“Microsoft is expected to recommend that the ‘average’ Longhorn PC feature a dual-core CPU running at 4 to 6GHz; a minimum of 2 gigs of RAM; up to a terabyte of storage; a 1 Gbit, built-in, Ethernet-wired port and an 802.11g wireless link; and a graphics processor that runs three times faster than those on the market today,” Mary Jo Foley reports for Microsoft-Watch.
“That’s according to developer sources close to the company. Microsoft officials would not comment on the Longhorn reference implementation,” Foley reports.
Full article here.
This is an absolute joke. At the rate Intel is currently crawling, there is no way they’ll have a Dual Core 6GHz CPU in time for Longhorn unless it really is 2008 (or later) before M$ finally has it ready.
Obviously Apple is doing something right since they can get their superior OS to run on hardware with less than 1/5 of those specs…
Good work Mr. Gates! I hope you and Mr. Ballmer stay in ‘control’ at Micro$oft for many years to come! Please, please stay on this track so we can watch your company diminish into obscurity
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />
What a joke… just like a Hummer today… big, ugly, unecological and horribly inconvenient…. yet, I’m sure that it doesn’t crash as much as Longhorn will.
Who said that Windows was a cheap solution will have to rephrase that.
Steve Jobs leads, the rest follow.
Ary said: ” Allchin also demonstrated an interesting migration tool that can optionally use an upcoming smart USB cable to transfer personal data from an existing PC to a new Longhorn-based PC.” YAAAWWWNNN….. Can you imagine how long it will take someone to transfer files via USB? THIS is the best they can do to help their poor XP users to transfer gigabytes of files to Longhorn? AND you have to wait over 2 YEARS for it!!”
Too bad they don’t have this feature available now, because it would take two years to transfer all your files over USB! Yikes!!!
I guess OS X is so good that Microsoft will need over 5 years to copy it and will require a system with 5x the power in order to run it. Figures…
this is one reason why its a good time to invest in Apple…
Apple introduced Macintosh in 1984. Then they rested on their laurels for about 10 years. During that 10 years, Microsoft worked diligently to copy the Macintosh. Meanwhile IS and IT people participated in the proliferation of MS and Intel because to us (yes, I was one of them) it represented IBM. It also represented job security in a couple of ways. A) It was harder so you needed “MIS” guys. B) No one was ever fired for chooing IBM.
In 1995 Microsoft introduced Windows 95 which for all intents and purposes was as close to the Mac as you needed to be for bragging rights, and “good enough” for most people. Consequently people went for cheaper hardware, and an OS that was good enough.
Today, Apple has again taken a strong lead in technology with OS X. Its UNIX foundation gives it the industrial strength, flexibility, security, and growth potential that Windows XP (really only 2000/NT warmed over) can only dream about. The thing is, Microsoft knows this and they aren’t asleep. Microsoft is working hard on Longhorn and we will see Longhorn in the next few years. My guess is that it will be one hell of a product. (MS developers think you will need at least a 4GHz Intel machine to run it on, a 6GHz being optimal.)
During the next few years, Apple has an opportunity. No one will argue that Windows is superior to OS X. If Apple maintains the constant, yearly updates to OS X and doesn’t start resting on their laurels again, MS may never catch up. If they sit around doing nothing, MS will eventually copy most of what’s in OS X and whether it works well or not, it will likely be “Good Enough” for most people, and “good enough” is all MS really needs.
Re: ” During the next few years, Apple has an opportunity. No one will argue that Windows is superior to OS X. If Apple maintains the constant, yearly updates to OS X and doesn’t start resting on their laurels again, MS may never catch up. If they sit around doing nothing, MS will eventually copy most of what’s in OS X and whether it works well or not, it will likely be “Good Enough” for most people, and “good enough” is all MS really needs.”
To prevent “Good Enough” from happening, two things, at least, need to happen. Steves’ focus needs to shift back to the Mac from the iPod to a very significan extent. Why would you spend time on something that has such a limited potential for profit? That is, to me, what iPod/iTms represents. iPods, yes, iTms, doubtful.
EVERYONE, (or the vast majority of people) NEEDs computers. iPods I don’t care about because I don’t have time for them. I work hard every day using my computer, and I think there are a lot more of me, then there are of them. The point is you go where the potential numbers are.
The second thing that needs to be done is that people in the real world need to be made aware of the very real daily benefits of OSX/Mac. Artsy-craftsy ads designed to appeal to the salon crowd, and to get you ad awards don’t do that. They don’t do much of anything except preach to a small choir.
That is not “Good Enough”
Otherwise, the “Good Enough” that we have been talking about will win.
If Steve does not show them an alternative, they will line up and by the dual core 6 gig Windows machine because they will see no other way. They must be shown an alternative, which comes close to existing now in the G5.
I have known many elitist people, hell, I have been one. What elitists do is say: I am superior to you and have a superior product, so you must
Come To Me, Kiss My Ring, and then I will allow you to buy my superior product. But I will not lower myself to advertise the facts that establish its’ superiority, since it should be self-evident.
Maybe it should be self-evident, but it’s not!
Steve Jobs, one of the smartest people in the world. He can run rings around anything Bill Gates supposedly has done. I know what it’s like to under-achieve. I think that is what he is doing.
End of rant.
Who wants to b*tch about hardware prices? Anybody? Anybody? Bueller? Okay, I will!
I just priced out a “bottom-line” Mac system and a Dell (Dimension 2400) system. Bumped ram to 1Gig, bumped the graphics card, HD to 160MB, wireless card, bluetooth, 17″ flat screen. The Mac system came out to about $3000 (from a base of $1799). The Dell system, which lists unmodded at $799, came out to about $2000. Oh, but that was with a 120MB HD (largest available), Dell’s proprietary video card (no other options available), and no bluetooth. So, the add-ons cost about the same but you get more for your money with the Mac.
So, sure, a Dell costs 2/3rds of what a Mac does … bottom-line comparable systems with reasonable add-ons to make them usable.
The thing is, that Mac will still be able to run whatever Mac OS is running in 2008. If you’re running a Dell and you want Longhorn, the machine you buy today will be obsolete in two years.
So, buy a Mac today for $3k, or buy a couple of Dells over the next few years for $4k … hmmmm, what to do, what to do…..
http://www.only4gurus.com/v2/longhorn.asp
For those who haven’t seen what longhorn look like… please, try to look at it without comparing the whole thing to OS X. It’s just impossible to compare it to Apple.
Can you guys imagine these screen in a 16/9 plasma screen? What a waste of hardware.
oh well.. now i don’t feel so bad about having to upgrade my 256 ram cuz the os x feels a bit slow..
2 GIG?!?! bwahahahahahahaha
and look at those screenshots.. thurrott says their way way better than panther.. well..they’re not..but at those specs, they better damn well be…
look at the windows, they’re transparent!!
uhh like STickies?
yea..
I’m running 10.3 on my 4 year old tangerine iMac just fine. I have a small upgrade (to 500 MHz from the original 266 MHz, upped to RAM to 384 MB, plus Firewire for an iPod), but it’s working just fine. Let’s see Longhorn run on systems that are 4 years old. Those numbers are insane.
I was speaking to our mac technical support guy today and apparently BSD (on which Apple’s OS X is based on) was around in the seventies!
If this is the case Apple had 30 years of open source R+D done before they even concieve OS X.
In which case that makes microshaft about 34 years behind unix.
Funny how people judge an OS before they’ve even seen/used it. Thats is exactly what is wrong with the Mac Community…and is also why the Mac will never dominate…All Show No Go…
“If this is the case Apple had 30 years of open source R+D done before they even concieve OS X.
In which case that makes microshaft about 34 years behind unix.”
Apple didnt do the R/D, College students, professors, MIT Guys and Att did…Apple didnt do shit..Its OpenBSD with old school UI enhancements, nothing new…
Actually windows is more like 40 yrs away..But you know..where will MS be in that same time frame of 50yrs…? I would say alot more advanced than *nix
Soon apple will be running the MSWinFXv2 Kernel which has been redesigned with Unix built right in…
Mwhahahaha
Raaaalff
And considering MicroShit just licensed Unix Code from SCO, Then Apple may be in for a Foot in the rear (Like Always) suprise…
Kung Pao anyone??
What? You think SCO’s claims have any merit, or that they have a chance of winning their suits?
And you expect people to think there’s any credibility to what you say?
BlowMacChunks … your last name wouldn’t happen to be Thurrot, would it?
Im not talking about SCO claims against the unix community, Im talking about MS Licensing Unix from SCO to combat linux…Hence the free download of bash for windows….Services for unix WILL be integrated into Longhorn..
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/sfu/
http://insight.zdnet.co.uk/software/linuxunix/0,39020472,2134917,00.htm
Speaking of judging before seeing. What are you doing yourself BlowMacChuncks? Are you using Longhorn to speak from experience? Longhorn is available and anyone can have it. The current codename version tells a lot about how the final product will end up looking like. + Why would MS now integrate Unix in Longhorn? A Unix Integration is not like a unix based OS Mr. It�s not the same I�m afraid.
MacOS X has integrated Windows through VirtualPC and for your information, that doesn�t make OS X a Windows Kernel based OS does it?
Microsoft has to re-write from scratch its OS core if they want a solid and consistent Windows (if they want windows to survive).
We’re not judging here Mr. We’re just laughing at the “system requirements” for “future longhorn” + the fact that its GUI is one of the worse I’ve seen so far.
Peace is upon you Mr.
It seems that MS is determined to “build” upon its existing OS rather than develop a completely new OS. If MS were to opt out for a Unix-based system this would put them in a direct head-to-head battle with Apple. It seems likely that MS would be in serious trouble competing with Apple with its 7 years of potential Unix experience. MS has dug a huge hole and it can’t get out of it without admitting that must follow Apple’s lead in OS development.
Burp
The hardware builders must be loving Latehorn because millions of pc lemmings will have to buy new computers just to run this.
Rich b, exactly. That is why it will be a success – the usual MS monopoly partners will want to sell a loada machines on teh back of the next “upgrade” – eventually, that greed will be their undoing.
When the price of Lorghorn and a new PC is greater than a Mac with OS 12.2 PC owners may finally see the light to switch.
If Microsoft creates Longhorn from an entirely rewritten code, you can be sure that it will be full of the worst bugs a person can imagine. As I recall when the source code for Windows was leaked, the total code came up to about 46 million lines. You can bet that Longhorn will contain far more than that. Each line will be a potential flaw.
I work in manufacturing and in all my years, I have NEVER seen a perfect product released to the public. The desire for perfection is there, but the reality is that there WILL be some flaws. The more parts a product contains, the greater the chance for error. There are simply too many lines of code in Longhorn for it not to be a public relations disaster, especially when you look at Microsoft’s history of quality control. With as many people working on the Longhorn project, there are far too many independent minds, and the probablility of making a cohesive operating system is really slim.
I suppose that M$ could borrow a bunch of code from the existing releases of Windows. I don’t give that much hope either since it is so buggy and patched. When I think of Windows and see all the patches, I think of a patched tire. There are more patches in the tire than the original tire material.
Ooohh… Now if OSX were ported to such a system!
dual-core CPU running at 4 to 6GHz
2 gigs of RAM; terabyte of storage;
1 Gbit Ethernet-wired port; 802.11g wireless link;
GPU that runs three times faster than those on the market today
That’d be sweet! Machine fast enough for Longhorn that runs OSX.