Windows Vista Release Slips to Q4 2006

Advertisement (Why?)

Days after the first test version of Windows Vista was released to beta testers, rumors are now begining to circulate that the operating systems release date has been pushed back. At the Microsoft Financial Analyst Conference on Thursday a Microsoft official said the OS would not be available until the 2006 "holiday season". Earlier this summer Microsoft had planned on making Vista first available to consumers beginning mid-2006.

Will Poole, senior vice president of the client division of Microsoft, made mention of the purported delay in shipment during his presentation at the conference. However, no reason was given for the setback.

Microsoft has yet to make official the reported “pushback” in the Vista release date. Presumably, the operating system would hit store shelves sometime between the Thanksgiving and Christmas shopping season.

News source: InfoWorld

Cont...

The top 10 software titles for the first six months of the year were dominated by PlayStation 2 games. Sony's console had six games in the top 10, including Sony Computer Entertainment's Gran Turismo 4 in the top slot.

Nintendo had the second most games in the top 10. Game Boy Advance games held two positions with Pokemon Emerald at second place and Legend of Zelda: The Minish Cap at seventh. The lone GameCube representative was Capcom's Resident Evil 4 in the eighth slot. But that tied Microsoft's entire Xbox contingent, with the tenth-place Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith lingering at the bottom of the list.

The only 2004 game to crack the top 10 was Take-Two Interactive's controversy-laden Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, which was released in October. The complete Top 10 consoles games of 2005 can be seen below.

Rank/Title/Platform/Publisher/Release Date/SRP

1. Gran Turismo 4 (PS2, Sony Computer Entertainment, Feb 05 $49)
2. Pokemon Emerald (GBA, Nintendo, Apr 05, $34)
3. MVP Baseball 2005 (PS2, Electronic Arts, Feb 05, $49)
4. Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith (PS2, LucasArts, May 05, $49)
5. Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas (PS2, Take-Two Interactive, Oct 04, $47)
6. God of War (PS2, SCE, Mar 05, $50)
7. Zelda: The Minish Cap (GBA, Nintendo, Jan 05, $50)
8. Resident Evil 4 (GC, Capcom, Jan 05, $50)
9. Midnight Club 3: DUB Edition (PS2, Take-Two, Apr 05, $49)
10. Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith (Xbox, LucasArts, May 05, $49)

(3 replies) #1 DCMonkey on 30 Jul 2005 - 00:23

I thought the plan has been to have it "broadly available" by the holiday season for a while now. Is this really different?

#1.1 scyphe on 30 Jul 2005 - 01:00

I completely agree, that's the last I heard as well, months ago (holiday season).

#1.2 SoLiD_MasteR on 30 Jul 2005 - 08:06

Me 2

#1.3 el22 on 31 Jul 2005 - 04:47

Saaaame here

#2 lylesback2 on 30 Jul 2005 - 00:23

surprise.... surprise...

#3 i like chips on 30 Jul 2005 - 00:24

haha weird. I read it as "available mid-2005" but when I clicked on the header, it changed to mid-2006. I was gonna comment on it

(2 replies) #4 Joel Ogden on 30 Jul 2005 - 00:25

QUOTE

Earlier this summer Microsoft had planned on making Vista available mid-2005.

Shouldn't that say 2006?

EDIT: Fixed just as I posted ^^

#4.1 shawncruiksh on 30 Jul 2005 - 00:28

I'm sneaky sneaky

#4.2 leojei on 30 Jul 2005 - 17:15

haha~ nice both of you~

(1 reply) #5 EduardValencia on 30 Jul 2005 - 00:27

wow,must be a huge reason to delay it

#5.1 Jugalator on 30 Jul 2005 - 01:12

Given the timeframe with both beta 1 and beta 2, the RTM always seemed surprisingly close with their former timeframe, so I always took it with a grain of salt when it became apparent we'd get this beta 1 first in the end of July / start of August. With a Q3 plan they'd really have to rush to beta 2, not to mention rushing through the release candidates.

#6 Deathray on 30 Jul 2005 - 00:27

As long as the finish product is worth the wait, i dont mind... Beta 2 will really shed light on how revolutionary Vista will be

(2 replies) #7 DrIndianaJones on 30 Jul 2005 - 00:28

Has to have a good reason. I wonder if perhaps Microsoft is adding back in some of the "cut" features?

#7.1 Jason on 30 Jul 2005 - 00:32

That would have to be the sidebar as nothing else is cut. WinFS is still being made and will be available after Vista is released.

#7.2 Jugalator on 30 Jul 2005 - 01:15

I think it's pushed so they won't have to cut more than they have already.

They've probably hit a point where they simply don't want to take away too many more important features from the OS, so work delays shows up on the timeframe instead of the final feature set.

I'm actually more confident in them really making Vista more of an improvement now that the RTM was pushed forward a bit. Those near-mid 2006 release dates were making me a bit nervous...

(1 reply) #8 Mr. Dee on 30 Jul 2005 - 00:32

Well, there is always the betas to enjoy until it hits RTM.

#8.1 Jugalator on 30 Jul 2005 - 01:14

Yeah, it's not too bad if you're an early adopter

It'll probably be in pretty high quality RC stages now when it was going to be RTM according to the former plan.

#9 Solarix on 30 Jul 2005 - 00:33

gotta wait one more year =

#10 srwal on 30 Jul 2005 - 00:40

Might be that they're getting problems fixing WGA saying its been "cracked" within hours of being released :-D

(2 replies) #11 Ely on 30 Jul 2005 - 01:04

This is old news, first read it this morning at activewin. Also the plan was always 2006 holiday season, I think they only changed the "broadly available" part, So now instead of perhaps an October, September realease, we will need to wait to December.

#11.1 Jugalator on 30 Jul 2005 - 01:12

"This is old news, first read it this morning at activewin."

#11.2 Ravensworth on 30 Jul 2005 - 07:10

This is old news, first read it this morning

Most retarded comment ever.

(5 replies) #12 root on 30 Jul 2005 - 01:12

They've got a lot of work to do. Let them take their time.

#12.1 nacs on 30 Jul 2005 - 08:26

Yeah because coding up a system like WinFS takes time.... oh wait nevermind that's cut.

Oh I got it--making a new skin for XP with 'glass' titlebars and retarded menu placement takes time

#12.2 Jeremy1 on 30 Jul 2005 - 08:36

Yeah, because that's all Vista will be...

For christs sake, Beta 1 is already well beyond that.

#12.3 MikeS2k on 30 Jul 2005 - 10:37

The feature list looks, well, crap considering MS have been developing this OS for 4 years.
Such wonderful features as

- Transparent Windows
- Getting rid of the "my" suffix
- a "Restart Manager"
- a new Desktop Search

and others that are probably available for XP right now, from third parties.

I remember the early buzz from MS saying that they would "vastly redesign the OS", virtually eliminating restarts, crashes, registry mess, etc. Now it seems it will just be jumbled up XP with some crap tacked onto it. For 5 years of work and millions of dollars of R&D, it really makes me wonder what the hell MS are doing.

Of course, they could suprise us and bring out a jewel, but I don't think anybody but the most hardened of fanboys is thinking that now.

#12.4 Andareed on 30 Jul 2005 - 13:31

They did implement 2 large apis: Indigo and Avalon.

#12.5 leojei on 30 Jul 2005 - 17:50

I remember the early buzz from MS saying that they would "vastly redesign the OS", virtually eliminating restarts, crashes, registry mess, etc.

really? I haven't heard such a vision expressed by Gate~ What I heard is the following

- virtually eliminating the needs to remember where your files are located
- fewer restarts and startup time
- safer computing environment
- faster and easier programming while providing feature-rich and graphics-rich user interface

(5 replies) #13 toadeater on 30 Jul 2005 - 01:18

So far I haven't seen anything that compelling in Vista to make people want to switch from XP immediately. It will need developers to support it before people have a good reason to switch.

Why should a developer make a product not compatible with the entire Windows user base, only to support the few new features of Vista? The new graphics API is the only thing that is really compelling, it opens up some major new possibilities that we haven't had anything close to before. But to support that GUI, developers have to drop XP support, and they're not going to do that initially, at least not for their flagship products.

WinFS and other cosmetic changes aren't really worth migrating to a new OS for the average home user. WinFS, btw, is pretty much what MacOS has had for years. How many people need a filesystem like this for the home? To do what, search through their daily spam, or illegally downloaded media files? Home users don't have that many files to warrant searching for them and using up resources on useless background tasks which Windows already has too many of.

Speaking of illegal (ahem, "unauthorized"

media files, if MS goes through with all the planned security features, even fewer people will want to switch. Especially when those features require hardware support.

Vista reminds me of NT, it's not really that attractive for the mainstream.

Am I missing some killer feature of Vista? What's so good about it, from the home users' perspective?

Here's what I think MS should concentrate on for Vista:

1. Stability - Windows should not BSOD due to software or drivers.

2. Management - Nothing should be hidden from users. Configuration files should be easily found and accessed. Better support for disabling uneeded services and drivers should be included. A better file type manager should be included. A better task manager that lists ALL processes, and also lists all network connections by process should be included.

3. Security - If anything tries to install a file on your PC, or alter critical config files, or change file associations without the user initiating it, there should be an alert warning what happened.

4. All non-essential applications like WMP, IE, OE, Messenger, or things like WinFS should be OPTIONAL and easily removed or shutdown. Yes, that includes making Windows Update support non-IE browsers.

I know there's no way in hell MS will ever do #4, but they can and should do the others, otherwise Vista is going to be an mediocre OS revision as we've had from MS since Win95.

#13.1 matt74441 on 30 Jul 2005 - 03:19

Unfortunately none of that is going to happen. Microsoft isn't making an OS for the geeks, they're making it for the average computer user who doesn't care how it works, just that it does. If you want complete control of your PC, get an AMD processor and install Linux.

#13.2 theyarecomingforyou on 30 Jul 2005 - 03:23

2. Management - Nothing should be hidden from users. Configuration files should be easily found and accessed.

Hell no! The average user should barely even be allowed near a computer, let alone given access to anything important. More advanced users are already able to find what they want.

#13.3 Jugalator on 30 Jul 2005 - 03:33

get an AMD processor and install Linux.

lol, what does an AMD have to do with working with the gritty details of a computer..

------------------

Am I missing some killer feature of Vista? What's so good about it, from the home users' perspective?

A big thing IMO is the new user rights mode. Hopefully it should restrict spyware and adware infections and what they can do, or virus infections if you'd get infected by that by not having administrator rights. To the average end user (which Vista is aimed for) that would result in "Windows doesn't go crazy, slow and bugged as soon". :p

Stability - Windows should not BSOD due to software or drivers.

Windows has to give drivers hardware access or your hardware would get much slower. Drivers seem to very rarely crash if they're WHQL marked so I can't really see much of a problem here myself. Sounds like a horrible decision to make to me -- much slower games to take away a BSOD every half year or so.

if MS goes through with all the planned security features, even fewer people will want to switch.

Huh? Why wouldn't they? Do you think that new protected media will work just fine on XP without any of these DRM checks? LOL. Trust me, such media will require Vista or upgrades to XP, or not work at all. Otherwise there's no point to it, and such a feature would work against MS. It'll probably come as a "required upgrade" to WMP for XP when it's time anyway. Then you'll cry blood about that and switch to Media Player Classic or something, and then you'll notice it doesn't support DRM'ed media at all.

You do realize these protective features only apply to DRM'ed media right? Non-DRM'ed media of course won't have special hardware restrictions etc. They don't even support DRM... Things like the DivX & XviD formats, etc. Don't worry about these things. You seem to believe their protective features will somehow block a random XviD movie!? It's not for that, it's for people like Apple to gain more options for their iTunes store.

I can't see how the DRM thing will ever work against Vista.

And yes, work is underway to bring better DRM support to Linux too. I don't see how it would possibly hurt Linux either though, for the same reasons as above.

WinFS, btw, is pretty much what MacOS has had for years. How many people need a filesystem like this for the home? To do what, search through their daily spam, or illegally downloaded media files?

Who's stupid enough to save their spam to their computer? Peronally I trash it, I certainly don't keep a searchable archive with it, but you seem to do it, so more power to you, I guess. As for WinFS, why don't you ask the bright people at Apple why their users like this feature? And yes, it's part to search through illegally downloaded media files for many, for sure. Is that a problem for you? It's to access information faster than you'd find the information by navigating through your folder hierarchies.

Last edited by 21023 on 30 Jul 2005 - 03:54

#13.4 Jeremy1 on 30 Jul 2005 - 08:41

But to support that GUI, developers have to drop XP support

Wrong. Avalon is being backported to XP, to solve the exact problem you bring up.

#13.5 leojei on 30 Jul 2005 - 17:30

and I think he's missing Indigo, which hasn't been revealed yet. And I don't think he's getting the point of how much Avalon and the underlaying new graphic engine is differing from Vista and XP. So far for video playback, I don't see overlay at all, what I see is accelerated bitmap buffer powered by software (the new graphic engine) and render it on screen, to allow Glass to work correctly.

Nothing should be hidden from users. Configuration files should be easily found and accessed. Better support for disabling uneeded services and drivers should be included. A better file type manager should be included. A better task manager that lists ALL processes, and also lists all network connections by process should be included.

Configuration files? I thought MS dropped using INI in favor to registry years ago~ It's true that most options are hidden from average users, but at least they can be found by power users (are you one of them?). The task manager already lists all running processes, and define your "Better support" for disabling un-needed services / drivers please. You can disabling services in the Services MSC, and drivers in the Drivers MSC, which else tools you want to get?

Windows should not BSOD due to software or drivers.

look, Windows don't BSOD by software, a software crashing would never result in a BSOD, unless you're counting drivers as software.

Yes, that includes making Windows Update support non-IE browsers.

This by far is the most idi*tic suggestion I've seen. What's your reason backing this suggestion?

And a bad news - WMP6.4 does not work in Vista BETA 1 at all, though the required DLLs are in place.

(1 reply) #14 rishid on 30 Jul 2005 - 01:29

Maybe WinFS will come with it now....

haha just kiddin

#14.1 leojei on 30 Jul 2005 - 17:31

I certainly hope so, but based on the schedule it's unlikely. WinFS must be tested in Vista before it can be RTM so Vista will probably be in 2007~ So let's leave WinFS behind a bit

#15 Tech001101 on 30 Jul 2005 - 02:25

hey this is not a new thing on behalf of Microsoft. So we just have to get used to dates being "approx" never the real date after we saw what happened with XP SP2. LOL

better watchout it doesn't spill over into the beginning of 2007. due to some more changes between now and then. MS can never keep a project deadline lately...is it a lack of knowledgeable developers that you keep hearing about on shows like Lou Dobbs.

one thing though is MS lacks creativity and instead look to other companies for ideas instead of being a leader they follow and improve someone else's idea.

anyway wake up MS stop waiting to see what the other guy is going to do next.

(1 reply) #16 nightRider on 30 Jul 2005 - 02:30

So toes this mean that we can buy Vista in stores this year??

#16.1 Jugalator on 30 Jul 2005 - 03:53

no, it means we can buy Vista at the end of next year, if there's no further delays

(1 reply) #17 iCeFuSiOn on 30 Jul 2005 - 02:34

Well I for one don't mind them pushing back the release date if it means releasing an outstanding product.

#17.1 petrolxl on 30 Jul 2005 - 18:24

I agree. Everyone is so quick to jump on Microsoft's case. When they release a bad product everyone will be complaining how they rushed development. Just take it easy everyone. We have XP and its a damn good platform for now.

<rant>
For all you people who aren't impressed with Beta 1: YOU SHOULDN'T BE. You people need to keep in mind this is the first BETA release. It is nowhere near complete. I can't seem to understand why people are so hard headed when it comes to this point. Microsoft said that this was more for developers and IT professionals who wanted to begin testing in a lab environment. If you don't like it now, don't use it and wait till beta 2 which will have the pretty icons and all the bells and whistles of a 3D-accelerated interface. I for one have found it to be pretty amazing where microsoft is heading with the product. If you look passed the missing icons and incomplete features you can already see the shapings of a great product. Please keep in mind there is still approx. 18 more months for developement to complete. Everything will take shape.
</rant>

(1 reply) #18 MustNotSleep on 30 Jul 2005 - 02:41

i wouldn't be surprised if the thing gets even further pushed back to spring-2007.

hey, i'm not in a hurry, XP treats me nicely.

#18.1 leojei on 30 Jul 2005 - 17:33

yeah, it's good for them to make XP this solid (though still rooms for improvements

) for these years. Win2k is very good too

#19 Axon on 30 Jul 2005 - 03:45

Conjecture, there's no solid evidence (I hope!) that this is in fact Microsofts Plan.

#20 mayamaniac on 30 Jul 2005 - 04:05

I always thought it was planned for 2007 release.

#21 Nova69 on 30 Jul 2005 - 04:52

If pushing it back a couple of months to release a product that may have more features and less bugs, then i'm all for it. If people are extremely desperate for some of the Longhorn/Vista features/looks, then i'm sure there'll be many new themes and add-on's onto XP that can emulate Vista far before its released.

(4 replies) #22 SVT on 30 Jul 2005 - 05:05

Windows Vista Release Slips

it's called vaporware for a reason. Windows Vista will follow the Duke nukem Forever realease schedule.

#22.1 kirupa on 30 Jul 2005 - 05:19

Someone inform Mr. SVT of the beta

#22.2 Jeremy1 on 30 Jul 2005 - 08:43

it's called vaporware for a reason.

If you're calling Vista vaporware, then you're just a moron. I've got a DVD of this "vaporware" sitting right next to me, and it's installed on two of my computers.

#22.3 jagedEdge on 30 Jul 2005 - 15:44

What it was planned to be is vaporware. It was supposed to be this whole great thing, and all they added was hardware acceleration, dialogs that ask for your password when you install something, two new APIs, and a search that won't even be in it when it's released. These are all that may be visible to the end user. Most of the improvement is for businesses with large, difficult-to-handle environments that need easy deployment and updating. Microsoft is starting to remove professional Windows as we know it from the home user and replace it with Media Center Edition and the Xbox.

#22.4 leojei on 30 Jul 2005 - 17:45

hmm...... if you use the beta then you know the "hardware acceleration" you're talking about is not really what you're imagining. Note it's a "software acceleration" backed by powerful hardware that has the LDDM (or whatever it's called) to stablize images rendered on screen (or whatever it does).

Also, the BETA adds additional NTFS security rules to prevent complete destruction of Windows (in another Windows environment - such as using your XP cannot wipe out Vista installation due to security policies).

a search that won't even be in it when it's released

I'm pretty sure you're wrong with that, I'm seeing that search box now and I'm using it even. WinFS is not a Spotlight-equivalent, but the search engine in Vista BETA is.

#23 Xerxes on 30 Jul 2005 - 05:36

If this delay means we don't get some rushed OS with parts still missing (like how it's currently going..*whistles*) but a something really good..then I'm all for it

I prefer it to take longer to get out the door then pushed out soon as possible with bits still missing...

#24 kronik on 30 Jul 2005 - 05:53

well I dont mind waiting as long as its worth it in the end.

(3 replies) #25 MajinDark on 30 Jul 2005 - 07:10

If MS really wants to cut down on the amount of malware that gets onto Windows, specifically the kind that bombards you after a clean install (remember Blaster/Sasser), they should bundle OneCare with Vista, but obviously not deep enough that you can't remove it (IE).

#25.1 machorro on 30 Jul 2005 - 07:38

it should be "bundled" in the way iLife is with Apple, an optional CD for you to install in case you want to install another app like McAfee or Norton or NOD32 or Kaspersky or whatever

#25.2 Sticktron on 30 Jul 2005 - 17:07

Except as soon as they try to offer users another free application to make their lives easier, they get sued. How can you win?

#25.3 M2Ys4U on 30 Jul 2005 - 20:47

as long as it's optional and not forced/built into the OS, they won't get sued.

(1 reply) #26 chimera963 on 30 Jul 2005 - 08:15

or it could be that theyr just delaying it. how are we supposed to know why they have delayed Vista even further?
Personally I predicted it would be delayed. Oh well, maybe his extra time will make Vista even better.

#26.1 Jeremy1 on 30 Jul 2005 - 08:45

or it could be that theyr just delaying it.

Yeah. Bill Gates and company just sat down last week and said "You know what would be great? If we delayed Vista a few more months!"

Hate to break it to ya, but that's not how business works. If they're delaying Vista, they have a damn good reason to do so. And that's the end of the story.

(1 reply) #27 nacs on 30 Jul 2005 - 08:23

Oh man this is funny. Hardly surprising but funny nonetheless.

They cut feature after feature and still can't deliver it over 5 years after their last OS release.

#27.1 Jeremy1 on 30 Jul 2005 - 08:47

They cut feature after feature

I count a whole two cut features, one of which was actually important (WinFS). Care to enlighten me on what else they're cutting?

#28 hardgiant on 30 Jul 2005 - 10:47

Windows Vista 2007

#29 MrCobra on 30 Jul 2005 - 12:17

Windows Forever.

(1 reply) #30 child998 on 30 Jul 2005 - 14:32

as long as the finall is good, i dont care when it comes out. better to wait a bit longer, then rush it and have a **** new OS.

#30.1 jagedEdge on 30 Jul 2005 - 15:47

Windows Vista ME.

(1 reply) #31 SimplyPotatoes on 30 Jul 2005 - 15:56

OH NO RUMORS ARE STARTING TO CIRCULATE !!!

#31.1 leojei on 30 Jul 2005 - 17:52

I hate to say "go get a life" but it really fits to be a reply to your comment

(3 replies) #32 Sticktron on 30 Jul 2005 - 17:05

Why is this even news? It's like everything MS does, people want to spin negatively.

We just got Beta 1 now, end of July 2005. Give them three months for Beta 2 (November '05), three more to get to RC1 (March '06), three more for RC2 (June '06) and then three more to hit final around September '06. That's Q4, and that's a very normal development schedule.

#32.1 nacs on 30 Jul 2005 - 17:39

Normal by whose standards? It'll be almost 6 years since their last release. Definitely not normal for MS.

Apple has made 3 or 4 OS X releases between the time XP came out and now. So definitely slow-as-balls by Apple's standards.

Last edited by 22516 on 30 Jul 2005 - 17:45

#32.2 leojei on 30 Jul 2005 - 17:56

I don't think you're getting the point of "standard". Sticktron is talking about the beta-to-rtm standards. BETA 1 expires on Sept 2006, which is a pretty good indication of what happens next. Also, though no RC2 for Vista, there's a rare RC0 which fits around the timeframe Sticktron just mentioned above.

#32.3 Jeremy1 on 30 Jul 2005 - 18:16

Apple has made 3 or 4 OS X releases between the time XP came out and now.

Those "releases" were basically just service packs. They don't count.

#33 rm20010 on 30 Jul 2005 - 18:23

As long as Vista is available to PC manufacturers by the beginning of 2007, I wouldn't mind.

#34 snappyfool on 30 Jul 2005 - 18:59

anyone know what the minimum or recommended specs are likely to be? was there any such information released with the beta? just wondering!

#35 megamanXplosion on 30 Jul 2005 - 21:02

WinFS is not a search tool. WinFS is a global storage facility used by programmers, you will never notice that it is not there! Yes, that does mean Windows Vista is delivering a search tool comparable to Apple's Spotlight; yes, that does mean Apple lied when they said SpotLight was the same as WinFS; yes, the media is totally clueless about everything going on in the operating system markets; and yes, winFS is still being shipped in the first service pack so it has not been cut. If those things haven't settled in your mind yet, read it again.

To those who think the feature list consists of perhaps 4 items, you are totally delusional. Here is a good list (that isn't extensive by any means, many small updates were purposely kept from being a part of the list!)...

------------------------------------

Deployment/Servicing: Monad
Object-oriented command-line tool that will eventually replace DOS. It was supposed to be released as a part of Longhorn server (due to be released a year after Longhorn) but was backported to Windows Vista. That's right, we got a great feature *earlier than expected*

Deployment/Servicing: Faster Installation
Installations will take 15-20 minutes in

Neowin.net