Microsoft: Longhorn beta will arrive by June

No_Style · Feb 7, 2005, 11:21 PM

SAN FRANCISCO--Microsoft is on track to release the first full test version of the next major Windows release by the end of June, a Microsoft executive told CNET News.com on Monday.

The company has said publicly that Beta 1 of Longhorn would arrive by the end of 2005, though internally, the company has been aiming for a release by midyear. The final version of Longhorn is slated for the second half of next year.

"There will be a beta 1 of Longhorn...happening in the first half of this year," John Montgomery, a director in Microsoft's developer division, said during an interview at VSLive, a conference devoted to the company's Visual Studio .Net toolkit. The release will be primarily aimed at developers, Montgomery said. "I do, however, expect that you will find IT departments starting to look at it, kick the tires, figure out what's in it and what's not in it."

Beta 1 will be the first look at Longhorn in its current form. Microsoft released a developer preview version of Windows at the Professional Developers Conference in the fall of 2003 and updated that early code last spring.
_______________
Read More/Source: ZDNet

FDM80 · Feb 8, 2005, 12:20 AM

June huh? Which in microsoft time means august/sept.

nForcer · Feb 8, 2005, 04:03 AM

Word on the street is Longhorn will be 64-bit native and won't run well at all on 32-bit OR dual-core systems.

It looks promising, as long as they keep it that way.

The_Neon_Cowboy · Feb 8, 2005, 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nForcer

Word on the street is Longhorn will be 64-bit native and won't run well at all on 32-bit OR dual-core systems.

It looks promising, as long as they keep it that way.

32 bit ? no it's 64 bit like 64 bit xp........ duel core 64 bit yes will be fine
heck even dos win98 should run on 32/64 duel cores

waether it see nd uses both cpu's is another story but XP/2003
should already be packing support

We would all moastly bee running 64 bit if intel wasn't a year behind amd on
the 64 bit consumer frount

nForcer · Feb 8, 2005, 11:33 AM

Woah, check your facts Neon. Intel had 64-bit technology years before AMD. And Sparc had it way before either of them.

What I'm wondering is it possible to install 'Longhorn' once its released on a non 64-bit system. Of course you can now but as of 'now' its not even an official Alpha release.

pr0digal jenius · Feb 8, 2005, 12:06 PM

In a way I hope longhorn ISN'T 32 bit compatible, as if it is, 64bit will never catch on in the desktop world.

Plus, if it's 64bit, it'll give me an excuse to upgrade

CDsDontBurn · Feb 8, 2005, 12:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nForcer

Woah, check your facts Neon. Intel had 64-bit technology years before AMD. And Sparc had it way before either of them.

What I'm wondering is it possible to install 'Longhorn' once its released on a non 64-bit system. Of course you can now but as of 'now' its not even an official Alpha release.

it is true that intel has had a 64bit processor long before AMD, but AMD has had a 64bit processor out to the public alot sooner than intel has.

So depending on how you look at both of you twos statements.....both of you are right

.

pr0digal jenius · Feb 8, 2005, 12:18 PM

AMD beat intel to the mainstream...but the itaniums have been around for quite some time now

The_Neon_Cowboy · Feb 8, 2005, 01:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nForcer

Woah, check your facts Neon. Intel had 64-bit technology years before AMD. And Sparc had it way before either of them.

What I'm wondering is it possible to install 'Longhorn' once its released on a non 64-bit system. Of course you can now but as of 'now' its not even an official Alpha release.

Check your own...

itanuim doesn't count neither does Zeon....Bussiness / sever only CPU's
intels 1st consumer 64 bit cpu's just recently showed up in the top end of the socket 775

the CONSUMER 64bit was 1st released by AMD well over a year ago...

heck INTEL would still be working on makeing 64bit if they hadn't blatenly STOLEN amd's 64 from a engeneering sample , wich are not protected by copyright/trademark law. Intels 64 consumer CPU shares 98% the same code as the AMD. Of couse Microsoft preferd AMD's model and it the hadn't intel would be competeing more with cyrix then AMD lol...
in short amd cought them with thier pants down and had them cold

Quote:

Originally Posted by pr0digal jenius

AMD beat intel to the mainstream...but the itaniums have been around for quite some time now

Bingo + itanums also require a special OS, not regular windows XP, not the same at all
remember guys I said CONSUMER cpu, not bussness sever use only cpu's

No linux doesnt count where talking main stream here

CDsDontBurn · Feb 8, 2005, 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The_Neon_Cowboy

No linux doesnt count where talking main stream here

pr0digal jenius · Feb 8, 2005, 03:15 PM

linux is getting on towards mainstream, actually, and windows XP 64bit runs just fine on itaniums...has for years...now theya re just revamping it for the 32/64bit stuff

No_Style · Feb 8, 2005, 06:40 PM

Linux is heading towards mainstream, but it has about half a dozen major obstacles to overcome before it comes close to MacOS or Windows desktop readiness.

As for the stealing accusation, once again may I remind you that Intel and AMD have a cross licensing agreement. It is not thievery when you can freely use the other's technology.

As for WinXP and IA64 (Itanium), it's non-existent and never will be according to MS. It just doesn't make sense to make a desktop OS for a server/business aimed CPU.

I believe, Itanium CPUs have a 32-bit compatibility mode as well, but it is no where as fast as AMD's.

I doubt Longhorn will be purely 64-bit. I'm sure there will be 32-bit and 64-bit versions , though. It's bad enough that you may need a "serious" graphics solution to support Avalon and the GUI sexiness. A lot of people may need to upgrade for Longhorn, but MS doesn't want to scare the consumers away with highly restrictive hardware requirements.