Vista won’t be ready for Christmas

I guess if Ubuntu can delay their “Dapper Drake” release by several weeks, then Vista can too. That means no Vista installed on holiday computers though. These are operating systems that are going to be supported for years and years, so it makes sense to get them right. Sounds like MSFT is using the time in part to get security tightened on Vista, which can only be a good thing if you have an internet-connected computer.

27 Responses to Vista won’t be ready for Christmas (Leave a comment)

  1. Spike

    And yet you still get the feeling that since this is an MSFT operating system, there are going to be significant problems within the first six months anyway 🙂 As an aside, I was excited to hear you can dual boot your MacBook Pro or other Intel Mac with XP.

  2. This happens every time MS comes out with an OS. And still they manage to call it “unexpected” in that article. I think it would be more unexpected if they actualy managed to hold the deadline.

    But I am still looking forward too it though..;)

    – ØØ –

  3. Tim

    Yes, certainly unexpected…. 8)
    It just gives others more time to get the competition going, i.e. Writely 😉

  4. I see you missed the midnight bedtime deadline again thoough 🙂

  5. Hey Matt

    I appreciate your professional attitude regarding one of your search competitors. It is refreshing to read your support for MSFT work on improving their product and getting it right. I think both of you should start working more closely together on alot of things, like SERP spam.

    The other day you had requested more spam reports especially ones from Asia that employed English stuffing techniques. I support you and Google for wanting to seriously clean some of this up and I strongly encourage spam reporting as well. I also read how you guys get bogged down in lawsuits over some of this effort to clean up the Internet. That is truly a sad thing. I can understand your hesitancy to attack this growing problem face to face and subsequent relunctance to ban some of the bigger players.

    Have you ever considered working together with other major search engines to combat SERP spam. It seems logical to me that if one penalizes a web page for “attempting to manipulate” your ranking system then the others should as well.

  6. pgaz

    Matt,
    Off topic, but there seems to be a need for a discussion about Supplemental results on this forum like you did with Canonical issues and 301/302 a while back. Those were probably the best and most highly referenced posts you’ve done and forums are still linking to them and talking about them.

    You’ve mentioned many times for webmasters not to be concerned about them but since people are more aware of them in SERPs, it would be useful to discuss them. Specific questions I have are:

    1. What benefit do these results provide the search user. Many seem VERY old copies of web pages that are in many cases obsolete and providing unhelpful information.
    2. Why do supplemental results sometimes appear ahead of normal indexed entries.
    3. Many supplementals are duplicate entries of the same pages (canonical issues).
    4. Will Google ever consider a utility (such as SiteMaps) for webmasters to remove them.

    Thanks!

  7. Broker Boy

    I totally agree with Pgaz.

    I’d like to see a way for webmasters to be able to permeantly remove old / bad pages.

    I’d also like to understand whether or not the %age of a site that is considered supplementary has a ranking impact on the site as a whole.

    If it does ( and this would seem to be logical to me) then being unable to remove old pages becomes a greater problem as a site ages ( as the site evolves and older pages are removed)

    Google has gone through a lot of changes ( algorithimically ) in the past few years this has lead to siteowners making changes to appeal to the current google algorithm. In some cases the original methods used were not ideal but as the google algorithm became more stringent on “webspam” many of these techniques has been replaced by more ethic client orientated approaches.

    For us this has also meant changes in site structure and product fulfillment which has lead to many pages no longer being of use and therefore removed from the site itself. This ultimately left much cleaner higher quality content that google really want to provide.

    However we’re stuck with these old pages resurfacing even after we have removed them using the google remove tool.

    A little more clarification about the status of supplementary pages would help set a lot of minds at rest or at least enable them to recognise that they have a serious LONG-TERM problem.

    Many thanks,

    BB

  8. This is not surprising in the least. I wonder if IE 7 will be released by then.

  9. why is it that every one of the last 30 posts has been hijacked to talk about supplementals?

    As for MS… their recent philosophy has been “it booted? Logo came up? Great ship it.”

    This is good… but they needed to delay it by a LOT longer. They might be adding some great features, but they’re all being built upon crap.

    They need to take the time and re-visit their whole “registry” idea and file system first… You can only patch so many leaks in the ship before you need to give up and just build a new one..

  10. pgaz

    >> why is it that every one of the last 30 posts has been hijacked to talk about supplementals?

    Hijacked is a little strong. There is a lot of speculation and discussion going on, specifically with Big Daddy and supplemental results. It would be nice to open a specific thread on this topic to dispel some of the myths and rumors. I think there will be plenty of focused discussion there.

  11. Oysterbay

    Ryan,

    Maybe volume of hijacks is indicative of some real problems that need to be addressed?

    If webmasters had more information on what was going on I bet the supplemental hijacks would stop.

  12. I agree with pgaz,

    There are lot af very frustrated site owners & webmasters that want to communicate with Google in order to get their sites properly indexed again.

    We appreciate that a fix may be on its way but the magnitude of this problem is such that site owners are desperate for regular updates.

    At present the only way is via this blog and until a thread dedicated to the homepage only + supplementals issue opens up then we have no choice but to post on unrelated threads.

    Matt I hope you can post an update thread even if its only a few words then we can use it to post requests for updates going forward.

    Our site which was perfectly indexed on Big Daddy until the recent problem ( including all pages in correct order!) has still not recovered at all with only homepage indexed.

    Perhaps you would like to use this site (see url aboce) as an example of a “Classic” case as the site had already had its previous canonical problems totally fixed by Big Daddy before disaster struck.

    A button somewhere must have been pressed to effect the change during further tweaking under the hood as the initial Big Daddy DC’s really had worked wonders.

    Many thanks

    Gary (Ellio)

  13. Duane Forrester

    Well, back on topic we go…

    I think MS taking the time to get things right is a good idea. I thikn back to the first laptops we got when XP came out…LOL

    THAT was funny – stuff just locking up or shutting down when you did *fill in the blank randomly*.

    That kind of crap we can all do without. delay the thing by months if you need to Bill, just get it right and usable out of the box please.

    “Mostly harmless” still leaves room for some harm, after all… 😉

  14. Following PlayStation’s lead to defer its PS3 version, MSFT has delayed the release of Vista for the sake of ensuring its code performance, compatibility and security issues.

    I’d rather wait for next year’s release than spend time downloading patches if things go wrong.

  15. Lee

    I’m looking forward to Vista, although lately I have been seriously thinking about making the switch to Ubuntu.

    As far as having to patch, that is just a common thing now adays. Every major OS out there today requires patches. OS X? Patches. Linux? Patches. XP/Vista? Patches. Personally, I find my systems run great when they are all patched up. Current XP patches are pretty infrequent, about the same as OS X.

    I’m sure I will continue to zig zag between XP/Vista and Ubuntu for a while yet, but I do see myself going Ubuntu eventually… it’s not a matter of if, but when…

    Lee J

  16. I’m not a huge MSFT fan, but as a webmaster I am almost forced to use MSFT product to ensure compatibility. I’m glad they delayed this now instead of having hundreds of thousands of computers go onsale and have virii within the first few days creating a Y27 episode…

    As for Ubuntu, I played around with it for a while. Pretty nifty and could do some damage to MSFT if the community gets together (like Spread Firefox) and starts spreading before the Vista release… I just don’t see that happening though.

  17. Mr. Cutts deserves credit for being a gentleman. (Steve Ballmer, take note!)

  18. that’s what I learned the hared way about ms over the last 10 years: don’t touch anything until it’s at least 2.0 …

  19. Ben

    I have the feeling that “pgaz” is posting under his name and then under another name to try to give himself credibility….

    But anywho, quoting: “They need to take the time and re-visit their whole “registry” idea and file system first… You can only patch so many leaks in the ship before you need to give up and just build a new one.. ”

    That’s exactly what Vista is – a whole new ship – and the major reason for the six years between releases. They rewrote the kernel and built it upon a different mindset.

  20. pgaz

    >>I have the feeling that “pgaz” is posting under his name and then under another name to try to give himself credibility….

    Ben,
    Take your meds and contain your conspiracy paranoia. I’ve only posted here under one name.

  21. Sounds like the retailers are going to be upset because this will impact their holiday sales.

  22. kneukm03

    So… this is totally off topic, but I have just experienced the weirdest Google error ever. I did a search for my name, and every result is listed twice. For example, the site that is result one (and has been for months) is now 1 & 2. Site that was 2 is now 3 & 4. No difference in the listings. It’s like that on down through the pages. Who the heck would I report this to and is it even something that the engineering team cares about? I’ve only seen this on my name, no other searches, I’m just wondering if it’s some new error creeping in.

  23. Gen

    What do you make of this site? It looks like a search honeypot, but is has no outbound links whatsoever.

    http://www.ascentone.com

  24. Ian, I did miss my deadline. My wife is out of town this week, so I’ve been staying up too late..
    Matt

  25. My wife is out of town this week, so I’ve been staying up too late..

    Good, cuz this place is getting a little sleepy, tell us some stories about a day at the plex? Anyone ever walk around with a video camera (scoble style) there? That would be pretty cool.

  26. I saw some demos for Vista this week at Mix06 and I must say I was pretty impressed with the interface. I also received a copy of Vista (February CTP) as swag, I just need a guinea pig computer to load it up on 😉

  27. I see you missed the midnight bedtime deadline again thoough .
    Chris

css.php