But you see, there is sense in this.

Believe me, my young padawan learners....

This has all happened before with Windows 95, and even to a certain degree Windows 2000. Machines need to get more powerful.

Is anyone going to dispute that?

So Windows 2005 or whatever its called needs 1 TB of disk space and 2 GB RAM - but the thing is that, if you look at it in perspective, a lot of us already have machines like that.

I've got 3GHz Pentium IV
1.5 GB RAM
Half TB Hard disk space

Its not unthinkable, is it?

Really?

It probably means that computers are about to become a lot more fun again for a little while. Good stuff.

{Masque hunts for the overclocking thread}

It was me, big bad Julio!

Everyone needs to read this.

i will be getting another computer anyways. hopefully computers in a few years will cost less than it does now.

Hey maybe TechSpot could give away a computer that can actually run Longhorn as a prize for guessing what the Windows whatever name it will be called or what day it will hit the stores...

No dude, it will run. Have faith.

it will run like a 486 ran Windows 95.

Have a nice life.



Good luck running Doom III and Half Life bloody 3 or whatever it is coming out next as well.

You'll need dual core for the real fun, believe me. Probably even quad core!

You won't get chips rated at 6 GHz that are single core, and if you do they will die like dead little 486 SX...

Aren't I a *******? Come on, how inspired will the name be?

Windows XP 2005 ?
Windows XL ?

But the date of release is a pretty interesting one. That could go on for ages.

People queued up outside stores overnight for Windows 95, you know.

Looking at these specs my guess would be that Longhorn is written in VB.NET.. A TB hard drive? The executables have to be VB scripts to fill that space!

Dell who? Have you seen the screen shots? no more crayon colored xp theme. i am excited!

Not quite sure if the clock is big enough, though...

More here.

I hope this thing is going to have some substantial new funcionality under it's bonnet. I say this because looking at it from the interface point of view, it's not all that much different from XP from what I've just seen. Just a little more stylised. What I mean is comparitive to the difference in the general layout between Win95 and Win98.

Maybe I've missed something, I dunno. Personally though, unless I have to buy it to keep up, if the only thing I find useful is a revised XP interface, then I'm happy to stick with XP for as long as possible.

Remind me to read a review or two when M$ finally decide when this thing is going to roll out, and can tell me exactly what will be in it.

I'm feeling quite cynical today. does it show?

That's just a basic view, from some early thing.

The real baby has a new GUI technology....





More here.

Even more here.

I would like to see something that makes a difference like going from command-line DOS to GUI windows 9x. We've had the same basic layout with minor changes for almost 10 years now. We need a change, a major one.

Well if you believe Microsoft marketting hype then that's what you will be getting.

Thankyou very much. I stand corrected, at least in part.

Fact remains though, as we all know all too well, is that the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Untill M$ can be consistant in what they are saying about it, there's no guarantee for us poor end users as to what we can expect.

Even then Microsoft could change the specs at the last minute.

Still, I'm intesested again now. Thankyou.

those screen shots look like xp but i have seen several that look completely different. the icons are much crisper to.