Windows Server 2003 Delayed

The general release of Microsoft’s Windows Server 2003 has been pushed back until at least April and could easily slip past that timeframe.

The wait for .NET keeps getting longer. The general release of Microsoft’s Windows Server 2003 has been pushed back until at least April and could easily slip past that timeframe. As of this writing, the formerly named Windows .NET Server 2003 was entering the Release Candidate 2 stage. Microsoft products typically go through several RCs before being sent to manufacturing; sometime after that, the product hits the streets.

One Microsoft contractor said that Windows Server 2003 would be released in April, “only if everything goes perfectly.” Windows Server 2003 was originally scheduled for release last year. That time frame slammed into the brick wall of the Trustworthy Computing initiative, which halted all work on products while developers were given additional security training and product code was examined and re-tuned to eliminate vulnerabilities. Microsoft has repeatedly touted Windows Server 2003 as being “secure out of the box.” Initially, however, Trustworthy Computing was to push back Windows Server 2003 only until the end of 2002. RC1, the first “near-completion” release, was released last July. To sign up for RC2, visit

About the Author

Keith Ward is the editor in chief of Visual Studio Magazine.

comments powered by Disqus

Reader Comments:

Sat, Feb 1, 2003 MegaXMan Palestine

Well, It's an old trick of microsoft.
I was certained that microsoft would not publish WIN .NET at the given time.
Microsoft likes to set fire around it's products so everybody gathers around, waiting for the product to be released then BOOOOM "You gotta wait for a little longer fans ... we've been working on it"

The old man (microsoft) getting harmless ... they only thing that makes this company stands for longer is NO COMPETITION

I like Microsoft though (i'm MCSD certified) there garbage (products) make things easier for us. we just need everybody to cooperate and became one huge company. at that point on time programmers will have less hard time and more to give .


Tue, Jan 14, 2003 John Long Island

Man, people will frigging whine about anything. If they released it before it was ready, you'd be screaming bloody murder about all of the uncorrected glitches.

Mon, Jan 13, 2003 techone madrid - spain


check this out, i will show u the future, start studying and upgrading right now:
... (2003), 2007 64 bit Ed.,
windows 2011 128 bit Ed.,
2014 window mainframe Ed.
2018 windows how cares Ed.
2022 Windows R.I.P.
100 services packs included... still 50 %
bug free.

2222: Bill Gates (inmortal) comes back and presents window zero Ed. (0 bugs)


Mon, Jan 13, 2003 techone madrid - spain

Come on folks, i am still studying for my mcse 2k - only need the 70-216 exam...
Yet to do another upgrade exam (2) for the .net shit. Rather do sun solaris 8:
2 exams and there are always easy upgrade exam´s to newer versions that take awhile to expire...
Guess that 2k3 shit will release after summer 2003, also exchange 2010, sql server 2011 etc bla bla

Mon, Jan 13, 2003 joe certification louisiana

i guess they need to get the "first" service pack out before they release windows 2003 server!

Sat, Jan 11, 2003 Norm FL

I'd rather them wait till 2005. Go ahead do a couple service packs before you even release it. Hell, we're still working on our Windows 2000 conversion...

Sat, Jan 11, 2003 bzoid Moscow

gmmmm no surprise, nobody could understand what is .Net? so it was a big trouble 2 make people 2 pay 4 a feature that nobody can understand, even developers, any way Unix is better

Fri, Jan 10, 2003 american usa

M$ F***ing lied! I put Windows XP Professional on my computer terminal, but i still can't F***ing FLY!?!?!?

Fri, Jan 10, 2003 Chris Canada

Ho, hum - another waiting period. So, here we go again another delay with more buggy software released under time constraints when the deadline for release gets closer. More problems...stay with Windows 2000.

Fri, Jan 10, 2003 Over Cooked South Carolina

They had computers in Alabama in 1991?!?! AND they ran Windows?!?!

Fri, Jan 10, 2003 P Florida


Fri, Jan 10, 2003 MCSE 4,2000, .Net? Canada

If it is Delayed to fix security bugs that is OK. But it is delayed for Product price increase due to predicted market growth so it's cheap trick. Why Microsoft always rushs in announcing their new products release dates ?

Fri, Jan 10, 2003 Anonymous Anonymous

MS is doing better job with Windows 2K and up than it was with 9x and NT. I would rather wait, but get stable product. Bugs will always be there as in any other software including UNIX, Linux, MF worlds.

Fri, Jan 10, 2003 Dick Boston area

Microsoft has delayed every OS owing to last minute needed changes. It is common for them to find new bugs in the just changed code. Why should .net 2003, I mean server 2003, I mean NT5.1 server be any different.

Fri, Jan 10, 2003 Chris Woburn MA

What about my soon to be 2000 cert credentials are they going to threaten to take those away too?

Fri, Jan 10, 2003 Bob Loveland, OH

Microsoft OS are always delayed, which should be good for us as they are making an effort to roll-out an excellent product. With the problems we face in today's world, making their software bug free and secure should be on everybody's wish list. I am tired of seeing products rolled out with bugs!!

Fri, Jan 10, 2003 King Middle Earth

I think the solution to the wordwide Microsoft problem is to force Microsoft to also pay for their own software like everbody else. They will then be audited by a worldwide consortium or organization to see that they are legal. The money will then be used to either bring the prices down of the software in the form of rebates or something. Microsoft will then be forced to make the prices cheaper the upgrade paths better; more service packs + support periods longer, or pay billions for their own software.

Fri, Jan 10, 2003 Michael Cronin Virginia

I'm glad that Microsoft has chosen to delay the release of this OS. I've worked with allot of their operating systems starting with Windows 3.1 and have seen Microsoft ship products that are insecure and I spent countless hours locking them down. When Windows 2000 shipped it was a big jump from 4.0 and I was amazed at the changes that took place. Since I signed up as a beta tester for Win2k, and tested the OS before its release I could not wait until its rollout. Now I’ve completely rolled it out to our entire organization. So I'm hoping that Windows .NET or what ever they chose to call it is even better. It will be released some day, and if they need to work on it until 2004 so be it. As long as it is more secure and bug free out of the box.

Most bugs are introduced when the combination of third party software is introduced to the operating system. Therefore, if Microsoft can understand that concept it will only make the OS better, and with the release of 2000, they seem to have cornered the market on that concept by incorporating driver signatures and the recovery console.

Fri, Jan 10, 2003 Jon P London

No surprises there then, no wonder people get p***ed off with Microsoft... Yet another delayed O/S... NT4, Win2k, Win95, Win 98, Win ME, XP... and now .NET.... This is just one more in the series of dissappointing O/S's

Fri, Jan 10, 2003 Alan Scotland

So what if it runs late, as long as the product is fairly robust, if that meens more testing, so be it. I think MS are going along the right line. I like the idea of consolodating there products, the current suit of servers is v confusing.

Fri, Jan 10, 2003 Wilhelm Tell Switzerland

How does this continous delay fit into the MSF (Microsoft Solution Framework) model, where Microsoft teaches that you always have to stick to the promised delivery date in a project, no matter what. As always, they don't practise what they preach.

Thu, Jan 9, 2003 King Middle Earth

Microsoft lost all there vision; so now they go in any direction ! Thinking that it is strategy.

Thu, Jan 9, 2003 seth Belgium

so... the SP1 for windows server 2003 and the first bug fixes will be delayed to ? ;o)

Thu, Jan 9, 2003 Beebe Hawaii

Does this mean we will have to get yet another MCSE? I give, I'm going to UNIX. See ya.

Thu, Jan 9, 2003 Andy North Carolina

Isn't everything with Microsoft delayed...
Tell me something we didn't already know.

Thu, Jan 9, 2003 Chuck Chicago

Is it .NET Server or is Windows 2003 Server? Please help me out of this confusion.

Thu, Jan 9, 2003 T Alabama

Of course we aren't surprised Mate! It's the Microsoft way. I've worked with NT/2000 since the first beta test in 1991 and it's been the same story for years. You know why the first release was NT 3.1? Because Windows was at version 3.1. Nice reason, huh?

Thu, Jan 9, 2003 Ed MA - USA

Didn't Microsoft aready name an OS after a release year (Windows 2000). Windows 2003 name will probably change before the final release. Windows .NET was alright. But the name that would make sense would be "Windows XP Standard Server ", "Windows XP Enterprise Server" and "Windows XP Web Server".

Thu, Jan 9, 2003 Techi Anonymous

naming an OS by calender is not appropriate it should not be shiped a vehicle model only version should change. What I meant is if it is a Network OS it will remain so ... otherwise they started with client os and ...

Thu, Jan 9, 2003 Al CA - USA

They can always fix some of the bugs with another Windows server in 2004/2005...
They need to stay in business!

Thu, Jan 9, 2003 JS Virginia

I just think it's bold they named it 2003, that really gives them a deadline.

Thu, Jan 9, 2003 AW Las Vegas, NV

This would only be surprising if it were announcing the on-time release of a relatively bug-free Microsoft product.

Thu, Jan 9, 2003 ichsnoo NSW, Australia

Is anyone actually surprised?

Add Your Comment Now:

Your Name:(optional)
Your Email:(optional)
Your Location:(optional)
Please type the letters/numbers you see above

Redmond Tech Watch

Sign up for our newsletter.

I agree to this site's Privacy Policy.