Windows 7 Beta Screenshots Leaked 587
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."
Sure those are pics? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Sure those are pics? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Sure those are pics? (Score:4, Funny)
Yeah, but I don't think its that much like their currently pushed Microsoft OS. I mean, the screen shot offering a Russian Mail Order bride isn't something I've seen in Vista.
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.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
This is the voice of the automated DMCA-takedown pulice speaking. /. is now considered far too serious a site to contain jokes. Please desist or face execution.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
wooooosh!
Re:Sure those are pics? (Score:4, Insightful)
Yeah, but I cannot read Chinese, so I really did not know what I was looking at.
Truthfully, what is wrong with the Vista interface? I thought the main thing people were complaining about was bad software compatability (which is a crock), poor drivers (the hardware developers have largely resolved this), the UAE (which can be turned off),and high resource hog (sadly, I have no comeback for this). Out of all the people that we have given Vista to in our company, not a single person has complained about the interface. In fact, the only two complaints we got was of a software bug (it exists in XP as well in this program package, but people natually blaimed Vista, even though they had it for years), and that their 15 year old printer suddenly does not work.
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.
Re:Sure those are pics? (Score:4, Interesting)
What's wrong with the Vista interface?
The impression I get (not having actually compared Vista and XP side by side) is that Vista makes less efficient use of my screen space, preferring to make aesthetically better use of whitespace and prettier icons.
The real thing I've noticed is that Windows Explorer no longer accepts custom columns, which is a major pain for a shop that uses TortoiseSVN. That is an interface issue that I resent. That and the much more subtle (than in XP) difference between active and inactive title bars.
Aside from that, Vista SP1 runs close to acceptably fast on a 2.83 GHz quad core with 4G of memory. It does compile fast, but the OS itself is sluggish at times, compared to, say, XP SP2 on my 1.66 GHz (or so) dual core Mac Mini at home. (Yes, I did turn off something compositing and Aero Glass, like the Windows Vista Annoyances book suggested.)
Having looked through lists of Vista advantages, it appears to me that the only real advantage is that we will be able to continue to buy it, unlike XP, which is becoming less available. I'm very definitely not a Microsoft fan, but XP SP2 was an OS that basically worked, and didn't get in my way very much. Vista SP1 is not there yet, and may never be.
To wistfully try to counter some of the follow-on comments: These are my experiences. They are real experiences, not made up. They can be ignored, but not wished away. Your experience with Vista may differ; frankly, I hope it's better for you.
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.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Aero doesn't use anything like 500mb of RAM.
Even more interestingly, people don't seem to complain about MacOS's use of pretty RAM-eating graphics, which back when it launched on relatively low end Apple hardware was an even bigger deal.
I guess people like the MacOS interface but not Aero. Transparent windows containing stuff you are trying to look at (hi Media Player) is probably a bad idea.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
A-ha. A Freudian spellink error. Vut ve have here is a vish that Microsoft vill fail.
I think ordinary people see problems with Vista, not just power-users. I don't think Microsoft is so stupid as to think that they can fool the majority of people by just tweaking or re-branding Vista and expect it to succeed, "Mojave Experiment" or not.
Re:Sure those are pics? (Score:5, Funny)
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.
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.
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.
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.
Re:Pointless (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Pointless (Score:4, Funny)
funny, mine goes up to 1023.
Re:Pointless (Score:5, Funny)
Call me old fashioned, but I still use punching cards as input. Much purer and reliable to me.
Re:Pointless (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Pointless (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Call me old fashioned, but I still use Unix with the command line interface. Much cleaner and faster to me.
Heck yeah. X is simply a tool for using the higher resolutions your monitor supports to fit more 80x24 terminals on the screen and position them in your preferred order.
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.
Re:Pointless (Score:4, Funny)
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.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I still use VISTA with the old Windows 2000 interface on my personal laptop, and XP with that one at work. All the themes following it have been "ooo, pretty" for about a week and then they get old and I'm ready for the more conservative classic interface.
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?
Re:Pointless (Score:5, Funny)
And here I was wasting time by clicking Settings on the search bar... :P
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?
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.
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!
Re:Pointless (Score:4, Informative)
Click on it again while it animates it's departure, and it just plain goes away.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, I'd rather have the performance of Windows 2000, the functionality of Windows XP and the GUI of.... Windows 2000.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
And, not to mention,
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.
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 :)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Except that's definitely AND. I have right now the taskbar at the bottom of the screen, the quicklaunch bar at the top and a "My PC" toolbar on the right.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:In case it gets slashdotted (Score:4, Funny)
> It's main color is no longer blue, it's brown
Windows: the biodegradable edition!
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.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
While I agree that the Unix security model is very far from ideal, and sudo'ing constantly sucks, there are some differences:
*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.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Actually, most of the Cairo concepts is now in Windows Vista--the only significant thing missing is the object-based Windows File System (WinFS) that Microsoft has been working on for many years.
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.
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".
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....
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).
Re:*Yawn*, I think I'll stick with Ubuntu. (Score:5, Funny)
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
*Yawn*, I think I'll stick withTinyXP. (Score:3, Informative)
"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?)"
TinyXP is nice for those who don't need all the extras. There's also a Vista version.
Re:*Yawn*, I think I'll stick with Ubuntu. (Score:4, Insightful)
No, the point is Windows is still swiss cheese no matter how much their marketing department is saying its secure.
A OS shouldnt need anti-virus.
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."
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
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.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
In general, I agree with you here. But really, how much can really be that different? Desktop environments (whether we're talking Windows, Linux, or whatever) have generally looked/worked the same since I can remember. Yes, each new version has added flasher/fancier/more efficient bits and pieces, but in general, it's all the same.
It's what the software does, not what it looks like that really makes the difference. Even then, the differences are pretty nominal, as the OS/Desktop is mostly just a platfor
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
(pity Windows programmers, in general, suck at following the >5 year old guidelines).
And the rest. IIRC you couldn't even get a "Designed for NT 4" label if your software demanded local admin rights. (Of course, you could get a "Designed for Windows '95" label which was almost identical visually)
In many ways it's a shame so few people (both individuals and businesses) continue to accept IT stuff (both software and hardware) which doesn't bear such labels. It might prompt developers to produce code that might be complete crap but at least won't stomp all over your system.
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.
Re: (Score:3, 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 would not be surprised Microsoft does the following:
1) They aggressively optimize the code base for x86-based CPU's, which means overall faster performance.
2) They decide (despite what has been said publicly to this day by Microsoft managers) to drop any pretenses of Windows 98 and earlier compatibility and require at least WIN32 A
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.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
But does it still support DRM (Trusted Computing or whatever)? Because so long as it does, I'm never going to switch, nor recommend anyone I know to switch from XP.
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.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I was a summer intern. I was implying that XP is also basically just a refined 2000; aside from the look and feel, it's a remarkably similar OS overall. In particular, the biggest differences that come to mind at XP's release time were the fast user switching and system restore (there were others, of course, but it's hard to remember much else that was very new and exciting).
We (the team I was on) were running Win7 on most of our machines, including production boxes, by the end of my internship. I won't cla
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Even if you polish a turd... (Score:3, Informative)
Try Ubuntu 8.04 with an ATI/Nvidia/Intel graphics card, and install "ccsm", and play with all the options. I have actually grown to like the "wobbly windows" that act a little like sheets of paper.
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!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
The problem with that logic is that there are competing operating systems which will happily run on "ten bucks of RAM" and do everything Vista will do. Its not that RAM is expensive, its that Vista wastes the RAM it has on stuff that users don't want. I don't want a bunch of trusted computing threads watching to make sure I don't dare watch a movie I paid for on a monitor I paid for. I don't want threads making sure the audio I listen to is being played on Microsoft Approved High Security DRM+ Speakers. I w
Screenshots (Score:3, Insightful)
To be honest, I don't care what it looks like. So long as there's a "classic" option, that'll do, but I have much bigger problems that are not addressed by releasing videos/screenshots.
I don't care what it looks like SO LONG as it has something I need. It doesn't look like it. In fact, it looks like they jiggered the Vista menus and toolbars a bit, renamed a few items, etc. These are changes I expect to see between SVN versions 7348738 and 7348740 of a window manager, not a "show-off" of the next version of Windows.
The main problem I have with Windows is the laughable security - just look at that warning next to "no anti-virus software found"... those sorts of messages make me crease up.
Antivirus software is like employing a $30/year, 500lb security guard to sit on the front step of your house and "confront" burglars, but who can't actually do anything to them because he can't stand up (and even if he could, why would he bother at $30/year?), while leaving all your doors and windows open and a ladder up to your bedroom out the back with a large sign that says "Free stuff inside" attached to it. Security Centre and UAC are like a nosey neighbour who you can't get rid of (without a lot of hassle) that likes to tell you that your security guard didn't come into work today or that some people walked out with tons of your gear but he didn't bother to call the police or anything.
Also, I hate the pathetic attempts to set standards for everyone, rather than letting the users adjust Windows to their liking. Even Vista's "classic" mode isn't like it should be, it's impossible to get things exactly how they were in XP. And somehow the OS thinks it "knows better" than you. I daresay it does most of the time but the point is that sometimes IT DOESN'T and I need to override it, whether that's simple and personal (I don't WANT to know that I don't have antivirus, I don't WANT a new start menu) or complicated and technical (e.g. if I'm setting modelines in X). Don't like the new ribbon? Well.. tough really. We've splatted it over everything from Paint to Wordpad.
I don't know if the release of Windows 7 is trying to cover for Vista's "mistake" (which, of course, MS has done quite well out of anyway because of the usual reasons) or whether they really think that people will want to upgrade to Vista and then to Windows 7 within the space of three or four years. Tell me that WinFS is in it, tell me it doesn't NEED antivirus or a third-party firewall any more (you could still install it, obviously, but if it didn't need it, who would?), tell me you've condensed all the versions into one quite-cheap version with no artificial limitations, tell me it's got some radical new ideas that nobody's seen before, tell me anything... but don't show me screenshots that I could mock up in seconds using Vista's menu and a quick Photoshop. Don't show me "features" that would take about 20 minutes each to write once the windowing/toolbar code was properly seperated out into new libraries. Don't show me even more of the same rubbish that I can't stand Vista for.
In the meantime, I've got to print off that antivirus screenshot and pin it on my wall to laugh at occasionally.
Why would I update? (Score:4, Interesting)
Unfortunately for Microsoft Windows XP is the first OS to "work well enough" which makes me ask, why would I update? IE 8 certainly looks nice along with the enhanced GUI features, but they aren't so large an improvement that I'm going going to spend $120 to upgrade.
As long as OOo, Firefox, Thunderbird and Gimp work on my computer, I don't see any pressing need to upgrade. They're going to have to pull out something much better for Windows 7 to get my hard-earned cash.
Even getting it "free" when I upgrade my computer isn't enough of an incentive because my computer's speed seems good enough at 2.67 GHz with 2 GB of RAM. I've also only used 32 GB out of 201 GB (I actually have more then that but they're on a separate partition for Linux which I need to develop in sometimes for university).
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.
Who really cares? (Score:3, Insightful)
I know everyone likes eye candy these days, but really, does the look of the Windows UI really make much difference? One of the biggest things I think Microsoft got wrong was to assume that people only cared about what Windows looked like, and really didn't care about how it worked. Now, I'm pretty sure that a lot of people don't care about how it works, as long as it does.
Oh dear... ...Paint? Calculator? (Score:3, Insightful)
I would like to see at least one --just ONE-- new piece of technology. WinFS much Microsoft!!!
I'm reminded of this comment from somewhere: 'Google isn't interested in Microsoft's 90s era technologies'.
increasingly irrelevent (Score:4, Interesting)
Who cares?
Apple (who is even more proprietary than Microsoft) has seen amazingly significant growth in their user base.
Desktop Linux (this is the year! again.) is growing.
People don't want to pay $200 for their operating system and another $400 (or more) for application software, just to write a few letters, surf the web, balance their checkbook and (maybe) run spreadsheets or create presentations. That's just not worth $600.
Ubuntu, Fedora, or what have you, and you get all this for free.
Vista (the OS that nobody wants) is becoming increasingly irrelevant. Windows 7 will suffer the same fate.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Apple (who is even more proprietary than Microsoft)
Oh, cool, you mean we can download the NT kernel source now?
Re:increasingly irrelevent (Score:4, Insightful)
That's a specious argument. Just because you can download some of the source of OS X, doesn't make Apple an "open" company. Their behavior demonstrates otherwise.
I dislike Apple less than I dislike Microsoft. However, if I want to run their OS, which is clearly superior to Windows, there is a > 25% premium on the hardware. Why can't I run OS X on a Dell, or Lenovo laptop? Why am I locked into Apple's hardware? Because Apple is a proprietary company.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I can get all the source code to products from Microsoft provided I sign certain NDAs with certain assurances and give a reasonable explanation as to why.
Yes, and you used to be able to get all the source code to VMS on Microfiche. That doesn't make either of them open systems.
Open systems are all about interoperability. Publicly documenting what you're doing, so that other people who aren't you, or your partners, can work with you. Source code is only part of that process when it is freely redistributable.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
1. If MS went the route of Apple and started selling their OS on tightly controlled hardware with a limited set of rock solid drivers, we wouldn't be talking about BSOD's, hard freezes, etc. - at least no more than it happens on OSX (oh yes, it does!).
2. Desktop Linux will not continue to grow until somebody gets the UI out of diapers. It will not go past the range of the geek and the hobbyist. The cost of maintaining a system in which most administrative functions end up having to be done in a terminal
Why do I get the feeling I've seen this before? (Score:3, Insightful)
I doubt whether it was originally intended as such, but I'm betting that the utter failure of Vista is going to mean Windows 7 will be rushed into production long before it's ready, and in a completely different form that what was originally conceived.
In short, I suspect Windows 7 will wind up being The Pig That Is Vista with lipstick...probably eye-liner and blush, too.
Re:I'm surprised (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Ah, nope.
Slashdot is CmdrTaco's blog [slashdot.org].
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.
Re:Ribbon Bars (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah, you're the only one using those applications.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Er... you might want to check your machine.
Admittedly, I'm running Opera but I didn't see anything of the sort in the page code. Maybe you hit a bad advert or maybe you've got something your end that's doing that?
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
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Usually, very early beta releases tend to use the interface from previous versions, so in terms of "look and feel" there won't be significant changes. Microsoft usually does the interface changes starting with the second beta releases, if the experience from the Windows XP and Vista beta testing is anything to go by.
(If I remember correctly, Windows 95 was probably the only Microsoft OS that had the new interface right from the first beta test versions, mostly because it was such a radical change in the int
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Since you've been using Windows for so long, clarify for me if you share the same experience with explorer?
Do you find that with mapped network and optical drives, that essentially the 'pauses and hangs' or nuances of the OS's seem essentially identical (in some regards) to previous versions? Almost down to the millisecond, it honestly feels like the same code to me.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)