Windows 11 Screenshots Leak, Show New Start Menu and More (theverge.com) 302
Screenshots of Microsoft's upcoming Windows 11 operating system have appeared online today. Originally published at Chinese site Baidu, the screenshots show off the new Windows 11 user interface and Start menu. The UI changes look very similar to what was originally found in Windows 10X before Microsoft canceled that project in favor of Windows 11. From a report: App icons are now centered on the taskbar, with a new Start button and menu. The Start menu is a simplified version of what currently exists in Windows 10, without Live Tiles. It includes pinned apps and the ability to quickly shut down or restart Windows 11 devices. The operating system is identified as Windows 11 Pro in screenshots, and we can confirm they are genuine. Microsoft has been dropping hints that it's ready to launch Windows 11. The software giant is holding a special Windows event to reveal its next OS on June 24th. The event starts at 11AM ET, and the event invite includes a window that creates a shadow with an outline that looks like the number 11. An ISO of Windows 11 has also leaked, according to multiple reports.
11? (Score:5, Informative)
I've been somewhat out of the loop on this, but wasn't the point of Windows 10's model that it would be the last one, forever to be updated but with no new increments in base versions?
Re:11? (Score:5, Insightful)
I assume they realized if they keep the moniker at Windows 10 and just upgrade it it would be much harder to extract upgrade fees.
With the switch to 11 they can act like it's all new and charge folks for the update from 10.
Whether there is enough good stuff in there to justify that remains to be seen but frankly I doubt it based on what we've been hearing. Seems more like a decent service pack than a full update worth of a new "version" and the outlay of money.
Maybe we will be surprised and the change from 10 to 11 will be free of cost in which case it's really semantics.
Re: 11? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed. This is simply adopting a similar versioning model as Apple and Google; as in "Version X, now with extra grits!"
Re: 11? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: 11? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: 11? (Score:5, Funny)
Windows 10. Microsoft said it would last forever, that it would always be there for me. We had plans together, a never-ending summer of updates, and endless backwards compatibility laid out for us. All lies. Empty, meaningless words that cannot fill the void in my hard drive. All along, you were secretly carrying the End Of Life for these golden, carefree days. When will the first software come out that says "Windows 11 required?". When will I have to update my hardware to enjoy the latest version of Windows? WHEN!?
My Windows 10 Compatible stickers have become as meaningless as my Messenger username. Worthless bits of data waiting for a day that will never come.
Re: 11? (Score:4, Interesting)
Not to be the killjoy to an obvious joke post but this is the internet so,
They had already been killing off hardware support for various things with their incremental model already. There is definitely hardware that working in early releases of Windows 10 that is no longer supported.
Re: (Score:3)
I've seen that NIC issue before, but it was a manufacturer issue. If manufacturers stop providing drivers for older hardware on newer versions of Windows, that's not really Microsoft's fault.
When it's very common hardware (looking at you Broadcom...), however, it's a really shitty thing to do.
Re: (Score:3)
And that's the problem with relying on the manufacturer to keep updating their drivers, rather than the linux model of open source drivers which can be maintained along with the kernel.
Manufacturers dropping support for perfectly good hardware, drivers with serious bugs that cannot be fixed and a manufacturer who won't fix them, losing the flexibility to update certain aspects of the kernel because you need to maintain a stable driver abi.
This is why the latest linux kernel can still support some pretty anc
Re: (Score:3)
Looks like the made the start-bar look a lot more like the MacOS Dock while they were at it.
Re: (Score:3)
Then what is the point?
Windows is expensive and complex and a nightmare to support and develop and it makes no economic sense to develop unless customers want a Windows 365 (for corporations) to do minor updates and driver fixes for newer hardware.
The days of hanging out at CompUSA at midnight for Windows95 are long gone as an OS is bundled with something like a cell phone plan these days. I see no reason to continue Windows except to run older desktop and enterprise software.
Giving out for free costs money
Re: (Score:3)
It's a free upgrade. Would you like to try again?
Re: (Score:3)
Assume much?
We don't even have an official announcement that the product exists, and you're already making claims about what the upgrade price will be?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
"Upgrade", ha ha ha.
Yes, "centered task bar icons", how did we live without them before??
All this innovation is making me dizzy!
Re:11? (Score:5, Insightful)
The real issue is the constant rolling updates makes compatibility checking and documentation a nightmare. You can't just say "compatible with Windows 10" anymore, you need to specify a range of releases. And the same goes for documentation. It has become a nightmare for searching for how to do things online since much of the Windows 10 documentation isn't for the latest version and often doesn't apply anymore.
They can ignore end users, but I can only imagine the corporate clients have been getting more pissed as time goes on
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Microsoft releases two Windows 10 updates a year. How is maintaining documentation for that any more onerous than for any version of MacOS or the various releases of Linux distros?
Re:11? (Score:4, Insightful)
Windows 10 2004, Ubuntu 20.04 (Score:3)
Windows 10 versions 1507 through 2004 are YYMM, very much like Ubuntu version numbers. Both are on semi-annual tracks if you're not on the long-term support branch of either. Since October 2020, however, Microsoft has replaced the last two digits 03/04 and 09/10 with H1 and H2 for first or second half.
Re: (Score:2)
I've been somewhat out of the loop on this, but wasn't the point of Windows 10's model that it would be the last one, forever to be updated but with no new increments in base versions?
You must be very out of the loop. Basically everyone in the Windows department who was involved with that strategy has left MS. ... THREE TIMES OVER. No seriously, senior leadership has changed in the Windows division 3 times the Windows 10 is the last windows strategy was announced in 2015. The most recent change was only a year ago.
Re: (Score:3)
I've been somewhat out of the loop on this, but wasn't the point of Windows 10's model that it would be the last one, forever to be updated but with no new increments in base versions?
You must be very out of the loop. Basically everyone in the Windows department who was involved with that strategy has left MS. ... THREE TIMES OVER. No seriously, senior leadership has changed in the Windows division 3 times the Windows 10 is the last windows strategy was announced in 2015. The most recent change was only a year ago.
But when management[-3] says 'forever', the meaning of forever doesn't change with the arrival of management[-2, -1 and 0]. If I hear a vendor say 'forever' I expect them to mean it.
Re: (Score:3)
No one ever said "Windows 10 forever". At the announcement of Windows 10 an exec said this could be the "last version of Windows, ever". That's different. Windows 11 can (and will) be based on the same code underpinnings.
Re: (Score:3)
Ha, to be honest the only reason I know about this was because I read an article answering the very question you had, which pointed to the huge turnover in the windows department.
Useless trivia for the day: Windows as of last year isn't its own department anymore. The combined it with the Surface division and renamed it Windows + Devices. This is interesting as it seems to be an even stronger push by MS to turn into Apple, wanting to sell their own computers with dedicated OS rather than just be a software
Re: (Score:2)
I mean, that's what they said, and it was true for awhile, and then it won't be true anymore.
I believe that's about the same for literally anybody anywhere saying "never" .. it mostly just means "for now" until it no longer does. Change is inevitable. You'd think the one of the first things people come to learn about the world is that the word "never" is very much an approximation or relative term unless you're talking in rigorous math or science terms.
Re: (Score:3)
I understand that Nigel Tufnel will be first in line to get this version.
Re: (Score:2)
I understand that Nigel Tufnel will be first in line to get this version.
"But - It's one crappier"
Is there going to be a 128 bit version? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Is there going to be a 128 bit version? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
I think so. I remember the transition from 16 to 32 and thinking what a welcome upgrade it was. I also remember thinking that this would be more than adequate for the foreseeable future. I still think that.
The move from 32 to 64, while more painful, wasn't nearly as liberating. I guess it's great that they're now affordable for those who can actually benefit from them, but they're still squarely in the 'nice to have' category. It's overkill for the average user, and I can't see that changing in my or
Re:Is there going to be a 128 bit version? (Score:4, Insightful)
====> the joke ====>
your head
Re: (Score:3)
I think you may be incredibly lucky to be making this statement. 32-bit Windows limits the maximum RAM per process to 2Gb [wikipedia.org], although it is possible to get round this with configuration settings and increase the limit to 4Gb, which is now generally regarded as the effective memory limit for 32-bit platforms. Upgrading to 64-bit Windows removes this limit [it becomes 8Tb, which is sufficiently beyond our present hardware on all but th
Identification would have been nice (Score:3)
Looking at the two pictures (wow! Two whole pictures), it would have been nice if the people paid to write these stories would stop being so chinsy with words and told us what we're looking at. Are we suddenly rationing words? Was the writer running out of space on the page?
I'm presuming the first picture is of something which is supposed to be a Start menu. It's difficult to tell considering a) there's no description of what it is and b) everything is so light and pale it's difficult to make out what you're looking at.
It would be nice if people stopped hiding things. This is almost as bad as Microsoft itself burying configuration items several layers deep in obscure places which have no relation to what you were looking for.
Re:Identification would have been nice (Score:5, Interesting)
I can see the first fail right away: The start button is no longer in the corner of the screen so it makes it much harder to just slam the mouse into the corner and be over the button.
This is history repeating: Windows 95/98 was famous for having a 2 pixel border around the start button so you couldn't do that.
Branding for the new payment model (Score:3, Interesting)
Here comes the subscription model...
Re:Branding for the new payment model (Score:5, Funny)
Windows 365.
Doesn't work on February 29 though.
An UI overhaul - a new major version? (Score:2)
Color me unimpressed because I see the same loathed "PC settings", so I presume it has the same broken "Windows Updates" infrastructure/service and most of the things which have been horribly broken ever since Windows Vista (specially if you reboot/reset your PC in the middle of performing them which oftentimes happens to people because the "progress" "indicator" freezes). Windows XP updates were a lot more reliable and didn't decimate disk space.
I also presume they haven't addressed horrible font antiali
Re: (Score:2)
A lot more screenshots: 1. https://www.deskmodder.de/blog... [deskmodder.de] 2. https://www.geeknetic.es/Notic... [geeknetic.es]
Yeah, it's basically a slightly different looking Windows 10.
Actually you can already download and test it: https://forums.mydigitallife.n... [mydigitallife.net]
Re: (Score:3)
UIX improvements would be nice (Score:3, Insightful)
I realize it's a lot to hope for, what from MS TODAY ( in the modern age, UIX is a fucking joke, not just from MS but from near everyone ), but I sincerely hope we get UIX improvements and not just changes.
Reduce actions necessary to fulfill the basic job function of being the interface between me and my software. Fewer clicks, less mouse dragging.
Re: (Score:2)
It's tough to beat the functionality that a 1970's-style UI of command-line and scripting language offers. Even if it was as ugly as a wide-collared shirt.
Re: (Score:2)
Well that's certainly true. In the late 90s the rage was upgrading business software from the old keyboard interface to the new fangled windows interface.
As the tech doing the "upgrades", people hated me. They went from being able to do 10 things in seconds to 1 thing every couple of minutes because of the paradigm change ( and, not to put to fine a point on it, the horribleness of the windows 3.11 interface ). I honestly don't think we've ever approached that level of UIX efficiency since then.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The learning curve of GUI is (usually) shallower. Easier to train people on new software if the software uses the same consistent elements and similar workflows. In the command-line world every app had it's own magic inscrutable language. I think it's not that the mouse and a framebuffer are magic, but that the office desktop remains a strong metaphor in the design of a graphical interface and can be applied more consistently than CLIs of the past.
There are pros and cons to CLI and GUI. But GUI really loses
Re:UIX improvements would be nice (Score:5, Funny)
Well, as to "why", that's simple; I was paid to do so. Given my general dislike of people, it was a win/win.
Re: (Score:2)
CLI and GUI have different Pros/Cons. Usually the strength of the one is the weakness of the other and vice versa. I sure as hell wouldn't want to try to create a SVG or do image touchup via a command line when a mouse or digital pen + tablet makes it trivial.
i.e. Good luck playing an RTS game from the command line!
CLI
+ Can script it
+ Trivial to repeat it
+ Can be fast to type / execute
+ Can chain commands
- Hard to learn
- Have to lookup or memorize commands
- Inconsistent syntax, parameters between programs
-
Re: (Score:2)
I've always found assembly to be the most functional of all even if quite obtuse.
Re: (Score:2)
You do realize that the command line is just as artificial as a GUI, yes? It is fed to you by OS engineers who though this is what you needed.
Apple had it right with their MPW build framework. You could fire up Commando after hiliting a text command, or choose from lists. Up popped a modal dialog box that let you specify the 800 command line arguments and values by clicking radio buttons, check boxes, maybe the odd text tidbit. As you did this, it built the command you were going to execute in an editable w
Re: (Score:3)
Sort of, but honestly change for change's sake is not a good thing. There's a lot of UI paradigms that are fairly well established and work well. Throwing that out just because some anxious UI designer thinks they're a genius isn't a good thing.
And whatever paradigm is adopted should be maintained from program to program. No, I don't want your uber-cool looking audio interface that looks like a 1980's cassette deck. Your portfolio of "cool and shiny" should not be getting in the way of the users work.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, right off the bat they've removed the "infinitely large" Windows corner button that can be reached with an un-aimed diagonal mouse movement in favor of a standard-sized icon that you have to aim for... so I'm not holding my breath for any actual improvements.
Seriously, the special properties of screen edges and especially corners are basic UI design properties that have been well-understood since at least MacOS 1.0, why do UI designers keep sacrificing functionality for cosmetics? Windows 10 *finall
lol (Score:5, Insightful)
So they're floating the icons in the center now? The whole point of anchoring the Start Menu in the left, starting in 95, was so that it's always in the same place and clicking on it is easy. If the bar expands and shrinks you'll have to find it each time.
"But that takes half a second!" some of you may complain. Fortunately for us, UI designers are smart enough (well, the non-Microsoft, non-GNOME ones) to understand that those little annoyances add up and lead to an impression--even subconsciously--that the UI is somehow bad, unpleasant, or defective.
Re:lol (Score:4, Insightful)
the original Lisa and Macintosh put the application menu at the very top of the screen because it was easy to slam the mouse all the way to the top. Having menus inside of windows required extra precision to target. In some ways Microsoft's switch from the design elements of Windows 2.x and 3.x and to putting the start menu in the bottom corner on Windows 95 was along a similar line of thinking on usability.
But marketing a user experience doesn't work if you can't constantly revise your user interface to show "innovations". No industry publications will spend time mentioning that your software's UI is exactly the same as it was in the last release, except perhaps in an negative light. I don't think UX is a game that anyone can win.
Re: (Score:2)
Screenshots on deskmodder.de, made of the same build, show the start button on the left. So the centered start button/icons just seems to be an option.
Re:lol (Score:5, Informative)
Agreed 100%.
Putting the start button in the center is idiotic. It is almost like the designers are clueless about Fitt's Law [wikipedia.org]
The reason the start button is on the EDGE of a screen is that you can't over shoot it! More so when it is in the corner of the screen.
more clueless UX designers (Score:2)
Marketing driving the UI = UX.
Copying Apple's mistakes may improve Windoze but they could hire a real UI person to make improvements. Apple messed up when they prevented anchoring the dock left/right instead of center.
When will somebody realize MENUS need to be fixed at the TOP of the screen for ALL apps?!
Here we have all this fussing about wasted screen space today when we have massive screens and then waste space on menu bars on EACH WINDOW or even kill the menus (for larger toolbars) or act like we have
Re:more clueless UX designers (Score:5, Interesting)
When will somebody realize MENUS need to be fixed at the TOP of the screen for ALL apps?!
This is one of the big reasons why I do not like Unity/GNOME.
If the application window is neat the bottom right corner of the screen, I have to move the mouse all the way to the top left corner to access its menu. Then all the way back to the application window. No thank you.
Re:more clueless UX designers (Score:4, Insightful)
I can bump the top edge of the display quite quickly and easily with my high speed mouse. The menus scattered on all the windows are far slower to target and waste space except for users who must maximize every app...
I guess we have different preferences.
For me the menu on top of screen would only make sense if I maximized every window. Otherwise instead of moving the mouse 5cm to the menu, I have to move it 30cm. This, by itself, is not that bad, however:
1. If the program window is small (let's say I do not need it to be big) and near the bottom of the screen, I have to look away from it to look at the menu as the menu, while in the field of vision for me, is not in the field of "being able to read it" vision. This takes a little bit of time. Not too much, but enough to be annoying. Maybe I should use lower resolution on my monitor or maybe I should have the menu to the application window.
2. With the menu on top of the screen, there is only one menu at a time. Which means that to open the menu of a currently inactive window, I have to move the mouse to that window (or its button on the task bar), click it to activate it, then move the mouse all the way back to the menu. This is annoying. It's like having a wired phone where the handset is on one room and the keypad i another.
2a. To use the menu I have to make sure that I have the correct program window active. When the menu is part of the program window, I know which window it belongs to. This especially applies if I use one program that has multiple windows, let's say a web browser. The menus for all windows would be identical, so, if the menu is not attached to the window, I have to make sure the correct window is active. That, again, takes a little bit of time and has potential for mistakes.
3. While the menu on top has "infinite height", the program window and various stuff inside it doesn't. Also, I do not know about you, but for me, moving the mouse faster makes it a bit less precise. So, moving the mouse 30cm to the menu, then 30cm back, trying to hit a 5mm wide row or a 10mm x 10mm icon is not as fast as moving the mouse 5cm to the menu.
4. As I use not only normal programs, but also RDP, VNC and other remote control software (not maximized), the menus that are on program windows inside those windows are where I would expect them.
As for screen space - Since in modern Windows (and Linux) versions program windows can overlap I do not really need to save the 5mm of window height on my 31cm tall screen.
But, let's say I did not want the program windows to overlap. OK, with a 31cm tall screen, I can fit, what, 3 windows with an average height of ~10cm? 5 x 6.2cm? Let's say that. 5 x 5mm menu bars take up 2.5cm of space. Not much at all.
But, maybe I am the weird one who likes not only menus in the actual program window, but also separate title bars and even status bars.
an accessible solution for you is pretty obvious: a trigger (such as a 3rd mouse button or F key) which pops up a vertical menu that clones the top menu at the location of the mouse.
That sounds worse than just having the menu with the program window. So yeah, using a desktop environment that, to me has crappy usability and then using addons or whatever to make the usability slightly less crappy is less appealing to me than just using a desktop environment that has a much better usability than the first one and even with no addons. KDE, LXDE and LXQT (I found out about this recently - so far I really like it) and the usual Windows UI for me.
Now, maybe if Windows 3.11 and Windows 95 had the menus on top of the screen, I would have gotten used to them and would hate menus on every window, but I have used menus on every window for many years and never had a problem where I wished they were somewhere else.
It does not really make sense to me conceptually. The program has title bar, menu, toolbars, data area, status bar all part of its window. It's nice and self-contained. Why would I even want the menu or the status bar or some buttons to be part of the system and not part of the program?
It's from the future! (Score:4, Funny)
How am I going to contain my excitement (Score:2)
So it is all about slappin' new paint on the user interface, moving icons around, and maybe a couple of widgets to make something that obviously have been easier to begin with easier.
Nothing improved about managing digital assets across systems and devices. Nothing new about access to the Linux or MacOS worlds. No interesting integration frameworks. No real functionality improvements just tweaks to old ones.
And most of all nothing new about security. Windows remains the prime disease vector that is
*ffrttprbprtrtrtzrrttzttzt* Don't care (Score:3)
Until there's big announcement that Windows will not reboot without MY OKIE DOKIE I refuse to respond to MS announcements with anything but a fart noise.
*ffrttprbprtrtrtzrrttzttzt*
Re: (Score:2)
You can prevent windows from rebooting with a group policy, just update to Windows Pro.
I would consider this a power user feature, because it's more important to me that "normal" users reboot their machines off hours when important updates are applied. If you're doing something that needs your machine to be on 24 hours a day, you're not a normal user (both by product definition and just by what "normal" means - the vast majority of Windows users don't need the machine plugging away on something 24 hours a d
Re: (Score:2)
If you're doing something that needs your machine to be on 24 hours a day, you're not a normal user...
Based on what metric? The reason I'm salty about this is I was simply making a backup. Us little people do that from time to time.
Re: (Score:2)
I assume you're already aware of "Active hours" and can't backup within a 12 hour window? These are hours you just tell windows not to reboot during.
If not .. were you running the backup task from another computer? I might consider that a power user backup scenario. You're backing up a live machine. You can say your OS shouldn't reboot without you asking (and you can do your backups within active hours to ensure that) but if you're backing up from a drive that is hosting a live booted OS, you're making a wh
Re: (Score:2)
Again,*I* need to make the decisions about when the reboot happens, not Microsoft. I don't need to run around trying to work within an artificial limitation that they half-assedly created AND fight with you about. Ultimately I ended up switched to an OS that doesn't take that control away from me and there's no switching back until that's specifically addressed.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, that and it really should be setup so that far less stuff requires a reboot. For some things its unavoidable (eg, even for Linux you have to reboot for a kernel update), but for example installing a program should NEVER require rebooting the system.
Re: (Score:2)
If you have the Pro version of Windows 10, you can set a group policy to not automatically download updates. It is the Microsoft-approved method of doing what you want. Group Policies are not available on Home edition. Once you start downloading though, the automatic installation and reboot will happen. However, as long as you ignore the update notification box that pops up daily, you can easily go for 6+ months and only perform updates at your convenience.
Re: (Score:3)
"Task manager says more than half the CPUs are in use and lotsa files are being copied... welp better abort all that so more telemetry can be installed."
So they are copying Apple again? (Score:5, Funny)
App icons are now centered on the taskbar, with a new Start button and menu
So basically they've copied the apple Dock. Guess old habits are hard to break.
Demonstrates lack of freedom (Score:2)
All the users who have zero choice to go back to what they are accustomed to may as well switch to linux now... It is almost as if MS is blindly copying to stay relevant and do not realize why people are leaving them ASAP; well, they haven't adopted linux style drivers or open sourced direct X so they must still know why they are dominant.
They are also reminding users that like Apple lock-in, MS is also a lock-in ecosystem.
Re: (Score:2)
All the users who have zero choice to go back to what they are accustomed to may as well switch to linux now...
For those who have that new-fangled technology called virtualization, one can move forward, backward, and side-to-side. Freedom is what you make of it, rather than what one complains about.
Re: (Score:2)
I would dearly love to stick Windows in a VM, but I need hardware acceleration (AMD Radeon Pro GPU) and that's not trivial to set up.
And no, this isn't for gaming, what few games I play run natively under Ubuntu. I can only imagine the difficulties of VMing Windows if you *do* game, much less avoiding the DRM thinking you are running some kind of hack.
Re: (Score:2)
Cairoshell [cairoshell.com] beat them to it.
Re: So they are copying Apple again? (Score:2)
They copied the apple dock, but the chromeOS app menu in it.
Looks like butts. At least some gradation/dimensionality seems to be creeping back in.
One word (Score:2)
App icons are now centered on the taskbar, ...
Barf.
The left side, out of the way of the active apps is fine, but to each their own. Hopefully this is configurable. I'd offer more commentary, but there's not much to go on here.
Looks a lot like Mac (Score:2)
Is Microsoft trying to align their UX with Apple? As soon as I saw the two screenshots I immediately thought Mac OS
Re: (Score:2)
I thought the same thing.
Once upon a time saying "it looks like a Mac" was a statement of praise, but after what Apple did to MacOS's UI in Big Slur, that statement can no longer be taken as a compliment.
I don't think any OS, whether desktop or mobile, in 2021 has a good UI with a good UX.
Re: (Score:3)
There's a couple of things Windows UI does better than the Mac at the moment. Drag and drop to currently unseen targets is better (the Windows way of dragging to a task bar, then the list popping up for open windows, then you drag to that window and it opens up. Takes a long time to type but utterly intuitive to do), and I quite like the "right click->New here"
Re: (Score:2)
Are you trying to "align" your comment with his?
Configurable (Score:2)
As long as the UI is configurable. I cannot stand UI that changes locations based on number of icons/programs running. As long as the start can go to the left corner (like always), and not on the side of the screen (like GNOME) .. Can uninstall useless apps, live tiles, etc. I will be happy.
Re: (Score:2)
Does it look like Windows 7 yet? (Score:2)
n/t
Don't care any longer (Score:3)
Move the window close/min/max buttons (Score:2)
Looks like OS11 (Score:2)
Ugly (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
> tons of unnecessary whitespace.
This. Microsoft have no clue about actual usability.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe their UI designer is a Python fan?
Re: (Score:2)
Incredibly, Win11 looks flattery than Win10. MS made a dumb mistake when they promoted the cyclops diversity-hire to head of UI design.
Re: (Score:2)
Why does that make me think "KDE" when I see it? (Score:4, Insightful)
Does anyone else feel like that's a screenshot from a KDE Plasma desktop? Or is it just me?
Ugly (Score:3)
It's terrible looking. My guess is they spent the most money on perfecting the startup sound. I can't say I blame them, for an OS like Windows that has to be rebooted all the time it makes sense. I don't even know Ubuntu's startup sound, in fact I don't even know if it has one.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I don't even know Ubuntu's startup sound, in fact I don't even know if it has one.
Ah, so you didn't manage to get Linux audio to work either. j/k :P
Operating Systems... (Score:4, Insightful)
1. Providing the Hardware Abstraction Layer so that the code you run doesn't need to be tailored for every variety of device your system can support...
2. Providing the services of pre-emptive multi-tasking, to ensure that you can run multiple applications across your machine, including both foreground and background processes. This is also the mechanism which ensures that bugs in one program [such as an endless loop] can't lock your entire machine.
3. Providing memory management, to ensure that each application gets memory reserved, that there are no risks of code or data belonging to one process being over-written by another, and for ensuring that malicious code can't get invoked...
4. Providing storage management, by giving software access to local and remote file systems, by handling file pointers, file locking, directory management [i-node creation, extensions, block management, etc]...
5. Providing security across the platform, by controlling access to all system resources, either directly - embedded in the core OS as basic functionality, or indirectly - for example through features such as a PAM [Pluggable Authentication Module] or an entire access management sub-system that can be de-coupled from the OS...
Pretty much everything else - including a fancy GUI, embedded applications such as Web Browsers, etc. are and should be considered as applications running on top of the core OS.
It is all too easy to think that merging all these features in to one huge blob of an install is a good thing. For many casual users, this might even be true. But it's also worth noting that this robs you of critical choices. What if you don't need a desktop?
But the real reasons that we should care about and pay attention to this is because of the plumbing, because of all the "stuff" that we don't "see" any more, because it is hidden neatly behind a shiny window. This is pretty much the poster child for "papering over the cracks" and trying to hide the crap-piled-on-crap mess that any OS [I'm not bashing on Windows here] can become when the plumbing gets hidden away.
If Microsoft stripped "Windows" back to just the core features that it MUST have - in order to call itself an operating system - and left the rest in neat, self-contained and user-selectable packages - it would be smaller, simpler, faster, more reliable and much, much more secure. It's been a long time since I have been developing code to run on Windows [and then it was VB/SQL, which I'm not sure counts] but the underlying OS can quickly become a quagmire. Although the OS rings are there, they are not well defined and there is a lot of unreliable code mis-using it. The general lack of "clean, well-defined interfaces" makes maintenance an nightmare.
Ah well, we're only one release from Version 12... [youtube.com] [you have to wait or skip ahead to the 2-minute point, but it's prescient...].
Re: (Score:3)
Microsoft handled a recently transition *much* more smoothly as they m
Re: (Score:3)
I have to concede that the following aren't, really, what I would consider to be core features of an operating system, but I'll go on to say that if the OS doesn't lay down some Rules of the Road covering how expects this to be done, the result is anarchy...
6. Managing Shared Resources, by laying down the rules governing things like the management of shared libraries (.dll and
7. D
First impressions (Score:3)
New sound scheme, kind of like it, more subdued.
New start menu should revive the industry for 3rd party start menu replacements from the 8/8.1 days. Lots of wasted space. When you first click it, you get your pinned items and recent docs, you have to click All Apps at the top to see your programs. Not a fan. This is dumb and they left enough space you could easily had the Win10 start menu layout here no issue. That said since this copy isn't activated or apparently in grace period, I can't customize it so maybe there are options to unfuck it some.
Although you can move it back to the left at least
New windows terminal is installed by default, finally
Not a fan of the new radio buttons. Instead of a solid dot, the selected choice has a color circle
Overall, the GUI changes are OK, nothing offensive (except the radio buttons) so far
Control panel is still there, with most of the Win10 applets it looks like
Widgets appear to be back in some form or another. Will need to wait to see if there is an API
No pre-installed mobile games that I've found so far
17.5GB for a base install of Windows 11 Pro (well and VMWare Tools)
It does allow you to login initially without a password on a MS personal account. I used my user name and authentication app, never entered my password. Also had an option to use a hardware token. Honestly can't recall if Windows 10 lets you do this on first login. Going to try later in the week with a M365/AAD account to see if there is anything new there.
Right-clicking on the task bar only gives an option for task bar customization. No menu like on 10 unless you right-click the start menu icon. Do not like. I use that all the time to quickly access the task manager
I'm sure there is some other stuff hiding under the hood but honestly this build feels like Windows 10 with a new skin applied. I'm not seeing anything major jumping out at me right now.
I'd post the name of the iso so others could go find their own copy under an internet rock, but apparently
Re:Start Button and Menu (Score:5, Interesting)
And do the icons expand as you mouse over them?
Re: (Score:2)
Other screenshots have shown it moved to the left.
This means that its likely configurable, and who knows what the default will be (even if it's set one way now that can change).
Don't read too much from a development screenshot - this is the time for them to play with some things and see how they work in the real world.
Re:Start Button and Menu (Score:5, Funny)
The way UI design has been going lately, don't be surprised if they move the Start button offscreen.
Re:Start Button and Menu (Score:5, Informative)
The way UI design has been going lately, don't be surprised if they move the Start button offscreen.
Wasn't that the original Windows 8?
Re: (Score:3)
Yup, early public builds of Windows 8 had it hidden until you slid the mouse cursor down to the lower left corner, and then the start button would appear. They believed that people would want to start using the "charms" menu to access the start screen
Re: (Score:2)