Our future with Longhorn?
Author
I read this morning that MS is finally going to release the first beta version of Windows Longhorn this summer - which got me thinking about how the next Windows will effect the game development community. I know it's probably way, way, WAY too early to be speculating about Longhorn - but I'm still curious to any opinions you all may have?
From everything I've heard, longhorn is going to be a complete failure. They started out with tons of features good for the masses and annoying for me, but they canceled all those features so now they're left with a rewritten XP for those that need 3" window borders and size 72 font because they can't see the 1" versions with size 24.
We are doomed! We'll burn in h... Oh. Sorry.
Er.
Longhorn can't break everything. There are too many games which use current technologies, and I believe we'll be able to continue to use them. I personnally wait the fully shaderified pipeline that is supposed to come with longhorn - because there are so many great things that can be done with a unified shader pipeline...
So I guess 1) we'll be able to continue to play with our current technologies and 2) we'll have very funny things to try :)
Anyway, I'm waiting it :)
Regards,
Er.
Longhorn can't break everything. There are too many games which use current technologies, and I believe we'll be able to continue to use them. I personnally wait the fully shaderified pipeline that is supposed to come with longhorn - because there are so many great things that can be done with a unified shader pipeline...
So I guess 1) we'll be able to continue to play with our current technologies and 2) we'll have very funny things to try :)
Anyway, I'm waiting it :)
Regards,
Quote:Original post by Extrarius
From everything I've heard, longhorn is going to be a complete failure. They started out with tons of features good for the masses and annoying for me, but they canceled all those features so now they're left with a rewritten XP for those that need 3" window borders and size 72 font because they can't see the 1" versions with size 24.
Hi Extrarius
I bet they will call it "MS Windows Managed XP.net 2009".
(Although I agree with you, let's speak about the technologies and the programming point of view - or let's move this thread to the lounge ;))
Kind Regards,
Actually, I'm quite excited for Longhorn. I'm not sure what features will be exposed to the user, but on the developer side I'll be very happy to see GDI's replacement by Avalon, plus the introduction of other managed APIs. Even Avalon by itself will be neat. My laptop runs at 1680x1050, and at default font sizes my eyes seriously ache, so an improved UI that scales with resolution will be really nice for me and my parents.
There are other improvements beneath the surface as well, including the addition of a new printing subsystem. True, the benefits might not be immediately visible to the end-user, but for developers it'll be great.
There are other improvements beneath the surface as well, including the addition of a new printing subsystem. True, the benefits might not be immediately visible to the end-user, but for developers it'll be great.
I'm interested in Avalon, but apparently that'll be ported over to XP as well.
It'll probably be performance that makes my decision. Before my computer esploded, it was a XP2000+ w/ 512mb of ram, and everything was lightning quick. Everything opened quickly, compile times weren't bad, and restarts didn't even give me enough time to pour myself a coke. I'm currently saving up for a new computer, and I won't settle for anything less.
It'll probably be performance that makes my decision. Before my computer esploded, it was a XP2000+ w/ 512mb of ram, and everything was lightning quick. Everything opened quickly, compile times weren't bad, and restarts didn't even give me enough time to pour myself a coke. I'm currently saving up for a new computer, and I won't settle for anything less.
Whenever I read anything about longhorn, it reminds me of the second system effect. For those who haven't read "The Mythical Man-Month" or who haven't heard of the second system effect in a software engineering course, the second system effect states that the second system a developer makes is typically disastrous. When the developer makes the first system, he knows that he is inexperienced and therefore keeps the system very slim, not trying to do too much. Every time he encounters an interesting idea for a feature, he stores that idea away for "next time." When next time, aka, the second system, finally comes around, every single interesting feature gets stuck into the system and it becomes bloated and cumbersome, eventually destined for failure.
If you don't count dos (and you shouldn't), then Longhorn is essentially Microsoft's second operating system. 95 was a revision of 3.1, 98 was a revision of 95, 2000 was a revision of 98, merged with the NT line, and XP was a revision of 2000. Longhorn is their first attempt to start over and create something new from the bottom up. Whenever I read the press releases of all the fancy ideas Microsoft has for Longhorn, all I can think of is how bloated and cumbersome it will be if everything that gets proposed actually ends up in there. Sure, some of the features are nice, but it'll still be a bloated POS in the end.
If you don't count dos (and you shouldn't), then Longhorn is essentially Microsoft's second operating system. 95 was a revision of 3.1, 98 was a revision of 95, 2000 was a revision of 98, merged with the NT line, and XP was a revision of 2000. Longhorn is their first attempt to start over and create something new from the bottom up. Whenever I read the press releases of all the fancy ideas Microsoft has for Longhorn, all I can think of is how bloated and cumbersome it will be if everything that gets proposed actually ends up in there. Sure, some of the features are nice, but it'll still be a bloated POS in the end.
Quote:Original post by cwhite
If you don't count dos (and you shouldn't), then Longhorn is essentially Microsoft's second operating system. 95 was a revision of 3.1, 98 was a revision of 95, 2000 was a revision of 98, merged with the NT line, and XP was a revision of 2000. Longhorn is their first attempt to start over and create something new from the bottom up. Whenever I read the press releases of all the fancy ideas Microsoft has for Longhorn, all I can think of is how bloated and cumbersome it will be if everything that gets proposed actually ends up in there. Sure, some of the features are nice, but it'll still be a bloated POS in the end.
Well that's not really true, I think most people would agree that 95 was pretty close to a complete rewrite of the basic OS kernel, NT is unquestionalby its own OS as is DOS, if you include the first version of windows then your up to 5 including Longhorn.
We were using Longhorn in 2003 as part of a developer early release, and it is amazing even back then it was really stable. I think people are being alittle too hard on them with the delays:) They are writing alot of new code. Don't forget apple started on OS X back in 95. That's 5 years from start to finish, which sounds like the 2001-2006 time that it took microsoft to go from XP to Longhorn.
Cheers
Chris
I'm looking forward to it with 'skeptical optimism':P
As I'm sure I will get it for free (maybe not immediately after release, but eventually), I will certainly give it a try. If I don't see the performance I like, then I will go back to XP, as I'm sure many others will/would also.
As I'm sure I will get it for free (maybe not immediately after release, but eventually), I will certainly give it a try. If I don't see the performance I like, then I will go back to XP, as I'm sure many others will/would also.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
