BetaArchive Logo
Navigation Home Screenshots Image Uploader Server Info FTP Servers Wiki Forum RSS Feed Rules Please Donate
UP: 4d, 0h, 1m | CPU: 46% | MEM: 2816MB of 7851MB used
{The community for beta collectors}

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ] 
Author Message
 PostPost subject: why did it ever stop        Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2008 7:05 pm 
Reply with quote
the answers are everywhere, but I am having some trouble putting everything together.

I am vurious as to why development of what we now know as Longhorn was stopped, and why they started working "Vista". I know later builds became unstable, and features were starting to become a mess, but why didn't they just fix that up? they basically let a few years of development go down the drain, and they released an operating system that wishes it could even be compared to "Longhorn". why didn't Microsoft just keep working on longhorn?


Top
 PostPost subject: Re: why did it ever stop        Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2008 11:08 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Fri Jun 29, 2007 9:30 pm

Posts
303
jwborc39963 wrote:
the answers are everywhere, but I am having some trouble putting everything together.

I am vurious as to why development of what we now know as Longhorn was stopped, and why they started working "Vista". I know later builds became unstable, and features were starting to become a mess, but why didn't they just fix that up? they basically let a few years of development go down the drain, and they released an operating system that wishes it could even be compared to "Longhorn". why didn't Microsoft just keep working on longhorn?

Longhorn is/was the codename for Vista. The only thing that they did was change the base of the code from XP to Server 2003 (a much better base).

Basically the original XP-based builds are really nothing more than XP with a few extra goodies thrown in, while the 2003-based builds are more feature/interface complete.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2008 11:09 pm 
Reply with quote
I understand the whole codename thing, but I understand that there was a "reset" when they changed over to the new code base. I wanted to know why they did that because they had to re-do everything, and a lot of awesome features were lost.


Top
 PostPost subject: Re: why did it ever stop        Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2008 11:42 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Sat Feb 24, 2007 4:14 pm

Posts
6612

Location
United Kingdom

Favourite OS
Server 2012 R2
logicaL wrote:
The only thing that they did was change the base of the code from XP to Server 2003


The original builds weren't XP based, rather pre-release server based. The change merely brought the RTM (SP1 I think) server core

_________________
BuildFeed - the ultimate collaborative NT build list - Windows Longhorn - a look at a defining Microsoft project


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2008 11:47 pm 
Reply with quote
but what actually caused the change? so many awesome things were lost! the gui was SO MUCH BETTER


Top
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2008 11:56 pm 
Reply with quote
Staff
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Wed Apr 11, 2007 2:11 pm

Posts
2607

Location
Germany, Earth

Favourite OS
Windows 10
jwborc39963 wrote:
but what actually caused the change? so many awesome things were lost! the gui was SO MUCH BETTER



You already said it, this caused the change:

Quote:
I know later builds became unstable, and features were starting to become a mess,



Longhorn was something like a "playground", the developers added a lot of things and experimented with Longhorn, but they hadn't set themselves a goal I think. Then Longhorn was too unstable and they decided to change the codebase and begun from the beginning.

_________________
MS vNext: Windows 10 ESD Database - Windows 10 Build Labs - Windows 10 Update Archive - Office 2016 Version Tracker - Office Downloader


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2008 12:21 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sun Mar 23, 2008 10:44 am

Posts
216

Location
Poland
The builds were unstable, etc. But still. The Longhorn concept was a great one and I do not understand why did they completely change their course by 180 degrees to make the piece of crap known as Vista. That concept was surely possible to code.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2008 12:37 am 
Reply with quote
gracz54 wrote:
The builds were unstable, etc. But still. The Longhorn concept was a great one and I do not understand why did they completely change their course by 180 degrees to make the piece of crap known as Vista. That concept was surely possible to code.


thats what I was getting at here. surely it was possible to fix it up, there were so many great ideas that never got implemented into "Vista"...


Top
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2008 8:37 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sat Aug 19, 2006 12:19 am

Posts
1915

Location
New Zealand
of course it was/is possible to fix them up, but much eaiser and faster to start over and not do the same mistakes.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2008 9:26 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Sat Feb 24, 2007 4:14 pm

Posts
6612

Location
United Kingdom

Favourite OS
Server 2012 R2
I think if you ever use 4093, you will quickly realise that Longhorn got bad very fast towards the end. It was probably for the best, though they could have tried to keep some of the Longhorn features :(

_________________
BuildFeed - the ultimate collaborative NT build list - Windows Longhorn - a look at a defining Microsoft project


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2008 2:57 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Thu Aug 31, 2006 2:45 pm

Posts
1432

Location
UK

Favourite OS
Longhorn 4074
Yeah, the project was bad organised.
But some good ideas went to trash with the project and nobody knows why...


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2008 3:16 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Fri Dec 29, 2006 6:40 am

Posts
1513
if you asked for when, it's August 04

it's sad that everyone saw 4074 and was excited about it.
They no news came for MS for another year.
When we all checked out 5048, everyone was surprisingly disappointed.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2008 3:45 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Wed Mar 21, 2007 2:42 am

Posts
748

Location
Guelph, ON, Canada
what base is 3718 built on ?


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2008 3:47 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Tue Feb 19, 2008 1:52 am

Posts
538

Favourite OS
xboxkrnld.15574
The last build I actually installed on my computer was 4074... I couldn't run any of the others (Old PC).

I haven't tried to install any other builds on my new pc... Should I even bother?


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2008 9:19 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Sat Feb 24, 2007 4:14 pm

Posts
6612

Location
United Kingdom

Favourite OS
Server 2012 R2
hypr wrote:
what base is 3718 built on ?


What I understand is that the Server builds and Longhorn builds were developed almost together when Longhorn was in its 3718 branch, as they updated the Longhorn kernel with the latest Server code, so Longhorn 3718 would have been built on Server Build 3718. This is shown by the fact the Server build was built about 1 week before the Longhorn build.

_________________
BuildFeed - the ultimate collaborative NT build list - Windows Longhorn - a look at a defining Microsoft project


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2008 10:04 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Fri Dec 29, 2006 6:40 am

Posts
1513
hounsell wrote:
hypr wrote:
what base is 3718 built on ?


What I understand is that the Server builds and Longhorn builds were developed almost together when Longhorn was in its 3718 branch, as they updated the Longhorn kernel with the latest Server code, so Longhorn 3718 would have been built on Server Build 3718. This is shown by the fact the Server build was built about 1 week before the Longhorn build.

thats because Lab06 builds are behind the main builds
3718 was based on XP SP1 and so was Server 2003


Top  Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ] 




Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

All views expressed in these forums are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the BetaArchive site owner.

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group

Copyright © 2006-2018

 

Sitemap | XML | RSS