Feeds

Windows Longhaul? Longhorn could be 2008, says Gartner

Why this could be a big problem for Microsoft

  • alert
  • submit to reddit

Secure remote control for conventional and virtual desktops

Longhorn in 2005 seems definitely off the agenda, and while it might ship in 2006, it could be delayed until 2008 or 2009, according to Gartner. According to a report of the Gartner Data Center Conference in Information Week, Gartner research VP Tom Bittman puts the likely release window between late 2006 and mid-2008.

The prediction isn't exactly as far out as it might appear on the surface, because he's talking (in Gartner's irritating probability-speak) of a 50 per cent probability of 2006, 40 per cent 2007 and 2008-2009 as outside chances. Major Microsoft projects do tend to slip pretty spectacularly, so history tells us none of these dates is entirely bonkers.

But we at The Register are becoming intrigued by what happens in the ever-stretching period between the shipment of Windows XP and the shipment of Longhorn. This gap is unprecedented, because in the past Microsoft has always had something half-credible to throw into the marketplace to keep interest alive and to keep the customers upgrading. Not having such a thing could have a pretty immediate adverse effect on consumer revenues, and there are more specific reasons why it could hurt in the corporate market.

Think yourself into the part - you're a business running Win2k or earlier clients, you've got the Microsoft sales people talking to you about upgrading to WinXP and Server 2003, and you've got the public prints and (cough) Microsoft's senior executives telling you Longhorn is the big deal upgrade. But what is it, when is it, and how feasible is it to wait for it? The Microsoft sales people can try to sell you .NET as here, and where it's at, but you surely have the growing impression that it's not quite where it's really at, because that's all about Longhorn.

Just a thought, people. Microsoft could be maiming its sales teams by sending them out without credible roadmaps, and talking up something it can't ship for years, just when Sun is starting to look dangerous on Microsoft's home turf, too. We think that if Microsoft can't nail Longhorn down absolutely to 2006 pretty soon, it's going to have to come up with some interim ideas to hold the fort. ®

Providing a secure and efficient Helpdesk

More from The Register

next story
Microsoft WINDOWS 10: Seven ATE Nine. Or Eight did really
Windows NEIN skipped, tech preview due out on Wednesday
Business is back, baby! Hasta la VISTA, Win 8... Oh, yeah, Windows 9
Forget touchscreen millennials, Microsoft goes for mouse crowd
Apple: SO sorry for the iOS 8.0.1 UPDATE BUNGLE HORROR
Apple kills 'upgrade'. Hey, Microsoft. You sure you want to be like these guys?
ARM gives Internet of Things a piece of its mind – the Cortex-M7
32-bit core packs some DSP for VIP IoT CPU LOL
Microsoft on the Threshold of a new name for Windows next week
Rebranded OS reportedly set to be flung open by Redmond
Lotus Notes inventor Ozzie invents app to talk to people on your phone
Imagine that. Startup floats with voice collab app for Win iPhone
'Google is NOT the gatekeeper to the web, as some claim'
Plus: 'Pretty sure iOS 8.0.2 will just turn the iPhone into a fax machine'
prev story

Whitepapers

A strategic approach to identity relationship management
ForgeRock commissioned Forrester to evaluate companies’ IAM practices and requirements when it comes to customer-facing scenarios versus employee-facing ones.
Storage capacity and performance optimization at Mizuno USA
Mizuno USA turn to Tegile storage technology to solve both their SAN and backup issues.
High Performance for All
While HPC is not new, it has traditionally been seen as a specialist area – is it now geared up to meet more mainstream requirements?
Beginner's guide to SSL certificates
De-mystify the technology involved and give you the information you need to make the best decision when considering your online security options.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.