Windows Vista Vista's true development time

Matt

Senior Member

Joined

May 7, 2007

Messages

861

• Aug 27, 2008

• Thread Author
• #1

http://win7mag.com/2008/08/windows-vista-didnt-take-5-years-to-develop/

I made a post about the development of Windows Vista.

 

K

Kyle

Essential Member

Joined

Feb 7, 2008

Messages

1,634

• Aug 27, 2008

• #2

Well, I wouldn't say it only took two years, but it surely wasn't five years. Of all the work they actually used coming from the end of XP to the start of Vista's RTM, it was probably a little over three years worth of work.

Even though Longhorn was dropped in favor of a code refresh, many things (Like the sidebar) made their way into Vista.

 

Matt

Senior Member

Joined

May 7, 2007

Messages

861

• Aug 28, 2008

• Thread Author
• #3

That's true. But then again, a lot of the thing in Windows 2000 were in Windows XP, so they always build from another OS.

But I agree, it might be more like 2 1/2 years or 3 years for it.

 

V

ViennaX

Fantastic Member

Joined

Aug 31, 2007

Messages

60

• Sep 5, 2008

• #4

Yep, I always though that Vista was based on Longhorn..
But now i know better

 

Matt

Senior Member

Joined

May 7, 2007

Messages

861

• Sep 5, 2008

• Thread Author
• #5

Nope, Server 03 is what it's based on, though you can find some builds of longhorn still out there.

 

B

BeatleManU

Extraordinary Member

Joined

Sep 19, 2008

Messages

10

• Sep 22, 2008

• #6

Longhorn, that would have been a cool name to use, I like it better than Vista, they should use in the future!