Sorry your browser is not supported!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/zd/152805

I always thought that basing Longhorn on .NEt was a bad idea and apparently MS agrees with me.

interesting. they shouldnt release another OS until .NET is fully sorted and an OS can be built on it, imho

altho .net may not be stable enough to build an OS on top of yet (if this article is true) the programmatic advances in it vs. its predecessors is quite awesome

i await more details

The entire article is from annoymous 'insiders', sorry but I have as many issues with the validity of that articles sources as I do with Killzone II being rendered on the PS3 after viewing the High-Quality video a few minutes ago.

Sorry but I think both are just wishful thinking.

.NET Framework 2.0 Beta 1 is fine, the recent problems have been with Beta 2. What has many developers eye-brows cocked about this is that Microsoft have admited they have no idea what the problem is.

What makes me seriously doubt the main validity is Microsoft Windows (.NET) 2003.

I don't see anything wrong with .NET 1.0, 1.1, or 2.0 .. however there are subsiquent versions that are causing problems.

1.1 SP1 for example crashes many 1.1 Applications.
2.0 Beta 2 crashed many 2.0 Beta 1 Applications.

The problem isn't so much how stable .NET is, but how stable it is in the hands of Microsoft. These versioning difference problems, is the main hurdle they have to over-come.

Still if what was said was true, then surely the WinFX SDK would not rely on .NET? The lastest CTP only came out a matter of a month ago.

if its true then ill have to snicker a little good on ya billy.