I just reviewed Mr. Pirillo’s response to my views on his take of Windows Longhorn Preview Build (5048). I was also reflecting on my choice of words and my friend Fernando’s response to the post I made about Chris. Yes, I was harsh, too harsh and I apologize for that, but calling someone’s work $#!@ was taking it a bit too far I still believe. The point remains that Mr. Pirillo’s comment was way out of context in terms of the situation. Microsoft has made it definitely clear that build 5048 is not what you think it is or suppose to be yet.
There is some disappointment within the Windows community over aspects of Longhorns value, specifically in areas such as the key pillars and a murky understanding of what the fundamentals are. I would prefer if Chris categorized his commentary within that context, this would obviously mean his frustration is with software, not hardware or better yet a lack in deeper evangelism of the key aspects of Longhorn that are significant to the typical Windows users. As for Paul Thurrott’s criticism of build 5048 I would say the same too, but his criticism was specifically towards the development process itself and not the end result.
But Chris, you seem to watch a 5-minute demo presentation and jumped to a doomed final conclusion of what Longhorn is all about. This is where constructive criticism and feedback comes in and it is clear that Longhorn is ready for that. Its definitely not for all Windows Enthusiast, but it does give the appropriate users the chance to gather their thoughts, carefully critique the OS and take notes in time for the beta.
Most of you would say I am too confident in what is looking more like vaporware by the builds, but only good can come from this. The hurry it system has been obviously phased out at Microsoft and I do believe they are looking at the end-to-end scenarios from all angles. The true meaning of Longhorn has not yet been revealed but is being crescendoed slowly but surely. There is a direction for Longhorn and it will be revealed in the right places at the right time. It has started so far with the hardware (not as clear as we all would like it to be, but it’s a “start”), next up is beta 1, PDC 2005 and then Beta 2.
So there is definitely opportunities for users to offer there input into the development process and at the same time make a positive impact. Microsoft is definitely listening and its up to us to know when and where to apply our input. As for developers and users, no one takes priority over the other, it is up to both parties to create the immersive experiences that Longhorn is all about, so I think that comment there again is biased and inconsiderate about the users should be at the very forefront. Software development is what runs Microsoft and knowing how to write code, ok Chris, just remember that.
So once again you are not thinking before you put cursor to electronic paper, you simply jump the fences and make ridiculous accusations about a Company you clearly have no understanding of. Your idea of Windows might not be necessarily the same idea as every Tom, Dick, Harry and Mary Jane. You speak in a tone that correlates to the same dictatorship messages that are derived from the Open Source Community.
The propriety of Microsoft and the Open Source Community does not mix, and my understanding of everything you have said relates specifically to making Windows Longhorn open source, which is basically answered with HELL NO, it ain’t gonna happen!