Microsoft dashes hopes for 'major' Windows server upgrade

Microsoft has re-committed itself to an interim release of its Windows server operating system, countering reports it had planned to go straight to a major release instead. Group product manager Ward Ralston has blogged Microsoft is sticking to its plan for an "R2" version of Windows Server 2008 and is not skipping to Windows …

[Jack Harrer]

Again?

How many years we've heard that next Windows/Windows Server/SQL Server/Exchange/Office is just over the corner? With all those new great features.

We're getting bored with this. We all know what it means, all delays, hype and then nothing of major interest. Vista calling once again?

[Dave McEneaney]

Not really an issue for me

I think Server 2008 is a damned fine product as it is.

[Pierre]

"compatibility with previous versions of Windows Vista and Windows Server 2008 is a design goal."

And we know what usually happens with MS "design goals...

[soaklord]

WHS

The important question on everyone's (mine) minds is are they going to port WHS to Small Business 2008 so we can get a 64b OS for the WHS community.

[Vince]

Not more windows surely

Meh, we've not even started rolling out server 2008 yet, they are having a giggle if they think people will keep upgrading.

[Tom Chiverton]

Vista pushing

"compatibility with previous versions of Windows Vista"

Not XP then... surprised ?

[Bronek Kozicki]

@Jack Harrer

The new version /must/ always be over the corner. Otherwise software company like Microsoft would have to fire programmers and dissolve. Or change modus operandi, but that takes lots of courage.

[alex d]

Cognitive dissonance

Windows 7 Server (internal codename) == Windows Server 2008 R2 (product name)

Holy @#$. Those bastards! I knew Windows 7 was a lie! It's gonna be a point release of Vista two years too late.

[P. Lee]

title here

"...compatibility with previous versions of Windows Vista and Windows Server 2008 is a design own goal."

FIXED ;)

*too long for title :(

[Eric Van Haesendonck]

They miss the objective

"compatibility with previous versions of Windows Vista and Windows Server 2008 is a design goal."

What customers want is perfect compatibility with XP, not Vista!

If they missed the point at the design goal stage i am worried about the final product...

[Anonymous Coward]

Windows Vista Bashing Server Edition

Where the hell are the MS fanbois to defend the behemoth? Could it be that Vista has killed them all off?

[Paul Stephenson]

surely

Surely compatibility with Vista/2008 is a design REQUIREMENT not a fekkin goal. sheeesh.

[Mark]

Move along - no story here

Why the fuss ? Where's the story ?

As far as the server road map is concerned it's been around for 5 years. Two years after the initial release there is the R2 release.

The reason for an R2 release is that it should coincide with the release of a new version of the workstation and keeps client/server functionality aligned.

There's absolutely nothing new here, the information is at least 5 years old.

[Mister Cheese]

Oooh, oooh, I've got a better name.

Windows Server 2009? No way will it be released in 2008... and I'll eat a chocolate hat if it does.

[Anonymous Coward]

Windows Server 2008 R2

Lets be honest here, how long until Windows Server 2008 SP1 before anyone will seriously consider buying and upgrading their systems... only to find that the applications and tools you actually need will have to be reg hacked to make them work. Linux anyone?

[Snert Lee]

definition?

Major upgrade as in embodies one or more significant technical improvements?

or

Major upgrade as in embodies the potential for significant profitability improvements?

[Zmodem]

or

theyve released most people who code and do IT tech prefer windows to look like win98 shell. and still have to add it to windows 7