Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

New MS Shell Will Not Be In Longhorn

Posted by Zonk on Fri Jun 10, 2005 04:45 PM
from the so-close dept.
Operating Systems Software Windows IT
sootman writes "Remember that new Windows shell? Looks like it'll be yet another technology that won't make it into Longhorn. 'It will take three to five years to fully develop and deliver,' said Microsoft Senior Vice President Bob Muglia this week at Tech Ed 2005. However, it's not dead yet--despite not shipping in Longhorn in 2006 or Longhorn Server in 2007, the article says 'Exchange 12 administration functions will be built atop Monad, which would enable users to do everything from the command line that can be done from the graphical interface.'"
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

New MS Shell Will Not Be In Longhorn 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • So the question on everyone's minds at this point is: What *will* Longhorn actually have in it? Avalon, Indigo, and WinFX are all being backported to XP/2003, WinFS has been dropped for the release, and now Monad (I love that name) is being cut. I'm not quite sure how Microsoft plans to sell the OS on such exciting features as "Better DRM!" and "We've got the security thing right this time. Promise!"

    "It will take three to five years to fully develop and deliver," said Microsoft Senior Vice President Bob Muglia this week at Tech Ed 2005.

    *Jaw hits the floor*

    Five years? Whoa. Five years ago, Windows 2000 was brand new. Five years ago, Mac users were still stuck with OS 9. Five years ago, the tech boom was still on. Five years ago, Bill Clinton was still President. Even worse is that Win32 is only ten years old!

    If it takes Microsoft five years to get something out the door, I think they will soon find themselves becoming irrelevant in the desktop market. Confidence can be a good thing, but over-confidence can mean disaster. The bright side to this is that users will win when Microsoft is forced to go back to being an applications vendor instead of an OS vendor. Maybe they'll even get around to making another BASIC that doesn't suck. ;-)

    On a slightly different topic, I really think that Microsoft is really on the wrong track with their combined Desktop/Server codebase bent. As technology marches on, Microsoft will quickly find that their competitors are taking advantage of technological solutions that only make sense on one side of the fence. I have to wonder if some of the delay that we're seeing isn't caused by Microsoft attempting to make all of their technology work in both arenas.
    • Longhorn will be to XP what Win 98 was to Win 95: prettier screen effects and no real differences that can't be obtained through service packs, and stability will likely suffer. But people will buy it just because it's newer and supposedly better.

      • Re:Inquiring minds want to know! (Score:5, Funny)

        by Ucklak (755284) on Friday June 10 2005, @06:10PM (#12785434)
        XP was to Win2K what Win98 was to Win95.

        I'm thinking WinME = Longhorn.

            • Re:Inquiring minds want to know! (Score:4, Informative)

              by man_of_mr_e (217855) on Friday June 10 2005, @08:15PM (#12786128)
              Remote Desktop and Remote Assistance, Shadow Copy Service, WebDAV (Web Client) Support, Concurrent Console Users (Fast User Switching), Camera and scanning wizard, System Restore Points, Driver Rollback, Side by Side DLL support, Windows Firewall, DualView (ability to have the display on both the screen and a projector or TV), Synchronization Manager, Automatic Update (this was later added to Win2k), and a bunch of other stuff I can't think of right now.

    • Five years... food for thought (Score:5, Insightful)

      by sterno (16320) on Friday June 10 2005, @05:08PM (#12784867) Homepage
      Yup, five years. So what I'm lead to wonder is which we'll see first:

      1) A good command line for Windows
      2) A good GUI for Linux

      I also have to wonder if Microsoft would be putting an ounce of effort into developing a command line if that wasn't something beneficial in Linux.

      • Yup, five years.

        Leaving aside the fact that there is really no excuse why they didn't put together a decent command line shell 20 years ago.

        Why didn't they just look at what was available elsewhere, and copy the VMS shell (which Digital released for the VAX machines in 1978)? Clean, simple, and with command and option names that are actually possible to remember.

        One of the most advertised aspects when Windows NT came out was that it was "designed by the people who wrote VMS". If this was true, d

    • So the question on everyone's minds at this point is: What *will* Longhorn actually have in it?

      Did you try checking Microsoft.com for this information?

      It takes some wading through marketing speak, but if you go through the trouble of checking out the info, you'll probably get a better figure of what's in it and not backported or delayed.

      Here: About Windows Longhorn security [microsoft.com], information management [microsoft.com], Avalon/Indigo/Aero [microsoft.com] (yeah, parts of those are backported, but not all of these technologies).

      If it takes
        • True, but the problem is that in GNU/Linux most programs are designed to work on the commandline.

          In Microsoft Windows, they are designed to work with the GUI. So they have to code a CLI, and add to all the apps. Plus Microsoft are beeing threaten on thiere two main incomes (office and windows) and facing a humilation on browser area.
        • Microsoft Barbie says "Writing Operating Systems is HARD!"

          Indeed. But writing command line shells? *jaw hits the floor again*

          You need to understand. They are trying to do for the command line whta they did for the GUI.

          This might not be a good thing. And can you imagine the complexity of the syntax?

          On the otherhand, maybe they are just trying to clone bash?

          • They're trying to create an object-oriented shell, where all system components are accessible as objects. This is naturally much more complex than a shell and command-line tools based on manipulation of text streams, but includes a lot of theoretical advantages, if it works.

            In general, I like the 'keep it simple' philosophy of traditional UNIX, but I'll try MSH, when it gets to a more mature stage, before deciding whether or not Microsoft have come up with a better CLI than the simple UNIX model.

                  • Re:Inquiring minds want to know! (Score:4, Insightful)

                    by NutscrapeSucks (446616) on Friday June 10 2005, @09:15PM (#12786443)
                    Attn Mac Zealots:

                    None of these AppleScript features are unique or interesting, so please stop telling us about them. Maybe they were in 1994, but the world has moved on.

                    Also, AppleScript itself is the worst programming language ever invented. Please don't damage your brain by using it.
                    • None of these AppleScript features are unique or interesting, so please stop telling us about them. Maybe they were in 1994, but the world has moved on.

                      Applescript has moved on, too.. Maybe you should check it out again.

                      Also, AppleScript itself is the worst programming language ever invented. Please don't damage your brain by using it.

                      If AppleScript is the worst language you've ever seen, you've lived a sheltered life indeed.

                      -jcr

                    • I think that blanket statement is a bit incorrect. Granted, Applescripting isn't exactly the most powerful language, but it does what it's supposed to do, and very well. It adds small functionality to programs that are not included with the software. As a "programming language" yes, it's lacking.

                      I find myself using applescript all the time on my computer. I think you just have to understand what it's used for.
      • Because there are a lot of tasks that require a good, programmable shell. WMI sucks big time and the primitive batch file methods of CMD.EXE are barely any better than the COMMAND.COM batch files of fifteen years ago. I gave the example a day or two ago of how easy it is to extract parts of the system date in Bash, which is really great when you've got automated scripts to move logs and put timestamp in the file name. It can be done in CMD.EXE batch files, but with the very odd FOR command.

      • Re:Inquiring minds want to know! (Score:5, Informative)

        by TCM (130219) on Friday June 10 2005, @06:37PM (#12785593)
        But what is bash without /bin/*, /sbin/*, /usr/bin/*, /usr/sbin/* and so on? Just a nice frontend.

        The main reason why a shell for Windows 1) takes insanely long to develop 2) will suck anyway is that the whole system beneath it is completely rotten, non-elegant and a pain to use.

        Take the 'ipv6' command for example, if you installed the IPv6 stack on XP. They use dash options (-p), where most of the "DOS" tools use slash options (which AFAIK are the reason they have backslashes instead of slashes in paths). The notion of an 'interface' with that ipv6 command is completely awkward. Since their real identifiers are nicely hidden away below the shiny Network control panel, you have to use 'ipv6 if' to retrieve an integer that corresponds to the desired interface.

        Examples of the current CLI sucking are:

        1) a tab-complete in the middle of the line destroys the rest of the line
        2) why does 'cd..' without a space even work?
        3) as in 2), a 'cd...' or 'cd....' works as well in that it returns no error, it just doesn't do anything!
        4) 'UNC' paths (\\server\path) are 'not supported' as the current directory. However, they are supported as args for commands (all commands?).

        These are examples that lead me to believe that there actually is no structure below the surface of Windows and the tools it offers. I believe that Microsoft developers look at something and go implement it in a quick and dirty way, without ever having a bigger design goal in mind and without ever changing something once it has been hacked into place.

  • What will? (Score:5, Funny)

    by udderly (890305) on Friday June 10 2005, @04:47PM (#12784608)
    Maybe MS could just make it easier by letting us know what actually *will* make it into Longhorn...

  • Split reality (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ProfaneBaby (821276) on Friday June 10 2005, @04:48PM (#12784612)
    While the standard DOS shell is nearly useless, WMI is still pretty damn powerful. It has problems (most people in production lock it down, which will break a lot of the truly useful uses for it), but it makes this statement:


    Microsoft Watch reports that Exchange 12 administration functions will be built atop Monad, which would enable users to do everything from the command line that can be done from the graphical interface.


    Almost redundant. You can already write scripts with WMI that will let you do MOST of the things in Exchange that you would want to do from the command line, and once it's in the script, it's at least semi-permanent.

    Even in UNIX, I tend to write scripts when there's more than 5 commands (even if the commands are all piped together into a single command) - I may know it well enough not to see it later, but my assistant tends to find the scripts very useful for his learning and library.

  • Where (Score:2, Flamebait)

    by m00nun1t (588082)
    Where was it ever stated that monad would be IN longhorn?

        • Re:Where (Score:5, Informative)

          by TripMaster Monkey (862126) * on Friday June 10 2005, @05:02PM (#12784804)


          OK...here's a quote from the BetaNews article referenced in the summary:


          Monad was slated to replace the command line in Windows with an object-oriented technology that rivals shells found on Unix systems. Beta versions of the software have been available to testers since early Longhorn alpha releases, but now Microsoft is looking further down the road with Monad.


          You know, if you would just RTFA, things would be a lot clearer...

  • This just in! (Score:3, Funny)

    by ClownsScareMe (840001) on Friday June 10 2005, @04:49PM (#12784630)
    Redmond, WA

    Microsoft (TM) announced to day that it's new graphical user interface, code-named Avalon (TM) will not ship with Longhorn (TM), it's next operating system. However, Avalon with be an integral part of Windows 2010.
  • What will Longhorn include that will make Windows 2000 or Windows XP using businesses want to move? All of the technology that was supposed to be Longhorn isn't Longhorn anymore.

  • Chicken shits! I *knew* it! (Score:5, Funny)

    by TripMaster Monkey (862126) * on Friday June 10 2005, @04:49PM (#12784643)


    Microsoft just doesn't have the Monads...

    ^_^

  • welcome our new longhorn overl - what? Oh nevermind, they're not here yet.

  • 1st thought: Good that it is comming... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Spoing (152917) on Friday June 10 2005, @04:52PM (#12784678) Homepage
    'Exchange 12 administration functions will be built atop Monad, which would enable users to do everything from the command line that can be done from the graphical interface.'

    2nd: The more time goes on, the more Windows takes on the features of unix.

    3rd: Most every OS is some form of unix at this point except for Windows.

    4th: Even Windows has a POSIX layer and unix-style command utilities for free as an add-on.

  • I'd put up even money now... (Score:3, Funny)

    by xanderwilson (662093) on Friday June 10 2005, @04:52PM (#12784680) Homepage
    ...That Longhorn updates won't come out nearly as regularly after Longhorn's release as they do now.

  • Wow... (Score:5, Funny)

    by shadowmatter (734276) on Friday June 10 2005, @04:52PM (#12784681)
    With all the features being removed, and the release date getting pushed farther and farther back, Longhorn will end up as nothing more than an expansion pack for Duke Nukem Forever!

    - shadowmatter

  • I'm just waiting for this headline: (Score:4, Funny)

    by alvinrod (889928) on Friday June 10 2005, @04:55PM (#12784724)
    "Today Microsoft announced that it's new operation system, Longhorn, will not contain Longhorn."

    What the hell is still in Longhorn?

  • Longhorn will offer precisely... what? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by ShatteredDream (636520) on Friday June 10 2005, @04:59PM (#12784770) Homepage
    It seems like every feature that was supposed to be cool except for the 3d-accelerated desktop is going to be either taken out of Longhorn or is going to be backported to XP to promote developers' use of it (like Avalon). Does anyone else see how this could end up with Microsoft effectively having no good reason for the average person to leave XP unless they buy a new PC? Why would a business want to move to Longhorn if it is a warmed over rehash of Windows XP?

    So many people went to Windows XP because even those who used Windows 2000 saw a lot of good benefits in it. Despite what some people may say, Windows XP can be a lot faster than Windows 2000 on things like disk I/O. I remember ripping a DVD under Win2k and then doing it again under WinXP when I got XP and seeing significant performance gains to the tune of going from about 4000kb/sec to about 7500-8000kb/sec under XP. Then there were other enhancements, but we all truthfully know that XP was a big jump for the average user of Windows.

    But why should people who like XP leave it for Longhorn? Unless Microsoft follows Be's upgrade path for BeOS and charges only $25-$50 for XP upgrade CDs, why should people switch? What does it do for them that can't be done just as easily with XP and which isn't negated by more hardware needs?

  • What's next? (Score:5, Funny)

    by creimer (824291) on Friday June 10 2005, @05:00PM (#12784783) Homepage
    The next thing that Microsoft will announce is that Longhorn won't run on the new Mac-Intel machines.

  • Monad the name? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Dasein (6110) <tedc@nosPam.codebig.com> on Friday June 10 2005, @05:06PM (#12784846) Homepage Journal
    Okay, so it's called Monad -- I've only heard this name in one other context, and that's Haskell (http://www.haskell.org./ [www.haskell.org] The interesting thing is that Simon Peyton Jones went to MSR a few years ago.

    So, it seems that, either the name is unrealated, and that would suck. Or, that somehow, this is related. *IF* it is realated, I'm not sure how adoption will go. Functional Programming can be a little odd.

    Anyone know?
    • I'm glad you asked so I can finally get my money's worth out of a philosophy class I once took.

      The name comes from the philosopher Gottfried Leibniz. He had this idea that existence was made up of these atomic building blocks of experience. They link together and form all that we know about the world around us. These Monads make up the composite of possibilities that form our "best of all possible worlds."

  • Why? (Score:4, Funny)

    by wertarbyte (811674) on Friday June 10 2005, @05:16PM (#12784967) Homepage
    Why does it take so long to compile Cygwin and Bash for Windows?

  • Let's try making a list! (Score:5, Funny)

    by rbarreira (836272) on Friday June 10 2005, @05:46PM (#12785229) Homepage
    People, let's try making a list of that which we do know that (for now at least) will be in Longhorn. Each person who replies just has to copy paste the previous list and add his content :P

    Let me start with:

    * RSOD (red screens of death)
    * Dropping the prefix "My" from "My computer", "My network places", etc

    • Re:Let's try making a list! (Score:4, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 10 2005, @08:08PM (#12786084)
      People, let's try making a list of that which we do know that (for now at least) will be in Longhorn. Each person who replies just has to copy paste the previous list and add his content :P

      Let me start with:

      * RSOD (red screens of death)
      * Dropping the prefix "My" from "My computer", "My network places", etc

      I'll try my best:

      * Avalon: a new user interface subsystem and API based on XML, .NET, and vector graphics.
      * Indigo: a service-oriented messaging system to allow programs to interoperate as part of the .NET framework.
      * WinFX: a new API replacing the current Win32 API (there's of course still Win32 + Win64)
      * .NET framework 2.0 (the foundation for Longhorn)
      * WGF - Windows Graphic Foundations
      * DirectX 10 which will further merge pixel and vertex shaders and introduce new technologies for 3D rendering.
      * Lower user privileges (IE 7 will run in these on Longhorn)
      * Included compiler (msbuild)
      * New driver model and improved kernel/driver loading (drivers get "unloaded" in realtime if they become unstable) - also drivers get loaded quicker in the boot process so you can enjoy higher res/color depth while booting - also improved is boot speed and install time.
      * New MS Installer
      * New document format competitive to PDF
      * An application deployment engine ("ClickOnce")
      * Improvements in the ClearType font rendering technology + new system fonts
      * New desktop search capabillities
      * Improved security through lower privileged accounts and services
      * Full support for the "NX" (No-Execute) feature of processors.
      * New graphic user interface (Aero) using vector graphics for rendering.

      That's everything I could come up and google within 10 minutes. Those are pretty much the biggest improvements that we know about. Then there are of course a lot of improvements on the device drivers, the way Windows handles drivers, wireless conectivity etc. The main code branch is built upon Windows Server 2003 SP1.

      This is still 2 years away from release so I'm sure they can come up with more stuff. Hell, AFAIK Monad and WinFS will be available as free add-ons later on (SP probably).
      • How about a shorter list... features that aren't going to end up in XP anyway, and features that actually have value.

        Avalon: a new user interface subsystem and API based on XML, .NET, and vector graphics.

        Which will also be available for XP. Scratch one.

        WinFX: a new API replacing the current Win32 API (there's of course still Win32 + Win64) .NET framework 2.0 (the foundation for Longhorn)

        That's two (or is it three) new APIs. New APIs by themselves have negative value. What can you do with them... tha

  • It was bound to happen (Score:3, Interesting)

    by GomezAdams (679726) on Friday June 10 2005, @06:05PM (#12785401)
    Little Billy Gates has to have all the world's attention focused on him and him alone and by doing that he is sinking his company. Look at what he is trying to do.
    • Become the only operating system for desktops and servers.
    • Become the only or most major game console and games provider.
    • Become the most major search engine provider
    • Become the only or most major embedded OS provider.
    • Become the only offices productivity tools provider.
    • Become the only or prevalent music download provider.
    • Become the most major e-books provider.
    • Become a major hardware provider for peripherals - keyboards and pointers.
    • Become the most major progran development tool provider.
    • Become the most major publishing tool provider.
    • Become the most major browser provider.
    • Become the most major media player provider.
    • Become the most major media editor provider.
    And this is just the list my poor tired old brain can come up with on short notice. I'm sure there's more. And all of it must be tied into the OS so he can claim "it's embedded and I can't get it removed with damaging my product".
    Gates is spreading his resources out to the breaking point to cover every blasted computing use on the planet and to smother all his competition. Just like a rubber band that's streached too far, it will snap and get ugly quickly when the end comes.

  • Why reinvent the wheel ? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by 'Tractor' Barry (788340) on Friday June 10 2005, @06:40PM (#12785618) Homepage
    Ho hum...

    In direct contrast to Apple (who had the sense to realise a good thing when they saw it by using *BSD as the basis of OSX) Microsofts new mission statement seems to be to prove the adage:

    "Those who don't understand UNIX are doomed to reinvent it, poorly."
    --Henry Spencer

    (apologies if the quote is attributed to the wrong person but I'm drunk and simply Googled for the first result...)

    And I'm not saying humanity can't do better than *nix but, currently, it's still a hell of a good start (mind you I've worked on ICLs, now Fujitsus, VME which is simply a pure pleasure... a pure pleasure... File generations... Mmmm... recover that file from 10 edits ago before you made a complete balls up of everything...)

  • The Emperor's New OS (Score:3, Funny)

    by lullabud (679893) on Friday June 10 2005, @07:18PM (#12785824) Homepage
    Longhorn is going to be packed with golden goodies which are so wonderful that nobody will be able to see them. It will take the few years following for their opacity to set in.

  • Let's summarize for a minute, shall we? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by ChaoticLimbs (597275) on Friday June 10 2005, @07:35PM (#12785908) Journal
    1. Microsoft is looking at implementing a subscription model instead of standard box sales in the near future.

    2. Microsoft takes, on average, 5 years plus between major revisions of their operating system.

    3. Microsoft's next operating system will not have the cool whiz-bang features they promised us, in spite of its six year lead time.

    4. Microsoft's Windows operating system does not come bundled with any useful applications. Their video editing application has a featureset close to zero, and MSPaint is simply unchanged since 1990, having not so much as a smudge tool. WordPad is a completely inferior word processor compared to ANY other currently available.

    5. Microsoft's operating systems cost a minimum of 99 US dollars, double that for anything useful in a business or network.

    In conclusion, Microsoft's "option" will cost you a yearly cost for a product that is improved minimally every five years, with a smaller feature set than you were promised, and you have to buy any applications separately if you'd like to do anything WITH your computer.

    Oh, Microsoft stock? SIGN ME UP!

    • Enough already! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by freeweed (309734) on Friday June 10 2005, @05:17PM (#12784979)
      Dude. It was funny the first time. Made me smile the second.

      It's long since stopped being funny, and just makes stories on Slashdot annoying as hell to read as we scroll past your 8 pages of the same joke.

      Remember, breveity is the essence of wit.

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.