How long did it take for the OS to be completed?

Discussion in 'Windows 64bit' started by Guest, May 11, 2005.

  1. Guest

    Guest Guest

    I'm doin a project on microsoft and i wanted to coment on how long it has
    taken for you to complete the project, i know you have been doing it for a
    long time, but i wanted to a real time frame...

    Thanks guys
     
    Guest, May 11, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Jupiter Jones [MVP], May 11, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Guest

    Guest Guest

    Sorry, i didn't specify which OS, i was meaning the 64-bit Win Xp edition

    Cheers,
     
    Guest, May 11, 2005
    #3
  4. Guest

    Guest Guest

    To complete WHICH project? To write the initial version of Windows NT
    (which is now what we call Windows)? (answer: 1989 through 1993)

    Or to port the OS to from x86 to the x64 platform? (answer: almost as long
    as it took to write the OS to begin with, but the work was done in spurts, by
    different collections of teams, at different times). By the time the x64
    came along, there was a lot more that was a part of "Windows" than there was
    back in the days of NT V3.1.

    P
     
    Guest, May 11, 2005
    #4
  5. Being that he is posting in the Windows 64bit General newsgroup it
    should be pretty obvious he meant Windows XP Pro x64 and/or Windows 2003
    Server x64.... After all those are the only two x64 Windows OSes out
    right now!
     
    Nicholas D. Ford, May 11, 2005
    #5
  6. Ben,

    Initial development work for the x64 product releases stated at the same
    time as the Windows Server 2003 SP1 work - as this was the code based used
    to develop the x64 products from.
    This work started in approximately April 2003 with some early x64 code being
    available at the Windows Hardware Developers Conference (WinHEC) in May
    2003. There were significant shifts in the development cycle during this as
    the Windows XP SP2 with all of the security changes/enhancements became a
    higher priority piece of work and then all of this work was needed to be
    back ported into the Server 2003 SP1/x64 codebase etc.

    Using the initial project kick off date to release date is not an accurate
    metric for the development cycle of a massive piece of software engineering
    as the resources available are finite and as illustrated above and
    priorities change etc.

    --

    Regards,

    Mike
    --
    Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]

    This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
    rights

    Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions, please use these
    newsgroups
     
    Mike Brannigan [MSFT], May 11, 2005
    #6
  7. Guest

    Antoine Leca Guest

    Quick question: Itanium is banned here?


    Antoine
     
    Antoine Leca, May 11, 2005
    #7
  8. Not at all. Just not any of us regulars using it. ;) And, I might add, it is
    no longer supported for client class machines.
     
    Charlie Russel - MVP, May 11, 2005
    #8
  9. Guest

    Antoine Leca Guest

    Thanks, it confirms what I thought (_all_ what I thought.)

    I was checking if I had missing something "obvious" ;-).


    Antoine
     
    Antoine Leca, May 11, 2005
    #9
  10. Guest

    MHPNW STAFF Guest

    Project seem's to be still ongoing.... ( Just A Joke) ....LOL

    Dennis
     
    MHPNW STAFF, May 11, 2005
    #10
  11. Guest

    Antoine Leca Guest

    That's funny that you take the pain to comment about the innaccuracy of this
    metric in this case. After all, it is _only_ two years.

    Yes, I know, the straight port of NetBSD was MUCH more quick (but see
    below), yet I do not feel it could be compared at all, both as NetBSD IS
    designed to be highly portable, and the total thing is quite a bit much more
    small as NT5.2 (both XP+2003.)

    But when I compare to the _other_ big port to x86-64 architecture, namely
    Linux, we are again in the same kind of numbers: they began much earlier,
    around mid-2001; but the real meat was delivered in the second middle of
    2003, and the "stability" was not here til 2004. I know it has MUCH to do
    with the real release of the hardware (and my hat down here to the guys who
    developped using only simulators and similar things.)

    FreeBSD also now delivers something workable (and for some months now,
    perhaps 8 months, since the release of 5.3 in fact), yet it is my impression
    they hit the "market" with a significant delay after Linux, so that they
    probably had taken profit of the experience of the colleague (nothing wrong
    here.) But again, if you compare with the date of the release of Frank van
    der Linden's work, June 2001 (which was followed on FreeBSD side as well),
    we are again speaking about years.

    Also, while NetBSD kernel worked on the simulator as soon as June 2001, it
    was not before December 2004 (source:http://www.netbsd.org/Ports/amd64/), so
    3 years ½, that NetBSD officially shipped with suppport for this platform.


    I am not sure you have to be shy, guys. Just avoid the blooby traps of the
    counter-marketing guys (from both sides ;-)).


    Antoine
     
    Antoine Leca, May 11, 2005
    #11
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.