Vista: Web Based OS

Discussions in microsoft.public.windows.vista Is Mostly FILLED With People
Posting About Vista Problems, Problems w/Vista: Install Problems, Run
Problems, Hardware Problems, Technical Problems, etc...

Eliminate Those "Problems": The Windows Live DeskTop - Windows Vista, Hosted
On Microsoft Servers, ANYWHERE! ANYTIME! ANYPLACE!!!

The View Master wrote:

> Discussions in microsoft.public.windows.vista Is Mostly FILLED With
> People Posting About Vista Problems, Problems w/Vista: Install
> Problems, Run Problems, Hardware Problems, Technical Problems, etc...
>
> Eliminate Those "Problems": The Windows Live DeskTop - Windows Vista,
> Hosted On Microsoft Servers, ANYWHERE! ANYTIME! ANYPLACE!!!

You know, posting to newsgroups while drunk is a sure sign you need to drink
less.

Or post less.

"Robert Moir" <robspamtrap+msnews@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:OBss1gcgGHA.4276@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

> The View Master wrote:

>> Discussions in microsoft.public.windows.vista Is Mostly FILLED With
>> People Posting About Vista Problems, Problems w/Vista: Install
>> Problems, Run Problems, Hardware Problems, Technical Problems, etc...
>>
>> Eliminate Those "Problems": The Windows Live DeskTop - Windows Vista,
>> Hosted On Microsoft Servers, ANYWHERE! ANYTIME! ANYPLACE!!!

>
> You know, posting to newsgroups while drunk is a sure sign you need to
> drink less.
>

Robert! There's a *DANGER* That, Your Head Might EXPLODE!!!

Re: Mars Attacks!!!

Restart the meds!

"The View Master" <L1Ranger@Hotmail.Com.(donotspam)> wrote in message
news:1647C631-7ACC-4648-A26C-FA24817D615C@microsoft.com...

>
> Robert! There's a *DANGER* That, Your Head Might EXPLODE!!!
>
> Re: Mars Attacks!!!
>

The Web Based OS: Windows Live DeskTop - Windows Vista, Hosted On Microsoft
Servers Is The Logical Progression of Windows Live:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Live

Hi,

I have some reservations about Microsoft's capability to deliver.

1. After Win2k, everything with XP and Vista has been all about "local"
desktops (caching) and everyone having admin rights, needing a registry
and a .NET Framework, MSDE, MDAC, MSXML, DirectX or whatever. The
dependency tree is huge. It's the exact opposite of what you'd need for
a web based o/s.

2. You have to define Web based o/s? If it means loading a bunch of
WinFS, WinFX, DirectX and XAML surface from a boot device in order to
deliver Microsoft's vision of non-DHTML-non-W3C-non-standards based UI
and rendering elements, again it's the exact opposite of what you'd need
for a true "web" based o/s - note the word "web" there...

In contrast, Linux is already there; their bootable image is light, fast
and based on open-standards. Google also have some good offers. If I was
choosing servers to run these types of services, I certainly would NOT
choose Windows; too bloated, too expensive and not fit for purpose.
Google run on Linux and it's perfect for "web based" services.

Andre Da Costa [Extended64] wrote:

> Thats your opinion.

--
Gerry Hickman (London UK)

Well, I Was *Wondering* When Sum1 Was Gonna Figure Out That, The Web Based OS
WILL BE Competition Driven!

Currently, Microsoft Has The "Jump"!

;-)

"Gerry Hickman" wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I have some reservations about Microsoft's capability to deliver.
>
> 1. After Win2k, everything with XP and Vista has been all about "local"
> desktops (caching) and everyone having admin rights, needing a registry
> and a .NET Framework, MSDE, MDAC, MSXML, DirectX or whatever. The
> dependency tree is huge. It's the exact opposite of what you'd need for
> a web based o/s.
>
> 2. You have to define Web based o/s? If it means loading a bunch of
> WinFS, WinFX, DirectX and XAML surface from a boot device in order to
> deliver Microsoft's vision of non-DHTML-non-W3C-non-standards based UI
> and rendering elements, again it's the exact opposite of what you'd need
> for a true "web" based o/s - note the word "web" there...
>
> In contrast, Linux is already there; their bootable image is light, fast
> and based on open-standards. Google also have some good offers. If I was
> choosing servers to run these types of services, I certainly would NOT
> choose Windows; too bloated, too expensive and not fit for purpose.
> Google run on Linux and it's perfect for "web based" services.
>
> Andre Da Costa [Extended64] wrote:

> > Thats your opinion.

>
>
> --
> Gerry Hickman (London UK)
>