4 ms·

This is one of the crappiest articles I've ever read. This tripe doesn't belong on HN! The author assumes that most people will want to use XPM to run 3d-inte

This is one of the crappiest articles I've ever read. This tripe doesn't belong on HN! The author assumes that most people will want to use XPM to run 3d-intensive applications and games, and require access to all their peripherals. Ludicrous. The author also assures us that there will ZERO 3d support on the VM. Maybe not, but if he were at all familiar with Parallels and VMWare Fusion, he would know that this has been done and Microsoft could do it as well. He accuses Microsoft of "FUD" while simultaneously refusing to call Vista by its proper name, instead calling it "Broken OS". Hypocrite! He assumes that everyone else "thinks" that XPM will be some magical transparent layer over 7 that most users won't know about and will magically run all their old applications. He also implicitly accuses Microsoft of misrepresenting XPM in this way. Bullshit! Microsoft has done no such thing. They make clear that this is just a Virtual PC with some Coherence/Unity like functionality, not some magical pixie dust integrated into 7. Lastly, he completely ignores the potential long term ramifications of this. This is just V1; Microsoft WILL eventually move to a Hyper-V based system in which all previous version of the Windows OS will be transparently virtualized and, if possible, share the hardware. At some point, it WILL be magic pixie dust sprinkled in the operating system, in which your old apps continue to "just work" while Microsoft is finally free to do major housecleaning of the Windows internals. So, I rest my case. This article is CRAP!

ableal 17y ago
Well, I tossed it in because I was getting a bit sick of the twitter pr0n flu videos, and thought that a discussion of MS joining the desktop virtualization party would be interesting. Of course, even for TheInq, the author stands out for sporting a somewhat rottweilerish style, which does get a rise out of his readers. Note that he also got some good flack in his comments. Apart from the scornful hostile tone, I don't think there's much that's technically inaccurate - it's just put in the worst possible light, like an attack lawyer would do. Which isn't really that bad: we can use a bit of critical thinking about what can realistically be had out of desktop virtualization, for what markets (and role vs. 'any browser + cloud apps').

ableal 17y ago

Well, I tossed it in because I was getting a bit sick of the twitter pr0n flu videos, and thought that a discussion of MS joining the desktop virtualization party would be interesting. Of course, even for TheInq, the author stands out for sporting a somewhat rottweilerish style, which does get a rise out of his readers. Note that he also got some good flack in his comments. Apart from the scornful hostile tone, I don't think there's much that's technically inaccurate - it's just put in the worst possible light, like an attack lawyer would do. Which isn't really that bad: we can use a bit of critical thinking about what can realistically be had out of desktop virtualization, for what markets (and role vs. 'any browser + cloud apps').