Hi,

I have heard about microsofts new OS which is due out around 2009ish

i cannot remember the name of it, or the code name of it atleast begins with V...

Im not talking about vista.

Anyone else heard about it.

Dan

I have not heard of this. I don't think this is true because Vista has only just been released and to release a new operating system just 2 years later would be stupid.

Most people haven't moved to Vista yet and with the security issues etc. which have been reported most people won't for a while yet.

I've heard of it too, it would be called "vienna". I also heard Microsoft was trying it's best to get it finished faster than Vista, but 2009 seems to be a little early indeed.

Here's a link I found

http://www.dmxzone.com/ShowDetail.asp?NewsId=11484

I think Microsoft would receive a bit of a backlash if they replaced Vista so soon. I predict 2010-2011 would be more likely

it is acceptable. vista might get outdated as the technology improves

I agree with AndrewP's timeline prediction. Microsoft is known for a lot of things, but moving swiftly when creating a new OS isn't one of those things.

The only reason they would move any faster is if Vista bombed and/or didn't sell as many copies as MS thought it would. Since it's prepackaged with any brand name PC, that's not likely to happen.

Thats it vienna! Lol thanks for someone saying

anyway, from the geeks gosip i have heard, they are trying to get it done ASAP. so they can begin testing and at least have it advertised etc in 2009 maybe sooner.

found this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_%22Vienna%22 says they release '09

very interesting.

im glad they are moving it up to 64bit should make it run faster and make better use of the computer reasources.

Dan

The thing that is getting lost in all of this is: "why?"

Why would MS rush to develop and market an OS that will make better use of resources that most people don't use (keep in mind that those of us reading and posting to this thread don't represent the vast majority) and don't really need since most people out there are content to have a computer that "goes online, sends email, and lets me type in Word"?

In other words, what is this really going to add for the majority? What does Vista do that way that say XP doesn't for the average user?

If they always did that we would be working on ancient things

if you look at vista,

you have home basic which is aimed at what you siad the ad user all they get is it looks good and they can go "i've got vista"

but as i have seen buying vista seems pointless unless you will go for the whole 10 yards (yes i know get the point that it is more than 9....) and get the ultimate one which would be for us! high profomance etc.
i have yet to get vista and i doubt i will get a leigit copy as they charge so F ing much. and i the ones i probally could strech to would be pathetic waste of money, also as microsoft only "allow" aka WANT you to instal iy on ONE unit would mean to upgrade everyone in my house on just the basic one would cost £500 and if i went for the unlimited it would be in the 1000's JUST for what essintall is a piece of sofwtare, and when your paying a multi-billion $$ corp i think ill go with a free pirate! LOL

dan

Vista or Vienna.. I couldn't care less :P . I'm on linux with a 6-month OS release cycle. I'm loving it

I totally agree with Hellmet, only, I'm noit using ubuntu, but gentoo. No release cycle, always bleeding edge.

you forgot to mention Microsoft "Fiji" http://www.legitreviews.com/news/2079/