Back in early December 2005, Microsoft publicly announced that it planned to ship a code-complete version of Windows Vista internally by the end of 2005, setting the stage for a future code-complete Community Technical Preview (CTP) build that the company would issue to testers. However, sources at the software giant now tell me that the company didn't make this milestone, and Microsoft now plans to ship a code-complete Windows Vista version internally by January 31, 2006 instead.
For its part, Microsoft says that Windows Vista is still on schedule. "[Corporate vice president] Amitabh [Srivastava] said in the November conference call that Microsoft would have the majority of features code complete by the end of 2005 and integrated into the product in early 2006," a Microsoft representative told me. "The development team is right on track with that guidance."
What's odd is that the next CTP--now due on February 17, 2006, according to my sources--will be based on a code branch that predates the code complete version. That suggests that the next CTP might not be code-complete as previously expected, though it will likely to include virtually all of the features Microsoft intends to ship in Windows Vista. Microsoft confirmed today that the next CTP will be issued in February, but didn't corroborate the specific February 17 date.
As I write this, Microsoft is testing Window Vista build 5293 internally. This means that the next CTP build could be in the 5300 range as Microsoft is currently expected to fork the Windows Vista code base for the February CTP on January 23, over four weeks before the planned February 17 ship date.
I just really think Vista is going to be delayed to early 2007 at the last minute. All these new APIs and major changes to the structure of Windows need a lot of thorough testing, and if they're canceling beta 2 and missing feature-complete milestones, I don't see how this thing can be considered on track for an end-of-year release. I'm already disappointed that what we see now is the final UI (in my opinion, the interface is really not much different from Windows XP...it's still the same ol' Windows with blurry window edges).
Vista has been an interesting story for Microsoft. Employee blogs like Mini-MSFT sprung up, articles were written revealing the internal restart in 2004, and the image of management at Microsoft was shattered. The engineering talent is there; the problem is management and the bloat of a company that won't trim the fat.
Because of this slow development cycle, Vista is offering lame-duck versions of features that OS X Tiger famously offered last year in April. And some of Vista's features are catching up to things offered way back in the first versions of OS X at the start of the decade. Not to start a flamewar--just pointing out how behind Microsoft's management has put themselves as they run off chasing Google's tail. Ugh.
There's no way to disagree with bonch's comments. Microsoft is moving forward, but it is sorely lagging behind. The software giant's short-sighted struggle with Google's services (and rumors of services) has it chasing its own tail. I'm afraid Vista will debut as a "catch-up" operating system. And late, to boot.
A truly secure Windows operating system would benefit everyone. Let's hope that's what Vista is, otherwise bonch is right...it's just window dressing (no pun intended).
Windows XP is relatively secure now if used with DEP turned on and a no-exec bit CPU.
AS LONG AS
The user at all pays any attention to security.
So Windows, as is, is pretty good considering it has to be all things to all people all the time. Convenient, easy to use, work with everything, allow everything, be everything. Microsoft has worked a near miracle.
But one has to at least tip one's hat to security to remain secure.
Register
