| Author |
Thread: Anyone know the 'longhorn' release date? |
    
Bronze Member Username: James_the_god
Doncaster,
South Yorkshire
England
Post Number: 28
Registered: Jan-05
|
| Posted on Thursday, January 13, 2005 - 03:11 pm: |
|
Asking if anyone knows an ACCURATE date for which the 'longhorn' project by microsoft is due to be released? |
|
|
|
Silver Member Username: Deathshadow
Post Number: 384
Registered: Oct-04
|
| Posted on Thursday, January 13, 2005 - 09:44 pm: |
|
Who cares ive used it = crap and a annoying @ss tool bar. |
Bronze Member Username: James_the_god
Doncaster,
South Yorkshire
England
Post Number: 30
Registered: Jan-05
|
| Posted on Friday, January 14, 2005 - 11:34 am: |
|
Ye but what you used was the trial, theres still over a year for them to work on it so you cant really judge it yet!! |
Silver Member Username: Deathshadow
Post Number: 385
Registered: Oct-04
|
| Posted on Friday, January 14, 2005 - 05:50 pm: |
|
Its Windows not much more to say besides - CRAP!
*Linux/UNIX |
Bronze Member Username: James_the_god
Doncaster,
South Yorkshire
England
Post Number: 33
Registered: Jan-05
|
| Posted on Saturday, January 15, 2005 - 06:37 am: |
|
I suppose its what your used to and I personally don't like Linux |
Silver Member Username: Deathshadow
Post Number: 386
Registered: Oct-04
|
| Posted on Saturday, January 15, 2005 - 05:42 pm: |
|
What is not to like about Linux? Just because it isn't user application how-to wizard friendly, prone to thousands of viruses Like windows, and can be left on for years straight w.o a restart? |
Unregistered guest |
| Posted on Sunday, January 23, 2005 - 01:15 pm: |
|
hmmm, isn't linux just as prone to viruses, but just no one can be bothered to write one for it because the majority of people don't use it.
I use Fedora Core at work, and windows at home. Linux serves my needs in a buisness environment, but it's pretty awful for home users.
I'm looking forward to the longhorn release, but I hear it might be as late as 2006.
Hugh
www.hcgallagher.co.uk |
|
| Posted on Sunday, March 13, 2005 - 03:21 pm: |
|
no comment- i dont use windows, i use macs |
|
| Posted on Saturday, April 02, 2005 - 04:46 pm: |
|
Damien, you're a pretty ignorant guy....anyways, the original question was if anybody knew the original release date for Longhorn, not whether or not it sucked.
p.s. Linux looks ugly |
Silver Member Username: James_the_god
Doncaster,
South Yorkshire
England
Post Number: 104
Registered: Jan-05
|
| Posted on Friday, April 08, 2005 - 01:56 pm: |
|
Olie, you made a very very good point. Damien is a pig ignorant know it all and yes linus is ugly and I would therefore say that Linux does suck. Its an OS for 'be different and Im ace' people.
So yes, back to my original point of the longhorn release date which I still dont know but highly suspect around end of 2006! |
ThatGuyYouKnow Unregistered guest |
| Posted on Tuesday, April 19, 2005 - 07:53 am: |
|
Quater 4 of 2006, aka Dec of 2006. still has memory leaks, take as long as they want, make a stable OS for once.
XP was relased with 11,000+ known bugs, Id rather not have service packs for longhorn.
I hope longhorn wont be larger than 10gb when finished, I want it to fit on my "boot" drive.
its currently about 4gb |
|
| Posted on Friday, April 22, 2005 - 04:52 am: |
|
Go for maxos Tiger, better dan microsoft crap!! |
|
| Posted on Friday, April 22, 2005 - 04:54 am: |
|
Go for apple's macos Tiger, much better dan microsoft crap!!! |
Hugh Gallagher Unregistered guest |
| Posted on Tuesday, May 31, 2005 - 03:57 pm: |
|
I can't wait to get a mac, Mac OS looks like a refreshing change from old linux and windows. Although overall I guess I like them all in their own ways.
I can't say I have much problem with stability using windows XP, Ive only had my PC crash once in the year and a half I've owned it... I think my Fedora Core is more Buggy than XP.
www.hcgallagher.co.uk |
|
| Posted on Wednesday, June 01, 2005 - 02:22 pm: |
|
I just need someone to tell me if a comp with these
Pentium4 3.0 Ghz 533 FSB
512 MB Ram
128 Gig Memory
Intel Integrated Graphics Media Accelerator 900
Will work with half life 2?
I tried doom3 and i play it fine but hf2 is said to be more intense graphic requires so someone tell me if i could play it thanks |
Silver Member Username: James_the_god
Doncaster,
South Yorkshire
England
Post Number: 132
Registered: Jan-05
|
| Posted on Wednesday, June 01, 2005 - 03:10 pm: |
|
I thought doom 3 was more graphics demanding. I can't believe that onboard graphics can play doom 3...its something separate cards stuggle with! You're processor is fine, your ram will be ok, although I'd just buy 1gb more on ebay for £50 and your 128gb harddrive will be plenty enough room for half life 2. HL2 is about 3.5gb i think. Just I've had experience with Intel integrated graphics and they wernt that impressive. The intel 3rd generation graphics core and the pixel shader 2 is a big improvement with your motherboard but I didnt know it was that good to play doom 3. |
|
| Posted on Friday, June 03, 2005 - 02:26 pm: |
|
It's not great but on low settings I run doom 3 without any problems
1 g of ram only 50 on ebay?? |
|
| Posted on Friday, June 03, 2005 - 02:46 pm: |
|
I found some ram online 1 gig is 110 is that good deal or no? |
Silver Member Username: James_the_god
Doncaster,
South Yorkshire
England
Post Number: 138
Registered: Jan-05
|
| Posted on Friday, June 03, 2005 - 03:33 pm: |
|
Dollers, yes thats good, but im from the uk, £50 in the UK is quite a good price. Wintec 1gb stick, retail package pc3200 ddr400 is about £55 with postage. Great deal I think.
If ure in America I'd have thought it possible to get it for a bout $90.
Ebay is the answer mate. |
boobooboi Unregistered guest |
| Posted on Thursday, June 09, 2005 - 08:10 pm: |
|
I use both windows and Linux. The thing is that Windows is easy to use and is really popular cuz of that. In Linux you tell the computer to do each thing and it tells you all the things going behind Windows so you know that everything works. Linux is better than windows,, ONLY IF you know how to use it really well. But for people who dont like a challenge and want to stick with the basics, then windows is for you. The release date for Windows codename longhorn is to release sometime in 2006. Probably in late 2006. A new much anticipated search tool, a new version of the EXPLORER Has been cancelled from being in the longhorn system due to this early release date to OEM manufacturers. |
Silver Member Username: James_the_god
Doncaster,
South Yorkshire
England
Post Number: 148
Registered: Jan-05
|
| Posted on Friday, June 10, 2005 - 04:40 am: |
|
Well It'll be interesting to see how different longhorn will actually be. I think it will the main operating system people will you in conjuction with dual core processors. Its predicted that by end of 06 and in 07 that 70% of computers will have 2 processors. Theres the xp x64 os for that already, but whether longhorn will be a good match, I find it likely. At the moment I guess longhorn is pretty much in the 'press conference' stage of allowing a glimpse and small insite to what it'll be like...just like with the ps3!
Dual processors...pfft Im getting a new pc in a month, I couldn't really care, computers now are way ahead of the technology and software we use with them. Sometimes technology advances too quickly, I think its difficult to keep up with. |
Joe_the_geek! Unregistered guest |
| Posted on Saturday, June 25, 2005 - 06:40 pm: |
|
Is Longhorn going to be 64 bit then? I am just about to go over to X64 at home to see what the difference is. I doubt that 70% of comps are gonna b dual processor tho! If you want to try Longhorn, the Longhorn transformation pack made by Windows X is meant to be pretty good, not sure myself tho, its only themes and that toolbar. I might give it a go and post my results. |
Silver Member Username: James_the_god
Doncaster,
South Yorkshire
England
Post Number: 163
Registered: Jan-05
|
| Posted on Tuesday, June 28, 2005 - 08:46 am: |
|
Longhorn confuses me a little and so does the x64. Im not sure what the point of x64 is? xp runs 64 bit programs anyway...
Longhorn should fix many bugs and its basically a really revamped version of xp with 3d interfaces etc.
Other than that, I think its just microsoft trying to get people to by the x64 when theres not much point.
Its not hard to get cracked working copies of o.s. anyway! |
joe_the_geek Unregistered guest |
| Posted on Thursday, July 07, 2005 - 06:27 am: |
|
Basically, 64bit platforms uses the whole capabilities of the 64bit processors. 32bit ones dont. Therefore x64 is AMAZINGLY much faster! |
Reneal S. Unregistered guest |
| Posted on Friday, July 22, 2005 - 08:44 am: |
|
Hey,
check this link out. I find it quite useful
http://www.team-tag.com/tag/index.html?fuseaction=tools.invlink&u=oshairzay&link ID=2 |
professor_snort Unregistered guest |
| Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 02:05 pm: |
|
x64 is 64 bit hardware. This means the processor and memory manager units can handle memory spaces of 64 bits. This translates to 16777216 terabytes of memory space. This should be enough for a while ;). High performances machines have used this architecture for years, as they typically 100s of GB of RAM and several processors. The problem with dual processors is that you pay for 2 processors and get about 1.5 the speed of one. It also shows signs that Intel is running out of chip space and innovative ideas.
Ideally an operating system should be built from the ground-up to support something like 64 bit. XP64 was not, but WAS64 was. However, Microsoft is Microsoft and many people I know running Windows AS 64 say it is still slow (I myself have only tried it for a few months). Linux and Unix and Mac OS-X are significantly better for server environments. Windows and Mac OS-X tend to be better for applications. I hope Steve Jobs makes OSx86 (OS-X for PC-like platforms) available for non-Mac hardware. I'd buy it. |
