backtop


Print 102 comment(s) - last by acase.. on Feb 9 at 3:17 PM


A leaked release schedule from Microsoft shows Windows 8 possibly arriving in 2011.  (Source: MSDN Blogs; Chris Green (former Microsoft developer))
Microsoft has plenty to feel good about these days

Microsoft struggled under a negative public image during the Vista years.  However, the work it did would help to lay the foundation for Windows 7, perhaps Microsoft's most popular operating system to date.  The new OS, which was released last October, was extremely well received thanks in part to an unprecedented public test program that saw millions download free trial builds of early versions of the OS and suggest ways Microsoft could improve it.

Now Windows 7 has hit a market share of 10 percent according to market research firm Net Applications.  To put those gains in context, Windows Vista did not hit over 10 percent until May 2008 – what took Windows Vista 16 months to achieve, Windows 7 did in a mere 5 months.

Currently, Windows Vista has around a 20 percent market share, while the nine-year-old Windows XP holds 60 to 70 percent market share.

Despite the emphatic success of Windows 7, the fastest selling OS in history, Microsoft is hard at work improving the operating system and its successors  Microsoft is reportedly readying Windows 7 Service Pack 1 for a June 2010 beta release and a September 2010 final release.  The SP1 will bring out of the box support for USB 3.0, one of the most exciting new computer technologies.

And according to Chris Green, a former Microsoft developer, Microsoft is already hard at work on the best-selling operating system's successor, code named Windows 8.  The next-gen Windows may be released on July 2011.  He leaked an entire release schedule which includes the upcoming Office 2010 and its successor Office 2012.

Microsoft also had some other good news to report.  In January 2010, Internet Explorer 8 became the world's most used browser, passing IE 6.  IE 8 currently has about a 22.31 percent market share worldwide.  Internet Explorer 8's gains have been partially fueled by Windows 7's success -- IE 8 is the default browser on the U.S. edition of the OS.  

IE 8 also has benefited from a recent push by Microsoft to get users away from IE 6 and IE 7, both of which have a flaw that was exploited by Chinese hackers to steal corporate data.  Microsoft is urging users to upgrade to the new browser.  Amazingly 20.07 percent of users in January still used IE 6 (many of these were likely business users).  Google recently announced that it would be phasing out support for IE 6.

Microsoft appears to be firing on all cylinders.  If it can continue its momentum with the release of Office 2010 later this year, it should be in a very favorable position at the year's end.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

IE 8 top browser
By BubbaJoe TBoneMalone on 2/3/2010 9:35:37 AM , Rating: 5
If Firefox was the browser included with Windows, I am pretty sure FEW people would choose to move to Internet Explorer.




RE: IE 8 top browser
By The0ne on 2/3/2010 9:39:25 AM , Rating: 1
Amen to that.


RE: IE 8 top browser
By Mitch101 on 2/3/2010 3:34:21 PM , Rating: 3
I use both IE and Firefox

I found an issue/bug with Frames that Firefox cannot display the frame or the information in the frame at all. The portion comes up blank in Firefox but fine in IE. Sure you can program this in but why not use the bug to my benefit. Because of this issue I included it on my administration pages of a website I run. So if your running firefox and try getting into my admin pages you wont even get the logon screen and if you got past that the user information isn't visible in Firefox. Doesn't even come up in view source on firefox. I hope they never fix this and I upgrade to the latest versions of firefox. The only way to access my admin pages is with IE. Every little bit of security helps.

Otherwise I use both but when I do dev work I use Firefox.


RE: IE 8 top browser
By reader1 on 2/3/10, Rating: -1
RE: IE 8 top browser
By retrospooty on 2/3/2010 10:02:26 AM , Rating: 3
" That's true. It's also proof that Microsoft's monopoly is harming society."

LOL - nevermind all my other responses to you in this thread. I now realize you are just an idiot and/or are just here to bash MS.

The whole world runs on MS software INCLUDING the factories that manufacture Mac's. MS gets a bad rap for alot of things, but you know what? Its mostly BS.

MS created an open software that supports 10's of thousands of different pieces of hardware from hundreds of different manufacturers. They do it all while adding in business networking functionality. The whole world runs on it, and my life id definitely made easier and more enjoyable because of it.


RE: IE 8 top browser
By rburnham on 2/5/2010 10:04:12 AM , Rating: 1
Please tell me your comment is ironic or just plain silly.


RE: IE 8 top browser
By BruceLeet on 2/3/2010 9:49:55 AM , Rating: 3
Well I recently introduced my girlfriend to Firefox and she was amazed by how fast and quick everything opened, I've even given her AdBlock Plus, which she really likes she never knew internet without banner ads etc. and she loves how much cleaner her Facebook looks....now I CANT get her off...no pun intended.

Needless to say she said something along the lines of "Im never gonna use internet explorer again, oh my crack Firefox is so awesome"


RE: IE 8 top browser
By Noliving on 2/3/10, Rating: -1
RE: IE 8 top browser
By sabrewulf on 2/3/2010 12:43:21 PM , Rating: 4
Firefox is more established, better supported, MUCH more flexible, and has the superior ad-blocking extension. Firefox is also faster, in my humble opinion. But then again I don't spend all day surfing sunspider benchmarks or hundreds of unique sites, nor would I guess do most people. Firefox handles cached page loads much more smoothly than Chrome, at least to my eyes.

Chrome is nice if you need something that launches a little faster on slow machines and you don't mind doing things Google's way and no other (utter lack of UI customization options).


RE: IE 8 top browser
By quiksilvr on 2/3/2010 6:24:13 PM , Rating: 2
I agree to an extent. I do get tired of constantly deleting Chrome's cache, but that can easily avoided if you set Google Chrome to open in incognito mode by default:
http://geekace.com/be-safe-open-chrome-in-incognit...

Also, you can customize the UI and alot more on Google Chrome as well (not to mention Adblocking):
http://www.techradar.com/news/software/application...

And Chrome is not a little faster, it is a magnitude faster. It's almost insulting to see a webpage open with advertisements nearly twice as fast as Firefox with no extensions or add-ons on except for Adblock Plus.

Firefox 3.6 is amazing. Its faster, it gives you easier customization and has better compatibility. But it just doesn't hold a candle to Google Chrome's ridiculous speed and simplicity.


RE: IE 8 top browser
By Byte on 2/4/2010 9:01:57 AM , Rating: 2
I always have about 7 browsers always open, for web dev and whatnot. But for pure speed from cache you just can't touch Opera 8 period. Try open up ebay, do a search click something. Now go back on fox, chrome, and opera. U will see.


RE: IE 8 top browser
By jonmcc33 on 2/3/2010 11:46:26 AM , Rating: 3
It's the Adblock Plus that is helping her surf faster. Firefox is quick on it's own but ads can really kill page load speeds. Take away those Flash and animated GIF ads and everything is blazing fast (with the exception of 56K).


RE: IE 8 top browser
By gavjof on 2/8/2010 11:52:08 AM , Rating: 2
I prefer NoScript and its whitelist approach. Both have the same purpose but I found AdBlock slowed page load times.


RE: IE 8 top browser
By putergeek00 on 2/3/2010 12:18:19 PM , Rating: 4
I introduced my wife to Firefox and not two weeks later she got infected by visiting a website. I went to the same website with IE8 and a HUGE warning came up telling me NOT to go to the site. So, Firefox cost me a few hours of work when IE8 would have stopped it before it even happened. :)


RE: IE 8 top browser
By sabrewulf on 2/3/10, Rating: -1
RE: IE 8 top browser
By wushuktl on 2/3/2010 9:51:01 AM , Rating: 5
who cares? It's just a browser! Can you argue that any of these IE8 users really not getting the full experience of the Internet because of not using Firefox? Are any of these guys not able to check their email or order their plasma TVs? Get off your browser high horse


RE: IE 8 top browser
By Taft12 on 2/3/10, Rating: -1
RE: IE 8 top browser
By ianweck on 2/3/2010 10:41:17 AM , Rating: 5
I just realized that whenever the topic of IE vs Firefox comes up, the Firefox users act just like the Apple users in the MS vs Apple topic. So, FF users = Mactards?


RE: IE 8 top browser
By Sazar on 2/3/2010 11:20:57 AM , Rating: 1
I think it should be fire-tards honestly ;)

Fwiw, I think a lot of corporate users still use IE, I know I do on my work system as I cannot use Chrome to access some internal sites. Same with FF when I used to use it.

So with the movie to Win 7, corporate users will also move that way.


RE: IE 8 top browser
By The0ne on 2/3/2010 11:43:08 AM , Rating: 1
It's actually Fck-Formating because when your nephew comes over and uses IE go to websites and there's nothing protecting him from them. It's a day not having to reformat or reinstall anything due to whatever the fck is out there that you can't clean.

IE8 has improved though but have limited experience using it. It's a matter of how fcked you've been with IE that's all.


RE: IE 8 top browser
By tastyratz on 2/3/2010 5:54:58 PM , Rating: 3
The biggest reason for I.E. popularity in the corporate world is centralization/manageability. I.E. ties neatly in windows and can be easily managed using the same software solutions, windows updates/wsus/etc. Its also built into windows and removes the need to support 2 different browsing systems.

Personally I prefer and use Firefox pretty exclusively, and I don't like I.E. Each browser has their merits and I recognize them... but to each their own.

end comments of non mac-like Firefox user.


RE: IE 8 top browser
By jonmcc33 on 2/3/2010 11:48:35 AM , Rating: 3
No. I use Firefox but I don't preach/force my opinion of web browsers onto others. If someone wants to use IE8, Opera, Chrome or Safari it will not make me lose a minute of sleep.


RE: IE 8 top browser
By 3minence on 2/3/2010 12:43:52 PM , Rating: 3
I agree, with one exception, and that is companies that use software that requires IE6. They have been holding back the internet and what developers can offer me.

I've used all the current browsers and like them all although I like Firefox (with AdBlock & NoScript) just a little better.


RE: IE 8 top browser
By acase on 2/9/2010 3:17:08 PM , Rating: 2
Totally agree...the company we are contracted for requires the use of IE6 for "security reasons". Ridiculous.


RE: IE 8 top browser
By theapparition on 2/3/2010 11:42:03 AM , Rating: 5
Better check your facts there. In the latest round of testing, posted here on DT, IE8 was the most secure browser and Firefox was actually quite weak in the field.

I use both IE8 and FF, and while Adblock is a nice addition, I don't find FF "leaps and bounds" better. So to say the FF is superiour is subjective at best.

I don't care what browser you use. Happy with Firefox, Chrome, Safari, IE, Opera, or whoseitwhats, I don't care. It's only a browser, not a life choice.

But don't spread misinformation.


RE: IE 8 top browser
By Targon on 2/3/2010 1:22:53 PM , Rating: 2
Secure is the key word here, but as others have said on the subject, bug reports for most browsers are kept hidden, so no one really knows how many bugs those other products have. As a result, you can't really go on the so-called official reports, because they are skewed based on a lack of information about most products.

The only way to tell which is the most secure would be to set up a series of web servers serving up pages with various known exploits and security holes, and then see which browsers allow the exploits to get through. I doubt that any of the people doing the so-called testing have actually done this to see which browsers are the most vulnerable.

The same configuration could also be used to see how well the various anti-virus packages keep people SAFE. Cleaning up after your computer is infected is a LOT more difficult than keeping the computer safe in the first place, and really, it is more important to know which products do the best job of keeping malware off computers in the first place.


RE: IE 8 top browser
By VaultDweller on 2/3/2010 2:22:48 PM , Rating: 2
I agree.

So does XKCD briefly when first waking up, but that quickly subsides:
http://xkcd.com/198/


RE: IE 8 top browser
By weskurtz0081 on 2/3/2010 10:11:38 AM , Rating: 3
I tend to prefer Firefox, but I find myself using IE8 a little more these days because FF can be such a memory hog, it tends to crash on me from time to time, and the occasional compatibility problem. IE8 seems to have caught up with FF for the most part, though I still prefer FF overall.


RE: IE 8 top browser
By inighthawki on 2/3/2010 11:01:34 AM , Rating: 3
I think a more important way to think about this is, how many people actually bother switching browsers? IE8 is probably sufficient for most people. What those stupid charts with IE8 at a dominate share aren't telling u is that 90% of ie8 users are using it because they DONT CARE what browser it is.


RE: IE 8 top browser
By therealnickdanger on 2/3/2010 11:26:39 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
What those stupid charts with IE8 at a dominate share aren't telling u is that 90% of ie8 users are using it because they DONT CARE what browser it is.


Not sure the charts are stupid. Reminds me of a time when I sold computers at CompUSA (in the 1990s). An older woman came in and I showed her a couple models within her budget that could get the job done. We're walking up to the register and she said, "Oh wait, I almost forgot, does this computer have Mac?"

... "Have Mac?"

Apparently, she had been using a Mac at her job for 10 years and this was to be her first home computer. Even though I showed her Windows machines and she picked out the Windows machine she wanted, she couldn't tell the difference. She was oblivious. I went on to tell her that Apple computers that use the Mac OS were a different item altogether and that she should consider sticking to what is familiar (because it was obvious she had no clue what she was talking about). I offered to show her one of the many fruity-colored iMacs we had in stock, but she just said, "Nah, I'm sure it will be fine."

I could probably go on ad nauseam with similar stories.


RE: IE 8 top browser
By inighthawki on 2/3/2010 11:38:40 AM , Rating: 3
I didn't say that people weren't oblivious to other browsing solutions, and weren't informed or anything like that. The fact is that even when giving that choice, they don't care enough to bother getting a new browser.


RE: IE 8 top browser
By therealnickdanger on 2/3/2010 2:30:38 PM , Rating: 1
Ah, I assumed the mysterious "90%" you referred to was the mainstream folks who wouldn't know they had a choice in the first place.


RE: IE 8 top browser
By jonmcc33 on 2/3/2010 11:39:46 AM , Rating: 3
True but Microsoft doesn't make Firefox, Mozilla does. Regardless of what the EU dictates from Microsoft, it isn't up to Microsoft to provide other company's products with their OS. Everything in Windows 7 was made by Microsoft or a company that Microsoft acquired.

The same goes for Apple's Mac OS X. You don't see them bundling Firefox or Opera with their OS.


RE: IE 8 top browser
By Jeffk464 on 2/3/2010 11:54:23 AM , Rating: 3
I know I definitely need firefox for the built in spell checker.


RE: IE 8 top browser
By Hieyeck on 2/3/2010 12:49:29 PM , Rating: 3
And yet IE would still remain a top browser - no other browser is AD/Group Policy compliant and corps would be sticking with it.


RE: IE 8 top browser
By killerb255 on 2/3/2010 2:57:44 PM , Rating: 3
Give me Group Policy support out of the box, and I'll agree with you...


RE: IE 8 top browser
By Shadowmaster625 on 2/3/2010 3:37:34 PM , Rating: 2
Firefox has got some very serious problems that they refuse to address. Try googling "Firefox loses connection and needs restart". You'll get an insane amount of results. I'll be surfing and all the sudden out of the blue nothing will load anymore. I have to close and save my tabs and reopen firefox. Then it works fine, for a while. Obviously if you're watching a video or playing a flash game, that crap is unacceptable. (As if it is ever acceptable.) But they refuse to fix the problem. IE8 is actually a lot more reliable. It crashes less often too.


RE: IE 8 top browser
By p05esto on 2/3/2010 7:31:04 PM , Rating: 3
Opinions. I'm a developer of 12 years and prefer IE8 against all other browsers. It feels faster, renders text smoothly and just feels more polished than FireFox for example.

But really, now that all browsers are so standards compliant does it even matter?

Wouldn't it be nice is there was one rendering engine that all browsers simply shared? The browser manufacturers could wrap their features around a single rendering engine so web sites would look the same to everyone. Why not? The core engine could be updated automatically from a single source whether the browser is 5 years old or 5 days.

....I can dream. shhhh


RE: IE 8 top browser
By DominionSeraph on 2/3/2010 10:10:49 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
If Firefox was the browser included with Windows, I am pretty sure FEW people would choose to move to Internet Explorer.


On two separate occasions after an XP reinstall, I found that Firefox 3.5 was my only working browser. Both times I used it to download IE8.

I don't hate on Firefox or Chrome. I just uninstalled Chrome recently after using it as my primary browser for about 3 months. I loved the screen real estate, and the speed of rendering was great. With Firefox, you have Adblock.
But neither had the day in and day out compatibility of IE8.

IE8 may bog down on an anime forum where it's rendering 50 animated signatures, and it may be a quarter second slower to show some pages; but goddamn it, you never have to swap out of it to do anything.


RE: IE 8 top browser
By Mike Acker on 2/5/2010 9:35:38 AM , Rating: 2
Firefox does not virtualize its tabs: all of the pages you are running run in the same address space. This puts Firefox a lap down, although knowing this you can certainly stick to one tab at time when you are on https type pages


RE: IE 8 top browser
By callmeroy on 2/9/2010 9:11:39 AM , Rating: 2
My first reaction is who give's a rat's arse who's browser is number one -- its a friggin browser, the most boring of all computer applications.

At this point in time I use both Fire Fox and IE 8 ...FF is on one of my laptops and IE 8 is on my "main" desktop.

They both do the job fine. It's a non-issue who wins the browser wars IMO.


Not Surprising
By retrospooty on 2/3/2010 9:33:54 AM , Rating: 3
Like it or not, right, or wrong, Vista was a total flop from a marketing perspective. It was percieved as problematic - and for alot of people was very slow, even on a new system with plenty CPU and RAM. 7 is fast, stable, and compatible where Vista had severe issues (with public perception anyhow). It also not only pretty, but even prettier than Vista.

For me its not only acceptable, but a pleasure to use, that is saying alot.

Nice job MS. If Apple had to support 10's of thousands of hardware from several hundred different manufacturues, as well as the whole enterprise sector they would fall on thier smug faces...




RE: Not Surprising
By reader1 on 2/3/10, Rating: -1
RE: Not Surprising
By retrospooty on 2/3/2010 9:49:02 AM , Rating: 5
"That's partially why the iPhone OS is so popular. Developers don't want to deal with a billion different hardware configurations.

Developers dont need to. The OS should do that.

The iPhone is so popular because it came out and blew every other smartphone out of the water on UI and useability. Now that they forced everyone else to raise the bar (and we all owe Apple a great big thank you for that - clap clap) others are now at the same level. Because Apple is a closed hardware platform, the others will not only match apple, but surpass apple at a better price.

Closed platforms are only ever succeseful if they are superior or cheaper than the open alternative. The iPhone was superior, not for long...


RE: Not Surprising
By BZDTemp on 2/3/10, Rating: -1
RE: Not Surprising
By SandmanWN on 2/3/2010 10:09:02 AM , Rating: 5
Uhm, Windows 7 Home Premium this month is $89.
Buying Call of Duty MW2 is a $69 purchase.

We are almost at the point where buying an OS that you will use for years and runs anything you want costs slightly more than a video game.

Seriously, stop the BS.


RE: Not Surprising
By Taft12 on 2/3/10, Rating: -1
RE: Not Surprising
By SandmanWN on 2/3/2010 10:45:19 AM , Rating: 3
Yes, I think $89 is perfectly acceptable for something I will use for years. Would I like it cheaper? Sure, but its more than fine at under a $100.
quote:
Also, $89 is not the price for 90% of the country who wanders into Best Buy wanting this great new OS they heard about on TV - they'll pay $200.

Which has probably very little to do with the actual cost of Windows and more likely price markups by BestBuy individually. Why do you think it costs different amounts and different stores? And WTF are you doing looking at BestBuy for an OS anyway?


RE: Not Surprising
By weskurtz0081 on 2/3/2010 11:58:26 AM , Rating: 2
Really? Did you bother looking at Bestbuy.com first or did you just decide to make that up?

So, when you say "90% of the country", you are saying they would go with the Windows 7 Pro upgrade OVER the Windows 7 Home Premium upgrade? If they go with the Home Premium upgrade, then they are only paying $119, not $200.


RE: Not Surprising
By weskurtz0081 on 2/3/2010 12:02:53 PM , Rating: 2
I see your link, but when I click on it, our security software blocks it. Why do you think everyone would go out and buy a full version of the software instead of a upgrade version? You can still do a fresh install over XP with an upgrade version, and Microsoft will even tell you how to do it so you have no problem activating it.


RE: Not Surprising
By Newspapercrane on 2/3/2010 1:16:43 PM , Rating: 1
Last I checked 90% of the country isn't going to go to best buy and purchase an operating system to install on their computers; they're going to go to best buy and purchase a computer that already has the operating system installed.

For people looking for operating systems to install on their own systems (people of more than like above average computer skills) there are multiple ways to get a discount when purchasing the operating system: OEM licenses, Upgrade licenses, and student discounts. If you're paying full retail for a Microsoft product, you're a sucker.


RE: Not Surprising
By rburnham on 2/5/2010 10:07:13 AM , Rating: 2
69 dollars for MW2?? Where are you buying your games. It's 59 dollars everywhere I look.


RE: Not Surprising
By jonmcc33 on 2/3/2010 12:30:12 PM , Rating: 3
I paid $109 for my OEM license for Windows 7 Home Premium. That is completely acceptable for an OS license.


RE: Not Surprising
By Jeffk464 on 2/3/2010 11:59:11 AM , Rating: 1
There was a long history of microsoft increasing the bloat of every new generation of its OS. In the past this has also been a boon to the hardware manufacturers as you required spiffy new hardware to run the OS. It wasn't until lightweight netbooks the customers started to demand a slick efficient OS. Now with tablets and a trend for laptops with long battery life I don't think MS will get away with making bloatware anymore. That being said if you had the hardware to run vista it seemed to be a completely effective and stable OS.


Mid 2011?
By Aloonatic on 2/3/2010 9:40:32 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
The next-gen Windows may be released on July 2011
This is great news. A Beta or Release Candidate may even be ready before the RC of Win 7 runs out :)

Seriously though, it seems that MS may well be in danger of being lead by it marketing/sales department into releasing products more often in order to maximise their earning potential. While there's essentially nothing wrong with a company doing that, they may well start to find people getting somewhat annoyed by this, and as other Operating Systems come along (with mobile OSs creeping into the computing space, Apple iPad for example, and Google aren't going to sit on their hands with Android) it might be something that MS ultimately regret.

Who knows, just a thought. Maybe MS see this trend too and are making hay, before the competition hots up.




RE: Mid 2011?
By Spivonious on 2/3/10, Rating: -1
RE: Mid 2011?
By Kepe on 2/3/2010 10:01:08 AM , Rating: 2
The dates are in D/M/YY, not in M/D/YY. So the Office should be RTM on the first of June, 2010.

M$ used to launch a new operation system every 2 to 3 years. There just was a huge gap between XP and Vista. Now they seem to be back on track with their launch cycle.


RE: Mid 2011?
By weskurtz0081 on 2/3/2010 10:17:00 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah, competition to MS is increasing a bit from companies like Appl€ and Googl€, so it's probably a good thing that they are stepping the game back up.


RE: Mid 2011?
By Mitch101 on 2/3/2010 3:42:46 PM , Rating: 3
The problem came from other OS's catching up on Microsoft's OS. They would boast how they had this feature also and some new ones that were already in development for Microsoft's next OS. By Microsoft going to a 3 year product cycle and only supporting current and previous gen people need to upgrade and Microsoft doesn't have to support an OS older than 6 years. It also keeps the competition from being able to catch up and pass a 7 year old OS.


RE: Mid 2011?
By Spivonious on 2/3/2010 4:31:17 PM , Rating: 2
Heh, I see what you did there. Clever.


RE: Mid 2011?
By ultimatebob on 2/3/2010 10:02:11 AM , Rating: 3
Does anyone know if Windows 8 is going to be a "major" new version release like Windows Vista (version 6), or a point release like Windows 7 (version 6.1)?

If "Windows 8" is really just Windows 6.2, they should be able to release it on-time. If it's going to be Windows version 7.0, they'll probably run into the same delays that they ran into like Vista.


RE: Mid 2011?
By sviola on 2/3/2010 12:08:33 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Does anyone know if Windows 8 is going to be a "major" new version release like Windows Vista (version 6), or a point release like Windows 7 (version 6.1)?


You know MS launched 7 as 6.1 due to software compatibility, right?


RE: Mid 2011?
By Mitch101 on 2/3/2010 3:49:40 PM , Rating: 3
I do but who cares except Microsoft haters? Vista worked well for me and Windows 7 was just that much better. If they are too busy focusing on versions they have run out of excuses to complain about. Might as well complain about the default desktop wallpaper.


RE: Mid 2011?
By jonmcc33 on 2/3/2010 12:41:24 PM , Rating: 3
Windows 7 is just a name. It is not a point release either. The 6.1 indicates what version of NT it is. Windows 2000 is NT version 5.0 and Windows XP is NT version 5.1. Windows XP surely wasn't a "point release" of Windows 2000 by any means. If you had used either extensively then you would know that.

A point release is for something that fixes minor bugs. Windows 7 surely is NOT a minor bug fix for Windows Vista. Anyone that has used either extensively would know that too.


RE: Mid 2011?
By 91TTZ on 2/5/2010 5:39:19 PM , Rating: 2
Actually Windows XP is based heavily on Windows 2000. The difference between Windows 2000 and XP is a lot smaller than the difference between Windows NT 4 and Windows 2000.

Drivers for Windows 2000 usually worked for Windows XP.


USB 3.0 support
By RU482 on 2/3/2010 9:45:01 AM , Rating: 3
yay for USB 3.0 support in the upcoming service pack. That should further help usher it in as a mainstream replacement for 2.0




RE: USB 3.0 support
By Taft12 on 2/3/10, Rating: -1
RE: USB 3.0 support
By Kepe on 2/3/2010 11:39:12 AM , Rating: 2
USB 3 is backwards compatible with USB 2, so there's no need to delay the adoption of USB 3 into new motherboards, since all your USB 2 devices will work perfectly fine. I'd say that in 2011 we'll see a huge amount of new USB 3 devices as the support for it will start to pick up.


RE: USB 3.0 support
By Jeffk464 on 2/3/2010 12:01:42 PM , Rating: 2
besides there is always pci usb 3 cards and manufacturer drivers to make it work.


RE: USB 3.0 support
By ImSpartacus on 2/3/2010 12:27:46 PM , Rating: 2
USB 3.0 is backwards compatible...

It's not like a board will be required to have both 2.0 and 3.0 ports.

Granted, for a while, many will do just that, but for cost reasons, not compatibility reasons.


RE: USB 3.0 support
By sdoorex on 2/8/2010 1:33:59 PM , Rating: 1
My new motherboard has neither PS/2 or RS232 connections. It also does not have an LPT connection. I have also seen a few mother boards that don't have PCI or IDE connections. The world of computer hardware, and technology in general, keeps moving forward.


That graph is fake (:
By BruceLeet on 2/4/2010 5:06:15 AM , Rating: 2
First of all.

The first "Extended support ?" date of 1/07/16 does not land on a Friday as shown, showing this graph was poorly thought out without much intricacy.

Interesting timeline nonetheless.




RE: That graph is fake (:
By BruceLeet on 2/4/2010 5:11:35 AM , Rating: 2
Yes, just cross referenced a lot of the dates, all of them are inaccurate and don't match up so wherever this graph came from did not come from any "former" Microsoft employee.

quote:
\\ according to Chris Green, a former Microsoft developer


Nice journalism, if you're amateur or not I just shoved this article down your throat.


RE: That graph is fake (:
By fcx56 on 2/6/2010 1:40:27 AM , Rating: 2
Maybe if you spent more time looking at the dates instead of "cross referencing" them you'd see that they are clearly in DD/MM/YYYY format. I saw you replied to your own post and thought that you had saved me the trouble of writing this, but alas five minutes later and you still hadn't caught on, this time firing off a rude comment to the author all the while looking like even more of an ass-hat! That is unless you were cross referencing them to a 13, 14, 22, 27 or 30 month calender, then I would apologize and concede.


RE: That graph is fake (:
By BruceLeet on 2/9/2010 2:14:08 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, CLEARLY a dd/mm/yyyy format.

Dig deeper...the Tuesdays/Thursdays don't land on the /dd/ listed.

;)


Those dates are all wrong
By Lord 666 on 2/3/10, Rating: 0
RE: Those dates are all wrong
By Kepe on 2/3/2010 10:09:59 AM , Rating: 3
Look at the dates a bit more carefully. They are day/month/year. Or have you heard of the 26th month of the year?

RTM for Office 2010 is the first of June 2010 according to the document.


RE: Those dates are all wrong
By Lord 666 on 2/3/2010 10:24:30 AM , Rating: 1
Even in D/M/Y format, the beta dates for Office 2010 are wrong.


RE: Those dates are all wrong
By SandmanWN on 2/3/2010 10:39:18 AM , Rating: 2
Perhaps you missed the question marks besides Office 2010 and Windows 8 signaling that its obviously up for changes as necessary.

What difference does it make anyway. You will get it when you get it.


ALREADY???
By Freezebyte on 2/3/2010 4:23:48 PM , Rating: 2
WTF is the point of releasing another MS OS that soon? What happened to the nice 5-8 year time line between OS upgrades? I'm just settling down with my Win 7 64bit here!




RE: ALREADY???
By Akrovah on 2/3/2010 5:28:39 PM , Rating: 2
That 5-8 year time line was actually the oddity. Look at the history.

Not counting 2000 which was supposed to be Business oriented and therfore separate form ME, despirte alot of tech savy home users jumping to 2000 instead of ME.
Windows 95 - 1995
Windows 98 - 1998
Windows ME - 2000
Windows XP - 2001
Windows Vista - 2007
Windows 7 - 2009

The 6 year gap between XP and Vista was not planned, and MS got reamed by business partners who expected a new product to sell every 2-3 years because of it.


RE: ALREADY???
By Roffles on 2/3/2010 9:09:25 PM , Rating: 2
Some will say 6 years but I will call it 9 years and counting for the vast majority of people (and businesses) who have settled into XP and will not move forward with a new OS. Microsoft really shot themselves in the foot with that 6 year gap, and businesses weren't exactly clamoring for Vista with all the reports of software incompatibility. And this economy isn't doing anyone any favors.

Win7 has finally arrived, but is it too late? Microsoft may have to wait for some of these old Pentium4 XP machines to start dying off before they see the market share they want.


IE6
By RobFDB on 2/3/2010 9:50:13 AM , Rating: 2
I work for British Telecom and most of the PC's in our office use IE6. That said I only use if for BT internal sites or a couple of BT external sites. All my other browsing is done in FireFox. But it goes to show you that even a massive company like BT that likes to think of itself as major player in the IT market is behind the times.




RE: IE6
By Taft12 on 2/3/2010 10:23:02 AM , Rating: 1
BT is a "major player" by virtue of their size, but they are not remotely "cutting edge". You can't be when your organization is that large.


By aromero78 on 2/3/2010 3:46:48 PM , Rating: 2
Anyone else notice that the site they linked for the browser share stats doesn't make mention of FF 3.6?




I'm confused.
By Icehearted on 2/3/2010 5:07:29 PM , Rating: 2
According to Cnet IE6 is doing better than 8.




iPhone OS > Windows
By reader1 on 2/3/10, Rating: -1
RE: iPhone OS > Windows
By michal1980 on 2/3/2010 9:34:28 AM , Rating: 5
wow.


RE: iPhone OS > Windows
By Totally on 2/3/2010 9:46:57 AM , Rating: 5
It's reader1, how does it surprise you?


RE: iPhone OS > Windows
By jvillaro on 2/4/2010 2:27:22 PM , Rating: 2
He reminds me a bit of Pirks... but actualy this one sounds even more crazy


RE: iPhone OS > Windows
By Sahrin on 2/3/2010 9:33:20 AM , Rating: 3
Uh, what? It's not even the first closed-platform OS.

It's an embedded OS. Basically every consumer electronics device on the market uses the same model. And several of them also allow sales of software and applications. You may have heard this subset. They are all many, many times larger than iPhone:

DS
PSP
Xbox 360
Wii
GameCube
Xbox
Nintendo 64


RE: iPhone OS > Windows
By Sahrin on 2/3/2010 9:34:12 AM , Rating: 2
I forgot to mention pretty much every mobile phone on the market since 2002.


RE: iPhone OS > Windows
By retrospooty on 2/3/2010 9:35:36 AM , Rating: 2
Not if its only available on Apple hardware. Open platforms will always win out.

when it came out it was head and shoulders better than the competition, so it did well. now the rest of the world is catching up and within another 2 years they will surpass it at a cheaper price.

See Win vs. Mac for historical reference.


RE: iPhone OS > Windows
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 2/3/2010 9:36:34 AM , Rating: 5
"Cocaine is a hell of a drug"


RE: iPhone OS > Windows
By retrospooty on 2/3/2010 9:39:07 AM , Rating: 1
LOL... 'Its a celebration!!! Enjoy your selves, bitches.


RE: iPhone OS > Windows
By vazili on 2/3/2010 9:41:11 AM , Rating: 3
wrong. I cant use any hardware I want with apple OS unless I hack it. There's a reason why Microsoft is number 1 when it comes to OS. Its because its not closed-platform


RE: iPhone OS > Windows
By Jeffk464 on 2/3/2010 11:59:59 AM , Rating: 1
Na, I think the main reason is because everyone else uses it.


RE: iPhone OS > Windows
By jvillaro on 2/4/2010 2:29:46 PM , Rating: 2
And there mothers... and grand mothers... Hell 90% of PC's run windows :p


RE: iPhone OS > Windows
By thekdub on 2/3/2010 10:22:23 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
The iPhone OS will become even more successful as apps replace web sites and the web browser is phased out.

What happens if you visit more than 180 websites and run out of home pages on your iPhone?


RE: iPhone OS > Windows
By menting on 2/3/2010 4:36:44 PM , Rating: 2
that's when you wake up and buy a real computer.


RE: iPhone OS > Windows
By Roffles on 2/3/2010 9:12:15 PM , Rating: 1
I laughed out loud.


RE: iPhone OS > Windows
By jvillaro on 2/4/2010 2:33:24 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
The iPhone OS will become even more successful as apps replace web sites and the web browser is phased out.


Really? Every website should or will be replaced for apps? Can you really be that dumb?


"And boy have we patented it!" -- Steve Jobs, Macworld 2007














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki