Windows 7

[Arrow_Raider]

http://news.google.com/?ncl=1148435360&hl=en

Windows 7 could arrive in 2009? This puts me in a difficult situation. My current computer isn't sufficient anymore and I want to build a new one this summer. By that time, windows xp will be unavailable for OEM and I will be forced to use Vista. However, if Vista is becoming obsolete in 2009, that makes me want it even less. Blah.

[RobDog888]

No worries as its going to be a beta and you know that time lines are always hard to adhere to. So 2009 for an new OS, no. More like 2010 or 2011 I'd say at the earliest. The 5 year main lifecycle of an OS would place the next one in 2012 for a RTM public release.

By that time you will need another new system again.

[mendhak]

By then, we can have flying cars too.

I'm surprised they haven't started referring to it as Vienna yet.

Interesting site I came across while searching for more info - http://www.windows7screenshots.com/

My favorite is this one simply because it has Apollo 13 in it. What OS development project could possibly go wrong with an Apollo 13 thumbnail? None, except for the Mac.

[RobDog888]

See, thats 2010 when the initial proposed RTM release would be ready but I highly doubt it. MS stated SQL Server 08 and Windows Server 08 would be released in Feb of 08 but Server 08 just got released and SQL is expected to be final by June I think.

Whos going to wait another 2-3 years for an OS? Still, theey will be all "Its not even SP-1 yet. I wont upgrade until then"

[Techno]

I doubt this because Steve Balmer said that Windows Vista will possibly and most likely be our last OS and all updates/code changes done through the web.....

I do remember though that the code name for the next version of Windows was blackwindow.... after Longhorn. But those were just in talks during development of Vista....

[RobDog888]

It would be a marketing diaster to release a new OS only after 2 years. The loss of sales on Vista would keep it from recouping expenditures of its development. Although to contridict myself, Windows 2000 and XP had a 3 year span between them. So 2010 is still the earliest we would see a new OS.

Now if those pixs are valid then it would appear that they are building it off of a Vista base so less work needed as its not being developed fromscratch. This could be because of all the dramatic changes they implemented with Vista in preparation for the next OS.

[Techno]

makes sense robdog. But no doubt, the way the MS OS lifecycle works (talking from experience and close "links" ) is that there will generally be 2 OS's in development at the same time, with one having more focus which would be the "to be released" OS....then 3 years after that has RTM'd, the other one would be more developed waiting to be released just before the end of lifecycle for the RTM'd OS.....

If its true (which I personally will confirm next week), then as we have gathered, earliest alpha (not beta, but alpha) would be in 2010 or even earlier for technet roadshows and events, ready to be released in around 2012

[RobDog888]

Right, I had a discussion with another forum member a year ago that they just couldnt fathom the idea of multiple versions in production at the same time. MS and other major outfits do not work in synchronous time lines. When one version is done they dont start a new one as they would take too long to get it out and the competition would catch up. MS has a roadmap for future OS versions well beyond Vista and Vienna. (Is that Vienna like those little hot dogs? )

[BillGeek]

Is it just me, or are they intentionally trying to "copy" the Mac interface? (To an extent, that is)

[mendhak]

It's just you. Trying to copy the Mac interface, that is.

[Techno]

haha

funny....I heard something else about how MS dev the OS's - fair enough they dont work in sync but there are 2 OS developments at the same time...but the one put in the "back" is just really really slow development (documents and some research) before they fully dev it after the "front" OS has been RTM'd