Microsoft Delays Windows Server 2008

Microsoft revealed today that it will not release Windows Server 2008, the successor to Windows Server 2003, on time. In a posting to the company's TechNet site, a Microsoft spokesman confessed that "Windows Server 2008, which we have been saying would Release to Manufacturing (RTM) by the end of the calendar year, is now slated to RTM in the first quarter of calendar year 2008." The blogger quoted Program Manager Alex Hinrichs as saying, "It just needs a little more time to bake."

The delay cannot come as much of a surprise to customers and partners, who have watched the Redmond, Wash., giant stumble out of the gate with new product introductions, most recently Vista. However, the delay also affects Microsoft's Viridian hypervisor, which Microsoft previously said would ship 180 days after Windows Server 2008. This delay further pushes the introduction of this crucial piece of technology until the end of 2008 or even 2009, noted John Abbott, an analyst with the 451Group, based in London. Hypervisor virtualization technology within Windows Server 2008 will give Microsoft a big advantage—when it arrives. "If this is embedded in the core infrastructure, it would be harder for a competitor like VMware to get in there," said Abbott. However, according to the analyst, this delay gives VMware, based in Palo Alto, Calif., "another six months to consolidate its already huge market lead" in the virtualization space.

View: Full Story on eWeek
View: Blog Post on TechNet

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Chicago Scraps Plans for Municipal Wi-Fi Network

Next Story

Amazon, Google, Yahoo, And Others Sued For Automating E-mail

13 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

MioTheGreat said,
Weird. It seems so stable as is.

I'd say they've probably come accross some issues when stress testing it, along with vendors noticing issues when certain combinations of hardware and software are used. Its difficult to test things because what might be stable on one machine causes crashes on another.

kaiwai said,

<snipped> It isn't Vista server. <snipped>


Actaully it is Vista server... it is vista with a new kernel... and the eye candy removed... If you'd actaully of used it you would know that. And please watch your attitued towards others

neufuse said,

Actaully it is Vista server... it is vista with a new kernel... and the eye candy removed... If you'd actaully of used it you would know that. And please watch your attitued towards others

1) I attacked him before of his in accurate information whcih was blatent flame bait. Yes, what I said was completely unacceptable but at the same time the individual in question needs to learn how not to use facturally inaccurate information to provoke a response.

2) It isn't Windows Vista kernel. Windows Vista branced off and Windows 2008 continued the developing. This code will then be released as Windows 2008. It isn't just Windows Vista + Server components.

The first poster tried to make out that NOTHING was developed and it is merely Vista with server components of which it is not. It would be as stupid as saying that Windows Vista was based of Windows XP SP2 when it is well and truly known that Windows Vista was based off Windows 2003 SP1.

Again, I stress - what I said was unacceptable, but at the same time I think that those who do respond need to stop making stupid comments that are not grounded in reality.

kaiwai said,
2) It isn't Windows Vista kernel. Windows Vista branced off and Windows 2008 continued the developing. This code will then be released as Windows 2008. It isn't just Windows Vista + Server components.

Yes it is. Windows 2008 = Vista SP1 + Server components. Just as Windows 2003 = Windows XP SP1 + Server Components. Very small difference in main source code doesn't make it different OS. Microsoft would be plain stupid and inefficient if it was otherwise. Main goal of productivity is to share as much code as possible. Haven't you've noticed that if MS OS bug is found then there is nearly 100% chance that same bug will affect both "Windows XP SP(N+1)" and "Windows 2003 SP(N)".

And for all that, the joke was really just that we dont need another OS released before its time (Especially a server environment)

Ogmius said,
And for all that, the joke was really just that we dont need another OS released before its time (Especially a server environment)

Yeah I read it that way too.