Microsoft has acknowledged today that Windows Server 2008 won't be ready to ship by the end of the year as planned. It's like the 1980s English synthpop band Naked Eyes was singing for you, Microsoft. You made me promises, promises / knowing I'd believe. The company broke news of the delay on their Windows Server blog (a …
What's the big deal?
Almost any product, in any sector, experiences production delays. If they launch too early online hacks claim premature ejaculation, if they delay the same people use it as an excuse to knock the manufacturer. What gives? It's not reasonable or fair, and considering this site's warm-and-fuzzy feelings about open source (fair business blah blah) it's very hypocritical.
If it's anything like Vista...
then Microsoft will have a hard time shifting people from 2003.
Windows 2000 is still a damn fine OS and Microsoft made the mistake with XP of taking a stable OS with minimal clutter and junk then turning it into the annoyance that is XP (out of box experience anyway).
Lets hope the 2008 interface is still nice and minimal.
Wankers. You don't bake a brisket. You smoke it.
I thought it was mince.
I'll get my coat...
from posting articles about the dates of MS software releases unless they are on-time or early. It will save all of us a lot of time.
Better than a Hot Link...
I'm sure he was out to lunch when he got that call (probably at Dixie's down the street) and couldn't come up with an analogy using a "hot link".
Redmond must be full of meat eaters.
If they were vegetarians, they'd be able to pinch that ``brisket'' off in no time --- no worries.
"Liberal use for the word 'launch'"
So kinda like the last few Apple 'launches' then, eh?
Lots of fiber in Apples.
Fiber. For regularity.
Delaying the release is sensible at least... because unlike the abortion that is Vista (herein known as Windows ME 2007), MS won't be able to force users to use their bloated, unstable junk by leveraging their monopoly on the supply chain and therefore might actually have to get it (mostly) working prior to release. Corporates are the only ones going to buy server 2007, oops 2008, and we're reeling enough with the thought that we're shortly going to either have to pay more microsoft taxes for the rip off that is the various licensing schemes (allowing us to *upgrade* Vista installs to XP) or be forced to use Vista. Forcing us to have to use another untested piece of bloat isn't going to sit well at all.
Now please excuse me while I load another Linux distro...
Dammit man there you go starting the fanboys off again!!
The apostles of Jobs will be foaming at the mouth starring into their flaming iBook/MacBooks composing some MS bashing comments as we speak!
Where's the IT angle?
I mean, end of the day, it's an MS product =D
From the Windows Server Division blog, linked in the article:
"In fact, this very web site ... has been running entirely on Windows Server 2008 since before Beta 3."
Now THAT's an endorsement! It shows that the latest version of the Windows Server line is FULLY CAPABLE of hosting a blog, dammit. In it's entirety!
Take that, MS doubters.
(It's also fairly amusing that despite the blog's statement that one of its purposes is to "to provide a place to have an open and honest dialogue about the development process", ALL of the comments are trackbacks to other MS blogs ...)
And my wife makes an excellent brisket by braising and simmering. No baking required!
- Does Apple's iOS 7 make you physically SICK? Try swallowing version 7.1
- Fee fie Firefox: Mozilla's lawyers probe Dell over browser install charge
- Pics Indestructible Death Stars blow up planets with glowing KILL RAY
- Hands on Satisfy my scroll: El Reg gets claws on Windows 8.1 spring update
- Video Snowden: You can't trust SPOOKS with your DATA