[ILUG] Longhorn

[Bryan O'Donoghue]

nadir at compsoc.nuigalway.ie wrote:

> is it not a case that microsoft are playing the catch up game, posts here seem
> to be saying MS are running miles ahead of linux,
> but we already have xfs and reiser is also being developed.
> all these linux technologies are extremely scalable, something I suspect
> longhorn will fail at, it will more than likely run slower and require more
> hardware. This has been the case with every windows release to date.
> where as I can run xfs quite hapily on my P3 at home.

Oh please...

I read some ludicrous hardware spec for Longhorn requirements, that I
thought was a parody of incremental Windows resource bloat... until I
realised the source for the hardware spec... was the beast itself.

/searches {ponderously, sans WinFS}

http://www.microsoft-watch.com/article2/0,1995,1581842,00.asp

[quote]
Microsoft is expected to recommend that the "average" Longhorn PC
feature a dual-core CPU running at 4 to 6GHz; a minimum of 2 gigs of
RAM; up to a terabyte of storage; a 1 Gbit, built-in, Ethernet-wired
port and an 802.11g wireless link; and a graphics processor that runs
three times faster than those on the market today.
[/quote]

Dual core 6ghz, 2 gb RAM, 1TB Hdd ?

Somehow, if I were buying a pretty meaty DB/Web Server as a Pizza box,
tomorrow, I'd be grateful, of such a spec.

Does granny Gates, really need all this to run LookOut and become a spam
host circa Longhorn release in 2006 ?

--

Best Regards,
Bryan