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 Scales Down Palladium

samzenpus posted more than 9 years ago | from the secure-enough dept.

Windows 475

bonch writes "Formerly known as Palladium, Next Generation Secure Computing Base (NGSCB) will not be fully available in Windows Longhorn after all. Instead, Longhorn will offer "the first part of NGSCB: Secure Startup," says Jim Allchin, Microsoft's group vice president for platforms. However, most hardware will not support this technology on release."

cancel ×

475 comments

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

So... (5, Interesting)

madaxe42 (690151) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369573)

What, exactly, is Longhorn going to do? They seem to have dropped more features from it than there were in the first place!

Re:So... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12369585)

A redundant first post. How the bloody hell does that work?

Re:So... (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12369612)

It happens all the time unfortunatly. Maybe the moderator was a women and the post only pointed out the obviously implied message.

Re:So... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12369770)

There's two meaning of redundant:
  1. the precise meaning, which you were thinking about: which duplicates what has been said elsewhere
  2. a colloquial meaning: pointless, devoid of any value, which can indeed be applied to first posts (or for most of other Slashdot posts, for that matter...)

Re:So... (5, Insightful)

Bobvanvliet (569014) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369587)

I'm guessing that despite everything it's main purpose will still be fulfilled...

Making MS lots and lots of good old cash.

Re:So... (4, Insightful)

EvilGrin666 (457869) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369590)

I suspect it wont do anything other than look slightly prettier and require a faster cpu, more disk space and twice as much memory as XP does to do the same basically thing.

Same old story really.

Re:So... (-1, Flamebait)

dioscaido (541037) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369823)

Insightful? I love you guys!!

Re:So... (5, Funny)

golgotha007 (62687) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369600)

When it's ready to go public, they're going to drop the cryptic development name of "Longhorn" and go with "XP Service Pack 3" instead.

Re:So... (5, Funny)

baadger (764884) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369631)

No no no. Usually you don't have to reinstall the OS to install a service pack, even if it does replace half the OS. ..this is clearly XP SE.

Truth in Advertising? (5, Interesting)

argent (18001) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369752)

If Microsoft was going to start naming operating systems consistently, then... let's see...

Windows 2000 -> Windows NT 5.0
Windows XP -> Windows NT 5.1
Longhorn -> Windows NT 6.0 or Windows NT 5.2?

Or maybe even Windows NT 5.11?

Re:Truth in Advertising? (2)

godlike (799740) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369817)

it will be windows nt 6.0 microsoft alread said that.

Re:So... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12369641)

IIRC Paladium can't be "fully operational" without the hardware system behind (the keys in the motherboard...) Maybe they realized it couldn't work without the whole system.

The other possibility is that they realized too many programs and computers would stop working at once and at the same time which would "kill" (or at least stop) all the Windows machines connected to the internet.

Re:So... (4, Insightful)

DigitumDei (578031) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369731)

Longhorn will still have improved plug and play type abilities. While to the average slashdotter security and WinFS may seem like the important things, to the average joe the ability to plug his camera/cell phone/mp3 player in and have it work without them having to do anything, is the most important thing.

That and pretty pictures...

Microsoft can make a killing from the average joe, and then release Longhorn SE with the added features a year or two later. And make another killing...

Re:So... (1)

arose (644256) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369773)

Improved as in "you can plug in your gadget without instaling the drivers first"?

What'll come out first Longhorn or 2.8? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12369760)

Longhorn or Linux kernel 2.8?

Re:So... (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12369762)

What, exactly, is Longhorn going to do?

Suck. It will truly suck. Literally it will suck your system resources dry without mercy.

Re:So... (1)

Morgahastu (522162) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369776)

Apparently most of Longhorn is a big rewrite of a lot of code. I suspect they are just taking this release to get all the code switched over while not stirring the boat too much. Once that's done and widely tested they can start adding on extra features.

More stability, security, etc.

Re:So... (2, Insightful)

rokzy (687636) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369813)

is this supposed to be a joke?

you don't "add on more stability, security...". either it's there from the start or not.

all you can do later is restrict usability to give the illusion of stability, security ("you are not allowed to use that driver", "your settings do not allow you to access this page" etc.)

Longhorn = Concept OS? (2, Insightful)

DigiShaman (671371) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369781)

Just as automobile manufactures develop a concept car in hopes to bring all ideas togeather, I can't help but wondering if Longhorn is offically an OS. Rather, it sounds like Longhorn is nothing more then a pet project of verious concepts microsoft is playing with.

I'm willing to bet the next version of Microsoft Windows will not be as dramatic as we see in Longhorn. I think they know that consumers are tired of being "feature shocked" with a different and reorginized GUI. Hell, I love computers. But I must admit, it does get aggravating having to reaquire reacquire your bearings on any new OS revision.

Re:So... (1)

ceeam (39911) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369821)

I guess mainly it will incite people to move to Macs.

And to think I used to worry about this... (4, Funny)

King_of_Prussia (741355) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369575)

I used to be afraid of what Palladium could do for the computing industry. Many tried to convince me that there was nothing to fear because there was no way in heck Microsoft could ever get anything done right and on time. It appears they were correct. Now it's being partially dropped from Longhorn, which is itself being pushed back to oblivion. Now I'm left wondering why I used to be worried.

Heck, Microsoft cannot even secure its own "proprietary" gaming console, why did we ever fear that they'd lock down all of our computers?!

Perhaps Microsorft have finally realised that such an invasive DRM system will cause a mass exodus of people from windows to Lenix. Microsoft seems determined to play into Lonis Torvaldez's hands with issues like these and I can't say that I'm ungrateful. Now if only WINE could play more games I'd switch straight away as the rest of my pirated material already works perfectly under linix.

Re:And to think I used to worry about this... (4, Insightful)

0x461FAB0BD7D2 (812236) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369623)

Why did we ever fear that they'd succeed?

Because even a broken clock is right twice a day.

Re:And to think I used to worry about this... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12369803)

Thats just because father time is brute forcing the keyspace.

Lenix? Lonis Torvaldez?!? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12369647)

Holy cow. I've got this image of some guy in a poncho sitting on a donkey in the middle of deep Russia holding a Linux distro. I'd nail down his nationality if I had any clue where people might live who are called "Lonis"...

Re:And to think I used to worry about this... (1)

xtracto (837672) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369648)

s to Lenix. Microsoft seems determined to play into Lonis Torvaldez's

Would you mind to write names correctly? I mean, how am I supposed to do a search in /. forums if you speak with that 1337 like accent?

Soo..... (4, Interesting)

Richard_at_work (517087) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369576)

What exactly is Longhorn still bringing to the table at its release? I used to look forward to Longhorn when I ran Windows, because it was supposed to contain all these new and wonderful technologies, then I got tired of waiting and .... well, my .sig says it all really.

Re:Soo..... (2, Insightful)

ssj_195 (827847) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369592)

Indeed - especially when you consider that some of the features that are actually worth getting vaguely excited about (except for Mac users like you, of course ;)) - i.e. WinFS and the 3D accelaration-type stuff (Aero?) are apparently going to be backported to XP. I think the upshot is that anyone with half a brain is going to stay on XP, and the only way that Longhorn will proliferate is by being included by default on new machines.

Re:Soo..... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12369624)

I think the upshot is that anyone with half a brain is going to stay on XP, and the only way that Longhorn will proliferate is by being included by default on new machines.


I really think your overestimating people there. A few of my friends are still saying "Can't wait for Longhorn". I'm know that they'll be queueing up outside the shop for it.

And yes, they have seen all the announcements about everything thats to be dropped.

Re:Soo..... (2, Funny)

xtracto (837672) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369633)

Well, I have to tell you I really can not wait for longhorn but, (as almost all my friends) I am sure I will not be queueing outside the shop, instead I will let my Mule do the queue ;o).

Re:Soo..... (1, Troll)

ssj_195 (827847) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369638)

I really think your overestimating people there. A few of my friends are still saying "Can't wait for Longhorn". I'm know that they'll be queueing up outside the shop for it.
I anticipated your response, which is why I originally included this proviso:

anyone with half a brain
;)

Re:Soo..... (0)

mrchaotica (681592) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369725)

And the upshot of the upshot is that CPUs have stopped getting faster, so we might see fewer people getting those new machines. Maybe if we're lucky Longhorn won't proliferate much at all.

Re:Soo..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12369758)

Wrong. Many processes run in the background, which can be scheduled on different processes (multi-core). Since these would be background operations, they should be relatively light-weight and not make a noticable hit to the user.

Microsoft would simply need to ensure that they did not create big, sequential activities that lock the system. It shouldn't be difficult to acheive.

Re:Soo..... (1)

jjon (555854) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369782)

I think the upshot is that anyone with half a brain is going to stay on XP, and the only way that Longhorn will proliferate is by being included by default on new machines.

Microsoft will threaten to stop producing security updates for XP, forcing everyone who wants to use this Interweb thingy without getting hacked to upgrade to Longhorn. Then at the last minute they'll extend the security support for XP and trumpet how responsive & kind to their users they're being.

They used this trick to get me to upgrade from 2000 to XP.

Hopefully WINE will have better games support by the time MS stop producing WinXP updates.

Re:Soo..... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12369595)

This is interesting, and the first post, which says exactly the same thing, is redundant?! I call mods on crack!

Re:Soo..... (1)

0x461FAB0BD7D2 (812236) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369614)

UNIX-like permissions and having files in multiple folders, better GUI and better internal structure. Also, it will bring the "It Just Works" paradigm to the Windows world.

In short, it's Mac OS X for x86. Isn't that what everyone wants anyway?

Re:Soo..... (3, Insightful)

CountBrass (590228) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369654)

The problem is that "It just works" also depends on a decent hardware platform.

And of course there's the rather obvious question of whether Microsoft are actually capable of creating the software half of "It Just Works". History would seem to suggest not.

I still remember Bill Gates announcing that in Windows 3.1 there would be no more UAEs (Unexpected Application Errors)! You know how this miracle was achieved? They re-named them to GPF (General Proection Fault).

How does the saying go: "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice shame on me"?

Re:Soo..... (2, Funny)

ssj_195 (827847) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369671)

How does the saying go: "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice shame on me"?
No, no, no - you got it all wrong! The saying goes like this:

"Fool me once... [pause] ... shame on... [pause] Shame on you... [pause] If fooled, you can't get fooled again."

:)

Re:Soo..... (1)

the_unknown_soldier (675161) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369799)

For once, we agreed

Re:Soo..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12369622)

OS X - Ive upped my standards, up yours!

Way ahead of you, buddy. I run Slackware KDE/Linux.

Hamburg pranksters have discovered Alka-Seltzer... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12369655)

MRW? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12369669)

Anyone know whether MRW (Mount ranier - dynamic remapping of bad sectors on removable media) is still being included in lonhorn?

Re:Soo..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12369683)

I've got sigs turned off you insensitive clod.

Re:Soo..... (1)

baadger (764884) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369684)

Maybe they've realised they can make more mint by targetting consumers and OEM's with mindless resource hogging eye-candy than they can producing an OS for the betterment of computing using innovative underware.

For most non-slashdotting home users it will be an 'upgrade', what I wonder is.. what will "Longhorn Server" offer over Windows Server 2003 after the eye-candy has been stripped?

Theres a Suprise. (0, Redundant)

Digital Warfare (746982) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369580)

So Longhorn will feature Aero only and nothing else will be different ?
Wtf has Microsoft been doing all this time?

Re:Theres a Suprise. (1)

whoisshe (878220) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369710)

Wtf has Microsoft been doing all this time?

lobbying for some divine intervention [nwsource.com] , apparently.

Microsoft and Security? (-1, Flamebait)

William Robinson (875390) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369581)

.. Naah.. u must be joking.

Re: Microsoft and Security? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12369609)

lol yeh i suggest 2 everyone as a 14 yr old computar speciulist that they switch to linurx. its clearly much bettar than window$ (lol i wrote a $ instead of an s which is called SATYRE) because its not made by biull gate$ (again, SATYRE - every post is a learning experence! XP! LEVEL UP! LOl).

Re: Microsoft and Security? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12369703)

Haha brilliant.

Re: Microsoft and Security? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12369741)

Which dick head has modded it flaimbait. M$ products are buggy, insecure, expensive and frustrating. Laugh at them.

Re: Microsoft and Security? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12369756)

So is Linux, when you calculuate in the TCO vs Windows..

Why am i not surprised? (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12369586)

Why am i not surprised?

Re:Why am i not surprised? (0)

PJBonoVox (876905) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369601)

Because you're an idiot?

Nothing to see here move along (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12369593)

Nothing new under the sun is there? seems like with each passing day, Longhorm looks morte and more like vaporware, by the end, is it just going to be XP with drop shadows and new icons?

For Microsofts sake, I hope not,

Re:Nothing to see here move along (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12369610)

For Microsofts sake, I hope not,
But for the sake of computing in general, I hope so :)

Re:Nothing to see here move along (0, Troll)

aichpvee (631243) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369637)

Not to troll here, but microsoft drops another feature from longhorn? How is this news?

Re:Nothing to see here move along (3, Insightful)

nkh (750837) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369666)

This feature was one of the most important and most scary "improvement" in the history of computers a few years ago: removing the control of the machine from the hands of the user, censorship controlled by Redmond. The fact that they removed this "feature" is an improvement by itself.

Re:Nothing to see here move along (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12369698)

It will return in due course. Think of it - if Microsoft get their way, then everyone not using a *legal* copy of Windows will be so severely disadvantaged that they will simply have no choice but to use it, and Trusted Computing is the enabler for this. Not only will it crush Linux completely, but it also stops piracy! Bill Gates once said that he didn't mind the rampant piracy occurring in e.g. China as one day "we'll figure out a way to collect". Trusted Computing will allow them to do just that. There is no way in the world Microsoft will give up on TC, ever.

Re:Nothing to see here move along (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12369700)

Yet you're still posting from windows, aren't you?

Not about the GUI (3, Funny)

skingers6894 (816110) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369598)

Good to see that Microsoft have not been concentrating on the frivolous activity of making the GUI sexy (obviously) and have been concentrating instead on the more serious improvements "under the hood".

You know, super secret stuff that they don't want to talk about in case Apple steal for the "Future Cat" operating system in 2020.

Re:Not about the GUI (1)

madaxe42 (690151) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369615)

Apple steal for the "Future Cat" operating system

Thundercats are go!

Re:Not about the GUI (1)

baadger (764884) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369658)

Birds...cat's..whatever. But come on..when did you ever see a birdcat?

Reporting the obvious (4, Informative)

MrMickS (568778) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369602)

Given that the majority of PCs out there don't have the necessary hardware to support the feature isn't this just an obvious statement. Reading the article its clear that the hardware isn't in a state to support the feature yet. It does hint that Longhorn will make use of the hardware should it be present.

So rather than this being something pulled from Longhorn it's just being emphasised that having a system with the TPM chip isn't a requirement for running Longhorn.

TP-M my ass. (3, Insightful)

Tuxedo Jack (648130) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369604)

"Secure Startup protects users against offline attacks, blocking access to the computer if the content of the hard drive is compromised. This prevents a laptop thief from booting up the system from a floppy disk to circumvent security features or swapping out the hard drive."

In other words, no more pulling out a drive to virus-scan it then replacing it or replacing a drive on an OEM machine - that won't allow it to boot.

"The security platform depends on a TPM chip being present in the system. The chip is an industry standard governed by the Trusted Computing Group, a non-profit organisation which develops security standards."

All nonprofits rely on donations to survive, and I can bet that a LOT of donations are going to start rolling in to them from certain organizations involved in content creation and distribution.

Also, if it requires a custom chip, it ain't gonna go over easy - new motherboards will be required.

Re:TP-M my ass. (4, Interesting)

Ashtead (654610) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369708)

In other words, no more pulling out a drive to virus-scan it then replacing it or replacing a drive on an OEM machine - that won't allow it to boot.

Probably right about the virus-scan. Outside the machine, the drive probably will look like it is full of garbage.

However, I don't think replacement will become impossible. If the machines won't allow replacement disks, this means that a disk failure will result in a useless machine; this will probably also get in the way of people wanting to add disks -- and the people wanting to put Linux on a second-hand machine will cry foul -- so this is going to fly as well as those boat-anchors those machines would become.

And this iteration of Longhorn at least will not require these chips... you won't have to buy new motherboards just now. But, perhaps further down the line this may become a required peripheral for Longhorn, but this will not be until most motherboards have it in place.

It looks like mostly a way of keeping stuff on hard-drives secret. As such this is not so bad in view of how frequent notebook-theft is, or how big the security problems of second-hand equipment are.

Re:TP-M my ass. (4, Funny)

NickFortune (613926) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369727)

I wonder if Secure Startup will be able to distiguish a linux installation from a hard drive "compromise". I would be sad if there was such a bug. Imagine how enthusiastically MS would leap into action to get it fixed.

Re:TP-M my ass. (3, Insightful)

wintermute1974 (596184) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369779)

no more pulling out a drive to virus-scan it then replacing it or replacing a drive on an OEM machine - that won't allow it to boot

Exactly. From the description of Secure Startup, it sounds like the only purpose of this feature is to frustrate Sys Admins and their minions.

Improved security is an easy sell to executives in large corporations, so expect to see mandates sent to the MIS or IT departments instructing them to only buy TPM-enabled motherboards.

Of course, these same executives will later fire their Sys Admins just as quickly as they can walk into their offices and explain how all the data in their expensive laptops is now unrecoverable.

Re:TP-M my ass. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12369780)

or swapping out the hard drive

Preventing hard drive upgrades?

I can see that being a winning technology of the future - way to go, Billy Boy!

______________

Why put off till tomorrow, when you can put off till the day after?

LINUX COCKS LINUX COCKS LINUX COCKS LINUX COCKS (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12369605)

<li> ____...____
.'" "'.
/ .--._.--. \
/ / _ _ \ \
/ l / \ / \ l \
; .-' \o/ \o/ '-. ;
l l () .-"""-. () l l
; l \ / l ;
\ ; \ / ; /
\ \ \ / / / cock chugging faggot!
<ul> .->""--. V .--""<-.
/ _ _ \
/ .' LINUX '. \ using
/ , , \ linux
/ / COCKS \ \ makes
; l l : you
l l l l a
l \ .-v-. / l homosexual
\ '. / _l_ \ .' /
;. `--l l--' .;
<ol> l `-. ___ D C ___ .-' l
l l ''' l l '''l l
; \ l l / ; you crave
<ul> \ \ ( Y ) / / PENIS and COCKS
TUXTOUCHEDMYJUNKLIBERALLYTUXTOUCHEDMYJUNK

Re:LINUX COCKS LINUX COCKS LINUX COCKS LINUX COCKS (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12369753)

Nobody can help you if you are an asshole.

Secure Startup (2, Insightful)

The New Andy (873493) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369607)

Secure Startup protects users against offline attacks, blocking access to the computer if the content of the hard drive is compromised. This prevents a laptop thief from booting up the system from a floppy disk to circumvent security features or swapping out the hard drive.

Either I'm stupid or they are (for humility's sake, I'll assume the first), but doesn't file system level encryption already solve this problem?

Also, Apple is already one step ahead by removing floppy drives from the computers.

Re:Secure Startup (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12369649)

Also, Apple is already one step ahead by removing floppy drives from the computers.


Seriously, who has a floppy drive anymore?

I haven't had 1 in my PC for many-a-year. I'm more concerned about whether it still allows CDs to boot.

If it does, then whats the point in this anyway?
If it doesn't, thats going to be REAL fun when I have to reinstall my mums computer...

Longhorn's new features will be in SP1 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12369620)

Old skool Penny Arcade comic [penny-arcade.com]

In Other News (5, Funny)

p0 (740290) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369626)

Microsft reports today that Longhorn will not be shipped at all. Instead, it would be shipping a stripped down version of Windows XP with an all new startup screen and bundled with features from late Windows 3.11

Re:In Other News (2, Funny)

skingers6894 (816110) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369657)

And in more other news...

"Longhorn" will be renamed to "LongHaul" to reflect the wait users are in for. Another suggestion which was rejected by MS marketing was "ShortFeatures", said to be accurate but unwieldy in the marketplace.

In Other Other News (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12369806)

In other other news, Netcraft are reporting that microsoft is dead...

Microsoft is totally dropping the ball (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12369630)

Microsoft is totally dropping the ball. Not that I'm complaining. But giving previews of software that's so bad that they have to threaten those that publish screenshots? Dropping important features?

I tell you, if IBM sunk $1 billion dollars into making a single grandma-usable Linux distribution, it'd be the best $1 billion they ever spent. That's a pipe dream, but seriously, if nobody capitalizes on this, it's a total missed opportunity to break the Microsoft monopoly.

In my opinion, the software is ready. KDE is all set to go. We've got office applications, dtp, multimedia, internet, databases... If somebody could fix CUPS, make software installation simple, and populate all the most important configurations in one area and give them easy-to-use and consistently-designed wizards (that the experienced users could of course ignore), this thing would be ready. Not World of Warcraft ready, maybe, but ready enough. Hell, I'd buy it in two seconds.

The problem is, you need someone with deep pockets to finance all the boring aspects of making a unified-feeling distribution and fixing all the intricate bits (like CUPS or whatnot), but if they did, and slapped a big old IBM on the cover, it'd be dynamite. And having IBM on it would probably add a center juggernaut quality that might make hardware companies more interested in doing proper driver support.

Re:Microsoft is totally dropping the ball (4, Insightful)

Yaztromo (655250) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369729)

That's a pipe dream, but seriously, if nobody capitalizes on this, it's a total missed opportunity to break the Microsoft monopoly.

One could argue that Apple has indeed capitalized upon this with Mac OS X Tiger, coming out tomorrow, which contains a lot of Open Source code in it (Darwin/FreeBSD, Apache, CUPS with an excellent interface, etc). And guess what? People are sitting up and taking notice.

The problem is, you need someone with deep pockets to finance all the boring aspects of making a unified-feeling distribution and fixing all the intricate bits (like CUPS or whatnot), but if they did, and slapped a big old IBM on the cover, it'd be dynamite. And having IBM on it would probably add a center juggernaut quality that might make hardware companies more interested in doing proper driver support.

No, no, and no. While IBM may have the deep pockets to do something like this, they are absolutely the WRONG company to do it. And I say this having previously been a long time IBM OS customer and as a former IBM employee.

First off, hardware companies have traditionally been afraid of IBM, because IBM has traditionally been a competitor (a view which probably hasn't changed much with the sale to Lenovo). Just take a look at how many hardware companies stepped up and supported IBM's previous consumer OS attempt, OS/2: support was often half-hearted, pathetic, or nil. The fact that IBM was behind it scared off potential hardware vendors (who, BTW, don't make their money off writing device drivers anyhow, and thus tend to like to keep driver development costs low by targeting as few platforms as possible).

Secondly, as anyone who bought in to IBM's OS/2 WARP v3 push and needed support probably knows, IBM just isn't set-up to provide end-user support. They have no experience nor expertise in consumer software support, and didn't do a terribly good job of it.

Sorry, but IBM creating their own consumer Linux would be the touch of death. IBM seems to know this themselves -- they have always expressed that they have no interest in creating their own Linux distribution, instead relying on partners to do this for them (like RedHat). There are much better options for such a company to produce such a Linux distro (and based on what I saw at LinuxWorld Canada last week, there are certainly some companies out there who are interested in trying).

Yaz.

Jack-off security.... (4, Insightful)

Patchw0rk F0g (663145) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369635)

Secure Startup protects users against offline attacks

Gimme a break. Who needs security from offline attacks more than security from online ones? If that were such a stretch, there are products http://www.computersecurity.com/laptop/cables.htm? PHPSESSID=f6bfd6ada2877cbe69e8f281ef4ca487 [computersecurity.com] that will help you out with that.

As an ACTUAL Windows user (and yes, I do use it; software investment, unfortunately) I'd love to see more ONLINE security: integrated firewall, antivirus, spyware, etc. That would more satisfy me.

Re:Jack-off security.... (1)

argent (18001) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369714)

I'd love to see more ONLINE security: integrated firewall, antivirus, spyware, etc. That would more satisfy me.

I'd like to see them turn the user interface clock back to 1995, before they started integrating the Internet with the Desktop.

That would do more to improve Windows security than anything else they could do. Look, if Steve Jobs can back down on "No Ugly Monitors on Nice Macs" and come back with "BYOKDM", then surely Bill Gates can back down on Internet Explorer Integration.

Re:Jack-off security.... (1)

whoisshe (878220) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369749)

Secure Startup protects users against offline attacks

Gimme a break. Who needs security from offline attacks more than security from online ones?

no no no, you've got it all wrong. by off-line attack they mean "installing linux".

Wrong security (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12369791)

You are probably hearing "security" and "trust" and falsely assuming this means YOUR security, or YOU being able to trust your computer.

In fact you, the user, are not the intended beneficiary of "trusted computing" at all.

The problem now is that people have too much control over their computers. From the perspective of somebody trying to limit what other people do, this is insecurity. If you write a computer program and sell it to someone, why, there's no guarantee at all that people will use it the way you wanted. People may find ways to trick your program into doing things it didn't intend, or even start to fiddle around with it and its innards, or use the files they made in your program in competing applications. It's as almost as if these people believe that just because they bought a copy of your software means they [i]own[/i] that copy. Something must be done about this. Vendors, like Microsoft, want to be able to "trust" your computer not to let you do things with it Microsoft doesn't want you to do. Hence, palladium.

Trusted boot is the first step in that. It convinces people that a piece of hardware in your computer that when switched on limits the ability to write to your hard drive to "trusted" pieces of code (and not scary things like Knoppix rescue cds) is a good idea. Somehow.

What he's trying to say is... (0, Flamebait)

SpikyTux (524666) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369636)

This will not work properly like other Microsoft "technology"

So what *will* Longhorn offer then? (4, Insightful)

Shaper_pmp (825142) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369661)

Is it just me, or is Longhorn increasingly beginning to resemble vapourware? We were sold the idea of a revolutionary next-gen computing platform, with all-new graphics subsystem, trusted computing (yuck, but at least different), enhanced security, relational filesystem, etc, etc, etc.

Now Avalon's being back-ported to XP, trusted computing isn't making it into the final product, WinFS has been pushed back to god-knows-when, and general security will likely be as god-awful and insecure as ever.

Against this background, what does Longhorn actually have to offer potential upgraders? Especially businesses?

Pretty Aero Glass UI? "Windows theme's always worked fine for us, thanks, and requires no user-retraining - why bother upgrading?"

But, it's all new! "Yeah, so we'll have to buy all-new hardware. And beta test it^W^W^W live with the inevitable but unfortunate 1.0 bugs.

Increasingly the reasons are "But, but, but, it's the new operating system from MS - you have to upgrade!", which is, obviously, no reason at all.

I was quite worried about LH when it was first announced - it sounded like a hell of a leap beyond anything Linux and Free Software had to offer (although, given time, I was sure FLOSS would catch up or surpass it).

Now, however, I'm having trouble retaining even mild interest - Microsoft hyped it so much, and are now so publicly failing to deliver on anything they've promised, that by the time it launches I wouldn't be surprised if they've Daikatana'd the thing practically to death.

Longhorn? Long-in-the-tooth, more like - a decrepit and crumbling shadow of it's former self that looks in danger of becoming irrelevent before it's even launched.

Of course, I may be condemning it unfairly here - are there any killer features that will save it from this downward trajectory?

Besides a billion-dollar marketing budget?

"world peace and cheap antigravity"! (4, Interesting)

NZheretic (23872) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369739)

1994 : Cairo Takes OLE to New Levels [byte.com]
The next version of Windows NT, code-named Cairo and targeted for release sometime in 1995, will be built around the concepts of objects and component software. It will have a native OFS (Object File System) and distributed system support.
1995 : Signs to Cairo [byte.com]
Cairo, Microsoft's object-oriented successor to Windows NT, will begin beta testing in early 1996 for release in 1997. Although Microsoft is not revealing the full details of Cairo yet, there are enough clues within current Microsoft OSes to yield a good idea of how it might work.
1996 : Unearthing Cairo [byte.com]
At the first NT developers conference in 1992, Bill Gates announced that Cairo would arrive in three years and would incorporate object-oriented technologies, especially an object file system. Since then, we've seen Windows NT 3.1, NT 3.5, NT 3.51, and most recently NT 4.0. None is object oriented, none has an object file system, none is Cairo. It seems that Cairo is Microsoft's sly way of promising the world. "Will we see Plug and Play in NT?" "Oh yes, of course, in Cairo." "Will NT ever produce world peace and cheap antigravity?" "You bet -- in Cairo."

Re:So what *will* Longhorn offer then? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12369750)

Maybe MS has gotten to the point where there's not much left to offer. Really, a new UI, or Palladium, don't offer anything to the typical user. Windows XP already does nearly everything Joe Blow could want, including being vastly more stable than previous incarnations of Windows. They can't just make new bloatware, because Intel and AMD can't push more Mhz and are now going dual core in the future, and there's nothing new or innovative in the percivable future that would require a new OS (think plug and play back in the day). An OS is just something to tie harware and software together and allow a person to use it. To that end, MS depends on the industry to find new things for windows to do, and right now nobody's doing anything big.

What a surprise - NOT! (4, Insightful)

$RANDOMLUSER (804576) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369662)

Longhorn is going to have a hard enough time getting adopted without the Orwellian DRM on both entertainment and software.

Rest assured that the first service pack will consist almost entirely of draconian DRM "enhancements".

(You did read the EULA, didn't you?)

Just waiting for the confirmation from Netcraft!! (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12369692)

... Microsoft is dying!!

Is Anyone Honestly 'Excited' About Longhorn (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12369716)

Even the die-hard foaming at the mouth MS fanatics seem to be having serious doubts about Longhorn.

Is there anyone who honestly looking forward to Longhorn? It seems like there is less and less of any reason not to go ahead an migrate to either Linux or OS X.

Re:Is Anyone Honestly 'Excited' About Longhorn (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12369789)

Linux already has the best desktop in the world [kde.org] , why wouldn't you switch? And if you like crappy desktops [apple.com] , well we've got one of those [gnome.org] too.

Steve Jobs - Balls of steel (3, Interesting)

skingers6894 (816110) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369717)

Is anyone else amused at the timing of the release of Tiger? By all accounts it was ready to go a month ago.

WINHEC finishes and then Tiger is released. Longhorn is shown to be an investment in distant future mediocrity and Tiger is released tomorrow.

Re:Steve Jobs - Balls of steel (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12369767)

Opensource really helps, even when it is under BSD licence. It saved Apple the work of doing the OS stuff, so it could mainly innovate on look, feel and userfriendlyness.

Microsoft will be putting unix style permissions in LH, so their security model will come closer to a long time proven concept. The bad part is that users really do not have a clue on how to use this (I know, I got those users in my company), and probably will do it badly, so it will bring bad fortune over this file security model.

Trusted Computing Group (4, Insightful)

wintermute1974 (596184) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369734)

The security platform depends on a TPM chip being present in the system. The chip is an industry standard governed by the Trusted Computing Group, a non-profit organization which develops security standards.
Why should users trust the Trusted Computing Group?

Who backs them? What is their official reason for existing? What is their real reason for existing? (This last question cannot be answered by merely reading this groups home page [trustedcom...ggroup.org] ; you need to consider the motives of those directing or controlling this group.)

My guess is that their official reason this group exists is "to promote safe environments by protecting users from various malicious computer exploits" or similar sounding goodness.

In contrast, my guess is that their real reason for existing is "to strip users of their existing rights to use the programs and data on their computers so that copyright holders can dictate if, when, and how users may access them".

What's the Palladium? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12369738)

The black sphere with which you can see "the eye" or Mordor? That shouldn't be used anyway and I am glad Microsoft scales it down! It is a dangerous tool!

For those wondering what Microsoft HAS been doing (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12369764)

For those wondering what Microsoft has been "doing" for the last 12 months, and how they are spending their billions in revenue. since it's clearly not about "product development", one hint was given by Eben Moglen, who says they have been hiring lawyers for the last 12 months and using them to shake down companies for cash in advance who use free software over "potential" patent disputes. In other words extorcion and racketeering. But you can read about this . [computerworld.com.au]

Thank goodness for MS Vaporware! (1)

utexaspunk (527541) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369765)

I guess here's one instance where we can be glad MS rarely lives up to their promises...

Stripped? (4, Interesting)

dJOEK (66178) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369775)



Is anyone here keeping a list of things that were supposed to be in Longhorn but aren't gonna be?

Secure Startup (2, Funny)

Timo_UK (762705) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369778)

The MS guarantee: Your Machine will be safe for the first 35 nanoseconds.

What does this button doooo? (2, Insightful)

krajo (824554) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369784)

From TFA: "A chip, the Trusted Platform Module (TPM), is used to encrypt data streams between the operating system and applications."
One question: why ?
I thought modern processors (like the 386) already kept processes from reading each others data. So it's not for separation.
It certainly won't keep an application from hacking the operating system, cause I don't think the TPM could possibly figure out if the data it encrypts is harmfull or not. So if the system call is buggy, it will be hacked TPM or not.
One use could be to only let digitaly signed/unmodified application to run ... hmm, why do I think that this coming from Microsoft is not good ?
Feel free to add more ideas...
bye, krajo

Six years for Microsoft to implement my solution (3, Interesting)

NZheretic (23872) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369811)

Google Usenet for "Trusted boot sequence" [google.com] and the earliest recorded instance is in the thread on About Hybris and all worms [google.com] :
>further, don't count on that system being able to stop all code from
>executing - it won't stop bootsectors,

Solution - Trusted boot sequence
(This would, to be truly secure, require a jumber on motherboard to be shorted for Flash-BIOS to be upgraded ) Flash-Bios checksums MBR bootsector, booting a rescue system on fail. MBR bootsector ( lilo etc ) checksums selected OS's required boot files, booting a rescue system on fail. OS boot system checksums ... well you get the drift.

A rescue system could be netbooting from a trusted server, signed rescue partition/file or signed bootable cd-rom/DVD.

Yes, NZheretic is David Mohring [slashdot.org]

The features I want in Longhorn (2, Funny)

KrisCowboy (776288) | more than 9 years ago | (#12369825)

1. Regular crashes (couple of times every hour would do) accompanied by "You want to submit a bloody report?" messages.
2. No support for *any* multimedia format except for WMA, WMV and ASF. Who cares for MP3 anyway.
3. It would be really nice to get a "Keyboard not detected - press enter ton continue" message for real in Longhorn :-)
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?