Windows 8 in 2012, Beta as Early as 2011

[Crispy]

Microsoft started dropping the first Windows 8 references as early as March 2009; yes, long before Windows 7 was finalized. And the next iteration of the Windows client and server operating systems are now taking shape in Redmond. The software giant already confirmed officially that Windows 8 client and Windows 8 Server are being developed in parallel. Just as it was the case for Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2. Still, the company is mute on the evolution of Windows, including features, capabilities, the actual timetable, etc.

The successor of Windows 7 is planned for availability within three years after the GA of its predecessor. Microsoft said it would impose such a rhythm after the release of Windows Vista, promising to never again repeat the gap between Windows XP and the delivery of the OS initially codenamed Longhorn. It took the software giant less than three years after Vista’s general availability to offer Windows 7 to customers around the world, and the same is valid for Windows 8.

Full read: Windows 8 in 2012, Beta as Early as 2011 - Milestone 1 has been reached, reportedly - Softpedia

 

[WindowsStar]

With thousands and thousands of machines, it took us almost nine years to move from Windows NT to almost all Windows XP machines. There are still 50 or so Windows 2000 and maybe 3 Windows NT machines but they are almost all gone. We have just barely started Deploying Windows 7 replacing our Windows XP machines. It will most likely take us nine years to finally get rid of all the last Windows XP machines. So to even think about Windows 8 really hurts my head. It is completely impossible for us to move to Windows 7 and then in 3 short years move to Windows 8. We have already decided that we will deploy Windows 7 all the way until Windows 9 with Service Pack 1 comes out.

 

[OneSerious]

Why do we need a new OS every three years? I thought the main reason why they developed 7 was because so many people seemed to have issues with Vista, not that they just wanted to pump out new OS's.

 

[mickey megabyte]

Why do we need a new OS every three years?

we don't - but microsoft would like us all to buy one.

hardware changes a lot in three years, software should catch up to take advantage of all the new goodies.

if it's lots better than the already pretty damn good 7, then i probably will buy it, especially if they give us a good chance to test the beta (and new builds).

can someone please pm me a link to the download, thanks.

 

[Adrian]

Why do we need a new OS every three years? I thought the main reason why they developed 7 was because so many people seemed to have issues with it, not that they just wanted to pump out new OS's.

Moores Law!

 

[Adrian]

Moore's Law

The law is named after Intel co-founder Gordon E. Moore, who described the trend in his 1965 paper.[7][8][9] The paper noted that number of components in integrated circuits had doubled every year from the invention of the integrated circuit in 1958 until 1965 and predicted that the trend would continue "for at least ten years".[10] His prediction has proved to be uncannily accurate, in part because the law is now used in the semiconductor industry to guide long-term planning and to set targets for research and development.[11] This fact would support an alternative view that the "law" unfolds as a self-fulfilling prophecy, where the goal set by the prediction charts the course for realized capability

Courtesy of Wiki.

 

[mcfly88]

pumped!!! i love windows 7, have high hopes for 8

 

[Win7User512]

Why do we need a new OS every three years? I thought the main reason why they developed 7 was because so many people seemed to have issues with it, not that they just wanted to pump out new OS's.

MS realized that by the time Vista finally came out, they had fallen behind with hardware and software. Vista had countless delays and was supposed to be released only a few years after XP.

They are trying to get back on track.

 

[windows7user]

Why do we need a new OS every three years?

Tell that to the Linux guys. Fedora and Ubuntu comes out with a new OS every 6 months. Linus Torvalds (creator of the Linux kernel) even said that a big problem with Microsoft is that they don't release a new OS more frequently.

 

[Win7User512]

Why do we need a new OS every three years?

Tell that to the Linux guys. Fedora and Ubuntu comes out with a new OS every 6 months. Linus Torvalds (creator of the Linux kernel) even said that a big problem with Microsoft is that they don't release a new OS more frequently.

Good point. They do release VERY frequently. And they have updates for the software and OS almost every week.

 

[Bootz]

Any linux based OS is only a fraction of what Windows OS's are. They are not even in the same league. Windows share of the market tells the story.

 

[mickey megabyte]

Any linux based OS is only a fraction of what Windows OS's are. They are not even in the same league. Windows share of the market tells the story.

what do linux distros leave out?

windows 7 doesn't even come with an email client.

 

[Vesko96]

Why do we need a new OS every three years?

Tell that to the Linux guys. Fedora and Ubuntu comes out with a new OS every 6 months. Linus Torvalds (creator of the Linux kernel) even said that a big problem with Microsoft is that they don't release a new OS more frequently.

Indeed. Although, Ubuntu (and Fedora), like all Linux OSs, are Open Source. Which means they have (probably) more people to work with, plus they do it for free.

 

[Vesko96]

Any linux based OS is only a fraction of what Windows OS's are. They are not even in the same league. Windows share of the market tells the story.

what do linux distros leave out?

windows 7 doesn't even come with an email client.

Definitely. Linux comes with EVERYTHING, mostly because all the software developed for it is open source as well.

 

[geeve420]

Why do we need a new OS every three years?

Tell that to the Linux guys. Fedora and Ubuntu comes out with a new OS every 6 months. Linus Torvalds (creator of the Linux kernel) even said that a big problem with Microsoft is that they don't release a new OS more frequently.

Indeed. Although, Ubuntu (and Fedora), like all Linux OSs, are Open Source. Which means they have (probably) more people to work with, plus they do it for free.

That is the important part, FREE. It maybe every six months, but you pay nothing, but your time. I complained about moving from XP due to cost for all my computers, glad I did it though. I just hate the feeling of knowing by next year or so I will need to save up and upgrade again. I also fear what won't work and force me into new software and hardware. I surely would hate to upgrade every three years (hardware and software). Just my 2 cents

 

[windows7user]

If Microsoft were to bundle in more software with Windows, they would just get in more trouble. People then will take advantage of this to smack Microsoft. They already have enough trouble bundling a web browser into the OS and you want them to bundle more?

 

[Bootz]

Any linux based OS is only a fraction of what Windows OS's are. They are not even in the same league. Windows share of the market tells the story.

what do linux distros leave out?

windows 7 doesn't even come with an email client.

For a home user linux leaves nothing out, i love ubuntu as a matter of fact. However there are reasons you dont see linux systems in a corporate environment. In addition to that, you do have to pay for Red hat which is probably the only linux you possibly might see in a business.

To top it off, if Linux was just as good as Windows everyone and every business would be using it because its free. But as we know thats not the case...

Actually Linux leaves one major thing out, support for most games. Which considering how big the gaming market is now, thats huge.

 

[Win7User512]

Any linux based OS is only a fraction of what Windows OS's are. They are not even in the same league. Windows share of the market tells the story.

_______________________________


For a home user linux leaves nothing out, i love ubuntu as a matter of fact. However there are reasons you dont see linux systems in a corporate environment. In addition to that, you do have to pay for Red hat which is probably the only linux you possibly might see in a business.

To top it off, if Linux was just as good as Windows everyone and every business would be using it because its free. But as we know thats not the case...

Only a fraction? Just because Windows has the majority market share doesn't mean Linux isn't used.

Not in a corporate environment? You're kidding, right?

It is as good as Windows, just not as user friendly. Windows is a point and click environment for any user to come along and pick up. Linux isn't.

 

[Tepid]

There are several problems that many IT guys are going to run into in the next 10 years if MS keeps to the trend and people continue buying PC's with Windows.

You will have environments that will nave numerous different OS's, there will be little conformity in the environment. Specialization in particular fields will be a necessity that not just any schmo off the street (like today) will be able to come in and work on a system and fix it.

That could be a blessing and a curse for IT professionals.
We need to weed out the Paper Cert Tech that really doesn't know jack, but passed their tests using Brain Dumps.

If Microsoft were to bundle in more software with Windows, they would just get in more trouble. People then will take advantage of this to smack Microsoft. They already have enough trouble bundling a web browser into the OS and you want them to bundle more?

Yeah, every time they do, they get smacked down for anti-competitive practices.

Who is the most anti-competitive company in the Business? Apple. it definitely NOT MS.

And as for Linux.

Sure it works out of the box, but if you want to do just about anything you do with windows, you better learn some programming, and take the time to learn how to compile things.

I have seen more people spend more time trying to make Linux work the way they want, than actually using Linux to do things that are extremely easy in Windows.

 

[cloud8521]

my problem with windows releasing so close to each other is the cost.
i essentially have to throw out my old OS that i paid good money for for the next one. sure theres upgrade version but that is still not cheap, your still 100$+