Would You Believe It - Vista Postponed Until 2007

19 comments

Reuters and BBC reports of M$ now delaying Vista launch to 2007. Don't think a further delay will surprise too many of us.

Quote:
It had originally aimed to launch Vista - the first major update since Windows XP was introduced five years ago - in the second half of 2006.


As the BBC say "Now arriving 2007"

Comments

This is good!

Don't say it as though this is a bad thing - it means that M$ is actually trying to get more of the bugs out before they ship it this time. Let them take all the time they need, I say.

My memory is shite but

My memory is shite but wasn't this thing first announced back in '99 or sometime in the late 90's? This coupled with the horrible progress MSN search has made in the past couple years makes me think Microsoft is no longer capable of competing.

If Google were producing this thing Longhorn would have been released in 2000.

not really surpirsed but,

I wonder when IE 7 will be out?

If google

were releasing longhorn, it would have been in beta for the last 6 years.

Got to agree, I would rather

Got to agree, I would rather have a good release than a shit release and 8 million patches.

what's better for marketing?

what's better for marketing? in a rapidly growing market like the ones msft and google compete i have to think speed trumps incremental improvements in quality.

I'm not following you Kid,

I'm not following you Kid, could you clarify ?

google gets trashed every so

google gets trashed every so often for releasing products/initiatives (google base, google analytics, google sitemaps etc.) that have shortcomings and are in beta. these are all growing markets (meaning demand for such things is still growing) and hence demand outweighs supply; in such instances being first mover is, IMO, more important than spending your time dotting your i's and crossing your t's and making something that is truly of high quality.

msft is playing catch up to google in a bunch of areas, so the analogy doesn't apply as well, but IMHO msft should at least be looking for some growth market that it can participate in and start releasing products very quickly in those markets. right now they're not doing that (they've been saying they will, but talk is cheap), and i have to question how savvy this is from a marketing perspective.

no patches?

Quote:
Got to agree, I would rather have a good release than a shit release and 8 million patches.

I wouldn't infer from their late deployment that therefore there will be less patches.

I have to disagree in this

I have to disagree in this case. MS owns the operating system, the only way they can lose it is if they screw the pooch so badly people start buying those cheap apples or someo other alternative.

In every other market yes I agree they need to be more entrepreneurial

Yeah Wheel but one can hope

Yeah Wheel but one can hope can't they ?

the only way they can lose

the only way they can lose it is if they screw the pooch so badly people start buying those cheap apples or someo other alternative

I think major operating systems can be free and web based.

google gets trashed every so often for releasing products/initiatives that have shortcomings

As I think more about it I think those shortcomings are often intentional to provide additional free marketing for the offering.

hey wow google base is full of porn everyone look! more free press than you much. then they start rolling it into search and people are like wow I better get going on this.

As I think more about it I

As I think more about it I think those shortcomings are often intentional to provide additional free marketing for the offering.

exactly.

ever notice which G products are lame/broken upon release and which ones arent? gmail was good from the start. why? because they were playing catch up big time, yahoo/aol/msn had a huge base and the switching cost of email is enormous. they needed to bring their A game if they wanted even the slightest chance of taking away that market.

when the google OS comes out, i would expect a release that works and works well from day one, as they are again a late mover in a market with a high switching cost.

gmail was good from the

gmail was good from the start. why?

reliability was shit, but everything else gmail was best of breed out of the gate

Might have to do with Intel

Might have to do with Intel and the adoption of 64 bit core processors.

the only way they can lose

the only way they can lose it is if they screw the pooch so badly people start buying those cheap apples or someo other alternative.

I can't believe I did it but I moved to Apple this month. It has far exceeded my expectations.

I moved to Apple this month

I guess that makes you a hippie graphic artist. You'll have to start growing your hair out. I noticed at SES NY that you'd gotten a start on the beard.:)

There aughta be a thread here on Apple, the company that wouldn't die. Unlike most hitech companies (including Google, MS, Amazon) who are all still one product wonders, Apple has not only never died in the last what, 20-25 years?, but has also managed to come out with new and innovative products through the decades. Personally I wouldn't discount the idea that we wake up one day and they've come out with something that makes them a serious contender in the computing field again. I thought the cheap macs they were selling a few years ago might do it, but no luck.

I noticed at SES NY that

I noticed at SES NY that you'd gotten a start on the beard.:)

Touche :)

And I recently moved hippy central for the south. Damn wheel, maybe you're right. I'm off to the gun range to get myself back in line.

whew!

As long as stuff keeps being written to the xp/2003 winapi, my trusty old NT4 platforms are okay :)

Not my servers, just machines like the one I'm posting from.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.