsoft's management (and you'd have to go pretty low to match me) but I can't see even them being so flagrantly (stupid|dishonest) as to promise a 2007Q1 delivery of a 60% rewrite of something that took five years to get this far.

  • Sad, Bad Reporting! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by cyberjessy (444290) on Friday March 24 2006, @10:48AM (#14988077) Homepage
    I have been installing and testing Vista since the early betas. To the last one, build 5308. I have seen things getting better all along the way, from better graphics, speed and more reliability. It looked like a mess earlier, but then they cut features and made schedules more realistic.

    Build 5308 is feature complete, and has not crashed even once. It supports all the devices on my machine. Now why the hell would they rewrite 60% of a perfectly well running system??? Microsoft has said that most of the work remaining is related to security and performance. I trust them, because I have seen it.

    I read the article, I could not find the source of this information. The memo that was included does not speak about this 60% figure. They have not mentioned any other sources. Now why is this making news!!!??

  • so lets make a list.. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by naelurec (552384) on Friday March 24 2006, @10:50AM (#14988089) Homepage
    1. Internet Explorer 7 still has major security issues that plague Internet Explorer 6

    2. Microsoft Office is delayed

    3. Vista is delayed.

    4. Microsoft restructures the Windows division before a major OS release

    5. Daniel Lyons from Forbes is underwhelmed with the Vista presentation and finds it complex and of little added value.

    6. Microsoft elected not to utilize its .NET tools in developing bundled applications that will ship with Vista, instead opting for lower level languages that are more suspectible to security issues.

    7. Throughout all of this, the security team at Microsoft decided to school Apple on security (I wonder if no one at Microsoft was paying attention?)

    8. Businesses sold on the "Software Assurance" and other licensing gimmicks are getting very aggervated at was could be considered bait-and-switch (get SA, get updates .. oh wait, we don't have updates because we are delaying ALL of our major products..)

    9. There is the possibility of major rewrites to Vista (though until it is confirmed by another source, I'll take it with a grain of salt..).

    Interesting.

  • I have access the vista code! (Score:5, Funny)

    by hsoft (742011) on Friday March 24 2006, @10:51AM (#14988100) Homepage
    It went from:
    #import <WinXP.h>

    WinXPApplyTheme(PRETTY_THEME);
    WinXP RunLoop();
    to:
    #import <WinXP.h>

    WinXPApplyTheme(PRETTIER_THEME); //To "Impact people" better
    WinXPApplyPolicy(DISALLOW_GATOR); //For improved security
    WinXPRunLoop(); // We're going to f___ing kill google!

  • I don't use osx but... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by codepunk (167897) on Friday March 24 2006, @11:10AM (#14988264) Homepage
    Apple could thrust one hell of a spear into the beast by releasing osx on standard intel now or very quickly. Yes it would be a frigging bold move but sometimes it takes a bold move when you want to make all the bucks. Yes of course drivers would be a big issue but I think that is a problem that could be solved also.

  • Wow. Nobody told me to rewrite my code. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by joemc79 (222495) on Friday March 24 2006, @12:30PM (#14989030)
    As someone who works on Windows Media Center for Vista, I can certainly say that we're not rewriting a bunch of code. I'm using MCE for Vista on my living room PC right now.

  • MS is just stalling - to avoid the DOJ (Score:5, Insightful)

    by mgpeter (132079) on Friday March 24 2006, @01:46PM (#14989649) Homepage
    The ONLY reason I can think that "Vista" has not been released yet is because the "probation" period of the DOJ settlement is due to expire (probably) in November 2007.

    Microsoft is a maximum profits kind of company and Windows is one of their Cash Cows. If it wasn't due to the fact that until Nov 2007 they have to somewhat play by "fair" rules, there would have already been at least 1 newer version of windows, I mean it has been over 4 YEARS !

    Microsoft is just playing the stall game to keep itself in the media, trying to keep the public view on Windows and not GNU/Linux or whatever. Mark my words, the next version of Windows (Vista) will be released mid-Nov 2007, just in time for Christmas 2007. And yes it will probably include their own media player, web browser, Anti-Virus, Anti-Spyware, Photo Editor, Desktop Search, Kitchen Sink, etc.

    • Perhaps... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Svartalf (2997) on Friday March 24 2006, @10:42AM (#14988026) Homepage
      But to be worrying about 60% of the code in a one year timeframe, in light of the 10's of millions of lines of code...

      If they're actually doing this (I've my doubts...), then Vista won't be out when they say it will be- it'll be delayed by another 2 or so years like Windows 95 ended up being (95 was started approximately 4 years earlier and was only supposed to take a year, year and a half to do- the delays were so bad that the press was making all blow and no go jokes with respect to the codename for the product, "Chicago".).

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.