Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Windows Operating Systems Software Microsoft

Looking at Longhorn 793

ShinyPlasticBag writes "Paul Thurrott has an excellent preview of Longhorn milestone five over at his Supersite for Windows. It looks like this may be Microsoft's equivalent to OS X -- the next version of Windows will have a 3D accelerated desktop and other graphical goodies. In addition to this, it will include a journaling file system, so us mere mortals can enjoy what Linux Geeks have had for years."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Looking at Longhorn

Comments Filter:
  • Filing system (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Neophytus ( 642863 ) on Sunday May 04, 2003 @04:08PM (#5876172)
    In addition to this, it will include a journaling file system, so us mere mortals can enjoy what Linux Geeks have had for years.

    The big question is if like NTFS it will be proprietary. Even after years of reverse engineering the NTFS nut still hasnt been cracked, and if FAT32 support is not included then people may be put off from dualbooting longhorn and another OS.
  • OSX... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by heldlikesound ( 132717 ) on Sunday May 04, 2003 @04:12PM (#5876205) Homepage
    It's funny to think that in two years Windows might be where OSX is now. Of course, OSX will be two years older at that point as well, and if 10.3 is any indication, Longhorn will not be enough to topple OSX, even if they stopped developing OSX now, (not in marketshare of course, just pure goodness).
  • Overhead? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by neuro.slug ( 628600 ) <neuro__@hotmaPOLLOCKil.com minus painter> on Sunday May 04, 2003 @04:14PM (#5876220)

    The Microsoft Windows Longhorn desktop is being drawn in a completely different way than all previous versions. Every window will have its own, full window-sized surface to draw to. The desktop will be dynamically composed many times a second from the contents of each window. The goal for desktop composition is to enable compelling new visual effects for both the Windows user interface and for applications created by third-party developers shown on increasingly affordable high-density displays.

    And people say the GUI in Mac OS X has a lot of overhead? Correct me if I am wrong, but this sounds like a big drain on the cpu, agp bus, and graphics card.

  • Re:Please... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 04, 2003 @04:15PM (#5876231)
    I'm similarly opposed to the 'eye-candy for the sake of eye-candy' line that Microsoft seem so fond of. But having a 3d accelerated desktop is far more than that. Even if it _looks_ exactly the same, you should expect a performance boost, since much of the drawing work is now being done in the GPU, rather than your CPU. And if you do happen to like eye candy, you get it basically for free (computationally).
  • by httpamphibio.us ( 579491 ) on Sunday May 04, 2003 @04:17PM (#5876243)
    Apart from this image [cofc.edu] the new trend of making next generation operating systems which have giant interfaces really worries me. I always felt the advantage of running 1600x1200 (or 3200x1200 in my case) was to have more workspace, not a higher resolution interface. When OSX came out I installed it on my iBooks, then immediately uninstalled it primarily due to it's absolutely intrusive interface (secondarily due to lack of support for the software I was using at that time. My PC recently suffered an HD crash and I couldn't find my Windows 2000 Pro CD so I installed XP (yeah, I tried linux... Redhat to be exact, and the out-of-the-box ceased to function after two reboots), and came across a similar issue... the interface is too big, too audacious, and clamors for attention.

    In Vegas the person with the biggest, brightest, flashiest sign will make the most money... but when it comes to OSs small, fast, and unobtrusive is the key, too bad nobody else sees that.
  • This beats me (Score:4, Insightful)

    by fredrikj ( 629833 ) on Sunday May 04, 2003 @04:23PM (#5876292) Homepage
    Not to bash Microsoft in general, but the dialog in this screenshot [winsupersite.com] demonstrates incredibly retarded user interface design.

    "OK" to terminate the application.
    "Cancel" to debug it.

    ???

    And this isn't new either, AFAIK the same dialog has been around since the Windows 9x days.
  • These sorts of questions apply to all devices, in the end.

    Take a look at your car. Do you really think it's design makes it much more aerodynamic, or do you think it's just the same eye-candy?

    What about the paint? Paint jobs are pretty silly things, by your logic. They cost money and all they do is act as eye-candy.

    What about the hubcaps, the flashing lights on the interior that never serve any real purpose, the leather, the...

    The point is: People like things that glitz.
  • by goombah99 ( 560566 ) on Sunday May 04, 2003 @04:27PM (#5876333)
    Why do you need a 3d desktop. other than the actual legitimate uses of 3d for presentation of data there are what one might call psycic ergonomics. By this I mean clues and hinting that communicate to your brain things you need to know. A good example from the 2-d days was the way a macintosh icon would have little tracers radiate out form the application to the main window when you double clicked it. like it sort of popped out of the applications icon. IN the modern OSX the genie effect (or scale effect) has much the same effect: when you minimize an open window your brain registers where it was parked without you having to give it much conscious thought.

    3d effect play simmilar roles. the tranparency and shadowing of foregroung and backrgound windows is something you immediatly grasp abd grasp without think about it becuase your brain already knows how po process those clues. like wise throbbing or size changing 3d icons can be subtle ways to grab your attention. Dialog boxes that drop down out of windows again clue you into what window they are refering to.

    now done wrong they could also be wizbang distractions. This is of course what has always distinguished say apple products from others. Apple tends to follow a consisten and understated GUI that just directs your eye where it needs to go.

    3d effects can clrify what is or is not a button, and even what you are supposed to do with it (twist, rock, slide, press)

    no you dont need 3d. heck you dont need a gui. Dos didnt have it even though it did have a graphics mode.

  • None of the things you mention about cars get in the way of, or slow down driving.

    The things humming mentioned get in the way of computing.
  • Parental Control (Score:5, Insightful)

    by selderrr ( 523988 ) on Sunday May 04, 2003 @04:32PM (#5876375) Journal
    New parental controls let parents determine when and how kids use the computer.
    This is one of the things I truly hate about windows : control, control, control !

    They drive it so far that a parent (me) has to control how kids use the computer. That's insane. We have 1 iMac at home for our kids (age 10,7 and 5) and they have to figure outTHEMSELVES when and how to use it. If they have a quastion, they can ask away. If they have a fight, i turn off the machine. It took 3 weeks to find a balance, and now they manage perfectly. No control needed.

    Control is like a handbrake on kids efforts to solve conflicts. You'de be amazed how intelligent the remarksof a 5year old can be if he is forced to find his own words. Quite often, he's capable of handling his big sister better than I ever could !
  • Re:Bass ackwards? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Chicane-UK ( 455253 ) <chicane-uk@@@ntlworld...com> on Sunday May 04, 2003 @04:39PM (#5876417) Homepage
    Well the majority of computer users are still susceptible to all the thrills & spills that electricity can throw at you. Surges, spikes, and powercuts are still common place - and not everyone has a UPS under their desk (despite their low cost these days).

    Plus, and lets be honest, Windows isn't THAT solid still.. whilst I think Windows XP is one of the best systems Microsoft have ever produced, I have still seen a few random resets and blue screens since using it. I think journalling filesystems definately still have a place.
  • Again? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by -tji ( 139690 ) on Sunday May 04, 2003 @04:44PM (#5876463) Journal
    "Windows Longhorn will offer sweeping changes over its predecessors and be the most significant release of Microsoft's desktop operating system since Windows 95"

    Isn't this how they describe EVERY iteration of their desktop OS's?

    The article goes on to describe a bunch of features that would make little or no difference to most users.

    Regardless of what you think of their technology, you have to be amazed that they can get so many people to pay ever-increasing amounts of money to "upgrade" their systems to the latest OS.
  • by the eric conspiracy ( 20178 ) on Sunday May 04, 2003 @04:51PM (#5876509)
    and charge an arm and a leg for it.

    They have that one covered.

    One thing that you can bet Longhorn will be way ahead of Mac OS X and Linux on is obnoxious license terms, activation woes and spyware.

  • by gadwale ( 46632 ) on Sunday May 04, 2003 @04:54PM (#5876535) Homepage

    The article refers to a UI feature called "stacks". From the article:

    "But there's more new to My Contacts than just the Carousel view. In My Contacts, you can arrange contacts by Name, Email, Work Email, Personal Email, Home Phone, Work Phone, or Online Status, but you can also utilizing a new feature called Stacks. Because you can't actually work with stacks in 4015, it's unclear what the feature does, but you can stack contacts by the same list of criteria by which you can arrange them, and you can also unstack them. Stacking and unstacking might be related to the Carousel view but, again, that's unclear right now."

    Here is a screenshot of the view [winsupersite.com].

    Recently, there was a Slashdot article [slashdot.org] here about a "piles" feature that Apple had patented in June 2001 that sounds very familiar. Screenshot of piles [mac.com] here looks different, but the concepts appear similar:

    "In addition, sources said Panther will finally mark the debut of the much-discussed "piles" GUI design concept, which Apple patented in June 2001. According to the patent, piles comprise collections of documents represented graphically in stacks. Users can browse the "piled" documents dynamically by pointing at them with the cursor; the filing system can then divide a pile into subpiles based on each document's content. At the user's request, the filing system can automatically file away documents into existing piles with similar content."

    Adi Gadwale.

  • Huh? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by 2nd Post! ( 213333 ) <gundbear@pacbe l l .net> on Sunday May 04, 2003 @04:56PM (#5876556) Homepage
    Where did I say a 3d accelerated desktop is required to accelerate 2d graphics?

    And why do you think I've never heard of 2d acceleration? What did I say to imply that?

    But to say more on the topic, 3d is a superset of 2d: So 3d acceleration is necessarily also going to be able to handle 2d acceleration, while 2d acceleration cannot necessarily handle 3d acceleration.

    Here's a trick: Lets say you have to manage 15 windows. With 3d acceleration you can take advantage of the Z/height buffer to keep track of all of them, since they all live on different levels. Without 3d acceleration, you have to create a data structure and window managment system, which necessarily requires the CPU and memory subsystems to deal with all the windows.

    See, if only for that, 3d acceleration trumps 2d acceleration. There are more situations like that too :)
  • Re:What? (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 04, 2003 @05:02PM (#5876605)

    how about the fact that you can start a secure FTP server from XP with seven mouse clicks?

    I just did that in OS X with four clicks! That's almost 43 percent faster than XP. Eat that!

  • by NanoGator ( 522640 ) on Sunday May 04, 2003 @05:13PM (#5876683) Homepage Journal
    "In addition to this, it will include a journaling file system, so us mere mortals can enjoy what Linux Geeks have had for years."

    4 years from now Slashdot will have a headline about how KDE's 3D accelerated desktop finally reached version 1.

  • Re:Huh? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Kirby-meister ( 574952 ) on Sunday May 04, 2003 @05:26PM (#5876763)
    Dude, read the post. He doesn't think a 3D accelerated desktop is required to accelerate 2D graphics. And 15 windows on different levels is not a 3D desktop. I can cascade 15 IE Windows and the way the human brain interprets them they are on different levels, one on top of the other, yet they are still 2D.
  • Re:This beats me (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Sentry21 ( 8183 ) on Sunday May 04, 2003 @05:33PM (#5876814) Journal
    Bash Microsoft in general - this is a perfect example of a general - and common - Windows problem, as well as a problem with Windows application development.

    Problem: Dialog buttons are improperly labelled. Programmers tend to use OK/Cancel dialogs in every situation where there are two options, just because it's easy. Same with Yes/No/Cancel. The problem rears its ugly head most in save dialogs.

    In the Mac OS, the standard is to use a Save/Don't Save/Cancel dialog. You tell the user that the document isn't saved, and they have these three options. If the user has never used the program before, or is the sort of user who forgets things immediately after learning them, or, in the case of several people I know, is visually disabled, they will not know (at a glance) what the dialog is for. They will, however, see the three buttons, which are clearly labelled with what they do, and if they know they don't want to save, or if they know they did something they didn't want to, they can click their preferred option.

    On Windows, Linux, and pretty much every other platform I've used, there is preferred the 'Yes/No/Cancel' dialog. The problem with this is that it isn't descriptive, and the user has to read the entire dialog to know what exactly is being asked. This wouldn't be a problem, except that some of the questions are 'Would you like to save?', some are 'Quit without saving?', and some don't even ask you about saving, but ask about something entirely different. I can't count how many documents I've lost because I click 'Yes' that I want to abandon changes, or 'No' I don't want to save them.

    The 'OK to Terminate, Cancel to Debug' issue is another hideous example, but you can find an unlimited number of them just built-in to Windows and Microsoft's programs. Besides that all, it also provides far more information than the average user cares about.

    Wrong way:
    'Application has generated an instruction that cannot be handled. *bunch of garbage*. Click OK to terminate the application. Click CANCEL to debug.'


    [OK] [Cancel]

    Right way:
    'An error has occured with program {programname}, and it will be closed.' (or something to that effect)


    [Close]

    If the user has a debugger installed (Dr. Watson is not a debugger), then provide a better interface, but as it is, Windows is a major pain to use for many users, for this exact reason: too much information that most users will never be able to use, and will never care enough to try to use. Keep it simple, stupids.

    --Dan
  • Re:Please... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by NanoGator ( 522640 ) on Sunday May 04, 2003 @05:46PM (#5876902) Homepage Journal
    "Can someone tell me why I need a 3d accelerated desktop?"

    Yes, the graphic load is moved off your CPU to your 3D Card, thus improving GUI responsiveness. If that's not a good enough explanation, then try using a dual machine. You'll be surprised at how much more responsive it becomes.

    "Would it be easier for me to navigate my windows if I could move between them as if I played Quake, instead of just clicking on the particular window I wanted?"

    Where does it say that the Windows shell will be like that? + 1 Imaginitive, -1 Offtopic.

    "Would I get more girls if my mailbox spun in cool 3d, instead of just opening?""Would my productivity improve if it took 5 more seconds to open a window just because it had to be animated, instead of just appearing?"

    Would you be more productive if your UI was more responsive while the CPU is busy? (you know, that little thing called multi-tasking?) Meanwhile, animations like that give you more visual elements to 'reflex' off of. I mean, if a light turns red at an intersection, do you start moving because you see the light or because the other cars start moving?

    "Would it be easier for me to read text if all windows were transparent?"

    You don't understand the value of transparency? I have an 'always on top' app on my screen right now that allows me to rapidly switch between desktop and apps within those desktops. It's all icon based, so I made it transparent. I can read text underneat it *and* see what apps I have running without having problems with clashing. You're right, transparent text on transparent text is bad. Icons and transparent text give your screen an added dimension of real-estate. Instead of assuming the worse, look at it's strengths.

    "Is the human mind better trained to cope with windows if they are rotated 45 degrees along some axis?"

    Were you able to read the scrolling text in the intro to Star Wars?

    "I simply don't get the 3d desktop, but then, I prefer stuff that work, instead of stuff that looks good and doesn't work."

    The whole point of it is to offload the graphics processing to the unused 3D Card, and free up CPU stuff for other things. The result is a more responsive UI. To boot, they can add features that some apps will find rather useful, like the task switching app I used (it's called AltDesk btw). The extra graphic goodies are actually quite useful. Imagine running at 1600 by 1200, but resizing a web page window with small text very smoothly. (Current methods create nasty nearest neighbor artifacts.)

    You may or may not care about this, but some of us that spend a great deal of time making good use of our UI find it rather exciting. If I can smoothly resize windows no matter what their native resolution is, that's damn cool.

    "//H, just realized he has another flamebait post on his record. Damn that karma!"

    You made some good points. It's sad, though, that you didn't just ask so you could learn. I mean, if you have to ask so many questions about why somebody's investing a lot of time and resources, then doesn't it strike you that maybe you just don't get it?

    For example, I think Bablyon 5 is stupid. I think the fans overrate it. But I don't go on long-winded rants about it because I know they enjoy it in a way that I haven't discovered. See my point? I'd sound like a total dumb-ass to them if I said "I don't see why you guys are so immersed in such a corny show."

    Heh I hope I made my point instead of pissing everybody off.
  • by Overly Critical Guy ( 663429 ) on Sunday May 04, 2003 @05:57PM (#5876973)
    I resent idiots who use "M$" as if it's insulting or clever in any way.

    How dare a company make money! Let's put a dollar sign in their name! That will show everyone how mature Linux users are.

    Your idea for laws that prevent hardware deals is fascism at its worst.
  • oh, goodie (Score:4, Insightful)

    by g4dget ( 579145 ) on Sunday May 04, 2003 @06:16PM (#5877094)
    Is this a competition among Microsoft and Apple to see who is less outdated?

    Journaling file systems are, what, a couple of decades old? Microsoft didn't invent them. Apple didn't invent them. The real question is: what took either of them so long to incorporate them?

  • Re:Please... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by spongman ( 182339 ) on Sunday May 04, 2003 @06:28PM (#5877160)
    There used to be video cards that had 2D acceleration as a selling point
    Yeah, most of them still do. The real difference between 2d and 3d in this case is the API. 2d acceleration as used by gdi, xaa, etc... is limited to simple primitives (drawing lines/curves, blitting, scaling, etc...). There's generally no ability to handle multiple layers, clipping or texture effects beyond the simple boolean operation, whereas a 3d API such as OpenGL or Direct3D gives you much more flexibility even if you aren't using the 3rd dimension.

    Of course, the real question is whether or not you really want all the extra eye-candy this brings.

  • by afantee ( 562443 ) on Sunday May 04, 2003 @08:32PM (#5877833)
    In the short period of 2 years since the initial release of Mac OS X, Apple has produced 2 major and numerous minor upgrades with significant performance improvement and lots of new features, in addition to shipping an impressive array of innovative hardwares (iPod, Xserve, Xserve RAID, LCD iMac, 17" PowerBook with slot-loading DVD burner, FireWire 800, BlueTooth, 54 mbps 802.11g AirPort Extreme, Gigabit Ethernet) and highly sophisticated software tools such as iLife, iSync, iCal, Keynote, Safari, Final Cut Pro, DVD Studio Pro, Shake, Logic, WebObjects, FileMaker Pro, AppleWorks, Rendezvous, QuickTime 6, iTunes Music Store, and so on.

    But what has the biggest software company done in the same time frame? Surprisingly, very few. Other than the countless security patches plus a Win XP Service Pack and Windows 2003 Server, the only things that come from Redmond are hypes.

    Longhorn is officially a 2005 product with very few features to brag about, and may well be delayed to 2006 or later if the track record of MS is anything to go by.

    It's just incredible that a small hardware company like Apple has somehow developed a bigger and better software portofolio than the most powerful company in the world , and frankly embarrassing when considering that MS is 60 times bigger than Apple.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 04, 2003 @09:11PM (#5878015)
    . . . and Microsoft only has one (NTFS).

    Ignoring the poor grammar for a moment, I would like to know why Microsoft would need more than one filesystem that does the same thing.
  • by Overly Critical Guy ( 663429 ) on Sunday May 04, 2003 @10:11PM (#5878256)
    Easy! Of course there's more than one way to do this, but to state blatently that this system is more powerful than GNU/Linux is uninformed at best, trolling at worst, and wishful thinking either way.

    Wrong. The filesystem is indeed more powerful than GNU/Linux.

    Using your theoretical system, Grandma still has to save her files in ~/photos. If not, you get to sit through an entire hard drive search. Fun.

    Longhorn will take at most a few seconds, no matter where the files are. See those "Library" folders in the Longhorn screenshots? Picture Library, for instance, will display all the pictures on your computer. All Explorer windows will be filterable in that way.

    You don't need special features like you suggest in a filesystem to manage your files properly.

    When you're dealing with gigabytes and gigabytes of data, yes, you do.

    I wonder how many years it will take for Linux to play catchup to these kinds of features that I imagine will be commonplace by the time 2005 rolls around. Heck, I'm still holding my breath for a hardware accelerated X replacement, but the Linux zealots are too afraid of change for that to happen anytime soon...
  • by Joe U ( 443617 ) on Sunday May 04, 2003 @10:58PM (#5878439) Homepage Journal
    Why does the average joe user, need several different journaling file systems for a desktop OS?
  • by towatatalko ( 305116 ) on Sunday May 04, 2003 @11:41PM (#5878613)
    "Finally I must mention that I have seen more Microsoft hardware this year than Mac hardware or software...." - you're either misinformed or under informed. A friend of mine was just terminated with his "hardware" team from Microsoft, because as their management said they're trying to get out of hardware business including overrated X-box. They're also closing all Web-TV operations.

    According to that friend Microsoft has no real vision for the future and just tries to dupe users into constantly upgrading, buying new hardware to sustain new software upgrades and pushing licensing schemas that are more likely to drive users into Linux. Running Longhorn would require expensive hardware upgrades and since economy is not coming back in any visible way people will not spend money to buy more hardware. Microsoft may become a victim of its own strategy that doesn't account for this new economic reality where people and IT shops will have fewer and fewer dollards to spend on M$ products.
  • by Mondo54 ( 48155 ) on Monday May 05, 2003 @02:32AM (#5879249)
    In the short period of 2 years since the initial release of Mac OS X, Apple has produced 2 major and numerous minor upgrades with significant performance improvement and lots of new features

    Or maybe it's because Microsoft has done more to support their current OSes' lifecycles? Sorry, but I've gone through the 2 major *paid* updates of OS X in order to have compatability with certain software.

    OS X 10.0 is now obsolete. Windows 2000 is still very much useable, supported, and widely-used.
  • by ExoticMandibles ( 582264 ) on Monday May 05, 2003 @03:26AM (#5879454)
    A couple points:
    1. Microsoft has heard back from Corporate America saying "please don't make us update so often". There used to be a new version of Office every year, and Microsoft's big institutional customers asked them to slow down. Microsoft has since deliberately slowed down the pace.

    2. Why should Microsoft bother? XP is still flying off the shelves, virtual and non-virtual. It took Nintendo 1.5 years to add a light to the obviously-deficient GameBoy Advance. When you own a market lock, stock, and barrel, there really isn't a strong incentive to innovate, and you definitely don't feel rushed.

    3. You are inflating Apple's accomplishments. How many of those products you named did Apple buy and stick their name onto? I don't follow the Apple software pantheon, but I do know that AppleWorks and FileMaker Pro were third-party software, and I thought Shake and Logic were too.

    4. Similarly, you are sidelining many of Microsoft's accomplishments, eliding Office XP, Internet Explorer 6, Windows Movie Maker, Windows Media Player 9, DirectX 9, ThreeDegrees, and more. Microsoft really does churn out a lot of software--they can afford to, as Windows and Office are cash cow juggernauts. So they spin out lots of new software to see if any of it sticks. (Which mostly it doesn't.) "Better" is a matter of opinion, but I sincerely doubt Apple has a "bigger" software lineup.
  • pitiful GUI (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 05, 2003 @04:13AM (#5879562)
    http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/4015_15 1.png

    Microsoft still needs lessons in GUI design.

    Don't waste 2 lines in a dialog box describing what buttons do. Push cancel to debug? Since when does cancel mean debug? Instead, have the buttons say "Terminate" and "Debug," eh? And is it me (I only glanced), but is there a clock in the task bar and another one in the right bar thing (which is a little big IMO). I think one clock would do...

    Granted it's pre-alpha, but these screenshots make Longhorn look like it should have been released about 2 years ago (the screenshot showing how icons can't be resized without getting pixelated). OS X icons are 128x128 and look great even resized to be bigger. And yet Longhorn won't be out until 2005 did I read?
  • Obvious (Score:2, Insightful)

    by iamweezman ( 648494 ) on Monday May 05, 2003 @12:39PM (#5882807)
    How could this be?

    It's quite obvious that windows was developed for the end user in mind and might lead the market for many years to come in the PC market.

    On the other hand Linux was built for the developer in mind and strangely enough still leads the market in the server area...Don't you recall the recent slashdot article that quoted the microsoft exec saying that windows 2003 is still playing catch up with the thing linux has had since it's arrival?

    Different users in mind. Different leads in different markets

  • by eclectic4 ( 665330 ) on Monday May 05, 2003 @01:23PM (#5883228)
    Okay then, M$ 2005 will be Mac OS 2003...

Anyone can make an omelet with eggs. The trick is to make one with none.

Working...