Windows 8 is coming in 2012

According to the latest roadmap from Microsoft, it would appear that Windows 8 will arrive sometime in 2012. This would follow a three year product cycle that would keep it in line with Vista and Windows 7 releases.

The road map is clear about the targeted date and does not try to hide the fact that the code name is "Windows 8". Little else is known about the OS other than its targeted date of release.

Let the speculation begin.

Image courtesy of msftkitchen.com

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Google phone on the way?

Next Story

Banned Xboxes flooding eBay and Craigslist

115 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

well we can certainly say they will NEVER replace the taskbar with what people thought to be a circle menu. hahaha... why? because it would certainly get in the way of people's prefered wallpapers. imagine that menu covering mario's face on my nintendo wallpapers. the very idea....

haven't had the need to use a registry cleaner or even touch the registry... guess they're gonna keep that. i guess in win7 they already polished it.

speaking of polish... please look here----> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUPXhIGd92E and speed up to 7:23

2 hooks are holding donald's arms (supposed to be for the legs for shoe polishing) but why is there a 3rd hook (holding his neck) just what is that for??? naughty disney....

They have already adopted technologies from Singularity, as Singularity and other MSR projects are research only, with no vision on getting stuff at the Windows Kernel. At Vista we saw improovements on memory management, and at 7 with the scheduler. There are more things to come, but as I said expect better more about the SP1, rather a Windows 8 Alpha Milestone build. Some things will start coming at surface in about 18 months...

There are some ideas on the internet that Microsoft's Singularity project might be used in Microsoft Windows '8'. This idea might not be implemented if the project fails or is unable to be put into production. If it does go into production, the kernel would be replaced so the operating system itself should be significantly improved.

They've learned from the past from their mistakes, and so do we. They'll do what they can to do for the upcoming operating system. As of now, I'll enjoy Windows 7 Ultimate. ;-)

Microsoft Research: Singularity

Any thoughts?

Personally feel they need to slow up on OS releases now and concentrate on just building the framework and then releasing and supporting one OS for a longer period of time with good service packs like they did with XP.

I think that Enterprise adoption is ALWAYS going to halfhearted when there are new major versions coming every three years. Some folks on here can't seem to understand it (when they just see installing it at home, and it working) but when you've got thousands of workstations, documentation & training about how the product works, application compatability to test on hundreds of apps, vendors who seem blisfully unaware that there is even a version of Windows OTHER than Windows XP and users who are terrified of change it makes it really hard to roll out new OS's on a 3 year cycle.

The only reason that they kept XP for so long is because they weren't able to release longhorn. Normally the life cycle is 2-3 years... but then look at most linux distros, they release a new version every year. The changes aren't usually as big though.

I hope they concentrate on the core OS and its file/folder handling. We are all building up large databases now days and need an OS that can maintain them. Id like to see more options in Explorer and a bit more detail on my files. I hope they don't go social networking/bing mad.

So Windows 8 will be MS's next hated OS, isn't that how it works, 98 was great, ME was bad, XP was great, Vista was bad, 7 was great, 8 will be ????

ur logic is incorrect if 98 was great, then according to u 95 must have sucked, but 95 was also great, meaning that following your logic 98 must have sucked, but u just said that 98 was great, so ur logic is flawed

Master1 said,
ur logic is incorrect if 98 was great, then according to u 95 must have sucked, but 95 was also great, meaning that following your logic 98 must have sucked, but u just said that 98 was great, so ur logic is flawed :o

95 was great, 98 sucked, 98SE was great, ME sucked

I must add, that kernel projects with 128bit exist at MSR with internal arithmetic at 128bit and 256 for ALU, but these are long term and have nothing to do with being added to the kernel produced by WKG. So just be sure, Windows 8 won't be 128bit and 32bit versions will exist too. I would be more calm and expect on what the Windows Kernel Group is up to lately, and this is SP1... so hang on.

manosdoc said,
Windows codename 8, won't be 128bit, and will still be in 32bit versions. That's 100% sure.

so where this news comes from?! are you from microsoft?

Didn't MS say they were dropping 32bit support after Windows 7?
I agree it wont be 128bit, at least not the desktop versions (The server versions maybe, but it depends on Intel and AMD and what they do with their high-end processors), but I wouldn't be surprised if 32bit support was completely dropped.

Kushan said,
Didn't MS say they were dropping 32bit support after Windows 7?
I agree it wont be 128bit, at least not the desktop versions (The server versions maybe, but it depends on Intel and AMD and what they do with their high-end processors), but I wouldn't be surprised if 32bit support was completely dropped.

It was rumored they were dropping it with 7, but if they did they would of alienated most of their business customers and until businesses starts adopting 64-bit, 32-bit is here to stay.

You sure it will still contain 32-bit versions? Microsoft already made the leap by forcing 64-bit on Windows Server 2008 R2, which once businesses adopt a 64-bit infrastructure on servers, it'll only be a matter of time before 64-bit will be accepted as a standard.

Microsoft also said 32-bit support would be dropped in Longhorn(Vista) before.

It will depend on whether there are still 32-bit x86 machines around the time when the system ships, if people still use atom based computers or some other i386 based devices, then you can safely assume there would be a fully functional or washdowned 32-bit version of Windows at that time.

Kushan said,
Didn't MS say they were dropping 32bit support after Windows 7?


No, they recently said the opposite but I can't find the quote right now.

I honestly wish they do something like what Apple did with snow leopard. Take some time to just improve the operating system. Optimise every little tiny application and streamline everything. They should also take out support for 32bit and transfer everything to 64bit.

It'll be even more amazing if they design windows 8 to be posix compliant (but doubt that'll happen). MS really needs to revolutionise their operating system otherwise they'll have a real problem on their hands with Google jumping on the OS bandwagon.

1) Windows 7 was an update release, so Windows 8 based on the current plan should be a major release.

2) I think 32 Bit will likely be dropped soon. Will that be Windows 8? Who knows... Maybe.

3) Not sure what Posix is, but it sounds cool. LOL I'll have to Wiki it when I have a chance.

4) Google's Chrome OS runs as a compliment to an operating system. It isn't meant as a replacement.

Chrome struck me as that whole fast boot alternative idea for when you just want to get up and online immediately. It isn't designed to be a gaming/productivity OS.

PCBEEF said,
It'll be even more amazing if they design windows 8 to be posix compliant (but doubt that'll happen).

Windows was the FIRST certified POSIX-compliant OS.
All Windows NT's have POSIX subsystem.

You do know this is the standard life cycle for Windows right? XP was an anomaly due to MS screwing up the development of Vista and 7 came out 3 years after Vista, not because Vista was crap and MS wanted to wipe it from history but rather they are just getting back to the standard schedule. MS pretty much hit the nail with 7 and I expect they'll continue to do the same and I fully expect Win8 final to be out 2012 sometime...just in time for the apocalypse :P

PCBEEF said,
It'll be even more amazing if they design windows 8 to be posix compliant (but doubt that'll happen).

Windows does have a Posix subsystem in the form of an add-on named Windows Services for Unix.

Ok MS this is your last chance or I'll migrate to that orange os!! oh I mean apple, yeah that's half bitten apple so you'll lost a very valuable user that's me!! think twice Mr.MS!!
Oh come on, someone that has private channel in microsoft tell'em that I don't like Vista/7 explorer UI, I'm sick of their damn childish design!!

MS can't make everyone happy. I'm sure the majority likes the explorer UI, if you don't just use a different OS.

veternan said,
Ok MS this is your last chance or I'll migrate to that orange os!! oh I mean apple, yeah that's half bitten apple so you'll lost a very valuable user that's me!! think twice Mr.MS!!
Oh come on, someone that has private channel in microsoft tell'em that I don't like Vista/7 explorer UI, I'm sick of their damn childish design!!

i will recommend you to switch to Ubuntu or Fedora instead of MacOS, you will not have to change your HW

PCBEEF said,
MS can't make everyone happy. I'm sure the majority likes the explorer UI, if you don't just use a different OS.

With all respect, majorities are wrong in Vista/7 explorer UI discussion!!

Juan4Ever said,
i will recommend you to switch to Ubuntu or Fedora instead of MacOS, you will not have to change your HW

hmmm will think about it!! but let's see, maybe MS will do something positive with win8 UI

veternan said,
With all respect, majorities are wrong in Vista/7 explorer UI discussion!!

And I'm sure the minorities against the Vista/7 UI discussions are Mac users :P

PCBEEF said,
And I'm sure the minorities against the Vista/7 UI discussions are Mac users :P

lol, I hate Mac!! but I don't like win7 UI it's complex... anyway love to see windows 8 UI...

veternan said,
With all respect, majorities are wrong in Vista/7 explorer UI discussion!!

With all respect, why the hell would Microsoft deliberately design their software to appeal to the MINORITY of users? So you don't like it, tough crap, the fact that the MAJORITY of people do means Microsoft did the right thing. You know what they say - the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. And you're one of "the few".
So yeah, by all means jump ship to another OS, I don't think Microsoft cares that they'll be loosing you as a customer when they'll have gained probably 10 or 20 in your place.

veternan said,
lol, I hate Mac!! but I don't like win7 UI it's complex... anyway love to see windows 8 UI... ;)

You know you can change the layout, right?

I love having my most used folders set in fav menu in windows exploerer etc, quick jump from one to the other without going up and down the old folder tree ala XP.

It's great. I don't quit get what more some people want?

I hope they don't change the Windows 7 UI in the next version of Windows, or at least keep an option to bring back Aero. I have totally fallen in love with Aero since the Vista days and can't see how it can be improved upon.

3 year cycle is too fast... they need to slow down to 5 years if that and make it more desirable not to mention more time to develop better UI, better abilities for the OS and extra's. As for the 2012 world destruction ...do you really think anyone would tell us its going to happen if it was just like from in the movie??? May as well suck it up and live life to the fullest till then cause ya never know.

Considering Ubuntu has 6 month cycles and OSX has one year to two year cycles 3 years is actually quite slow. If it takes them 5 years to bring on a new OS we'll just have another xp vs vista issue except it'll be win 7 vs win 8.

PCBEEF said,
Considering Ubuntu has 6 month cycles and OSX has one year to two year cycles 3 years is actually quite slow. If it takes them 5 years to bring on a new OS we'll just have another xp vs vista issue except it'll be win 7 vs win 8.

Exactly. By doing the "Major / Release" updates they hope to avoid that sort of thing I think.

PCBEEF said,
Considering Ubuntu has 6 month cycles and OSX has one year to two year cycles 3 years is actually quite slow. If it takes them 5 years to bring on a new OS we'll just have another xp vs vista issue except it'll be win 7 vs win 8.

That was supposed to read:

Exactly. By doing the "Major / Update" releases they hope to avoid that sort of thing I think.

But the Edit button on here apparently still doesn't work...

sava700 said,
3 year cycle is too fast... they need to slow down to 5 years if that and make it more desirable not to mention more time to develop better UI, better abilities for the OS and extra's. As for the 2012 world destruction ...do you really think anyone would tell us its going to happen if it was just like from in the movie??? May as well suck it up and live life to the fullest till then cause ya never know.

It's the same as their xbox. Thanks God it won't happen this time.

RealFduch said,
I heard it's based on MS DOS 7.0.

HOW SO ??? FOR ALL WE KNOW THEY MIGHT DO A CLEAN CODE THAT NOW THEY HAVE VIRTUAL XP MODE

I'm requesting an edit to the title. They're clearly talking about the server component here, not the client. And for major versions of Windows Server (2000, 2003, and 2008), they've never been in sync with the client-side release.

Only reason why Windows 7 is up there is because it just launched. But notice how Windows Vista isn't there (not because they hate it). It wouldn't have been wise to not put up there an OS that hasn't even been out a month yet, you know?

dagamer34 said,
I'm requesting an edit to the title. They're clearly talking about the server component here, not the client. And for major versions of Windows Server (2000, 2003, and 2008), they've never been in sync with the client-side release.

Only reason why Windows 7 is up there is because it just launched. But notice how Windows Vista isn't there (not because they hate it). It wouldn't have been wise to not put up there an OS that hasn't even been out a month yet, you know?

Vista isnt there because it wasnt up to par and it's best for them to just not mention it.

And I guess you could consider windows 2000 professional the 'client' side to windows 2000 server. XP was just based on it.

It's kind of funny how they refer to windows 7 as an 'update release'. I think we all know that windows 7 is just a 'fixed' windows vista.

No, Windows 7 is referred to an "update release" because that's exactly what it is - and that's not to say it's a "fixed" vista, as you claim. This is how Microsoft has ALWAYs done it. This might come as a shock to you, but Windows XP (You know that Amazing OS you love so much?) was just an "update release" of Windows 2000.
Intel are exactly the same with their processors, except they call it a "tick-tock" cycle.

I know it is an update release, and I know that's how microsoft has always done it. But I think they've always talked about windows 7 as a HUGE release, when we all know it's a reworked vista.

Windows 7 will least like 5 years until we start seeing the move to 128 bit with like DX 13/14 only being supported in this Windows 8 and higher.

I'm guessing just for fun.

32bit computing lasted from Windows 95 all the way up to Windows 7 today. The move to 64bit, although a good one overall, was only really important to MOST people because they wanted more than 4GB of RAM. That doesn't really factor into the 64bit -> 128bit jump as 64bit can handle something like 16Ebs of RAM or something absurd like that. We wont be moving to 128Bit any time soon, at least not any time in the next decade.

Guys <frustrated noise/> do you not see the tilde before 2012? ~2012... right there.. it is a rough estimate. Why would you say "Windows 8 is coming in 2012" in the headline as if it was a sure thing? <more frustrated noises/>

I personally can't see any 'major' things coming up. Computers are spreading to become all kinds of devices: this is something major. Windows will be more of the same. We should look for developing holography by now. This would be 'major'...

Andrew Lyle said,
I would like it if Microsoft kept with the Windows # branding. The numbers seem to be easier to follow and so far a big hit.

I think it's because names like Vista sound too much like a soccer mom minivan.

jim2006193 said,
Bring on the Alphas!

Nah, let them take their time. I'll start looking for leaked betas or pre betas on 2010 (ends) - 2011 (starts)

Cool. I wonder what Windows 8 will bring. "Major Release" sounds very exciting (And in line with what they were saying before). I like the new release strategy...

I too am looking forward to hearing more news on this Although I am happy with Windows 7, it would be nice if they came up with something completely different and even better (not that I can think of any more major improvements which can be made :P I'm sure there are some, haha).

Calum said,
I too am looking forward to hearing more news on this Although I am happy with Windows 7, it would be nice if they came up with something completely different and even better (not that I can think of any more major improvements which can be made :P I'm sure there are some, haha).

WINFS maybe ?

Dude, I bet you don't even know what WINFS was supposed to be. It's dead and it will never come back.
Anyway, Windows 7 is a nice OS, but I'm sure Microsoft can do even more to simplify it. For instance, while the Control Panel works really great for me, it scares the hell out of my parents and computer-illiterate friends. I mean, you open it and there's a bunch of text and links. Believe it or not the average (dare I say, DUMB) user gets lost right there. Then after trying one they think is the one, they are presented with MORE LINKS! Then of course they all run calling me asking for help.

Pharos said,
For instance, while the Control Panel works really great for me, it scares the hell out of my parents and computer-illiterate friends. I mean, you open it and there's a bunch of text and links. Believe it or not the average (dare I say, DUMB) user gets lost right there. Then after trying one they think is the one, they are presented with MORE LINKS! Then of course they all run calling me asking for help.

That's a good point. Definitely worth a rework I think...

Pharos said,
Dude, I bet you don't even know what WINFS was supposed to be. It's dead and it will never come back.

WINFS or any new IMPROVED file system that do not need to be maintaned (defragmention)

Major release - like the disaster that was longhorn? the next OS will be more of the same with a few improvements I think.

Wikipedia has got it covered - WinFS (short for Windows Future Storage) is the code name for a data storage and management system based on relational databases, developed by Microsoft and first demonstrated in 2003 as an advanced storage subsystem for the Microsoft Windows operating system, designed for persistence and management of structured, semi-structured as well as unstructured data.

Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WinFS and http://channel9.msdn.com/posts/JonUdell/Where-is-WinFS-now/

It is impossible to build a file system that cannot fragment. You can handle it easily by having the defrag tool automatically run once a week.

Pharos said,
For instance, while the Control Panel works really great for me, it scares the hell out of my parents and computer-illiterate friends. I mean, you open it and there's a bunch of text and links. Believe it or not the average (dare I say, DUMB) user gets lost right there. Then after trying one they think is the one, they are presented with MORE LINKS! Then of course they all run calling me asking for help.

One of the thing i love in Win 7 (and Vista) is that i have no use for the start menu or control panel, in the classical form. I just hit the start button and start to type what i need to open, and then Enter. For using Control Panel, i open it up and type in the Search box and select what i need from the list. In my opinion this simplifies a lot the process of accesing an item, as you don't have to remember the name of the item (which is not always 100% relevant for the action it performs) or the path.
Of course, this might not apply to computer illiterate, as they would need to at least know the computer term of what they are trying to do :)

Back on topic, if Windows 8 does not come as a major improvement on Windows 7 (i don't know what that means, as Windows 7 is pretty good, both in terms of quality and features), it will have a hard time convincing the buyers. 7, besides the features and stability, and everything else, had the advantage of launching on a market splitted between an old OS, although still loved by many (XP), and a flawed OS (Vista). Windows 8 will probably find a market dominated by a modern OS with lots of good features and good stability and security.

Every FS fragments, the thing between NTFS and others on the *nix side is that NTFS defrags later, after data is writen and so on. While other ones like say UFS etc check before and defrag if needed, or something along those lines.

It's the difference between proactive defrag and reactive defrag. NTFS just handles it later.

You guys are forgetting about the rise of SSD storage. An SSD with TRIM doesn't need to defrag. In fact, Windows 7 disables the automatically scheduled defrag task when the installation detects you're using an SSD (it detects a rotation speed of zero). The seek times are so low that fragmentation isn't as much of a concern. The TRIM problem and fact that early SSD's don't support it is part of the reason for the disabled defrag - in that case it would make a bad problm (no TRIM) into a worse problem. Luckily the new SSD's coming out support TRIM and the more reputable manufacturers allow you to flash your SSD to incorporate support.

Defrag is dead!

iamwhoiam said,
^ WINFS was never a file system.

+1

For anyone still mentioning "Where is WinFS" needs to look up the blog post by Ed Bott on the subject. WinFS = Windows Future Storage and was to be a relational layer between Windows and NTFS. It was never meant to replace NTFS. All of the goals they wanted to accomplish with WinFS they were able to accomplish with the indexing service.

WinFS became to big and to unwieldy. The technologies that were originally developed for WinFS were subsequently dismantled and found their way into other Microsoft technology such as SQL Server 2008.

iamwhoiam said,
^ WINFS was never a file system.

I am not talking about WinFS as WinFS it self, I am talking about a new improved filesystem, I am just naming it as WinFS because it come to my mind.
A filesystem that do not need to be defragmented to say something, a strong point in a *nix system.

pd: sorry, my english is not good enough to make my point clear.

Juan4Ever said,
I am not talking about WinFS as WinFS it self, I am talking about a new improved filesystem, I am just naming it as WinFS because it come to my mind.
A filesystem that do not need to be defragmented to say something, a strong point in a *nix system.

pd: sorry, my english is not good enough to make my point clear.


probably a dumb question, but why would a FS not need defragging
Isnt it dependent on where the write heads are at the time of the write request? How does the FS change that?

mikefarinha said,
All of the goals they wanted to accomplish with WinFS they were able to accomplish with the indexing service.

No they weren't, I wish people would stop saying that. There's no self-describing (XML) metadata. That was the most exciting part of WinFS from my perspective, as someone who deals with things like images. I don't want to rely on media management programs to add metadata which means nothing outside of those programs.

And from what I've read as I was following WinFS there was some thought about changing things at the file system level but they later gave up on the idea.

Neoauld said,
probably a dumb question, but why would a FS not need defragging
Isnt it dependent on where the write heads are at the time of the write request? How does the FS change that?

no question is dumb... and i really do not know.
but, correct me if i am wrong...
ext3 or ext4 need to be defragmented by the user command? it have something to be with the write heads?

What, 3 years after Windows 7? Which was 3 years after Vista? Keeping in mind that XP was 3 years after 98, which was 3 years after 95...

(Yes, I know there were other Windows OSs released inbetween them, but when you focus specifically on JUST Desktop OSs or JUST Server OSs, you'll notice a pattern with Vista being the only real exception).

Tim Dawg said,
Ummm....you're missing an OS - Win 2000


Windows 2000 was for business only, however your point is still valid in terms of releasing Windows ME in 2000, then XP in 2001/2002.

Ridlas said,
Just in time to install it and then die a few months later :P

LOL I guess I should go for the payment plan on that laptop then... :P

Silverskull said,
Major release. Wouldn't it be nice if they completely redesigned the UI for touch devices? Surface-style.

Oh and before anyone asks:

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/2012.html

Vista and windows 7 is a major UI enhanced release....
I believe microsoft is going to come with something big!!! They have learned from their mistakes(Vista)... win 8 is going to be big but i think they should give some more for the next release.... may be a 4-5 year cycle would be good....

still1 said,

Vista and windows 7 is a major UI enhanced release....
I believe microsoft is going to come with something big!!! They have learned from their mistakes(Vista)... win 8 is going to be big but i think they should give some more for the next release.... may be a 4-5 year cycle would be good....

+1

still1 said,

Vista and windows 7 is a major UI enhanced release....
I believe microsoft is going to come with something big!!! They have learned from their mistakes(Vista)... win 8 is going to be big but i think they should give some more for the next release.... may be a 4-5 year cycle would be good....

i agree simply because Windows 7 just came out. we don't really 'need' a new OS til AT LEAST 2013-2014 (or so) if you ask me. a new OS once every 5 years sounds about right

Silverskull said,
Major release. Wouldn't it be nice if they completely redesigned the UI for touch devices? Surface-style.

Oh and before anyone asks:

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/2012.html


Windows 7 was a minor release as I said it, but some none technical user wrote otherwise, good to have this Microsoft slide to show the roadmap.

Windows 8 will be a major release that will focus on 64 bit architecture and virtualization/Cloud (and some suggest it may even support 128 bit architecture)

windows 8 will have to bring new inspiration. to compete with the old Windows users (WinXP-Win7) and competotors such as Apple and Google OS.

Hopefully there would be a 2nd path which MS follows which goes the way Chromium OS is going. 3 years is a lot of time for drastic technology improvements in the Web apps space. A 2010 Q3 or 2011 Q1 release of something like this would be ideal. With Office Web Apps coming up really nice, this would be welcomed even more.

raindrop said,

Windows 7 was a minor release as I said it, but some none technical user wrote otherwise, good to have this Microsoft slide to show the roadmap.

Windows 8 will be a major release that will focus on 64 bit architecture and virtualization/Cloud (and some suggest it may even support 128 bit architecture)

windows 8 will have to bring new inspiration. to compete with the old Windows users (WinXP-Win7) and competotors such as Apple and Google OS.


Ah, yes, there's cloud computing. That's one option there... have hosted user profiles for the general public. Business users are used to that, home users aren't.