Slashdot Log In
Windows 7 Beta Screenshots Leaked
Posted by
timothy
on Tue Sep 23, 2008 03:02 AM
from the they're-prevolutionary dept.
from the they're-prevolutionary dept.
Slatterz writes "Screenshots of what is said to be the next version of Microsoft's Windows operating system have been leaked onto the internet. The ThinkNext.net blog posted a range of screenshots over the weekend which it said represents Windows 7. Overall, the screenshots show a distinctly Vista-like interface, but there is still plenty of time for tweaks and changes to take place."
Related Stories
Submission: Windows 7 beta screenshots leaked by Anonymous Coward
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Sure those are pics? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Sure those are pics? (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Sure those are pics? (Score:5, Informative)
I think the parent was trying to make a joke. The joke was that they were videos but the operating system was going so slow that they only seemed like screenshots.
Parent
Re:Sure those are pics? (Score:5, Interesting)
I only need to use Vista for a little testing every few weeks. I can't use it for 5 minutes without wanting to throw the computer out of my 7th floor window. The interface is very inconsistent. It's also constantly popping up message windows (not just the security Allow/Deny). The mouse pointer doesn't always indicate the system is busy when it's doing something, so I often think it's not responding to my clicks, but I can never tell. Although it's purely a matter of taste, I hate the translucent windows. They're very distracting.
I would never touch Vista if I didn't have to use it occasionally for testing.
Parent
Re:Sure those are pics? (Score:5, Informative)
I hate the new control panel. Silly small little inconsistencies add up:
Before, to change your window theme you could either access it by right clicking on your desktop and going to preferences. Or you could go into your display properties in the control panel. This was a little easier to do for me, because I can reach it with keyboard commands.
I went to turn off Aero in Vista (and thus, free up 500mb of memory). I couldn't find it. I looked all over in control panel. It wasn't there. They removed a lot of the 'basic' desktop preferences away completely from the control panel. Um, hello?
Little inconsistencies like this - where you can access PARTS of your display properties from one thing, and other parts from elsewhere - but not both from the same place. It's pure lunacy. And it's rife throughout the OS.
Parent
Re:Sure those are pics? (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Sure those are pics? (Score:5, Interesting)
Someone in Redmond must have gotten up early for a cofee and to read Slashdot. The pictures on the blog are gone now--he was made to take them down.
Parent
Pointless (Score:5, Insightful)
That said, given that aero was one of the nicer things about Vista, I imagine they'll base the GUI on it but make it look different enough to elminite comparissons between vista.
Ideally they'll strike a balance between the prettyness of vista and the functionality and performance of XP.
Re:Pointless (Score:4, Insightful)
I hope they don't keep that. If microsoft wants to prevent the bad press associated with vista - they may need to make it un-vista-like atleast superficially.
Parent
Re:Pointless (Score:5, Insightful)
Bad press was about performance and lack of support.
What they will do is repackage Vista almost 100% the same except for minor tweaking and GUI gimmicks.
Just that in 2 years time, all the machines on the market will have driver and be fast enough to run vista, so they will be able to claim 'XP level' performance and driver support. They will even claim that they are right on time and boast about their new fast development cycle.
Parent
Re:Pointless (Score:5, Insightful)
Ideally they'll strike a balance between the prettyness of vista and the functionality and performance of XP.
Call me oldfashioned, but I still use XP with the Win2000 interface. Much cleaner and faster to me.
Parent
Re:Pointless (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Pointless (Score:5, Funny)
Call me old fashioned, but I still use punching cards as input. Much purer and reliable to me.
Parent
Re:Pointless (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Pointless (Score:5, Interesting)
Just a note: XP Professional and Vista Enterprise or Ultimate can run a NT subsystem for POSIX, including a fairly complete Unix-like OS called Interix. On XP, look for the "Services For Unix" (SFU) downloads, on Vista it's called "Subsystem for Unix Applications" (SUA).
Although bash isn't included in Interix by default, it's downloadable for free, either manually or via command-line package manager, from http://www.suacommunity.com/ [suacommunity.com] (along with many other tools, including perl, ssh/sshd, svn, and the full GNU build toolchain, to name the ones I use most often). You can run Win32 programs from within an Interix shell as well, so I actually use bash as my primary Windows CLI shell these days.
Parent
Re:Pointless (Score:5, Informative)
Yes. For example, when MS bought Hotmail and changed the servers from FreeBSD to Windows, they used SFU (including ssh and rsync) to do the remote administration. There was a leaked MS memo discussing this, it was on Slashdot back in the day. Here [slashdot.org], in fact.
Parent
Re:Pointless (Score:5, Funny)
What ever happened to that little fella, anyway? He was there one day and then...gone!
Say, I wasn't supposed to feed him, was I?
Parent
Re:Pointless (Score:5, Funny)
And here I was wasting time by clicking Settings on the search bar... :P
Parent
Re:Pointless (Score:5, Funny)
One of my pet peeves about XP is that when I disable the search dog in the normal way, it looks at me, wags it's tail, turns around and walks away.
I just fucking told it I don't want any cute animated characters in my OS, so why should disabling it be animated?
Parent
Re:Pointless (Score:5, Funny)
One of my pet peeves about XP is that when I disable the search dog in the normal way, it looks at me, wags it's tail, turns around and walks away.
I just fucking told it I don't want any cute animated characters in my OS, so why should disabling it be animated?
It used to be worse in the betas. Then if you tried to disable the search dog, Rover, it would just replace him with Cujo who was larger and would sometimes go crazy and chew up your files.
Parent
Re:Wagging Tail (Score:5, Funny)
I seem to recall Microsoft like that idea so much that they paid their former CEO a huge amount of money to look at you, wag his tail, and walk away.
Delicious!
Parent
In case it gets slashdotted (Score:5, Funny)
For those of you who cannot read the article due to slashdotting, here are some highlights:
* It's main color is no longer blue, it's brown
* The default desktop image features a graphical heron
* The start button is now a circular orange button
* Task bars or "Panels" can now be found both at the top of the screen AND at the bottom.
* The new graphical bells and whistles previously referred to as Vista Aero is now called "Beryl".
* Beryl is cooler and runs much smoother than Aero. It requires much less hardware power than Aero.
* The new version of Windows is said to be much more stable and secure than any previous version.
Re:In case it gets slashdotted (Score:5, Informative)
I realise you're taking the piss, but...
Not new to Windows. I'm pretty sure you've been able to do this since Windows 98.
Parent
Re:In case it gets slashdotted (Score:5, Informative)
I know that it's possible in XP because I checked before posting. Unlock the taskbar, and drag the toolbars around the screen. It's not quite as flexible as in Ubuntu, as the start button, clock, notification area and application 'tabs' all have to be on the same bar. But stuff like quick launch, search field... basically anything in the 'Toolbars' menu can be dragged to different parts of the screen.
I think you've been able to do that since 98, as that was when the quick launch bar was introduced. If I'm wrong, then I stand corrected :)
Parent
From what I hear... (Score:5, Insightful)
Look and Feel isn't the problem with Vista.
A todo list would be a far more valuable leak at this point if MS want to change their fortune.
*Yawn*, I think I'll stick with Ubuntu. (Score:5, Interesting)
As far as I can tell, there is nothing that looks really really special that would prompt me to shift off what I'm running now. The fact that they still require malware protection (evidenced by the "we can't detect any anti-virus software, panic" screen), tempts me to question why they haven't focused more energy on securing the system.
The only really interesting thing I saw was the sharing option, "homegroup"? Could be interesting. But overall, nothing revolutionary.
Come to think about it, I remember reading before MS Windows XP came out about all the wonderful things that were going to be in it. Yet, when it did come out, it wasn't a revolution, just more gradual changes.
This promises more of the same.
So, as I said, I'll stay with Ubuntu, because if nothing else, at least it runs on my machine with only 512 MB of ram. (I'm poor, and it works, why would I upgrade?)
Re:*Yawn*, I think I'll stick with Ubuntu. (Score:5, Insightful)
And before Windows 95, they promised a badass new system codenamed Cairo, remember that? It would rival what NeXT and IBM had back then... and people believed that shit. Always keep in mind, Microsoft is a master in overpromise and underdelivery.
Parent
Re:*Yawn*, I think I'll stick with Ubuntu. (Score:5, Funny)
If you cant afford a 2 gig stick of ram you can't afford the power to run a computer. Or food.
Get a job, hippy.
Parent
Re:*Yawn*, I think I'll stick with Ubuntu. (Score:5, Informative)
Have you considered that 512Meg is sufficient for his needs? I also have 512Meg systems running Ubuntu and they're snappy and work well. Heck, my wifes computer (WinXP) has 2Gig and it rarely uses more than 620Meg or so.... That's with both of us logged in.
512Meg for a normal desktop doing a bit surfing email, word processing, spreadsheet and similar "light" task is sufficient. (Clue in the 640k is enough for anyone commenters)
For him, the choice might be between "spending money on something he doesn't really need" and "not spending money at all".
Parent
Re:*Yawn*, I think I'll stick with Ubuntu. (Score:5, Insightful)
I can understand the question in the inverse direction, but this is the strangest concern I've ever seen. Software written for a low end machine wouldn't run faster on a beefed up machine?!?
I must be missing something, care to expand a bit on the issue?
I've always been /for/ the idea on giving developers 5-year old machines so they start to care a bit for performance. Heck, and I am a developer....
Parent
Re:*Yawn*, I think I'll stick with Ubuntu. (Score:5, Insightful)
Dude, we CAN afford it but that's not the point. The point is there's something seriously fucking wrong with the software world if we're at the stage where we need ~ 600 MB of RAM to merely open google.com (vista + drivers + IE).
Parent
Re:*Yawn*, I think I'll stick with Ubuntu. (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:*Yawn*, I think I'll stick with Ubuntu. (Score:5, Funny)
(I'm poor, and it works, why would I upgrade?)
You are the cause of the credit crunch! Support the economy with inappropriate consumerism
Parent
And the one they missed out (Score:5, Funny)
Why do we say 'Leaked'? (Score:5, Insightful)
Everyone knows 'Leak' is Public-Relations-Speak for 'Released'. Now if someone uploaded Windows 7, *THAT* would be a leak. But for anything else than that, why can't we call it what it is?
"Windows 7 Beta Screenshots Released"
Fix'd!
Re:Why do we say 'Leaked'? (Score:4, Funny)
As Groucho would have said: "Windows leaks, but I repeat myself."
Parent
Re:Why do we say 'Leaked'? (Score:5, Informative)
Everyone knows 'Leak' is Public-Relations-Speak for 'Released'. Now if someone uploaded Windows 7, *THAT* would be a leak. But for anything else than that, why can't we call it what it is?
No one said "leaked" in the original blog where the screenshots are. This came from reposts on other blogs and from the Slashdot summary. So if it's "PR" speak, I guess Slashdot's doing the PR work for Microsoft here.
If you want a piece of real news for Windows 7, let me "leak" two your way:
1) Windows 7 will unbundle many bundled apps it used to come with, such as Windows Mail, Photo Gallery, Movie Maker. They will be now offered separately as free downloads on live.com. This means if you use Thunderbird, you never have to install Windows Mail (former Outlook Express) anymore.
2) Windows 2008 and Vista SP1 were based on the same exact source code, packaged with different modules and configuration. Windows 7 will continue this approach, as it will share the exact same source with Windows 2008 R2.
Parent
This is a good thing. (Score:5, Interesting)
With a product that's been stable for a long time (stable in the development sense, not in the 'not crashing' sense) you shouldn't expect any large changes between major versions, and no changes at all between minors. You don't just throw away decades of work to make it different for the sake of it. If there are any differences they're probably only there because the marketing department demanded something obviously different so people would upgrade for the new eye candy. Or, at a push, because some HCI guru has had a brainwave about how to make things radically easier to work with. That's very rare though.
Frankly, the fact it looks very similar is a good thing. It might mean MSFT aren't just doing some window dressing.
It looks just fine (Score:5, Insightful)
Windows 7 will be a hit if they focus on what people have been complaining about, which is largely the sluggish performance - and this is what we should devote our attention to.
I can see they fixed the big problem with Vista... (Score:5, Insightful)
The name. They couldn't figure out how to salvage Vista trademark, so they're just making some relatively minor changes, and releasing it with a new name.
Re:I can see they fixed the big problem with Vista (Score:5, Informative)
Having worked on the Win7 team, I'd say Vista to Win7 felt more like the difference between 2000 and XP. There are a couple new big features (Win7 has multitouch support, BitLocker has been dramatically improved, etc.), a variety of UI tweaks and tricks (the new theme picker, the modified system tray, and more of that sort), and some mostly-behind-the-scenes changes (faster bootup and hibernation on multicore machines, UAC by default now elevates without prompting for Microsoft-signed executables, and a few others).
It *is* an improvement, but could arguably be described as a refined and matured version of Vista, with a couple new features. It's a bigger change, especially from the user perspective, than XP RTM to XP SP2, but much smaller than XP SP2 to Vista.
Parent
Re:I can see they fixed the big problem with Vista (Score:5, Informative)
You mean that if somebody can figure out how to forge a microsoft signature or infect a signed file they can get carte blance access to your machine.
Spoken like someone who has absolutely no concept on how certificates and signing works.
Read up on certificates and signing code, then come back and say you're sorry.
Parent
With a barrel of salt and a pinch of mixed metapho (Score:5, Insightful)
If you are in marketing, and have a dog of a product to sell, a good tactic is to focus attention on the jam that you'll be selling tomorrow. Of course you don't actually have the jam yet, and you're still selling borg-daschund, so you can't just come out and say 'hey we have this radical NEW NEW softwares so much much better than the old tired limp one you are using to wash your spreadsheets'. So you behave like a hose. A drip here. A leak there. And before you know it all the people are clustered around the tiny tiny pastures of green in a desert of grey, saying 'wowser, check that colour scheme out'. Such a pity that they can't click to discover that the buttons don't do anything, but that's someone elses job and Bob is on an extended five year coffee break.
Don't get too excited people. Remember that Microsoft is incapable of shifting an OS in the timescales that we've seen casually prognosticated. By the beginning of 2010 Vista will have hit its sweet spot in terms of hardware, and the drivers will be mature. That would be the worst time of all to introduce Vista2. Look to about 2012 for the next version, once Vista has peaked.
Microsoft are in a monopolists market, there's no need for them to improve Vista in the short term despite the screams of pain from users. And anyway, the way to maintain dominance when you are the market leader is to force changes, so that your competition looks like followers; there's no way back for them.
Executive summary: don't wait, at best this is a distraction. Go make some software. You be the leaders now.
Re:With a barrel of salt and a pinch of mixed meta (Score:5, Insightful)
The wha?
Tip: With ram at around $20 a gig, the people running around screaming that Vista won't run on ten bucks (512meg) of RAM should probably not be considering a $200 OS. It doesnt run on the free toy you get with a happy meal either.
DAMN YOU RONALD MCDONALD... DAMN YOUUUUU!
Parent
Not "leaked" - a deliberate marketing campaign (Score:5, Insightful)
This is Microsoft we're talking about.
This is a deliberate and orchestrated part of Microsoft's marketing campaign that will gradually intensify up until the time when it is foisted onto the general public as the next "most secure version ever" release (together with several increasingly crippled "home" or "business" versions) of the next iteration of WindowsNT (WinNT7).
Do not be fooled by this "leaked" bullshit.
Ribbon revolution (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem of MS is that the desktop metaphor works. You have a desktop, you have icons on it, you click an icon to launch a program. From an UI point of view, there's not much too it. So how do you sell a new cycle of your product when you're unable to offer true new stuff like a history machine or database file system?
These screenshots show nothing but that same ability to launch the same old programs in windows. With one exception: the ribbon (or tabbed toolbars or whatever you want to call it). There even seem to be mini ribbons on things like IE8. This, I think, is an interesting development, as MS seems be be targeting differentiation from Linux and Mac style UIs. I for one think both the old menu style is kind of broken (but easily fixed if the standard lineup is updated to our times) while the new ribbon style also has many problems. Problems are: abandonment of all the sweet we got from IBM Common User Access standards (less consistency throughout applications-but better, optimized usability for single programs you mastered), less screen estate for the content, too many options in view for basic users (by adding lots of icons/functionality to the normal view, it weirdly seems for power users - yet then they remove the menus from standard view to reduce complexity). One of its strongest points is context-changes. The weakest that one app will have ribbon, the next traditional menus, and it's a mess now with two systems. Overall, it has some advantages and disadvantages, and it will be interesting to see MS pursue this idea and use it on their user base, and see what happens. Me, as a View->Toolbars option I'd never object to it, but I'm not sure about defaulting it because I rather dislike CUA being lost. I don't like the mess with the hiding of tradional menus/alt key, perhaps they should go for a single topbar on the desktop, Mac OS style.
Overal, I'm not entirely convinced yet this is a real improvement, or just another alteration to defeat the problem of the 2nd paragraph, which reminds me too much of football teams slightly changing their kits every season, to sell "new" kits to their fan base. But I applaud MS for at least trying to combine it. I guess this is one of the good side-effects of MS becoming less relevant. They will have to innovate.
Re:I'm surprised (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:Interface "changes" (Score:5, Insightful)
They can't really do anything else without pissing off a majority of their customers. Lets face it, if they put in a dock or unified titlebar on the top everyone would lambaste them for copying Apple, not to mention there are 3rd party apps that have the same functionality, which may put them in an antitrust situation.
The only annoying thing about vista UI is UAC, and from the article it appears that they possibly fixed that. I was envious of expose, but then I installed Switcher, and while it may not have the same functionality, I'm content.
The only things I would like out of windows 7 is for it to use less resources, improve UAC, and increase security. The last thing I want is a total UI overhaul or total rewrite making 98% of my programs run slower in emulation mode, or not run at all.
Parent
Re:Ribbon Bars (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah, you're the only one using those applications.
Parent
Re:Vista is Windows 7. (Score:5, Informative)
1. Windows 1
2. Windows 2
3. Windows 3 / 3.10 / 3.11
4. Windows 95
4.1 Windows 98
4.9 Windows ME
Windows NT (Started at 3 to be on parity with regular windows at the time)
3. NT 3.1 / 3.5 /3.51
4. NT 4
5. Windows 2000
5.1 Windows XP
5.2 Windows XP 64 / Server Edition
6. Windows Vista
Parent