News Windows Blue to launch in August, claims source

[captain caveman]

Not sure if this type of update schedule will go down well with business , another reason why w8/blue will not be adopted.

[faugusztin]

Originally Posted by rollo

so hes posting other peoples rumours sweet.

So you would instead have a website where you would get only PR about new product launches and reviews of released products ? A big part of pretty much all tech websites are rumors about future software and hardware stuff .

[Maki role]

Originally Posted by Gareth Halfacree

Okay, seriously now people. I'd like to propose a new workflow: click on article -> read article -> comment on article. I feel this would be a distinct improvement on the current workflow of: click on article -> comment on article. Especially when said article says this:Just a suggestion, like.

I'm sorry but you're going to have to take your own advice here Gareth. I said "If they are going to continue" not "If this next one". The next one may be free, but if they charge full whack for something afterwards then it's not any better. If they're not charging, then where is the money coming from? I'm simply making the link that with a decreased main lifespan, the cost needs to go down for future releases to compensate.

Come on, I've read every article I've ever posted on fully, this is no exception.

[Showerhead]

Does this not jepordise the huge enterprise market of their business? I always thought businesses preferred the long cycles as it gives something they can easily train users on and that should be stable.

[Blackshark]

As others have said, so long as if is near enough FoC for upgraders - happy

[Woodspoon]

Not convinced that this is a good idea, long release cycles give home users the opportunity to really get used to an OS, let's business users Taylor software as and systems for their needs and let's programmers have a constant platform to base their work on.
Yearly updates aren't going to help system familiarity for anyone.
Just seems like a bad idea, just my thoughts though.

[Gareth Halfacree]

Originally Posted by Maki role

Come on, I've read every article I've ever posted on fully, this is no exception.

I apologise for misinterpreting your comment.

[Blackshark]

Shower - well Enterprise at the moment is trying to get their head round Server 2012 (great product - AWFUL metro experience). So I suspect there is a push to get a 'fix' out by releasing a Server Pack (ie. FoC) and move us on from Windows 8

[damien c]

Windows 8 to me would have been good, if I didn't need to run a add on so that I could get the start menu back rather than that stupid tiled mess.

I will be sticking to Windows 7 for a while yet.

I used Windows Vista for a long time and had no issues with it, until a gpu waterblock leaked and caused problems with Windows once I took that card out.

When I got the block back and fitted the card again it, went back to being fine straight away.

As for faster releases of Windows I cannot think of anything good that would come from it.

[GoodBytes]

I don't get why people here are freaking out AGAIN. Microsoft said that the update will at a nominal fee or free. I expect Apple pricing. Where if you buy a version of Windows, new, you pay the full price, but annual update are small nominal fees or free. Same as Apple. (Well in the case of Apple, you pay the OS in the price of the over-priced system that you just got).

It will be like 15-30$ Can/US, so what 8-9 pounds? Guys clam down.

Microsoft has no choice to do this. If they continue with the 3 year life cycle, the Microsoft is already doom. People expect faster OS releases, and the market is pushing toward that.

[dr-strangelove]

Originally Posted by GoodBytes

People expect faster OS releases, and the market is pushing toward that.

Really? In my experience people hate having to upgrade their OS. Case in point - all the people who are sticking with Windows 7 because they don't want to learn how to use the Windows 8 UI. Everytime MS release a new OS people are going to ask themselves 'what do I gain by upgrading' and if MS can't continually offer them strong incentives people aren't going to bother.

[Noob?]

I'm still using Windows 7 but also have Windows 8 on the main rig, it does take a little while to get use to (scratch that, still getting use to it) but I do like it! However, another OS/upgrade on Windows 8?.....

[Corky42]

As it proven by around %40 of the OS's in use still being an 11 year old XP.

I do wonder if this hole release new version quickly isn't something thought up in the marketing/PR department, as one thing to catch headlines is the release of a new version of X.

Or am i being cynical ?

[azazel1024]

Originally Posted by steveo_mcg

I wouldn't count on that either, I'll upgrade to the next version of windows which offers tangible improvements or the first version to drop metro

Sadly that was 8 for me. I didn't NEED SMB3.0, but it is very, very nice to have. Or so I assume. I only have Windows 8 on my desktop so far (trialing before I install on my server)., but I really, really wanted SMB3.0. The advantage of SMB multichannel makes a big difference for me.

Again, SMB2.1 I could live with, but I really wanted the extra throughput. I am running static link aggregation with a pair of Intel CT GbE adapters in both my sever and desktop, for 2Gbps of bandwidth, thoughput with SMB2.1 I am limited to 1Gbps per connection for a max of 2Gbps. With SMB3.0 I can connect at the full 2Gbps and I wanted to run another pair of cables, I could get the on-board NICs in on the action for 3Gbps of through put. I might do that with the server (so desktop to server I can have 2Gbps and leave a spare connection to the server at 1Gbps from another source), but probably not with my desktop. In the end though my limitation is my disk arrays currently as my desktop 1+1TB array maxes out around 300MB/sec max with a minimum of around 190MB/sec (outer versus inner tracks) and my server is a little slower at 280MB/sec max with a minimum of around 180MB/sec.

I do miss my start menu and plenty of other things make no sense, but some of the performance upgrades are very nice (such as SMB3.0, smaller memory footprint, faster booting, etc). I'll probably grab a utility to "reinstall" the start menu and then most everything will be right in the world again.

[steveo_mcg]

In my experience, the windows market is divided between home and corporate users who want superficially different things from the OS. Both want a secure core but home users (muggles) want new and shiny and corporates want stable and unobtrusive. "We" don't really figure into the discussion I'm afraid. MS recognises this and offers superficial feature differentials, Workgroups or HTPC functionality but I think it'll be a while before office users have to worry about metro.

Corky42 is probably right though, its a marketing dept led initiative to garner positive headlines more often. They must be worried about Apple its not like they really need to market they're still virtually a monopoly.

[GoodBytes]

Originally Posted by dr-strangelove

Really? In my experience people hate having to upgrade their OS. Case in point - all the people who are sticking with Windows 7 because they don't want to learn how to use the Windows 8 UI. Everytime MS release a new OS people are going to ask themselves 'what do I gain by upgrading' and if MS can't continually offer them strong incentives people aren't going to bother.

I don't know... people are really exited when a new MacOS comes out, when a new Android update comes out, they even root their Android phone to get the update NOW and an not wait for their service provider and make it available, same for iOS. Windows is the only one that is slow as a snail, with a 3 year update cycle... imagine 3 years from now.. do you think Windows 8 on tablet will be mildly interesting? how about Windows Phone 8? Both will be looooonnng have bitten the dust.

You guys think you'll have to re-install everything, and that's the end of the world. It will be like when you install a Service Pack. The same way you update you phone, tablet, MacOS.

Screw businesses, they have a 6 year update cycle.. they wither catch up, or stay continue with 6 year life cycle. It is simple as that. Why should WE suffer when businesses are slower than a race against a can of tomato. A company with an active IT department, and an active software developer team in their hands for any custom solution, have no problem keeping up. Yet you only see that in small and medium companies, and tech companies.

[GoodBytes]

Originally Posted by Corky42

As it proven by around %40 of the OS's in use still being an 11 year old XP.

I do wonder if this hole release new version quickly isn't something thought up in the marketing/PR department, as one thing to catch headlines is the release of a new version of X.

Or am i being cynical ?

It's because Microsoft trying to make a full loop that will create this massive singularity.
You see, now we have Windows 8.. then 9, then 10... soon.. 95! A full circle that will make Microsoft... TAKE OVER THE WORLD!!! (even more so)

[GoodBytes]

Originally Posted by steveo_mcg

Corky42 is probably right though, its a marketing dept led initiative to garner positive headlines more often. They must be worried about Apple its not like they really need to market they're still virtually a monopoly.

I don't think so, because Microsoft has completely restructured itself inside, to do this. I believe we will see, for possibly the first time, some level of actual communication between departments. At least on the Windows RT, Windows and Windows Phone side. Could that mean, in the near future (I don't expect that on the coming up update of Windows, but after that), finally a proper integration between devices, like Apple? There is no question that Microsoft tried to do this, time and time again, but just fails. It got better (I mean look at Vista): http://www.aerotaskforce.com/uploads/Capture5.JPG
But not between devices to actually have a proper connected devices.

So no I don't think its marketing.


p.s:
I know I am on going on 3 posts in a row, sorry about this, I just taught of about what I am going to say.

[papalarge123]

i dont agree with some of these comments, i do agree however this may be a silly idea, microsoft has a very large chunk of the market even now with all the hype of tablets, the most usable friendly OS on the PC is windows, whether 10 years old or 1 year, but trying to follow a company that has a low percentage of the market, seems a stupid idea, microsoft realy havent learned anything over the past 10 years since XP,
majority of PC users in the home are normal ppl using it to surf the web and facebook, they dont care about upgrading, as long as it works,
another section of the industry are gamers and enthusiasts, who dont mind re-installing every couple of years, but test before they jump in,
and last but not least, companies and servers, use an OS that has been patched to hell before even trying making sure it will run as table as possible, saving money is the key here, the less needing doing to it the more money saved in the long run.
but considering Microsofts past history where a new copy of windows takes almost 6-12 months of patches to even get stable or do what u need efficiently, then this yearly option will never work, in any of the sections of the PC userbase,
microsoft, should look back and learn from its mistakes, and not make new ones, make a stable OS straight out of the bat, make 2 different styles of OS, WIN 7 style for most users, and Win 8 block style for all in one touch screen users, also phones and tablets, listen to what the consumer wants, and not what u think is best for us (stupid idea getting rid of the start menu,), and probably take a little longer between OS's, making sure they are almost perfect as soon as it is released,
i think my rant here is done, sorry, but sometimes i have a lot to say.

[rollo]

The fact windows xp still has 40% market share suggests microsofts upgrade ideas have failed already.

People make a big thing over phone updates as they actually do something.

Windows vista to windows 7 was a tiny change. It was mostly under the hood improvements.

Windows 7 to 8 if you disable metro is a similar tiny change of under the hood improvements.

Take iOS 4 to 5 and you gained alot more in usable features vs vista to 7.
Or andriod 2.2.2 to andriod 4.0 which is what most users saw and its a major change.

Apple OS releases are made a big thing of cause whatever apple does has to be widely published by media outlets and television. They also seem to generate exciment and hype that Microsoft has never been able to generate for its windows brand.

Main reason I feel there doing this is for the surface rt as if they left it with the same OS for 3 years with just dif hardware it would struggle to really get any hype for releases.

Windows 8 is after all a touch os first.