New Longhorn Screenshots And Schedule 688
Mozillabird writes "WinSupersite has recently updated the Longhorn release schedule and has provided some new screenshots of Aero. The first beta of Longhorn is May 2005, though there is some speculation about how much of Avalon and Aero will be implemented in that beta. The "big beta" is scheduled for this Fall."
A little comparison: (Score:3, Insightful)
(Sarcasm)But hey, if you cant beat them... cheat them.(/sarcasm)
Re:A little comparison: (Score:5, Funny)
Yes. I think he said it with a straight face.
Re:A little comparison: (Score:2)
Re:A little comparison: (Score:5, Funny)
Innovation. Microsoft Patented.
Everything else is derivative.
Re:A little comparison: (Score:5, Funny)
Actually they acquired the patent rights from Al Gore.
Re:A little comparison: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:A little comparison: (Score:4, Informative)
Re:A little comparison: (Score:5, Funny)
Raw and uncut.
Consider this to be hardcore old-skewl style: before they had them fancy html interpreters they just looked at the text and IMAGINED its formatting.
What code? (Score:5, Funny)
[. . .] before they had them fancy html interpreters they just looked at the text and IMAGINED its formatting.
That's OK, Vicsun. I don't even see the code anymore. I just see blonde, brunette, redhead . . .
Vision check! (Score:4, Funny)
The links were actually for searching tools, I think you need a trip to the eye doctor!
When he's finished have him give me a call so I can find out how to have the same condition.
Re:A little comparison: (Score:4, Insightful)
Whoops... Anyway, I think they can be a definite selling point in that OS-level search capabilities integrate better into the user experience.
For one, OS integration gives you the ability to create "smart" (dynamic) folders which are basically the results of a query against metadata in all files but still have a system-level validity.
In other words, you can create your "Yosemite" folder [apple.com] which will contain anything related to that keyword, and you can do that with other programs, such as DevonTHINK [devon-technologies.com]. What you can't have with third-party apps (AFAIK) is automatic scanning of files across the entire system without prior settings, and most of all, the ability to treat "catalogs" as real directories which you can burn to CD, backup, compress & archive, etc...
More to the point, do these third-party apps offer APIs to other applications, so that you can use their functionality, say, when saving a file or including a picture from your library? That's what OS-level search capabilities are about, at least the way I understand them.
Re:A little comparison: (Score:2, Funny)
[/sarcasm]
/ducks (Score:3, Funny)
Re:A little comparison: (Score:3, Insightful)
Let me tell ya one that DID catch on though;
Browser Integration into the primary GUI.
Nice. Really nice. Without it using a GUI is insane. Broadband net access tends to do that to a person, if I want to look something up, open new window, go to dictionary, type in word.
All of a sudden, the net IS part of my desktop. Kick'in. You want to know what killed Desktop Push technology? No longer needed, the internet is now just one more data resource on my co
Re:A little comparison: (Score:5, Insightful)
You've blatantly obviously forgotten how you learned Windows and also have blatantly obviously never seen a co-worker struggling to do so.
I had to learn Windows three years ago (at the same time I learned Linux) and I can testify that there is almost NOTHING obvious about it (other than being aware that clicking a mouse on something makes something happen. Duh!)
Re:A little comparison: (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not seeing it. You're opening a new window to look at something new - in what way is that "integrated?" Or perhaps more to the point, in what way is that usefully integrated? Is is somehow better to have that new window initially display files and folders than to just show your home-page? How is this any better - or any different - than just launching an IE window?
I also use broadband and (for example) dictionary.com or wikipedia.org as a handy always-ready reference. But I do not find the desktop "integration" of IE to be any more convenient than just using whatever browser is available on the machine.
For myself, personally, one of the beefs I have with the Windows GUI is that Windows Explorer tries to do too many things - what do the control panels or network printers have in common with my files, anyway? All of that integrating slows Windows Explorer down without providing anything that looks (to me, at least) like a clear benefit.
Re:A little comparison: (Score:3, Interesting)
Looks like you haven't learned that there are different Linux distros yet. I have Yoper Linux on a 233 MHz that boots faster than my XP on a 3 GHz, not to mention how fast the apps start. Gentoo is pretty fast too.
See, with Linux you can find lots of options and tradeoffs depending on what you want. With Windows you get XP or your option is something older, less functional, slower, etc.
Re:A little comparison: (Score:5, Informative)
Check out this excerpt from a recent review of the MSN Toolbar Suite [winsupersite.com]:
At the Professional Developers Conference 2003 in Los Angeles last year (see my exhaustive coverage of that show), Microsoft chairman Bill Gates touted the searching innovations that would go into Longhorn, the next generation Windows version that's now due in mid-2006. In a way, by detailing the new desktop search features Microsoft was working on so early, Gates had thrown down the gauntlet. In today's PC world, desktop search is a miserable, slow affair, and as Microsoft executives are fond of pointing out, it shouldn't take longer to find a file you know is on your hard drive than it takes to perform a Web search.
However, Gates was also giving his competitors a leg up on Microsoft. And since announcing its Longhorn desktop search intentions, Microsoft's worst fears were realized. Other companies began copying the Microsoft desktop search strategy, knowing that the never-ending Longhorn delays would help them get to market sooner and appear to be nimbler and even more innovative, though it's sort of astonishing how transparent that latter claim is. Chief among these competitors are Apple and Google.
Apple CEO Steve Jobs announced in June 2004 that the next version of Mac OS X, due sometime in 2005, will include a desktop search feature called Spotlight. The Spotlight feature set is a rough subset of the desktop search features Gates discussed in late 2003, but presented to the user with Apple's standard graphical excellence. Spotlight, according to Apple, is a "radically new and lightning fast way to find anything saved on your personal computer. Email messages, contacts and calendars, along with files and folders, all show up in Spotlight results." Spotlight's biggest claims to fame, presumably, are its near-instant search results and support for document meta data, both of which are, again, planned features of Longhorn. But no matter. While Apple has been busy copping Windows features since Jobs returned to Apple in late 1996 [!!!!!], the company's tiny market share ensures that very few people will benefit from Spotlight, despite Apple claims that it will deliver on desktop search a year before Microsoft ships Longhorn.
The gall astounds me. But hey, he actually believes it.
Re:A little comparison: (Score:5, Funny)
Re:A little comparison: (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:A little comparison: (Score:4, Interesting)
I don't think who came up with what idea first is really important here, since with increasing computational power, searching could only get faster and more practical - it was an inevitability that searching would become a more important part of the desktop user experience. However right now OS X is winning the race over Windows, IMHO. WinAmp has included find-as-you-type since early versions. Now iTunes, Mozilla, Finder, and Firefox have it.
Re:A little comparison: (Score:5, Interesting)
Regardless of the past, Microsoft announced and demo'd this feature BEFORE Apple even mentioned spotlight. I'm not saying Apple copied MS, I'm saying MS *DIDN'T* copy Apple, not this time anyway...
Re:Apple's patent on desktop search before Microso (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Apple's patent on desktop search before Microso (Score:5, Informative)
I hope you're not stupid enough to think that Apple was the origin of that concept.
Note the wastebasket, bottom right. [toastytech.com]
This is on a Xerox Star system.
Re:Apple's patent on desktop search before Microso (Score:3, Interesting)
From someone who worked at Xerox: [mprove.de]
(I worked at Xerox on Star/Viewpoint from early '83 to '89.)
This was true of the first version of Star, but this problem was recognized very early, perhaps even before the first shipment of Star. A new project, known internally as Phoenix (although spelled "fnx") was designed to solve this problem. It drew from the Mesa Development Environ
Re:A little comparison: (Score:3, Informative)
Riiiiight... (Score:2)
Right, because with a name like "rolling thunder" [wikipedia.org], it has to be good!
Re:Riiiiight... (Score:5, Funny)
Images REMOVED from article! (Score:4, Informative)
Here they are:
OS X-alike password request for program installation [scaredlittleboy.org]
New "not responding" message and blurry translucent window borders [scaredlittleboy.org]
Sync manager [scaredlittleboy.org]
Re:Riiiiight... (Score:3, Funny)
"booking cruises folder" (Score:3, Funny)
useless info in status bar (Score:5, Interesting)
This makes me think about the utterly stupid winXP feature that displays the number of files in a selected zipfile... is that usefull for anybody ? Why do you zip files in 99% of the cases ? TO REDUCE SIZE. so what do you want to know about the selected zip ? Right : it's size. For all other items, the filesize is shown, except for zips.... DUH !!!!
The person who suggested that feature should be shot with a ripe banana until dead ensures... twice !
Re:useless info in status bar (Score:2)
It almost makes you wish they lose their monopoly....
uh... did I say that ?
Re:useless info in status bar (Score:2)
It is also in the details view on the left tab. Or you could look at size in the tile view.
Re:useless info in status bar (Score:5, Informative)
Anyway, anyone notice a few things?
1.) The dialog that appears asking for an admin password to install software. Directly ripped from OS X.
2.) The titlebars and status bars have gotten bigger for seemingly no good reason. However, the minimize/maximize buttons have been horizontally stretched. This should help alleviate the infamouse "accidentally-close" clicking everybody does now and again. They're still touching each other, though. Weirdly, OS X's are also sitting beside each other but I never accidentally hit the close box. There is space between them.
3.) More shiny blue. Since this isn't the final Aero 3D-accelerated interface, expect more of this but using DirectX.
4.) Drop-shadow from windows in focus. Again, directly ripped from Apple.
Longhorn is shaping up how I sort of guessed. More and more, the Explorer windows are being made to look like web pages, with lists and shortcuts running everywhere.
Since Longhorn will be out in 2006, there's a potential release for another OS X that same year. I predict Steve Jobs will have his designers reimplement Aqua using Quartz/CoreImage. I don't see Apple making everything 3D, but I do see them fully converting everything to vector-based widgets and OpenGL shader effects (that's what CoreImage is based on). Apple has already stated that they have seen no developer interest in integrating full polygonal 3D into the desktop like that, and that developers usually just create a custom OpenGL view.
Note: I compare to OS X because I'm a recent convert and don't plan to ever go back to Windows again. OS X feels five years ahead of everybody. Since every bit of new Longhorn technology is being backported to Windows XP, the only selling point Longhorn will have is its interface, which is something Microsoft has never been known for excelling at. It should be interesting watching Microsoft attempt to pull off aesthetics. Last time they tried that, we got Luna. Blech.
Re:useless info in status bar (Score:4, Interesting)
2) OS X, did not exactly make that feature, it is just sudo, with a pretty face. Windows has runAs which similar to su.
3) Unlike sudo in longhorn, the system actually uses lowest priviledge, as in even if you are logged in as an admin, your applications lauch with lower priviledges, unless you authorize them.
4) Aero i dont is backported....
Re:useless info in status bar (Score:5, Interesting)
As for ripping off, I think the similarity between Aero's back and forward buttons and the KDE Crystal icon set's [kde-look.org] is rather striking. Microsoft's version does look a tiny bit better, though.
Re:useless info in status bar (Score:5, Insightful)
Microsoft, like every other OS manufacturer on the planet, has had search capabilities of some sort or another forever. They're making their's better, Apple is improving their's, etc. Who gives a shit whether Apple or Google or Microsoft starting improving search funtionality first? I happen to be glad that they're making the effort. It will probably be a useful addition.
Guys, grow up. Unless they're breaking some sort of IP law, you should be applauding them for implimenting the good features of other OSs instead of knocking them down. Linux, OS X and Windows all share a shitload of similar look and feel features as well as mountains of similar features under the hood. Who used the first hard drive? Who used the first start menu-style button? Who put "disk drives" or "My computers" on the top, left of the desktop? Who put a trashcan on the desktop? The fact is, IT DOESN'T MATTER anymore because they all have 'em now.
Spend yout time dinging the company that doesn't impliment a good feature. Leave MS alone if they're actually trying to things that look or work better.
TW
TW
Re:useless info in status bar (Score:3, Interesting)
Pretty sure that was ripped from Linux, before OSX even existed, and I'm also quite certain Linux wasn't the first either.
Re:useless info in status bar (Score:5, Insightful)
Look at WMP. WMP 6.4, the pinnacle of usability and compact design (and yes, I now use Media Player Classic), devoted all but a thin border, compact progress bar, and menu bar to content. WMP 10, on the other hand uses up as much space with stupid buttons, goofy widgets of questionable use, some Photoshop flunkie's shiny excretions and other useless noise, as the actual content itself (for videos obviously). It's huge, ugly, hard to use, and the Classic skin seems to have been retired, which was the only one I found to be useful and not butt-ugly or goofy-looking, as opposed to some art-school dropout's idle doodlings...
You can't expect them to reverse this long trend by devoting more screen space to content! It's all about the application and Windows is becoming like pop music stars who are popular not for their music or talent, but for their clothes, looks or bad behavior. Microsoft, for whom I used to have a fair amount of respect as a UI designer, has fallen into the same trap that has infected every other major software developer since 16-bit color became the norm and the Web helped set back UI standards 15 years... they are more interested in looking "pretty" than being more functional.
I'll give them one thing, the default Windows XP theme was the ugliest Windows UI since Windows 2.1 (which suffered primarily because it was stuck in 16 colors with exactly 1 palette), but Aero actually looks half-decent, if, typically for MS, cluttered and overly busy. At least it's not ugly. A bit rococo perhaps, but not ugly.
Still, I imagine that, should I ever find myself using Longhorn, the first thing I'll do is turn it off and go back to the Windows 2000 style, which combined the best functionality with minimal but attractive artistic improvements. But at least Aero doesn't look like a busybox for holding the attention of babies or MS executives.
Of course, I can't imagine any reason to ever upgrade from Windows 2000, or XP for my laptops that came with it. What could MS possibly offer in Longhorn that an average user would ever want or need? Mostly more protection from all the bad design decisions MS has made over the last 20 years, I suppose. Also, I like the fact that a gigabyte of RAM is still considered a lot. I imagine that will be the minimal reasonable requirement to do any real work with Longhorn, just like 128MB was for Windows 4.0, 256MB was for Windows 2000* and 512MB is for XP.
Hell, I still use Visual C++ 6. It lets me get the work done that I need to get done efficiently and effectively without bloating me up another half-dozen byzantine technologies getting in the way of me doing work (although I am impressed by what I've read about the compiler in the 2003 version). Actually, I'd probably upgrade, but none of my clients want to. Watcha gonna do? If it works, don't break it.
* I actually ran 2000 with 64MB on a laptop for some months back around 2000. It actually wasn't too bad as long as I didn't load more than one or two programs, but for any serious work, it wouldn't have been usable.
What? You don't like the XP Teletubbies theme? (Score:5, Funny)
It's branding (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:useless info in status bar (Score:3, Insightful)
In which respect, they're not all that different from MacOS, KDE, or GNOME. All UI designers are in love with useless eye candy.
Re:useless info in status bar (Score:3, Interesting)
The trouble is, it doesn't even do a good job at it. IMO the single most important piece of information is the file name, in case it's too long to be fully visible in the list view above the status bar. But the statusbar in the screenshot has even less space for the filename than the list view does!
Re:useless info in status bar (Score:4, Funny)
Unless, of course, the default XP theme becomes the new Windows Classic theme for Longhorn. What are you going to do then?
Is it just me... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Is it just me... (Score:2)
It's not just you. (Score:5, Insightful)
Perhaps it's just the techno-nerd in me, but I can't stand it when my computer tries to hide things like actual file locations from me, which is what the new Explorer seems to be doing. The very first thing I do when I set up a Windows machine is turn off all the GUI "features" that hide the contents of directories, file extensions, and menus from me.
Does anyone actually find these features useful?
Bad HIG? (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm not impressed - I favor "clean" GUI's (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd like to see how a GUI like this "Aero" will go over with the Windows users who instinctively switch every XP box they touch to "classic" mode.
all of these screenshots do not impress me (Score:3, Interesting)
No screenshot of this "New OS" has yet to impress me. Maybe it gets it's hype because "New OS" = boost in hardware sales. But you know what. When the majority of your hardware sales are sub 500 pc's you're not going to make up any profits on the early adopters who buy the bigger and faster machines.
What have we gotten with every new version of Windows.
Software quits working
Have to buy new versions of antivirus and other utilities in many cases to get full functionality and also see above.
Waiting on hardware to get "New Seals of MS Approval" which IMO is silly because that WHQL crap never stopped Nvidia drivers from causing the nv4_disp.dll BDS's.
Oh and this "New OS" that was supposed to run on pc's that were wildly faster (10Ghz) machines. Where are those new machines??
Longhorn is a shell of the promises that were made, it most likely incorporates code from XP/NT4 base so will incorporate security holes and bugs and probably new avenues of attack. It's just plain ugly, and probably will be slow at best on existing equipment.
If you're looking for a new OS you may be better off with OS X on a PPC, or Linux on x86.
Re:all of these screenshots do not impress me (Score:2)
We all managed to let go of progman and fileman, didn't we? Heck, fileman isn't even included in XP any more, as far as I can tell.
Re:all of these screenshots do not impress me (Score:2)
Re:all of these screenshots do not impress me (Score:3, Insightful)
For the same reason they did 10 years ago?
Coincidentally, in 2005 it's 10 years since Microsoft started their Windows 95 era, and a introduced a very different way of working with Windows, compared to Windows 3.
Re:Why will users learn a new ui. (Score:3, Interesting)
What the hell are you talking about? The first version of Windows I used was 3.1, and I'm using the XP interface now, and will be using the Longhorn interface when I upgrade to that.
Hardware Recommendations (Score:2)
Desktop CPU: 3 GHz Intel Pentium 4 processor with HyperThreading Technology 530 (or higher) or 3 GHz Intel Xeon processor with 2 MB L2 cache, or AMD Athlon 64, Sempron, or Opteron 100, 200, or 800 processor, single or dual-core versions.
Mobile CPU: 1.86 GHz Intel Pentium M processor 750 (or higher), or AMD Turion 64 Mobile Technology, Mobile Sempron, or Mobil
More Apple copying (Score:4, Interesting)
How Many Times (Score:3, Insightful)
Apple copied from Xerox, but you don't mention that. Let's all move on, it's not the 80's anymore, MS writes their own code and Apple builds onto BSD. It's been old for years now and it's getting really annoying to hear the same repetitive crap day-in, day-out.
Re:How Many Times (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:How Many Times (Score:4, Insightful)
So did Apple 'copy' Kai?
(For the record, I don't care much myself - I just get tired of the relentless "Microsoft just copy but Apple innovate" stuff. It's not always true.)
Re:How Many Times (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:How Many Times (Score:3, Informative)
1) Shortcuts (and symbolic links for that matter) break when the original file moves or is renamed. Aliases (from System 7 in 199-freaking-1) have a two-step process to "find' the original. First based on file-id (
Avalon and Indigo Preview (Score:5, Informative)
As far as I can tell Avalon isn't hardware accelerated yet but it is still pretty low in CPU usage. The fairly simple calculator sample included uses 25 megs of RAM though!
Fun stuff to play with, even if it's not production ready.
Re:Avalon and Indigo Preview (Score:5, Interesting)
Try running 50 copies of your calculator app and just watch as each one drops to hardly anything.
Claims from the article... (Score:3, Insightful)
"In Longhorn, applications will launch and load files 15 percent faster than with Windows XP."
How was the figure arrived at exactly? All applications and all files will load 15 percent faster?
"Additionally, Longhorn will feature a new instant-on capability that will see Longhorn-savvy systems resume from Standby in 2 seconds or less."
Doesn't "Longhorn-savvy" kind of imply specific hardware is required? Or is that just me? And to be honest, I wouldn't really sell this as a feature other OSs have had for years...OS X certainly starts up from standby on my iBook in under 2 seconds...
"Longhorn will more reliably resume from crashes,"
Surely time would have been better spent by programmers and engineers actually stopping the OS from crashing so much? I'm an OS X user, and I'll be the first to admit that when it does crash, it tends to crash badly, but at least (in my experience) the crashes are fairly rare (say, once a month) instead of upwards of one a day...
"One thing users should be aware of is that Longhorn will include a new kernel and will thus not offer the same level of compatibility with legacy 16-bit and 32-bit code that Windows XP does today. For business users, Microsoft believes that Virtual PC 2007 will help broaden corporations' compatibility options."
This seems like a bad idea - I'm guessing home users will also want to run legacy applications (that favourite game of your son's that you bought five years ago, that piece of productivity software you really like but can't afford an upgrade)...wouldn't it be better to do what Apple did during the switch between OS 9 & OS X, and bundle an emulator in with the OS? Rather than forcing home users to buy their own copy of Virtual PC 2007?
Re:Claims from the article... (Score:2)
That's just insane? Why would they ever do that? After all, customers like crashes!
They have been working to improve stability since they began, not on longhorn but on OSs, although it didn't really become a major focus until Windows 95... the same operating system you seem to be making your comments from.
Personally speaking, I keep my 2k and XP machines running for about a month straight
Re:Claims from the article... (Score:2)
the same way that they dubbed XP as optimized for gaming, therefore games run much faster under it(not).
all the windowses so far have been 'faster' than earlier versions, at least in market speak. to be frank, they might be into something there... maybe they cache 15% of things into memory beforehand or use some other way that theoretically gives a speed boost BUT on all current systems ends up being slower
Re:Claims from the article... (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't believe this. This is market speech. This is totally impossible. If this is the case, we will see the end of the Microsoft monopoly with the release of Longhorn.
Why run Longhorn and upgrade all your apps (except for the one for which the vendors have died out, but 50% of your department insists on continuing to use because it 'just works'), or run them in a Virtual Machine, when you can get Linux, for free, run Wine, which will offer better compatability, or run either a) Qemu, b) VMware, or c) Remote Desktop into a Windows XP server box for legacy apps.
I refuse to believe this thing about compatability, because the entire Microsoft monopoly is built on compatability. Microsoft would never drop such a golden ticket into the hands of Windows opponents.
If this is true, it makes the barriers to either Mac OS X or Linux transitions non-existent. Windows would have to compete on merits alone (security, usability, extensibility).
Bwahahaha. I'll go back to the real world now. This'll never happen.
Re:Claims from the article... (Score:4, Informative)
Windows XP doesn't crash one a day, either. I've only gotten a BSOD twice in my years of using it.
Windows has gotten a lot more stable over the years.
Re:Claims from the article... (Score:3, Informative)
Testing?
All applications and all files will load 15 percent faster?
It didn't say "all." Do you have to take everything so literally on an OS preview for something coming out in about 1-2 years from now?
Doesn't "Longhorn-savvy" kind of imply specific hardware is required?
Yeah, specific hardware is required to enable specific new features. Just like the NX bits in the newer CPUs like AMD64 require newer software (like WinXP SP2) for the new features to work. Wha
Nice fonts! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Nice fonts! (Score:4, Informative)
If you look really hard at the lower case 'u' you'll notice there's a tail in the screenshot, where there isn't one in Corbel.
That said there are visible improvements in the kerning in the screenshot to the native kerning in XP.
Re:Nice fonts! (Score:3, Insightful)
You hear that low rumbling sound? That's 500 years worth of dead typographers spinning in their graves.
You're right to not care -- in fact, it's a failure on the part of the type selector if you do notice the type instead of the text itself -- but that doesn't mean that some type is not better than other type.
When "graphics people" bitch or praise type it's because th
Ugly as sin? (Score:2)
Aside from being dark, the title bar buttons are very small, and are flush with the top of the window - meaning lots of missing them and clicking on the window behind it.
It also seems to add a lot of dimensionality that isn't really needed, and just serves to 'busy-up' the interface. Give me a clean, bright, colourful interface over a dark, plum-colored travesty like this any day.
Frightening (Score:3, Funny)
Except for... (Score:3, Funny)
"But Mommmmm! You promised not to throw out my posters of Linus if I stopped using old pizza boxes as a mattress!"
Fleeing the country... (Score:5, Funny)
Bryan has too much time on his hands (Score:5, Funny)
Blue, Green, and Purple? (Score:4, Interesting)
Yawn (Score:5, Funny)
I call fake on the screenshots! (Score:5, Interesting)
Even if the interface work here isn't fake, there has been some copying/pasting going on OR Longhorn doesn't have file size and date functionality yet
Re:I call fake on the screenshots! (Score:3, Interesting)
Why does
"View All Documents"
Have a reference number
000125-J00896
While
"View All E-mails"
Doesn't?
Oops.
Re:I call fake on the screenshots! (Score:4, Insightful)
I hope that's JPEG compression (Score:3, Funny)
First thing I'd do with L'Horn... (Score:4, Funny)
Hows that fancy screenshot gonna look then.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:My take on the screenshots (Score:4, Interesting)
Maybe I'm strange, but I consider that a feature, not a bug. I like being able to change the perceived file type without having to edit the file contents or metadata or whatever. AND I can ascertain the perceived filetype in a simple console dir listing.
There once was a day (Score:4, Insightful)
that seems to be all anybody cares about any more. Or have
we reached the point where there is no innovation except
(debatedly) in how the UI is presented?
It must be better. It's taken nearly 8 years... (Score:3, Interesting)
If it's so great...
-Why is application launching only 15% faster than XP, despite requiring a 3GHz Pentium?
-Why can Microsoft only seem to get screen real estate back by shrinking existing controls?
-Why is this Paul Thurott person so enamored with what will essentially be a has-been OS with the features and security of something you can buy today from Apple?
If I was Steve Jobs, I'd release Tiger for X86 at MacWorld 2006 - get the PC users hooked before Microsoft can evern release their Tiger work-alike to manufacturing.
Chumps.
It doesn't look enough like Windows! (Score:5, Insightful)
That was one of the main reasons why people said they wouldn't consider using Linux. It was one of the main reasons many people wouldn't use Open Office.
Could it be that upon the release of Longhorn, people may find Linux to be more familiar?
I've heard many consultants say that businesses (mostly small businesses) won't switch from Microsoft Outlook or Microsoft Office, even though alternatives would definitely suffice, purely because their employees (or at least some of them) can't handle change.
Many people still use insecure Microsoft solutions, because they feel overwhelmed when presented with something even slightly different. Look at the hassle getting people to switch to the more secure Firefox Web browser!
I guess that the new look and feel of Longhorn is either going to cause people to postpone upgrading as long as possible, or even give people more incentive to try out Linux. I mean, if you're going to have to get used to something new anyway, why not put Linux in the mix?
Aero? Aqua? (Score:3, Funny)
Even more screenshots and features leaked. (Score:3, Funny)
Quartz ? (Score:3)
Windows is not Simple (Score:4, Insightful)
I use Linux and Windows both. They're suited best for different tasks, different people. But I'm definitely not so much a Windows guy. Here's why:
Linux can be very stripped-down if you want it to be (word to the Gentoo-ers -- yeah!). I can arrange my personal directories exactly how I want them, and I can get to everything I need very quickly, thanks to the omnipotence of the command line. Basically, Linux has the feel of a complex math equation that has been totally factored down to its optimal simplicity.
But Windows seeks to acheive a similar feeling of simplicity not through elegant design, but through showmanship: a veneer of simplicity acheived through even more underlying complexity. It throws all these abstraction layers over your files and your tasks, so that you have to rely on more software to do your stuff.
If there's one thing programming has taught me, it's that software is one of the most unreliable things humans have ever made. If the same task can be accomplished with less code, then you have better code -- always (unless less code results in horrible machine efficiency or lack of modularity).
If I want to get to all my stuff on my Linux partition, I just click up /garage.
If I want my stuff on Windows, I click into D:\. Not too bad, but wait -- all those abstraction layers in Windows constantly insist that I keep my files in C:\Documents and Settings\alucinor\My Documents. But what if I don't want to keep my music files in C:\Documents and Settings\alucinor\My Documents\My Music? Just set an option, right?
Heh ... I do that, and it ~would~ normally work. But since there's so many abstractions, so much software, I often will find crap getting stuck in the My Music folder yet again later, sometimes by the same program.
What I don't like about the Windows design philosophy is that they want to take your computer use into their hands, and they do it acting as though those hands of theirs are perfect. But when they're less than perfect, it just gets annoying, and their hands get in your way.
"Quit auto-archiving my media files, Media Player! Just show me a directory structure instead of artist/album breakdowns of what's in the My Music folder! I just want to burn a cd, dammit!"
Yeah. Looks like WinFS is just going to throw even more sediments of imperfect software in the way of what I want to do. "They're features!"
Advice to OS makers: let the OS stay in the background. Too bad that's impossible for a company that ~has~ to make the OS seem important.
When I use Linux I don't think about using Linux. I just use it.
When I use Windows I'm constantly reminded that I'm using Windows. That's bad design. But I suppose it's necessary when your business is the OS.
Re:Eye candy (Score:2)
the thing about Apple it that it looks good AND works well.
Re:Whatever (Score:2)
Re:Stacks (Score:2)
And Microsoft has prior art too. They've been producing piles for a long time now.
You mean to say... (Score:2)
Re:MIRROR OF LONGHORN SCREENSHOTS W 20721 DESCRIPT (Score:2)
Re:Send To (Score:5, Insightful)
Just like Linux with Gnome, KDE (etc...) and OSX are just polished versions of an OS that was designed 30+ years ago.