Next XP rev Longhorn a 2003, client-only product?

The Politburo hints...


The Grand Old Duke of York is clearly in charge of Microsoft's operating systems roadmaps for, having marched Longhorn up to the top of a distant (2005, said his Billness) hill earlier this year, he has now marched it straight back down again. Longhorn, the next version of Windows XP, will not after all be a 2005 product, but will quite possibly be a next year product after all.

Which would suggest it's been pulled out of the 'hard megaproject' category (never mind, Bill already got the glowing write-up in Fortune) and moved over into the 'easy-ish rev' one. This possible revelation comes in Mary-Jo's latest in eWeek, but you'll have to parse the Delphic quotes to figure out the signposts.

"Given the deployment cycles and budgeting that customers work through," said a spokeswoman, "and given the significant customer interest in our upcoming release of Windows .NET Server 2003, we have determined that another major release of Windows Server in the Longhorn client timeframe does not meet the needs of most of our customers."

Now, with .NET Server 2003 due in early 2003, if Microsoft is syncing its server and client OS release dates (yes, we know, if it really is doing this why is it .NET Server 2003, but Microsoft has been 'officially' syncing them, even though it isn't doing it really) then it ought to have another rev of .NET Server out at the same time as Longhorn.

Or it ought to mean to, anyway. But if you look again at what the spokeswoman said first, she's citing customers, which with .NET Server would be big customers. Microsoft has been coming under pressure from these to produce more accurate roadmaps, and it does seem to be trying to do so. So, simply saying you're going to do something then not doing it really isn't an option.

Now, she also says there'll be a major Server release, which will presumably be Blackcomb, to follow .NET Server 2003. So no major server release with Longhorn, but major server release to follow the next server release. Which means Longhorn is earlier, but is client-only. And if it is a 2003 product, then all of the people who said Microsoft was only kidding earlier this year will turn out to have been right. ®


Other stories you might like

  • To Washington's relief, GlobalWafers to spend $5 billion on Texas plant
    Cash had been burning a hole in company's pocket after deal to buy Siltronic fell through

    Taiwan's GlobalWafers announced on Monday a new use for the $5 billion it first earmarked for a purchase of Germany's Siltronics: building a 300-millimeter semiconductor wafer plant in the US state of Texas.

    Construction on the facility – which will eventually span 3.2 million square feet – is expected to commence later this year, with chip production commencing by 2025. The plant will sit in the city of Sherman, near the Texas-Oklahoma border, where it is slated to bring in 1,500 jobs as production climbs towards 1.2 million wafers per month.

    GlobalWafers is the world's third largest producer of silicon wafers and Sherman is already home to its subsidiary, GlobiTech.

    Continue reading
  • Tencent admits to poisoned QR code attack on QQ chat platform
    Could it be Beijing was right about games being bad for China?

    Chinese web giant Tencent has admitted to a significant account hijack attack on its QQ.com messaging and social media platform.

    In a post to rival social media platform Sina Weibo – a rough analog of Twitter – Tencent apologized for the incident.

    The problem manifested on Sunday night and saw an unnamed number of QQ users complain their credentials no longer allowed them access to their accounts. Tencent has characterized that issue as representing "stolen" accounts.

    Continue reading
  • Carnival Cruises torpedoed by US states, agrees to pay $6m after waves of cyberattacks
    Now those are some phishing boats

    Carnival Cruise Lines will cough up more than $6 million to end two separate lawsuits filed by 46 states in the US after sensitive, personal information on customers and employees was accessed in a string of cyberattacks.

    A couple of years ago, as the coronavirus pandemic was taking hold, the Miami-based biz revealed intruders had not only encrypted some of its data but also downloaded a collection of names and addresses; Social Security info, driver's license, and passport numbers; and health and payment information of thousands of people in almost every American state.

    It all started to go wrong more than a year prior, as the cruise line became aware of suspicious activity in May 2019. This apparently wasn't disclosed until 10 months later, in March 2020.

    Continue reading
  • India extends deadline for compliance with infosec logging rules by 90 days
    Helpfully announced extension on deadline day

    India's Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) and the local Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT-In) have extended the deadline for compliance with the Cyber Security Directions introduced on April 28, which were due to take effect yesterday.

    The Directions require verbose logging of users' activities on VPNs and clouds, reporting of infosec incidents within six hours of detection - even for trivial things like unusual port scanning - exclusive use of Indian network time protocol servers, and many other burdensome requirements. The Directions were purported to improve the security of local organisations, and to give CERT-In information it could use to assess threats to India. Yet the Directions allowed incident reports to be sent by fax – good ol' fax – to CERT-In, which offered no evidence it operates or would build infrastructure capable of ingesting or analyzing the millions of incident reports it would be sent by compliant organizations.

    The Directions were roundly criticized by tech lobby groups that pointed out requirements such as compelling clouds to store logs of customers' activities was futile, since clouds don't log what goes on inside resources rented by their customers. VPN providers quit India and moved their servers offshore, citing the impossibility of storing user logs when their entire business model rests on not logging user activities. VPN operators going offshore means India's government is therefore less able to influence such outfits.

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022