Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Microsoft Drops .NET Name For Next Windows Server

timothy posted more than 11 years ago | from the muddled-nomenclature dept.

Microsoft 490

metamatic writes "C|net is reporting that Microsoft is dropping the name "Windows .NET Server" and going back to "Windows Server 200x" (where x is currently expected to be 3). Other products with .NET in the name are also being evaluated for renaming. Analysts are being quoted as saying that slapping .NET on so many Microsoft products has confused people as to what .NET actually means. Or could it be that customers know what it means, but nobody wants to buy it?" Obiwan Kenobi points out a similar article at ENT News

cancel ×

490 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Big Fucking Whoop (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5058683)

Who cares? Oh, I see, just more chances to get some good old MS bashing in.

Re:Big Fucking Whoop (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5058692)

Do they call you the Customizer?

Re:Big Fucking Whoop (-1, Offtopic)

SnowDeath (157414) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058714)

No, that they don't. n00b, you're going to hell.

You are so fucking gay (-1)

News For Turds (580751) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058862)

faggot ass pillow biter.

This is hardly news... (1, Redundant)

bwalling (195998) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058688)

They are changing the name because people are getting confused about what .NET really is. It was a bad idea for Microsoft to try to add ".NET" to every single product they sell.

Re:This is hardly news... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5058844)

"They are changing the name because people are getting confused about what .NET really is. It was a bad idea for Microsoft to try to add ".NET" to every single product they sell."

Hey thats news to me.
Ya know what isn't news to me, the fact that Microsoft is bad for America, thats just a fact my friend.

Re:This is hardly news... (1)

jerkychew (80913) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058851)

I still don't know what the hell .net is supposed to be, and I like to think I'm at least a little technical...

Re:This is hardly news... (4, Interesting)

MonTemplar (174120) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058856)

Actually, I think it's more like what they did when they changed Windows NT 5.0 to Windows 2000 - hoping to ditch all the bad news (mainly delays in getting to a working product) associated with the former name.

Re:This is hardly news... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5058943)

Let's see..you're reading a news site. The story was posted on the front page of said news site. It's a recent announcement, from -another- news site.

I guess my only question is, what the fuck qualifies as news to you?

My theory... (1)

hackwrench (573697) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058951)

My theory is that they couldn't get the .NET features that are supposed to be in the product done in time, so no (or not enough) .NET features no .NET designation.

fp! (-1, Flamebait)

Gizzmonic (412910) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058694)

/\
||
||
/\||/\/\
/\| |
||| |
\ | |

Your comment violated the "postercomment" compression filter. Try less whitespace and/or less repetition. Comment aborted.

Full of Holes... (5, Funny)

akiy (56302) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058696)

A net, by defition, is full of holes...

Re:Full of Holes... (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5058761)

defition

Yes, that's right. A net is where you put "de fish in".

Re:Full of Holes... (3, Funny)

msheppard (150231) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058764)

new name = Sieve Server 2003

M@

Re:Full of Holes... (0, Offtopic)

jdreed1024 (443938) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058798)

What humorless wanker modded the parent as "Troll"? It's +1 Funny. Wish I had mod points...

Re:Full of Holes... (3, Funny)

rbolkey (74093) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058802)

No, that's not the net they are talking about. The net they're talking about is short for network, which is something fishermen do with nets.

Re:Full of Holes... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5058803)

Oh, come on Moderators. Have a sense of humour! That was hilarious!

.NET? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5058698)

It's a trap!

Re:.NET? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5058807)

Go back to Fark [fark.com]

Hmmm (0, Flamebait)

hether (101201) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058702)

slapping .NET on so many Microsoft products has confused people as to what .NET actually means

Crap?

Re:Hmmm (3, Funny)

filth grinder (577043) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058745)

When does Micro$oft plan to drop the $ from their name?

oh wait...

is it time? (3, Funny)

smack_attack (171144) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058705)

Is it time to start callng it Microsoft bob.NET?

Re:is it time? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5058751)

Was that supposed to be funny or are you just high on something?

Re:is it time? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5058796)

maybe you are some 1998 script kid and don't know what MS bob is... eh?? dumbass.

Ahahaha! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5058708)

.NET is great, too bad no one likes Palladium

dotNet the .Net (2)

stonebeat.org (562495) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058710)

and dotNet the Linux while you are at it.

Confusion? (5, Insightful)

_ph1ux_ (216706) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058716)

I agree with the bit about confusion....

I was very confused (and still am) to exactly what .NET is - and palladium for that matter. I asked here on slashdot what they were and the major differnces between the two.

Someone posted a link to an MS page that supposedly explained what they were - but it still was very vague and didnt help much.

So - anyone out there clear on what .NET is and maybe palladium for that matter who would care to expound on the merits of this wonderful technology?

Re:Confusion? (2, Informative)

EnderWiggnz (39214) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058753)

in reality its a replacement for win32 api's .

in marketing, its anything you want it to be.

Re:Confusion? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5058765)

dotNet is Microsoft's attemp to wipe off Java.
Paladium is Microsoft's attemp to make hardware unusable without a Microsoft operating system.

Re:Confusion? (5, Informative)

larien (5608) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058793)

.NET is their buzzword compliant strategy including SOAP, XML, Web services and their latest plan to crush competitors. Somewhere in there is the ditched Hailstorm/Passport plan for world domination.

Palladium is the DRM, sorry, secure platform where the idea is that a Palladium enabled OS will only run signed apps, presumably adding security by not running any viruses, worms and any haxxor tools. Of course, this means any open source will not work in a Palladium OS because of the difficulty of getting an open source app signed.

That's my understanding of the two, but I'm not 100% sure; it's been difficult trying to work out exactly what .NET really means...

Re:Confusion? (2)

jfroot (455025) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058897)

NET is their buzzword compliant strategy including SOAP, XML, Web services and their latest plan to crush competitors. Somewhere in there is the ditched Hailstorm/Passport plan for world domination.

ok.. not to sound like a noob.. but what does THAT mean? I would like a specific example of how someone would use .NET in their everyday life.

Re:Confusion? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5058918)

Of course, this means any open source will not work in a Palladium OS

Not just open source, but just about any app that isn't from the "big guys" (or at least from someone willing to pay whatever fee Microsoft decides is suitable). It is a tool that practically guarantees a monopoly on the desktop.

Re:Confusion? (5, Informative)

danheskett (178529) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058852)

1. .NET is at least four things:

a. Runtime environment. This is a replacement for Win32 the "foundation" classes of Windows. Basically a new way to develop Windows applications. Analagous in several ways to Java. Doing quite well. Keystone is "Visual Studio .NET". Also the ".NET Runtime".

b. Server platform. This is what this article is about. Lots of products where called "Microsoft X .NET" (or were going to be). Renamed and re-evaluated.

c. .NET Services. A way to use XML to remotely call functions and procedures and retrieve data. Integrated heavily with (b) and (a). Alive and kicking.

d. .NET Passport. A centralized database of information to be accessed via (c), (b), and (a). Failed already, quite close to be mostly permanetly dead.

2. Palladium is also several things:

a. A subset of TCPA (Trusted Computing Platform Association/Architecture).

b. A system that uses strong encryption and tamper-resistant hardware to physically control access to portions of computer functionality. Specifically provides: integrity checking of code, sealed storage, non-repuditation (somewhat), authentication (somewhat).

c. A platform on which to build highly "robust" or effective content control/DRM systems.


3. Analysis. .NET is pretty cool. A much better way to develop applications for Windows. Visual Studio 6 is seriously dated. .NET should also facilitate the possibility of cross-platform applications. All and all a complete redesign of Windows development methodology that was sorely needed. .NEt server platform is finished in traditional name-based sense. Essentially all it was a collecton .NET Runtime/.NET services/Previous Applications that had been renamed and updated. No big loss with the name change. Passport is dead, thank god. XML Web Services aren't gaining traction for end-users, but are definately useful in some situations.

Palladium - the jury is still out in my mind, but its bad in the mind of most slashdotters. Essentially I like the idea of creating a system where you can physically guarantee short of physically modifiying hardware on the microchip level that a program will do "X". The real test will be to see how it is implemented, how the level of openness is, and what levle of control MS wants to impose. I'd give it 50/50 chances for widespread success and 25/75 for geek approval.

Hope this helps.

For a very detailed explanation... (4, Informative)

NickSD (595340) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058922)

check out The Ars article on .NET [arstechnica.com]

Re:Confusion? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5058948)

They are both the same in one respect, they are
a method by which a convicted monopoly abuser,
is again attempting to lock America (and the world) into another monopoly. .NET a unified language agnostic development framework that doesn't care what operating system you use as long as its windows.

Palladium security brought to you by the most larcenous and incompetant software development firm on the planet.

I'm so excited i'm getting tingly all over. :)

In Soviet Russia... (-1, Offtopic)

I'm not a script, da (638454) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058962)

...NET drops you!

cool (0)

jason777 (557591) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058717)

I program with Microsoft.NET, and I cant figure out what the hell it means.

Re:cool (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5058842)

My girlfriend's older sister is a developer working for Microsoft on .NET and she doesn't really understand what it is trying to be either!

hmm (1)

VAXGeek (3443) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058722)

now's your chance to change linux 2.6.x to ".NET".

have a good weekend everybody (-1)

YourMissionForToday (556292) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058725)

I gotta go take a shit.

.NET is a flop! (1, Troll)

Newer Guy (520108) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058732)

.NET is a flop and M$ is simply doing damage control.

Re:.NET is a flop! (1)

FatRatBastard (7583) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058766)

Not a flop per se (MS will keep pushing it) but more of a refinement. MS is good at this (and admittedly so are most software companies). Promise the moon at launch time, deliver a scooter. Yes, the scooter may be useful, but we were expecting a f**king planetoid.

buzzword compliant? (5, Interesting)

Maeryk (87865) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058733)

Is it that even Microsoft is suffering in the dot-com crash and the burst of the tech bubble? Possibly with the advent of sites like this one, Cnet, and shows like Screensavers, people are beginning to realize a buzzword is just that, and nothing more?

I kinda thought that naming something ".net" was kinda stupid after the bad taste left in Joe Public's mouth after the whole ".com" thing..
but Im far from a rabid Microsoft supporter anyway.

I still think it should be "Microsoft.ownsU" for the truth in advertising requirements.

Maeryk

Re:buzzword compliant? (2)

MonTemplar (174120) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058813)

I still think it should be "Microsoft.ownsU" for the truth in advertising requirements.

I think they'd settle for Microsoft.ownsYourBankAccount instead, given their desire to get people forking out for their wares on a regular basis... *grin*

So... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5058736)

Once again .NET is .NOT.

What next (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5058737)

Could Windows Longhorn be called Windows 2005?
With Padillum.net security.

Ahem (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5058742)

In Soviet Russia, we say .NYET to Microsoft!

Re:Ahem (2, Offtopic)

caluml (551744) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058846)

In Soviet Russia, we say .NYET to Microsoft!

I personally think this is worthy of modding up... ;) And I blew my 5 mod points earlier.. ;)

I submitted a cool story earlier too. Would have been fun.
Yeah, yeah, I know. "Note: grousing about rejected submissions is Offtopic and usually gets moderated that way. It happens, don't take it personally."

Re:Ahem (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5058849)

BWAHAHAHA! Soviet Russia joke and a hit on MS!

Kudos to you sir!

Re:Ahem (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5058864)

That was actually a funny soviet russia joke!

Re:Ahem (2)

MonTemplar (174120) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058921)

In Soviet Russia, we say .NYET to Microsoft!

Don't know where you've been, but people in the rest of the world have been using the '.NYET' put-down for ages - maybe not on /. but I've seen it used a lot over on ZDNet Bunf^H^H^H^HTalkback... :)

Geez, just when... (0, Offtopic)

idontgno (624372) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058743)

I was about to get all crazy about their shizz.net!

what is .net? (2, Insightful)

seeksoft (579626) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058744)

I agree with the confused thing. I have NO idea what .net is. I used the visual studio, but its not vb7. its "VB.NET" wtf? So maybe somebody in this thread can tell me what .NET is?

Re:what is .net? (1)

mehip2001 (600856) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058917)

.Net is simply a development platform much like java. It provides a class library and a way for programmers to access them.
(Note: This is a very simplified way to think about it. There are lots of biased and un-biased articles on the web that will give you a far more complete explination.

.NET slapping. (2)

Neon Spiral Injector (21234) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058752)

I don't know of any actual products from MS other than the planned Windows .NET that had .NET in their name, but I am still confused as to what it is. .NET is really like Java, isn't it? I mean Java was a language, a set of libs, and a VM/byte code spec. I think, I never quite figured out where those lines were drawn either.

May I suggest Microsoft .WS. That way they can tell everyone it means Windows Server, when it really is Western Samoa.

Re:.NET slapping. (1)

stratjakt (596332) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058809)

Visual Studio .NET

I saw .NET as something they tagged onto all of their developer/enterprise products, and XP something they tagged onto their desktop products.

Server .NET, Visual Studio .NET, Exchange Server .NET

Windows XP, Office XP

But, what's in a name?

Re:.NET slapping. (4, Interesting)

Enzondio (110173) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058831)

Visual Studio.NET is the biggest one I can think of (and consequently VB.NET, ASP.NET, etc.)

It is similar to Java, the big difference being that many many languages could all be compiled into the same bytecode.

What was spiffy was you could very easily use different languages for different parts of your program. Business logic in C, interface in VB, etc.

I know you could do this before but .NET made it much easier. It's not a bad product, it's just not the end all be all that they were hyping. And is that really all that surprising?

Re:.NET slapping. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5058837)

Visual Studio .NET

Re:.NET slapping. (2)

bwalling (195998) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058860)

.NET is basically a programming framework. A bunch of libraries (DLLs) that you can use to base your programs on, so you don't have to write code for the basic things like generating a form, or sending an email, or making an HTTP request.

MS gave up on defining .NET (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5058756)

Or could it be that customers know what it means, but nobody wants to buy it?"

Apprentely, MS hasnt been able to define .NET either.
So, if they call it 'Server 2003' folks will just consider it an upgrade rather than tapping Billy boy on the shoulder asking him 'What the heck is .NET'??

so.... (3, Funny)

Britissippi (565742) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058760)

So now its .NOT ?

Or, IN SOVIET RUSSIA (sorry), .NYET ?

Re:so.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5058840)

I, for one, welcome our new .overlords

And back again... (1)

Shishio (540577) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058762)

So once they're almost finished moving away from the .NET naming system, people will start understanding it.

A couple of years later, its .COM or .ORG or .MSFT

Changed name too (2, Funny)

ad0gg (594412) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058773)

MSN Direct Active XP+ 2004 Server

Re:Changed name too (2)

MonTemplar (174120) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058964)

Nah, make that ItReallyDoesntHaveAnyBugsThisTimeHonest Server :)

Don't you mean... (1, Offtopic)

Dimwit (36756) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058785)


"Obiwan Kenobi points out a similar article at ENT News"

Don't you mean dotENT news?

(Hint: It's supposed to be a joke...)

Re:Don't you mean... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5058919)

that's net funny.

Re:Don't you mean... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5058931)

Apparently the moderators thought not.

Misunderstanding (5, Interesting)

YellowElectricRat (637662) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058786)

There certainly is a glut of managers who think that .NET must be something to do with the little messenger icon that pops up when you install Windows XP and it asks you to register your .NET passport. And this isn't just your typical pointy-haired manager type, it's people with a reasonable amount of technical expertise, too. I've had to do plenty of explaining as to what .NET is when these managers see it in the spec document. I have to say though, that (so far) .NET is a pleasure to work with for developing those intra-extranet synergistic B2B enterprise solutions. It seems to lend itself quite well to that :)

Re:Misunderstanding (3, Interesting)

2nd Post! (213333) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058971)

".NET is a pleasure to work with for developing those intra-extranet synergistic B2B enterprise solutions."

It sounds like you're taking about WebObjects when you say that...

This is the blurb from the WebObjects site:
"A powerful rapid application development environment, backed by Web service, data access and page generation capabilities, extends the reach of developers and reduces the cost of ownership by ensuring flexible, maintainable design. WebObjects is the ideal way to develop, deploy and extend powerful web services."

The difference being that WebObjects is 5 versions and 3 OSes old now, stable, and based on 'open' technologies, and .NET isn't :D

While they are at it (1)

taggat (547334) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058806)

While they are at it they should close this [microsoft.net] down and this [microsoft.com] too... Because when I go there I get so confused. taggat

Good move by Microsoft (5, Insightful)

Henry V .009 (518000) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058808)

Having .NET on everything is actually hurting .NET--no one understands what it is because it is so generic. It also makes it harder to figure out what individual products are.

I would be highly doubtful that this means that Microsoft is somehow 'backing off' .NET

.NET Server Benchmark (2, Funny)

DeComposer (551766) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058812)

Does this mean we can now post .NET benchmark results without Microsoft's written consent?

Re:.NET Server Benchmark (1)

YellowElectricRat (637662) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058877)

Although this seems like your "typical" Microsoft crap, both WebSphere and WebLogic, the much vaunted Java based web platforms have the same clause in their license agreements too.

At the risk of looking like a MS lackey, .NET is a good platform - it is competitive performance wise with most, if not all of the J2EE based platforms on the market for Web apps. And cost wise, it beats them hands down. From the anecdotal evidence I've seen, the only way you can practically get WebSphere or Weblogic to handle the sorts of loads that .NET based apps can is to run them on mainframes - note that I've only heard this from colleagues and J2EE consultants I've worked with, so take it with a grain of salt.

Oh no! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5058815)

Now Slashdot will have to change all those MS .Net advertisements they have. :(

Hypocrisy at its greatest.

Once again, /. is way behind the game... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5058818)

The Register had this same story yesterday

It's really pathetic that it took /. a full 24 hours to get news as important as this. Err, not really "news" anymore...

Dot Net (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5058821)

Bill: Nobody wants dotnet!
MS Marketing : Let's rename it and fool the bastards
Ballmer: * grin *

forget the year numbers (1)

stuuf (587464) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058824)

Just call it Windows NT Server 5.1.2600 like it probably is internally referred to by.

Microsoft forgets its failures quickly (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5058827)

With so much $ in the bank, they will let go of their failures quickly. Even though the tech community still teases them about Bob and crap like that, Microsoft pretend it never happened. Slowly, this will happen with .NET. It was a horrible idea from the start, and has severely backfired. Even though their credibility is ruined, they will move on and bumble around in the dark some more until they catch on to something. In the fable, the boy who cried wolf got three chances. Microsoft seems to get a lot more credit and trust from people than that, so it doesn't really matter that this has flopped on their face. They could have just released an upgrade to VB, but they had to sound like they had a lot more up their sleeves than that. They are casting a NET for a new strategy for the company, and they keep coming back with tin cans.

So does this mean .Mac can go back to iTools? (2)

joel8x (324102) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058832)

Although iTools always sounded pretty lame, .Mac as a name never made any sense with the exception of its similarity to the name .Net.

If only... (2)

Sri Lumpa (147664) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058834)


If only .Net could become a .Bob, maybe that would cut MS down a bit (didn't they say that .Net was a bet the company project?).

Call it whatever you want (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5058854)

It's still lightyears beyond the likes of linux and OSX.

aren't you being a little harsh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5058896)

I'm sure .NET will catch up in a year or two, tops. :-)

Surely a disapointment for ms? (2, Interesting)

posternutbaguk (637765) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058865)

A name change may seem a small thing, but not too long ago microsoft were telling all and sundry that .NET would be the future of the computing world.

The fact that they change the name to something NOT containing the magic term '.NET' must mean, at the least, that all the expensive PR has failed.

microsoft need to actually demonstrate an actual use for .NET, after all, if I'm a qualified C++ programmer and I don't really know what it's 'about', how the hell is Joe Public gonna buy into this?

Re:Surely a disapointment for ms? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5058878)

This doesn't change the fact that it is a yet another quality product from Microsoft which linux hippies everywhere are jealous of.

maybe they should rename it to (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5058869)

another classic microsoft "technology brand" that kinda meant a bunch of things:

ActiveX

It's active, and it's X .. hmm. ..

This is News? (0, Troll)

DAldredge (2353) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058872)

This is News?

what I don't understand... (2)

esarjeant (100503) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058881)

What I really don't understand is what MS hopes to accomplish by tweaking their product names only very slightly. So it use to be Windows 2000 Server and now it's going to be Windows Server 2003... big deal.

If .NET was really a bet-the-business proposition, they might as well call the product what it is. Windows Server for .NET Version 1.0. Maybe MS has realized that .NET isn't as much a fundamental paradigm switch as it is a client/server application you run on your computer.

And for that matter, the workstation version could be Windows Workstation for .NET Applications Version 1.0. That might actually help the consumer a little!

Honestly, the users that were suppose to benefit from "consistent" naming conventions (Win 95, Win 98, Win 2000) have been duped with WinME, WinXP and whatever else MS is going to call their next workstation version of NT.

Enough of these naming "conventions" already; call it what it is. IMHO, Apple is doing the most work in this area -- an OS is simply OS # - makes sense to me.

great news (2)

roalt (534265) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058893)

I just check whois and windowsserver200x.com is still available!

I'm gonna be rich...

heh (2, Funny)

cetan (61150) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058895)

I bet a lot of domain name speculators/squatters are feeling good about their .NET-related purchases now...

.net versus .WET (2)

tenzig_112 (213387) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058905)

It's hardly surprising that they encountered market confusion considering how many people will always associate .net their internet provider's domain name.

An even greater cause for brand confusion is the .wet initiative [ridiculopathy.com] introduced at last year's Comdex show (which happened to coincide with a Vegas-area porn industry convention).

Could this be yet another sign? (2)

core plexus (599119) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058910)

I'm wondering if we are seeing yet another sign of something shaking loose in Redmond? There's been all these unintended discharges of memos (Halloween, etc.), the deal with their faking 'switch' ads, etc. etc. And now this, appearing as if the left hand disagrees with the right hand. Anyone have info on a compilation of these and other 'slipups'?

Personal Strap-On Aircraft for Auction on eBay [xnewswire.com]

Wired Article (3, Informative)

bahwi (43111) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058914)

There's a blurb about it at the bottom of this [wired.com] Wired Article.

One quote "Microsoft also is re-evaluating the ubiquitous name's use on other software." adds another dimension to this than just taking it off of the Windows 2003 Server.

No no no.... (2, Insightful)

Dark Lord Seth (584963) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058916)

It will be called "Microsoft Windows ($current_year + 1)" so that it won't LOOK terribly out of date for the next two years.

Anagram (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5058930)

points out a similar article at ENT News

Funny how a similar article's being posted to a news site that's an anagram of NET...

a third choice (1)

DeadPrez (129998) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058937)

Analysts are being quoted as saying that slapping .NET on so many Microsoft products has confused people as to what .NET actually means. Or could it be that customers know what it means, but nobody wants to buy it?"

Actually its, "No one knows what .NET actually means nor do they want to buy it."

The .NET stategy? I finally figured it out (1)

hysterion (231229) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058938)

It goes as follows (note the Copernican inversion):

Step 0: Profit!
Step 1: ???
Step 3: .NET

Then we'll finally have enough .dots in the middle of all sentences that nobody knows where anything starts or ends.

the meaning of .net (2)

deego (587575) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058952)

I agree that loyal microsoft users tend to be a bit less computer-savvy, but I think even they should have figured out by now that

NET stands for the INTERNET. Microsoft innovated, invented it. Microsoft 0wnz it.

All this proves (2, Insightful)

slycer9 (264565) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058954)

is that M$oft knows the value of the public's perception. Other companies have pulled moves similar to this over the years, with far less fanfare (not to mention the griping and moaning).
It doesn't matter what it's called people, all that matters is what it does.
Mandrake, Suse, Slack...need I say more? Same thing (essentially) different name. .Net, WinSrv200X...doesn't matter, (assuming as based on the article) since all of the core is remaining the same.
Name change only. As far as no one in the general public 'getting' what .Net was intended for...well, it wasn't intended for the GP now, was it?

Instead it'll be Windows.museum (0, Offtopic)

ink (4325) | more than 11 years ago | (#5058956)

No? Yes? Hopefully?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>