View Full Version : Windows Longhorn
DarkReality
11-06-2003, 10:13 AM
Just like the description says. ???
I know it's the next Windows, scheduled for release in 2005. I've seen screenshots, but I think they were fake because it looked like Linux skinned to look like Windows. For example the desktop switcher and digital looking clock that are so obviously Linux and not Windows.
Anyway, I was on another verifieds site *gasp* and saw Longhorn Build 4015. Nobody's sharing it right now, but when I get it, I'll post the hash link, if it works.
Is there a better way to get the latest Longhorn build?
Also, for those of you that know it, what does it have that XP Pro/Corp doesn't?
Supernatural
11-06-2003, 10:30 AM
Longhorn is still early alpha. At this stage in devlopement, the only changes seem to be graphical. I've never seen it or used it myself, so I couldn't tell you more. I WOULD download it and try it myself... if I had the diskspace to support another OS installation. ^_^
DarkReality
11-06-2003, 10:33 AM
Oh, I've done dual boot a few times, and only when I'm feeling like a dumbass. I'd wipe my drive, put Longhorn in, try it for a day or two, and then go back.
When I get my new computer and retire this one to being a Linux box, I'll test shit on this computer. Linux seems to work OK on a dual boot, it's Windows that whines about it. (Well, it doesn't, it just performs worse.)
j4y3m
11-06-2003, 10:33 AM
i dont know...when it goes final ill most likely try it :)
Evil Gemini
11-06-2003, 11:05 AM
I remember a while ago (a real while ago) some one on the forum downloaded it and tried it out.
Its not fake.
I wouldnt worry about it though because it runs shit since its in alpha stage
Kunal
11-06-2003, 03:46 PM
longhorn is so shit at the moment, it sucks, dont bother downloading it mate. search the forum for longhorn, ull find a few topics like this one where i have said its shit and put many reasons why ;)
Kunal
11-06-2003, 04:17 PM
Originally posted by shn@6 November 2003 - 16:09
Screw longhorn :P
you said it in one (i no it was two word but who cares!) :lol:
fr600
11-06-2003, 04:29 PM
Build 4054 is available on suprnova...
Kunal
11-06-2003, 05:06 PM
Originally posted by fr600@6 November 2003 - 16:29
Build 4054 is available on suprnova...
build 4054 :blink:
The latest leaked build is 4051 which is the PDC build and that one sucks more than others
Izagaia
11-06-2003, 05:29 PM
Anything "tech-type" named after a slab of beef is just plain ass. I mean really- you say "longhorn" and the first thing in my mind is medium rare with a cold coors light. :P
Kunal
11-06-2003, 05:30 PM
Originally posted by Izagaia@6 November 2003 - 17:29
Anything "tech-type" named after a sirloin is just plain ass. I mean really- you say "longhorn" and the first thing in my mind is medium rare with a cold coors light. :P
:huh: :huh: :huh:
i_have_a.d.d.
11-06-2003, 05:52 PM
good shit longhorn (http://novasearch.net/index.php?search=longhorn&searchtype=sequential&sort=None&order=desc&what=torrents§ion=All+Sections) look here it will show u
Kunal
11-06-2003, 06:11 PM
i_have_a.d.d. your sig is way to big, get it sorted *pms mod*, only because there more ppl like me on dial up
MUSLEMAN
11-06-2003, 07:50 PM
emule has it also
DarkReality
11-07-2003, 10:12 AM
Originally posted by Izagaia@6 November 2003 - 17:29
Anything "tech-type" named after a slab of beef is just plain ass. I mean really- you say "longhorn" and the first thing in my mind is medium rare with a cold coors light. :P
Actually, Longhorn is the name of a bar. Apparently Whistler (the code name for Windows XP) is a mountain somewhere that Gates and Co. like to vacation at, and Longhorn is a bar at the base of the mountain.
Which makes it alright with me.
Shn - Your worthless opinions are unwelcome, especially since you tried to bash on Lindows and ran when I replied. And I still haven't heard a good rebuttal to that argument from any "hardcore Linux h4x0rz". Which tells me there probably isn't one. So go back to your half-assed command-line based OS with a half-assed shell and come back when you've found a Linux distro that's a viable alternative to Windows, becuase like I said, I don't like Windows either, but it's the only choice for me. Which is why I get pissed when people bash Lindows, because none of the other distros have done shit to compete with Microshaft. :rolleyes:
fr600
11-07-2003, 01:38 PM
Originally posted by Kunal+6 November 2003 - 23:06--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Kunal @ 6 November 2003 - 23:06)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-fr600@6 November 2003 - 16:29
Build 4054 is available on suprnova...
build 4054 :blink:
The latest leaked build is 4051 which is the PDC build and that one sucks more than others [/b][/quote]
May be its 4051 I forgot. Nevermind...
MUSLEMAN
11-08-2003, 12:45 AM
sombody say longhorn??
http://www.geocities.com/fshaitoon/desktop/Grabby6.jpg
Supernatural
11-08-2003, 04:21 AM
Originally posted by MUSLEMAN@7 November 2003 - 19:45
sombody say longhorn??
How does it run? It looks polished and clean to me (which I prefer).
MUSLEMAN
11-08-2003, 04:28 AM
Originally posted by Supernatural+8 November 2003 - 00:21--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Supernatural @ 8 November 2003 - 00:21)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-MUSLEMAN@7 November 2003 - 19:45
sombody say longhorn??
How does it run? It looks polished and clean to me (which I prefer). [/b][/quote]
so far so good took for ever to load up tho http://smilies.sofrayt.com/%5E/g0/beer.gif
johnboy27
11-08-2003, 05:30 AM
I tried the 4029 build for a few minutes.It just semmed like XP to me.Seemed to work fine
DarkReality
11-08-2003, 10:55 AM
Muscleman - What is that I'm looking at? It looks like you're running some heavily modified Windows with some kind of emulator running Win2k, WinXp, and Longhorn.
Can you explain that screenshot because it looks really fucking sweet. Meanwhile I'm gonna go look for answers with a search for VMware Workstation. :)
wienerschnitzel
11-08-2003, 11:04 AM
I installed longhorn 4015 a while ago. I would freeze after 3 minutes everytime. From what i could see it looked alright. I have downloaded and burned 4051 but i haven't been bored enough to install it yet. From looking at the files on the disk it seems real.
DarkReality
11-08-2003, 11:16 AM
I wish people would share 4051.
I'm downloading 2 right now. One appears to be an EXE but it's probably just a renamed ISO. It's 675946Kb of which I have 488365Kb. Nobody is sharing it.
The other one is an ISO, and a 56K'er is sharing it at about 2.65K. That one is 675951Kb of which I have 533266Kb.
File sizes reported from K-Lite's Traffic window.
What's the difference, does anyone know?
And could someone post a hash to a working, confirmed 4051?
Evil Gemini
11-08-2003, 01:19 PM
Originally posted by DarkReality@8 November 2003 - 11:55
Muscleman - What is that I'm looking at? It looks like you're running some heavily modified Windows with some kind of emulator running Win2k, WinXp, and Longhorn.
Can you explain that screenshot because it looks really fucking sweet. Meanwhile I'm gonna go look for answers with a search for VMware Workstation. :)
he is using VMware (http://www.vmware.com/download/). Its really handy to try new OS's out.
I had Virtual PC installed and had DOS, Windows XP, Linux Redhat and windows 98 running all at once :D
3RA1N1AC
11-08-2003, 01:24 PM
Originally posted by DarkReality@8 November 2003 - 02:55
Muscleman - What is that I'm looking at? It looks like you're running some heavily modified Windows with some kind of emulator running Win2k, WinXp, and Longhorn.
Can you explain that screenshot because it looks really fucking sweet. Meanwhile I'm gonna go look for answers with a search for VMware Workstation. :)
as far as i can see, he's using WindowsXP with a multiple desktop app, prolly some java-based desktop calendar, a truckload of systray icons, and VMWare Workstation hosting some other copies of Windows. it ain't an emulator-- VM = Virtual Machine. it's multiple systems running side-by-side, not really on top of each other.
VMWare just regulates the other systems' access to the hardware and emulates a couple of things like the drivers for the video card, IDE card and network card. there is a little bit of emulation involved, but mostly the other systems are directly accessing the computer hardware so it's much faster than an emulator could hope to be. VMWare and VirtualPC are similar programs, if you've ever heard of the latter.
RuffRyda
11-08-2003, 02:49 PM
One question, how'd you get those dates in the background of your screenshot Muscleman?
DarkReality
11-08-2003, 10:17 PM
Wow, can I get that on K-Lite??
I have heard of VPC. In fact I got a Mac G4 last year, with the hopes I could run VPC to play games and a few apps that I needed Windows for. I then found out that VPC makes it run like 50% performance - in the case of that Mac, 400MHz and 128MB RAM. Plus, the Firewire DVD burner wouldn't work with it; it would have to be taken apart and installed internally. My roommate worked at the place I got it, so I exchanged it for what was then a top of the line PC, which I still run.
I wouldn't mind running a Linux distro in VMWare if it works good; partitioning sucks.
3RA1N1AC
11-08-2003, 10:36 PM
okay, to be precise, there is one version of VirtualPC which is actually an emulator-- the Windows-On-Mac version of VPC is an emulator, not a VM. that's why it's slow. other versions, and other VM programs, use very little emulation because they're hosting an OS that's compatible with the hardware.
but otherwise, if you're hosting a Mac version of Linux on MacOS for example, it'd be a VM rather than an emulator. if you're hosting a different edition of MacOS, it'd be a VM. i believe "classic mode" is basically OSX hosting OS9 in a VM.
and yeah, even in a true Virtual Machine, everything will not work 100% correctly just because the guest system can't gain complete control of certain hardware components through the emulated drivers. but most programs that don't use things like CD burning or 3D acceleration should work fine-- VMs are mostly useful for testing different OS's and using office applications, not for things like 3D apps where the hardware-sharing isn't really advanced enough to accomadate it.
Originally posted by DarkReality+7 November 2003 - 04:12--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (DarkReality @ 7 November 2003 - 04:12)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-Izagaia@6 November 2003 - 17:29
Anything "tech-type" named after a slab of beef is just plain ass. I mean really- you say "longhorn" and the first thing in my mind is medium rare with a cold coors light. :P
Actually, Longhorn is the name of a bar. Apparently Whistler (the code name for Windows XP) is a mountain somewhere that Gates and Co. like to vacation at, and Longhorn is a bar at the base of the mountain.
Which makes it alright with me.
Shn - Your worthless opinions are unwelcome, especially since you tried to bash on Lindows and ran when I replied. And I still haven't heard a good rebuttal to that argument from any "hardcore Linux h4x0rz". Which tells me there probably isn't one. So go back to your half-assed command-line based OS with a half-assed shell and come back when you've found a Linux distro that's a viable alternative to Windows, becuase like I said, I don't like Windows either, but it's the only choice for me. Which is why I get pissed when people bash Lindows, because none of the other distros have done shit to compete with Microshaft. :rolleyes:[/b][/quote]
Heres an idea.
Why dont you go to that mountain.........whistler or whatever its called, get to the very top and then just jump right off it. :)
Then once you split your head open and break every bone in your body from that lovely fall, we can go into that bar..........longhorn and have a drink. :lol:
You did not have to bash me like that. I was just expressing my opinion towards longhorn. Right now it sucks, but then again, its suppose to because its not even out yet.
Btw, the simple fact that you use lindows tells me a lot about you. I dont claim to be elite at all. In fact lots of people in here will tell you that Ive helped them on numerous occasions with various problems pertaining linux. There is no "easy" linux and its a shame to see someone with a brain not use it and resort to something shitty like lindows.
<_<
3RA1N1AC
11-08-2003, 11:07 PM
Originally posted by shn@8 November 2003 - 14:58
something shitty like lindows.
personally i think OSX is a good example of what a Linux desktop edition should be like. Linux is great for servers and programming, and for people who just like to tinker and spend time configuring options, but a desktop OS should be noob-friendly and not present the user with that many things to configure-- it should just install itself off the CD and be ready to use.
i can't comment on Lindows though. never tried it. :P
Originally posted by 3RA1N1AC+8 November 2003 - 17:07--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (3RA1N1AC @ 8 November 2003 - 17:07)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-shn@8 November 2003 - 14:58
something shitty like lindows.
personally i think OSX is a good example of what a Linux desktop edition should be like. Linux is great for servers and programming, and for people who just like to tinker and spend time configuring options, but a desktop OS should be noob-friendly and not present the user with that many things to configure-- it should just install itself off the CD and be ready to use.
i can't comment on Lindows though. never tried it. :P [/b][/quote]
Quite an interesting bunch.
Who died and made you guys "king of o.s. standards"?
A good desktop o.s. for me is one that I can use according to what I like and dont like. If I dont need user friendliness then obviously Im not going to require it as a number 1 standard for what a good o.s. should be.
Dont make up the rules as you go just because you have a handicapp. Thats right, a handicapp. Some people obviously have a problem with reading simple documentation and using common sense.
You actually want people to make everything easy for you so you wont have to do anything yourself. What you fail to understand is the more we try to develop o.s., desktop or whatever, the more elementary and rediculous it gets..
Its like having the mentality of an adult, but yet forced to live the life of a child.
Ok, maybe a bad analogy...........but I really dont know how "SIMPLE" I can make it for you.
Ok here's simple:
If its too hard to use then dont use it. How's that? :)
DarkReality
11-09-2003, 11:47 AM
Shn - You're proving my point, and you still have never answered my statement about why Lindows is important. You just come off with the elitist hacker Linux user. Don't make me break your glasses. That's not a threat. Or a promise. It's a wiseass remark. I had to say that, because I didn't type it in assembly language, so I figured you wouldn't get it.
That's fine, you like your command-line based OS which doesn't support half the hardware out there made for Intel/AMD based PCs and has shitty software support. I'm very adept with Windows, but Linux is a whole other animal. I'm sure you know this. Nothing is the same. It's all different. The fact that they're both windowing GUIs is very trivial. So I need an easy to use Linux distro, one that will basically hold my hand as I learn it, because being good with Windows (I won't say guru, cuz I'm not) I just want to jump right into a new OS and try everything.
So who died and made you king of OS standards, as you put it? Linux has given every competent coder the opportunity to configure the OS the way they want it, and Lindows has chosen the path of user friendliness. I guess you use Slackware from your Signature? I've heard some things about Slackware. That it's a very user unfriendly system. That it's geared to power users. And that's fine. For you. Because you know Linux. I don't. So I went with Red Hat. It was supposed to be the best. But it didn't support my sound card. So I tried Mandrake. People said it was easy to learn. But all it was, was a command prompt and I don't know Unix. Lindows came along and I had a chance to use it at no expense to me and I got a 6 month Click n Run membership. So I tried that too.
Actually, you can bash me harder because I don't run Lindows anymore. Just XP Pro. Lindows had a few things I didn't like. Text wasn't showing up right, I couldn't find full screen video in six media players... there was a number of reasons.
I hope that Lindows forces or at least encourages (and I'd prefer the latter) other Linux makers to make Linux easier to use. Linux can still be a power OS, and be simple enough for people to actually use.
globalterminator
11-09-2003, 02:02 PM
im running a beta version of it, along with windows xp. longhorn is far to buggy at the moment.
Originally posted by
[email protected]@9 November 2003 - 14:02
im running a beta version of it, along with windows xp. longhorn is far to buggy at the moment.
No you're not ;)
It probably won't reach beta for another year.
And if you aren't using advanced partition hiding, that would explain why it's so buggy for you, never mind the alpha bugs, two XP's (longhorn and whistler)will conflict and crosslink.
Originally posted by DarkReality@9 November 2003 - 05:47
Shn - You're proving my point, and you still have never answered my statement about why Lindows is important. You just come off with the elitist hacker Linux user. Don't make me break your glasses. That's not a threat. Or a promise. It's a wiseass remark. I had to say that, because I didn't type it in assembly language, so I figured you wouldn't get it.
That's fine, you like your command-line based OS which doesn't support half the hardware out there made for Intel/AMD based PCs and has shitty software support. I'm very adept with Windows, but Linux is a whole other animal. I'm sure you know this. Nothing is the same. It's all different. The fact that they're both windowing GUIs is very trivial. So I need an easy to use Linux distro, one that will basically hold my hand as I learn it, because being good with Windows (I won't say guru, cuz I'm not) I just want to jump right into a new OS and try everything.
So who died and made you king of OS standards, as you put it? Linux has given every competent coder the opportunity to configure the OS the way they want it, and Lindows has chosen the path of user friendliness. I guess you use Slackware from your Signature? I've heard some things about Slackware. That it's a very user unfriendly system. That it's geared to power users. And that's fine. For you. Because you know Linux. I don't. So I went with Red Hat. It was supposed to be the best. But it didn't support my sound card. So I tried Mandrake. People said it was easy to learn. But all it was, was a command prompt and I don't know Unix. Lindows came along and I had a chance to use it at no expense to me and I got a 6 month Click n Run membership. So I tried that too.
Actually, you can bash me harder because I don't run Lindows anymore. Just XP Pro. Lindows had a few things I didn't like. Text wasn't showing up right, I couldn't find full screen video in six media players... there was a number of reasons.
I hope that Lindows forces or at least encourages (and I'd prefer the latter) other Linux makers to make Linux easier to use. Linux can still be a power OS, and be simple enough for people to actually use.
Linux will run on just about anything. You have to have the initiative to get the system up and running accordingly.
If it doesnt support something on your pc, then you have the power to make it support by loading the drivers for it at boot up or passing a simple set of options to the kernel, or if all else fails, recompile your own custom kernel designed specifically for your pc. Try calling microsoft up and ask them if they will make a version of windows specifically for your model computer right down to every peice of hardware you have in it.
I dont understand people sometime. Youll do a boatload of searching for that cracked app or movie or other pirated peice of material but you cant take 10 minutes and a little searching on google to find a driver for for whatever peice of hardware you say that linux wont support. Btw, I have nothing against cracked apps or movies :D
Take this in mind. Once you have fully configured any linux system. Its well worth the time and effort. Your system will be configured properly and unless you reinstall linux again, for whatever unnecessary reason that my be, then you wont have to configure it again for the most part.
3RA1N1AC
11-09-2003, 05:07 PM
Originally posted by shn@8 November 2003 - 15:35
Who died and made you guys "king of o.s. standards"?
A good desktop o.s. for me is one that I can use according to what I like and dont like. If I dont need user friendliness then obviously Im not going to require it as a number 1 standard for what a good o.s. should be.
Dont make up the rules as you go just because you have a handicapp. Thats right, a handicapp. Some people obviously have a problem with reading simple documentation and using common sense.
nobody died and made me king of O.S. standards. user-friendliness made MS and Apple the kings of desktop O.S. standards.
as for a handicap-- you're assuming that mastery of the command line and a penchant for configuration up the wazoo is necessarily a desirable thing for every single person. i wouldn't say that people are handicapped for not taking the time to learn calculus, either. most people don't need it, and it would be arcane knowledge serving no purpose other than for bragging rights.
you can rail against the handicapped all you want, but the dominance of MS and Apple in the desktop arena proves again and again that being ready to go out-of-the-box with little to no configuration is what succeeds. i'm not saying that Linux should be forced into user-friendliness mode like MS and Apple, but if it is going to reach that level of acceptance as a desktop O.S. that's what it will eventually do. otherwise, it will remain a niche system indefinitely.
Originally posted by 3RA1N1AC+9 November 2003 - 11:07--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (3RA1N1AC @ 9 November 2003 - 11:07)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-shn@8 November 2003 - 15:35
Who died and made you guys "king of o.s. standards"?
A good desktop o.s. for me is one that I can use according to what I like and dont like. If I dont need user friendliness then obviously Im not going to require it as a number 1 standard for what a good o.s. should be.
Dont make up the rules as you go just because you have a handicapp. Thats right, a handicapp. Some people obviously have a problem with reading simple documentation and using common sense.
nobody died and made me king of O.S. standards. user-friendliness made MS and Apple the kings of desktop O.S. standards.
as for a handicap-- you're assuming that mastery of the command line and a penchant for configuration up the wazoo is necessarily a desirable thing for every single person. i wouldn't say that people are handicapped for not taking the time to learn calculus, either. most people don't need it, and it would be arcane knowledge serving no purpose other than for bragging rights.
you can rail against the handicapped all you want, but the dominance of MS and Apple in the desktop arena proves again and again that being ready to go out-of-the-box with little to no configuration is what succeeds. i'm not saying that Linux should be forced into user-friendliness mode like MS and Apple, but if it is going to reach that level of acceptance as a desktop O.S. that's what it will eventually do. otherwise, it will remain a niche system indefinitely. [/b][/quote]
Your sort of contradicting yourself.
Im sure you know that when you use macs or apples or whatever the hell you want to call em, that your using UNIX, which is what linux was based on in the first place and their almost the same thing.
3RA1N1AC
11-10-2003, 03:35 PM
Originally posted by shn@9 November 2003 - 09:25
Your sort of contradicting yourself.
Im sure you know that when you use macs or apples or whatever the hell you want to call em, that your using UNIX, which is what linux was based on in the first place and their almost the same thing.
sigh... you're grasping at straws. i'm not questioning the value of a Unix-based kernel. if you didn't catch the drift of my earlier post, it was that OSX is a good example of a fully formed & configured, user-friendly, Unix-based desktop O.S.
and the kernel alone does not make a system.
Originally posted by 3RA1N1AC+10 November 2003 - 09:35--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (3RA1N1AC @ 10 November 2003 - 09:35)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-shn@9 November 2003 - 09:25
Your sort of contradicting yourself.
Im sure you know that when you use macs or apples or whatever the hell you want to call em, that your using UNIX, which is what linux was based on in the first place and their almost the same thing.
sigh... you're grasping at straws. i'm not questioning the value of a Unix-based kernel. if you didn't catch the drift of my earlier post, it was that OSX is a good example of a fully formed & configured, user-friendly, Unix-based desktop O.S.
and the kernel alone does not make a system. [/b][/quote]
The kernel alone is the "core" of the o.s. Without a kernel the o.s. would cease to function all together. I would say that makes up a system. :P
3RA1N1AC
11-10-2003, 08:38 PM
is Linux a system without GNU?
edit: okay i'll just go ahead and predict that you're gonna say all other software is an embellishment of the system. but realistically, not just technically, a kernel without applications is just about as useful as applications without a kernel.
DarkReality
11-14-2003, 02:11 PM
Shn - I have some words of advice for you. Sometimes, it is better to shut the fuck up and let us think you're an idiot, than to open your fucking proverbial mouth and remove all doubt.
A kernel doesn't make up an OS. Are you trying to say that there is no difference between Windows NT and Windows XP? Wait. Here's another one. Are you trying to say there is no difference between Red Hat Linux, a desktop GUI based Linux, Lindows, a super tweaked user friendly Linux, and Mandrake, a command line Linux?
Now who's contradicting themselves?
The kernel is merely the core; it's no part of the interface or anything else. See, I don't know that much about kernels, but I know what you said is full of shit.
Whatever though dude. Open up your terminal server and try to hack my system if you think you can. ;) I live for reformatting. :D :ph34r:
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.